MEMORIALS OF THE COUNTIES OF ENGLAND

                             General Editor:
          REV. P. H. DITCHFIELD, M.A., F.S.A., F.R.S.L., F.R.H.

                              MEMORIALS OF
                            OLD LINCOLNSHIRE

[Illustration]




[Illustration: LINCOLN CATHEDRAL, EVENING.

    _E. R. Taylor pinx._      _Andre & Sleigh Sc._]




                              MEMORIALS OF
                            OLD LINCOLNSHIRE

                                EDITED BY
                      E. MANSEL SYMPSON, M.A., M.D.
                  _Author of “Lincoln” (Ancient Cities)
              Co-Editor of “Lincolnshire Notes and Queries”_

                         WITH MANY ILLUSTRATIONS

                             [Illustration]

                                 LONDON
                    GEORGE ALLEN & SONS, RUSKIN HOUSE
                             RATHBONE PLACE
                                  1911

                         [_All Rights Reserved_]

                   Printed by BALLANTYNE, HANSON & CO.
                   At the Ballantyne Press, Edinburgh




TO THE RIGHT HONOURABLE EARL BROWNLOW LORD-LIEUTENANT OF LINCOLNSHIRE

THIS VOLUME IS DEDICATED BY KIND PERMISSION




PREFACE


Lincolnshire, perhaps, is known most widely as the second largest
county in England, as pre-eminent in agriculture and stock-breeding on
wold, heath, marsh, and fen, as well to the fore in the manufacture of
agricultural and other machinery, as possessing the largest fishing-port
in Europe (Grimsby), and as being associated with “The Handicap.”

But, apart from all these, she can boast of very many attractions for the
traveller and the antiquary. Flat and low though her shores may be, yet
there is a fascination in the great extent of “yellow sands”; and there
is a recompense for the level plain of marsh or fen in the vast expanse
of sky, where “The incomparable pomp of eve, And the cold glories of the
dawn,” are seen at their finest.

And the views are wonderful: from Alkborough, over the junction of
the Trent, the Ouse, and the Humber; from Lincoln, over the plateau
eastwards to the wolds, or westwards over the valley of the Trent to the
Nottinghamshire and Derbyshire hills; or eastwards, from the edge of the
“high wold,” over the great plain

    “That sweeps with all its autumn bowers,
    And crowded farms and lessening towers,
        To mingle with the bounding main.”

The county possesses the birthplaces of Newton, Tennyson, Henry of
Bolingbroke, Archbishop Whitgift, and John Wesley. She has produced
explorers like Franklin, and heroes of romance and reality like Sir John
Bolles (the hero of the Spanish Lady ballad) and Captain John Smith of
Willoughby (who was rescued by Pocahontas). St. Botolph, St. Guthlac,
and St. Gilbert of Sempringham were all Lincolnshire in origin and life,
and the latter founded the only monastic order (that of the Gilbertines)
which originated in this country.

The monastic institutions of this county have had to be passed by in this
volume. Although there are no vast or splendid remains (if Thornton Abbey
gate-house and Crowland be excepted) above ground, still the excavations
of the Rev. C. G. Laing at Bardney Abbey have proved how large and
beautiful one at least of those buildings was.

The city of Lincoln, again, demanding a volume to itself, has not been
dealt with here, save in so far as it appears in Roman times.

The greatest and noblest “memorial” of all is, of course, the mighty
Minster, superb in its architecture and in its situation, with its great
roll of bishops from St. Hugh and Grosseteste to Christopher Wordsworth
and the much beloved, most saintly, Edward King. But this subject could
not be treated of piecemeal, and has been deliberately omitted.

But Lincolnshire is particularly rich in splendid and interesting
churches, and much will be found in this volume to justify these epithets.

Stamford, Boston, and Grantham all have had full justice done to them,
while Tattershall Castle may well serve as a specimen of the best
domestic building of the time of King Henry VI., as Doddington does of
“the spacious times of great Elizabeth.”

The history of the county has been interesting, and at times very
important. The wars of King Stephen, the battle of “Lincoln Fair,” the
Lincolnshire rising in 1470, and the second insurrection in 1536 at the
suppression of the monasteries, have had to be passed over; but the
_pre_-historic facts, those of the Roman rule, and of the great Civil War
will be found.

To the Rev. P. H. Ditchfield, the General Editor of this series, and to
the Rev. G. E. Jeans, whose knowledge of Lincolnshire is unequalled, for
much kind help and advice; to all my contributors, and to all who have
given photographs or illustrations, I desire to tender my most sincere
thanks.

                                                       E. MANSEL SYMPSON.

    DELORAINE COURT, LINCOLN, _November 1910_.

NOTE.—As the County of Lincoln possesses no heraldic bearings, the Lord
Bishop has kindly permitted the use of the coat-of-arms of the See of
Lincoln to be used on the cover of this volume.




CONTENTS


  Prehistoric Lincolnshire                By Rev. A. HUNT, M.A.           1

  The Romans in Lincolnshire              By Rev. E. H. R. TATHAM, M.A.  24

  Saxon Churches of Lincolnshire          By A. HAMILTON THOMPSON, M.A.  53

  Kirkstead Chapel                        By C. HODGSON FOWLER, F.S.A.   81

  South Lincolnshire Churches             By W. E. FOSTER, F.S.A.        85

  The Church of St. Andrew, Heckington    By W. G. WATKINS, A.R.I.B.A.  114

  Boston and its Church                   By G. S. W. JEBB, M.A.        120

  The Town and Church of Grantham         By A. HAMILTON THOMPSON, M.A. 131

  Stamford                                By V. B. CROWTHER-BEYNON,     162
                                            M.A., F.S.A.

  Tattershall Castle and Church           By the EDITOR                 179

  The Sepulchral Brasses of Lincolnshire  By REV. G. E. JEANS,          198
                                            M.A., F.S.A.

  Mediæval Rood-Screens and Rood-Lofts
   in Lincolnshire Churches               By the EDITOR                 206

  Lincolnshire and the Great Civil War    By Rev. E. H. R. TATHAM, M.A. 249

  Doddington Hall                         By Rev. R. E. G. COLE, M.A.   280

  Lincolnshire Families                   By Rev. CANON MADDISON,       309
                                            M.A., F.S.A.

  Spalding Gentlemen’s Society            By MARTEN PERRY, M.D.         319

  INDEX                                                                 341




LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS


  Lincoln from the South-East (Evening)                      _Frontispiece_
           (_From a water-colour drawing by E. R. Taylor_)

                                                               FACING PAGE

  St. Peter’s Church, Barton-on-Humber (from S.W.)                      54
                (_From a photograph by C. C. Hodges_)

  St. Mary’s Church, Stow (Interior, looking S.E.)                      58
                (_From a photograph by C. C. Hodges_)

  St. Margaret’s Church, Marton (Tower before restoration)              78
                (_From a photograph by C. C. Hodges_)

  All Saints’ Church, Holbeach (Nave, looking W.)                       86
                (_From a photograph by T. M. Foster_)

  St. Mary and St. Nicholas Church, Spalding (Nave, looking N.E.)       86
                (_From a photograph by T. M. Foster_)

  All Saints’ Church, Moulton (Nave, looking E.)                       100
                (_From a photograph by T. M. Foster_)

  All Saints’ Church, Moulton (South Aisle, looking N.W.)              100
                (_From a photograph by T. M. Foster_)

  St. Andrew’s Church, Heckington (Plan)                               116
                 (_From a drawing by W. G. Watkins_)

  St. Andrew’s Church, Heckington (South Transept and Porch)           118
              (_From a photograph by H. W. Hitchcock_)

  St. Andrew’s Church, Heckington (from the E.)                        120
              (_From a photograph by H. W. Hitchcock_)

  St. Botolph’s Church, Boston                                         126
              (_From a photograph by G. Hadley & Son_)

  Angel Hotel, Grantham                                                138
                (_From a photograph by G. W. Wilson_)

  St. Wulfran’s Church, Grantham (Plan)                                146
                      (_Drawn by H. Thompson_)

  St. Wulfran’s Church, Grantham (North Porch)                         150
                   (_From a photograph by Emary_)

  Stamford (from the Meadows)                                          164
                  (_From a photograph by Nicholls_)

  Stamford, St. Mary’s Church and Hill                                 170
                  (_From a photograph by Nicholls_)

  Stamford, Screen in Browne’s Hospital                                172
                  (_From a photograph by Nicholls_)

  Tattershall Castle (from the S.W.)                                   188
              (_From a photograph by G. Hadley & Son_)

  Tattershall, Holy Trinity Church (from S.E.)                         196
              (_From a photograph by G. Hadley & Son_)

  Brass of Matilda, Lady Willoughby de Eresby                          200
   (_From a photograph by F. E. Harrison from rubbing by W. Scorer_)

  Brass of John and Alice Lyndewode                                    204
   (_From a photograph by F. E. Harrison from rubbing by W. Scorer_)

  Crowland Abbey, Rood-Screen from the East                            218
               (_From a photograph by Aymer Vallance_)

  Lincoln Minster, Pulpitum from the East                              222
              (_From a photograph by G. Hadley & Son_)

  Holy Trinity Church, Tattershall, Pulpitum from the East             228
              (_From a photograph by G. Hadley & Son_)

  St. Denis’ Church, Sleaford, Rood-Screen                             231
             (_From a drawing by the late Herbert Kirk_)

  St. Edith’s Church, Cotes-by-Stow, Rood-Screen and Loft from the
    Nave                                                               236
              (_From a photograph by G. Hadley & Son_)

  St. Mary’s Church, Winthorpe, Rood-Screen and Chantry Screen         238
               (_From a photograph by Aymer Vallance_)

  St. Peter and St. Paul’s Church, Middle Rasen, Rood-Screen           246
              (_From a photograph by G. Hadley & Son_)

  Doddington Hall (from S.E.)                                          284
            (_From a photograph given by R. E. G. Cole_)

  Doddington Hall, Long Gallery                                        300
                (_From a photograph by W. J. Smith_)

  Doddington Hall, Dining-Room                                         306
                (_From a photograph by W. J. Smith_)




ERRATA


  Page 106, line 4, _for_ “Norman capital” _read_ “Norman pier.”

    ”  108, paragraph 6, should read—“This church probably had its origin
              from the Abbey of Castle Acre—aided by the laity.”

    ”  109, line 1, _for_ “St. Mary Magdalene’s, Gedney,” _read_ “St.
              Mary’s, Gedney.”

    ”  180, line 28, _for_ “1220” _read_ “1201.”




PREHISTORIC LINCOLNSHIRE

BY THE REV. ALFRED HUNT, M.A.


That part of England which we now know as Lincolnshire passed through
great changes in its surface before the advent of mankind.

The rocks which lie beneath the surface soil in this county are all made
by deposit, for several thousand feet in thickness, and are what are
called stratified rocks. They indicate the fact that in past periods
of time Lincolnshire was all under a great sea. Occasionally in the
limestone rocks are found small branches or pieces of trees, as well as
great quantities of fossils of many kinds. The fact that oak and silver
birch twigs are found inside the limestone shows that trees were growing
elsewhere when the rocks were being laid down by the action of water in
Lincolnshire.

Beneath the limestone are found thick beds of red sandstone, while still
deeper down, over 3000 feet below the surface, lie beds of coal in the
north-western part of the county—indicating vast changes in the land
since what is now coal was first formed.

After the deposit or formation of these thick beds of rock, the land
seems to have been raised above the surface of the sea, to be in turn
covered with vast sheets of ice, called glaciers.

These glaciers extended all over Lincolnshire and up into North Britain
above Aberdeen in the one case, and joined another vast glacier
stretching right across what is now called the North Sea to land which is
known to-day as Norway.

These glaciers carried on their surface blocks of rock of many kinds,
some of an igneous nature, and as the glaciers moved slowly the fragments
of rock were carried many miles from their original source. As the ice
melted, these blocks of rock fell to the ground, and are now found all
over Lincolnshire.

The time when these glaciers of Britain melted away is given by Lord
Avebury[1] as about fifty thousand years ago, but they “may have lingered
among the mountains, and occupied some of the valleys down to a much more
recent period.”

The deepest borings in Lincolnshire have not yet reached the fiery or
igneous rocks _in situ_, except in the Isle of Axholme; therefore those
fragments of igneous rocks found on the surface, or in the soil, or
in glacial clays, indicate that they have been transported from their
original source, which, in certain instances, is as far distant as Norway.

Since the melting of the most recent glacier, other great changes
have taken place in the surface of the land, owing to elevations and
depressions, and the action of rain, frost, and denudation over wide
areas.

A vast forest (now submerged) formerly existed right along the edge of
the east coast of Lincolnshire; at specially low tides it is seen exposed
at Chapel St. Leonards, Ingoldmells, and other places on the East Coast.

When the Romans came to Britain, and began their conquest or occupation
of Lincolnshire, A.D. 50, they found extensive portions in the south-east
of the county covered by great meres stretching many miles in extent.
In the south-western part of the county were extensive forests; in the
north-western part of the county was the island, now called the Isle of
Axholme; but during the Roman occupation, and for centuries afterwards,
were vast sheets of fresh water, with here and there an island or islet
standing out above the surrounding meres. On the eastern side of the
county, along the sea-board, the Romans built extensive banks or sea
walls.

Prior to the Roman occupation of Lincolnshire, a race or different races
of people lived in the land we now know as the county of Lincolnshire;
and it is of this period that we write regarding the earliest known races
of mankind in the county.

The different races of mankind in the Prehistoric Ages or Periods have
been tabulated as—

    1. The Eolithic Man, or Dawn of the Stone Age.
    2. The Paleolithic Man, or the Old Stone Age, subdivided by
         Professor Dawkins as (_a_) The River Drift Man and (_b_)
         Cave Man.[2]
    3. The Neolithic Man, or New Stone Age.
    4. The Pygmy Man.
    5. The Bronze Age, subdivided as Early and Late Bronze Periods.
    6. The Prehistoric Iron Age.
    7. The Iron Age of the Roman Period.

We will deal with each of these races separately as they concern
Lincolnshire.


THE EOLITHIC PERIOD

Of this period no traces of the work of mankind have been found in the
county of Lincolnshire.

It is a period which some experts strongly affirm show traces of the work
of man in other more southern parts of Britain; so far as our experience
by definite research has extended, we are not satisfied with the evidence
offered, and prefer to keep an open mind.


THE PALEOLITHIC PERIOD, OR OLD STONE AGE

Many thousands of specimens of man’s work in this period or age have been
found in Southern England—that is, as we define it south of a line drawn
from the Severn to the Wash—but none of these old rough stone weapons
have been found _in situ_ in Lincolnshire. From the facts presented by
geology and a careful study of the county, it would appear that, while
Paleolithic Man existed in the south of England, north of an imaginary
line from the Wash to the Severn no traces of mankind have been found
relating to the Paleolithic Period. It is probable that the great
glaciers covered what is now known as Lincolnshire and Northern Britain
in that period, and formed an inaccessible barrier to the progress of
mankind.


THE RIVER DRIFT PERIOD AND THE PERIOD OF CAVE MAN

In these ages or periods, mankind found a home in the caves of North
Yorkshire, at Kirkdale and on both sides of Cresswell Craggs, the
boundary line between Nottinghamshire and Derbyshire. Quite recently[3]
discoveries have been made at Upper Langwith, also on the borders of
the two counties, Nottinghamshire and Derbyshire, showing unmistakable
signs of Cave Man dwellings and handiwork. While these places are not
far geographically from Lincolnshire, yet, to be accurate, no trace of
Cave Man or River Drift Man has been found in what is now the county of
Lincolnshire.[4]


THE NEOLITHIC PERIOD

It is in this period we first find traces of mankind in Lincolnshire.
Various burial places and many finds of implements show how widely
Neolithic Man spread over and occupied the county.

These implements are described as stone axes, spear-heads, lance-heads,
arrow-heads, scrapers, gouges, chisels, pot-boilers, knives, borers,
graving tools, hammer stones, whetstones, polishers, sink stones, anvil
stones. A list of the places where these “finds” have been recorded is as
follows:—

    *Alkborough.
    Barlings.
    *Billinghay.
    Branston.
    Brigg.
    Broughton.
    *Burwell.
    *Bully Hill.
    Caythorpe.
    Claxby, near Alford (flint flakes).
    Cold Harbour.
    *Cold Hanworth.
    Crowle.
    Coningsby Warren.
    Coxey Hills, near Louth.
    Doddington.
    Donington-on-Bain.
    Elkington, South.
    Fiskerton.
    Fotherby.
    Friskney.
    Ferriby, South.
    Gonerby.
    Gonerby, Little.
    *Haxey.
    Healing (arrow-head).
    Horncastle.
    Hubbard’s Hills, Louth.
    Irby.
    *Isle of Axholme.
    Keal, West (arrow-heads).
    Kelstern.
    Kirkstead (axe-head).
    Kirton-in-Lindsey.
    *Legbourn.
    *Lincoln.
    *Lynwode.
    *Mablethorpe.
    Maidenwell.
    Manton.
    Messingham.
    Newport, Lincoln.
    Nocton (axe-head).
    Ponton, Great.
    Potterhanworth.
    Reepham.
    *Ruckland.
    *Salmonby.
    Saxilby.
    *Scawby.
    *Scunthorpe (arrow-heads).
    Sleaford.
    Spalding (spear-head).
    Stewton.
    *Stow.
    Tathwell.
    Tetford (arrow-heads).
    Welton, by Lincoln (whetstone).
    Wragby.
    Woodhall.
    *Witham River.

Those marked with an asterisk (*) are to be seen in the County Museum at
Lincoln.

Many of these implements are excellent specimens of the art and skill of
the Neolithic workers in stone. For the purpose for which they were made,
they seem to have served well.

The axe-heads have been (in some cases) made to be used with wood handles
formed out of the branches of trees. In the course of ages the handles
have perished, but the stone implement remains.

Often people unacquainted with the subject of stone implements ask, “How
do these stone implements differ from stone forms of natural shape?”
There are several points for students to notice about “Worked Stone
Implements.” The points to be noticed with the Old Stone or Paleolithic
Implements are as follows:—

    1. The Flat Top, where the blow was struck to separate the
         implement from the flint nodule.
    2. The Bulb of Percussion caused by the blow.
    3. The Conchoidal Fracture or shell-like flake.
    4. The Flaking off at the back.
    5. The Dorsal Ridge or Ridges.
    6. The Secondary Working, round the edges.
    7. The Patina or Skin, the result of exposure to the weather.

In the characteristics of the New Stone Implements, or Neolithic Stones,
which are found in Lincolnshire, the points to be noticed are—

    1. The Definite Shaping of the Stone.
    2. The Worked Edges of the Implement.
    3. The Piercing or Socketing of the Stone.
    4. The Patination of the Implement.


THE NEOLITHIC BOATS

Several boats made out of the trunks of trees have been found in the
county—

    Two at Lincoln.
    One at Scotter.
    Two at Castlethorpe, near Brigg.

One of the two boats found at Castlethorpe was an exceptionally fine
specimen of the Neolithic boat craft. In length it was 45 feet, and 5½
feet wide inside, made out of an oak tree trunk. Within the boat was
found a very fine polished stone axe-head.

The interior of the boat showed that it had probably been charred, and
scraped or chopped out with a stone hatchet.

The boat is now transferred from Brigg to the Hull Museum.


POTTERY OF THE NEOLITHIC PERIOD

Very little pottery of this period has been found in the county.

One very good specimen of a jar or vase, broken in pieces, was found
by Mr. S. Maudson Grant on the sea-coast, outside the Roman Bank at
Ingoldmells.

This specimen is now deposited in the Lincoln Museum.


NEOLITHIC BURIAL PLACES

The burial places of early man in Lincolnshire must have been very
numerous, judging from the remains we still have surviving to this day.
These people were buried in barrows or large mounds of earth, which are
called “Tumuli.”

In Lincolnshire the barrows are of two classes, called Long Barrows and
Round Barrows.

The Long Barrow is the oldest form of interment, and belonged to the
race of people called Dolicho-cephalic, or long-headed people. Sir John
Lubbock says: “The Long Barrows are like the Gang-graben of Scandinavia,
in which the dead are buried and not burnt.”

It is in the _Long_ Barrows that we find this Neolithic race of people
buried their dead in Lincolnshire.

One of the Long Barrows still exists at Swinhope, near Grimsby, and there
are others in different parts of the county.

In a map of Lincolnshire, published about 1570, by Saxton, the position
of some of the barrows was indicated. From that map we have compiled the
following list, but the list includes both kinds of barrow, long and
round—there being no indication on the map to distinguish the one form of
barrow from the other:—

    Aukborough, 2.
    Ashby.
    Barkstone.
    Barnetby.
    Barrow, 2.
    Barton.
    Belton.
    Binbrook.
    Bonby.
    Boothby Graffoe.
    Bottesford, 2.
    Blyborough.
    Branston, 3.
    Braceby.
    Burton-upon-Stather, 2.
    Caburn.
    Carlton, North.
    Caythorpe.
    Clixby.
    Coleby.
    Coleby, near West Halton, 4.
    Cranwell.
    Croxby.
    Croxton.
    Cuxwold, 2.
    Dunston, 2.
    Ferriby, 2.
    Fillingham.
    Frodingham, 2.
    Fulbeck.
    Glentworth.
    Grange de Lings, 2.
    Grantham, 2.
    Harmston.
    Hatcliffe, 2.
    Haydour.
    Hemswell, 2.
    Horkstow, 2.
    Howsham.
    Hybaldstow, 2.
    Ingham.
    Kirmond le Mire.
    Limber, 2.
    Londonthorpe, 2.
    Manby.
    Manton, 2.
    Mere Hospital, 2.
    Messingham.
    Metheringham.
    Navenby, 2.
    Nettleham.
    Normanby.
    Normanton.
    Rauceby, 2.
    Redbourne.
    Riby.
    Riseholme.
    Rothwell.
    Ropsley.
    Rowston.
    Saxby.
    Scampton.
    Scawby.
    Scopwick.
    Scotter, 2.
    Scotton, 2.
    Searby.
    Southorp.
    Spridlington.
    Stainton le Vale.
    Thoresway, 2.
    Thornton, 3.
    Ulceby.
    Waddington, 2.
    Walesby.
    Walcot.
    Welby.
    Welton.
    Welton le Wold, 2.
    Willoughton.
    Wootton.
    Worlaby, 3.
    Wrawby.
    Wyham.

The custom of raising a mound over the place where the dead are buried is
very ancient, widespread, and continuous to the present day: examples are
to be seen in Egypt, India, America, and Britain. In its simple form it
is seen in the village churchyard, in its greatest development it is seen
in the magnificent pyramids of Egypt.

In the Long Barrows no metal implements are found unless they have been
used for what are called “secondary interments.”

The date of these Long Barrows is variously stated; Canon Greenwell says,
“probably 1000 B.C., but may be much earlier”; others say they were
probably made 3000 B.C. or 5000 years ago. The definite date cannot be
given, but only probabilities stated.

It is in this Neolithic Age that the bodies of the dead were placed in a
cist or stone box; that is, large stones were placed round the body, and
on these upright stones was fixed a covering stone.

One such system of burial was found at Rothwell, near Caistor, and
another at Dunholme.

In nearly every case of burial of this kind, which is called
_Inhumation_, the body has been placed facing the sun in a contracted
position; that is, with the knees drawn up to the chin and lying on
its side. Some specialists think this position indicates the sleeping
attitude, others think it points to the fact that as the child entered
into life in a contracted position, so the dead body was similarly placed
for departure from life, with the possibility of entering into a new life
after death.

Frequently by the side of the dead body were placed the weapons that he
used when living—axe-heads, arrow-heads, knives, and spear-heads.


LIFE OF THE NEOLITHIC PEOPLE

Naturally we may ask how did these people live? The answer undoubtedly is
by hunting, fishing, and fowling. They appear to have had large flocks of
sheep, goats, and cattle, and possessed dug-out canoes or boats.

Their dwelling places were probably hut circles, but no remains of these
have so far been found in the county of Lincolnshire.

Their care of the dead would lead us to suppose that, by comparison with
similar practices in other parts of the world, they believed in a future
state or future life.

Who were the Neolithic people?

This question has been asked by many, and the answer given by Professor
Boyd Dawkins[5] and others is that they were Iberians, and are
represented at the present time by the surviving Basque peoples of the
Western Pyrenees, on the borders of Spain and France.

“By a chain of reasoning, purely zoological, we arrive at the important
conclusion that the Neolithic inhabitants of the British Isles belong to
the same non-Aryan section of mankind as the Basques, and that in ancient
times they were spread through Spain as far south as the Pillars of
Hercules, and as far to the north-east as Germany and Denmark.”


THE PYGMY RACE OF MAN IN LINCOLNSHIRE

One of the most recent discoveries regarding Prehistoric Man in
Lincolnshire is the finding of some thousands of diminutive flint
implements at Scunthorpe, Manton Common, and Scotton, in North
Lincolnshire. At the suggestion of the writer of this article, Mr. E. E.
Brown made a careful search at Scunthorpe in A.D. 1900, and found some
thirty or forty specimens.

Since then the Rev. Reginald Gatty, the Rev. Alfred Hunt, and others have
found hundreds of specimens at Scunthorpe.

The Pygmy Flints are of various forms and sizes. Similar forms and
shapes have been found in Lancashire, Yorkshire, Bedfordshire, Suffolk,
Sussex, and elsewhere in England. On the Continent similar forms of Pygmy
Flints have been found in Belgium, France, and Germany. They have also
been found in Egypt, Palestine, North and Central Africa, and in great
numbers on the Vindhya Mountains, India.

The bodies or bones of these Pygmy people have been found at Sohâgi Ghât,
on the Vindhya Mountains, in Germany, and at Bungay, Suffolk, quite
recently, by Mr. H. A. Dutt, of Lowestoft.[6]

The Pygmy Flints all show points characteristic of the work of man:—

    1. The Bulb of Percussion.
    2. The Conchoidal Fractures running down the flint.
    3. The Dorsal Ridges on the back of the flint.
    4. The Secondary Working along one edge.
    5. The Patina or Skin, the result of weathering.

Their shapes have been described as—

    Crescent-shaped.
    Triangular or Scalene.
    Arrow-head.
    Round-headed and pointed.
    Chisel-shaped.
    Trapezoid or Rhomboidal.
    Flint knives with serrated edges.

They are figured in the _British Museum Handbook to the Stone Age_, on p.
110, Fig. 132.

They are beautifully made, and show extraordinary keen sight in those
who made them—frequently one side only shows secondary working, and the
chipping is so finely done that often twenty and thirty different chips
have been made on a fine thin edge of flint in the length of half an inch.

The question has been asked, how may we know Pygmy Flints are the work of
mankind? Practically by the same method that we know other flint or stone
implements are the handiwork of man. Examine these Pygmy Flints closely,
and you will be able to trace—

    1. The Bulb of Percussion, showing where the blow was struck to
         separate the flake from the flint nodule.
    2. The Conchoidal Fracture running down the length of the flint.
    3. The Dorsal Ridges on the back of the flint.
    4. The Secondary Working along one edge.
    5. The Patina or Skin, the result of weathering or exposure.

These distinct characteristics prove these flints are no haphazard
flakings from a flint core.

When you can pick up these Pygmy Flints, and show all these
peculiarities, you are able to convince reasonable men that they are the
work of a race of people, who, with keen vision and clever handiwork,
were able to make tools which have outlived their own age and race by
many thousands of years.


SIMILARITY IN DESIGN

One point of great interest in these widely scattered Pygmy Flints is the
great similarity in design. So much is this similarity carried out that,
if you place a Scunthorpe specimen beside one found on the Vindhya Hills
in India, it is almost impossible to say which is from the one place and
which is from the other.

This similarity in design has led many specialists to think that the
Pygmy Flints of Scunthorpe are the work of a migrating people, who passed
over from India through Asia and Europe to Britain. Amongst those who
accept this theory are Dr. Gatty and Vincent A. Smith, M.A., of the
Indian Civil Service, one of the greatest specialists we have on this
subject.


WHAT WAS THE USE OF THESE PYGMY FLINTS?

Various conjectures have been made as to the use of these small flint
implements. They must have been made for human daily use and need.

_Arrow Points_ are easily accounted for as used in hunting—being, it
is supposed, fastened to wood shafts; which is still the practice of
Australian savages.

_Fishing Hooks_ is another very natural suggestion for some of the forms;
when fixed with sinew or gut, the triangular form makes a specially
suitable hook to catch in the throat of fish.

_Knives_ is undoubtedly another use to which some specimens are adapted;
the clear cut edge would, even after the lapse of thousands of years, cut
flesh of animals at the present time.

_Boring Tools_, for making holes to sew skins together for clothing
purposes, is also a natural theory for other specimens of these Pygmy
Flints.

_Chisels_ for scraping and shaping wood handles or hafts of their tools
is also another suggestion, which is highly probable from the shape of
the flints with a square cutting edge.

_Skin Scrapers_ is still another use for which some specimens of the
implements may have been made by these people who lived by the chase;
while it is also possible that other shapes were mounted in wood frames
and used as saws, sickles, and harpoons, as shown in _British Museum
Handbook_, Fig. 118.

Some of them may have been used for tattooing, as has been suggested, but
certainly not a great proportion of the many thousands that have been
found.


BY WHAT CLASS OF PEOPLE WERE THESE IMPLEMENTS MADE?

To begin with, these small implements were made by people with _keen
vision_, the minute character of their work being more easily seen and
appreciated under a magnifying glass than with the naked eye of an
ordinary observer.

They were also _clever designers_, as the persistent shapes of these
implements show. It is not to an ordinary person an easy matter to chip
out a piece of flint in the shape of these samples; the same figures or
shapes are repeated in hundreds of instances.

Again, they were _careful workers_, as is seen by the way in which these
flint implements are made. To-day men would have to exercise almost the
care of a jeweller if they wished to make implements equal in shape and
accuracy to those found on the Scunthorpe Floor, made by these Pygmy
workers.

They knew how to _make_ a _fire_, as many fragments of charcoal have been
found on the floors of their dwelling places.

As regards _their clothing_, I am inclined to the idea that they clothed
themselves but slightly, and what clothing they had was made of the skins
of animals taken in the chase.


PYGMY SITES, STATIONS, OR DWELLING PLACES

One very interesting feature regarding Pygmy stations, sites, or dwelling
places where these Flints are found is their close association with a
_Peat Floor_. Monsieur de Pierpoint says: “He collected some thousands
of Pygmy Flints on the high plateaux above the Meuse. Formerly a thick
forest covered these mountains, and in that district the small flints
are mostly found near springs and away from the east winds.” Both at
Scunthorpe and on the hills of the Pennine Range, it is on or in the Peat
that these diminutive Flints are discovered. Dr. Colley March found them
in a bed of Peat 6 feet deep, in certain cases 10 feet deep, and at an
altitude of 1350 feet above sea-level. Dr. Gatty found them at Scunthorpe
on the top of the Peat and below the wind-blown sand 200 feet above
sea-level.

It was on the Peat that I and my friends, the Rev. R. N. Matthews, of
Tetney, in the year 1900, and the Rev. Samuel Wild, of Dunholme, found
numerous examples as recently as the spring of 1907. Dr. Gatty found
as many as 200 implements on the floor of one habitation. These facts
lead me to the belief that the natural conditions or surroundings of
Scunthorpe have completely changed since the time of the deposit of these
implements.

I believe that the natural conditions at Scunthorpe were very much like
the conditions at the Ituri Forest of North Africa at the present day,
where we see a Peat deposit in progress; that the Pygmies lived in a
warmer atmosphere at Scunthorpe than now exists in England; and that
these people lived in communities in small huts, such as may be seen now
among these living survivals of Pygmy people. They were in fact _Forest
Dwellers_.

No pottery has been found with the Pygmy Flints in Lincolnshire, but a
class of rude hand-made pottery has been found with the Indian Pygmy
Flints, and entire skeletons of the Pygmy people have been found both
in India and Germany. In India they dwelt in caves and rock shelters,
but at Scunthorpe we have no trace of caves or rock shelters; therefore
hut circles seem to be the only alternative to fall back upon as their
dwelling places in Lincolnshire.


TO WHAT PERIOD IN THE STONE AGE MUST WE ATTRIBUTE THE PYGMY RACE OF
MANKIND?

Here we have a problem that puzzles many at the present time. Mr. Read,
of the British Museum, suggests a Neolithic Age or Bronze Period, while
Mr. Vincent Smith does not agree with that, but inclines to the belief
that they are to be placed at the end of the Paleolithic Age. Dr. Colley
March calls it the Early Neolithic Floor of East Lancashire.

One thing is certain, we do not find any smooth or polished stone
implements on the Pygmy Floor. Another thing is equally true, we do not
find Pygmy Flints associated with Bronze or Copper implements, so that
they were not metal workers.

The suggestion has been thrown out that the Pygmies were a weak race
who were overcome by Neolithic Man. This may be true, but we have the
authority of Herodotus, 2000 years ago, and modern travellers like Dr.
Wollaston of 1907, pointing out that the Pygmies were, and are at the
present time, rather a fighting race of people. After considering all the
evidence obtainable, I am inclined to think that the Pygmy Race must be
placed in the Messeolithic or Middle Stone Age.

It is true that at one period “there were giants on the earth in those
days,” so also it is true that there were dwarfs on the earth in other
days. Was this race the Iberic race?

It is ably argued by Mr. W. J. Knowles, Vice-President of the Royal
Society of Antiquaries of Ireland, that Neolithic Man is the descendant
of Paleolithic Man.

The question before ethnologists to-day is: How was this transition
effected? Was it through a Messeolithic Age?

Because there are no references to the Pygmy Flint Age in the standard
books of thirty years ago on Prehistoric Man, such as those of Boyd
Dawkins, Canon Greenwell, Sir John Evans and Mr. Mortimer of Driffield,
some few people are prepared to question the reality of what are called
Pygmy Flints.

To begin with, each of these authors referred to have within the last
few years become thorough believers in Pygmy Flints as the product of
mankind. This is shown by their speeches at the recent meetings of the
British Association at York and elsewhere.

Then let the doubtful person concerning Pygmy Flints turn to recent works
on Prehistoric Man, such as Mr. Charles H. Read’s _Handbook or Guide to
the Stone Age_, in the British Museum, published 1902, to Prof. Windle’s
book on _Remains of Prehistoric Age in England_, published 1904, to the
articles by Vincent A. Smith, late of India Civil Service, to Dr. Gatty,
and other works, he will then, I think, if open to conviction, be ready
to admit there is more evidence for a Pygmy race than he anticipated.


HISTORICAL REFERENCE TO THE PYGMY RACES OF MANKIND

If we go back to the ancients, we have the authority of Herodotus, Book
II., Chapter 33, page 51, that “the Nasamonians were captured and carried
off by the Pygmy Tribe and led across extensive marshes, and finally came
to a town where all the men were the height of their conductors and black
complexioned under the middle height.”

Homer’s _Iliad_, Book III., line 9, refers to Pygmy nations.

Aristotle calls them Troglodytal—which would seem to indicate that they
were Cave Dwellers in that age. Homer and Aristotle both place them near
the sources of the Nile.

Pliny, Book VI., 19, and Philostratus, _Vit. Apoll._, Tz. III., 47, and
others, place them in India, where, in modern days, many thousands of
Pygmy Flints have been found.

The representation of Pygmy people is frequently met with on Greek vases
and Egyptian pottery.

After two thousand years of literary silence about Pygmy people, modern
travellers like Captain Harrison have brought over from the Ituri Forest
Pygmy people, and exhibited them in all parts of England.


SMALL DARK-COLOURED PEOPLE UNDER THE MIDDLE HEIGHT

Major Powell Cotton, in the year 1907, gives his experience of life
among the Pygmies of the Congo Forest, and describes them as “small
dark-coloured people under the middle height.”

Dr. A. F. R. Wollaston, also in 1907, returned to civilisation through
the Congo Forest and the volcanic region of Mfumbiro, and says the tops
of the extinct volcanoes are covered with dense bamboo and inhabited by a
Pygmy race.

In Central Mexico we have relics of a Pygmy people, the dried head of one
being offered in Mr. Steven’s London auction room this year (1907).

The last surviving Aztecs, a very diminutive people, we remember to have
seen exhibited in Manchester thirty years ago.

All these instances point to diminutive or Pygmy races of men scattered
over the world.

As the literature on this subject is so limited, we venture to name the
authorities quoted:—

    Herodotus.
    Pliny.
    Homer.
    Philostratus.
    Aristotle.
    British Museum, _Guide to Stone Age_, by C. H. Read, Esq.
    Dr. Colley March, of Rochdale.
    W. H. Sutcliffe, Esq., of Littleborough, Lancashire.
    The Rev. Reginald A. Gatty, LL.B., of Hooton Roberts, Doncaster.
    Dr. Sturge, formerly of Nice, now of Mildenhall, Cambridge.
    The late A. C. Carlleyle, Esq., of the Archæological Survey of India.
    M. de Pierpoint, of Brussels.
    M. Thieullen, of Paris.
    Sir John Evans.
    Professor Boyd Dawkins.
    Professor Windle, of Birmingham.
    Major Powell Cotton.
    Dr. A. F. R. Wollaston.
    Vincent A. Smith, Esq., M.A.


THE BRONZE AGE IN LINCOLNSHIRE

The earliest appearance of bronze in Britain is put down at 2000 B.C.

As we have already stated this period is divided into Early and Late
Periods by specialists.

Specimens of both periods have been found in many parts of the county,
and so far as we have been able to trace them, we have compiled the
following list of places where they have been discovered:—

    Anwick.
    Barton-on-Humber.
    Billinghay.
    Boston, B.M.
    *Branston, B.M.
    Brigg.
    Broughton.
    Burringham.
    Caythorpe.
    Caenby.
    Crosby.
    Crowle.
    Crowland.
    Elsham.
    Fleet.
    Flixborough.
    Fiskerton.
    Gainsborough.
    Halton, West, B.M.
    *Haxey, B.M.
    Horncastle, B.M.
    Kelsey, South.
    Kyme, South.
    Langton.
    Leasingham.
    *Lincoln.
    *Nettleham.
    Newport, Lincoln.
    Owersby, North.
    *Reepham.
    Roxby, B.M.
    Scothorne.
    Scunthorpe, B.M.
    Sleaford.
    Toynton, B.M.
    Washingborough.
    Winghale, B.M.
    Winterton.
    Winteringham.
    Wrawby.
    *Witham River.

Those marked with an asterisk (*) are to be seen in the County Museum
at Lincoln. Those marked B.M. are in the British Museum.

The objects found include swords, celts (socketed and unsocketed),
arrow-heads, spear-heads, palstaves, adzes, knives, daggers, circular
shields, armlets, bracelets, bridle bits, trumpet, horse trappings
(probably a peytrel at Caenby).

These show progress in the art of man from rude plane castings to what
may be called high art in decoration, as shown in the very elaborate
shield from the river Witham, and now in the British Museum, figured in
their catalogue to the Early Iron Age on page 90.

It is to this period that we must attribute many of the very fine pieces
of pottery belonging to Mr. H. Preston, now deposited at the Lincoln
Museum. It consists of cinerary urns, drinking cups, food vessels,
incense cups, and other forms of vessels.

The places where this early class of pottery has been found in the
county, so far as we have been able to compile it, is as follows:—

    *Billinghay.
    Caythorpe.
    Denton.
    Donnington.
    *Dunston.
    Ferriby, South.
    Heighington.
    Horncastle.
    Kirton in Lindsey.
    Lincoln.
    Manton.
    Normanton.
    *Potterhanworth.
    Scotter.
    Willingham, North.
    Woolsthorpe.

Those marked with an asterisk (*) are to be seen in the County Museum
at Lincoln.

All this pottery is made of burnt clay in an open fire.


CLOTHING OF THE PEOPLE IN THE BRONZE AGE

In the one instance where a body has been found with clothing at Haxey in
the Isle of Axholme, it was that of a woman dressed in skins with sandals
on her feet. Cæsar’s statement in Book V., paragraph 147, describes the
Celts or Britons as wearing skins on their bodies for clothing, and the
parts of the body not covered with skins being painted in order to render
themselves more terrible in battle.


BRONZE AGE BURIALS

We have already referred to two classes of barrows or burial places. One
is described as a long barrow, the other as a round barrow.

It is in this latter class of burial place that the people of the Bronze
Age buried their dead.

The round barrows belong to another race of people who existed in
Lincolnshire, and are described as Brachy-cephalic or round-headed people.

In these burial places bronze implements have sometimes been found, and
occasionally stone implements, showing that the Stone Age overlapped or
ran into the Bronze Period.

Incompleteness of the circle in the barrow points to design.

An alphabetical list of the places where in recent times the round barrow
existed is as follows:—

    Barrow.
    Bardney.
    Brigg.
    Burgh.
    Burgh-on-Bain.
    Burnham.
    Bully Hills, 6.
    Claxby by Alford.
    Cockerington.
    Cleasham.
    Donington-on-Bain.
    Falkingham.
    Gainsborough.
    Halton, West.
    Haugham.
    Horncastle.
    Ingoldsby.
    Kelstern.
    Langton by Spilsby, 3.
    Revesby.
    Riseholme.
    Spellow Hills.
    Temple Bruer, 2.
    Wainfleet, 2.
    Walcot.
    Well near Alford, 3.
    Welton in the Marsh.
    Wold Newton, 20 urns.

The barrow was considered to be the habitation of the spirits of the dead.

In the Bronze Age often the body was burnt wholly or in parts. Sometimes
the ashes were collected and placed in an urn. This burning of the body
seems to have been one of their sacred rites of burial. In nearly every
case where the body has been burnt, holes seem to have been bored or
drilled into the ground underneath the body. Sometimes these were stake
holes, but the wood has perished. In these barrows was buried the chief
of the clan or tribe.

A plate picture of the different kinds of skulls of the Dolicho-cephalic
and the Brachy-cephalic people appears in the _British Museum Handbook to
the Antiquities of the Bronze Age_, page 20.

It is considered very probable that the round-headed people were the
conquerors of the long-headed race.


ENTRENCHMENTS OF THE IRON AGE

It is to this age we must refer the making of the lines of entrenchments
in various parts of the county at Honington, Ingoldsby, Kingerby, Hoe
Hill, Fulletby, and other places.

The Bronze Age people are generally called Celts, and have been
subdivided by Professor Rhys as Goidelic and Brythonic races—the older
race being the Goidels and the later race Brythons.

    “Both races spoke a language that belonged to the Aryan or
    Indo-European family, but had certain peculiarities that point
    to racial divergence.”—C. H. READ.

It is to the Bronze Age Professor Boyd Dawkins would attribute the
erection of the great stone circles, such as Stonehenge, Avebury,
and other places, but of these stone circles no remnants exist in
Lincolnshire.


THE PREHISTORIC IRON AGE, 400 B.C.

Traces of the occupation of Lincolnshire in this period are to be found
in the pre-Roman smelting furnaces for iron in various parts of the
county at Manton and elsewhere.

Certain iron spear-heads, daggers,[7] sheaths,[8] and swords[9] of bronze
from the river Witham are also attributed to this period. The art of
enamelling the surface of metal appears in the Prehistoric Iron Age, and
its chief centre seems to have been the British Isles.

The shield found in the river Witham is put down to this period in
the _British Museum Handbook_, pages 87 to 92. It is one of the most
beautiful specimens of inlaid work yet discovered.

    “With the introduction of iron a change in the burial customs
    took place in Britain. Cremation was carried on, but the dead
    were frequently interred at full length in a stone chamber, or
    shallow pit, along with various articles used in daily life.”

Doubtless there are many “finds” of stone and bronze and iron implements
from Lincolnshire in private collections that are not described in any
book or catalogue extant.

It is only by personal knowledge, and by contributing that knowledge
to a common centre, that anything like a correct record can be made
for the benefit of students and futurity of the Prehistoric Period in
Lincolnshire.

With the coming of the Romans, B.C. 55 and 47 A.D., we enter on the
Historic Iron Age, which is outside the scope of this article. As regards
the Roman occupation of Lincoln, A.D. 50, we have written elsewhere.[10]




THE ROMANS IN LINCOLNSHIRE

BY THE REV. E. H. R. TATHAM, M.A.


Roman Lincolnshire has no written history. There is not a line in any
extant ancient writer describing the progress of a Roman army within its
limits. Yet that wonderful people have left indelible marks of their
presence in the county, not merely, as elsewhere, in a few fortifications
connected by military roads, but in the systematic reclamation of a whole
district. The details remaining to us of their conquest of the island
apply principally to the south-east, the north, and the north-west. And
yet the marshy plain of the Lincolnshire coast must have been then, as it
proved in later times, an ideal refuge for native tribes at last driven
to bay. Bounded on the east by the sea and on the south by impassable
fens—subject in parts to submersion by the sea—the county was only
accessible to a southern invader on its south-west side, through the
forest which then covered Kesteven. But the Roman conqueror was seldom
daunted by natural obstacles; and some further explanation is needed of
the fact that, in the earlier stages of the conquest, his efforts seem
constantly deflected to the west. Some have fancied that the Romans
recognised their most implacable enemies in the Druids, and that these
priestly fanatics retreated westward before them until they were finally
exterminated by Paulinus in their stronghold of Mona (Anglesey). A
simpler hypothesis is that, like the Regni in Sussex and the Brigantes in
Yorkshire, the inhabitants of our county at first propitiated the enemy
by alliance and by giving hostages for good conduct.

The tribe which, according to Ptolemy (about A.D. 120), then occupied the
counties of Lincoln, Leicester, and Nottingham, was the Coritani. If, as
some have supposed, this tribe was a branch of the Eceni, it would almost
certainly have been involved in the rebellion of Boudicca (A.D. 61).
Yet for at least ten years we hear of no further expedition undertaken
in this direction. If, on the other hand, the tribe was subject to or
allied with its powerful northern neighbour, the Brigantes, it may
possibly have been included in the compact which, before the year A.D.
50, was made by that tribe with the invader. Professor Rhys conjectures,
rather hesitatingly,[11] that the Coritani may have been a remnant of the
pre-Celtic population, and that their submission may have synchronised
with the conquest of the warlike tribes of the southern midlands, to whom
they had been subject.

Anyhow there is no positive indication that before A.D. 70 the Roman
forces had penetrated into the eastern counties beyond the southern shore
of the Wash. Some have fancied that the Coritani were subdued by Ostorius
(A.D. 50-55), or Paulinus (A.D. 57-62). But the line of advance taken by
both generals was to the north-west, along Watling Street, rather than
due north; and Ostorius in particular is said to have established a chain
of fortified camps—doubtless to secure his communications—from the Nene
to the Severn. But when Petilius Cerealis assumed the command in the year
A.D. 71, the peace with the Brigantes was broken, and Tacitus represents
that the ensuing campaigns, of which he only says that “there were many
battles and some not bloodless,” lasted the four years of this command.
As his father-in-law, Agricola, was then in command of the Twentieth
Legion, Tacitus must have known the facts, and may have reserved a full
account of them for his _Histories_, but the portion of the work which
deals with this war has not survived.

We do not know what were the headquarters of the Roman governors from
A.D. 61 to 71, but they were almost certainly south of the Wash. An
advance, therefore, against the Brigantes of Yorkshire must have brought
them along the western branch of Ermine Street to Lincoln, as any good
map will show. To the west they had the difficult country of the Peak,
to the east the dreaded Fenland, and there is no direct road through
Nottinghamshire to York. Starting from Durobrivæ (Castor)—which was
perhaps the most easterly fort on the Nene, and as such occupied by the
Ninth Legion in A.D. 61—and taking the line of road afterwards laid down,
the army would at first bend to the north-west to avoid the immediate
neighbourhood of the fens. Along this road, still traceable, and called
in parts the “High Dyke,” there are camps at Casterton, Easton, and
Ancaster, the last of which subsequently became an important station. At
length, after traversing the high ground of the Cliff, the army would
appear on the ridge of Canwick, facing the “Lincoln Gap.” On the crest
of the opposite hill, from which they were separated by a flooded valley
then reached by the tide, lay a strong British “oppidum.” It would be
no light matter to take such a position by storm, but taken it was,
whether by force or through a timely surrender. When once occupied, this
stronghold would be turned into a military earthwork and used as a base
of operations against the Brigantes, thus becoming the nucleus of the
subsequent city. The advance into Yorkshire, if supported by a fleet,
may have been made from the north gate of the camp by the direct line
of Ermine Street to Winteringham on the Humber, for the Ouse was then
navigable as far as York. But it seems more likely that this was a land
expedition, and that the earliest road was that which leaves the main
Ermine Street four miles north of Lincoln, and under its present name
of Tillbridge Lane points direct to Littleborough on the Notts bank of
the Trent. Here a camp would be formed, which developed later into the
walled station Segelocum; here also was a ford which could soon be made
available for the passage of an army. The banks were sloped away so as to
make the descent easy to a raised causeway—paved with stones and held up
by strong stakes driven into the bed of the river. This causeway, which
was 18 feet wide, existed till 1820, when, owing to the obstruction it
caused to navigation in dry seasons, it had to be removed; but part of
the paved descent can still be seen on the farther bank. The reason why
the road from Lincoln to this ford was not more direct is that it avoided
the low land, then subject, as will be shown, to constant flooding from
the Trent.

It was perhaps not till the governorship of Agricola (A.D. 78-85), when
the country between the Humber and the Tyne was completely subdued,
that Lindum became an important fortress. In his _Life of Agricola_
Tacitus names a provokingly small number of places in Britain; but he
states that that general, in the second year of his command, “erected
garrisons and fortresses among those tribes which had hitherto considered
themselves a match for Rome.”[12] His, therefore, may have been the
vigilant eye, which first discerned the strategic value of Lindum;
but possibly it was Hadrian, or one of his commanders, who elevated
it to the rank of a “colony.” This term was applied under the Empire
to a settlement of veterans, which was held to form an integral part
of Rome, and whose government was a copy in miniature of that of the
capital. Each colony had its senate or “curia,” and annually elected two
“duumviri,” corresponding to the consuls. A portion of the neighbouring
land was assigned to each soldier, and the men were sometimes allowed,
for a time at least, to retain their arms. If we may trust the “Ravenna”
list of towns, the only “coloniæ” in Britain were Colchester, Lincoln,
and Gloucester, and this was perhaps the order of their foundation.
These colonies formed in themselves so strong a nucleus of Roman
civilisation that they were seldom or never made garrison towns. The
three headquarters of the legions—York, Chester, and Caerleon—were not
colonies;[13] and there is no trace of a colony among the military
stations on Hadrian’s Wall. The small number of these towns in Britain,
and their intimate connection with Rome, indicate the great importance
of Lindum. Another proof of this is the fact that the Foss Way, which,
at least in part, is a work of the second century, seems to have been
constructed with the express object of creating easy communication
between Lincoln and the thickly-settled district of the south-west. No
other town, except London, York, Colchester, and perhaps Cirencester, was
connected with so many highways of the first class.

The existing remains of Lindum, though unfortunately much defaced by
continuous occupation, fully corroborate this view. In the third and
fourth centuries it was a kind of twin-city—the original “colonia,” about
37 acres in extent, occupying the brow of the hill, while the lower
town, a sort of “annex” to the first, descended its slopes to the banks
of the Witham. The original town must have been of great strength. Its
northern and southern walls were about a quarter of a mile in length,
and were each pierced by a gate—probably a double gate—through which
the Ermine Street passed and bisected the city. The eastern and western
walls were a little shorter—about 420 yards—and each had a gate in the
centre, also probably double, with guard-rooms on each side of the
central space. The walls were 10 feet thick and over 20 feet in height.
Though obviously repaired at various times, it is likely that they were
erected at the foundation of the colony, as the recent destruction of the
unwalled Camulodunum would be a stern warning to the first colonists.
A few fragments exist, none in a perfect state; but the inner face of
the northern (now strangely called “Newport”) gate is still entire,
though half buried in the soil, and is a unique monument of Roman rule
in Britain. It consists of a central arch about 16 feet wide, which had
two posterns, of which the eastern, though built over, still remains; the
other was destroyed about a century ago. The gate was formerly supposed
to have been single; but it stands 20 feet back from the neighbouring
fragments of the wall; and an old engraving, here reproduced,[14] shows
the remains of two arches on its northern side. Such double gates are a
frequent feature in the stations on Hadrian’s Wall. The south and east
gates were still standing at the end of the seventeenth century, at
least in part. But the former, which was near the brink of Steep Hill,
was pulled down soon after, though its eastern postern can still be seen
within a house; while the latter, which stood just east of the Deanery,
was only demolished in 1763. The western gate was accidentally discovered
in 1836, buried beneath the high mound of the Castle. The arch was
uncovered, and found to be of the same age as Newport; but it collapsed
a few days later from the weight of the superincumbent earth, though
fortunately not till the sketch of it here shown had been taken. From
this it appears to have been exposed nearly as low as Newport without
discovering posterns, which may have been absent from this gate, because
no military road passed through it. Yet there were signs of a return
wall, which indicate that the gate was double. The western wall followed
the line of the Castle rampart and beyond it to the waterworks reservoir;
the eastern passed under the chapter-house and the eastern transepts of
the Minster.

The Forum was in the north-western quarter of the town, for the bases
(and part of the shafts) of nineteen fine columns were found between 1878
and 1897 in Bailgate, standing in a line north and south, and fronting
the course of Ermine Street. Of these five are double and one triple,
and the space of 16 feet between two of the double columns—the sixth and
seventh from the south—doubtless represents the street between the east
and west gates; it is exactly in the line, and the side pavements were
found much worn by the foot traffic. The building on the south side of
this entrance to the Forum is thought to have been a temple; that on
the north was probably a basilica, and a part of its northern wall—now
called the Mint Wall—is still standing some 25 feet above-ground. It is
70 feet long and 3½ feet thick, and is formed of stone and of six courses
of triple bonding tiles, with intervals of 5 feet between the upper
courses. This building is supposed, from the red tint of the columns
and the charred remains found at their base, to have been destroyed
by fire. Along the centre of the city, parallel with Ermine Street,
has been found a large main sewer, with branches running into it from
right and left. The city was supplied with water by underground pipes
from two springs—one on the hill outside the western wall, the other
three-quarters of a mile away, on the Nettleham Road. From the latter the
water was conducted, by pipes cemented together, into a neatly bricked
well, called the Blind Well, which once existed a few yards north of the
Assembly Rooms, but has now been filled up.

But the most interesting discovery in this quarter was that of the
milestone dedicated to the Emperor Victorinus (one of the Thirty
Tyrants), which was unearthed in 1879, and is now to be seen in the
Lincoln Museum. It was found probably on its original site, where the
cross street entered the Forum from Ermine Street. Victorinus held the
supreme power in Gaul for little more than a year, so that the erection
of this stone can be placed with certainty in A.D. 266-7.[15] This
discovery confirms the reading “Segelocum” in the _Antonine Itinerary_,
and also the distance there given. Some have thought that Carausius, the
“Menapian admiral,” who seized the reins of power in Britain twenty years
later under Diocletian, resided for some time in Lincoln. For this there
is not much evidence. His coins, of which there are 300 known types, are
common not in Lincolnshire only, but in all parts of England; and he
is more likely to have established himself in London or near the south
coast. But it is possible that the northern wall of Lindum, in which
some of his coins have been found, was repaired in his time or a little
later. Less than half a mile north of Newport Arch are to be seen remains
of an earthen rampart, with a fosse on the northern side extending about
350 yards east and west, and with entrenchments running from the corners
at right angles towards the city. Stukeley imagined that these were the
defences of the British “oppidum”; but their shape and the practical
certainty that the Britons would choose the edge of the hill leave little
doubt that they are Roman outworks, possibly enclosing a northern suburb.

But the natural direction for the enlargement of the city would be the
southern slope of the hill towards the river; and at some period—perhaps
in the third or fourth century—the eastern and western walls were
prolonged until they met a transverse wall, 50 yards from the river, at
about the centre of which is the mediæval gate called the “Stone-bow.”
Leaving the south-east corner of the original wall at the Cantilupe
Chantry, the prolonged east wall descended the hill between the Vicar’s
Court and the Bishop’s Palace (where part of it still exists), through
the Temple Gardens, with the “Were Dyke” as its fosse, to the junction of
Silver Street and Broadgate, where was a gateway, called Clasket Gate.
Thence it was continued to a bastion, once called the Tower Garth, on the
south side of St. Swithin’s Square. From this point the southern wall,
which was lately uncovered in several places, extended to the “Stone-bow”
and along Guildhall Street and Newland to its south-west corner at
the (so-called) “Lucy” Tower, whence it ascended Motherby Hill to the
western end of the original south wall at the corner of the Castle. This
later town would be nearly double the size of the original colony, and
the whole twin-city must have covered an area as large as that of Roman
Colchester (108 acres). The walling of the lower city points to a sense
of insecurity, but whether this arose from native disaffection or from
a fear of foreign invasion there is no evidence to show. It probably
contained no official buildings, and few important remains have come to
light within it, but a hypocaust was found in 1782 near the top of High
Street.

Space would fail us in enumerating the many lesser articles of interest
discovered in Lincoln. Seven tessellated pavements have been found, all
in the upper city; a perfect Roman altar, with inscription, came to light
in 1884 on the site of St. Swithin’s Tower; and at least six sepulchral
slabs have been unearthed, three of which were in memory of soldiers of
the Ninth (Spanish) Legion—perhaps an indication that to this legion,
which is not mentioned after Trajan’s reign, lands were assigned at the
foundation of the colony. Traces of interments have been found bordering
the roads on the north, east, and south of the city; those beyond the
east gate seem to be the most numerous, and in one case the remains were
enclosed in a large burial-chamber. In the immediate neighbourhood of the
city were villas of some size. At Canwick Church there is a tessellated
pavement, two feet below the floor-level, extending the whole length of
the nave; and at Greetwell, a mile and a half to the east, a substantial
residence was discovered, with many rooms and corridors, and with
pavements of artistic design.

In the three centuries between Ptolemy, who first mentions the city,
and the abandonment of Britain by Rome, Lindum is named but once—in the
_Antonine Itinerary_. But it seems likely that Adelfius, one of the
three British prelates at the Council of Arles, was its bishop in 314.[16]

With regard to the roads radiating from Lindum, it will be convenient
to deal first with those to the north. From Newport Gate, Ermine Street
continues to the Humber for thirty miles in a direct line—absolutely
straight, indeed, for five-sixths of the distance. Mr. Codrington
assumes without reason that this road was earlier than that already
mentioned, which crossed the Trent and passed by way of Doncaster and
Castleford to York.[17] Present appearances certainly justify his view,
for the latter road now seems merely a branch of the former. But this
may not always have been the case. Originally the first four miles may
have been nearer the edge of the high ground through Burton and North
Carlton into Tillbridge Lane; but when the direct Ermine Street was
constructed this portion would not be repaired, and therefore would be
completely disused, as the increase in distance by the new road would be
trifling. It is a curious fact that the only section of Ermine Street
between London and the Humber included in the _Antonine Itinerary_ is
that between Lincoln and Godmanchester; the route from Lincoln to York
in two Iters (V. and VIII.) is by the Doncaster road, which is longer
than Ermine Street by several miles if York were the objective, but which
rather points directly to Isurium—supposed by some to have been the
Brigantian capital.[18] The presumption should surely be that the shorter
route, which involved the crossing of a broad estuary, would be a later
construction of more settled times. In the parish of Scampton, adjoining
the Doncaster road, and about a mile and a half north-west of the point
where it branches from Ermine Street, was discovered in 1795 a large
Roman villa, with forty rooms and thirteen tessellated pavements—one
of a very beautiful design. The whole building covered a space 70 yards
square, and included two courtyards, thus differing somewhat in plan from
the great villas of the south-west.

Ermine Street from Lincoln to the Humber is one of the finest of Roman
highways—clearly traceable to-day for almost the whole distance. In a
stretch of thirty miles there must have been a middle station, which
was certainly in Hibaldstow; but since remains have been found here on
both sides of the great “Way,” its exact site is uncertain. At the farm
of Gainsthorpe, about 200 yards to the west, is a remarkable cluster of
ruined habitations, which has never been properly explored: excavation
here, and in a large camp a little to the north on the east side of
Ermine Street, promises to yield fruitful results. From this point there
would naturally be a by-road to Caistor, ten miles due east across the
Ancholme valley, but no traces of it are on record. A pavement has been
found in Hibaldstow, and two more at Storton in Scawby—the next parish
to the north. The line of the road passes through Broughton, three
miles west of Brigg, where various remains have been discovered; and
the country round it, as it approaches the Humber, abounded in rural
residences of the better class. At Roxby, a mile and a half to the west,
a good pavement was found in 1709; and about forty years later, three
more of very superior design were discovered below the Cliff House in
Winterton, one of which had a bust of Ceres in the centre. A fourth near
the same spot, with a figure of Apollo, was unearthed in 1797; and in a
garden at Horkstow, more than three miles east of this site, was found
a pavement with three compartments, in which are depicted the Fates,
Orpheus playing the lyre to the animals, and a chariot race. Among the
remains found at Winterton are many coins, spear-heads, a brass eagle,
and a potter’s kiln; while another kiln was found at Santon in Appleby,
a few miles to the south. This district—as also the chalk ridges of the
Eastern Wolds—seems to have been favourable for the manufacture of the
coarse grey and stone-coloured pottery, so common on Roman sites in the
county. The Ermine Street ended at a promontory overlooking the Humber
in the parish of Winteringham, below which was an ancient haven called
Flashmire, now silted up. This point is a little east of the Roman
“station” of Brough on the opposite shore, so that boats could make the
crossing of under two miles with the inflowing tide. In the dry summer of
1826, when the water was low, a paved causeway or jetty—like that leading
to the Trent at Littleborough—was exposed on both the Lincolnshire and
Yorkshire banks. Stukeley says that, when the “station” at Winteringham
was ploughed up in 1700, extensive remains were found—as of stone
foundations, pavements, and streets made of gravel and sea-sand. About
four miles south-west of this point, and half-way to the Roman Camp at
Barton, lies South Ferriby. Here is an ancient well-spring, near which
at various times interesting articles have been found—some, perhaps,
votive offerings to the local goddess of the spring. These objects, now
principally in the Hull Museum, include cinerary urns of all kinds,
fireplaces, coins, and a remarkable collection of bronze _fibulæ_—many
harp-shaped (two with the Gaulish maker’s name, “Aucissa”) and others
flat, with the disc in the shape of a fish or sandal. From Winteringham
there may have been a branch-way to Barton—seven miles to the east. At
Alkborough, about four miles westward, there is a strong camp, about
one hundred yards square, overlooking the junction of the Trent and
the Humber. Its Roman origin is disputed, and the area has never been
carefully excavated.

Returning once more to Lincoln, we find at least one road leaving the
east gate of the city, which is nearly identical with the present
Wragby road. This was in line with the Foss Way, but was of much less
importance. At Claybridge, about seven miles from Lincoln, a by-way
branches off south-eastwards to the fort at Horncastle; while another,
called Horncastle Lane, which is probably Roman, bends westward to the
junction of Ermine Street and Tillbridge Lane. The main way continues
north-eastward through Ludford and Ludborough to the coast, where it
ends at some remains of saltworks in the parish of Grainthorpe. Its
easterly part used to be known as “Salters’ Lane,” and it crosses the
“High Street” from Horncastle to Caistor at Ludford. It is possible
that this route and a branch-way from Ermine Street were the only roads
from Lincoln to Caistor; at least no traces of a road, or even of Roman
remains, are known to me on the direct line between the east gate and
Caistor.

No road of any importance seems to have left Lincoln by the west gate;
and the reason for this is to be found in the physical features of
the neighbourhood at the time of the Roman occupation. The part of
Lincolnshire north of the Witham is still called “Lindsey”—a name which
indicates by its final syllable that, when it was given, the district was
practically surrounded by water. On all sides but the south it is so to
this day—viz. by the sea on the east, by the Humber on the north, and by
the Trent on the west. In the Roman period—and indeed for many centuries
after—the Witham was tidal as far as the narrow “Gap” between Lincoln and
the opposite high land of Kesteven. Geologists tell us that this “Gap,”
now intersected by the Witham, was in pre-glacial ages scooped out by
the Trent, the course of which from Newark was then north-east instead
of north; and that after that river had been “captured” by the Humber
(_i.e._ diverted into its present bed by the opening of a longitudinal
valley from the north) it would always tend to revert to its original
course in time of flood. The result of this constant flooding was the
formation of a large mere, extending from the western end of the Gap
as far north as Brampton, beyond which the east bank of the Trent was
too high for the water to escape. The first syllable of Lindum no doubt
represents the Celtic word, which was applied to this large sheet of
water. Faint remains of it can still be seen in the small pool of
Brayford—just below the south gate of the lower city. The flood-water
came through five openings in a low range of sandhills between Spaldford
and Brampton; and the first work of the Roman engineers was to build
banks across these openings, and so shut out the water of the Trent. The
southernmost opening at Spaldford—the most dangerous because the highest
up the valley—was closed by a bank from 12 to 15 feet high and a mile and
a half in length.

Through the marsh which was left when the water disappeared the Romans
constructed a navigable canal, now called the Fossdyke, between the
Witham and the Trent. Its original course at the western end was,
according to Stukeley, more direct than at present—joining the Trent
not, as now, at Torksey, but about two miles farther south. From its
bed was dredged up in 1774 a small bronze statue of Mars, with a Latin
inscription. At Lincoln itself the Sincil Dyke, a drain of the “Slaker”
type—to ease off the water in time of flood—was constructed connecting
the upper and lower ends of the loop which is made by the Witham in order
to pass through the Gap. These operations certainly took place at a very
early period of the Roman occupation of Lincoln. For until they were made
effective, it would be impossible to lay the line of the Foss Way between
Lincoln and Leicester; and we know from a milestone discovered on that
road three miles north of Leicester, and dedicated to Hadrian in A.D. 120
(when he was in Britain), that the eastern part of the Foss Way—doubtless
the earliest made in order to connect Lincoln with Watling Street—was
being laid down in the first quarter of the second century. In the valley
below Lincoln, Ermine Street and the Foss Way, which were united for the
crossing, traversed the marshes of the Gap on a pile-foundation.

But the chief anxiety of a Roman general, who would secure the submission
or tranquillity of this part of Britain, must have been the condition
of the Fen district along the lower reaches of the Witham, and beyond
it to the south. If the Coritani had to be subdued by force of arms,
as we have supposed, their subjugation must have been a long business.
Moreover, the Romans were experienced agriculturists, and must have
guessed the value of the rich fenland east and south-east of their
colony. On that side there was doubtless an even larger mere than on
the west—caused partly by the flood-water which had overflowed the Gap,
partly by streams from the high land of Kesteven; and this sheet of
water must have risen considerably in height during the spring-tides.
In this mere for many miles the stream of the Witham must have been
barely discernible. Below it the district of Holland was a vast morass,
liable to inundation both by the sea and by the rivers—then of much
larger volume than now—which fell into the Wash. It is not likely that
this district was largely settled by the natives before the Romans came,
and the British antiquities found are few; but it was a natural refuge
for the disaffected—as was shown later during the Danish and Norman
invasions. Herodian says[19] of the campaign in Scotland in 209 that the
Emperor Severus made passage for his troops over the fens, where, “from
the frequent overflowing of the ocean, the inhabitants will swim and
walk, though up to their middle in water.”

The engineering skill needed to cope with this situation was very great;
and if proof be required that the Romans exercised it, the answer is
sufficient that neither before nor for a thousand years after this
period was there a central organisation strong enough to carry out such
operations. The work had to be of two kinds—draining, to carry off
the flood-water and void the rainfall coming from the high land, and
embanking, to shut out the sea. In the former the Romans acted upon
sound principles, which were often neglected in after times. They used
the natural rivers as arterial drains, and led the subsidiary drains
into them. History records that they executed similar works in other
parts of the Empire. The Pontine marshes and the Lombard valley of the
Po were drained under the Republic. The Emperors Claudius and Hadrian
began and completed a canal between the Fucine Lake and the Liris. In
the Low Countries, Drusus, in 12 B.C., drew a channel connecting Lake
Flevo (Zuyder Zee) and the Rhine; and in A.D. 47 Corbulo made a canal,
twenty-three miles in length, between the Rhine and the Meuse. Eleven
years later a project for uniting the Saone and the Moselle, and thus
completing a waterway from the Mediterranean to the North Sea, was only
not attempted from fear of the jealousy of Nero. If a full account was
ever written of the Roman settlement of Britain, the operations now to be
described must have filled a large place in it.

The present channel of the Witham from Lincoln to Boston is much too
straight to have ever been the course of a natural stream. From Chapel
Hill just below Dogdyke, where there was a tidal creek, the river was
canalised to Boston as late as 1761; but there is no record in historical
times of such an operation in the twenty miles from Lincoln to Dogdyke.
In order to drain the lower mere described above, a channel was cut
along the high land for that distance, and the upper waters of the river
directed into it. In very early (perhaps in Roman) times there was
another branch of the Witham due east from Dogdyke through the upper fen
to Wainfleet, where it received the Steeping, and thence into the sea
near Gibraltar Point. Very probably it was the draining of the district
near Lincoln which hastened the silting up of this ancient channel. But
at no time can it have been, as some have fancied,[20] the principal
outfall of the river, for it is much farther from the sea, and could not
have been tidal, like the other, for the whole distance.

The most remarkable monument of Roman engineering in the Fens is the
catchwater drain called the Cardyke (_Brit._ “fen-dyke”), which leaves
the Witham at Washingborough about three miles from Lincoln, and then
for eighteen miles takes a southerly course parallel to that river at
distances varying from two to five miles from it. The primary object may
have been to intercept the water of the numerous streams coming from the
Kesteven uplands; but it was doubtless intended to be navigable, as its
width at the water-level was 50 feet, and at its bottom 30 feet. On both
sides was a raised bank, flattened at the top to serve the purpose of a
road, and still in some places crowned with a modern road. In the parish
of Heckington, nine miles due west of Boston, it makes a sharp turn to
the south-west, and then skirts the western border of the Fen for over
thirty miles, till, after a course of fifty-six miles, it joins the river
Nene, half a mile south-east of Peterborough, and about five miles below
the Roman town of Durobrivæ (Castor). In some parts the Cardyke has been
obliterated, and in many it is now a mere ditch; but its whole course
can be exactly traced, and for a few miles it is still used as a drain.
The last eight miles are beyond the borders of our county; but within
those borders Roman remains have been found in at least ten parishes
through which it passes. No vestiges can be found of the seven forts
alleged by Stukeley to have been raised along its course, but there is a
camp at North Kyme, within a short distance. Even with the aid of forced
labour—partly, perhaps, imported from the Continent—such a work must have
taken many years to construct; and it may have been in progress during a
great part of the century between Trajan and Severus (A.D. 100-210). Its
long course, parallel to the canalised channel of the Witham, suggests
that its northern portion was first undertaken to assist in draining the
mere south-east of Lincoln. But when this object was accomplished, and
the immense work was taken in hand of embanking the shores of the Wash,
the canal would gradually be extended southward in order to provide an
inland waterway past Lincoln, by the Fossdyke, the Trent, and the Ouse,
to the northern capital at York. This measure could hardly have been
contemplated until the Holland Fen was sufficiently dry to admit of
causeways being made across it into Lindsey on the north and Norfolk on
the east.

The seabanks in Holland and East Lindsey, which are now called the “Roman
Banks,” extend by a most circuitous route for about a hundred and fifty
miles from Wisbech nearly to Grimsby. Tradition ascribes them to the
Romans; and as their bases are deeply buried in silt, they are evidently
of pre-Norman origin. Mr. Skertchly has estimated that at least eleven
million tons of material must have been used in their construction. His
collaborator, Mr. Miller,[21] suggests that this stupendous work may
have been partly executed before the Roman invasion. But as this idea
rests upon two very uncertain conjectures—(1) that the Coritani were
Germans from the Low Countries with a knowledge of embanking, and (2)
that they may have learnt engineering from the Greek colonies in Gaul,
it may be dismissed as improbable. The tribal natives, whatever their
state of civilisation, could hardly do more than provide a core of clay,
upon which the banks of blown sand could gradually form. It has been
well pointed out that the Roman Banks are not works of such a kind as
could be carried out in portions, and spread over a number of years.[22]
“The enclosure of a large tract covered by the spring-tides is a work
that requires great vigour, and must be carried on continuously, or the
earth put into the bank during one set of tides will be washed away
again.” That is to say, it is a work which would require a strong, and
even despotic, central authority. In the fen south of Boston there is
a succession of about twenty tumuli, called the Fen Mounds, which are
all within about three miles of the ancient banks, and some of which
are called “toot” (or “look-out”) hills. They have been supposed to
be British,[23] but only one of this southern series is crowned with
a circular entrenchment, and it seems much more likely that they were
raised to protect the bankmakers from a surprise attack.

The Romans do not seem to have reaped much fruit from their labours,
except perhaps in the complete pacification of the district. Holland
affords but few traces of their settlement, except in pottery and coins
found along the line of the banks, as at Holbeach, Fleet, Heckington,
and Swineshead. There was an important oblong camp on the Witham at
Redstone Gowt, about a furlong south of Boston, where remains have been
found. Its importance was due to the two circumstances that here was a
ferry in connection with the road called the Saltway into the Midlands,
and that at this point a canal, now called the Old Hammond Beck, took
over some of the Witham water due west round the end of Bicker Haven to
Swineshead, and thence, taking a sharp curve, after a southerly course
of thirteen miles, fell into the river Glen at Pinchbeck. This canal was
here parallel to the Cardyke at distances of from four to six miles.
It could not have been made until the seabank had been thrown up all
round Bicker Haven to keep out the tides. The course of these banks show
the enormous amount of land near the Wash—about 64,000 acres—that has
since been gained by accretion. The Wash, called by Ptolemy “Metaris
Æstuarium,” was a bay with an entrance some two miles narrower than at
present, into which fell the waters of four tidal rivers—the Ouse, the
Nene, the Welland, and the Witham. The Seabank, starting from Wisbech on
the Nene estuary, proceeds north for about ten miles, and then curves
round west to the Welland estuary below Spalding. But about eight miles
farther south is another westerly bank, parallel to the first, from
Cowbit to Tydd St. Mary. This bank, called “Ravenbank,” was probably used
as a road from Ermine Street into Norfolk, and south of it, between the
Welland and the Nene, are three entrenchments, a few miles apart, where
Roman remains have been found. About Spalding, where the Westlode—an
ancient drain now filled up—fell into the Welland, the Seabank turns
north to Surfleet, and then, running west, north, and east to encircle
Bicker Haven, reaches the Witham at Redstone Gowt. From this point it
can be traced north to Wainfleet, and thence, with intervals, to beyond
the entrance to the Humber opposite Spurn Point. Its character varies
considerably in different places. Between Boston and Skegness it often
appears too broad to be artificial; but in general it is only a few yards
wide, at an elevation of from 10 to 20 feet, and is frequently used as a
modern road.

Some of these banks were doubtless used also by the Romans as roads, not
for wheeled vehicles, but for pack horses in connection with the salt
industry. The Romans were well acquainted with the manufacture of salt by
evaporating sea water in pans or reservoirs prepared for the purpose. The
flat coasts of Lincolnshire are especially favourable to this industry.
Remains of such pans can still be detected on Bicker Haven, which is many
miles from the present sea-shore; but the principal saltworks appear
to have been at Wainfleet St. Mary, just outside the Roman Bank. If
Ptolemy’s “Salinæ” is to be placed in Lincolnshire, as some suppose, no
spot is so likely as Wainfleet. There was an ancient road into the Fen
called the Saltway, or Bridge End Causeway, which crossed the Cardyke
between Swaton and Bridge End. It is found on both sides of Bicker Haven,
which must have been crossed by a ferry, and thence it points north-east
through Frampton and Wyberton to Redstone Gowt and the Seabank beyond
the Witham. If this be a Roman way—and remains found along its course in
Kesteven seem to prove the fact—it probably belonged to the late Roman
period, after the seabanks round the Wash had been completed. But the
Wainfleet saltworks may have been developed much earlier, and the salt
conveyed by road through Lindsey to Horncastle and Lincoln. Oysters were
another commodity that could be procured from the Boston Deeps, though
they were not of so fine a quality as those from the Richborough beds,
which delighted the epicures of Rome.

One immediate result of the draining and embanking of the Fens would be
the more complete occupation of the forest or heath district of Kesteven.
That district was intersected by two branches of Ermine Street, which
both start from Castor, and may have united at Lincoln. The eastern
branch, which enters the county at West Deeping and runs along the high
land parallel to the Cardyke for over twenty miles, is the shorter in
actual distance; but it was not the main route, and the branch-ways from
it across the Fen indicate that it was the later in date. South of Bourn,
where was a camp close to the Cardyke, it is known in parts as Langdyke,
High Street, and King Street; between Bourn and Sleaford it is generally
called Mareham Lane. There was a by-way from it at Morton, which has been
traced to the western branch at Great Ponton; and at Threckingham it is
crossed from the east by the Saltway just mentioned. On each side of the
latter way, about four miles west of Threckingham, tessellated pavements
have been found at Haceby and Aisby; and after crossing the western
branch at Cold Harbour,[24] near Grantham, the Saltway passes south-west
into Leicestershire. At a ford near Sleaford, where coins and much
pottery indicate that there was some kind of station, the eastern branch
is within six miles of the western at Ancaster; and there was doubtless
a cross-road between them, as interments have been found at Rauceby and
coins at Bully Wells.

Ancaster, on the western branch of the Ermine Street, is one of those
sites which, from a military camp on a main southern route, rose to be
a small town, with a population probably engaged in agriculture. It is
now generally identified with Causennæ, the station next to Lincoln in
the fifth Iter of the _Itinerary_; but its distance from the colony is
only fourteen miles instead of the twenty-six there given. No traces of
walls are now visible above-ground, and even Leland, nearly four hundred
years ago, spoke doubtfully as to their existence; but since his time
their foundations have been met with on the north and west sides. The
boundaries of the station, which was nearly square, and was surrounded by
a fosse 50 feet wide and 10 feet deep, can still be distinctly seen; and
it was defended at the corners by circular towers, the outlines of which
on the north-west and south-east are well defined. The area enclosed is
about six acres; and the course of Ermine Street, which intersects it,
is near the western boundary. This suggests that the town was extended,
before the erection of its walls, up the slope towards the east. Its
position, on much lower ground than the heights around, was probably
chosen partly to provide shelter from the bleak winds of the heath,
partly for the sake of two springs which are close to its northern and
southern limits. From a description of the place in 1579, it appears that
pavements and “arches” had then been discovered within it; but a large
part of the area, called the “Castle Close,” has long been under grass.
It needs no practised eye to detect that there are foundations beneath
the uneven turf, and systematic excavation might yield discoveries of
much interest. An immense quantity of coins were found in Stukeley’s
time not only within the area but about the surrounding hills. But the
most remarkable object—unearthed in the churchyard in 1831—was a small
sculptured group of the three _Deæ Matres_, seated in a _sella_ carved
upon a plinth, with a column and a little incense altar on the base in
front of them. Statues of these “Protecting Mothers”—who were provincial
rather than Roman deities—have been found at the Wall stations of Chester
and Birdoswald; there, however, the figures are separate, and not ranged
in a single _sella_. The cemetery of Causennæ seems to have been just
outside the southern gate, while north of the village has been found a
potter’s kiln and a small milliary with an inscription to Constantine
the Great. The latter was not on its original site, and its base had been
broken off.[25] On a high hill in Honington, about two miles south-west
of Ancaster, is a small British camp, with a triple vallum almost
circular, enclosing about an acre and a quarter. This was doubtless
occupied by the Romans, for two urns full of coins have been found within
it. There was probably a cross-road west of Ancaster, communicating with
the Foss Way at East Bridgford (Margidunum) in Nottinghamshire. Coins and
pottery have been found at Foston and Allington along the direct line;
and the Sewstern grass lane, locally supposed to be Roman, joins it from
the south-east.

The eastern branch of Ermine Street can be traced for about four miles
north of Sleaford, but its subsequent course is unknown. At or near
Sleaford it threw off a branch-way, which passes through Ewerby and North
Kyme (where it crosses the Cardyke), and points towards Tattershall and
Horncastle. At North Kyme, where two bronze leaf-shaped swords have been
found, is a small camp with a double vallum, and two more are on record
in Tattershall Park. These entrenchments are in a position to protect
the draining operations in the upper fen. Nine miles to the north is
Horncastle (in mediæval documents always written Horncastre), which was
a _castellum_, or walled fort, built in the angle (Saxon “Hyrn”) formed
by two streams, the Bane and the Waring. The Celtic name of the chief
stream is responsible for its identification with the “Banovallum” of
the anonymous Ravennas. A few detached portions of the wall can still be
seen, showing its area to have been about four and a half acres, with
its longer sides (about 200 yards in length) on the north and south. The
masonry is rude, but probably only the core remains, the facing-stones
having been removed for building purposes in later ages. The only remains
known to have been found are coins, pottery, and some leaden coffins
outside the walls. This fort may have been built in the first century if
coins are any indication of date, for among a large number, covering the
whole Roman period, about ten belong to that century. If so, it may have
been purely military in origin—built in order to overawe the natives of
the Southern Wolds, and so serving the same object as Caistor among those
of the north.

But towards the end of the third century, when the Pax Romana had long
been established, there arose a new enemy—the Saxon sea-rovers—against
whom new measures had to be taken. The first British fleet, which was
formed under the leadership of Carausius, had such success against them
that its commander seized the supreme power, and for a time maintained
the independence of the island. But after the continental Empire resumed
its sway in _A.D._ 296, this fleet was allowed to melt away; and a new
land organisation was established, described in the _Notitia Imperii_,
which split up the military command into three divisions, and placed
them under the Prætorian Præfect of Gaul. By this arrangement, which
may have originated in Constantine’s jealousy of his subordinates, the
military force was chiefly massed in the two districts most exposed to
invasion—the northern province, under the Duke of the Britains, whose
headquarters were at York, and the south-eastern littoral, under the
Count of the Saxon Shore. The central and western parts of the island,
being much less exposed to danger, were defended only by a few squadrons
of cavalry under the Count of the Britains, who had no legion under his
command. It has generally been assumed that the northern province was
bounded on the south by the Humber.[26] But if the “Saxon Shore” ended,
as seems likely, at the eastern side of the Wash, such a division would
result in leaving a long stretch of Lincolnshire Marsh, the flat shores
of which were peculiarly exposed to invasion, outside the control of
both the commanders, who had to defend the east coast. This district
would thus be the “Achilles’ heel” of the whole system. Personally I
am convinced that the northern province extended to the Wash, and that
its southern boundary, which perhaps was ill-defined, was, roughly,
the river Nene and Watling Street from High Cross (Venonæ) to Chester.
It was essential for security that both banks of the Humber should be
under one command; and it is hardly conceivable that Lincoln and York,
whose connection by road and water was so intimate, were in different
provinces. But though there was apparently no walled fortress on the
hilly shore between the Tyne and the Humber, the exposed coast of Lindsey
would naturally need some defence of the kind; and direct communication
would, of course, be established between the northern province and the
forces on the Saxon Shore.

Such communication, I believe, already existed before the _Notitia_
system was set up. The Peddar’s Way, “one of the best preserved Roman
roads in East Anglia,”[27] can be traced to-day for 45 miles from the
borders of Suffolk (starting no doubt from Colchester) to Holme-on-Sea,
at the eastern headland of the Wash. This spot is four miles west of
Brancaster, the northernmost fort on the Saxon Shore, and the presumption
therefore is that it was laid down before that fort was built. Pointing
from the opposite promontory of the Wash (which would have to be crossed
by a boat journey of perhaps ten miles) an undoubted Roman road passes by
Burgh into the Wolds, and communicates directly through Caistor with the
Humber, and by branch-ways with Lincoln and York. The town of Wainfleet
(All Saints), some six miles west of this promontory, is often said to
have been the Roman haven for the Lindsey coast; but it is singularly
poor in Roman remains, and its supposed name of “Vainona” is an invention
of the eighteenth century. The road just mentioned is difficult to
follow in the Marsh east of Burgh, but there are signs of it outside
the Roman Bank west and south of Skegness. Here, according to tradition
related by Leland, stood a walled haven town “with a castle,” which was
destroyed by the sea not long before his time; and the shifting sandbanks
of “The Knock” now covering it must have been the promontory which gave
to Skegness its name. Mediæval documents mention _the site_ of this
“castle,” but are silent as to its owner; we may therefore infer that
it was the ruins of a Roman _castellum_, which in other instances, both
in our county and elsewhere, is called a “castle.” Such a conjecture is
incapable of absolute proof; but as Peddar’s Way ends in no walled fort,
there would naturally be one on the opposite coast. The coincidence is
at least curious that the two _Notitia_ forts of Branodunum (Brancaster)
and Præsidium (which has been placed in our county) were both garrisoned
by a body of Dalmatian cavalry, whose native shores were marshy tracts
indented by deep bays.

Just beyond Burgh—where coins are found, though the station must have
been small—the Lindsey road takes to the Wolds, and traverses the high
ridge overlooking the Marsh, its straight course for five miles (two only
on a modern road) being unmistakable. Coins and pottery have been found
in the adjacent parishes of Welton, Willoughby, Well, and Claxby, in the
last-named parish chiefly in a well-marked camp overhanging a stream,
which here issues from the chalk. At the highest point in the district,
where this “way” separates the parishes of Ulceby and Dexthorpe, there
was some kind of station or “mansio,” roofed with flanged tiles, in a
field where the plough annually turns up many coins and other remains.
From South Ormsby the road follows the Blue Stone Heath Road (probably
British in origin) along a winding ridge and through a camp, now
scarcely traceable, below which, in Worlaby, have been found the walls
of a building containing Samian pottery and a quantity of charred corn.
Either here or at Ulceby a branch-way may have left this road direct for
Horncastle and Tillbridge Lane; its course is not certain, but cinerary
urns have been found at Ashby Puerorum, about half-way. At Ludford the
main “via” crosses Salters’ Lane from Lincoln, and becomes merged in the
“High Street” from Horncastle for nine miles to Caistor, and beyond it
for fifteen miles, by Yarborough Camp, to Barton or South Ferriby.[28]
Near this road have been found tessellated pavements at Walesby, Claxby,
and Bigby. At Barton there are remains of an earthwork called the “Castle
Dike,” but much of it has been washed away by the Humber. Another road,
long known as Barton “Street,” leaves the first about a mile south of
this camp, and passes through or near to Louth; its subsequent course is
uncertain, but there are various camps in the Marsh district which may
have been connected by it.

Caistor, which stands on a tongue or spur half a mile west of
“High Street,” is a very interesting spot. Its position is one of
great strength, and suggests a British origin, as it has all the
characteristics of a “promontory fortress.” It was surrounded by a wall,
strengthened at intervals by turrets or bastions, one of which remains in
ruins on the south side of the churchyard; there is also a considerable
fragment of the western wall in the garden of Grove Cottage. The exact
area of the station is difficult to estimate, as the north and east walls
have disappeared; but it was perhaps ten or twelve acres. There are two
fine springs issuing from the rock on the south side of the fortress.
In the churchyard, which is entirely within the area, Roman coins and
pottery are constantly found, but stone foundations seem absent, and the
fine ornamental ware is scarce. In early records the site is often termed
Than—or Thwang—Castre, probably from the tongue of land on which it
stands, and from this name Geoffrey of Monmouth ascribes its building[29]
to Hengist, according to the legend by which that mythical chieftain
encompassed an area granted him with “thongs” of ox-hide. The same
story is told of other “Tong Castles” in Shropshire and Kent, and seems
borrowed from Virgil’s account of the foundation of Carthage.

The occupation of our county by the Romans appears to have been more
thorough than is sometimes supposed. Only in the north-west corner—the
Isle of Axholme—which was then marshy and exposed to the Trent floods,
are traces of their presence wanting. Much more doubtless remains to
be discovered, for Eastern Lindsey is still comparatively unexplored.
The district seems to have been, as now, largely agricultural; and the
finding of over twenty villa sites in Kesteven and Lindsey indicates
that the wealthier class of landowners resided on their estates. This
circumstance points to a long period of peace, which may have lasted more
than a century—from about A.D. 170. During that time the road system
would be completed, and the industries of potters and saltworkers, so
characteristic of our county, gradually developed. But a time came
when the Pictish and Saxon marauders must have made great havoc in a
district which had a long sea-front, and was but slightly protected
by walled towns. In the year 368 these two sources of trouble united
to overwhelm the province like an invading flood. The northern tribes
broke across the Wall of Hadrian, and in concert with the sea-rovers,
who had defeated and slain the Count of the Saxon Shore, advanced their
plundering hosts to the very gates of London. By a series of victories,
Theodosius, the ablest of the imperial generals, gave the province
a short breathing-space. But the weight of taxation imposed by an
over-centralised government was gradually crushing the provincials; and
discontent gave an opening for the revolt of various usurpers in the
last days of the Roman rule. When the legions were finally withdrawn in
A.D. 410, the country districts became unsafe. Traces of fire in the
ruined villas of Scampton, Worlaby, and other places betray the work of
a ruthless, uncivilised foe. The owners may have escaped to the towns,
or even, if wealthy, have reached the Continent. But their industry was
doomed, and many miles of cultivated land must have passed back into mere
prairie. The banks and drains were neglected, and much of the fenland,
so laboriously won, returned to its former flooded state. If we could
recover the story of one large town, such as Lincoln, in the fifth and
sixth centuries, many a dark problem would be solved. In the absence of
such records, the withdrawal of the Roman legions and officials is like
the ringing down of a thick curtain upon the drama of British history in
the ancient world.




SAXON CHURCHES IN LINCOLNSHIRE

BY A. HAMILTON THOMPSON, M.A.


Lincolnshire is more rich than any other English county in churches
which, if few are indisputably of a date earlier than the Norman
conquest, retain traces of an architecture whose character at any rate
is of a distinctly pre-Norman type. The county has nothing to show, it
is true, of that early work, associated with the first century of Saxon
and Anglian Christianity, which gives so unique an interest to the
church architecture of certain districts in Kent and Northumbria. The
neighbouring shire of Northampton possesses in Brixworth a monument whose
importance overshadows that of Stow, and in Barnack and Earl’s Barton
buildings which are, in point of detail, a match for Barton-on-Humber;
while many who might hesitate to grant the pre-Conquest origin of
Bracebridge, could hardly deny it to the Northamptonshire church of
Wittering. The missionary visit of St. Paulinus has left but one
trace, in the dedication to St. “Paul” of a church in Lincoln, of the
connection of Lindsey with the religious life of Northumbria. That
distinction on which Lincolnshire has prided itself, the possession
of a Saxon cathedral at Stow, not hidden away in the foundations of a
later building, but still in use as a parish church, begins to lose its
value as the historical evidence on which it depends is more carefully
examined. With the exception of Stow and St. Peter’s at Barton, the Saxon
monuments of Lincolnshire are humble and unpretentious in character,
without any very definitely architectural features; and he would be a
bold man who should assert positively, on the little evidence which we
have to show for their date, that they were built in days of Saxon rule.
Equally bold was the assertion of Professor Freeman with regard to the
two towers in the southern suburb of Lincoln, that native workmen built
them while the Minster was rising in the style of the conquerors on the
hill above.[30] Such positiveness is rebuked by the discovery that this
picturesque statement was founded on evidence referring to churches in
a different part of the city.[31] Avoiding either extreme, we may say,
in our present state of knowledge, that most of the so-called Saxon
churches of Lincolnshire represent a late state of Saxon art, open to
Norman influence, but preserving a distinctly national tradition. Some of
these monuments are undoubtedly later than the Conquest: of others, and
perhaps of the majority, it may be said that, though a post-Conquest date
is possible, yet the character of the work is of a kind that might be
expected rather before the Conquest than after, and belongs at any rate
to a type of art prior to the general spread of Norman influence. Thus
the epithet “Saxon” may fairly be given to such buildings, even though,
in point of date, they may belong to the Norman period.

[Illustration: ST. PETER’S CHURCH, BARTON-ON-HUMBER.]

Of the pre-Norman date of the lowest stages of the tower and of the
western forebuilding of St. Peter’s at Barton-on-Humber there can be
no doubt, as we shall presently see. And at Barton the chief point of
interest comes into view, in which these churches are of most importance
to the architectural student. At the end of the tenth century, a date
which may perhaps be claimed without extravagance for the Barton church,
the parish church plan in England was a matter of experiment. The
basilican plan with aisles had never been popular beyond a few larger
churches: Lincolnshire does not furnish us with a single instance of
the nave with aisles or of the apsidal sanctuary, which, with certain
modifications, are features of some Saxon plans. The simple plan of
aisleless nave and rectangular chancel, which had been adopted probably
in most Saxon churches, had been complicated by the introduction of
the tower into the scheme. The tower was for the present the uncertain
factor whose place in the plan the Lincolnshire builders, and those
of other counties with them, were trying to determine; and it is the
position of the tower which gives Lincolnshire Saxon ground-plans their
peculiar importance. We may be doubtful about the place of towers like
Earl’s Barton and Barnack in the plan: they may have been merely western
appendages to churches which have now been entirely replaced by later
buildings, or they may have been the church itself, with its walls raised
into a lofty tower, at once a place for bells and a look-out in time
of danger. There can be no such doubt at Barton-on-Humber. In our own
day the tower and its western annexe stand at the west end of a large
late Gothic church; but, at a restoration in 1898, the foundations of
an eastern annexe, very similar in size and shape to the western, were
discovered, showing beyond all doubt that the tower formed the main
body of the church, standing between a chancel and what may have been
a baptistery—rooms for the altar and the font—of almost equal size.
The tower was broader than its adjunct: two entrances remain, one on
the north, the other on the south, opposite each other, and towards
the western end of either wall. Mr. Hodgson Fowler, who discovered the
foundations of the chancel, also discovered other foundations, presumably
of Saxon date, to the east of the tower, which seem to suggest that a
larger building with an elongated plan was in contemplation, but was
superseded by a compact plan which found itself centralised in the space
allotted to the tower.[32]

A somewhat similar plan occurs at Broughton, a village some four miles
west of Brigg, and close to the line of Roman road which led from
Lincoln to the Humber. Here the fabric has none of those distinctively
Saxon features which are found at Barton; it is almost certainly a
work of later date. The eastern wall of the tower, as at Barton, has
been absorbed in the breadth of an aisled nave of a later period; but
the eastern quoins are still visible, continuing to the ground, and
indicating that the tower was once broader than the portion of the
building east of it. That this eastern building, moreover, was small,
and that the bulk of the congregation occupied the space west of it, is
suggested by the fact that, as in many later chancel arches, decorative
treatment—too rude here to be taken very seriously as architectural
membering, in spite of its efforts—is confined to the western face of
the arch by which the chancel was approached from the tower-space.
Here, then, we have once more the tower-space forming the main area for
worship, with a small chancel to the east. At Broughton, however, instead
of the corresponding western annexe which we find at Barton, there is a
large three-quarter-circular projection, containing a newel staircase
which leads to the belfry stage of the tower; and, instead of the two
doorways at Barton, there is only one, this time in the south wall. The
western projection at Broughton is often ridiculously called a western
apse. It is, and always was, a turret for a staircase. Three other such
turrets exist. One, at Brixworth in Northamptonshire, was added in front
of an earlier western doorway, when the original porch of the basilican
church was heightened into a tower. Another, at Brigstock in the same
county, forms an integral part of a western tower with strongly Saxon
features; its staircase was always of wood, as may have been originally
the case at Broughton.[33] The third instance is in Lincolnshire, at
Hough-on-the-Hill, seven or eight miles north of Grantham. Here the stair
turret is part of a western tower of more than probably pre-Conquest
date, and of proportions as ample as those of Earl’s Barton; and one is
tempted to discover a parallel to Broughton, and another quasi-parallel
to Barton-on-Humber. But the face which the tower presents to the
church behind it is singularly blank; and it remains to be seen whether
there lie hid, beneath the plaster, quoins, like those at Broughton, to
indicate the existence of a chancel whose foundations may still be buried
beneath the western floor of the nave.

At Barton and Broughton, and possibly at Hough, we are face to face with
a small compact plan—at Barton definitely centralised in the tower-space,
at Broughton without the same centralisation, but with the main body of
the church still gathered beneath the tower. In these cases, when we
speak of the tower and the tower-space, we must regard the tower simply
as an upward continuation of the body of the church. The congregation has
not found shelter on the ground-floor of a tower: the tower is the upper
storey or storeys of their church. However, in the two further instances
of towers not western which Lincolnshire affords us, the tower-space must
probably be regarded as a feature in the plan distinct from the main body
of the building; it is not a church on which a tower has risen, but a
space which is there because a tower forms a definite part of the design.
Waith Church, a few miles south of Grimsby, is for the most part a modern
Gothic building, with an entirely modern plan.[34] But between the
chancel and nave, and flanked by a south transept, rises a tower of a
type very familiar to travellers in Lincolnshire, but here alone seen in
a central position. Its position must always, however, have been between
eastern and western out-buildings; for its eastern and western walls
are pierced by low arches of equal height and width, very different in
proportion from the ordinary western doorway and tower arch. There seems
to have been no entrance in either of the side walls. In all probability,
then, we have here, not a definitely centralised plan, but a tower-space
intervening between a nave and chancel. Of the relative dimensions of
these to the tower-space it is impossible to speak: we have no remains
to guide us. Again, this tower may have been simply an elevation of
the eastern portions of the nave walls, as in those cases to which the
term “axial” has been given; or, as in some Norman churches, it may
have projected north and south of the adjacent nave and chancel. In the
last case, we should have the ground-plan of Barton-on-Humber, with its
centralised character probably destroyed by the elongation of its western
annexe. The nave and the tower-space become independent divisions of the
plan.

[Illustration: ST. MARY’S CHURCH, STOW, LOOKING EAST.]

The Saxon church of Stow survives only in part; and to assert that the
present fabric, which is largely of the later part of the eleventh and
the earlier part of the twelfth century, is a rebuilding of the older
church on its original scale, would be to assert what we do not know.
However, the church was planned on a scale somewhat more imposing than
was usual in Saxon times; and enough of the older work is left in the
transepts to assure us that they, at any rate, covered their present site
from the date of its foundation. Their length and general proportions
postulate a nave to match; and we may assume, without much doubt, that
the present Norman nave rose upon Saxon foundations. The chancel may have
been enlarged to its present dimensions by Norman builders; this is, at
least, more likely than that the Saxon chancel was equally spacious. The
visitor to Stow about the time of the Conquest would have seen nave,
chancel, and transepts, as indeed the visitor to-day may see them,
grouped round a central tower, which rose straight from the ground in
their midst, independent of their buttressing aid. The quoins of the
tower go down to the ground; the arches which connect the tower-space
and the adjacent arms of the building are, as it were, piercings in the
tower walls rather than the actual substructure on which the tower walls
rested.[35] The tower-space at Stow is thus in some measure a central
area, the focus of the plan; and a vivid imagination might conjure up in
this instance the Barton-on-Humber plan reproduced on a larger scale,
and converted into a Greek cross by the addition of transepts. But it is
more probable that here, as at Waith, the tower-space is shifted slightly
to one side of the centre of the plan, and, while keeping much of its
dignity in the general scheme, is no longer the main body of the building.

In most English churches the most convenient plan from the earliest
times has been the oblong nave and practically square chancel, divided
by an arch which, to our modern ideas, has sometimes been inconveniently
narrow, but without the intervening tower-space, which became in so
many later churches an obstruction to the unity of worship in chancel
and nave. We have seen Lincolnshire builders experimenting with that
new-found addition to the plan, the tower, packing their nave into its
ground-floor, trying what can be done with a central area, abandoning—we
speak of probabilities—the complete symmetry of the centralised plan,
and finally wedging the tower in between the arms of the building, as an
effective focus for the church as seen in elevation. The difficulties,
the inconvenience, the uncertain conditions, of centralised or
quasi-centralised planning, are now in most cases abandoned: the builders
frankly remove their tower-space to the west end of their plan. Upon it
rises a bell-tower, which may on occasion be used as a look-out tower
in time of disturbance, or even—though this seems very doubtful—as a
place of refuge for the inhabitants of the township. In most instances
the tower-space will be entered by a western doorway, and will be the
porch of the church, just as, at Brixworth or at Monkwearmouth, in other
counties, the original porch has become the substructure of the tower.
The porch will lead into the nave of the church, oblong and aisleless;
and, in the east wall of the nave, an arch will give access to a small
rectangular chancel. This is the normal Lincolnshire, and indeed the
normal English plan; and this plan powerfully affects the architecture
of the Norman and Gothic periods of English art. The centralised plan
may survive in beautiful forms, and will always be the more interesting,
owing to its greater capacity for variation; but the western tower of
the Saxon period, and the elongated plan associated with it, will be the
standard of planning congenial to the larger number of English masons.

It is unnecessary to particularise between the various churches of Saxon
origin in Lincolnshire which have western towers. There are many, and
the number may be stated rather variously. The present writer, excluding
Hough and Broughton, which, as we have seen, may be treated more suitably
with centralised plans, counts some thirty towers in part or wholly of
the distinctively Saxon type.[36] Some of these, as he already has said,
evidently were built at a date later than the Conquest. Of no one of them
would he courageously assert, on the mere evidence of plan and details,
that it was built actually and beyond doubt before the Conquest. But that
they were built by the hands of Saxon workmen, and that they represent a
definitely Saxon tradition, are hypotheses which, if they do not offer
themselves to a very clear proof, may at any rate be enunciated as highly
probable.

The consideration of the dimensions of these towers on plan may be left
to the discussion of their relative dates, with which this chapter
will conclude. Having noted variations of plan, we must now look at
architectural details. Of those peculiarities of technique which are
most readily recognised as Saxon, St. Peter’s, at Barton-on-Humber, is
a nearly unique example in Lincolnshire, and its value is still higher,
in that the upper stage of the tower presents features of a rather
different kind, more typical of Lincolnshire, but less specially and
exclusively Saxon than those of the lower stages. The tower is divided
by two string-courses into three stages, the middle stage low and squat,
the lowest stage much the tallest of the three, and subdivided into
two parts, an upper and lower, by external decorative arcading. This
subdivided stage represents the body of the church; the middle stage
probably represents the original bell-chamber; and both these stages,
together with the small western annexe, have definite “long-and-short”
quoining. The “short” stones, as usual, back into the rubble-work, of
which the tower is built; but their protruding faces are cut away flush
with the rubble, and are hidden beneath the plaster which covers the
whole surface of the tower. The decorative arcading, however, already
alluded to, is formed by irregular strips of dressed stone projecting
from the surface, the heads of which, formed by small horizontal
impost-blocks, are connected in the lower stage by semicircular strips.
On the crown of each of these rude arches rests the foot of one of the
upright strips of the upper stage, which are connected similarly by
strips of triangular form, the apices of which touch the under side of
the string-course between the lower and the middle stage. The surface of
the lower stage is thus cut up into two series of tall arcaded panels.
The bottom part of one of the lower panels is pierced on the north and
south sides of the tower by a doorway with rounded head. The upright,
dividing two of the upper panels on each of these sides, is partly cut
away to make room for a double window-opening with rounded heads, the
opening being divided by a small piece of wall faced, at the level of
the outer wall, with a baluster-shaft. These windows lighted the body
of the church, the inner roof of which came at this point. The middle
stage keeps the “long-and-short” quoining, but the strip-work has here
given place to an unpanelled plastered surface, broken only by a double
window-opening, similar in construction to that in the stage below, but
with triangular instead of semicircular heads. Like the middle stage of
the tower, the western annexe of the church has no strip-work on its
walls, but has “long-and-short” work at its angles. It is lighted by a
semicircular-headed opening in each of the north and south walls, and
in the west wall by two circular openings set one above the other. All
these openings are splayed outwards as well as inwards. The eastern wall
of the tower can be seen from the inside of the present church, with its
“long-and-short” quoining perfect to the ground, and with breaks in the
masonry where the eastern annexe originally joined it. The arch which
pierces it on the ground-floor—the chancel arch of the Saxon church—is
very plainly treated with dressed jambs, impost-blocks, and voussoirs,
but without any moulding. In the wall above is a single opening of
considerable width, with rounded head, rather massive jamb-stones, and
thin, flat impost-blocks. Above this comes the double opening of the
belfry stage, which would have stood clear of the roof of the Saxon
chancel.[37]

Turning from these features of the original church walls, its western
annexe, and its belfry stage, to the uppermost stage of the tower, we
are met by a striking difference. We already have seen the strip-work of
the lowest stage disappear. Here the “long-and-short” work is gone as
well, and the quoining is of small oblong stones set on one another at
right angles, so that each of the adjacent faces of the wall is in bond
with every other of the quoins. The window-openings are still double,
and have rounded heads, but they are taller than those below, and are
divided, not by slabs of wall with baluster facings, but by slender
rounded shafts set in the middle of the thickness of the wall, with heads
corbelled out so as to form rude capitals, and to support through-stone
impost-blocks, corresponding to those at the head of the jambs on either
side. Of the absence of splay, inner or outer, to the openings we can
say nothing; the double splay has occurred only in the western annexe.
But the disappearance of “long-and-short” work, that most unmistakable
of purely Saxon details, and the introduction of a new type of double
opening, are significant of a change of style which has come over the
Saxon building art since the church and tower began to rise.

Thus, at Barton-on-Humber, we have two different types of Saxon
work—that very peculiar form, with its tendency to panel decoration
with strip-framing, which produces its highest decorative effect at
Earl’s Barton, side by side with a more staid, less fantastic manner
of building, which is without architectural ambition, uses decoration
very sparingly, but can achieve very pleasant effects of proportion
within its modest limits. This second style, as it may be called, is
emphatically the style favoured by Lincolnshire builders. Of the first
style, Barton-on-Humber is the only really conspicuous example in the
county.[38] Strip-work decorations, not uncommon in the Saxon work of
the South Midlands and South of England, of Mercia and Wessex, is quite
the exception within the belt of Danish influence. It appears here and
there as a kind of frame to arches and their jambs, or to the heads of
window-openings. The best examples of its use in this connection anywhere
in England are to be found in the jambs of the noble tower arches at
Stow, where a semicircular shaft is carried down the face of the wall
close to the angle of the jambs, and is accompanied by a flat strip
of stone at a few inches distance. Both shaft and strip are finished
off by rough corbels a little above the floor level.[39] But Stow is an
exceptional church. As a rule, we find the strip-frame retained purely
as a flat hood-mould to doorways and windows, without a trace of that
individuality of style which distinguishes it at Stow, and preserving a
still more distant kinship to the work at Barton.

“Long-and-short” work pursues a more hardy existence. Quoining was
necessary, and the “long-and-short” method was at once serviceable and
fairly ornamental. So, while strip-work, a merely decorative arrangement
of pilasters without constructive use, went its way, “long-and-short”
quoining remained. We come across it chiefly at the angles of naves,
which in several cases have been left almost untouched, when aisles of a
later date have been added. St. Mary-le-Wigford and St. Peter-at-Gowts
at Lincoln are cases in point. Bracebridge is an excellent example,
for here all four angles of the nave can be traced. Cranwell, near
Sleaford, and Ropsley, near Grantham, are other unmistakable instances.
But here we must beware. The critic is too common who, assuming that
a piece of wall is Saxon in character, immediately jumps to the
conclusion that its quoining must be “long-and-short.” If the quoins
are not arranged in a regular series of pieces alternately vertical and
horizontal, then the work is not “long-and-short” work. If one or two
stones thus arranged occur in the middle of irregular or of the common
“small-stone” quoining, we are not justified in speaking of the fabric
as showing “long-and-short” work. If the quoining shows a merely rough
general resemblance to the “long-and-short” arrangement, it is not
“long-and-short” work, but work of a quite haphazard type.

This brings us to one of the leading features which distinguish the
towers so characteristic of Saxon work in Lincolnshire. We may study
their angles to our heart’s content, and discover “long-and-short” work
with the eye of faith, but we shall actually see it in only one instance,
and there in the jambs of a western doorway of the tower, rather than
in the quoining of the tower itself. In this instance, at Rothwell,
near Caistor, the south-west quoining of the adjacent church has been
left standing, like a small rectangular buttress, against the junction
of the twelfth century nave and south aisle. It is formed of irregular
stones, but such “long-and-short” work as there is, is confined to the
tower. This is an exception. At the Lincoln churches and Bracebridge,
where we have noticed “long-and-short” quoining at the nave angles, the
quoining of the tower is of small stones; and this is universally the
case. If we go northwards, by Marton, Heapham, Springthorpe, Corringham,
Harpswell, and Glentworth, to Winterton and Alkborough; if we cross the
Ancholme to Worlaby, and then go by Barton-on-Humber to Clee, Scartho,
Holton-le-Clay, Waith, and Laceby; if we traverse the Wolds by Swallow,
Cuxwold, Rothwell, and Cabourn to Caistor and Nettleton, and, descending
by way of Hainton to Lincoln, make our way along the South Cliff to
Branston, Harmston, and Coleby; if we go as far south as Boothby Pagnell,
Little Bytham, and Thurlby-by-Bourn, and finish our journey in the
midst of the parts of Holland at Great Hale, the only genuine piece of
“long-and-short” work we shall have found in a western tower is that at
Rothwell. It is true that this journey will have included more than one
doubtful member of the family, and some of its genuine members which
have lost, under the hand of the restorer, most of their appearance of
age; but its result will be the establishment of the general rule that
the Saxon tower-builder in Lincolnshire did not avail himself of the
“long-and-short” method of quoining.

It will hardly need this journey to be convinced of his preference for
the double window-opening, divided by the mid-wall shaft. This declares
itself patently in the well-known towers at Lincoln; and all the
towers mentioned above still have, or probably have had, such windows.
Sometimes, as at Nettleton or Coleby, the belfry stage has been entirely
renewed in the later Gothic period. Sometimes, as at Winterton or
Alkborough, the tower has simply been heightened, and the Saxon belfry
stage has become an intermediate storey. Sometimes, as at Cuxwold, the
top of the tower has been lopped off altogether, or, as at Swallow,
has been replaced by a modern stage in a rather incongruous style. In
every case the original existence of the “mid-wall shaft” window cannot
be reasonably doubted. The form of such openings as remain is very
much the same. Its main outlines have been seen in the uppermost stage
of the tower at Barton: two adjacent openings, with dressed jambs and
voussoirs flush with the general surface of the wall, with rounded arches
springing from through-stone impost-blocks, and received at their meeting
by another such block, which rests on the mid-wall shaft itself. These
openings pierce the wall without any splay. They have no strip-framing,
and seldom, if ever, any attempt at hood-moulding. Although, as has been
hinted, some beauty of form may be claimed for them, they are as simply
constructed a type of arched opening as could well be devised. Their
proportions are sometimes rather elegant; and, when they are set round
a small upper stage, divided by a projecting string-course or off-set
from the unbuttressed and sometimes slightly tapering length of the lower
stage, their effect is always striking.

The architectural value of these towers, so simple in their principles
of construction, so insignificant in their height, is less than their
historical interest. Saxon builders had little architectural knowledge
or skill; and buildings like Stow impress us more by their height and
mass of wall than by any very striking architectural feature. The work
at Barton-on-Humber is curious and interesting building: it is not
architecture. In the Lincolnshire towers, a step is taken in the right
direction by the avoidance of merely decorative surface-ornament. The
tower asks for judgment on its own merits. Where it is divided by offsets
into two or three stages, the result is satisfactory; although, if the
belfry stage is of much the same area as the stage below, the tower
looks top-heavy. This certainly is the case of St. Mary-le-Wigford. At
St. Peter-at-Gowts, a small upper stage is set firmly and squarely upon
a long and tapering lower one; and there is no finer tower in the whole
series. The third type, where there is no off-set—the much-restored tower
of Springthorpe is now, if it was not always, in this state—is merely
insignificant.

The treatment of openings in these towers, other than the mid-wall
shaft windows, is open to few variations. Western doorways are low and
narrow: large stones are used in the jambs; and, though the heads are
arched, the actual opening is covered by a flat lintel. The roughest
of these openings is in the tower at Winterton, where the head of the
doorway is formed by a huge stone, cut with a segmental curve on its
under side to give the effect of an arch. Flat rectangular hood-mouldings
of small projection sometimes follow the curve of the doorway arch and
meet the extreme edge of the impost-block. At Clee, one of the best
towers of the group, such a hood-moulding bounds a doorway head of two
orders of voussoirs, the lower slightly recessed beneath the upper;
but such refinements are rare. A similar recessing of a lower band of
voussoirs occurs in the tower arches at Clee and Scartho, but in no case
is it accompanied by any attempt at moulding the arch or recessing the
jambs to match. An edge-roll was worked very tentatively at Nettleton
along part of an unmoulded tower-arch, but was abandoned when about
half completed. An ambitious and unique attempt at recessing, in the
chancel arch at Broughton (now the arch from the tower into the nave),
remains as a monument of the failure of the Saxon mason in his search
for means of architectural expression. Both orders of the arch spring
from an undivided impost-block, and the shafts, which should bear, and
are intended to correspond to, the inner order, are stranded on either
side of the back of the opening, with their heads left bare and their
function denied them. As a rule, in doorways and tower arches, the mason
was content with a plain unmoulded arch, springing from projecting
impost-blocks on the top of jambs, the dressings of which are simply the
quoins of a rubble wall. He varied the proportions of his tower arches,
giving them great height, breadth, and dignity at St. Peter-at-Gowts,
building them tall and narrow at Clee, Scartho, and Holton-le-Clay,
or with rather less elevation and rather more breadth at Rothwell and
Cabourn, frequently allowing them, as at Cuxwold or Alkborough, to remain
low and rather broad in proportion. These variations of the tower arch
constitute one of the most interesting features of this type of building:
they introduce an element of individual design, and the loftier form of
arch often produces by its mere size an effect which is not due to any
obvious architectural virtue.

The lesser windows of the towers are usually small and narrow, with an
inner splay. Their outer openings are often flanked by very large dressed
stones: their rounded heads are seldom arched—there is a good arched
window head in the south wall of the tower at Coleby—but are more often
cut in the under side of a lintel; and sometimes this cut, exceeding a
semicircle, produces the “key-hole” form of opening. At Rothwell there
is in each wall of the tower, below the “mid-wall” windows, a small
rectangular opening with a wide inner splay: a somewhat similar opening
pierces the wall above the west door at Nettleton.

In the masonry of these towers two striking features are apparent.
One is the disappearance of that “through-stone” treatment of dressed
masonry, which is an undoubted characteristic of early Saxon work.
A little doorway in the west wall of the north transept at Stow has
voussoirs and jamb-stones, each of which faces the whole thickness of
the wall. But the jambs below the tower arches are faced with double or
triple, not single stones. And while it is rare to find a tower arch
or doorway of this style formed of a core of rubble between facings of
dressed stone, yet there are few in which the facing stones do not become
less closely set together, and wide rubble fillings do not take the
place of neat and close jointing. The other feature is the appearance of
“herring-bone” masonry. This may be seen in some profusion at Broughton,
and in a striking and unusual form at Marton; and, although it is not
general, it occurs in other places.

Modifications in the tower plan are almost confined to an increase of
dimensions which, in some members of the group—notably Caistor—is rather
remarkable. One tower alone—Great Hale—introduces a newel staircase
into an angle of the fabric; and this is almost absurdly unsuited to
the probable size of those who had to climb it. We have seen that, at
Hough and Broughton, nearly circular excrescences were formed to hold
stairs on the west side of the towers. As a rule, we may believe that
the upper floors of the towers were approached by ladders. It may be
noted that in Lincolnshire there are very few of those openings above
the tower arch, which are often quoted to prove the use of the tower as
a place of habitation, and probably led to a landing and wooden stair
communicating with the interior of the church. There are such, as at
St. Peter-at-Gowts, Winterton, and Broughton; but they are exceptional,
and the probable plan of Broughton makes it possible that, as at
Barton-on-Humber, the opening was merely a piercing in the wall between
nave and chancel.

But if there is little variation in plan, there is, as has been noted,
even in the simplest towers, some degree of variation in detail.
There are cases, moreover, in which the tendency to variation takes
the direction of increased ornamental treatment. Instances are quite
common in which the heads of the mid-wall shafts, bulging to support
their impost-blocks, have been carved into the form of capitals—plain
cubical or cushion-blocks, as at Winterton or Clee; rough suggestions of
classical volutes and foliage, as at Glentworth or Scartho; varied forms
of fruit and leafage, as at Bracebridge; or delicate and cleverly cut
relief work, as at St. Peter-at-Gowts. And these capitals are not the
only features which show the tendency. At Alkborough ornamental material
has been transferred from some deserted Roman villa in the neighbourhood:
a cornice from an entablature has been cut up, used as imposts, and
turned upside down to form plinths for the jambs of the tower arch. But
at Branston, south of Lincoln, the builders have not borrowed ornament.
Like the masons at Broughton with their abortive recessed arch, they have
tried to copy what they have heard of, what some of them at any rate have
seen, and have covered the lower part of the west wall of their tower
with arcaded panelling, with rounded arches and cushion capitals. This,
and the central doorway with shafting and rudely foliated capitals, have
been inspired from a source quite distinct from that which brought into
being the strip-work panelling of Barton-on-Humber.

We are at once impelled to ask what this source is. And this question
brings us to the consideration of two final questions, which are
complementary to one another. What influences from the Christian
architecture of other countries were felt by Lincolnshire masons? Is
there any element of progress to be traced in the Saxon buildings of
the county? In short, to combine the two questions into one, can any
chronological sequence be traced in these buildings, by comparing them
with the work of Romanesque builders in other countries?

We already have allowed the term “Saxon” to them, on the understanding
that a pre-Conquest date is not implied thereby, but merely the fact that
their style is different from that of buildings to which we give the term
“Norman.” It may also be premised that, in considering their relative
date, we have to deal cautiously and tentatively with a series of
probabilities. We must also put legend aside. A hardy tradition, resting
on no authentic basis, but engraved on a brass tablet within the church,
points to certain traces of fire in the church of Stow as evidence of its
burning by the Danes in 870. If this were true, and if the lower walls
of the tower, as they exist to-day, were the tower walls of the Saxon
cathedral of Sidnaceaster, we should be able to point to a church of the
ninth century, if not earlier, which would probably have supplied an
architectural standard to the diocese. However, we have nothing but the
size of the church and an unfounded, if time-honoured, assumption to give
it claim to cathedral rank. The very name of Sidnaceaster was probably
invented in post-Conquest times, by some one who misread the signature
of one of the bishops of Lindsey to the decrees of a Saxon council.[40]
And, finally, the authentic history of the church of Stow does not begin
till about the year 1040, when Eadnoth, Bishop of Dorchester, with the
powerful assistance of Earl Leofric and his wife Godiva, set a band
of religious men on the site hallowed by memories of the miraculous
sojourn of St. Etheldreda on her flight from York to Ely. All that lies
behind 1040 in connection with this church is pure romance. When Bishop
Rémi later in the century restored St. Mary’s Minster at Stow, what he
probably did was to complete Eadnoth’s ambitious beginnings, on a worthy
scale, out of reverence for St. Etheldreda, and not out of sentimental
feeling for an old cathedral church which he had superseded for all time
by his new church at Lincoln. If a small archdeaconry in the Norman
diocese of Lincoln, corresponding to the original district of Lindsey,
took its name from Stow, we must not consider this as admitting the old
cathedral dignity of Stow. The size of Eadnoth’s and Rémi’s church made
it the most prominent building in the archdeaconry: no more convenient or
suitable name could be supplied to the district.[41]

1040, then, is a recognised date to which we can refer the earliest work
at Stow. We know, too, that a church was founded at Alkborough in 1052,
and the work in the western tower there, with its triangular-headed
belfry windows, may be claimed for that date or not long after. These
are practically the only two pieces of dated evidence on which we can
rely, for we have already seen that the evidence as to Coleswegen’s
churches at Lincoln does not apply to existing buildings.[42] Stow, as
we have seen, retains strip-framing to the tower jambs on a large scale:
“long-and-short” work occurs in the north transept doorway and in the
jambs of a window opening in the south transept: through-stone masonry
is used in the north transept doorway, but abandoned in the tower arch
jambs. Alkborough has none of these characteristics. We are thus at
liberty to assume a gradual cessation of purely Saxon technique between
1040 and 1052.

Further, at Barton-on-Humber, although we have no documentary evidence
to guide us, it is obvious that the tower is of two styles. The uppermost
stage forms an addition to the original design in a somewhat more
simple style. An interval of date between the stages is certain: the
length of that interval would be hard to ascertain. But the fantastic
strip-panelling and “long-and-short” work of the lower stages of the
tower belong to the height of a fashion in architecture which is seen
gradually disappearing at Stow. The strip-framing and “long-and-short”
work at Stow are of a different and less purely decorative type: we are
not surprised when in the upper stage of the tower at Barton, or in
the tower at Alkborough, they disappear altogether. So far, then, this
statement of progress is justifiable. The lower stages of the tower at
Barton are obviously earlier than the upper stage. The upper stage has
affinities of detail with the tower at Alkborough, and clearly belongs
to much the same or a slightly later period. The tower at Alkborough
is at least twelve years later than the only trustworthy date for the
early work at Stow. And, as we have just seen, the work at Stow, in
its selection and treatment of elements which had been used at Barton
in careless profusion, is probably later in date than the earlier
portion of Barton. With Barton may be grouped, from the character of its
“long-and-short” quoining and the window-openings of its stair turret,
the interesting tower at Hough-on-the-Hill. With Stow we may group,
at any rate provisionally, those fabrics which have “long-and-short”
quoining of a substantial type, flush with the surface of the wall,
instead of projecting in rather thin strips beyond it—this will include,
as we have noticed, some naves of churches. With Alkborough and the
upper stage at Barton can be combined church towers generally, Hough
alone excepted, and work of a partly Saxon character, like that at
Stragglethorpe, not far from Hough. The “long-and-short” work in Rothwell
tower is so small in quantity that it can hardly be treated as an
exception to the third group.

Professor Baldwin Brown, in his valuable monograph on Saxon
ecclesiastical architecture, has provided strong arguments for the
influence of Teutonic Romanesque architecture on our Saxon builders.[43]
It has long been the fashion to suppose that the decorative detail at
Barton-on-Humber and other kindred churches is an imitation of timber
construction in stone; the rudeness of treatment makes the supposition
excusable. But we can hardly grant that Saxon builders could have
imitated a system of construction which was not at any rate general till
a much later date; and it is much more likely that the work at Barton is
copied roughly and clumsily from a type of decorative work which, in the
tenth and early eleventh centuries, was common in the Rhenish provinces
and in the districts of Northern Italy architecturally related to them.
It is unquestionable that the double opening with mid-wall shaft found
its origin in the same provinces. Northern Italy doubtless exercised its
influence on Germany; Germany, in turn, influenced the Saxon masons. In
three other cases at least German influence is more than probable. It is
certainly responsible for the double-splayed window-opening; it probably
affected the simple type of capital which was developed into the cushion
capital of later days; the unfaced rubble masonry and thin walling of
Saxon churches are found commonly in early Romanesque German churches,
and are the antithesis of the faced rubble and thick walling of Normandy
and the Romanesque buildings of France; while the position of the western
tower in the Saxon plan is a further German feature.

On the details of English intercourse with Germany it is unnecessary
to dwell. There is plenty of evidence to show that a close connection
existed between the two countries, which cannot but have had influence on
the progress of art in England. That progress must have been practically
at a standstill during the long epoch of Danish invasion. The date
at which we may most reasonably expect an architectural revival to be
general is that period, the last thirty to forty years of the tenth
century, when so many monasteries were rebuilt or newly founded, and the
monastic life re-established. This revival was strongly influenced by
the monasteries of the Netherlands, which lay in the direct current of
architectural progress between Germany proper and England. To this date
at earliest, then, may be assigned the earliest parts of the church at
Barton-on-Humber, and possibly the tower at Hough. We cannot go further
back without deserting probability. At the same time, if we limit this
work to the latter half of the tenth century on the one hand, we are not
precluded from allowing that it may be later. Barton-on-Humber lay in the
very path of the Danish invaders who established their power in England
between 1002 and 1014. The base of operations of the heathen Swegen was
at Gainsborough; there he died, and there he was said, though wrongly, to
have been buried. The older parts of the church at Barton show no sign
of the ruin which we might expect to have thus befallen them. Perhaps
the church was left roofless by Swegen, but restored and completed, with
the upper stage added to the tower, towards the middle or after the
middle of the eleventh century. But it is also equally probable that the
whole lower structure may be a rebuilding under the Christian Canute of
a church ruined by his father; and that, after an intermediate stage
in which the church may have taken the form shown by Professor Baldwin
Brown, the tower was heightened by a storey.

The oldest Saxon fabrics in Lincolnshire need not, therefore, be earlier
than the eleventh century. It will be noticed that of these Barton gives
us a centralised plan, while Hough presents a plan which certainly is not
in keeping with that of the usual western tower. The head of the second
group, Stow, is another experiment in “central” planning. The remaining
anomalies of plan, Broughton and Waith, belong, in the matter of
technique, to the third group, in which the western tower predominates
overwhelmingly. The German features of the third group already have been
described. But they are less marked than those of earlier groups, and the
buildings are open to influences, especially decorative influences, of
quite another kind.

Towers like those of St. Mary-le-Wigford and St. Peter-at-Gowts, or of
Bracebridge, may be regarded, on the strength of their different quoining
and their lack of any bond with the fabric behind, as final additions to
churches which, in point of date, we have provisionally classified with
Stow. Not infrequently, the tower and church were built together without
afterthought, as at Winterton, where the ends of the nave walls still
remain in bond with the tower, enclosed within the spacious church of the
twelfth, thirteenth, and fourteenth centuries. If we attempt to classify
these towers chronologically, however, we may try several standards. The
relative height and width of the tower arch affords no criterion; this
seems to be varied at the fancy of local masons. Again, rude attempts
at moulding, like that at Nettleton, tell us nothing; the moulded tower
arch at Corringham is so out of keeping with the tower itself that it
can hardly be part of the original design; the wide arch at Harmston
is clearly a reconstruction achieved comparatively late in the twelfth
century. But the absence of through-stone masonry, the approach to the
system of rubble core and dressed facing, indicate a growing assimilation
to “Norman” methods. The tower at Waith has a facing of rough ashlar,
which is found in no other Lincolnshire tower of the type. Another
tell-tale sign is the appearance of herring-bone work, which Norman
builders used freely in the walling of their earlier castles, and
builders of the pre-Conquest period certainly used little, if at all. The
“herring-bone” masonry of the tower at Marton is identical in style with
that in the curtain-wall of Tamworth Castle.

Can these novelties have come into use before the Conquest? If so, we
must presuppose a growing acquaintance with building methods as pursued
in Normandy. This is not improbable. Norman influence was felt in English
life during the reign of Edward the Confessor,[44] and imitations of
Norman, as at an earlier date of German, technique are not beyond
reasonable imagination. But it must be acknowledged that, while we are
fain to discover the germ of Anglo-Norman art in these simple monuments,
the constructive, purely architectural quality, which is the essence of
that art as manifested at Durham or in the west front of Lincoln, is
totally absent from them. That essential quality is not a home growth,
but a foreign importation. The chief element of structural transition in
these towers is to be found in their growing spaciousness. Areas which
are on an average oblongs of some 10 feet 5 inches long by 10 feet 8
inches broad grow at Caistor to 15½ by 17½ feet, and at Harpswell to
about 15 by 16 feet. With the growth of the area the wall thickens,
thus affording a contrast to towers like Hough, where the large area is
enclosed by thin walls. The eastern wall of the tower at Alkborough is
less than 2½ feet thick; the average thickness of such walls is about
3 feet 7 inches. At Caistor the wall is 5¾ feet thick. One cannot fail
to recognise that the slender tower of Saxon type, while keeping its
unbuttressed character and its “mid-wall” arches, is spreading out into
the ordinary broad and heavy Norman tower.

In the capitals of the mid-wall shafts a decided step is being taken
in the same direction. The plain “cubical” type may be regarded as
following a course of natural development at home which found conspicuous
perfection in the architecture of the Norman period. But in other
examples, and those fairly numerous, the end aimed at is clearly that
reminiscence of the Corinthian capital which is familiar to those who
have visited the abbey churches at Caen, with its upper volutes and its
lower band of acanthus. The best examples of this are at Scartho and at
St. Peter-at-Gowts, where the effort, if somewhat crude, is still to some
extent achieved. The effort is again seen in the capitals at Great Hale,
in which the general outline is that of the “cubical” cap, with volutes
carved on the flat upper part, and the carved under surface reeded so
as to give a suggestion of the band of acanthus. At Bracebridge, again,
in capitals of the “cubical” type, volutes and rather unusual forms of
conventional foliage appear; and in other cases, as at Glentworth, the
volute is used without much skill, but with some variety of design.
The unfinished form in which the sculpture is sometimes left suggests
forcibly that it was added after the capitals were in position. Indeed,
if this were not the case, defenders of the pre-Conquest date of these
towers would have to give up their position altogether. Unless we imagine
that English artists used their memories to reproduce classical capitals
which few of them are likely to have seen, we cannot imagine these
capitals coming into existence otherwise than under Norman influence, and
Norman influence after the Conquest. The most successful imitations of
early Norman capitals are at Harpswell, where, as we have observed, the
measurements of the tower are of a Norman and not of a Saxon type. At
Caistor, unfortunately, the original belfry windows are gone, so that we
cannot form any judgment as to the character of their capitals.

[Illustration: ST. MARGARET’S CHURCH TOWER, MARTON (BEFORE RESTORATION).]

When any attempt, then, is made to demonstrate the transitional character
of these towers, to form them into a link between Saxon and Norman work,
we may acknowledge at once that they have an abiding influence on the
plan of the parish church. Were it not for the tradition handed down from
the Saxon period, the towers of Boston, Grantham, Louth, or Heckington
might be in all kinds of different situations with regard to their
respective churches. But of influence upon Anglo-Norman construction,
upon architecture properly speaking, they had none. There is no seed in
them of that marvellous development of stone vaulting which, under Norman
hands in England, was to set in motion the full artistic energy of the
Middle Ages. If, again, we look at the lesser matter of architectural
detail, we must confess that the appearance of detail of a semi-Norman
kind in them shows little capacity for shaping foreign ornament and
adapting it to individual ends. All that we see is inaccurate copying.
The life, the independence of thought and aim, the power of adaptation,
the force of structural genius, which characterise the works of a
transitional period, are all to seek. Yet, in spite of these drawbacks,
on which men enlightened by contact with Norman art cannot have been
slow to comment, the survival of the Saxon type of tower in Lincolnshire
till quite late in the Norman period is a remarkable fact. The tower of
Branston Church is of the traditional Saxon form and of much the usual
Saxon proportions. The arcades in its western face on either side of the
main entrance have unmoulded arches flush with the rubble surface of
the tower, small shafts standing on high plinths of ashlar work which
form the surface of the lowest five or six feet of the wall, and double
cushion-caps, such as occur in more than one Lincolnshire tower. So far
the workman does not commit himself as to the date of his work: its
character is not inconceivably that which a mason more skilled than usual
might have given to his work before the Conquest. But the high archway of
the intervening entrance, with its edge-roll, its lesser mouldings, and
its hood, its jamb-shafts with their voluted capitals, is unmistakably
a copy—rough, but not inaccurate—of the lesser archways which flank the
western doorways of the Norman west front at Lincoln, and occur again
on the returned sides of the Norman wall. This doorway is no insertion:
it is the builder’s chosen enrichment to his tower. No one will presume
to argue that Rémi’s masons at Lincoln went for the model of their
archways to a clever piece of work which some local artist had achieved
at a small local church; and, this argument apart, the earliest date for
the tower at Branston must be about 1092. Possibly after this date few
towers of such slender and pronounced Saxon proportions were built in
Lincolnshire, but the old form persisted. The western tower of Boothby
Pagnell cannot, in its present condition, have been built before 1150:
it is probably some years later. Like Caistor and Harpswell, it is broad
in dimensions, and the walls are thick; but it keeps the unbuttressed
form, and the window with mid-wall shaft. This late survival of a type of
building which has impressed its features but little on subsequent forms
of architecture testifies to its close association with the life of the
county, and to the reluctance of the masons to abandon a feature which
was a familiar sign of the religious activity of the countryside.




KIRKSTEAD CHAPEL

BY C. HODGSON FOWLER, F.S.A.


Within a few hundred yards of the line of the outside wall of the
once-important Cistercian Abbey of Kirkstead, founded in 1139, stands an
extremely beautiful chapel of the purest Early English work, the special
use of which is not known, but which was probably for the use of pilgrims
to the Abbey and was probably served from it.

It now stands solitary and desolate, greatly out of repair, with its
north and south walls much out of the perpendicular, and its vaulting
consequently twisted and its beautiful lines disturbed.

That the settlement of its walls is not all of recent date is shown by
the heavy fifteenth or sixteenth century buttress built against its north
wall, but undoubtedly its dilapidation has seriously increased of late
years.

The chapel is a simple oblong in plan, measuring inside the walls 43 feet
6 inches in length by 19 feet 6 inches in width, with side walls 2 feet 8
inches, and east and west walls about 3 feet 2 inches thick.

It is divided on plan into three bays by vaulting inside and by
buttresses outside; and divided horizontally in two parts by strings
running round the building externally and internally. The height from the
floor to the inside string is 6 feet, and from the floor to the crown of
the vaulting 21 feet.

Both east and west gables have been taken down, and the whole building is
now covered by a low-pitched roof hipped at each end, with a poor modern
bell-cote of perhaps about the beginning of the eighteenth century.

At the east end is a triplet of unequal lancets, with well-moulded arches
internally and double-shafted jambs, the shafts having carved caps and
well-moulded bases, the outer shafts also being banded. The centre light
is 8 feet 9 inches high and 1 foot 2 inches wide, the side ones being 7
feet high and 9 inches wide.

The exterior of the west end is extremely effective, a richly moulded
doorway under the outer string, which is here raised to a height of 11
feet 10 inches, having above it a very well designed composition of three
arches, all well moulded, the outer two being blank and the centre one
containing a deeply-recessed vesica window about 5 feet 2 inches high and
2 feet 6 inches in diameter.

The two side walls have each six lancets, each about 8 feet high and 9
inches wide, all with shafted jambs internally having carved caps and
moulded bases, but plain splayed arches.

Near the west end of the north wall is a second doorway—now walled up—and
in the north-west angle a doorway leading into a stair turret.

The vaulting is quadripartite in the centre and western bays, but
sexpartite in the eastern one. The ribs spring from carved and moulded
corbels, themselves springing from the string round the building. The
vaulting ribs are about 9 inches thick, well moulded with a centre and
two side rolls and deep hollows between, the transom ribs having the
hollows filled with acutely pointed dog-tooth moulding, the diagonal ribs
being without it. The springing of these ribs is about 10 inches above
the corbels. There is no ridge rib, but there are well-carved bosses at
the intersection of the diagonal ribs, the centre and western ones being
all foliage, the eastern one foliage, with the _Agnus Dei_ in the centre.

Externally the building is divided into bays by rather flat buttresses of
about 1 foot 6 inches projection, running up into a corbel table on the
two side walls. The corbels are simply chamfered, and carry an equally
simple cornice.

At the north-west angle the two buttresses are of rather greater
projection and of considerable width, giving space inside them for the
staircase mentioned before.

The west doorway is an excellent example of good Lincolnshire
thirteenth-century work, the arches well moulded and enriched with
dog-tooth, the jambs having one attached and two detached shafts with
well-carved capitals.

The carving of these and all the other capitals in the chapel is of the
stiff “celery” stalk foliage so common in Lincolnshire work, and all,
equally with the mouldings, refined and evidently the work of high-class
masons and carvers.

Internally there are no ancient features beyond those already mentioned,
except a very simple triangular-headed piscina in the eastern bay of the
south wall. The projecting part of its basin has been broken off, but two
grooves for a wooden shelf remain.

The chapel, being a donative without restriction, was used as a
Presbyterian chapel from 1720 to 1812, and was then filled up with pews,
and a pulpit of Jacobean character, apparently previously in the chapel,
was erected in front of the east window.

Most fortunately, however, in thus fitting up the chapel, the joiner
incorporated in the pews two pieces of an Early English screen, of an
exceedingly interesting description, and which no doubt originally cut
off the eastern bay from the body of the chapel. These two pieces are
each about 6 feet long, and consist of an open arcade, the upper part
of the screen, each having six trefoil-headed openings, the heads being
cut out of boards only ⅞ inch thick and rudely pinned on to uprights 2⅞
inches square worked into octagonal shafts 1¾ inch in diameter, with
moulded caps and bases. The whole work is somewhat rude in execution, but
is an extremely valuable specimen of early woodwork.

The only other object of interest in the chapel is an effigy of Purbeck
marble of a knight, now set up against the south wall. This is thought
to represent Robert, the second Lord Tattershall, who died _c._ 1212. He
is in a hauberk of banded mail, the earliest of the five known examples,
and wears the cylindrical helmet, with convex top, having two bands
crossing in front.

For many of these particulars I am indebted to drawings by Mr. J. Nixon
and Mr. A. Hartshorne in the _Spring Garden Sketch Book_.




SOME SOUTH LINCOLNSHIRE CHURCHES

BY W. E. FOSTER, F.S.A.


In no part of Lincolnshire—a county famous for its ecclesiastical
buildings—can so interesting a group of churches be found as that between
Pinchbeck and Sutton St. Mary—a distance of about fifteen miles.

First we have the village church of Pinchbeck, next the Church of St.
Mary and St. Nicholas, Spalding—always the church of the town; then the
interesting village church of St. Mary’s, Weston; then within a mile
the village church of All Saints, Moulton; then within another mile
the village church of St. Mary’s, Whaplode; then we have the beautiful
Church of All Saints, Holbeach, always a town church; then we have the
two village churches of Fleet and St. Mary’s, Gedney; and lastly, the
interesting town church of Sutton St. Mary.

Any stranger visiting the district must be struck with the size and
magnificence of the village churches of Pinchbeck, Moulton, Whaplode, and
Gedney, which have always been out of all proportion to the requirements
of the inhabitants of those various places. It was not the needs of
the people that prompted the erecting of these four beautiful village
shrines; but the church-building rivalry that existed between the two
wealthy abbeys of Croyland and Spalding.

These four village churches, all within twelve miles, as the crow flies,
are probably unequalled in the kingdom, and are lasting monuments of the
energy and zeal of the two local abbeys in providing places of worship
in the villages over which they had sway.


SPALDING

The first church to which we will direct our attention is that of St.
Mary and St. Nicholas, Spalding.

This church owes its origin to a dispute between the prior and monks of
Spalding and the town’s people, about the year 1280. The history of the
foundation of this edifice is supplied by the records of the priory.

It appears that about the dawn of the fourteenth century there were
two parish churches for the town of Spalding, which were on the west
side of the river Welland. One, the Holy Rood, stood on the south side
of the present market place—on the priory walls, about the spot where
the Stamford and Spalding Bank premises are erected; the other St.
Mary, Stokes, which also stood on the priory wall, but nearer the river
Welland and to the High Bridge, that crosses that river. The bells of
these churches not only disturbed the prior and his monks, but the two
buildings being in such a dilapidated condition, the parishioners flocked
to the abbey church, near by, to the great inconvenience of the inmates
of the monastery. William Littleport, who was then the prior, came to
an agreement with the townsmen about the year 1283, and obtained leave
to pull down the two churches, which were probably small buildings with
Norman style of architecture. With contributions from the townsmen, he
agreed to erect a new church for the parish on the east side of the river
Welland, and in the year 1284 he laid the foundation-stone of the present
church. The land on which it stands was then the burial ground for the
town, and part of the mortuary chapel that was then standing was worked
into the new building, and forms part of the south and east walls of the
chancel of the present church.

[Illustration: SPALDING CHURCH NAVE, LOOKING NORTH-EAST.

HOLBEACH CHURCH NAVE, LOOKING WEST.]

When the church was restored in the year 1866, foundations of an earlier
building than the present one were discovered beneath the level of the
floor of the nave—extending westward from the chancel to midway of the
great arches of the transepts. The lines of these foundations were at
right angles with the east wall of the chancel, which is not square with
the present chancel walls, and is of much ruder worked masonry.

Most of the churches in the district, when restored, have revealed the
carved stone work of earlier edifices, which had been freely used by the
builders when either enlarging or rebuilding the churches. This is not to
be wondered at, considering the difficulty the builders had in getting
the stone from the district of Stamford—for from that neighbourhood
nearly the whole of the stone came that was used in erecting the churches
the subject of this article. It must have been costly even in those
days, when labour was cheap. It had to be quarried in the “Uplands,”
and floated on small flat-bottomed boats during the winter months down
the shallow rivers to the various churches—for the roads were well nigh
impassable for such traffic—dressed by the masons on the spot in the dark
season of the year—and built into its place in the summer months, when
the stone would be dry and so able to resist the winter frosts. Their
work was slow, but it was good and sure.

The present church, of which the abbey and prior were the patrons,
was dedicated to the same saints as the abbey, and was erected in the
Geometrical style of architecture of a severe character, considering
the date it was built—for at that time that style of architecture was
dying out, and was not so severe in its character—but in this district,
styles of architecture did not give place to the new till much later than
elsewhere in England and on the Continent.

The dimensions of this early church are easily defined in the present
building externally by the original buttresses on the west end of
the nave, the north and south ends of the transepts, the south-east
buttresses of the nave, and the south wall of the chancel, which had been
built upon the earlier chapel foundations as previously mentioned, and
the angle buttresses at the east end of the chancel; and visitors should
notice that in building on the old foundations, the east wall of the
chancel is not at right angles to the two other walls of the building—the
northern wall is upwards of two feet longer than that on the southern
side.

Such was the early church at Spalding, with probably a campanile or small
tower at the west end of the north aisle. At the restoration in 1866 the
foundations at that corner of the building were on examination found
to be more solid and capable of bearing a much greater weight than the
rest of the building. That a campanile or tower formed part of the early
church—and in the Early English style of architecture—is confirmed by the
fact that Early English base mouldings and windows are worked into the
present tower, as well as ledger stones of Perpendicular date and some
whole stone coffins.

In relation to this tower it is interesting to record that in 1401 there
was another dispute between the townsmen and the prior in relation to the
bells, and it was probably in consequence of that dispute the present
tower was erected and the bells hung in the same.

During the Curvilinear Period the south aisle, the south outer aisle, and
the present tower were added, with Thomas à Becket’s Chapel at the east
end of the south outer aisle. This chapel was used for a great number of
years as the Grammar School.

This Curvilinear tower was not originally intended to carry a spire,
but one was at a subsequent period added, which so severely tried the
strength of the tower that at the time of the Restoration it was in so
dangerous a condition that the bells could not be rung.

In the Rectilinear Period the church was further enlarged, and the
following were added:—

    The present North Aisle.
                Outer North Aisle.
                North Porch.
                One Buttress on the South Outer Aisle.
                Two Buttresses on south side of Chancel.
                South Porch.
                North-east Buttress of North Transept.
                Stairs to Rood-loft.

The Parish Church of Spalding presents an excellent example of how the
architects of the period transformed an Early Geometrical church into a
Rectilinear one.

Originally the nave and transepts were of one uniform height throughout,
as were also the roofs, plates, clerestory-range, arches, capitals, and
bases respectively. The pillars of the nave were heightened about 6
feet about the year 1450, when the arches were reset and the clerestory
rebuilt and the present windows inserted.

The tower (Perpendicular) should be compared with that of All Saints’,
Moulton, another church built by the Spalding monks. It is surmounted by
lofty pinnacles and flying buttresses connecting them with a crocketed
spire rising to the height of 153 feet. It is placed at the west end of
the south outer aisle.

Mr. Sharpe, in his _Lincoln Excursion_, 1871, says: “The tower and
spire rank among the finest in the country.” And writing on the church,
he says: “Although its separate features have no great merit, it
presents one of the most striking interiors to be seen in any parish
church; due in a great measure to the variety and irregularity of its
different parts, and the many singularities of designs, to which the
various alterations of form have given rise, as well as to the excellent
restoration it has received.

“The Chapel of St. Thomas à Becket is a curious building, the windows of
which have tracery of an unusual kind, in which both right and flowing
lines are introduced.

“The north porch is an important structure of somewhat late in the
Rectilineal Period, with a groined fan-tracery roof and parvise over it.”

Owing to the proximity of the priory, the rich and influential persons
who had died before the demolition of monasteries were buried in the
convent church. The parish church was most ably restored by the late Sir
Gilbert Scott in 1866. The high pews and galleries were removed. The
organ was erected in a new chapel built on the north side of the chancel.
The west window of the nave was filled with new tracery, and the whole
of the windows filled with stained glass. The roofs were thoroughly
overhauled, and new pews erected.


WESTON ST. MARY

The next church of which we have to treat is the village church of St.
Mary’s, Weston, another of the Spalding Priory churches. The parish of
Weston formed part of the at one time large Manor of Spalding and its
members, of which the Priors of Spalding were lords; and all records
point to the able and philanthropic way the monks treated the places
within their jurisdiction. With respect to the mode in which they treated
Pinchbeck, and the means by which they built that fine village church,
the existing records of the monastery give a most interesting account.
That Weston Church was restored under the able direction of the then
vicar, the late Rev. Canon Edward Moore, F.S.A., is sufficient guarantee
that it was a thorough, though conservative, restoration, and those who
visit the church will be ready to testify that as a model of a village
church Weston St. Mary would hold a very high place.

That the present is not the first church at Weston we have proof, for
about the year 1135 Thomas de Multon, who was the chief tenant of the
Prior of Spalding, and resided at his castle at Moulton, whilst attending
the funeral of his father in the Abbey Church of Spalding, gave to the
monks, in the presence of his family, the Abbot of Croyland, and many
others, the church at Weston. Weston was in his manor of Moulton. The
gift was confirmed in the presence of the Chapter of the Priory of
Spalding, and also by Thomas de Multon depositing his clasped knife on
the high altar of the Abbey Church. This Thomas was the father of Lambert
de Multon, who, with his wife Matilda, was buried in Weston Church;
and there is still in the north-west corner of the north transept his
sepulchral slab which formerly had two effigies. Lambert doubtless was a
benefactor to the church, and so acquired the honour of sepulture within
its walls.

In the early part of the thirteenth century (during the reign of King
John), and whilst John, a Spaniard, was the Prior of Spalding, a fine
was levied between him and Lord Thomas de Multon for the advowson of the
Church of Weston, and, judging by the architecture, it was about this
time the monks began the building of the present church.

With the exception of the transepts and tower, the whole of this
pretty church belongs to the earliest part of the Lancet Period. The
two transepts belong to the Geometrical Period, and the tower to the
Rectilinear Period of architecture. The student may compare the nave of
this church with advantage with the earlier nave of Moulton, another of
the Spalding Priory churches—it seems as if the same workmen had been
engaged on both buildings. The nave has five compartments of pointed
pier arches of two orders, of which the first only is moulded, resting
on light clustered piers consisting of circular and polygonal shafts
surrounded by four light detached shafts. The piers are low and the
shafts not banded. The pier capitals present a series of carved work of
the earliest Lancet foliage, and are very stiff, but are more free and
of far more advanced character than those at Moulton. The chancel arch
of two orders is an excellent example of the early work of the Lancet
Period. The clerestories should be compared with those at Whaplode, Long
Sutton, and Moulton, which show the gradual change from the Norman to the
Transitional and the Transitional to the Lancet styles of architecture.
This church illustrates how the Transitional ideas in regard to moulding,
&c., show themselves in this early example of Lancet work.

The chancel has single lancet windows and slender buttresses of the early
part of the period, and should be compared with the two buttresses at the
east end of the south aisle of Moulton Church.

The font is an interesting one, and is of the same date as the nave.
The tower, which is the lowest in the district, does not call for
observation. The south porch is a very good specimen of the period, and
will repay careful inspection.


ALL SAINTS’, MOULTON

Old though this splendid village church is, it is not the first church
the parish possessed, for there was an earlier one which it is believed
stood on the north side of the main road leading from Spalding to
Holbeach, in the same manner as the Church of Weston now does. The site
of this early church was near the present “Bell Inn.” When the turnpike
was made in 1761, a great number of human bones were dug up and the
foundations of buildings were discovered. The impression then was that
the site of an ancient church and burial ground had been disclosed.
This church was probably a small Saxon building. Domesday Survey does
not record any church at Moulton. That need not cause any surprise, as
it was no part of the commissioners’ duty to make a return of churches.
It is true some are mentioned, but in the majority of cases, even where
churches were known to have existed, there is no mention of them in the
Survey.

The Priory of Spalding was founded a few years previously to the Norman
Conquest (_cir._ 1051) by Thorold the Sheriff, and was liberally endowed
by him and Lady Lucy, who married Ivo Tail-bois, nephew to the Conqueror.
Through her family Spalding Priory became possessed of the manor of
Spalding, and the owners of the advowson of Moulton Church.

Cole, in his priceless MSS. now in the British Museum, states:—

    “Be it known that the right of advowson of the Church of
    Moulton was acquired by the Prior and Convent with the manor
    of Spalding ... and they always held it without strife or
    controversy.”

The Priory supplied priests to officiate in the early church at Moulton.

The following charter of Robert, Bishop of Lincoln (1094-1123), is
interesting:—

    “To all the faithful in Christ and to the sons of the Holy
    Mother Church Robert, by the grace of God Bishop of Lincoln,
    greeting. We provide for the Church of God usefully when
    we assign its benefices to fitting persons for pious uses.
    Therefore, for religion’s sake, and fully trusting to the
    honesty of our beloved sons H⸺ [Cole states it was Herbert]
    the Prior and the monks of Spalding, we concede and confirm to
    them for a perpetual alms the churches of Spalding, Pinchbeck,
    Multon, and Hautebarge with all their appendages, viz. to the
    Church of St. Nicholas and the monks serving God there to hold
    for their own use, for the support of the Poor, of guests, and
    the infirm; and we corroborate the same by the attestation
    of our seal; save and excepting in all things the right and
    dignity of the Church of Lincoln. Witness: Henry of Huntingdon,
    archdeacon, &c.”

Cole, speaking of this charter, says: “The Prior and Convent appointed
the vicars temporal in the said churches according to their will for
seven or eight years, or for any other time at their pleasure.”

By the 4th and 5th parts of the Register of Spalding Priory, now in the
British Museum, we learn the great sway the monastery had over “their
vill of Multon”:—

    “The tenants of the Prior in Multone on account of their
    contracts and misdemeanors struck and committed in the fee
    of the Prior assemble at the Court of the Prior in Spalding.
    Likewise the Prior in his said Court of Spalding has control
    over the bakers and brewers and the vendors of bread and ale
    in his fee in Multone. Likewise the residents in the fee of
    the Prior at Multone are in frankpledge to the Prior in the
    same Court of Spalding, and came there for the purpose of
    making view of frankpledge and their amendation. Likewise the
    gallows of the Prior of Spalding in Spalding serve for those
    condemned in his Court of Spalding, taken in his fee of Multone
    and convicted of felony in his Court of Spalding. Likewise
    the right of patronage of the Church of Multone belongs to the
    manor of the Prior of Spalding in Spalding.”

Such was the position of affairs at Moulton when the monks at Spalding
in the twelfth century began building the present Parish Church of All
Saints.

During Prior John’s time (_circa_ 1175-1190) we next learn something
concerning the church at Moulton. Coles in his MSS. gives some curious
articles offered by the rector and patrons of the Church of Moulton
against Thomas de Multon, “a great man in these parts,” and head tenant
of the monastery, “showing the ill-feeling and jealousy which had sprung
up between the ecclesiastical and lay lords as well as the anxiety of the
monastery to secure the aid of the parishioners in building the present
church, and pointing out their duties to their ‘Mother Church.’”

    “Articles offered against Thomas de Multon by the Prior and
    Convent of Spalding, Rectors, and Patrons of Multon, and by the
    Vicar of the same.

    “In the first place, it is offered against the said Sir Thomas
    that he has a certain chapel unlawfully erected in his manor,
    and causes divine service to be there celebrated without the
    consent and will of the said prior and convent and of the
    vicar, and without the authority of any superior person, to the
    danger of his soul, and to the no small prejudice and injury
    of the said prior and convent and the vicar of the parish
    church of Multon. Likewise, that the chaplains celebrating
    in the same, by the power and authority of the said Sir
    Thomas, receive the parishioners of Multon, not only at the
    Sacraments, but also at the Sacraments of the Church, contrary
    to the injunction of the holy canons, to the danger of his
    soul, &c. (as above). Likewise, that his chaplains aforesaid,
    by the power and authority of the said Sir Thomas, unjustly
    appropriate to themselves, and carry away for their own use,
    to convert to their own pleasure, the oblations made in the
    said chapel, and also other offerings which by right belong
    to the parish church aforesaid. On which account the said
    chaplains are also _ipso facto_ suspended from the celebration
    of the divine offices, and are irregular in like manner when
    celebrating the divine offices, yea, rather profaning them.
    Which said chaplains the said Sir Thomas, contrary to the law
    of God and justice, sustains and defends in the wickedness
    of such iniquity and manifest error, to the prejudice and
    subversion of the rights of the parish church of Multon, to
    the danger of his soul, &c. (as above). Likewise, since it
    pertains to parish rights, that all the parishioners ought,
    at least on Sundays and Feast-days, to attend their parish
    church devoutly, there to attend to the prayers diligently,
    to listen to the divine offices and other salutary admonitions
    which are wholesomely made for the information of the people;
    nevertheless the same Sir Thomas has hitherto refused, with
    contempt, to attend his parish church at Multon aforesaid,
    whilst he remains there, or in any way to acknowledge it by
    his personal presence, and still unduly, to the danger of his
    soul, &c. (as above). Likewise, that since the parishioners,
    according to ecclesiastical discipline, ought on Sundays and
    Feast-days, as aforesaid, to come to the parish church not
    alone to pray there, and hear the divine offices, but also
    that they might be present together, anxious and attentive to
    the Declaration of the Feasts and of the Bans, to the mandates
    of the Church and their superiors, and to the executions and
    injunctions there made by the ministers of the church as the
    custom is, for the information of the people and the salvation
    of their souls, and that they might reverently and devoutly
    fulfil such injunctions and instructions to the utmost of their
    power; nevertheless the said Sir Thomas and others of the
    parish of Multon, by the authority only of the said Sir Thomas,
    and by occasion of the said chapel, under-estimating and
    despising their own parish church, assemble in the aforesaid
    chapel on the said Sundays and Feast-days to hear mass there
    only, entirely regardless of the salutary admonitions of their
    mother church, and all injunctions and informations of the
    same, like sons degenerate towards their mother, which is
    horrible, to the manifest danger of his soul, and of the souls
    of many others, and to the prejudice of the parish church, &c.
    Likewise, that by his own authority, and by occasion of the
    said chapel, he differs from the community of the parishioners
    of Multon, and strives to avoid parochial law and subjection,
    in that although he is a parishioner there he will not receive
    the holy bread, like as others his parishioners devoutly and
    thankfully receive it, chiefly because he is not the patron
    of the said church, neither does he admit the clerk bearer of
    the holy water, which is disgraceful in such a lord, since
    even the poor villeins of the parish, and the miserable women
    likewise, cherishing their household-god, receive it gratefully
    and kindly; the duty of which said clerk was first of all
    devised for the common convenience of the parishioners, and
    thus far laudably approved, and, from time immemorial, has been
    generally observed.

    “Likewise that, since all the parishioners are bound by
    parochial law to contribute to the building of the parish
    church, and to acknowledge and sustain it, like as sons a
    mother, the same Sir Thomas, although a parishioner of the
    church of Multon, and a son of the same, among others greater
    and more powerful, has refused to contribute any part of
    his goods towards the building of the church, and refuses
    unlawfully, because by no special law is he free from this kind
    of duty, to the danger of his soul, &c. (as above).

    “Likewise, since it belongs to the church of Multon and to
    its ministers to make citations through the parish, and
    corrections, for the most part enjoined by the mandate and
    authority of superiors, the said Sir Thomas, wishing to
    exempt his chapel aforesaid, and by reason of the said chapel
    the whole of his manor of Multon, does not permit any one
    of his family, by reason of any compact or contract, to be
    cited within the boundaries of the said manor, nor otherwise
    justified according to the form of the Church, but as well
    he as others of his family, under his authority and power,
    waywardly resist and intolerably rebel, lest they should be
    cited and corrected, as well for the cruel injuries oftentimes
    brought upon the ministers of the said church, as also for
    mortal threats, so that the ministers of the said church dare
    not approach the manor of Multon aforesaid for the purpose of
    making any citation or execution on the part of the church,
    neither can they do so without danger of death, or pain of
    body; on which account many sins committed by the said family
    are left unpunished, and ample opportunity for sinning is
    afforded by the said Thomas, whilst he cherishes and defends
    such persons in sin and error, contrary to the state of the
    Church, and the reverence of God and the Church, and likewise
    to the notorious detriment of his soul and of the souls of
    many others, and to the prejudice and injury of the church of
    Multon, and of the said prior and convent and of the vicar.

    “But the said prior and convent and the vicar protest that,
    if the said Sir Thomas has, for himself, any special right,
    by reason of which he can duly claim such rights, or defend
    himself in the premises, and be in any way exempt from
    parochial right, that such right and judgment being shown in
    due form, or inasmuch as he shall show that he is lawfully
    protected by special privilege with regard to any article in
    the premises, they will be so far ready to yield to these
    oppositions, and to cease from their pursuit in this matter,
    and to dismiss him in peace commended to the Lord.”

The Prior of Spalding, powerful though he was, had formidable opponents
in the Multon family, who not only had the Pope, who had given Sir Thomas
licence for his chapel, on their side, but also the temporal power of
the State. So great was the Multon influence, that the Prior was glad
to come to terms with the “head tenant,” and a composition was signed
by the parties in the Church of Weston, on Wednesday next before the
Circumcision of our Lord in the year 1259.

    “Composition between the Prior of Spalding and Sir Thomas de
    Multon, in a suit moved between them, regarding the minor
    tenths and an annual rent.

    “Memorandum, that in the presence of Sir (dominus) John Prior
    of Spalding, on the one part, and Thomas de Multon, on the
    other part, in the Church of Weston, on Wednesday next before
    the Circumcision of our Lord, in the year MCCLIX., to treat
    of peace between the parties aforesaid, conceded and agreed
    upon by the will of both, in a suit moved in the Court of
    Christianity, regarding the minor tenths, namely, hunting in
    the park of Multon, herbage of the garden, cut wood, dovecots,
    butter, domestic geese, fisheries; and in a suit moved in the
    Court of our lord the King, regarding an annual rent of 60s.,
    peace was renewed in the manner following, the mediators being
    Master Alexander, Rector of the Church of Swineshead, at that
    time Official of the Lord Archdeacon of Lincoln, Sir James de
    Bussi, parson of Skirbeck, Master William de Walpol, Sir John
    de Grethford, Vicar of Multon, Gilbert de Cheile, and others,
    namely, that the said Thomas shall pay the tenth of milk at
    the tenth day, or cheese, with all the collected cream (cum
    tota pinquedine coagulatim) at the will of the Lord Prior,
    and the right shoulder of venison (bestiæ suæ venationis).
    In like manner he shall pay the tenth of domestic fowl, and
    of his dovecot, fully and wholly without contradiction. But
    the Lord Prior has remitted to the said Thomas the tenths of
    the fish-ponds. Moreover the petition regarding the tenths
    of garden herbage and of cut wood shall cease between the
    aforesaid parties, until the tenths of this nature shall be
    generally paid. Moreover the said Thomas has agreed to the
    payment of the said annual rent of 60s. to the Lord Prior at
    the proper terms, and with his glove has invested the same in
    the hands of the said Prior, and has mortgaged the arrears of
    three years, namely nine pounds; nevertheless the said Lord
    Prior, at the instance of common friends, has remitted to
    the said Thomas the half of those nine pounds. And the said
    mediators are witnesses of this peace.

    “Robert, Sub-prior of Spalding; John de Tid; John, monk of
    Spalding; Master Henry de Edinham, clerk; William de Cletham,
    clerk; officials, &c., and many others being present, seeing
    and hearing. In testimony whereof the seal of the office
    aforesaid is affixed.”

Cole gives an interesting composition between the Prior of Spalding and
the vicar of Moulton regarding a pension; likewise regarding portion of
the vicarage.

One cannot but think with the erection of All Saints’, Moulton, began
the church-building rivalry between the two neighbouring monasteries of
Croyland and Spalding, which lasted until the dissolution of the greater
abbeys. Croyland had built the Norman portion of the present church of
Whaplode. Then Spalding Priory, about 1175, began the present Church of
Moulton, the nave of which would be considerably larger than the Norman
nave of Whaplode, and though Moulton nave is built in the Transitional
Period, in a great number of its details it resembles Whaplode; for you
have at Whaplode four shafted compound piers, while at Moulton you have
the four shafts arranged round a central column forming part of the solid
masonry, still all engaged and forming a solid pier of coursed masonry;
next you have a further development of the idea—four larger and four
smaller shafts placed alternately, but still engaged, almost immediately
followed by the disengaged shafts of the Lancet Period, as at St. Mary’s,
Weston.

The pier bases are similar to those at Whaplode, though they show the
slight advance art had made, but at Moulton you will find a circular
bench round the base. The Croyland monks, when they saw the church at
Moulton was finer than theirs at Whaplode, not to be outdone by the
younger monastery, lengthened the nave of Whaplode; and though Spalding
long afterwards added a bay to the nave at Moulton, that at Whaplode is
still the longest and narrowest nave in the district.

The capitals of Transitional work at Moulton are interesting—the stiff
engaged leaves are all inclined one way, and follow one another round the
necks of the capitals.

Mr. Sharpe says—

    “In the pier capitals of the eastern part of the nave of
    Whaplode and the nave of Moulton churches we see the early
    efforts of the artists of the period to produce relief and to
    disengage the flowers and the leaf from the surface to which
    it was attached. The strong resemblance of the ornamentation
    of the capitals in these two churches leaves no doubt that
    the Transitional portion of the nave at Whaplode and the nave
    at Moulton are contemporaneous work, the same artists having
    probably been employed on the carved work of the naves.”

At Moulton an arch at one time apparently sprung from the westernmost
pair of pillars, across the nave, from the engaged pillar rising through
the capital of the nave pillar. There is a strong buttress at the back
of each of these pillars, which are continued to the clerestory, and
can be seen from the outside. There probably was a tower or campanile
standing between the two pillars, which was pulled down probably in the
Rectilinear Period, when the present tower was erected—one bay further to
the west. The northern clerestory, which is Transitional and earlier than
that of the south side, may be compared with that of Whaplode. The south
clerestory is Late Transitional. In the Rectilinear Period, in 1400, the
windows of the clerestories were altered and the present roof was built.

The aisles, originally only 10 feet wide, were in about 1310 widened
to 17 feet, the south aisle being first done. Some of the original
Transitional buttresses were re-used (the eastern and smaller ones), as
was also the fine south Transitional doorway. The north aisle was done
about 1320-25, and the original Transitional doorway was re-used. When
the tower and spire were built about 1380, the aisles were lengthened,
like the nave. Sharpe writes on the tower and spire: “Their relative
proportions may be pronounced faultless.... The tower and spire may be
taken as the most perfect realisation of the Rectilinear form of this
noble addition to the English parish church to be found anywhere.”

The walls of the tower appear to have settled as the work progressed,
but the architects of those days were equal to the emergency, and so
rectified the work as the building progressed, and so well was it done
that the tower has kept its perpendicular for five centuries. The spire
is 6 feet 8 inches at base, and the stone 6 inches thick.

The chancel was rebuilt late in the fourteenth or early in the fifteenth
century, but the chancel arch is post-Reformation work. The east window
and the organ chamber are new. The sedilia were reset in the fourteenth
century. In the north wall is a mutilated sepulchre or founder’s tomb;
also there is a blocked-up vestry door of the same period. The vestry and
room over it have long since disappeared. The rood-screen, which has been
recently very well restored, is of the same date as the chancel, and is
by far the best specimen of a rood-screen in the district.

The church was restored in 1867-8, when (_inter alia_) the organ was
removed from the gallery at the west end and placed in the new organ
chamber. There were also placed in the church a new font, pulpit,
reading desk, and seating, mullions placed in the aisles’ windows, roofs
repaired, gallery at west end of nave removed, and new windows in the
chancel. There were formerly several chapels with altars in the church,
the last vestiges of which were removed at the restoration in 1867-8.

Members of the Multon, Welby, Wigtoft, and Kyme families rest in the
church, as well as the body of John Horrox, the founder of the Moulton
Grammar Schools. Unfortunately at the restoration the sepulchral slabs
were removed to “fit in better,” and at the present time are not over the
bodies of those whose memory they perpetuate.


ST. MARY’S, WHAPLODE

This church is not only the oldest in the district, but, in spite of the
lamentable condition to which it has been reduced by the ill-usage and
neglect in bygone days, it is one of the most instructive and interesting
to the architectural student in South Lincolnshire.

    “The Parish of Whaplode, prior to the Conquest, was under the
    jurisdiction of the convent of Croyland, the abbot of which,
    from the earliest times, was lord of the principal manor. It
    was proved at a trial before the Bishop of Lincoln in 1447,
    the abbot “held the principal demesne rights in Whaplode, and
    had there besides the fee of the church markets, fairs, wastes
    and warren, right of pillory, as also the assize of bread and
    beer,” though it is recorded that the abbot’s rights were
    disputed, and that Ralph Mershe (abbot from 1253-1281), at
    great expense, and after long suits at law, gained the manor
    of Gedney and the _church_ at Whaplode. This seems strange,
    as every record from the earliest times connects the abbot of
    Croyland with the patronage of Whaplode Church, and that the
    convent used to supply chaplains to do duty. In addition to the
    Croyland records, there are the public records, for we find
    that the abbot, in Henry III.’s reign, in 1245, had a grant
    of a weekly market on Saturday, and a fair on the Assumption
    of the Blessed Virgin and six days afterwards, and that this
    grant was confirmed by Edward I.; besides which we have the
    ecclesiastical documents in the Bishop’s Register at Lincoln,
    showing that the abbot presented to the church in 1239, 1246,
    1250, 1251. The abbot won the day, and Croyland abbots held the
    presentation to the living until the Dissolution in the reign
    of Henry VIII.”

[Illustration: MOULTON CHURCH SOUTH AISLE, LOOKING NORTH-WEST.

MOULTON CHURCH NAVE, LOOKING EAST.]

The monks of Croyland were the builders of Whaplode’s two churches,
though doubtless largely aided by the laity, as we have seen was the case
at Moulton. Unfortunately the records of Croyland do not give the same
amount of information in reference to the building of their churches as
do those of Spalding Priory in reference to theirs.

There is no trace of the building of any earlier church at Whaplode than
the present one, and we are unaware of any remains of earlier work being
found when the church was restored, about the middle of last century.

The earliest part of the present church is the chancel arch and the four
eastmost compartments of the nave, which were built about 1125, in the
Norman style of architecture. It is greatly to the credit of King William
I. and the invaders and their descendants, that no sooner had they got
this island into a settled state than they began building cathedrals,
monasteries, and parish churches all over the kingdom. Croyland was the
first to inaugurate the church-building move in this district, and if
they had completed the church as evidently originally designed by the
Norman architect, it would have been a very fine specimen of the period.

Before the work was resumed at Whaplode, in the Transitional Period,
the masons had been busy at work on the present churches of Moulton and
Sutton St. Mary. The monks of Croyland, about forty or fifty years after
they had built the Norman portion of the nave, erected the westernmost
portion in the Transitional style (1145-1190), and which made the nave
110 feet long and 19 feet wide, the longest and narrowest nave in the
Elloc division of Lincolnshire.

The Norman chancel arch is only 13 feet wide and very low, which gives
the east end of the nave a very heavy appearance.

The smallness of the Norman arch seems to have claimed the attention of
the architects at a very early date. They cut away the large semicircular
shafts which carried the soffit of the arch and worked in a Transitional
corbel to make the opening wider.

One cannot but think that the Norman columns of the nave were intended to
carry a far heavier structure than was ever placed on them, and that the
architects altered their plans even before the arches had been erected.
The clerestory is partly Norman, and the rest, with the west front,
Transitional.

The west front has been terribly mutilated, but happily sufficient
remains to guide the architect to its perfect restoration; fortunately
it has not been so badly ill-treated as the chancel, which is a standing
disgrace, and is as bad a form of Churchwarden’s style as can well be
conceived. There is even here, however, enough of the original work left
to guide the architect in its restoration, if only funds were forthcoming
from the rectors, who are trustees of a public school.

One regrets it is not possible in an article of this nature to enter into
the details of the Norman-Transitional work at Whaplode, or compare it
with the work of the same period in the churches at Sutton St. Mary and
Moulton. To the student a visit to the three churches is very instructive.

As at Moulton Church, where the tower with its spire wins the admiration
of all visitors, so does the tower of Whaplode. It is curiously placed,
and with what object one is at a loss to understand.

Mr. Sharpe, writing on the tower, states—

    “The very striking south-west tower, standing in an unusual
    position on the south side of the eastmost compartment of the
    south aisle, must have been commenced immediately after the
    completion of the nave. In its four stages in height, of which
    the three lowest belong to the original design, though carried
    out in a manner which leads us to conclude that the first
    stage, which carries a zigzag in its pointed arcade, was the
    only one completed before the close of the Transitional Period,
    the arcades of the two upper stages exhibiting an almost pure
    Lancet treatment in their details.

    “The fourth stage, with its embattled parapet, added in the
    Curvilinear Period, gives an appropriate finish to this elegant
    design.”

Richard de Gravesend, Bishop of Lincoln, gave the following charter to
Croyland in the year 1268:—

    “To all faithful Christians by whom this writing may be read,
    Richard, by Divine permission Bishop of Lincoln, sendeth
    health in the Lord. We will that you should by this present
    writing know; that, whereas our beloved children in Christ,
    the religious persons, the Abbot and Convent of Croyland, have
    long since obtained the grateful consent and assent of our
    predecessor, the blessed Hugh, of famous and revered memory, as
    also of his Holiness Honorius, some time chief bishop of the
    Roman Church, likewise confirming the same of the church of
    Whaplode, whereof they were and are the patrons, to have it to
    their own proper use in manner as in this instrument is more
    fully contained.

    “We, at their devout and frequent petitions that we would
    favourably, more graciously in the premises, grant them our
    assent and consent to the permission and favour done them by
    our said predecessor, the consideration of their order inducing
    thereto, having due regard to the special devotion of the said
    religious persons, and their sincere love in the Lord towards
    our venerable church at Lincoln, and the Bishop thereof, being
    more readily inclined to grant their petitions and requests,
    as therefore in the monastery of Croyland the weightiness of
    religion and observance of their order for the sake of sanctity
    and principally in favour of hospitality, which are known to
    flourish in that monastery, and which do and ought to render
    it esteemed by all men, remembering that favour should not
    be denied to such requesting it, of the assent and grateful
    consent concerning of our beloved children in Christ of William
    Lessington, in respect of Divine Piety, and especially for
    enlarging the duty of Divine worship therein, have given,
    granted, and by this our present Charter have confirmed, to
    the monastery of Croyland, and to the monks there together
    serving God, the church of Quaplode (Whaplode), in which they
    obtain the right of patronage, to be possessed to and for
    their own proper uses for ever, the rent and profits of which
    church they may indeed convert to their use, and without any
    impediment; for the future have power lawfully so to convert
    the same, a competent portion thereof being still reserved
    for the vicar perpetually serving the same church, wherein we
    likewise ordain and establish the Vicarage out of the profits
    of the said church for the support of him and his ministers,
    and the charges thereof as we have thought fit by our episcopal
    authority, thus to distinguish the portions of the said abbot
    and convent and the vicar before mentioned by them to us and
    our successors to be presented whenever the said vicarage shall
    happen to be vacant, that they, the said abbot and convent, may
    have the whole tithe of sheaves of the said church of Whaplode,
    with all demesne lands, and its rights and appendants to the
    said church any way belonging, and all the tithe of flax and
    hemp purely and absolutely. Moreover, that they may have and
    quietly take or receive the whole tithe of wool and lambs
    arising from the whole parish (to wit) as consisting in fleeces
    of wool and bodies of lambs, but that the vicar for the time
    being successively to us and our successor to be presented by
    the said abbot and convent to the vicarage aforesaid shall,
    by reason thereof, by this our ordinances for ever hereafter
    take and have the whole altarage absolutely and indisputably,
    in whatever name conceived, and in whatsoever it doth and may
    consist. The tithes of sheaves, flax, hemp, wool, and lambs,
    and also the whole demesne land with its rights and appendants,
    as is before said (only excepted), the said vicar shall have
    and take the whole tithe of hay of the whole parish entirely
    and without any diminution, and without impediments of the said
    abbot and convent. He shall, moreover, have the redemption of
    wool and of lambs wheresoever in the parish from the number
    of five and so counting downwards, to wit where according to
    the custom of the place to the tenth of the fleeces and of the
    lambs it cannot by any means amount to every kind of tithe as
    well as of wool as of lambs beyond the number of five, arising
    by counting upwards to the aforesaid custom, remaining wholly
    in the power of the before-named abbot and convent, as is
    before mentioned.

    “Whereupon we strictly forbid any deceit or fraud to be by any
    one done under pain of the greater sentence; but we ordain
    that the before-named abbot and convent do provide for the
    Vicars for the place and time successively to be instituted a
    competent mansion in a convenient place at first by them the
    said abbot and convent, to be erected and competently built for
    the first Vicar who shall be instituted next after the cession
    or decease of Simon, now Vicar of the church of Whaplode,
    thenceforward to be repaired or new built on the same spot as
    by accidental cause, necessity, or age requiring it ought to be.

    “We moreover ordain that the first and every Vicar by the
    bishop to be instituted after the cession or decease of the
    said Simon for the time being do sustain and allow ordinary
    episcopal and archidiaconal charges due and accustomed, and
    that they take care of and keep in repair and find books,
    vestments, and other necessary ecclesiastical ornaments, and
    repair the chancel of the church when it wants repairs at their
    costs, and also provide and sustain all ministers necessary for
    serving the vicarage before treated.

    “Now we will and ordain that this our ordinance have force
    for ever in all and singular the above said articles, saving
    in all things the episcopal customs and dignity of the church
    of Lincoln, that therefore full credit may be given to this
    our present ordinance, and that a perpetual security may be
    provided for the said abbot and convent and the vicars for the
    time to come. We have caused this instrument to be corroborated
    with the sanction of our seal. Done in the month of January
    in the year of our Lord Christ’s incarnation 1268, and the
    eleventh year of our consecration.”

The original Norman chancel was destroyed about the year 1320, when a new
chancel was built, of which little now remains, worked into the present
one, and one bay of the north wall, with a pillar, a part of the east-end
wall, and the jambs of the arch at the east end of the north aisle.

The Transitional aisles were taken down, and the present ones, with the
north transept, were erected about 1420. At the same time the clerestory
was heightened, and the present windows were inserted. Fortunately the
builders did not destroy the Transitional work.

When the wider aisles of Whaplode were erected, the builders, as at
Moulton, preserved the original Transitional south doorway and re-erected
it, and also the west doorway, which was erected in 1180, and is, with
the two doorways at Moulton, the oldest in the district.

The north and south porches are post-Reformation.

The roof of the nave, now being repaired, is a good example of the
Rectilinear Period.

The font is a creditable imitation of a Norman one, but is of
post-Reformation work.

The area of this church is so great that only the eastern portions of the
nave (the Norman portion) and aisles are fitted with open seats; the rest
of the church is entirely open, which gives it a cathedral appearance.
There is a fine seventeenth-century monument to Sir Antony Irby and his
wife, ancestors of the Right Hon. Lord Boston. There were formerly three
chapels in the church. Colonel Holles, when he visited the church about
1641, found memorials to the families of Fitzwalter, Littlebury, Rye,
Beke, Quaplod, Venables, Kyrketon, Haultoft, Walpole, Pulvertoft, Welby,
Ogle, and others.


ALL SAINTS’, HOLBEACH

Of this large and beautiful church little need be written. It is a
fine Curvilinear building, though merging into Rectilinear in the
tower and spire. It belongs to the latter part of the period, and is
the only church in the neighbourhood which is built in one style of
architecture. The work of erecting the edifice was practically continuous
from beginning to finish. It was built in the reigns of Edward III. and
Richard II., probably between 1340 and 1380.

The present church is not the first church at Holbeach—one would be
inclined to believe it was the third; the first would be a small Saxon
church, and the second a small Norman one, but a more substantial
structure than the first.

With regard to the earlier church or churches at Holbeach, we have
considerable documentary evidence, although we find few if any of their
remains in the present church, unless the Norman capital which lies on
the floor at the south-east corner of the nave, and some few of the very
numerous corbel heads at the terminations of the hood-moulds of the
clerestory windows, which are grotesque and rude enough to have been the
production of Norman workmen, formed parts of the earlier Norman church.

There is no mention of a church at Holbeach in the Domesday Survey, but
Pope Alexander in 1177 addressed a deed to Spalding Abbey confirming the
possessions of the Priory (in this district), and amongst them we find it
held “the Church of Holbeach with all pertaining unto it.”

Again, in 1189, we find Thomas de Multon, Lord of Holbeach, and others,
who conspired against the Abbot of Croyland, meeting in the Church of
Holbeach.

In 1194, on the morrow of the Holy Trinity, a settlement was arrived
at between Fulco d’Oiri, who claimed the advowson of the Church of All
Saints, Holbeach, and the Chapel of St. Peter in Holbeach; and he made
over the advowson to Conan, fil Elie de Holbeche, and his heirs for 21s.
rent in Holbeche, and for one “calcaria de aurata” (a pair of gilt spurs)
at Easter for all services.

The advowson of Holbeach, prior to the Bishop of Lincoln acquiring the
same, had belonged to the Multon family, a member of whom in King Henry
III.’s reign had a grant of a weekly market and also fairs at Holbeach.
The various legal suits brought to recover the advowson of Holbeach
are most interesting reading, and are given in Macdonald’s _History of
Holbeach_, a work well worth consulting.

In 1332, however, the church had a new patron—Henry, Bishop of Lincoln.
By deed dated at Stone, in the county of Northampton, “on the nearest
Wednesday after the feast of St. Martin,” the Bishop, in the sixth year
of the reign of Edward III. (1332), William de Harcourt, Knt., for the
sum of £500, made over to Henry, by divine permission Bishop of Lincoln,
the advowson of the Church of Holbeach; and in the Lincoln Register there
is a charter given in 1332 by William de Harcourt, Knight, appointing two
attorneys to put the Bishop in possession of Holbeach Church.

The Pope in 1334 despatched a papal bull to the Bishops of Hereford, Ely,
and Durham, directing that the Church of Holbeach, the patronage of which
the Bishop of Lincoln had lately acquired, should be appropriated to the
see of Lincoln.

On 5th February 1334, 7 Edward III. (dated at Nettleham), the Bishop of
Lincoln granted a charter to Dominus Thomas de ... appointing him his
(the Bishop’s) attorney to receive seisin of the Church at Holbeach.

In 1335 a licence was granted to William de Goseberkyrk, the newly
appointed Vicar of Holbeach, to hear confessions in reserved cases.

It appears that almost directly the Bishop of Lincoln obtained possession
of the advowson, and had placed his nominee into the vicarage, he at once
set about building the present church at Holbeach, which then excelled
the two neighbouring churches of Moulton and Whaplode. This doubtless led
the monks of Spalding and Croyland to enlarge their respective churches,
and rekindled the church-building energy of the twelfth and thirteenth
centuries.

The visitor will not fail to notice the north porch. In appearance it is
more in keeping for a baronial castle than a church porch. It is no part
of the original design or building, and was added years afterwards. It
was flanked at the north-east and south-east angles with massive circular
towers, one of which leads to the parvise above, and the other appears to
have been used as a cell or porter’s lodge.

Previously to being erected at Holbeach it had, we believe, formed part
of the manorial castle of the Multon family at Moulton. A mere glance
at the structure will show it was never designed for an ecclesiastical
building. It was probably removed from Moulton when the castle fell into
decay in the fifteenth century. The Multon family had died out for want
of males, and their property had been divided among co-heiresses.

The south porch and door are part of the original building; the door is a
beautiful example of the woodwork of the period. The font is also a good
example of the period.

The church has been well restored in recent years, and several painted
glass windows have been inserted. The work of restoration commenced when
the late Rev. Arthur Brook was the vicar, and has been continued in
the time of the present vicar, the Rev. Canon Hemmans. The church well
deserves a visit.

There is a fine altar tomb to the memory of Sir Humphrey Littlebury,
and when about the year 1640 Colonel Holles visited the church he
found armorial bearings and inscriptions to members of the families of
Littlebury, Kirketon, Calow, Welby, Leyke, and others.

There are chimes in the tower, erected in 1776 by Edward Arnold of St.
Neots, and a fine ring of eight bells.


ST. MARY MAGDALENE, FLEET

This church was built in the Curvilinear Period; it is chiefly notable
for its detached south-west tower with spire, which, though of no great
size, are well-proportioned and of good design. The spire is perfectly
plain. There are some well-carved corbel heads serving as supports to the
timbers of the roof.

This church has its origin from the laity, most probably from members of
the Multon family, who were lords of the manor, or from the Fitzwalters
and Haringtons, who divided the Multon family properties through marrying
the co-heiresses of that family.

The church has been wisely and well restored.


ST. MARY MAGDALENE’S, GEDNEY

This church, like Holbeach, is a beautiful fabric, and many think the
clerestory is the finest in the district. The history of the church is
written in stone—the tower gives it.

    “Of the original building,” writes Mr. Sharpe, “nothing but the
    lower part of the west tower now remains. It is not improbable,
    however, that the pair of double lancet openings, now forming a
    lower storey of the present cell chamber, was the belfry-stage
    of the original tower; and that three different roofs, of
    which the weatherings still remain on its east wall, have at
    different times abutted against it. If this be so, the history
    of this church and its three principal changes of form are
    written on this wall. The first roof, the ridge of which was
    below the sill of these lancet windows, covered a low church
    of the Lancet or Transitional Period. The second roof was
    that of the more pretentious Curvilinear nave, when the whole
    church received a new character, a lofty ground storey and
    spacious side aisles. The third roof, rising high up into these
    lancet windows, marks the epoch when the handsome Rectilinear
    clerestory was added and the tower raised another stage, in
    preparation for a lofty spire that was never executed.”

In the Curvilinear Period the spacious chancel, with its large plain
three-light windows, was erected. The ground storey of the nave and the
side aisles were shortly afterwards built. The south doorway is of good
workmanship for a village church of this period. The twelve three-light
clerestory windows are of the Rectilinear Period, as are also the
battlemented parapet and pinnacles, also the upper storey of the tower.

The south porch and parvise are of this period, as is also the nave roof
and the small square-headed window—low side window in the south wall of
the chancel.

On the south door, which is a fine specimen of the period, is this
inscription—

    PAX XTI SIT HUIC DOMUI ET
    OMNIBUS HABITANTIBUS IN EA
    HIC REQUIES NOSTRA.

The east window of the north aisle contains old stained glass. The church
is now undergoing restoration, but as there are some of the original
oaken open benches still in the church, the restorers should have no
difficulty in putting in suitable woodwork.

Dr. Stukeley, the Holbeach antiquary of the eighteenth century, states:
“This church was built by the abbots of Croyland, who had a stately house
on the north side of it and vast possessions in the parish. The upper
part of the tower is of the same date as the church, but built upon older
work; both were no doubt built by the abbots—assisted by charitable
donations. In the chancel window is a religious in his habits.”

In the account of Holbeach Church we saw how Fulko de Oiri in 1194 parted
with the advowson of Holbeach, and there is little doubt that he had the
advowson of the church at Gedney, though Croyland had a manor in that
parish.

As stated in the account of Whaplode Church (1253-1281), Ralph Mershe,
the Abbot of Croyland, at great expense and after long suits at law,
gained the _manor_ of Gedney and the church at Whaplode, but it does not
follow he had, at the time, the advowson of Gedney—on the contrary, the
following pedigrees from the Plea Roll of 7 Edw. III. and 8 Edw. III.
clearly show he had not:—


PLEA ROLLS (_De Banco_, Easter, 7 Edw. III.).

    Lincoln—

    James de Ros sues the Abbot of Croyland for the advowson of the
    Church of Gedeneye (Gedney).

    Falk de Oyry, _temp._ Henry III.
                   |
                Emecina.
                   |
    Giles de Gousille, 35 Henry III.
                   |
                 Peter.
                   |
                 Ralph.
                   |
                 Ralph.
                   |
                Margaret = Philip le Despenser.


In the following year, in the suit in _Coram Rege_, Hilary, 8 Edw. III.:—

    Lincoln—

    The King sues James de Roos for the next presentation to the
    Church of Gedeneye, which he claimed as guardian of Ralph de
    Goushill.

       Fulk D’Oyry, _temp._ Henry III.
                      |
                   Emytine.
                      |
       Giles de Goushill, 35 Henry III.
                      |
                    Peter.
                      |
                    Ralph.
                      |
    Ralph under age in charge of the King.


There is in the Lincoln Will Registry the will of a Philip Goushill of
Gedney, dated in the year 1401.

Eleanor de Clare, who was the granddaughter of Edward I. by his wife
Eleanor of Castile, married Ralph le Despenser, who was hung in 1326, and
their fourth son Philip, who died in 1313, married Margaret, daughter
and heiress of Ralph le Goushill; and when Colonel Holles visited Gedney
Church about 1640 he found the arms and monuments to the families of
Despensers, Roos, Clare, D’Oyry, Goushill, Welbys, and others.

Doubtless Stukeley is correct in stating the Curvilinear church of Gedney
was built under the direction and influence of Croyland, aided by the
laity; but one should be disposed to consider the earlier churches were
not built by the monks of Croyland. However, it is too long a subject to
discuss in this article.


SUTTON ST. MARY

We have, in our accounts of the churches of Moulton, Whaplode, and
Weston, frequently referred to the fabric of the Church of Sutton St.
Mary and to the interesting Transitional work it contains.

The origin of the church is clearly shown by a charter, given at the
close of the twelfth century (about 1180), by which the site was conveyed
to the monastery of Castle Acre in Norfolk.

    “Know all men present and to come, that I, William son of
    Erneis, by the permission of Nicholaa, my wife, give and grant
    and by this my charter confirm, to God and S. Mary of Acre and
    the monks serving God, three acres in Sutton, in the field
    which is called ‘the old fenland,’ near a road, to build a
    parish church, as a free and perpetual gift for the salvation
    of my soul and of Nicholaa, my wife, and for the soul of my
    father, Robert son of Erneis, and the soul of my mother, and
    for the souls of all my ancestors, and for the soul of Richard
    de Haia, and for the souls of all his ancestors. And I desire
    that the previous wooden church of the same town, as soon as
    the said new church is built, be taken away, and the bodies
    there buried be carried into the burial ground of the new
    church and there reinterred, and the old burial ground utterly
    destroyed.

    “Witnesses: John the Chaplain, Doun Bardolph, Radulph Travers,
    and others.”

It appears that Robert de Haia, about half a century previously, had come
into possession of the manor of Sutton, in Holland, through his wife, and
had built the small church referred to in the charter.

It is probably through Nicholaa that the monks of Castle Acre were
enabled to find the funds to build the Transitional-Lancet work in the
present church, as she was a large benefactress to the abbey.

John of Gaunt possessed the manor of Sutton through marriage with Blanche
of Lancaster, but whether he contributed to the funds for enlarging the
church there is no evidence to show, but one may assume the lords of the
large manor of Sutton aided the monks.

The Guild of St. Thomas of Canterbury, founded in the reign of Henry IV.,
had a chapel in the church, in which masses were said for the souls of
Henry IV., his Queen, and John of Gaunt.

Viewing the church from the exterior, one sees no signs of any part of
the early Transitional church—the Rectilinear work completely covers it;
but on entering we at once observe the interesting early Transitional
work of the nave and lower clerestory.

The seven compartments of the nave (ground and clerestory) remain nearly
perfect, but in a somewhat altered condition, for the nave walls and roof
having been raised, and higher aisles added, the Transitional clerestory
now only serves as a blind storey to the later Rectilinear superstructure.

The piers and pier arches should be compared with those at Whaplode,
Moulton, and Weston, with which they make an instructive lesson.

The tower and spire are quite early Lancet work. Mr. Sharpe remarks:—

    “Unquestionably one of the earliest and most remarkable
    designs of the Lancet Period in the kingdom—scarcely clear of
    Transitional influence, erected indeed at the very commencement
    of the period, and standing originally completely clear of the
    church on four noble arches, crowned, moreover, by a lofty
    wooden lead-covered spire flanked by four similar wooden
    lead-covered pinnacles—it must have been, at the time it was
    erected, one of the most striking structures in the country.

    “It is especially valuable to us as conveying an idea of the
    manner in which many of the towers of our cathedrals and parish
    churches of this period, now deprived of their spires, were
    originally finished; and it is remarkable as one of the very
    few which, having escaped fire and decay, remains still in its
    original position.”

The westmost part of the south aisle, with its windows, is of the
Curvilinear Period, so is the small building at the north-east corner of
the chancel.

In the following period (the Rectilinear) are the lofty side aisles and
the north and south porches.

The font is the original Norman one, though it has been new-worked.




THE CHURCH OF ST. ANDREW, HECKINGTON

BY W. G. WATKINS, A.R.I.B.A.


Five miles east from the market town of Sleaford, just where the rolling
uplands dip down into the great fen stretching out to Boston and the
Wash, lies the village of Heckington; it is mentioned in Domesday as
Heckintune, where one Gilbert de Gaunt held land, and there was a priest
and a church. This same Gilbert de Gaunt had accompanied William the
Conqueror to England, and for his services was rewarded with large grants
of land in this and many other counties; he rebuilt the Abbey of Bardney,
on the banks of the river Witham, about nine miles from Lincoln; richly
endowed it; and was there buried in 1094, leaving his son Walter to
further enrich the abbey, amongst other endowments, with all the tithe
of corn and hay of his land in Heckington. In 1345 it is recorded that
Roger de Barrowe, the then Abbot of Bardney, obtained a royal licence to
appropriate the Church of Heckington; and it is interesting to note that,
among other tomb slabs revealed by the excavation of the abbey church
in 1909, was that of this same Roger de Barrowe, while the foundations
of the choir and transept showed that they were part of the same Norman
church which the piety of Gilbert de Gaunt had raised.

At the time Roger de Barrowe was obtaining his licence one of those waves
of building activity that swept over certain localities in the Middle
Ages seems to have reached the district round Heckington. The naves of
Sleaford, Silk Willoughby, Billingboro, Swayton, and Helpringham, and
the whole Church of Ewerby, were rising white from the masons’ chisel in
the new and graceful Curvilinear style; but it was at Heckington that
this local school, through the resources of the rich and powerful abbey,
were able to crown their work by one of the finest and most complete
parish churches to be found in this or any other one period. The exact
date at which the work was commenced is uncertain, but it appears that
closely subsequent to the appropriation of the church by the abbey in
1345 the old fabric was swept away, and the foundations of the new
structure laid. Richard de Potesgrave, presented to the living by King
Edward in 1307, was the then vicar; his effigy lies under an arched
recess on the north side of the chancel, the usual position for the
founder’s tomb, and an inscription, now lost, recorded that he built the
chancel of the church in honour of the Blessed Mary, St. Andrew, and All
Saints, which may not necessarily mean that he provided the funds, but
that the work was done under his care, just as we say that Bishop Hugh
built the choir of Lincoln Cathedral.

Except in the great Perpendicular structures of East Anglia, it is
comparatively rare to find a parish church built at one effort, in one
style, and untouched by subsequent accretions, as at Heckington—so rare,
in fact, that the picturesqueness and irregularity arising from the
association of various styles and dates in the majority of our churches
has almost come to be looked upon as an essential part of our Gothic
architecture, and one of its leading characteristics; and though it is
true that the mediæval builder excelled in the charming _naïveté_ with
which he superimposed his own work upon and adapted it to that of his
predecessors, yet when the opportunity occurred of starting _de novo_, he
built with dignity and symmetry, and devoid of intentional irregularity
or straining after what we call picturesqueness. So at Heckington
Church we find a perfectly symmetrical and dignified plan of apparently
orthodox cruciform type, and with a western tower; while a more critical
examination shows that the transepts are not in their usual position
immediately west of the chancel, but separated therefrom by a short bay
of aisleless nave, being, as a matter of fact, not really transepts at
all, but attached chapels. And their position is therefore logical, for
here the tower is, very properly for a small parish church, at the west
end, while the true cruciform plan demands, nay requires it, on the
crossing.

How well this apparent eccentricity and departure from the orthodox
was justified by results is shown as the church is approached from the
south-west, whence the nave may be seen continuing through and past the
transepts, which are kept on a lower level than the nave, and thus break
up the structure into a beautiful piece of grouping, without in any way
detracting from its apparent length.

The tower and spire, 97 feet high to the parapet, and 182 feet to the top
of the vane, is an interesting example of the transition stage between
the early broach spire and the pinnacle and flying buttress treatment
of the Perpendicular Period; for here are both pinnacles and broaches,
the former hexagonal in plan, and attached to the broaches by gablets,
through which openings are pierced, forming a continuous walk behind
the parapet. The pinnacles are too high and the general grouping at the
base of the spire too heavy for its height, and it seems likely that the
architect used the proportions he had been accustomed to in a broached
spire and parapetless tower as at the neighbouring Church of Ewerby
(possibly by the same hand), and failed to allow for the shortening
effect of the parapet and pinnacles. The outline of the spire has no
“entasis” or swelling to counteract the drooping effect of the converging
straight lines, but the same result has been achieved by the gablets of
the eight “lucarnes,” or spire lights, which add bulk, and at the same
time break the continuity of the outline; at Ewerby, which has no spire
lights, the entasis is distinctly noticeable. Sometimes this refinement
was carried to excess, as at Leadenham in this county, where the result
has been to produce a grotesque resemblance to a sugar-loaf. No doubt
the elaborate crocketing of the angles of later spires was another
expedient to the same end.

[Illustration: _St Andrews Church. Heckington. Lincolnshire._

Ground Plan.]

In the flowing tracery and foliage of the south porch gable are three
interesting shields—Edward the Confessor, a cross patonce between five
martlets; St. Edmund, three crowns two and one; and the royal arms of
England, three lions passant gardant. The figure in the apex of the gable
is missing, but, from the adoring angels on either side, it was probably
that of the Virgin and Child. The whole of the south side is a perfect
example of Curvilinear art; the flowing lines of the window tracery and
pierced parapets, buttresses with niches and pinnacles enriched with
foliage and carvings of vigorous yet refined workmanship, the bold and
lofty staircase turrets at the east end of the nave, all disposed in
perfect harmony and proportion, and tied together by the admirable group
of mouldings sweeping round the base. Here is English Gothic at its
zenith—vigorous, yet refined; luxuriant, yet restrained. The priests’
door on the south side of the chancel cuts rather clumsily into the jamb
and sill of the window, owing to lack of space between the latter and
the adjoining buttress. The writer recollects a church in Suffolk where
a similar difficulty had been surmounted by throwing the buttress clear
of the wall on a flying arch and placing the door beneath it—a pretty
instance of the manner in which the mediæval builder created a virtue out
of a necessity. The east end is perhaps the most pleasing part of the
exterior—admirably proportioned, vigorous, and graceful, the seven-light
window one of the finest in the whole country; were this the only portion
of the church left to us, it would yet have proclaimed the unknown
architect a master of his craft.

The interior is at first disappointing; the arches only chamfered, not a
moulding or a piece of carving visible; rood-screen, pews, pulpit, and
every scrap of old woodwork swept away. But walk into the chancel, turn
to the north wall, where Roger de Potesgrave, in eucharistic vestments,
lies under an arched recess, and a little farther east appears a mass
of tracery and sculpture, like an elaborate aumbry; it is the Easter
Sepulchre, perhaps the richest in England, except one of the same date
at Hawton, near Newark. Below, in canopied niches, sleep four Roman
soldiers; next, the sepulchre itself, a small recess, with figures of the
three women and the attendant angels, and above this the risen Christ
attended by adoring angels. For richness and delicacy of execution it is
beyond praise. Easter sepulchres in stone (often they were of wood, and
have been swept away) were designed as a permanent receptacle for the
celebration of a rite marking the advent and holiness of Easter. On Good
Friday the consecrated host was deposited in the sepulchre, where it was
continually watched until Easter morning, when it was again placed on
the altar. In the articles of inquiry issued by Cranmer in 1547 one is,
“Whether they had upon Good Friday last past the sepulchre with their
lights, having the sacrament therein?” On the south side of the chancel
are fine sedilia in three compartments, in design and execution equal
to the Easter Sepulchre; the seats are covered by groining and trefoil
arches with gables, above which are sculptured Our Lord, the Blessed
Virgin, SS. Barbara and Katherine, and St. Michael; the cornice bears
figures of angels crowning the saints below and swinging censers. A
recent writer on English mediæval figure sculpture says: “The stone of
these pieces is the Lincoln and Ancaster oolite, and they are insertions
in the body of the building, so they are probably importations from the
Lincoln or Stamford workshops. Of coarser texture than the carvings of
clunch at Ely, they have less freedom and incisive cutting, but their
composition has the same quality of decorative story-telling.”

[Illustration: ST. ANDREW’S, HECKINGTON, SOUTH TRANSEPT AND PORCH.]

From the north wall of the chancel several steps lead up into the vestry,
which has a double piscina, and below which is a vaulted undercroft,
known as the “scaup” (skull) house. The south transept, known as the
Winkill Aisle, from the local family who were probably benefactors to
the church, has sedilia and a double piscina.

The architectural features of the church are beautifully illustrated by a
series of forty plates in Bowman and Crowther’s _Churches of the Middle
Ages_, but the full story of its connection with the Abbey of Bardney
still waits investigation from the patient historian, and would probably
prove of great interest.

[Illustration: ST. ANDREW’S CHURCH, HECKINGTON, EAST END.]




BOSTON CHURCH

BY G. S. W. JEBB, M.A.


HISTORY

Botulf (_i.e._ Ruling Wolf) is said by Bede to have been born in the
seventh century of a gentle Saxon family, and to have studied with his
brother Adulf on the Continent. On his return (Adulf remaining to preside
over a monastery at Utrecht, and becoming Bishop of Maestricht), Botulf
begged permission of Ethelmund, King of East Anglia, to found a monastery
in some retired and desolate spot, and chose Icanho (Ox Island) beside
the Witham, probably the site of Boston. At Icanho he died on 17th June
655. The monks’ huts were burnt by the Danes in 870, but the relics of
the saint had been safely translated, part to Ely, and part to Thorney,
and the site of Boston was in later Saxon times included in the wapontak
of Skirbeck. After the Norman Conquest the greater part of the parish of
Skirbeck, with its two churches, one of which presumably stood on the
site of Boston Church, was granted as part of the honour of Richmond in
Yorkshire to Alan Rufus, who, shortly before his death in 1089, obtained
the ordination of the rectory of Boston, and granted the patronage to the
Benedictine Abbey of St. Mary at York, the monks of Boston constituting
a priory of that abbey, and the church, which was probably of wood,
apparently serving both the parish and the priory. A new church of stone
was built at once. It consisted of a nave 25 feet by 60 feet, with aisles
each 12 feet wide, a chancel, and a western tower 9 feet square; the
floor level was about 4 feet below the present floor. The foundations
were exposed in the restoration, 1851-53. The priory buildings were on
the north side of the church. In 1309, when the fervour excited by the
preaching of the friars was still felt, and the prosperity of the town
was at its height, the pious gratitude of the burghers led them to begin
the present magnificent church, the foundation-stone being laid on the
Monday after St. John Baptist’s Day by Dame Margaret Tilney, assisted
by Richard Stephenson, merchant, and John Truesdale, the rector. This
church originally consisted of a nave of seven bays with aisles, a
chancel originally of three bays, and a south porch. In the Perpendicular
Period the chancel was lengthened by two bays, when Fleming, formerly
rector of Boston, was Bishop of Lincoln; and the magnificent tower was
added outside the former west window. A chamber was also added over the
porch, and there were six subsidiary chapels (all but one of which have
now been destroyed), besides, at least, two others (those of St. Mary
and SS. Peter and Paul) at the east ends of the south and north aisles
respectively, screened off within the church itself. The whole was
probably completed about 1500; as it now stands the church is, in cubical
content, the largest purely parish church in the kingdom, and is only
surpassed in floor area (20,270 square feet) by those of St. Michael,
Coventry (24,015 square feet), and of Yarmouth (23,265 square feet).

In 1480 the Knights Hospitallers, who had a commandery in the parish,
founded by the De Multons about 1230, purchased the advowson from St.
Mary’s Abbey, and made the parish church their collegiate church. They
also obtained an appropriation of the rectory, and a vicarage was
ordained. The Knights maintained a college of ten priests, living in a
house in Wormgate (_i.e._ Withamgate). The old church of the Knights was
deserted, and was eventually pulled down in 1626, the material being used
to repair St. Botulf’s. After the sale of the advowson the priory became
of small importance, and was dissolved in 1536. The Order of the Knights
was dissolved in 1540, and its possessions confiscated by King Henry
VIII., who, in 1545, sold the endowment of the rectory and the patronage
of the vicarage to the newly-created corporation of Boston, subject,
however, to the payment of the vicar’s stipend, and to the duty of
repairing the chancel. At the Reformation the screens were broken away,
and the church despoiled of its furniture and decoration.

During the great rebellion it was used as a cavalry stable, the horses
being tethered to iron rings fixed in the pillars. The Antipædobaptists
then had a congregation in Boston (which was revived and endowed in 1756,
and is still flourishing), and were influential in the neighbourhood;
this led to the destruction of the mediæval fonts in Boston and many
of the neighbouring churches. The brasses also were torn up, and what
remained of the stained glass and stone imagery was broken, and the
chapels and other buildings encircling the church were gradually removed
during the seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries.

On the resumption of the Church services at the Restoration of Charles
II., some slight attempts at improvement were made, a new font and
reredos and a beautiful pulpit and altar rails being provided. Towards
the end of the eighteenth century the present ceiling was put up. The
original ceiling of the nave was a flat wooden one, doubtless elaborately
carved and gilded, nailed on the under surface of fifteen huge beams
which cross the church between each pair of clerestory windows. The
ceiling seems to have been injured by fire, and the beams themselves
became rotten at the ends, and tended to sag in the centre, and were
therefore supported by uprights nailed against the wall with trusses
at an angle of 45°; these uprights and trusses were then concealed by
panelling which was made to resemble the springers of a sham vault,
and was painted a dirty yellow. The lean-to roofs of the aisles were
similarly concealed by sham vaulting, and the chancel, hitherto covered
with a semi-octagonal roof, divided by boldly moulded ribs into panels,
had a sort of sham tunnel vault at a much lower level, so low, indeed, as
to have to be tilted upwards to bring it above the crown of the chancel
arch. An organ was provided and placed in the chancel arch, having in
front of it a gallery supported on oaken columns (now in the Roman
church in Boston). The western portion of the church was shut off by a
high screen with wrought-iron gates, and the remaining portion of the
nave arranged with the pulpit in the centre, and square pews gradually
sloping upwards so as to be level with the sills of the windows. The
chancel was used only for the quarterly communion. In 1835 the Municipal
Reform Act vested the patronage in the Bishop of the diocese, who twice
collated under this Act, but the corporation was permitted to sell, and
in 1853 did sell, the advowson to Mr. Ingram; he devised it to his widow;
she, in turn, devised it to Sir E. Watkin, her second husband, whose
representatives in 1906 conveyed it to the Bishop of Lincoln in right of
his see. The restoration of the church was begun in the middle of the
nineteenth century, about £11,000 being spent under the direction of Sir
G. Gilbert Scott. The fabric was put in good repair generally, the stone
vaulting of the tower was inserted, a new font was erected, the pews were
replaced by oaken benches, the organ placed in a chamber to the north
of the chancel, the east window provided with new tracery and filled
with poor stained glass, a new altar table with a good red frontal,
and some new plate, were purchased, and canopies, copied from Lincoln
Cathedral, were added to the stalls; provision was also made for lighting
and warming the church. An offering from the Bostonians of America was
devoted to restoring the sole remaining chapel, which is situated on the
western side of the south porch. The church was re-dedicated in 1853.

Since then there have been a few slight improvements; six of the sixteen
windows in the aisle have had stained glass inserted, and it is generally
good. The chapel has had three of its windows fitted with stained
glass, and has been furnished with an altar and reredos, and a screen
separating it from the church provided; two additional frontals have been
given for the high altar, and it is backed by an elaborate, though as yet
incomplete, reredos of carved oak, designed by Weatherley. The church is
still much disfigured by the ugly ceiling, and has a cold unfurnished
look, to remedy which screens, stained glass, and colour decoration would
be required; unfortunately, the church is so large that nothing can be
done which does not involve a considerable expenditure.


GENERAL DESCRIPTION

The church consists of a nave of seven bays 150 feet long and 44 feet
broad, north and south aisles each 28 feet broad, a chancel of five bays
87 feet long, a western tower (making the total length 293 feet), a south
porch with chamber over it, and a chapel 18 feet by 40 feet immediately
to the west of the porch. All the nave and aisles windows, except the
four at the ends of the aisles, have decorated tracery, two designs (one
of them a very poor one) being alternated throughout; the three western
bays of the chancel have also decorated tracery. The four end windows of
the aisles, the west window of the chapel, and the four windows in the
eastern bays of the chancel are Perpendicular. The great east window has
modern tracery, copied from the east window of Carlisle Cathedral. The
three south windows of the chapel have reticulated tracery. The tower
is vaulted at a height of 157 feet. Below the vaulting are the door,
three great windows (west, north, and south), and above them four pairs
of windows with ogee heads; between the two sets of windows the walls
are pierced by an interior passage. Above the vaulting is a ringing
chamber, and over that the belfry surrounded by an exterior passage.
Access to this is gained by two staircases, the lower portions of which
are no part of the tower, but are contained in turrets, which were the
principal decoration of the west front before the tower was built. The
belfry contains the clock and a peal of twelve bells, on which tunes are
played by machinery every three hours. The bells are dated as follows:
1 and 2, 1785; 3, 1772; 4, 1710; 5, 1617; 6, 1758; 8, 1867; and the
remaining four, 1897. The roof of the tower rests on the transoms of the
four great belfry windows, the upper part being hollow. On the top of
the square tower stands the octagonal lantern, which appears never to
have been finished. The total height is 280 feet. The furniture is not
very noticeable, except the series of sixty-four _misericorde_ stalls in
the chancel. The altar is a modern one, 12 feet long. There are a modern
brass eagle lectern, a very poor litany desk, and the base of a poor
modern screen; the renaissance pulpit, with its sounding board recently
restored, is one of the best pieces of furniture. The font was designed
by Pugin, and is as satisfactory as could be expected; the benches are
clumsy and raised on platforms, and the alleys except the central one
have been filled with unnecessary benches, and so appear unduly cramped,
but there is a good open space at the west end. At present the base of
the tower is used as a vestry, but the erection of a new vestry opening
from the chancel is in contemplation. An organ is mentioned as having
been in existence in 1480, but it was destroyed in 1590; a new organ was
begun in 1713 by Schmidt, and it has since been continually repaired
and added to; there are now 2378 pipes. It is rather buried in an organ
chamber built out on the north side of the chancel, and has a poor
monotonous case dating from the last restoration.


MONUMENTS

The oldest monument in the church is one dated 1340, a black marble slab
in memory of Wisselus Smalenburg, citizen and merchant of Münster. It
was originally in the Church of the Franciscan Friars, but was buried
on the destruction of that church, then built for about a hundred
years into the wall of a cottage, and eventually was placed in Boston
Church, near the west end of the north aisle, in 1897. There are two
good fifteenth-century altar tombs in recesses in the south aisle: one
of a Knight Hospitaller in full armour, the other of a lady; both are
unidentified. They were originally in the Knights’ Church, and, when
that was pulled down in 1626, were moved to Boston Church, but have only
been in their present position since 1853, when the lady’s tomb had the
arms of Tilney carved upon it, though without any idea that she really
belonged to the Tilney family. On each side of the altar is a black
marble slab with brass; that on the north being in memory of Walter
Peascod and his wife; that on the south in memory of Richard Strensal,
rector from about 1375 to his death in 1408. He is vested in surplice,
almuce, and cope, the orphrey of the cope being adorned with figures of
the Apostles under canopies. Both these were originally in the Chapel of
SS. Peter and Paul. Towards the west end are some slabs which have no
doubt been engraved with figures, the faces and hands joined in prayer
being now filled in with concrete. The monuments generally seem to have
had their places much shifted in the restoration in the middle of the
nineteenth century.


ENDOWMENTS

The parish was originally endowed with tithes (which are now represented
by farms allotted in lieu thereof on the enclosure of the fens) and
glebe. On the ordination of the vicarage in 1480, the vicar was allowed
the use of the rectory house (pulled down in 1750, and now represented
by a house built in 1870), and also had a stipend of £33, 6s. 8d. (fifty
marks), charged upon the endowments of the rectory: he also receives
from the Governors of Boston Grammar School an annual income of £266,
13s. 4d., representing the provision made by Philip and Mary when they
restored to the Corporation of Boston the ancient endowments of the trade
guilds, out of which the Grammar School and the assistant clergy had been
supported. These endowments had been confiscated in 1552, under Edward
VI., by William Parr, Marquis of Northampton, who subsequently took part
in the attempt to set Lady Jane Grey on the throne: the vicar also has
a fen allotment and various small modern endowments which, allowing £75
for fees, bring up the income to about £400 per annum net. Provision is
also made under the charter of Philip and Mary for a second priest—the
lecturer—who receives £250 per annum from the Governors of the Grammar
School, and interest on £200 (Falkner’s Legacy), which latter sum is
in the hands of the Corporation. The Mayor’s Chaplaincy, founded in
1557 by Henry Fox, has an endowment of about £160 per annum, managed by
the Boston Charity Trustees. There is a modern endowment of about £45
per annum, given by the Misses Gee, for the curate of St. James’; the
Ecclesiastical Commission allow two sums of £60 each towards the stipends
of the fourth and fifth priests; and there are other small endowments
for the choir, the fabric and the poor, which bring up the total income
from endowments in connection with the church to about £1000 per annum.
It is impossible to exactly distinguish the rectory endowments from the
other lands held by the Corporation, but, roughly, their value may be
taken at £1200 per annum. About £2000 per annum is raised by voluntary
subscription in connection with the church.

[Illustration: BOSTON CHURCH.]


RECTORS AND VICARS

1228. John Romanus. His legitimacy was doubtful, and he had to obtain
a papal dispensation before holding the benefice. He was Canon and
first Sub-Dean of York Minster, and afterwards Treasurer and Archdeacon
of Richmond. He was the father of the Archbishop of York of the same
name. He died in 1256 at an advanced age. It is not known who was his
successor in the rectory.

1309. John Truesdale, as rector, laid the foundation of the present
church.

      Henry de Hemmyngburgh, afterwards Sub-Dean of Lincoln.

1316. Mr. John Barett.

1362. William de Sandford.

      John Strensal, rector in 1378 and 1381.

1408. Richard Fleming, afterwards Bishop of Lincoln and
Archbishop-designate of York.

1425. John Ickworth.

1431. Richard Layot.

1448. John Marshall.

1462. Roger Cheshire.

1482. William Smyth, the first vicar, presented by the Knights of St.
John. All the rectors had been presented by St. Mary’s Abbey. He was
prebendary of Heyther in Lincoln Cathedral. He was buried in Boston
Church, but his brass, mentioned by Colonel Holles and by Browne Willis,
is not now visible.

1505. William Gunays, died at Boston.

1505. Robert Wylburfos, died at Boston.

1512. John Tynemouth, Bishop of Argos, buried in Boston Church.

1524. John Mabledon, D.D., a brother of the Order of St. John. He
resigned on a pension of £6, 13s. 4d. per annum.

1536. Brian Sandford, probably an opponent of the changes which had
already begun when he was instituted. In 1552, when the church was being
spoiled of its plate and furniture, the Corporation order communication
to be had with Vicar Sandford for surrendering his benefice.

1554. Robert Richardson, whose tenure of office just coincided with the
reign of Queen Mary. He would be the first of eighteen vicars presented
by the Corporation of Boston.

1559. William Fiske, preferred to Moulton vicarage.

1561. William Holland.

1583. Lewis Evans.

1584. James Worshippe, M.A., formerly Mayor’s Chaplain.

1592. William Armstead.

1594. Samuel Wright, B.D.; he resigned.

1599. Thomas Wooll, M.A., a Nonconformist. He was presented at the
Archdeacon’s visitation in 1606 “that he weareth not the surplice; it
hath been tendered to him, and he sitteth upon it.” He was preferred in
1612 to the rectory of Skirbeck.

1612. John Cotton, M.A.: after twenty years of nonconformity he found
it necessary to resign his benefice, and flee to America to avoid
prosecution. In compliment to him and other refugees the settlement of
Trimountain had its name changed to Boston. He died there in 1652.

1633. Anthony Tuckney, D.D., a Nonconformist, Mayor’s Chaplain from 1629,
Master of Emmanuel College in 1644, Trinity College in 1653, and Regius
Professor of Divinity in 1655 at Cambridge, and therefore non-resident.
From 1651 the Corporation paid Banks Anderson (who had since 1643 been
minister at Holbeach) £70 per annum to minister in the church; but as he
was an antipædobaptist, a separate minister had to be hired to administer
holy baptism. Anderson was one of the elders summoned by Cromwell to
his Independent Convention at the Savoy in 1658. About the time of his
arrival in Boston, a great witch-hunting campaign took place. On the
Restoration he formed an Independent congregation; he died in 1668, and
was buried in the church. Tuckney resigned his vicarage in 1660, and his
other preferments in 1662. He died in 1670.

1660. Obadiah Howe, D.D., a Puritan, previously successively in charge of
Stickney and Gedney. His brass is in the chapel.

1683. Henry Morland, M.A., previously Lecturer. He died at Boston.

1702. Edward Kelsall, M.A., previously Master of the Grammar School. He
died at Boston.

1719. Samuel Coddington, M.A., also previously Master of the Grammar
School. He died at Boston.

1732. John Rigby, M.A., also previously Master of the Grammar School. He
died at Boston.

1746. John Calthrop, M.A., also Vicar of Kirkton, and a prebendary
of Lincoln Cathedral. He represented the clergy of the diocese in
Convocation. He was buried at Gosberton, of which place he was a native.

1785. Samuel Partridge, M.A. He also held the rectory of the south
mediety of Leverton till 1797, and was also Vicar of Wigtoft and of
Quadring.

1817. Bartholomew Goe, B.A.

1838. John Furness Ogle, M.A., collated by the Bishop of Lincoln under
the provisions of the Municipal Reform Act, 1835. He died at Boston.

1851. George Beatson Blenkin, M.A., a prebendary of Lincoln Cathedral,
under whom the church was restored. He died at Boston.

1892. John Stephenson, M.A., a prebendary of Lincoln Cathedral. He
resigned.

1905. Reginald Thomas Heygate, M.A., a prebendary of Lincoln Cathedral.




THE TOWN AND CHURCH OF GRANTHAM

BY A. HAMILTON THOMPSON, M.A.


Grantham is still, and long has been, a name familiar to travellers
between the north and south of England. Only a few miles west of the
old Roman road from London to York, it lies directly in the course of
the more modern road, and for more than fifty years has been one of the
principal halting-places on a great railway system. The traveller from
the south, who has left the Fenland behind him some ten miles north of
Peterborough, and has for another ten miles or so ascended the valley of
a stream whose waters eventually find their way into the Welland near the
Wash, passes through a short tunnel, and rapidly descends into the Witham
valley. On his left hand the Witham winds through pleasant meadows, with
the noble tower of Great Ponton Church on its farther bank. The stream
passes under the railway near the ford by which the traveller approached
Grantham during the greater part of its history, leaving the Roman road
not far west of Somerby for the by-road known as the Saltway. The smoke
of engineering works begins to fill the air; and the tower of Spittlegate
Church, close to the line, and, farther away, the rather attenuated tower
and cupola of the Town Hall, promise little historical or architectural
interest. But if he looks a little beyond his immediate surroundings
he will see that beyond this industrial and modern suburb there lies a
more inviting town, with a huge tower and spire and the body of a great
church mounting high above its red-tiled roofs, with a pretty background
of tree-crowned ridge, with the parks of Belton and Syston closing the
view to the north-east, and to the north-west the line of the North Road
as it cuts its way up Gonerby Hill.

Grantham is sometimes said to take its name from the river, one name of
which, as of the Cam at Cambridge, may have been the Grant. The Witham,
which rises across the border of Rutland some miles to the south, and
flows northward from Grantham, approaching the Trent near Newark, and
turning aside to take its own course to the sea by Lincoln and Boston,
widened into a small lake or marsh as it drew near to Grantham. The
first settlement of Grantham must have been dictated by the sight of a
potentially fertile valley. It grew up, so far as we know, neither round
an abbey nor beneath a castle, but as a community of agriculturists. The
church, which grew to such proportions in its midst, grew probably with
the prosperity of the town; while of the castle, which stood on the east
side of the town, between it and the river, we know nothing but the name.
Grantham was not one of those fortified river towns, like Stamford and
Nottingham, which played a part in the campaigns of Edward the Elder and
his sister. And its first definite appearance in history is the entry in
Domesday Book, where it is numbered with the King’s possessions. It had
belonged to Edith, Queen of Edward the Confessor; and included within
it there was a right of jurisdiction, granted by a nun named Ælswith to
Peterborough Abbey, and now held by Colegrim. The Queen had a hall in
the demesne, and the church and its property are mentioned. The history
of the manor and soke of Grantham is somewhat complicated, and a full
account of it is beyond the scope of this article.[45] When Edward I.’s
commissioners visited the town in 1275, to inquire by what warrant lands
were held there and privileges exercised, the jurors gave an account
of the descent of the lordship, which indicates that the Norman kings,
like their successors, treated the manor and soke as grants to be held
in dower by their wives or daughters.[46] They said that Maud “regina
et heres Anglie”—obviously Henry I.’s daughter, the Empress—enfeoffed
William de Tancarville, hereditary chamberlain of the duchy of Normandy,
of Grantham and the whole soke, to be held of her in chief, apparently
by service of ten knights’ fees, as he sub-enfeoffed this number of
knights. The chamberlain’s grandson, Ralph, took part in the rebellion of
Normandy against John, and forfeited the possession. John then gave the
town with the soke to William, Earl of Warenne, on whose death in 1240
his widow, Maud, a daughter of William Marshal, Earl of Pembroke, was
allowed to remain in seisin. At her death, however, in 1249, Henry III.
resumed the property, claiming that the Earl had held it only while the
King was pleased to suffer him; and in 1254, when Prince Edward married
Eleanor of Castile, it was granted to him, the claims of John, the then
Earl Warenne, being overlooked.[47] Edward, however, a few years later
gave the town and soke to the Earl, to be held of him by the service of
four knights. The grant was confirmed by a royal charter, in which Henry
III. laid stress on the principle that the manor was inalienable from the
crown. The lordship and manor seem to have been in different hands from
the later part of the reign of Henry II. to this period; but under Prince
Edward and Earl John they seem to have been reunited.[48]

Earl John died in 1304, and the lordship escheated to the Crown. It was
then granted to Aymer de Valence, Earl of Pembroke, who held it till
his death in 1324.[49] Edward II. then granted it, or part of it—for
here again there seems to have been a temporary divorcement of the
lordship from the manor—to John, Earl Warenne, the younger.[50] But he
first took care to preclude John from claiming it as his hereditary
right by requiring him to quit-claim it to the Crown: this done, he
allowed the grant. In 1338, shortly before John’s death, Edward III.
gave the reversion of part of the tenement to William de Bohun, Earl
of Northampton,[51] after whose death (1360) his son Humphrey was
allowed to hold it. In 1363, the castle and town were granted to Edmund
of Langley.[52] The manor was possibly retained by the young Earl of
Northampton, and the grant of castle and town seems not to have included
the soke. In 1399, the manor reverted to the Crown, by the attainder of
its holder, the Earl of Northumberland, and was granted to Edmund of
Langley. The soke also, on the death of Sir Robert Byron, passed into
Edmund’s hands.[53] Edmund died in 1402; and castle and town, with
manor and soke, were granted to his son Edward, Duke of York, who died
at Agincourt. In 1420 they were given in dower to Katharine of France on
her marriage. Edward IV., in 1461, granted the lordship with the manor to
his mother Cicely, Duchess of York: his grant included the inn called “le
George.”[54] On her death, the manor with its appurtenances was settled
on her granddaughter, Elizabeth of York; and from that time till the time
of William III., save for an alienation to private owners during the
Commonwealth, it was regarded as Crown property, and held in dower by
the Queen-Consort for the time being. The Earls of Rutland were stewards
of the manor. William III., in 1696, alienated it to the first Earl of
Portland, and since then it has remained in private hands, though not in
the same family.

Other proprietors also held property, and had certain forms of
jurisdiction in the town. The traveller who entered it from the south in
the year 1300, after crossing the Salters’ Ford and passing the leper
hospital which about this time began to give its name to the suburb of
Spittlegate, might have seen, on the wide space outside the town, near
the modern Town Hall, the cross which within the last few years the
King of England had built to mark the southward progress of his wife’s
funeral procession.[55] On his right hand, on and near the modern St.
Peter’s Hill, were the lands of the abbey of Peterborough, which had
been granted to it by Ælswith before the Conquest, and by Colegrim
afterwards, and had been confirmed to it by royal charter.[56] On this
land probably stood the Church of St. Peter, of which too little is
known to justify definite statement.[57] Near the church he would see
the opening of Castlegate, east of which lay the Castle, the visible
symbol of the royal lordship. He would keep straight on along the higher
ground. Passing along High Street, he might already see here and there
a handsome house of Ancaster stone, such as he certainly would see in
forty or fifty years’ time. It is doubtful whether the inn, afterwards
known as the “George,” was built yet: it is probable that the little
guild chapel which stood on the same side of the street till late in
the eighteenth century belonged to a later period. Farther on, on the
opposite side, stood the “Angel Inn,” on the property of the Knights
Templars of Temple Bruer. Within the next decade the Order of the Temple
would be no more; and their property here, as elsewhere, would—at any
rate, it seems likely—be granted to the Knights of St. John of Jerusalem
in England. The gateway of the “Angel,” as we know it to-day, was not
built till more than half a century later: the rest of the street
front is of a still later date. Opposite the “Angel” was the opening,
afterwards known as Coal Hill, leading to the market-place—if, indeed,
the market-place was divided from the High Street then as now. On the
west side of the market-place was the house of the Grey Friars, on the
property known later as the Grange, and for some time, in accordance
with the modern genius for confounding monks with friars, as Cistercian
Place. It is possible that the Franciscans, who appeared in Grantham
about 1290, may have come from the house of their order at Bury St.
Edmunds, and that the Benedictine abbey of Bury may have allowed them to
settle on the property which it had received in frankalmoin from William
de Tancarville, and had been allowed to retain after the forfeiture of
the Tancarville estates.[58] In 1318 Richard Kellawe, Bishop of Durham,
allowed the Friars to convey water to their house from springs on his
land at Gonerby; and the conduit, built in 1579, which is to be seen
on the west side of the market-place, is the successor of the conduit
of the Friars. But it is probable that already, in 1300, the chief of
the four ancient wells from which Grantham took its supply was in the
centre of the market: it may already have been roofed over, and the dyers
may already have begun to spread their goods on market-days beneath
the projecting eaves of the roof. At the “Angel” the traveller would
be sure to find wool-merchants travelling from fair to fair, or the
King’s buyers come to transact business with the rising wool-merchants
of the town.[59] North of the “Angel,” the High Street was continued,
under the name of Watergate, down the slope of the hill which led to the
watering-place at the bridge over the Mowbeck, the little stream which,
flowing down the Harlaxton valley, met the Witham below the town. Our
traveller would leave this on his left: a narrow lane, now Vine Street,
used till 1705 merely as a foot-path to the church, would take him to the
head of Swinegate, the road along which the town swine were driven daily
to spend the day on Manthorpe Moor. Here possibly markets had been held
till within the last quarter of a century; and here, till 1645, stood
the old Apple Cross, the High Cross of Grantham. But the space had been
encroached upon by the westward extension of the church;[60] so that
Grantham lost that magnificent combination of church and market-square
which is the unrivalled distinction of its neighbour Newark. What the
town had lost, however, the church had gained in architectural beauty;
and in the year 1300 the west front, much as we now see it, had been
finished, and the scaffolding was probably being removed from a spire
which at that time was unsurpassed in England. The spire of the mother
church of Salisbury was not to be completed for many years: the spire
of Newark was not taken in hand till the second quarter of the century.
More than a century later, Grantham spire would be surpassed in height
and grace of proportion by the great lantern-tower at Boston: two hundred
years later, the spire of Louth would challenge both. But in beauty of
detail, whatever may be their advantages in design, neither Louth nor
Boston can compare with Grantham; and in this respect the one steeple in
England which has ever surpassed it is the “Broad” Tower of Lincoln. Yet
even this was not yet completed for another ten or eleven years, so that
for the moment the spire of Grantham stood without an equal.

The space by the Apple Cross was then, we may suppose, less impeded by
houses than at present; and south and south-east of the churchyard were
the outer works of the Castle, whose memory was long preserved in Castle
Dyke, the lower part of Castlegate. But of the Castle itself, as has been
said, little is known.[61] Only once in its history, and then apparently
when the Castle existed no longer, was Grantham prominent as a military
centre. The Kings of England, its nominal lords, must all have passed
through Grantham in their progresses. Edward I. was often there.[62]
Edward IV. came through the town at the head of the procession which
brought the body of his father from Pontefract Priory to the College of
Fotheringhay. Charles I. was there at least three times, on his way to
Scotland in 1633, and again in 1640 and 1641. On none of these occasions
do we hear of the Castle. And when, on the 19th of October 1483, Richard
III. sealed the death-warrant of the Duke of Buckingham here, causing the
Great Seal to be brought for that purpose post-haste from London, he did
it, not in the Castle, but “in a chamber called the King’s Chamber in
the Angel Inn”—the chamber whose outer wall, and at any rate one window,
may be seen above the gateway of the “Angel.” The Castle may have risen
in Norman times, possibly on the site of Queen Edith’s hall, the face
of which, however, would have been completely altered by the new Norman
earthworks. But, if this were so, the most that we hear of it is a casual
mention here and there, and its survival in one or two local names.

[Illustration: ANGEL HOTEL, GRANTHAM.]

The visit of Richard III. to Grantham was marked by his grant of a
charter to the Corporation of the town, which exempted them from the
authority of the Sheriff of Lincolnshire in the execution and return
of writs, making the Alderman and his twelve Comburgesses magistrates
within the town and soke, and giving them a prison in the town. A charter
had been granted to the Alderman and Burgesses by Richard II. in 1377;
and Richard III.’s charter was probably an extension of the privileges
granted by a charter of Edward IV. in 1463. From 1463 Grantham dates its
existence as a corporate borough, the recognition of its Merchant Guild,
and the right of sending two burgesses to Parliament. Its Alderman was
elected by the Comburgesses annually in the church, the Corpus Christi
chapel of the chancel being used, as time went on, for that purpose.[63]
Probably the members of Parliament were at first elected in the church:
their election later on took place in the Grammar School, until in 1765
Corpus Christi College at Oxford, as trustee of the foundation, objected
to the damage done on these occasions. It was then decided to transfer
parliamentary elections to the church or the Guildhall. Grantham lost
one of its members in 1832, but still returns one. James II. converted
the Alderman into a Mayor by a charter of 1685. In April 1688, however,
a _Quo warranto_ summons was served on the Mayor; and in the following
November the Corporation, taking advantage of the banished King’s
proclamation which restored such bodies to their ancient rights, reverted
to their old state. Their later constitution included an Alderman, twelve
senior and twelve junior Comburgesses. For these the Municipal Reform Act
of 1835 substituted a Mayor, four Aldermen, and twelve Councillors.

We have seen the connection of the church with the civic life of the
town; and it is to the church and its history that we now turn. In 1085
it formed part of the royal manor, and the right of presentation to it
belonged then and for some time after to the King. The parish of Grantham
was then probably conterminous with the soke. The churches at Houghton,
which corresponds to the modern parish of Spittlegate, Londonthorpe, and
in the outlying member of the soke at Braceby, were regarded as chapels
of Grantham from early times. The extent of the mediæval parish is fairly
represented by the report of Henry VIII.’s commissioners in 1535-6. They
found the vicar of the northern mediety of Grantham holding as part
of his charge North Gonerby and Londonthorpe; while South Gonerby and
Braceby were in charge of the vicar of the southern mediety. Belton and
Sapperton, also members of the soke, formed independent parishes from
an early date: one can scarcely doubt that the alienation of property
there to religious houses was followed quickly by the alienation of
the townships from their mother church and the building of churches of
their own, to which their new lords presented.[64] In 1091 the lands and
endowments of the Church of Grantham were granted to St. Osmund, who gave
them to his new cathedral at Old Sarum. The presentation still remained
with the Crown. If we may trust the shaky memories of the jurors of
1275, with whose statements the justices apparently were satisfied,
the Empress Maud granted the advowson and right of presentation to
the Church of Sarum.[65] From that time it became a prebendal church
of the Cathedral of Sarum, divided into medieties, whose rectors, the
prebendaries of North and South Grantham, impropriated the endowments
already granted, and claimed some jurisdiction within their prebends.
The church was probably served by chaplains, until Hugh of Wells,
Bishop of Lincoln, whose energy in providing regular incumbents and
stipends for the impropriated benefices of his diocese, has a memorial
in the priceless rolls of institutions and charters belonging to his
episcopate, and in his book of ordinations of vicarages, arranged for the
presentation and institution of regularly paid vicars. The first vicar
of North Grantham was instituted on September 23, 1223; the first vicar
of South Grantham about two years later.[66] It is not at all unlikely
that many of these vicars were careless about residence, and that their
duties were often delegated to the chantry priests, whose number grew in
the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries: we know that, in the seventeenth
century, the care of the parish was left often, if not habitually, to
one of the two incumbents. But each of the two prebendaries in Salisbury
presented his own nominee on a vacancy in his particular vicarage till
1713, when, on the voidance of the vicarage of North Grantham by death,
Mr. John Harrison, the south vicar, was instituted also to the other
mediety. There are still prebendaries of North and South Grantham in
Salisbury, who presented to the vicarage until 1870; but their connection
with the prebendal church is now severed save in name, and, while the
impropriation has passed into other hands, the vicar is collated by the
Bishop of Lincoln.

On its first connection with the Cathedral of Sarum the church was much
smaller than it is now. As we stand beneath the tower and look along
the nave, we shall see that the second pillar east of the tower in both
arcades is a pier composed of a broad mass of wall with a respond on
either side; and, coming nearer, we shall see that the western respond is
much later in character than the eastern. Across the space between these
composite piers, covering their site, and extending a little farther
to north and south, came the west front of the twelfth-century church,
possibly even that of the church mentioned in 1085.[67] It had no aisles;
its side walls stood a little outside the line of the present arcades,
where their foundations still exist. Of its connection with the chancel
we can say nothing, but high up in the north wall of the chancel there is
“herring-bone” masonry; there is “Norman” tooling on the stones in the
wall below the east window, and in the south wall it is possible that
some of the masonry is of the same date. If the chancel was originally of
its present length, it was as long as the nave—a most unusual proportion
in Norman times; but the nave may have extended farther east, or there
may have been a tower between nave and chancel. If so, the tower was
possibly built either as a continuation upward of the eastern parts
of the nave walls, or straight from the ground without transepts. The
imposing provisions for a rood-screen in the fourteenth and fifteenth
centuries removed all possible traces of the earlier arrangement.

About 1180, or a few years later, aisles were added to the nave. To
this work belong the two eastern responds already mentioned, and the
three beautiful clustered columns on either side between them and the
chancel-screen. These columns are of that type, in which the shafts,
although approaching the detachment and individual emphasis of each
member which are the great features of early Gothic art, have not yet
wholly broken away from their absorption by the main mass of stonework.
That mass, however, has acquired grace and slenderness without losing
strength; the pier, adequate to the weight it has to bear, has taken
the place of the shafted mass of wall, the bearing power of which was
out of proportion to its real function. The carving of the capitals,
too, marks the Transitional character of the work. The respond of the
north arcade has a carved capital of distinctly late Norman character.
As we go eastward, this conventional arabesque sculpture disappears, and
foliage, at first here and there, then altogether, takes its place.[68]
The carving of the capitals of the south arcade was evidently begun
after the north arcade was completed, and only one of them was finished.
These piers were connected by semicircular arches, the lower voussoirs
of which were in some cases retained as springing-points for the pointed
arches which we see at present. These later arches, with their acute
points, led to the blocking of the round-headed clerestory windows, the
openings of one or two of which may be traced in the wall above. This new
arcade was not built, as was so common, by taking the old church walls
gradually to pieces and building piers and arches in specially made
gaps and breaches; but the older walls seem to have been taken down,
and the arcades built, as has been noted, slightly within their line.
The east responds of the arcade are gone altogether, owing to the later
widening of the eastern bay; and of the aisles which were now added to
the church it is difficult to premise anything but this, that they were
in all likelihood about half as broad as the present aisles, if as much,
and were covered by lean-to roofs, abutting on the nave walls below the
clerestory. The earlier chancel, and, if there was one, the central tower
(a little to the east of centre), were probably left unaltered.

In this state the church remained until the last quarter of the
thirteenth century, a building handsome and interesting, but not
specially remarkable for size, and without any peculiar or unique
feature. Its western doorway may have opened straight upon what was then,
it appears, the market-place of the town. The commercial prosperity of
the place, its trade in wool, were growing; and we are justified in
supposing that the merchants of the town took their part in the great
extension of their parish church. This extension was no mere result of
the fact that Grantham was a lordship belonging to the Crown; nor, we may
be sure, did the Dean and Chapter of Salisbury undertake the gratuitous
task of enlarging to nearly double its size a church which represented to
them a portion of their income, and would certainly never occur to them
in the light of a cherished possession demanding expensive care. But to
the men of the town it was a cherished possession; and the greater part
of the cost was doubtless supplied by merchants, the fathers and kinsfolk
of the Haryngtons and Saltebys who founded chantries in the next century
within its walls. But the mother church at Salisbury helped to supply
at any rate some of the ideas to which the townsmen’s money-gifts gave
shape. Her chapter-house was finished somewhere between 1270 and 1280,
and the cusped circles in the heads of the windows of the north aisle at
Grantham, the shafted mullions with plainly moulded caps and bases, are
accurate reminiscences of its simple and beautiful geometrical tracery.
Lincoln, too, where, in 1280, the great eastern chapel—the so-called
“Angel Quire,” built to contain St. Hugh’s shrine—had been consecrated,
supplied its share: the west window of the north aisle at Grantham is an
ingenious adaptation to six lights, with a slight improvement, of the
eight-light east window at Lincoln. These, however, are merely details
by which the work at Grantham may be assigned to the year 1280 or a
little later. The design of the masons included a western extension of
the church, accompanied by a widening of the aisles, and, with this, the
building of a western tower.

In setting out their plan, they remembered what had been done at Newark
some fifty years before. There a western tower had been begun, standing
free of the aisles on three sides; but, as the work advanced, the
builders had determined to bring their aisles westward flush with the
west wall of the tower, and had pierced arches, as an afterthought, in
its north and south walls. The work at Newark was temporarily stopped,
and, when it went on again, Grantham led the way with one splendid
effort. The Grantham builders apparently began work with their north
aisle. It was on a vast scale, and spaced with so little regard to the
spacing of the columns of the nave that the north doorway, instead of
opening against an interval between columns, has a column and part of an
interval opposite it.[69] The earlier north aisle was totally enclosed by
this new work, which not merely stretched three bays to the westward—the
third of these bays, which roughly corresponds to the internal space
occupied by the tower and its piers, being nearly as wide as the other
two together—but also was extended a bay eastward, so that it encroached
on the chancel wall, or, it may be, on the space hitherto occupied by
the tower. From the walls of the aisle the builders probably passed to
the lower courses of the tower piers, the arches from the tower into
the new aisles, and the western doorway,[70] and then joined the tower
piers to the west angles of the older nave by two arches on each side,
with intermediate columns whose form was evidently suggested by that of
the earlier columns east of them. If this hint was taken from the older
work, the imitation did not extend to the rounded arches. The new arches
were sharply pointed, and, to give uniformity to the connected work,
new pointed arches were built up in place of the old rounded ones. This
obviously was done by removing just as much of the upper wall of the nave
as was necessary, and blocking the clerestory. No clerestory seems to
have formed part of the new design. As part of this task, the chancel was
connected by an arch with the eastern part of the new aisle, and the old
west front and north aisle walls were removed.

[Illustration: PLAN OF GRANTHAM CHURCH.]

We need not dwell on the beauty of this work, which touches exactly the
Transition from the first to the second period of English Gothic, on the
north doorway, with its array of mouldings and shafts, on the details
of the windows, the grotesque carvings of the eaves, the boldness and
cleanness of the outlines of buttresses and base-courses. The next work
was the completion of the steeple, and this was done well, but apparently
with some rapidity, about the year 1300. There is, perhaps, a slight
indecision of design in the small stages of arcading and “smocking” above
the west window; and the west window itself, with its mullions crossing
in the head, is more effective from the point of view of its parade of
“ball-flower” than from that of design; but there can be no question as
to the beauty of the twin two-light windows above the “smocking” stage,
or to the character which the belfry-lights, with their strongly defined
central mullion, their crocketed triangular hoods, and the statued niches
in the spandrils they form with the parapet, give to the tower.[71] Nor
can there be anything but admiration for the great angle-buttresses,
rising from their niched lower stages by a series of sloping offsets into
four tall crocketed pinnacles round the base of the spire; nor for the
method by which the diagonal sides of the spire, which rises from within
a plain parapet, are connected by broaches with the pinnacled angles
of the tower: nor for the crocketing, plain in detail but elaborate in
effect, and the three ranges of lights of the spire itself. The top was
rebuilt in 1664, probably a few feet lower than it had been. It was
struck by lightning in 1797, and repaired rather timorously.[72]

The south aisle was already set out on a scale little less than that
of the north aisle, and probably it was completed as far as a point
corresponding to the east end of the nave, soon after the completion of
the spire. This work was done more hastily, and with less consistent
magnificence than that of the north aisle; but it has been so much
restored that it is difficult to realise its appearance when it was
built. The masonry, however, is of a poorer kind, and seems to indicate
that funds were not so easily forthcoming as before. The south doorway
and the outer doorway of the porch are thirteenth-century structures,
removed from their original positions to corresponding places in relation
to the new aisle. The windows, where they are original, show the design
of crossing mullions which we have noticed in the west window of the
tower, but the shafts used in some of them seem to be re-used from
windows in the older south aisle.

Whether this aisle was closed by some temporary arrangement at the
east end, or whether an east wall was ever built, we cannot tell; no
foundations of such a wall exist, so far as is known. Work, at any rate,
seems to have stopped about 1310-20. It was not long before it was
resumed, but the resumption was gradual. Three great works belong to the
next stage—the building of the south chapel of the chancel and the crypt
beneath, the rebuilding and northward extension of the north porch, and
the building of the rood-screen. Both the south chapel and the extended
porch were the result of the foundation of guilds and the multiplication
of chantry services.[73] The south chapel itself, extending the whole
length of the chancel, and connected with it by an arcade of four bays
cut in its south wall, was probably the chapel of the chantry of St.
Mary, founded by William Gunthorp. Richard Salteby, whose canopied tomb
is in the south wall of the nave, immediately east of the south porch,
founded the chantry of St. John the Baptist, whose services were probably
performed at an altar near the southern staircase to the roof. This
altar may have stood at first against the east wall of the aisle; later,
it would have stood against the screen across the entrance of the Lady
Chapel. Of the position of the other fourteenth-century chantries we know
little; but one helpful document, enrolled among the public records,
tells us of some of the altars and services in the church in 1349, and,
in particular, of the altar in the rood-loft (_in solario coram magna
cruce in medio ecclesie_), at which a chaplain said mass daily “after the
first stroke of the bell which is called Daybelle”—the bell which still
rings at five o’clock every morning from Lady Day to Michaelmas.[74] The
crypt below the Lady Chapel, divided into an eastern and western portion,
and approached by two doors on the outside of the church, may have
contained other chantry chapels; but the western portion was possibly
used as a bone-hole.

[Illustration: NORTH PORCH, GRANTHAM CHURCH (ST. WOLFRAN’S).]

The church, in addition to chantry foundations, contained valuable
relics, among which were portions of the bodies of the patron saints of
the church, St. Wulfran, Archbishop of Sens, missionary to Friesland, and
monk of Fontenelle,[75] and of St. Symphorian, the martyr of Autun. It
is highly probable that, as time went on, these relics were preserved in
the eastern crypt; the beautiful staircase, with its elaborate doorway,
by which this crypt in the fifteenth century was connected with the
chancel, had evidently some special purpose. But it is almost certain
that, on such days as the 15th of October, the feast of the translation
of St. Wulfran, when people flocked into the town for what is now known
as the Onion Fair, the relics would be exhibited to the devout visitors
from the chamber above the north porch, through the small traceried
window above the north door. This chamber was approached by staircases in
the outer pinnacles of the north porch. Its construction seems to have
been the _raison d’être_ of the rebuilding of which we have spoken; the
whole lower storey, the inner porch, the open way in the middle, left
to give room to church processions, the outer porch, were vaulted over,
and, to admit of this vaulting, the pediment of the north doorway was
ruthlessly mutilated. Those who have discovered in this upper chamber
the vicarage of North Grantham will find in it rather a chapel where the
relics belonging to the church were kept and exposed to the faithful, and
in the two staircases (an expensive provision for so small a vicarage) a
way of entrance and of exit for those who wished to visit the shrine and
seek contact with its treasure.[76] The floor and the vaulting beneath it
have now been removed, and the destruction which it caused to the north
doorway is only too clearly visible. The date of the chamber above the
south porch, in its present state, is rather uncertain; the little window
looking into the church, which points to its use as a watching-chamber,
is of the fifteenth century.

The Lady Chapel is one of the most perplexing portions of the church: the
masonry of its walls and the early fourteenth-century tracery of one of
its windows suggest that, if there was a more than temporary wall at the
east end of the south aisle, its materials were re-used here. The arcade
and the tracery of the remaining windows, almost disagreeably fantastic
in its exaggerated curves, point to an advanced period in the fourteenth
century for its completion, and show signs of that failing force which
was an immediate result of the Black Death. We may assign the ten years
between 1350 and 1360 to this work. The circular buttress-turrets at the
east end are very like those which flank the north porch at Holbeach
Church in South Lincolnshire, a building of much the same date. When this
work was finished, only one thing remained to be done to give the church
the form of a regular aisled parallelogram. This was the building of a
north chapel to the chancel, a continuation eastward of the great north
aisle. As we have seen, the eastern bay of that aisle already opened
into the chancel. The lengthening was not taken in hand until a century
and a quarter after the Lady Chapel was built; and, in the interval, one
important piece of work was achieved, the widening and heightening of
the eastern bay of the nave on either side, evidently to give dignity
to the rood-screen and loft. It is not at all unlikely that there may
have been a chancel arch up to this time, perhaps with twelfth-century
jambs supporting a pointed arch, like those which had been added to the
nave arcades. If so, it was now cut away: the responds of the arcades on
either side were destroyed, and from the wall-face thus mutilated—the
recklessly hacked surface may be seen by opening a hinged panel in the
side of the modern screen—wide and lofty arches were thrown across to
single dwarf-shafts resting on the abaci of the twelfth-century piers to
the west. Thus unimpeded space was obtained for the screen with its loft,
and the great rood on its beam above. The character of the work is later
than 1350; and the screen to which the document of 1349 refers probably
underwent some alteration, or was now replaced by a new one, the central
portion of which was certainly of stone.[77] Of fifteenth-century work
is the crypt door, with its solid panelled screen on the south of the
chancel; a window of much the same date was inserted in the south aisle,
just east of the south doorway of the nave. In the latter half of the
century the east wall of the north aisle was removed; the north wall of
the chancel was pierced with three wide arches with slender responds and
intermediate piers, poor in design and detail; and the north chancel
chapel, with its large Perpendicular windows, was built. This was known
as the “Corpus Christi Quire.” This has been repeatedly referred to the
munificence of Richard Foxe, Bishop of Winchester, a great benefactor
of Grantham Grammar School and the founder of Corpus Christi College at
Oxford. Foxe certainly was one of the trustees for the foundation of a
chantry in Grantham Church, served by two priests, one of whom was to be
the grammar schoolmaster; but the chief founder of the Corpus Christi
chantry was a certain John Orston, whose name also occurs as founder of
the Trinity chantry. This foundation (1392) was nearly a century earlier
than the actual building of the “Corpus Christi Quire.” We have seen how
the chapel was the scene of the election of aldermen. For many years the
records of the borough were preserved in the eastern crypt, in a great
wooden chest with three locks. Foxe’s emblem of the pelican is said to
occur on the lower side of the bowl of the octagonal font. However, the
font, with its sculptured panels of events in the life of our Lord, is
probably earlier than Foxe’s day; and the pelican is, of course, a common
emblem of the Blessed Sacrament.

Early in the sixteenth century the present vestry, a long room at right
angles to the western bay of the north chancel chapel, was built as a
chantry chapel by a wealthy family named Hall. It is now entered through
the arch which formerly stood above the founder’s tomb; the small
doorway at the side has been blocked. This building abutted against one
of the pinnacled turrets by which the roof was approached, and blocked
its entrances. This was the last structural alteration to the church
during the Middle Ages. The great building, served by its two vicars
and at least eight chantry priests—to say nothing of the chaplain,
whose stipend bound him to read the Gospel as deacon at the daily mass
at the high altar—stood, at the beginning of the sixteenth century, in
something like its cathedral-like seclusion of to-day. The vicars had
their houses on either side of the church; the chantry priest of St. Mary
lived in a house whose site is now absorbed by the south-west corner of
the churchyard. The houses of the other members of what was now called
the College were either round the church or not far away. A house called
the Chantry House stood in Watergate till the middle of the nineteenth
century; it was then removed and entirely rebuilt in Belton village,
where the date 1470 may be seen above one of the old windows, which was
preserved in the rebuilding. East of the church was the mansion of the
Halls, where Margaret Tudor, daughter of Henry VII., stayed in 1503, on
her way to Scotland to become the wife of James IV. A handsome house
of the later seventeenth century stands on the site; the pretty little
thirteenth-century doorway in the garden wall may possibly have belonged
to the church; its mouldings agree with those of the south doorway and
some of the jamb-shafts of the windows of the south aisle, which are
obviously remains of work of this period. On the north side of the
churchyard still stands the sixteenth-century Grammar School, founded
with the aid of Bishop Foxe in 1528, and endowed by Edward VI. in 1553
with the possessions of the Trinity and Lady chantries. Foxe was born at
Ropsley, in the hilly country south of Grantham. From Woolsthorpe, in
the same district, but further west, came the most famous pupil of the
school, Sir Isaac Newton. Among its earliest scholars was William Cecil,
a native of Bourn, afterwards famous as Lord Burghley; and a third name,
this time of a native of Grantham itself, is that of the metaphysician,
Henry More, the head of the school of Cambridge Platonists. Colley Cibber
was also educated here, an interesting if not altogether illustrious
pupil. The schoolroom was used till within the last few years. Since then
handsome school buildings have been completed on the opposite side of the
headmaster’s house, in the dip through which the Mowbeck used to flow
visibly, and the old schoolroom has been fitted up as a school chapel.

Henry VIII. numbered Grantham among those sees which he intended to
found. Not till lately has a suffragan bishop in the diocese of Lincoln
taken the title of Bishop of Grantham. The dissolution of the chantries
put an end to the “College,” and the vicars of the “prebendary church”
in post-Reformation times had to be content with very small stipends.
Puritanism raised its head in Grantham formidably, as in most parts of
Lincolnshire; and the Corporation, though in the main orthodox, had, in
1620, established a weekly lecture in the church on Tuesday, to which
they invited the most eloquent clergy of the neighbourhood. The preacher
afterwards attended a Corporation dinner, and was allowed a pint of sack.
These lectures, although doubtless intended to afford a substitute for
irregular prophesying, also gave opportunities to lecturers of a Puritan
cast of thought. Preaching was evidently regarded at Grantham as of
more importance than the decency of ritual. The communion-table stood
in the middle of the chancel without a rail round it, and was treated
without reverence. Peter Titley, instituted to the south vicarage in
1625, removed it, set it altar-wise against the east wall, and railed
it in. Unhappily, the Alderman of Grantham in 1627 was a Puritan, and
Titley had made himself unpopular by inhibiting the lecturers. Attending
the church in state, the Alderman ordered his mace-bearers to remove
the altar to its old position. A free fight followed, and Alderman
and Vicar appealed to Bishop Williams. The Bishop delayed a final
decision; and, a few days later, the Alderman, followed by the Vicar,
rode off to seek a personal interview at Buckden. Williams, although
he had expressed approval of Titley’s action, and after Titley’s death
officiated at the altar itself, acted with some partiality towards the
Puritans. His answer to the Vicar, which he sent through the hands of
the inhibited lecturers, raised a controversy beyond Grantham; and the
war of pamphlets, in which Heylyn, Prynne, Burton, and others took part,
became a matter of other than local history. Titley seems to have held
his own, and the altar was still against the east wall after his death
in 1633.[78] During Titley’s incumbency some additions were made to the
church. Possibly the east window, of a very plain Perpendicular type,
resting on a fourteenth-century sill, was inserted at this time.[79]
A clerestory was added to the chancel about 1628, when the roofs of
the church were lowered; and it is much to be regretted that this
was destroyed at a nineteenth-century restoration, in that spirit of
iconoclasm which imagines that, by destroying post-mediæval masonry and
furniture, it is restoring churches to their “original state.” In 1640
the Chancellor of the diocese presented the church with an organ; but
although the Corporation approved, the Puritans opposed the gift for the
time successfully.[80] The organ was erected, but probably was not used;
and the great event of the year was the re-hanging of the bells and the
blocking up of the ground floor of the tower by a wooden ringers’ gallery.

Three times between 1601 and 1640 had plague visited the town; and early
in 1643 came the scourge of civil war. The Royalists were the first to
occupy the town, their troops being quartered in the tithe-barn of the
prebendaries, to the south-east of the churchyard, and close to the site
of the Castle. In spite of a temporary repulse, they held Grantham
till May 22, 1643, when Cromwell won his first battle on a field to the
north of the town. “Belton fight” was followed by the battle of Winceby,
in October. The year before the Corporation plate had been seized by
order of Parliament, but was fortunately restored to the town. This
year Fairfax demanded a vote of £300 from the Corporation, who did as
they were told; but the town refused to pay, and the Alderman and some
of the Comburgesses were sent to Nottingham Castle. Released in 1644,
they formed a Royalist faction in and outside the town, corresponding
with the garrison at Belvoir, and taking part in the guerilla warfare
of the countryside. But in 1646 came the end of the war. Belvoir and
Newark castles were surrendered, and their fortifications slighted.
Under Puritan rule the Royalist burgesses were deprived of their rights;
but the town returned to something of its old quiet and prosperity. The
woodwork of the church had been destroyed by the soldiers during the
Civil War, who used it for fuel, and probably the state of the building
was rather dreary. When in 1648 an Alderman was elected in church, the
deprived Royalists took the occasion to brawl. The weekly lectures
were restored in 1646, and, somewhat earlier, the poorly paid vicars
had their stipends augmented by the sequestration of the Salisbury
prebends. In spite of this, one of the vicars found it more agreeable
to his conscience to be non-resident. In 1651, the Mercers’ Company,
trustees of an investment left by Lady Campden to form the endowment of
two lectureships, one of which was to be in Lincolnshire, granted the
moiety to Grantham. The Campden Lecture is still preached on Wednesday
morning in every week; and yearly by the provisions of another endowment,
chargeable on the “Angel Inn,” a sermon is preached against the sin of
drunkenness. Of course, after 1646, the colour of the lectures in Church
were strictly Puritan; but the ejected parsons of Boothby Pagnell and
Barrowby, Dr. Sanderson and Dr. Hurst, were living in Grantham; and
their spotless life and example seem to have won the respect of all.
Sanderson became Bishop of Lincoln at the Restoration. It was during the
Commonwealth period, from 1651 to 1656, that Isaac Newton was at school
in Grantham, lodging with one Mr. Clarke, and experimenting with an
amateur sundial and with models of horsemills and windmills.

After the Restoration the history of Grantham is that of any quiet
country town, until the coming of the railway and the establishment
of the engineering works. The most startling event in its story was
the pulling down of the Market Cross by Mr. John Manners, then lord
of the manor, in 1779. He was compelled to restore it by _mandamus_
the following year. The ecclesiastical history of the town is equally
peaceful. The church was invaded by galleries and box-pews; the
rood-screen, if it had not already gone, was taken down; the western part
of the nave was left unused, and glass screens to shut out the draught
closed in the eastern bays of the nave and the chancel. The ringing
gallery, which blocked up the lower part of the tower, was removed
in 1752; and, though one cannot regret the opening out of the noble
western arch, it is probable that other woodwork in the church might
have been better spared. The encumbrances of the building were removed
during the nineteenth century. Something was done at a restoration which
took place in 1851, during the incumbency of Mr. William Potchett. The
western part of the south aisle was re-roofed, and the present tracery
of the west window of the aisle seems to have been put in. Part of a
fund left in 1795 for the beautifying of the church was applied in 1853
to filling the west window of the north aisle with stained glass of a
painful brilliance, and the staining of the other two windows of the
west front took place between 1852 and 1855. Under Mr. George Maddison,
vicar from 1856 to 1874, Sir Gilbert Scott thoroughly restored the whole
building. This restoration, completed in October 1868, gave us the church
substantially in its present state. While the chancel clerestory was
removed, an act of compensation was performed in the recusping of the
tracery in the windows of the north aisle. Eight years later followed the
restoration of the north porch. Since then, the church has received many
beautiful gifts—Sir Gilbert Scott’s chancel-screen; Mr. G. F. Bodley’s
reredos, which has been heightened of late years to conceal the east
window and add a gradine to the altar; Mr. Kempe’s stained glass; and,
latest of all, the restored reredos in the crypt, the lofty font-cover,
the organ-case, and the restoration of Hall’s chapel, which are the work
of Mr. W. T. Tapper.

One thing remains to be noted in connection with the church—its two
libraries. The second of these is of no special interest. It was given
to the church in 1764 by Dr. John Newcome, Dean of Rochester, and Master
of St. John’s College, Cambridge, and placed within rails at the east
end of the south aisle. It was then removed to Hall’s chapel in 1806,
and found a third home at the west end of the south aisle towards the
end of the century. It has been removed again within recent years. The
other library was given in 1598 by Francis Trigg, vicar of Welbourn, and
was housed in the room over the south porch, which seems to have been
repaired, if not rebuilt, about this time. The books, bound for the most
part in stout oak boards, are set, as in mediæval libraries, with their
leaves outwards, and are chained to rings on an iron rod in front of each
shelf. The collection includes some early printed books of the fifteenth
century, and editions of Fathers and mediæval theologians. The library
was intended for the use of the vicars; and in 1642 one Edward Skipworth
left a small endowment to supply it with firewood in winter, that the
vicars might prosecute their studies. Gifts were made to it from time to
time. Henry More presented his writings to it, and Dr. Sanderson gave it
one of the few copies of Philip II.’s _Polyglot_, printed at Antwerp,
which had escaped destruction by sea. Of the eight volumes, only two and
a fragment remain. A verger is said to have been found lighting a fire
with some of the leaves. Fortunately, the full value of the library is
now appreciated; and, if it does not attract many earnest students, it is
at any rate regarded with intelligent curiosity.[81]

With the gift of Francis Trigg, “_Welborne quondam Concionator
amans_,” we leave Grantham. No longer the small market town, whose
City Fathers never stirred in the streets without their gowns, the
Alderman distinguished by his tippet with its gold clasps, but a busy
manufacturing and railway town, with growing suburbs and a population of
from 20,000 to 30,000, it yet keeps something of its country aspect. The
trees at the back of the church and along the North Road, the splendid
chestnut in Finkin Street, close to the middle of the town, the easy
escape from the houses to the slopes of the Harrowby Hills, or the
canal path to Harlaxton, make it a pleasant place to see or stay in,
and compensate for the bleak features of its approach from the south.
Though no one could claim for its surroundings the privilege of startling
beauty, yet there is no more smiling a piece of country in the English
Midlands than that of which it is the centre. Cut off from the Fenland
flats on the east by a long table-land with a gradual eastward slope,
and on the south by the broken country towards Bourn and Stamford,
it has on the north the long line of pretty villages which mark the
road to Lincoln, and on the west the vale of Belvoir, overhung by the
wooded escarpments of the Leicestershire Wolds. It is the centre of a
country which possesses some of the most beautiful village churches and
the noblest houses in England. Due north of the town is Belton House,
where Wren’s gifts of moderation in proportion and of masterly internal
spacing are at their best; and just beyond is Syston, high on the brow
of a hill, and gazing across the intervening ridges at Belvoir. Between
Grantham and Belvoir are the great modern houses of Harlaxton and Denton.
Harlaxton, a palace in size, is set on a terrace at the end of a straight
drive which dips down from the Melton road and then rises gradually
towards the house, and is backed by a view of wood and hill. And on the
south, not comparing with these in size, are the beautiful little houses
which the wool merchants of these parts built for themselves—Anthony
Ellys’ house at Great Ponton, and Thomas Coney’s high stone mansion at
Bassingthorpe, and, farther on, the larger hall which Richard Thimelby
built in 1510 at Irnham. These are all within no long distance from
the town, and all, except Belvoir, within the county. For those whose
acquaintance with Lincolnshire is limited to its legendary reputation
of flatness, fogginess, and, if one may use the word, fenniness, there
could be no better object-lesson than the climb along the lane from Great
Ponton to Bassingthorpe, or the walk from Harlaxton to Grantham, with the
great spire of St. Wulfran’s framed, like the vignette on the title-page
of a book, within the arches formed by the intervening trees.




STAMFORD

BY V. B. CROWTHER-BEYNON, M.A., F.S.A.


Of the picturesque and interesting old towns in which the county of
Lincoln is so rich, it may be questioned whether any can excel, or even
equal, Stamford. Though unable to claim a life-long acquaintance with
this delightful, old-world borough, the present writer confesses to have
quickly fallen a victim to her charm, a feeling which time has only
served to increase.

Possessing, as she does, such strong claims to the attention and
appreciation of the historian, the antiquary and the artist, it is small
wonder that Stamford has provided the theme for a large number of printed
publications, ranging from Butcher’s _Survey of Stamford_ (1646) down to
handbooks issued as recently as 1907 and 1908. Chief among these must be
reckoned Francis Peck’s monumental _Academia tertia Anglicana, or the
Antiquarian Annals of Stamford_, a most exhaustive, albeit a somewhat
wordy and diffuse work, issued in 1727. The present brief account of
Stamford makes no pretension to originality, and represents merely a
compilation drawn from the many excellent works which have already been
contributed by other and abler hands, and to the authors of which the
writer desires to acknowledge his indebtedness.[82]

Situated on the banks of the river Welland, which divides the town into
two unequal portions and which here forms the boundary between the
counties of Lincoln and Northampton, Stamford presents the peculiarity
of a town which is in two counties, in two dioceses (Lincoln and
Peterborough), and under two civil jurisdictions, though the municipal
borough includes the greater part of both portions of the town.

In a volume whose scope is confined to the county of Lincoln, it may
savour of trespass to deal with the Northamptonshire portion of Stamford;
it is, however, hardly practicable to give an intelligible account of the
history of the place without some reference to “Stamford Baron” (as the
part south of the Welland has been designated since the middle of the
fifteenth century),[83] though every endeavour will be made to introduce
as little extraneous matter as possible.

The remote history of Stamford is enveloped in a veil of romance which
present-day knowledge has perforce torn rudely away. The establishment
here of a British University in 863 B.C. by a British prince, Bladud,
seems to rest solely on the statement of Merlin of Caledonia, writing in
the sixth or early in the seventh century A.D., and the fable need not
detain us further.

When we come to the period of the Roman occupation, we might, in view of
the fact that the great military road, Erming or Ermine Street, crosses
the Welland close to the present town, expect to find evidences of a
considerable Roman settlement at this important point of the road. It
is somewhat surprising, therefore, that, with the exception of some
comparatively insignificant discoveries to the west, between Stamford
and Tinwell, nothing has at present come to light which can be said to
point to the existence of a settlement in Roman times on the site of
the present Stamford. Possibly the proximity to the south and north,
respectively, of the important stations of Durobrivæ (Castor) and
Causennæ[84](Ancaster) may have rendered it unnecessary to establish
another and intermediate station. At any rate the fact remains that we
cannot adduce any proof of the existence of a settlement or village here
till Saxon times, and it is probable, therefore, that the name Stamford
or Stanford (a name of Saxon origin, from _stan_, stone, and _ford_) is
the first and only one which the place has borne. The name doubtless
had reference to the ford by which, before the erection of a bridge
substantial enough for horse traffic, communication between the two sides
of the Welland was maintained; and though we find, as is commonly the
case with place-names, many variations of spelling, such as Staunford,
Staunforth, Staundforde, &c., the name has remained substantially the
same.

The earliest contemporary reference to Stamford is found in a charter of
Wolfere, King of Mercia, dated 664, wherein “all that part of the town
of Staunforde ... beyond the bridge,” is stated to belong to the Abbey
of Medeshamstede (Peterborough).[85] It appears, therefore, that even
at this early date the town occupied both sides of the river, and was,
we may fairly suppose, a place of some size. A few years before this,
namely, in 658 (if we may believe the testimony of Prior Wessington of
Durham, writing in the fifteenth century),[86] was founded the earliest
religious house in the Stamford district. This was St. Leonard’s Priory,
erected by Wilfrid, the friend of Oswy, King of Northumbria, and
afterwards Bishop of York. Wilfrid bestowed this new foundation upon the
monastery of Lindisfarne, where he had received his education, and on
the removal of the monks from Lindisfarne to Durham, the Priory of St.
Leonard, Stamford, became a dependency of Durham. The site of this priory
(of which more anon) is about a quarter of a mile eastward of the present
town.

[Illustration: STAMFORD, FROM THE MEADOWS.]

The ninth century was a period of stress in this part of England, and
Stamford was called upon to furnish a contingent of young fighters to
defend the country against the marauding Danes. The Danes, however,
proved too strong, and Stamford soon fell under the foreign yoke and was
joined with Lincoln, Leicester, Derby and Nottingham to form the Danish
“Five Burghs.”

Space will not permit us to narrate the varying fortunes of the opposing
forces—English and Danes—in the almost incessant struggles which marked
the period preceding the Norman Conquest—struggles in which Stamford was
held sometimes by one party, sometimes by the other, and not infrequently
was in the hands of both, when the river formed the dividing line between
the rival camps.

In the year 972 Eadgar granted, or, it may be, confirmed to the Abbey of
Peterborough the privilege of coining money at Stamford, but the exact
position of the mint in the southern part of the town cannot now be
determined. It is an interesting and significant fact that coins of the
Stamford mint have been met with in considerable numbers in hoards found
in Scandinavia.[87]

The fortification on the north bank of the Welland was doubtless
originally a Danish earthwork, an English stronghold being erected by
Alfred in opposition on the south side, near the present Midland Railway
Station. When the Danes had secured a foothold they seem to have replaced
their earthen defences by stone walls which encircled their settlement.
At the present day considerable portions of the Stamford town walls are
in existence, though these have obviously been reconstructed from time to
time, and nothing earlier than Norman work can be positively identified
in the portions still remaining. Perhaps the most striking vestige now
to be seen is a round bastion on the west side of the town, near Rutland
Terrace. Speed’s map of Stamford (1600) shows eleven towers in the line
of the walls, together with seven principal gates and two posterns. The
southern town does not appear to have ever been defended by walls, though
it had five fortified gates.[88] All the gates in both sections of the
town have now been demolished, the last (St. George’s Gate) as lately as
1806. The water-mill, situated near the Castle, was originally built by
Edward the Confessor, and is still known as the King’s Mill, though the
present structure is of the eighteenth century.

Soon after the Conquest the Danish castle was replaced by a substantial
Norman building, and the site is still marked by an Early English gate
and a portion of the arcaded wall of a chamber which was subsequently
used as a manor court. At present the Castle site is occupied by an iron
foundry, and it is among the buildings, sheds and heaps of scrap iron
connected therewith, that the visitor has to search for what remains of
the old mediæval stronghold. It seems a sad pity that a spot of such
historic interest and picturesque position should ever have been allowed
to fall into the state of unsightly neglect which characterises it to-day.

The dawn of the twelfth century saw the beginning of the long era of
building in and around Stamford, the visible results of which have
rendered the town so famous among generations of ecclesiologists and
students of architecture. St. Leonard’s Priory, already mentioned, which
had suffered severely during the Danish incursions, was rebuilt at this
time, and, judging by the remains of the nave of the Priory Church (which
is all that now remains), must have been a noble edifice. The west
front, the portion latest in date (_c._ 1190) of the existing fabric,
is one of the finest examples of its kind in the country. In the centre
of the lowest stage is a blocked doorway surmounted by a round arch of
four highly enriched orders. The arch is supported by groups of elegant
detached shafts, terminating in foliage caps of Early English character
and exquisite workmanship. On either side of this central door is another
smaller recess of similar character. Above, in the second stage, is
an arcade of seven round-headed arches with chevron ornament, three
being open and four blocked; while over this again, in the gable, is a
vesica-shaped moulded recess. Sad to relate, this beautiful old building
is now doing duty as a cart-shed!

Stamford is not rich to-day in architecture of the Norman style, and
St. Leonard’s Priory, a small portion of what remains of St. Paul’s
Church (now used as part of the Grammar School premises), an arch on
the west side of St. Mary’s Hill, known as the “Pack-horse Arch,” and
a few fragments of the original Hospital of SS. John and Thomas (now
incorporated in Lord Burghley’s Bedehouse at the south extremity of the
bridge), are perhaps all that we can assign to this period. We must not,
however, conclude from this that Stamford was ill equipped with churches
and religious foundations in the twelfth century. All Saints’, Water
Street, on the south side of the river, was erected in 1066, but has
now entirely disappeared, while the original church on the site of the
present St. Martin’s was begun in 1133. All Saints’ College (attached
to Crowland Abbey) and St. Mary’s Benedictine Nunnery, founded in 1109
and 1120 respectively; St. Giles’ Lazar House (1150); the House of the
Holy Sepulchre and Chapel of St. Mary Magdalene (of about the same date
and with some remains still visible in a private residence known as “The
Hermitage,” close to the George Hotel); St. Michael’s Priory (1156); the
Hospital of St. John the Baptist and St. Thomas of Canterbury (1170);
and a cell (_c._ 1200) of Peterborough Abbey, in Burghley Park (traces
of which are said to remain in the kitchens of Burghley House)—form
a list which, though incomplete, abundantly attests to the religious
activity which existed here at this time. All the above were in the
Northamptonshire part of the town. Of those on the north side, there
is documentary evidence that the Church of “All Saints in the Mercat”
(_i.e._ Market), so called to distinguish it from All Saints’, Water
Street, was in existence in 1170, while we may assert, on architectural
grounds, that the Church of St. Paul was also erected in the twelfth
century. Among buildings of slightly later date we may mention the
Hospital of St. Leger (1208), near St. Paul’s Church; St. Mary’s Priory,
Newstead, for Austinian Canons, founded in 1230 and situated about a
mile eastward of the town; and the Friary of SS. Mary and Nicholas, for
Dominicans (1230), on the south side of St. Leonard’s Street—of all of
which houses no traces now remain.

Of the Franciscan or Black Friary (_c._ 1250), near St. Paul’s Gate on
the eastern side of the town, a small postern gate may still be seen;
and of the Carmelite or White Friary (1260), situated a little to the
north-east of the preceding, the picturesque gateway which now gives
access to the grounds of the Stamford Infirmary but which is of later
date (_c._ 1350), is one of the architectural features of the town.
In 1292 the Gilbertine Canons of Sempringham, a community which has
a special interest as being the only order originating in England,
founded a Hall in St. Peter’s Street, on the west side of the town, a
few remains of which are still visible; and in 1335 an Austinian Friary
was established not far from the same spot, of which a fragment or two
remain, built into an almshouse hard by. The list here given, which,
it is to be feared, is somewhat in the nature of a catalogue, cannot
fail to establish the fact that Stamford was an important centre of
religious life during this period, an assertion which receives additional
corroboration when we examine further the records of the church-building
in the town.

Although Stamford can never have covered what we should now consider
a large area, she possessed as many as sixteen churches, a number now
reduced to six; and if those which remain may stand as a fair sample of
the whole, Stamford, in her halcyon days, must have been able to furnish
a veritable feast of architectural beauty. Of some of the churches which
no longer exist little is recorded, as, for example, All Saints’, Water
Street (already mentioned), St. Stephen’s, St. Thomas’, St. Michael’s
Cornstall, St. Mary’s Bennewerk (_i.e._ within the “works” or walls),
and Holy Trinity. These were all destroyed in 1461 under circumstances
to be noticed hereafter. St. Clement’s (near Clement’s Gate, now known
as Scotgate), St. Peter’s (situated on St. Peter’s Hill, and originally
belonging to Hambleton, Rutland), and St. Andrew’s (in Broad Street),
were removed under an Act of Parliament in 1553. The parishes belonging
to both the above groups of vanished churches were subsequently
apportioned to one or other of the surviving parish churches.

Perhaps this will be a convenient place at which to offer a few
remarks—necessarily very brief and inadequate—concerning the churches
which are still in existence, since no account of Stamford could be
deemed complete which did not include some notice, however imperfect, of
what many would deem her chief glory—namely, her Gothic architecture.

As a recent writer[89] has pointed out, it is essential that the student
of the Stamford churches should bear in mind that the memorable year
1461, when the town was laid waste by the Lancastrian army, witnessed the
partial or complete destruction of every church in the place; and that
when the work of restoration began, the materials were re-used so far as
was found possible, portions of those churches which it was decided not
to rebuild being in all probability worked into the fabric of those of
which the restoration was taken in hand. When we bear this fact in mind,
certain features found in some of the churches can be explained which
would otherwise be most difficult to account for.

_St. Mary’s Church_ occupies a striking position at the top of the
hill leading from the Welland Bridge to the centre of the town. The
thirteenth-century tower, surmounted by a beautiful fourteenth-century
spire of the broach type, forms what many would consider Stamford’s
fairest architectural possession. The arcading on the belfry and the
elegant tracery in the spire lights are among the many exquisite
features of this part of the building. The nave appears to have been
rebuilt in the Perpendicular Period, though the material is largely of
thirteenth-century date. The chancel is in the Early English style, while
the chapel on the north side, of fifteenth-century work, contains a fine
contemporary wooden roof which still preserves its original gilding and
decoration.

_All Saints’ Church_ is favoured by its open situation, having in this
respect a great advantage over the majority of the Stamford churches.
Though alluded to in a document of the twelfth century, as stated above,
no portion of the present fabric can be assigned to a date earlier than
the thirteenth century. Of the latter period are the nave and chancel
arcades and the remarkable arcading on the outside of the south and east
walls. The pillars of the south nave arcade are singularly beautiful,
having foliage caps surmounting banded, detached shafts. This church,
moreover, is rich in monumental brasses, one of which commemorates
William Browne (the restorer of this church in the fifteenth century) and
his wife. Of this William Browne we shall have occasion to speak when we
describe “Browne’s Hospital.”

_St. John’s Church_ is a strikingly uniform Perpendicular building, and
affords an admirable example of the style. It contains a well-preserved
oak screen as well as a good specimen of a timber roof, which retains
some of its original colouring and has carved figures of angels under the
principals. In the windows are some remains of fine old glass.

[Illustration: ST. MARY’S CHURCH AND HALL, STAMFORD.]

_St. George’s Church_ exemplifies better than any other what has been
said concerning the restoration of the Stamford churches after the 1461
havoc. Without this explanation a visitor would be sorely puzzled on
beholding a series of nave columns, each consisting of an Early English
base supporting an octagonal drum of Decorated date, above which is an
Early English cylindrical section, surmounted in its turn by another
octagonal portion and a cap, both of Decorated style. The church once
possessed a series of windows containing representations of King Edward
III. and the first Knights of the Garter, but unfortunately this glass,
which would have been of inestimable value and interest at the present
time, was destroyed during the Parliamentary wars.

_St. Michael’s Church_ is quite modern (consecrated in 1836), though it
occupies the site of an eleventh or twelfth century building. It contains
but little of interest to the ecclesiologist.

A portion (the south aisle) of the _Church of St. Paul_ survives, and has
been used since the sixteenth century as a class-room in connection with
the Grammar School. It is a curious and somewhat puzzling building, being
partly of thirteenth-century date, but having on the south wall a Norman
corbel-table. It also contains fragments of later date, a piscina and a
small heart shrine.

So far all the churches we have been considering are on the Lincolnshire
side of the river, but for the sake of completeness a word or two must
be said of the _Church of St. Martin_ in the Northamptonshire part of
the town, though this is strictly outside our subject. It is mainly
a fifteenth-century structure, though there are traces of the older
building which is known to have existed on this site. Some of the windows
contain some fine old glass which was brought here from Tattershall
Church and elsewhere; but perhaps the chief interest of the church to the
visitor is afforded by the series of tombs of the Cecil family, including
those of the great Elizabethan statesman, Lord Burghley, and of his
father and mother, as well as a very pretentious Italian marble monument
commemorating John, Earl of Exeter (_ob._ 1700), and his wife Anne. An
opportunity occurs here to correct an error which has found its way, by
repeated copyings, into almost all the printed accounts of this church,
to the effect that William Laud, who became Archbishop of Canterbury,
was once curate of St. Martin’s, Stamford, whereas the parish which
can in reality claim this distinction is Stanford (formerly known as
Stanford-on-Avon), near the borders of Warwickshire. Both places being in
the same county and diocese, the mistake is a not unnatural one.[90]

Before we pass from the consideration of Stamford’s architectural
features, we must briefly notice another class of institutions with which
the borough is exceptionally well endowed, namely, almshouses; and chief
among these is Browne’s Hospital or Bedehouse, founded towards the end
of the fifteenth century by that William Browne whose name has already
been mentioned as the rebuilder of All Saints’ Church. He was a wealthy
merchant of the Staple of Calais, born of an old Stamford family, and
was himself six times Mayor of the borough. The Bedehouse is under the
care of a Warden and Confrater, and accommodates ten men and two women.
The residential part of the establishment was rebuilt in 1870, but the
old dormitory (no longer so used), with the audit-room over it, the
cloisters, and the small chapel communicating with both, and extending
upwards to the full height of the building, remain as they were. The
oak screen, through which the chapel is entered from the west, is an
exquisite example of woodwork of the best Perpendicular Period, and
the windows of the chapel and audit-room contain some very beautiful
contemporary glass. The Bedehouse, moreover, possesses some fine and
valuable furniture and fittings, including a very curious almsbox
discovered in a wall during the 1870 restoration.

[Illustration: CHAPEL SCREEN, BROWNE’S HOSPITAL, STAMFORD.]

Hopkins’ Hospital, founded in 1770, contains in one of its walls a
gargoyle and part of a window, the only remaining fragments of the
Austinian Friary which stood close by.

Lord Burghley’s Bedehouse was founded by the great Lord Treasurer in
1597. It occupies the site of the old Hospital of St. John and St. Thomas
at the south end of the town bridge.

Fryer’s Almshouses, Truesdale’s Hospital, Snowden’s Hospital (or St.
John’s Callis), Williamson’s Hospital, and St. Peter’s Hospital (or All
Saints’ Callis), of which a mere enumeration must suffice, combine to
make a formidable list of such charitable institutions, which speaks
well for the philanthropy and public spirit of past generations of
Stamfordians.

After this somewhat lengthy architectural digression it is time to
resume the thread of Stamford’s general history where we left it at the
beginning of the church-building period. In 1206 the manorial rights of
Stamford were conveyed by the King to the Norman noble, William, Earl
Warren, whose name figures largely in the early history of the town. He
made considerable additions to the castle, and, according to tradition,
was responsible for instituting the famous “bull running” in the river
meadows below the Castle, which became a popular annual celebration.
The story goes that Earl Warren observed one day in the water meadows
an infuriated bull, which made its way into the town, scattering and
attacking in its wild career those of the inhabitants who were unlucky
enough to come in its way. The spectacle appears to have appealed to
Warren’s sporting instincts, and he thereupon made over the meadow to
the butchers of the town on condition that they provided a bull annually
on 13th November for a repetition of the pastime. It was not until 1839,
after a keen struggle between the public and the authorities lasting for
several years, that this ignoble “sport” was suppressed.

Earl Warren’s arms (checquy argent and azure), impaling the royal arms of
England, are borne by the borough of Stamford to this day, as can be seen
by a glance at the shield on the front of the Town Hall on St. Mary’s
Hill.

In 1256 Henry III. granted the first charter to the town, and we may,
perhaps, pause here for a moment to consider the municipal history of the
borough, which has been a long and honourable one. Edward IV., in the
first year of his reign, bestowed a second charter on the town by which
the chief alderman was raised to a position of exceptional privilege and
responsibility, being within his jurisdiction the immediate lieutenant of
the King. The next charter dates from the reign of Charles II., and in
this the chief alderman is for the first time styled “Mayor.” The last
charter was granted by James II. The early archives of Stamford perished,
like so many other valuable possessions, in the Lancastrian onslaught
upon the town in 1461, but the subsequent municipal deeds and documents,
including the 1461 charter, have been carefully preserved. The Stamford
corporation, moreover, possess exceptionally fine regalia, including a
small and very beautiful silver mace believed to be of the time of Edward
IV., a larger mace dated 1660, and a third of majestic size presented in
1678. The last, which bears the initials of King Charles II., was given
by Charles Bertie, who was one of the members representing Stamford in
Parliament. He also presented the corporation with a valuable silver
punch-bowl, capable of containing five gallons. Two additional silver
cups were the gifts of other donors in 1650 and 1658.

In 1266 a situation arose in connection with Stamford which forms a
curious chapter in her annals. Following on the revocation by Henry III.
of a licence under which a number of students from Oxford and Cambridge
had established themselves at Northampton, a migration of these young men
to Stamford took place, and their numbers being increased by a further
secession from Oxford in 1333, there grew up in the town a species of
rudimentary university which at length incurred the jealousy of the
older universities. Both parties appealed to the King, with the result
that the Stamfordians were ordered to disperse. It was not, however, till
some of the more recalcitrant of the students had been removed in custody
to Oxford that the royal mandate could effect its purpose. It is believed
that up to comparatively recent years the undergraduates of Oxford and
Cambridge were called upon to register a definite undertaking that they
would abstain from studying at Stamford. The scene of this episode in
Stamford’s history was on the south side of St. Paul’s Street, the site
being now occupied by a girls’ school, still known as Brazenose, and
standing where the old Brazenose College of the Oxford seceders formerly
stood until demolished in 1668. The famous Brazenose knocker, which the
Oxonians are said to have carried with them from their Oxford hall,
remained behind at Stamford until late in the nineteenth century, when
the authorities of Brazenose College, Oxford, purchased the premises and
bore the precious relic in triumph back to its original home on the banks
of the Isis.

In 1293 Queen Eleanor’s body rested here on its way from Harby to
Westminster, and a cross (of which nothing now remains to mark the site)
was erected on the western side of the town, near St. Clement’s Gate, as
was done at each point where the cortège halted on its journey.

In 1363 the Castle and manor of Stamford were given by Edward III. to
his son Edward, Duke of York. The connection thus established naturally
led the inhabitants to espouse the Yorkist cause in the Wars of the
Roses which followed in the next century, and they thus brought upon
themselves the calamities which have already been referred to in dealing
with the churches in the town. In 1461 the Lancastrian army, marching
towards St. Albans under Sir Andrew Trollope, attacked, captured and
well nigh demolished the town, at the same time destroying all the
municipal archives. Ten years later, however, occurred what is known as
the “Lincolnshire Rising,” which ended in the defeat of the Lancastrians
near Empingham, a few miles north of Stamford.[91] In this fight the
Stamfordians by their courage earned for themselves such distinction that
King Edward IV. marked his appreciation of their services by granting
permission for the royal lions to be placed on the coat-of-arms of
Stamford side by side with the arms of Earl Warren.

Of the events of the next half century we will only mention the
re-establishment and re-endowment of the old Grammar School (which is
known to have been in existence for over two centuries previously) by
William Radcliffe in 1530, the benefits of whose munificence are enjoyed
to this day by the boys of the town and district.

The latter half of the sixteenth century witnessed the dissolution of
the monasteries under Henry VIII. This event in a town which, as we
have seen, contained religious foundations of nearly every order then
in existence, must have wrought an overwhelming upheaval, and as we
contemplate the situation we are forced to realise that, to a great
extent, Stamford’s glory had departed.

In Elizabeth’s reign began the rise of the Cecil family, whose fortunes
have since been so closely bound up with Stamford.

Richard Cecil, the father of the great Lord Treasurer, obtained
possession of the manor of Burghley in 1528, and, after adding
considerably to the estates, died in 1552, and was buried in St.
Margaret’s Church, Westminster. His more famous son William, afterwards
first Lord Burghley, was born at Bourne, and received part of his
education at Stamford Grammar School, proceeding thence to St. John’s
College, Cambridge. He rose to be a statesman of eminence under Edward
VI., but his name is, of course, more intimately associated with the
reign of Elizabeth. The Queen on more than one occasion visited Stamford,
and the room, with its furniture, which she occupied at Burghley House
is still shown to visitors. The Lord Treasurer was a great benefactor to
Stamford, of which he was made lord of the manor by his royal mistress.
It is, perhaps, hardly necessary to state that both branches of the Cecil
family, now represented by the Marquises of Exeter and Salisbury, trace
their descent from the Elizabethan statesman.

In 1565 William Cecil employed John Thorpe to design “Burghley House by
Stamford town,” which remains one of the stateliest of England’s stately
homes. Seeing, however, that it stands in Northamptonshire, it is not
intended to deal at length with the building or the wealth of artistic
treasures which it contains.

The troubles of the Civil War did not leave Stamford untouched, and
Cromwell’s iconoclastic followers have left their mark on many a church
and monument, while Burghley House underwent a siege in 1643.

It is said that Stamford can claim to have been the last place to shelter
King Charles I. as a free man; for, after spending a night at a house
on Barnhill as the guest of a Mr. Wolph, he passed out under cover of
darkness accompanied by two friends, and made his way to the headquarters
of the Scottish army near Newark, only to be basely sold by them to the
enemy immediately afterwards. The gateway by which the King departed
still exists, but was considerably altered by the well-known antiquary,
Dr. Stukeley, who occupied the premises in the eighteenth century. From
the close of the Civil War, Stamford has enjoyed a period of unbroken
peace and quiet prosperity. Before the advent of railways the town was
an important posting station from its position on the Great North Road.
The immense range of stabling at the back of the famous old “George Inn”
sufficiently testifies to the amount of coaching and posting traffic
which passed through Stamford during the period in which these were the
recognised methods of travelling. The fact that the main line of the
Great Northern Railway was taken through Peterborough, instead of through
Stamford as was first contemplated, resulted in the latter town being
left for a time somewhat in a back-water, though at the present time the
railway facilities are admirable. The rapidly increasing use of motor
vehicles seems likely to revive to some extent the conditions of the
old coaching days; but, like many another venerable and historic town,
Stamford seems to have wrapped herself in an atmosphere of dignified
repose which even the clamorous passage through her main streets of a
stream of turbulent automobiles appears powerless to disturb.

In bringing these memories of old Stamford to a close, the writer
is only too conscious that he has been able to do but scant justice
to his subject. If, however, any reader be tempted hereby to visit
this fascinating old town and thus to supply by his own observation
and research all that in these pages is lacking of historical and
topographical description, assuredly he will not be disappointed.




TATTERSHALL CASTLE AND CHURCH

BY THE EDITOR


The ancient castles of this country, almost without exception, are full
of interest to all sorts and conditions of men and women. The remote
antiquity of the rude hill-top fortresses of Cornwall, Wiltshire,
and Wales; the huge earthworks of Old Sarum; the story of a gallant
defence like Newark; the close association with history of the Tower of
London, and with the magic of romance like Conisboro’, Kenilworth, and
Carlisle, find devotees for each. Often, too, castles are among the most
picturesque objects of picturesque scenery, as Manor Bier, Dunolly, and
Tantallon may testify; while to the archæologist they present a world of
interest as their plans, their builders, and their history are discussed,
occasionally with a wordy vigour which recalls the fights their walls
have witnessed.

Few indeed of these attractions can be claimed for Tattershall. A huge
square pile of perhaps the most admirable mediæval brickwork in the
kingdom (its only real rival being Hurstmonceaux), it can scarcely be
called picturesque; its military history is of the slightest, and its
plan and general arrangements are fairly well known. Still, from the
great architectural charm of its construction and the many and various
noble families who have been concerned in its building and possession, no
“Memorials of old Lincolnshire” would be complete without some notice of
its history.

The word Tattershall is defined by Mr. Streatfield as meaning the house
or hall of Teitr, a Scandinavian name, signifying blithe or gay, thus
showing that before the Norman Conquest there probably was a Norse or
Danish dwelling on this spot.

But in Domesday it only appears as Thorp (now Tattershall Thorpe, a
hamlet half a mile away on the road to Kirkstead). This manor was
given by William the Conqueror to one of his attendant knights called
Eudo, son of Spirewic. His son, Hugh Fitz-Eudo, who was also called Le
Breton, erected the neighbouring Cistercian Abbey of Kirkstead in 1139.
A small fragment, part of the south transept apparently, alone is left,
reminding one of the stately remains at Kirkstall and Roche, by its
unadorned simplicity of style, which distinguished the early buildings
of the Cistercian, itself a reformed branch of the Benedictine Order.
The chapel (_Capella extra portas_, as it is termed), a few yards south
of the abbey ruins, is described elsewhere in this volume, and is a
most delightful and dainty specimen of Early English architecture. It
contains the earliest wooden screen work (after that in the loft above
the altar at Compton, Surrey) in the kingdom, and a Purbeck marble figure
of an armed knight, which with its barrel helmet with perforations for
the eyes, no breathing holes, the general character of the armour,
and the foliage beneath the head, is dated somewhat between the years
1200 and 1225, and is most probably the effigy of Robert de Tatesale
and Kirkstead (a grandson of Hugh le Breton) who died in 1212. In 1220
he obtained from King John, by present of a well-trained goshawk, a
licence for a market on Fridays for Tattershall. The cross still exists,
with arms of Tattershall and Cromwell on it. His son, also a Robert,
obtained a licence from King Henry III. in 1230 to erect a castle of
stone in Tattershall:—“Pro Roberto de Tatteshale—Rex concessit Roberto de
Tatteshale quod libere et sine impedimento unam domum de petra et calce
firmari faciat apud manerium de Tatteshal: et mandatum est vice comiti
Linc. per literas clauses quod ipsam dictam domum firmare permittat
sicut praedictum est. Teste ut supra.”—(Patent Roll, fifteenth year of
the reign of King Henry III. m. 2.) Nine years afterwards he obtained
the same King’s leave to embattle this house (“quod possit kernellare
mansum suum.”—Patent Roll, 23 Henry III. m. 12). No remains of this
castle are known to exist now; it seems doubtful whether some portions
may not have endured into the early years of the last century, but this
point will be more fully dealt with later on. If this were not so, then
probably the first castle—as far as regards its masonry at least, for
the mounds and moats are remnants of its original fortifications—was
entirely swept away when the second castle was rising on its site in
all its whilom magnificence. The third Robert de Tattershall married
Mabel, eldest sister and co-heir of Hugh de Albini, fifth Earl of
Sussex and Arundel, and his grandson, the fifth Robert, was summoned
to Parliament in 1297 as the first Baron de Tateshale, and died in the
following year. His son, the sixth Robert, died in 1303, and the seventh
Robert in 1305, without any children. So that three aunts—Emma, who
married Adam de Cailli, and died in 1306; Joan, who married Robert de
Driby, and died in 1330; and Isabella, who married Sir John de Orreby,
became co-heirs. Tattershall seems to have become part of the share
of the second one, Joan. By her marriage with Robert de Driby she had
four children—Simon (died in 1323), Robert, John, and Alice. The third
son, Sir John de Kirketon (Kirton in Holland), apparently acquired and
held, from certainly 1334 till his death in 1367, the castle and manor
of Tattershall. And in Kirton there is still an entrance-gate which has
on it the arms of Tattershall quartered with those of Cromwell, showing
that this connection was kept up after his death. Owing to the deaths of
her brothers without leaving any children the Tattershall property came
through the family of Bernak by the marriage of Alice with Sir William
de Bernak (who died in 1339), and she herself died in 1341. Their eldest
son, Sir John de Bernak, had married Joan, sister and eldest co-heiress
of Robert Marmion, second Baron of Winteringham. This is another link
between Lincolnshire and this noble family besides Scrivelsby, which,
with “Tamworth tower and town,” had been granted to Robert de Marmion,
Lord of Fontenoy, by William the Conqueror, and the parish of Coningsby,
only a mile away from Tattershall, was Marmion property also. Sir John de
Bernak and his wife had two sons—John who died in youth, William who died
in 1359—and a daughter, Maud or Matilda. Consequently the reversion of
the Tattershall property came in 1367 to her and her husband, Sir Ralph
Cromwell. As pointed out above, the property being in possession of Sir
John de Kirketon till this year 1367, the Bernaks can never have actually
possessed it, though, curiously enough, William, brother and heir of
John, son of John Bernak, has the barony of Tateshale (put wrongfully
in Norfolk) twice attributed to him in an inquisition post-mortem in
1360, the thirty-fourth year of King Edward III. The family of Cromwell
seems to have been settled in the villages of Cromwell and Lambley in
Nottinghamshire, a few miles north-east of Nottingham, from about the
year 1166; but I know of no connection between this family and those of
Thomas Cromwell, the “Malleus monachorum,” and of Oliver Cromwell, the
Protector. The Cromwells had already, in the thirteenth century, been
allied with the family of Marmion, as the fourth Ralph Cromwell married
Mazera, second daughter and co-heiress of Philip de Marmion. The ninth
Ralph Cromwell, knight (son of Sir Ralph Cromwell and Amicia de Beler,
daughter and heiress of Roger de Beler, co. Leicester), who married
Maud Bernak, was summoned to Parliament as Baron Cromwell in 1375 and
1398, in which year he died, his widow surviving till the year 1419. The
second Ralph, Lord Cromwell of Tattershall, died in 1416. His son, also
Ralph, was Lord Treasurer of England from 1433-1443, a peer of great
wealth and influence, and the builder of the existing castle and church
of Tattershall. Another building of his in stone (no doubt because it
was easy to procure, as brick was at Tattershall) has been described
and illustrated in a previous volume of this series, _i.e._ Wingfield
Manor House, Derbyshire. He also held the appointment in 1435 (after
the death of the Duke of Bedford, Regent of France, at Paris) of Master
of the Mews, and Falconer to the King. He married Margaret, daughter of
John, Baron Deincourt, and his wife Joan, daughter and heiress of Lord
Grey de Rotherfield, also connected with the family of Marmion. Lord
Cromwell died in 1455 (his wife having predeceased him in 1454), and left
no family. They both were buried in Tattershall Church. Consequently, his
two nieces, daughters of his sister Maud (who had married Sir Richard
Stanhope of Rampton, Notts, and who had died in 1455), became his
co-heiresses. Of these Maud married, first, the distinguished soldier,
Robert, sixth Lord Willoughby d’Eresby, who died in 1452, having had no
children by her; next, Sir Thomas Nevile, third son of Richard, first
Earl of Salisbury, who was killed at the battle of Wakefield in 1460,
also leaving no family; and thirdly, Sir Gervase Clifton, of Clifton,
Notts, who was killed at Tewkesbury in 1471. Maud herself died in 1497
and was buried in Tattershall Church. Joan married Sir Humphrey Bouchier,
third son of the first Earl of Essex, who was summoned to Parliament
(_jure uxoris_) in 1461 as Baron Cromwell, and who was killed at the
battle of Barnet in 1471. She married, secondly, Sir Robert Ratcliffe,
and died in 1472, leaving no children. She also was buried in Tattershall
Church.

According to the poet Skelton, King Edward IV. possessed Tattershall, as
he makes him say—

    “I made the Tower strong—I wist not why—
    Knew not for whom, I purchased Tattersall;”

and his badge, the falcon and fetterlock, may be seen in the east window
of the church.

The property, being forfeited to the Crown, was bestowed in 1487, by
King Henry VII., on his mother Margaret, Countess of Richmond. King
Henry VIII. granted it, in 1520, to Charles Brandon, Duke of Suffolk,
upon his marriage with Mary, the King’s sister. In default of heirs,
it again reverted to the King. In 1551 King Edward VI. granted the
castle and manor to Edward Fines, Lord Clinton, who was created Earl of
Lincoln in 1572. His great-grandson, Theophilus, fourth Earl, in 1649
petitioned Parliament for compensation for the damage done to Tattershall
Castle during the civil war. Tradition has assigned the dismantling and
unroofing of the castle to the time just after the battle of Winceby,
near Horncastle, in 1643, and W. A. Nicholson[92] has recorded several
inscriptions on its walls, of the years 1642, 1644, 1645, and 1648,
showing that it probably was not in good keeping about that period. It
continued in the possession of the male line of the Earls of Lincoln
till the year 1692, when Bridget (only daughter and heiress of Hugh
Boscawen by Margaret his wife, fifth daughter and eventually co-heiress
of Theophilus Clinton, Earl of Lincoln) married Hugh Fortescue of Wear
Gifford, North Devon (one of the most charming manor houses imaginable),
an ancestor of the present noble proprietor, the Earl Fortescue.

We may now turn our attention to the past and present state of this once
magnificent residence. It was built, as mentioned above, by Ralph, the
third Baron Cromwell, of whom William of Worcester speaks as follows in
his _Itinerary_: “The Lord Treasurer expended in building the principal
and other towers of his Castle of Tattershall above four thousand marks;
his household there consisted of above a hundred persons, and his suite
when he rode to London commonly of one hundred and twenty horsemen,
and his annual expenditure was about five thousand pounds.” The date
of the castle’s erection can be told, within a very few years, by the
heraldry which is its most prevalent ornament. There is the coat of arms
of Tattershall (chequy _or_ and _gu._, a chief _erm._), which might be
used by any lord of Tattershall since heraldry began; of Driby (_arg._ 3
cinquefoils _gu._, a canton _gu._), which would date from the reign of
King Henry III.; those of Bernak (_erm._ a fesse _gu._) and of Cromwell
(_arg._ a chief _gu._ over all a bend _az._), from the reign of King
Richard II. (the first shield in the fireplace on the ground floor, i.e.
_gu._ 10 annulets _or_, has been supposed to be an early shield of the
Cromwell family), but the shields of Cromwell and Tattershall impaling
Deincourt (_az._ a fesse dancetté between 10 billets _or_) show that not
until after Lord Cromwell’s marriage with Margaret Deincourt could the
castle have been thus decorated, and, as there were no children of that
marriage, there could be no such union of arms after their deaths. Also,
the very frequent repetition of the Purse (with its double bags and the
motto, “N’aj je le droit?”), the badge of office, marks the period of
building as coinciding with that of Lord Cromwell’s tenure of the Lord
Treasurership, _i.e._ from 1433 to 1443. It is an interesting thought
for Lincolnshire folk that very probably a celebrated Lincolnshire man,
William Patten of Wainfleet, Bishop of Winchester, was the architect
of these “bricky towers”; the school at Wainfleet, also in brick, is
another token of his architectural skill in this material, as his work at
Winchester Cathedral and at Magdalen College, Oxford, testified in stone.
He was a great architect, a personal friend of Lord Cromwell’s, and was
one of his executors (another one being, curiously enough, Chief-Justice
Sir John Fortescue, an ancestor of the present proprietor); the
neighbouring church of Tattershall being unfinished at Lord Cromwell’s
death, William of Wainfleet helped to complete it, having probably
designed it also.

The plan of a mediæval castle was, generally speaking, as follows: There
was an outer wall surrounded by a ditch, over which a drawbridge would
give access to the main entrance. Then separated from the first by a
second ditch would be the second (the inner) wall. Both walls would be
strengthened by towers at suitable points. Within this inner ward, as
the space inside the inner wall was termed, the chief living rooms—the
barracks, so to speak—would stand. Finally, there would be the donjon
or keep, the strongest of the castle buildings, frequently erected on a
mound, and capable itself of withstanding for some time a hostile attack
even though the rest of the castle was in the enemy’s hands.

Tattershall Castle was defended by an incomplete outer moat, which,
starting from the north-east angle of the area, went along the north
and west sides, and communicated with the river Bain; there is still
some water in portions of this ditch. It probably was carried eastwards
so as to enclose the church, but there is a noticeable dip in the
ground on the eastern side of the castle area, which is probably the
same moat defending that portion of the castle. From a plate of the
castle published by Buck in 1727 (which is in the writer’s possession),
much knowledge can be gathered of the arrangements and buildings of
Tattershall at that date. The inner moat was complete, and the outer wall
which surrounded it, for the most part of brick, is in fair condition;
it was supplied with water from the outer moat by a culvert piercing the
outer bank and wall about the middle of the north side, which is plainly
visible, and around which the bank is faced with stone. This, according
to Buck, was protected by a strong and tall tower over it. On the east
side of the moat may be seen a blocked up arch, which was connected with
the outer moat at that point, and ran eastwards beneath the church to
that part of the moat. The main entrance to the castle was evidently a
little north of this arch, much in the line of the present pathway, for
Buck plants a large gateway with two towers and portcullis here, on the
inner side of the inner moat. Just outside and to the eastwards is a
brick building of two storeys, and of exactly similar work to that of the
rest of the castle. This house, which was probably used for guard-rooms,
had at the north-west angle a turret staircase, and the only door on the
ground floor was originally on the southern end, opening on to a terrace
wall which defended this part of the castle. The outer wall was about
twelve feet high (judging from the mark where it joined the house), with
arched recesses and loopholes, and over all a platform with a crenellated
parapet. A brick turret was at the south end of it, and the ruins of
this and the drain into the moat are still visible. On the south side of
the inner moat can be seen some stone corbels in the brick-facing wall,
which were evidently to support a drawbridge. On the west side of the
outer wall is a large brick one-storeyed building (with little arched
cupboards or recesses in the walls, as will be found elsewhere), probably
a guard-room, and the ruins of a strong tower farther to the north and
east, on the edge of the outer moat.

On the south of the inner court is a large piece of ground, elevated
and surrounded by a stone wall, except on its eastern side; this was
probably an adjunct of the original castle, and was used for tilting and
other exercises. It was approached doubtless by the drawbridge already
mentioned. Eastward it joins a still larger portion of ground on the
south of the church—the castle garden or pleasaunce. This is walled in
partially with brick, and has had two doorways in the south side. In
the spandrils of one were the coats of arms of Cromwell and Tattershall
quarterly, and that of Deincourt.

The inner ward now is nearly flat, and contains no buildings save the
great tower or keep, having unfortunately been levelled about 1790.
Besides the entrance-gate already mentioned, we find from Buck’s view
that in 1727 there still existed the eastern portion of the chapel,
showing an apse of which two perpendicular windows were visible, and a
great part of the dining-hall, which had a fine bay window and five other
windows. To the left of the keep, and in the left foreground, are some
buildings which very possibly were the remains of the castle of King
Henry III.’s date.

Next we come to the chief feature of the place, the so-called Castle,
which in reality was only the representative of the keep of earlier days.
The inner ward wall joined it at the north-east and south-east towers,
where the marks are plainly visible; the north, west and south sides were
defended by the outer moat. It is 87 feet long by 69 feet wide, and the
parapet of its angle turrets is no less than 112 feet above the level
of the ground at its base. It is almost entirely constructed of small
red bricks, traditionally supposed to have been brought from Flanders,
though there is no reason why they should not have been made in the
county. The walls externally have patterns, chequers, and lozenges in
blue-black bricks upon their surface, and the groining of brick in the
upper rooms is most delicately moulded, and may well serve as a lesson
to us, even in this twentieth century, in artistic workmanship. On this
work still exists considerable traces of pink plaster with red lines, to
imitate brickwork—a curious case of carrying coals to Newcastle! Local
stone (Ancaster probably) is used for the windows (which retain most
of their tracery and mullions, except those of the ground floor), the
machicolations, the battlements (in one place cement has been used for
repairs), and the very admirably executed chimney-pieces, which will
receive special attention later on. There are brick relieving arches
over all the windows, doorways, and fireplaces in the castle. The large
windows, which are more evident on the west, the exposed side, than
on that facing the inner ward, show that the great change in warfare
was in progress—that “villainous saltpetre” was altering the type of
fortification from a massive tall keep like Rochester or Conisboro’, or
the Edwardian castles of Harlech or Conway, to low-walled earthworks,
such as those which still surround Berwick, and which were erected in the
“spacious times of great Elizabeth”; also, these windows show that the
nobleman’s castle was changing into the nobleman’s palace or mansion, of
which, again, the Elizabethan buildings, such as Longleat, Hatfield, and
Haddon Hall, are the finest examples.

[Illustration: TATTERSHALL CASTLE, FROM THE SOUTH-WEST.]

The basement storey contains a large central room, with a very flat
arched ceiling, a room in each of the towers, except the south-eastern
one (which contains the staircase), and a room in the thickness of the
eastern wall, which has similar arched recesses in its north and south
walls to those already described. There has been a well in the centre of
this basement area. A staircase leads down to the central room from the
outside of the east wall.

There seem to have been no less than forty-eight separate apartments,
four of these being very large (about 38 feet long by 22 feet wide and 17
feet high), and occupying the centre of the building one over another.

That on the ground-floor may have been the common hall or hall of
entrance; it is entered by a door in the east wall, and has four large
windows, which have lost their tracery and mullions, two in the western
side, and one at each end, and an exceedingly fine stone fireplace in the
eastern wall. Its arch is of ogee shape, well moulded, much flattened,
the ogee ending in a finial above the upper battlemented edge, which has
small pilasters with capitals at each end. The heraldic decoration is as
follows, reading from left to right:—Cromwell (ancient?), the treasurer’s
purse, a lion rampant (for D’Albini), treasurer’s purse, Marmion,
Bernak, treasurer’s purse, Cromwell and Tattershall impaling Deincourt,
treasurer’s purse, Cromwell and Tattershall quarterly. In the lower line
come treasurer’s purse, barry of ten (if Cailli, it should be barry of
eight; it is sometimes assigned to Clifton, but it does not agree with
the shield of Clifton of Buckenham[93] who married Elizabeth, sister of
the second Baron Cromwell, or of Clifton of Clifton,[94] Maud Stanhope’s
third husband), treasurer’s purse, Deincourt, Driby, treasurer’s purse,
Grey of Rotherfield, and treasurer’s purse. In the middle, beneath the
point of the ogee, is the shield of Cromwell, much defaced.

The room on the first floor might have been the hall of state or the
audience chamber. Approach to it is gained by a newel staircase, the
steps being stone, in the south-east turret, which begins a few feet
above the level of the ground, and ends at the fourth storey, the
ground-floor large room having had an entrance, now blocked up, from
its south-east corner into this staircase. The hand rail, continuous
and ingeniously moulded in stone, flush with the wall, is noticeable. A
similar one, but slightly projecting, is in the staircase of the Alnwick
Tower in the Bishop’s Palace, Lincoln; another in the staircase to the
crypt in Grantham Church; and another, of much later date, in Kirby Hall.

The large room on this storey has three windows with excellent
Perpendicular tracery, and the two western ones have the recess ribbed
and vaulted; there is no window opening through to the north, as a
chamber has been constructed in the thickness of the wall. The fireplace,
which is in the east wall, has a well-moulded depressed arch, with
amusing grotesques in the spandrils on either side and at the side of
the circles, reminding one of the hard-working creations of Dicky Doyle
on the cover of _Punch_. The pilasters and battlemented top are much
the same as in the lower fireplace, but its chief ornament is a row of
heraldic shields and badges in circles across its front. First comes the
familiar purse, then Tattershall, St. George and the Dragon, Cromwell
and Tattershall impaling Deincourt, Cromwell and Tattershall quarterly,
on a shield couché, with two savage men as supporters, on an esquire’s
helmet a cap of maintenance inflamed. Next comes a representation under
an embattled arch of a lion being rent asunder by a man, a feat which
was related of Hugh de Nevile, who served in the Crusades under King
Richard I. It does not seem quite clear why this achievement of a Nevile
should appear here, though, as we have seen, Maud Stanhope married a
Nevile as her second husband. Then comes a lion rampant for D’Albini,
and the treasurer’s purse. The spaces between the roundels above are
occupied with shields of Bernak, Driby, Cromwell (one defaced), Cromwell,
Tattershall, and Deincourt below, with the treasurer’s purse. About the
end of the eighteenth century this fireplace was bricked up and opened
at the back, to be used for the room in the eastern wall, where dwelt
a pensioner, whose duty it was to be in readiness to light a cresset
beacon-fire on the south-east tower in case of invasion.

The large room on the second floor was perhaps the state bedroom, and has
three beautiful windows; a chamber in the thickness of the south wall
preventing a similar window in that wall. The fireplace is of much the
same general character as the last one, but has the spandrils filled with
foliage, and the place of the roundels is taken by ten panels, ornamented
with foliated tracery, making altogether an exceedingly delicate
architectural composition. Alternating with the treasurer’s purse are
the shields of Bernak, Deincourt, Driby, Cromwell, and Tattershall. In
the thickness of the eastern wall of this floor is a beautifully vaulted
gallery, 38 feet in length, vaulted in five compartments, with diagonal
ribs of brickwork; on the connecting bosses are the shields of Driby,
Tattershall, Deincourt, and Cromwell. It is lit by three fine mullioned
and traceried windows.

The large room on the third floor has very similar windows to the
others, and the fireplace also is very like that in the floor beneath;
but the treasurer’s purse has invaded the spandrils, and the shields
of Deincourt, Driby—one broken and defaced—Cromwell, and Bernak being
separated by small treasurer’s purses, are enclosed in eleven dainty
panels, with different tracery. On this floor in the eastern wall are
two rooms even more richly vaulted than the gallery below, the spandrils
being filled in with quatrefoils of moulded brickwork, enriched with the
shields of Tattershall, Cromwell, Deincourt, and D’Albini (or Beler).

The floors of these great rooms were constructed of timber, and
plastered; each floor resting on four great massive girders of oak, the
upper one having a lead roof. Till a few years ago there were still
four beams remaining _in situ_, but after the castle was struck by
lightning, and one beam was thrown down, the others were taken down to
avoid the chances of any accident. The lightning seems to have struck
the north-east tower (which alone had kept its conical roof), and jumped
across to the western wall, where it tore out the external footings of
one window on each floor, till it reached the ground.

A very noticeable feature of Tattershall Castle is the covered gallery,
well supplied with loopholes, which runs from turret to turret, partly
projecting over the machicolations of the walls, having had above a
parapeted and embattled platform. These galleries upon the machicolations
are not uncommon in the châteaux of France. Visitors to the region of
the Loire will remember good instances of this feature in Langeais,
Azay-le-Rideau, and de L’Islette. A small staircase in the thickness of
the wall of the south-eastern turret continues from the large circular
staircase to the top of the turret. The turrets are battlemented, and
have brick-arched machicolations. They were in Buck’s time apparently
all roofed in with conical spirelets, terminating in fleurs-de-lys.
All these roofs now are gone. In these turrets are fireplaces, for, no
doubt, partly, the warder’s comfort, but also, possibly, for providing a
prompt supply of boiling oil or lead “or something humorous” wherewith
to discomfort the adversary beneath. And both in turrets and elsewhere
in the buildings the necessary garde-robes may be found. The chimney
stacks, on the east side particularly, must have added to the appearance
of the tower, as they were originally considerably higher than they are
now. Excepting the lightning stroke few modern events connected with the
castle have been more interesting than the fall of a lad of nine years
old, on June the 2nd, 1879, from the top wall of the keep to the floor
inside, a distance of 76 feet. He came off with a dislocated hip and
other bruises; but, like Joan of Arc’s 60 feet leap from Beaurevoir, “by
some miracle broke no bone in (his) body.”

It might be mentioned that the fireplaces, which have been rather
minutely described, are believed to have been carefully studied by Pugin
when he was engaged in designing the internal decoration and fittings of
the Houses of Parliament. About four miles north of Tattershall are the
remains of another tower—Tower-le-Moor—of the same date, construction,
and materials as Tattershall Castle. It was probably built by Lord
Cromwell as a hunting-box, and was about 60 feet high. Only one angle of
it exists now; considerably more is seen in Buck’s print of it in 1727.

Since this article was written, the property has been sold to Mr. Albert
Ball, J.P., of Nottingham, who is, I believe, quite sensible of the great
value to the nation of his new possession.


TATTERSHALL CHURCH

There are no indications existing at Tattershall of any earlier church
than the present one, at least above ground—for foundations have been
discovered beneath the south transept floor, which have no apparent
connection with the church as it now is—except perhaps the font, which,
as far as its base and stem is concerned, is of Decorated (_i.e._
fourteenth century) date. That there was an earlier church is certain
for the following reasons. In 1323 Joan de Driby wished to assign,
amongst other items, “the advowsons of the Church of the said Manor
of Tatreshale, &c., to Gilbert de Bernak, parson of the Church of
Tatishale,” &c. “The said church is worth twenty marks by the year.”
Also on the choir steps is the brass of a former steward of Ralph, Lord
Cromwell, _i.e._ Hugh de Gondeby, who died in 1411. And in the will of
the founder, Ralph, Lord Cromwell (of whom there has been much to say in
recording the history of the castle), dated 1451, it is directed that he
was to be buried in the middle of the choir of Tattershall Collegiate
Church, until the said church is rebuilt, and then to be removed and
buried in the middle of the new church, but so that no impediment be
placed in the way of going in or going out to those ministering around
the divine offices in the aforesaid choir. And in Bishop Alnwick’s
visitation of his cathedral in 1440[95] there is mention made of the
erection of the parish church into a collegiate one by the Treasurer of
England. The present building was, in part at least, erected by Ralph,
third Lord Cromwell, as a collegiate church dedicated in honour of the
Holy Trinity. He obtained a licence from the Crown in 1439 to endow it
for the support of seven priests, one of whom was to be the warden, six
secular clerks, and six choristers, and he also founded almshouses for
thirteen poor persons of either sex, to be under the supervision of the
warden of the college. The chaplains were to maintain divine service
perpetually, to pray for the King, alive or dead, and for the souls of
the founder, and of his grandmother, Dame Matilda Cromwell.

In 1519 Bishop Atwater visited Tattershall, and remarked that the
choristers were only taught to sing, whereas they ought also to be
instructed in grammar, and he noticed that the chaplains were in the
habit of dressing like laymen, so he ordered them in future to dress as
priests, according to their statutes. The seal of the college represented
the Trinity in a canopied niche, beneath being a shield of arms, Cromwell
and Tattershall quarterly. The college was dissolved in 1545, and was
granted to Charles Brandon, Duke of Suffolk, the King’s brother-in-law,
to whom the adjacent castle and manor had come in 1520. The buildings
of this college, which were on the south side of the church, have
disappeared. The almshouses, on the north side of the church, are
probably on their original site.

The church, which is situated about eighty yards east of the castle, is a
large and very spacious cruciform structure of stone (probably Ancaster,
which has weathered well, and looks in many places as though it had been
worked a year or two ago), consisting of nave, with aisles, choir, north
and south transepts, a north porch, doorways in the west and north aisle
of nave, south transept, and door in choir, and western tower. There have
been cloisters on the south side of the choir to which this door gives
entrance, and two porches corresponding to that existing on the north
side, and the other at the south end of the south transept.

It is 180 feet long, the transepts together are 100 feet in length,
the nave 60 feet wide, the chancel 26 feet, and the transepts 20 feet.
Over the entrance to the north porch is a niche for a statue, below a
handsome cross, and above a shield, with the coat of arms of William of
Wainfleet, Bishop of Winchester, to whom some part of the architectural
design of the castle has been attributed (he is supposed to have finished
this church after the founder’s death), _i.e._ fusilly ermine and sable,
and on a chief sable, three lilies slipped. Over the south porch was a
similar shield according to Holles; in the windows above both porches
was the inscription: “Orate pro anima Radulphi nuper domini de Cromwell
et Tateshall, Thesaurarii Anglie et fundatoris hujus Collegii.” On the
west side of the door of the north porch is a holy water stoup. Over
the east window of the choir is another niche, probably for the Holy
Trinity. The tower has a fine square-headed western doorway beneath a
band of panels containing blank shields, a five-light window above,
then a small square-headed light, and three-light belfry windows. The
parapet is now plain, with crocketed angle pinnacles, which end, below
the parapet, in double angular buttresses, a feature not uncommon in
Perpendicular towers, but not much to be admired—especially here, as it
makes the tower look rather low and squat. There is a staircase in the
south-west angle of the tower, leading also on to the aisle roof. At the
junction of the choir and south transept is a circular turret, in which
is a staircase from the pulpitum or choir screen, up to the transept
and nave roofs: it has been higher, and probably was used, as in so many
other Lincolnshire churches, as a Sanctus bell-turret. The first great
impression gained on entering the chancel is its exceeding lightsomeness,
the window surface is very extensive, compared with the wall space, and
unfortunately, except in the east window, all the coloured glass is gone.
This came about in 1759, from the then Lord Fortescue giving the then
Earl of Exeter the glass from the windows to put in St. Martin’s Church,
Stamford,[96] on condition that the Tattershall windows should be glazed
with plain glass. This condition was not observed for many years, and
the interior of the church, particularly of the choir, suffered terribly
from exposure and neglect. The windows of the nave and transepts, of
four bays, are of good design, as is the clerestory range over nave and
transepts, of three lights, but the north and south transept end windows
are very fine, and of almost identical pattern with those in King’s
College Chapel, Cambridge, except that the latter have five bays, and
Tattershall six, and at Tattershall, throughout all the windows, there is
a complete absence of cusps.

[Illustration: “PULPITUM” OF TATTERSHALL COLLEGIATE CHURCH, FROM THE
EAST.]

The small amount of painted glass that was left has been collected
together in the east window of the choir, where can be recognised the
Treasurer’s badge, and the shield of Tattershall, &c. A few remains exist
of the stalls, which were dated 1424, in an inscription on them, and
their stone quatrefoiled base (similar to that of the stalls in Lincoln
Minster) is now placed in the nave. There are fine sedilia and a piscina
in the south wall of the choir, and angels on the corbels of its roof,
holding shields with instruments of the Passion on them. There are two
interesting wooden pulpits, and a portion of a cornice of wood along
the top of the wall in the nave above the south aisle windows. In the
north transept are now carefully fixed the series of fine monumental
brasses—one to Ralph, Lord Treasurer Cromwell (the founder of the
church), and his wife; to William Moor, second Provost of the College; to
Joan, Lady Cromwell; to Matilda, Lady Willoughby de Eresby; to another
Provost of the College, possibly John Gyger; to William Symson, chaplain
of Edward Hevyn, who was steward to the Countess of Richmond, and who
founded a chantry in this transept, where is a piscina (as there is also
in the south transept). A small brass to the memory of Hugh de Gondeby,
1411, is in the centre of the choir pavement. The fine and interesting
choir screen and loft (pulpitum) is dealt with at length in another
chapter by the writer.




THE SEPULCHRAL BRASSES OF LINCOLNSHIRE

BY THE REV. G.E. JEANS, M.A., F.S.A.


I propose in this paper to establish the point that Lincolnshire has
not hitherto been given sufficient credit among antiquaries in general
for its share in the great national treasure of monumental brasses.
Brasses are in themselves among the most beautiful and the most durable
of monumental records. They can reproduce details of armour and costume
with a delicacy which is scarcely possible in the most sumptuous stone
or marble monuments. The great majority are of such convenient size
that they can be rubbed on a single large sheet of paper; and, unlike
altar-tombs, can be studied all at once. And furthermore, for these and
other reasons, brasses have long attracted a special body of devotees
among antiquaries, some of whom will rub and record a brass with loving
zeal, while they will hardly look at the church which contains it, or
at any of its other records in tomb or window. Thus it may be that our
brasses have been better examined and figured than any other form of
monumental effigy.

Nevertheless, I may claim to have shown in my list of Lincolnshire
brasses, republished from _Lincolnshire Notes and Queries_, that a good
deal still remained unexplored in this and, therefore, probably in
other counties. Brass-lovers (no convenient single name has yet been
invented) have naturally turned to the counties where brasses are to be
found in almost every church, such as Norfolk, Suffolk, and Kent, or the
northern and eastern ring of London; and the best of these have been
splendidly illustrated in different forms by J.S. Cotman, the artist
(1819), Mr. E.M. Beloe, the Rev. E. Farrer, W.D. Belcher, and others.
None but casual single illustrations of the Lincolnshire brasses have
been published. But I should think that none of those who saw Mr. William
Scorer’s magnificent collection of rubbings of them, at the meeting of
the Archæological Institute at Lincoln in July 1909, could doubt the
claim of Lincolnshire to a much higher place than has been generally
granted hitherto among the counties of brasses. The great long series
in Boston Church, and the glorious, though fearfully maltreated, one in
Tattershall Church were seen on that occasion _in situ_, and there is
another great display in the county at All Saints’, Stamford, besides the
many instances of one noble brass, or sometimes two, as at Spilsby and
Gunby St. Peter’s. One of the most learned and accurate brass-lovers I
have ever met, the late Rev. C. G. R. Birch, told me that in his opinion
Lincolnshire, in the proportion of _valuable_ brasses to the whole number
remaining, stood perhaps first among the counties.

       *       *       *       *       *

I will now place the brasses under different categories to show how well
Lincolnshire would come out in a County Championship in almost every
class.

First would come the _series_, say of not less than six, in a single
church. These are of course rare everywhere. Even in a county so
overflowing with brasses as Norfolk, only about half-a-dozen churches
would be able to qualify. Lincolnshire, as I have just said, has three.
That in Tattershall Church is beyond all doubt one of the finest series
in England, in spite of its heartrending maltreatment. There are seven
brasses here, of which no less than four are of the first rank, namely,
the great one of Lord Treasurer Cromwell, those of his two nieces—Joan,
Lady Cromwell, and Matilda, Lady Willoughby d’Eresby—and the brass of a
Provost of the College. Besides these there are two interesting brasses
of priests and one of a civilian, 1411. Every brass in this noble set
deserves study.

Next comes Boston, which, as being almost the greatest of English ports
in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, having a special connection
with the Low Countries, and being one of the great centres of merchant
guilds, must at one time have been among the richest in England in
this kind of memorial. Here there are no less than seventeen brasses,
including what are little more than fragments, ten of which are effigies
or the remains of figure brasses. Two of these, those of Walter Pescod
and his wife and the unnamed priest of about 1400, are of the first rank,
and exceedingly valuable for the figures of saints in the canopy shafts
of the former and the orphreys of the latter.

All Saints’, Stamford, has eight brasses, six of which are with effigies,
one very fine and all interesting.

We turn now to the _earliest_ brasses, which are of course very valuable.
The first period in most books is taken to be the reigns of the first
two Edwards, 1272-1327; and of this period there are only nineteen
or perhaps twenty in all England, of which Lincolnshire has two, at
Buslingthorpe and Croft. Everybody knows that the premier brass is Sir
John d’Aubernoun’s at Stoke d’Abernon, Surrey, because that is dated
1277. But the extremely interesting half effigy of Sir Richard de
Boselyngthorp, unfortunately not dated, is certainly not much later than
Sir John d’Aubernoun, and, as I suggested and Mr. Macklin agrees, may be
even a little earlier. Buslingthorpe is a very remote church, and there
is no rectory house near, so it is to be hoped that some special care is
taken about this precious monument. The one at Croft is somewhat similar,
but is generally regarded as from ten to twenty years later.

Taking now the classes of people who are represented in effigies, we may
regard them as mainly coming under five heads—knights or noblemen in
armour, priests, ladies, merchants, or judges. How does the county come
out in these?

[Illustration: BRASS OF MATILDA, LADY WILLOUGHBY DE ERESBY (1460?), IN
TATTERSHALL CHURCH.]

In _Knights_ there is a fairly representative sequence. Beginning with
the Buslingthorpe and Croft brasses just mentioned, we have then Sir
Henry Redford at Broughton, and Sir Andrew Luttrell at Irnham (fourteenth
century); Lord Willoughby at Spilsby; and others at Laughton, Gunby,
Covenham St. Bartholomew, South Kelsey, and Holbeach (early fifteenth);
Robert Hayton at Theddlethorpe (1424); the grand brass of Lord Cromwell
at Tattershall (1455); Henry Rochforth at Stoke Rochford (1470); Sir
William Skypwyth at South Ormsby (1482); and several of the sixteenth
century, as at Norton Disney, Ashby Puerorum (two), Horncastle,
Harrington, and Hainton (a tabard).

In _Priests_ the list is only moderate, but it is headed by the fine
one at Boston in the sacrarium (_c._ 1400), and the grand late one of a
Provost at Tattershall, whom I take to be John Gyger (_c._ 1510). There
are two other priests at Tattershall—William Moor (1456) and William
Symson (1519). Another interesting brass of a priest is that of William
de Lound (_c._ 1370) at Althorpe in the Isle of Axholme. This was covered
up by coats of paint daubed over the altar-tomb on which it was set, so
that it was only discovered at the restoration of the church. The brass
of a priest in cope (_c._ 1490), at Fiskerton, is interesting as having
been lost, but fortunately re-discovered by Bishop Trollope in a shop at
Lincoln. The rest are unimportant.

In _Ladies_ the county would claim high rank if it were only for the
beautiful brasses of Lord Cromwell’s nieces and co-heiresses, Joan,
Lady Cromwell, and Matilda, Lady Willoughby d’Eresby. Lady Cromwell’s
effigy, with long flowing hair kept back by a jewelled bandeau (which
looks as if the brass had been engraved before she was married), I regard
as the most graceful figure on a brass in all England. Both are fine
studies of dress. Their date cannot be accurately fixed, since they are
certainly earlier than 1497, the year of Lady Willoughby’s death; but
in my list, in _Lincolnshire Notes and Queries_, I have given reasons
for believing that they were engraved between 1460 and 1480. The next
finest is of another Lady Willoughby, Margery, who died in 1391; it
is in the Willoughby Aisle, now kept locked, in Spilsby Church. There
is another effigy of a lady with flowing hair, Elizabeth FitzWilliam,
1522, at Mablethorpe. A fine figure of a lady, _c._ 1400, was discovered
at Gedney in 1890. She was probably of the Roos family, who held the
manor. She wears the nebular head-dress, with hair flowing from under
it. The only other lady with costume of much interest is one, probably
a Skypwyth, at South Ormsby. Ladies represented with their husbands are
seldom very elaborately treated as to their costume. About 1480 they had
the “butterfly” head-dress, which one would suppose must have been as
annoying to their husbands and brothers as the modern lady’s gigantic hat.

Turning now to _Civilians_, Lincolnshire has several brasses of great
merchants, though more might be expected in what was in the Middle
Ages one of the chief trading counties with the Continent. The finest
of these probably was the great brass of Walter Pescod, 1398, now in
the sacrarium of Boston Church, though it has lost the wife’s effigy
altogether, the feet of the merchant himself, the inscription (happily
recorded by Gervase Holles), and part of the superb canopy. For a study
of saints in the smaller figures it is, though out of its true place,
now happily placed for comparison with the contemporary priest on the
other side of the altar. The next important brass of a merchant is that
of William Browne, the founder of the great hospital at Stamford, in All
Saints’ Church there, where there are others of the same family also.
Simon Seman the vintner, standing on two wine-casks, in St. Mary’s,
Barton-on-Humber; and the two Lyndewodes, father and brother of the
author of _Provinciale_, at Lynwode. And if judges are to be counted with
civilians, the interesting brass of William de Lodyngton, Justice of the
King’s Bench of Common Pleas, in the rebuilt church of Gunby, close to
Burgh station, must not be omitted.

Now let us turn our attention to peculiar types of brasses, and see how
we stand in these. I will take three interesting types—cross brasses,
palimpsests, and brasses of local workmanship.

The _Cross_ is not, I should say, a type that one would wish to be
largely extended, as it seems to sacrifice the main object of the brass;
but that it is capable of much grace is shown by the beautiful though
mutilated cross at Grainthorpe, which stands on a rock in the sea, with
carefully drawn fishes of five kinds swimming round it.

Of _Palimpsests_, or brasses used a second time, there is one of the most
interesting in England at Norton Disney. This brass of the Disney family
is notable as a very late instance (_c._ 1580) of armour. The reverse
is the larger part of a plate with a long Dutch inscription relating to
the founding of a chantry with daily mass in a now destroyed church at
Middelburg in 1518. No doubt the brass was soon stolen, together with
the endowment of the mass, in the Reformation. But the interest does not
end here. Not many years ago it was found that the whole of this brass
is in England, the smaller portion having been used again for one of
the Dauntesay family, also _c._ 1580, at West Lavington in Wiltshire.
There are several others, including one at Boston, with a lady on each
face, and one of Sir Lionel Dymoke at Horncastle, which has a Flemish
inscription on the reverse.

_Provincial workmanship_ needs, of course, a good deal of technical
knowledge to detect. The immense majority of English brasses were made
by London artists, and the only provincial schools seem to have been in
Lincolnshire and Yorkshire. One small mark usually found in provincial
work is mentioned by Haines, namely, that the hands are held apart, one
on each side of the breast, as in Lord Willoughby’s brass at Spilsby.

I must here mention two very singular brasses to be found in the county.
I do not know of any instance of bodily infirmity commemorated except in
the curious brass of William Palmer, 1520, at Ingoldmells. He has beside
him a “stilt” or crutch, and in the inscription he is called, “William
Palmer wyth yᵉ stylt.”

The brass at Edenham is—or rather was, for it is now taken into the
church for safety—quite startling, being formerly on the west face of the
tower, forty feet from the ground. It is of an archbishop, and when the
Lincolnshire Architectural Society went to Edenham in 1888, and the brass
was there described by Bishop Trollope, I remember that much amusement
was caused by the episcopal figure looking so much like a rough portrait
of the good bishop himself. It may, however, be taken as certain that
this is not a sepulchral brass, but part of a representation of the giver
of the tower, _c._ 1500, since the rivets of another brass, the donor
kneeling, can be detected on the other side of the west window lower
down. It must then be of a saint, and so may be assumed to be St. Thomas
of Canterbury. It is, however, well worth mention here.

Lastly, I turn to the inscriptions. There are many rather curious ones
dotted about the county, but they are mostly too long to be worth
transcribing in full. I will give, therefore, two only, from Wrangle and
Lusby.

At Wrangle, on the tomb of John Reed, a merchant of the Staple of Calais,
and his wife, is a marginal inscription running round a large slab, which
has been broken in parts, but was copied by Marratt. The introduction of
the verse part is curiously abrupt, and seems to need some link. It runs:
“_They for man when yᵉ [winde blows make the mill grin]de. and ev. on thy
own soule have thou [a minde. that thou givest w]yth thy hande that shalt
thou finde. and yᵗ thou levys thy executors comys far behinde. do for
your slefe whill yᵉ have space. to pray ihu of m̅cy and grace i̅ heuen to
haue a place._”

[Illustration: JOHN LYNDEWODE AND HIS WIFE ALICE (1419) IN LYNWOOD
CHURCH.]

In the tiny church of Lusby, close to the battlefield of Winceby, there
is a small brass plate on a slab which bears, as far as I can make it
out, the date 1555. It has a pretty little inscription in verse as a
dialogue between a wife and a husband. It runs:

    “_My flesh in hope doth rest and slepe_
      _In earth here to remayne._
    _My spirit to Christ I gyve to kepe_
      _Till I do rise agayne._”

    “_And I wyth you in hope agre,_
      _Though I yet here abyde._
    _In full purpose if Goddes will be_
      _To ly down by your syde._”

I hope now that I have sufficiently proved my point as to the great
value and interest of the Lincolnshire brasses. Mr. Macklin in his small
work, _Monumental Brasses_, made a kind of tripos for the counties, in
which Lincolnshire, though taking honours, only won a third class. In
his larger and greatly improved book, _The Brasses of England_, in “The
Antiquary’s Library,” this list disappears, and I should be surprised
if he would not now raise the county to his second class. At any rate,
some twenty brasses of great importance or fine workmanship, together
with many rare or even unique instances of particular types, are amply
sufficient to establish a claim to considerable distinction.




ON MEDIÆVAL ROOD-SCREENS AND ROOD-LOFTS IN LINCOLNSHIRE CHURCHES

BY THE EDITOR


In many times and in many places religious men have loved to veil or
screen off those parts of their House of God which they considered more
particularly sacred, from the “profanum vulgus.” The veil of the Jewish
Temple, the veil which stretched across the Saxon chancel arch, the
chancel-screens from the earliest days of Gothic to our own in the Church
of England, the “Jubé” in France, Belgium, and Germany, the “screens and
ambones” of Italy, and the “Iconostasis” of the Greek Church (different
in position though it be), all testify to the widespread character of
this custom. The very word “chancel” itself is derived from the Latin
_cancelli_—a lattice-work or screen.

In the decrees of the Second Council of Tours, A.D. 557, “lay persons
were not to enter the chancel, which is divided off by screens, except to
partake of the sacrament of the altar.” A complete screen extended all
round the choir later on. Eusebius describes the choir of the Church of
the Apostles, erected by Constantine at Constantinople, as enclosed by
screens or trellis work, marvellously wrought: “Interiorem ædis partem
undique in ambitum circumductam, reticulato opere ex aere et auro affabre
facto convestivit.”[97] Professor Willis describes the screen of old
St. Peter’s at Rome as follows (and an engraving of it is also given by
Pugin): “In front of the steps (to the altar) were placed twelve columns
of Parian marble, arranged in two rows; these were of spiral form and
decorated with sculpture of vine leaves: the bases were connected by
lattice-work of metal or by walls of marble breast-high. The entrance was
between the central pillars, where the _cancelli_ or lattices were formed
into doors. Above these columns were laid beams or entablatures upon
which were placed images, candelabra, and other decorations; and indeed
the successive Popes seem to have lavished every species of decoration in
gold, silver, and marble work upon this enclosure and the crypt below.
The entire height, measured to the top of the entablature, was about 30
feet; the columns, with the connecting lattices and entablatures, formed,
in fact, the screen of the chancel.”[98] At San Clemente, at Rome, the
chancel is divided off by a screen wall all round, being 4 feet 6 inches
high; each ambo, or reading-desk for Epistle or Gospel, is in the middle
of the north and south walls and faces east. Between this choir and the
sanctuary is a cross wall of marble, 6 feet high, with an opening in
the centre. These existing screens are probably due to Adrian I., and
date from the year 790, but they are almost certainly on the original
lines.[99] At Giotto’s Chapel of the Arena, Padua, the chancel is formed
by marble screens on each side of the nave, leaving a broad entrance-way
between them, and enclosing about one-third of its length. Against the
west sides of these screens are altars, each with a small carved marble
reredos; whilst on the east are steps leading to the two ambones: that on
the north being a book-rest, carved in marble, and fixed with its face to
the east; that on the south of iron, and turning upon a pivot.

Thus even in Saxon times the choir of Canterbury, which extended into
the nave, was enclosed by a breast-high wall. And Gervase tells us of
the choir of Conrad (A.D. 1130), “that at the bases of the pillars there
was a wall built of marble slabs, which, surrounding the choir and
presbytery, divided the body of the church from its sides called aisles.”
The same choir of Canterbury is now enclosed by the very beautiful screen
built by Prior d’Estria. Rochester again has a solid stone wall round its
choir, and the same is the case at _Lincoln_ (though never a monastery).
“The choir, as a rule, was occupied,” says Dr. Jessopp, “exclusively by
the monks or nuns of the monastery. The servants, work-people, and casual
visitors who came to worship were not admitted into the choir; _they_
were supposed to be present only on sufferance. The church was built for
the use of the monks: it was their private place of worship.” And, as
we shall see presently, the screens were still more solid where there
happened to be a parish church in the nave.

Pugin, in his well-known work on the subject of rood-screens, points
out another reason for these walled-in choirs (besides the one just
mentioned), _i.e._ that they shut off in some degree the cold draughts
of air from the monks during their frequent and lengthy services in
buildings which at that time (and for many a century to come) were
not warmed at all. Later still the cathedrals, other than monastic,
like _Lincoln_, and collegiate churches like Southwell, followed suit
in separating off the choir from the nave. In all these cases, as a
rule, the screen was solid, but when the same movement spread to parish
churches, the chancel was divided off by a screen of open work, there
being no need for the N. and S. screens, as a rule (though Newark has
them), so that the congregation—here regarded as an integral part of the
worshippers—might see the altar and all the ceremonial. In such Saxon
churches as have retained their Saxon chancel arches, these are very
narrow, and originally in all probability were closed by a veil, more
or less completely. This is alluded to in an Anglo-Saxon Pontifical,
“extenso velo inter eos (_i.e._ clericos) et populum,” and by Durandus
(who was Bishop of Mende, a small city in the Lozère district of France
from 1286 to 1296), “interponatur velum aut murus inter clerum et
populum.” Later, when the use of the veil ceased, and these chancel
arches were felt to be, through their narrowness, a great obstruction to
the view from the nave into the choir, openings were made on each side to
partially circumvent this difficulty. At _Bracebridge_, near Lincoln, for
example, the chancel arch, exceedingly narrow (being only 5 feet wide),
is of Saxon date and has a round-headed opening—a hagioscope—on either
side.

The Lenten veil (a remnant of former use), which was hung across the
chancel between the screen and the altar, is alluded to in _Lincoln
Cathedral Statutes_, “velum pendere ante altare,” and at _Leverton_, as
“the veil of the temple hanging between the choir and the altar in Lent.”
At _Heckington_ and _Claypole_ still remain the hooks used for this
purpose.

But besides separating the clergy and laity, the western portion of the
screens, where they were solid, or the upper part where they were open,
served to support, or was in close relation to, a horizontal beam—the
rood-beam—which stretched across the chancel arch, and itself supported
the rood. This, of course, was a crucifix, and, as Fuller says, “when
perfectly made and with all the appurtenances thereof, had not only the
image of Our Saviour extended upon it, but the figures of the Virgin Mary
and St. John” (the former on the north at Our Saviour’s right hand, the
latter on the south side and so at His left).

It may be mentioned here that roods carved in stone have been found on
the outside of Saxon churches. Thus, on the west side of the porch at
_Branston_, near Lincoln, are the remains of such a sculpture under a
three-headed arch; also at _Marton by Stow_ a Saxon crucifix rudely
carved in stone was found during the restoration in 1892, and another
existed at Headbourn Worthy, Hants.

A Saxon or Runic cross was found in the north aisle in restoring
_Colsterworth Church_; and at _Barton on Humber_ (St. Peter’s), over the
inside of the eastern arch of the tower, is a stone slab with a face
carved in the upper part of it.

These roods of wood or metal were apparently early introduced into
churches, with or without the screens as mentioned before: “A.D. MXXIII.
Kanutus Rex dedit ecclesiæ Christi in Doroberniæ” (vel Duroverniæ =
Canterbury), “portum de Sandwico cum corona sua aurea quæ adhuc servatur
in capite crucis majoris in navi ejusdem ecclesiæ.”

Stigand again, who was buried at Winchester in 1069, according to
John of Exeter: “Magnam crucem ex argento cum ymaginibus argenteis in
pulpito ecclesiæ contulit.” Aldred, the last Saxon Archbishop of York
(1060-1069), erected “Supra ostium chori pulpitum aere, aere auro,
argento auro, mirabili opere Teutonico exornavit,” in Beverley Minster.
Mention is made of a black marble crucifix at Waltham in the time of
Canute, and the rood at Battle Abbey is spoken of as existing in 1095.
Gervase, in describing Lanfranc’s cathedral at Canterbury (1174), says:
“A screen with a loft (_pulpitum_) separated in a manner the aforesaid
tower” (the central one) “from the nave, and had in the middle and on the
side towards the nave the altar of the Holy Cross. Above the loft, and
placed across the church, was the beam, which sustained a great cross” (a
crucifix almost certainly), “two cherubim, and the images of St. Mary and
St. John the Apostle.”

Occasionally, as at Chipping Ongar, we find indications of a rood-beam
having been placed across the _east_ end of the chancel, immediately
above the altar, and, of course, carrying on it the rood. At _Stow_, in
the chancel, in the jambs of the side windows north and south of the
altar space, there was a fracture and displacement of the mouldings
exactly in the same place in each, no doubt to support a beam for the
crucifix.

In some cases these altar-screens were double walled, with a kind of
platform or gallery on the top, whereon the sacred relics could be
displayed, while the space between the walls served as a sacristy or
feretory. At _Lincoln Minster_, for instance, the original reredos-screen
was double, with a long narrow space, serving as a sacristy, between
the two screens lighted by the quatrefoils, still open in the back
screen wall, with aumbries, &c., in the walls, and a newel-stair at the
north-west corner leading to the tabernacle above. A similar arrangement,
according to the late Precentor Venables, of a narrow slip sacristy
behind the reredos may be seen at St. Nicholas’, Great Yarmouth, and at
Llantwit in South Wales. A somewhat similar example exists at Beverley
Minster; at the back (_i.e._ eastwards) of the altar-screen is a
platform, reached by a stair at the north end, and supported by three
elegant arches on shafts, with a vaulted roof, an excellent specimen of
Decorated work. At York Minster, again, there was a double screen—

    “The wooden screen behind the high altar of the same work as
    the rest of the quire, surmounted with triangular coats-of-arms
    containing each a rose, &c., of the common form, supported
    behind by angels. It was handsomely painted and gilt. It had a
    door at each end which opened into a place behind the altar,
    where antiently the archbishops used to robe themselves at the
    time of their enthronization, and thence proceeded to the high
    altar, where they were invested with the pall. On the top of
    this screen was a gallery for musick.... By the taking away
    of this the altar was carried back one arch to a stone screen
    behind it of excellent Gothick architecture.”

Professor Willis believed that this was the place where the portable
feretrum or shrine of St. William was kept. At Winchester Cathedral,
behind the high altar (the beautiful altar-screen of which will be
mentioned presently), is a raised platform in the feretory, cut off from
the choir by the reredos-screen, with originally an arcade in front of
it, making a platform of about 10 feet broad. This probably sustained
the shrine of St. Swithun, and also those of SS. Birinus, Edda, and
Ethelwold. The eastern face is ornamented with tabernacles of Decorated
work, and the floor under the platform is carried by a small vault, to
which entrance is gained below the range of tabernacles. This vault is
supposed to be the “Holy Hole” of the records.

An altar-screen with rood, &c., is to be seen in an illustration of the
hearse of Abbot Islip in Westminster Abbey. At St. Cross, Nuremberg, a
rood with St. Mary and St. John and several angels, contained in very
fine and lofty tabernacle work, surmounts a carving of the Deposition
by Veit Stoss, which is protected by triple doors, with paintings by
Wohlgemuth, over the high altar. This may also have been the case at
Chichester, as in the years 1276 tapers are mentioned: “Supra trabem
pictam supportantem crucifixi imaginem viii ejusdem ponderis.” In the
Laudable Customs of Hereford, in the twelfth century, there is an
allusion to the beam in “Missa accenduntur xiii cerei supra trabem”; and,
on great feasts, “iv ante majus altare quinque in basinis xiij super
trabem et vij super candelabra.” Joceline de Brakelond tells us that
at Bury St. Edmunds, in the Abbey Church, there was a “Crux que erat
super magnum altare, et Mariola et Johannes, quas imagines Stigandus
archiepiscopus magno pondere auri et argenti ornaverat, et Sancto Ædmundo
dederat.” The following quotations from the Liber Niger of _Lincoln
Minster_ (about the year 1236) refer to this in all probability: “Item
in eisdem festis invenire, xvi cereos supra trabem secus altare,” &c.
“Omnes prescripti cerei exceptis cereis super candelabrum ereum et trabem
secus altare,” &c. “Item in principalibus festis debent ponere xvj cereos
parvos super trabem secus altare et illuminare et extinguere et in
depositione habere unum illorum quem voluerint.”

Then on the choir-screen top, whether of wood or stone, there was
a gallery—the rood-loft which came into general existence in the
fourteenth, although as we have seen it was mentioned in the eleventh
century, and in parish churches often the only evidence left of this
rood-loft’s existence is the stone staircase of approach.

The _names_ of the rood-loft are various: Holy Loft, Candlebeam, Pulpitum
(Englished as poulpete, &c.), Rood Soller or Soler (the latter a word
used by Chaucer, who speaks of the “Soler Hall at Cantebrige”; it is
interesting to note that there is still a _Garret_ Hostel Lane and
Bridge there). In Norfolk it was called the Perk or Perch; in France,
the Jubé; in Germany, the Letter; and in Wales, Lloft y Grog. The screen
itself has been termed the trelyse, as in Mr. Gibbon’s _Early Lincoln
Wills_ we find one R. Bradley bequeathing 3s. 4d. for “gilding of the
trelyse.” Also it was termed spur or spere, as J. H. Parker gives us in
a contract for a rood-loft at Merton College Chapel, _c._ 1486, “with
speres and lynterns for two awters.”

As there is a great difference between the solid stone screens of
cathedral, monastic, and collegiate churches, and the light wood ones of
parish churches, both in material, design, and uses, it will be well to
describe each class separately.

The solid chancel-screens of cathedrals, abbeys, and collegiate churches
have first to be considered. They may conveniently and naturally be
divided into two classes, of both of which _Lincolnshire_, in spite of
much ambonoclastic energy, can still show examples.

_Those cathedrals which were originally monastic, and those monastic
churches which had parochial naves._—In these (and it will be seen
later, more especially in the Cistercian foundations), there were two
solid stone screens, of which one was at the east end of the nave, with
an altar, the Jesus altar, or Holy Cross altar, or parish altar, in the
midst of its western front, and a door on either side. This was the
rood-screen, and would have the rood with its belongings on its loft or
on a transverse beam a little above it. (Mention will be made presently
of the parish rood-screen and loft which was still further westwards.)
Between the two screens was an interval, generally of one bay, which,
among the Cistercians, was allotted to the inmates of the infirmary, the
sick, old, and infirm. At Norwich Cathedral this interspace is the Chapel
of Our Lady of Pity; the same was probably the case at Peterborough,
where an altar is named, “of Our Ladies Lamentation,” and at Durham.

Passing through the interval we should come to the second screen, also
of stone, and with a loft. On this would be the organ, and there would
be a projecting feature eastwards from which the Gospels, Epistles,
and Lessons might be read, or portions of the service chanted. A brief
extract from The Rites of Durham,[100] followed by a citation of
examples, some of which are destroyed and some fortunately extant, will
make this arrangement, I hope, quite clear. After speaking of “the pair
of organs over the quire dore” in the eastern screen, the writer says:—

    “There” (_i.e._ in the same loft) “was also a Lanterne of
    wood, like unto a Pulpit, standing and adjoyning to the Wood
    Organs over the Quire door, where they had wont to sing the
    nine Lessons in the old time on principal dayes, standinge with
    their faces towards the high Altar” (pp. 27-28).

Then, with regard to the western screen, his account runs as follows:—

    “In the Body of the Church, betwixt two of the highest Pillars
    supporting, and holding up the West side of the Lantern,
    over against the Quire door, there was an Altar, called
    _Jesus_-Altar,” &c. “And on the backside of that saide Altar
    there was a fair high stone Wall: and at either end of the
    Wall there was a door, which was lock’d every night, called
    the two Rood-doors, for the Procession to go and come in at;
    and betwixt those two doors was _Jesus_-Altar placed, as is
    aforesaid” (p. 54).

This altar was protected by a screen “of wainscot,” and had a “table” or
triptych over it:—

    “There was also, in the height of the said Wall, from pillar
    to pillar, the whole story and Passion of our Lord wrought in
    stone, most curiously and most finely gilt. And also above
    the said Story and Passion, was all the whole story and the
    Pictures of the twelve Apostles,” &c. “And on the height above
    all the foresaid story from Pillar to Pillar, was set up a
    border very artificially wrought in stone with mervellous
    fine colours, very curiously and excellent finely gilt, with
    branches and flowers,” &c. “And also above the height of all,
    upon the Wall, did stand the goodliest and most famous Rood
    that was in all this land, with the Picture of _Mary_ on the
    one side of our Saviour and the Picture of _John_ on the other,
    with two splendent and glistering Arch-angels, one on the one
    side of _Mary_ and the other on the other side of _John_,” &c.
    “Also on the backside of the said Rood before the quire door
    there was a loft,” &c. (pp. 56-57).

This arrangement is scarcely mentioned by writers on foreign
rood-screens, though Pugin gives a hint of it in his description of the
Domkirche—the Cathedral—of Lübeck, which has a central altar and side
doors, whereof he has given a plate, and two bays to the westward of this
screen there is a rood-beam supporting the rood. There is an iron screen
also, with central altar and side doors, in Freiburg, Switzerland.

In England this double screen seems to have been most characteristic
of Cistercian churches. Thus, at _Louth Park Abbey_ there was a stone
screen, called the pulpitum, at the west end of the choir, extending
across the nave, whereon stood the organs, &c. In the middle of the
screen was the choir door or lower entrance (_inferior introitus_). The
bay west of the pulpitum (which was sometimes of considerable thickness,
with an altar on either side the quire door, as at Jervaulx) was open,
and formed the retro-quire, where those who were extra-chorum for a time
(_e.g._ the _minuti_, _i.e._ those who had been let blood), and such of
the infirm as could attend, might hear the services.

West of this bay was a second screen pierced with doors at either end,
and having an altar in the middle against its western side. On top of
this screen was the rood-loft, with the great rood and its attendant
images. A bay westward was a low fence screen (the wainscot screen
alluded to in the above quotation from The Rites of Durham), and the
remainder of the nave was fitted up for the conversi or working brothers.
At Fountains, J. T. Micklethwaite noted the same arrangement. At Bolton,
in Yorkshire, where the nave is in actual use as the parish church, the
altar stands precisely in the position of this Jesus or parish altar;
the piscina may be seen close at hand in the south wall, and the Late
Perpendicular oak screen, once in front of the altar, is now at the west
end.

Where there was a parish service in the nave of a conventual church, the
nave was more or less completely shut off from the choir. The parish
altar then would stand, as first mentioned in the case of Bolton, against
the east wall of the nave, and consequently there would be a parish
rood-screen and rood-loft still farther down the nave, so as to cut off
a chancel, so to speak, for the parish service. At _Freiston Priory_
(although this eastern separating wall of the nave is modern, the choir
having perished), the altar is approximately in the position of the
people’s altar, and the staircase to the rood-loft, and the traces of
the rood-screen (which exists in a neighbouring parish church—that of
_Fishtoft_), show that three bays of the nave were cut off by it. Almost
exactly the same arrangement exists at Dunster, where the choir was
ordered, in 1499, to be used exclusively by the monks, and the nave to be
appropriated to the parishioners. A coëval rood-screen extends across the
nave, cutting off two eastern bays, with a rood-stair in the south aisle,
showing its present position to be the original one.

At Edington Priory Church, Wiltshire, a new altar has been erected in the
position of the original parish one against the screen. At Westminster
Abbey the choir runs far into the nave (cutting off the five eastern
bays), and is separated from it by a high and deep screen of which the
inner stonework dates from the thirteenth century, but the fronting is
modern. One bay west was the rood-screen; below it, on the floor of the
nave, was the Jesus altar, at which mass was said in presence of the
people. Above, in the rood-loft, was a second Jesus altar, from which, on
certain days, the Epistles and Gospels were read.

Also, as everywhere in churches before the Reformation, there were
altars in connection with the rood-screens and rood-lofts. For instance,
in 1400, Lady Johanna, late wife of Sir Donald de Hesilrigg, bequeaths
“To the convent of the house of Gysburgh, in Clyveland, one vestment of
camaca to serve in the pulpit there, and one chalice of silver gilt.”
At _Grantham_ Parish Church, where there was a stone rood-screen, we
know, from a mention in the Patent Rolls, that there was an altar in the
rood-loft. In York Minster there was an altar in the loft before the
image of the Saviour, on the south side of the church, for two chaplains,
founded in 1475-6 by Richard Andrew, Dean of York.[101] In the same place
an inventory is given, of the date 1543, of the belongings of the “altar
of the name of Jhesu in the rudde loft.”

At Norwich Cathedral the pulpitum still exists as the organ loft (with
a staircase north and south from central passage to loft), between the
twelfth piers of the nave (from the west end), the space between these
and the eleventh is taken up by the Chapel of Our Lady of Pity—the
ante-choir. Between the eleventh piers is Bishop Le Hart’s screen, with
central door and an altar on either side, that on the north dedicated to
St. William, that on the south to St. Mary. Further west, between the
tenth piers, was probably a wooden screen, and either on this or above
Bishop Le Hart’s screen the rood would be placed.

An early screen at St. Albans, built by Abbot Richard, 1097-1119, is
described as a wall of stone finished with a wooden capping, the altar
being raised in the centre towards the nave. The present screen, called
St. Cuthbert’s, cuts off three bays of the nave westwards of the lantern.
In the centre is the altar of the Holy Cross, with a door on each side
opening into the choir eastwards. If the rood-beam and figures were not
supported by the screen, they must have been probably westwards of it
(_eastwards_ in Murray’s _Cathedrals_), and supported by their own screen
perhaps.

The only instance in _Lincolnshire_ of a screen of the kind just
described exists in _Crowland Abbey_. Here the north aisle of the nave
seems to have been used for the parish church (as it is now) from early
times, but the arrangement in the nave is the same as that mentioned
above, though I know of no remains of any eastern screen having been
discovered. The splendid western Norman arch of the central tower is
screened across below by a solid wall, pierced by two side doors, and
on the west side there is a space betwixt them for the altar. Also, on
this side, there is a band of panelling of sunk quatrefoils, extending
right across the screen a little above the doors (a wooden reredos and
panelling probably filling up the plain portions of this wall); while
the eastern face of the screen is ornamented with a panelled band of
quatrefoils alternating with shields, and the rest of the surface is
covered with panelled tracery of Perpendicular date. The doorways on this
side are four-centred, with square-headed mouldings above, the spandrils
being filled in with foliage. This screen most likely was built by
William de _Croyland_, who was master of the works from 1392 to 1417. In
1539, probably the whole arch was built up solid, with a square-headed
two-light window in the middle, so as to allow the nave to be used as the
parish church when the choir and the rest of the abbey was pulled down.
The roof of the nave fell in about 1688, after which the north aisle
would again be used as the parish church. It is interesting to recall
the fact that at Leominster a new north aisle was built to serve as the
parish church, and so also at Blyth.

This central position of the altar, with a doorway on either side, was
a general arrangement in the Jubés of Germany, of which Pugin’s plates
of those in Münster Cathedral, the Domkirche and the Hospital, Lübeck,
the Dom at Hildersheim, and that at Gelnhausen may serve as specimens.
G. E. Street gave a sketch of a choir-screen with central altar on its
western front, and a door in either side, at Zamora Cathedral (_Gothic
Architecture in Spain_, p. 92). And a rood-screen at Wechelburg, Saxony,
with crucifix, SS. Mary and John, central western altar, and side doors,
is figured in Fergusson’s _Handbook of Architecture_, vol. ii. p. 583.

[Illustration: CROWLAND ABBEY ROOD-SCREEN, FROM THE EAST.]

In all Norman cathedrals, probably, the choir extended westwards
across the transepts into the structural nave. Consequently in any
later erection of screens to mark the entrance into the choir, this
ancient line of demarcation would be followed. The late Professor Willis
remarks of the screen already alluded to at Canterbury, as described by
Gervase, “that it may have remained, though in an altered form, to the
Reformation. One of Winchelsey’s statutes (dated 1298) expressly commands
that the two small doors under the great loft between the body of the
church and the choir, which are near the altar under the Great Cross,
shall remain.” Thus also at Chichester, Bishop Arundel’s Oratory (which
was pulled down in 1859) stood across the western arch of the central
tower. At Winchester, the rood-screen was in the second bay of the nave.
At St. Albans, St. Cuthbert’s altar-screen is three bays down the nave,
and at Norwich Bishop Le Hart’s screen (when complete with a vaulted
extension westwards, and a screen still farther, whereon the rood-beam
would be placed) takes in three bays of the nave. At Westminster four
bays, at Gloucester one bay, were included in the choir: at Peterborough
the organ-screen enclosed the first bay of the nave, and there was a
second screen as at Norwich, one bay farther west. The choir of the monks
at Ely extended westwards beyond the central tower, and after that had
fallen, beyond the octagon to the second pier of the nave. At Furness
Abbey the pulpitum doubtless occupied a bay between the third pair of
piers in the nave. At _Crowland_, as has been stated above, the existing
stone screen is across the western side of the lantern. All these, except
Chichester, belonged to the Benedictine Order. At Kirkstall Abbey, a
Cistercian house, the plan, as it existed in the twelfth century, shows
the extension of the choir into two bays of the nave, and at Roche Abbey,
also Cistercian, there are traces of the rood-screen, three bays down the
nave (with central door and two side altars), no other screen being found
save a wooden one in the same line across the north aisle.

In several of the cathedrals on the “old foundation” there is only one
screen which—as abroad—has served for rood-screens, the rood either being
on or above it. _Lincoln_, York, Ripon, Wells, and Southwell are all
furnished with screens of this kind, which have no trace of altars on
their western front. I am rather doubtful whether there may not have been
altars on each side of the western doorway of the screen at Southwell.

At _Lincoln_ the solid stone screen stretches across the entrance to
the choir between the eastern piers of the central crossing, being
thus in length about 42 feet and in depth from east to west about 12
feet 6 inches. Its height from the floor of the nave to the top of
the parapet is 17 feet. The western front of the screen consists of a
central canopied archway having four recessed tabernacles with rich
ogee canopied arches, grained continuously on each side, separated by
detached buttressed piers. The wall behind is covered with diaper work,
and subdivided by a shelf enriched with leafage below. There are still
remains of colour and gilding. Three steps lead up to the doorway, from
which a passage, with flat ceiling and skeleton vaulting (reminding one
of similar work in the screen at Southwell) gives entrance into the
choir. On the left, _i.e._ on the north side of this passage, opening by
double doors, which have some excellent examples of original ironwork
upon them, is a broad staircase leading to the loft above. Just at the
entrance to the staircase is the door, on the west side, of a dark recess
with an aumbry. The staircase has also a flat ceiling and skeleton
rib-vaulting, and has, on emerging above, a corbel table charmingly
carved with rich foliage, forming a kind of edge to the hatchway, on
three sides. On the south, or right-hand side, of the central passage is
a small room, with solid vaulting, lighted by a square window looking
into the south choir aisle, guarded by the original iron bars.

On the south side also of the screen, there is a second stair leading to
the loft, formed in the thickness of the screen wall of the first bay of
the south choir aisle, lighted by a pierced quatrefoil, and approached
by a small ogee-headed archway, to be reached by a short step-ladder.
This, it has been stated, was for the use of the custodian of the choir,
and from its smallness could never have been used by priests arrayed
in canonicals. The eastern side of the screen is formed by the return
stalls, and over the entrance there is a projection of half polygonal
shape, and of much the same date as the choir-stalls themselves. It
is noteworthy that the eastern doorway in the stone screen has a deep
moulding running round the arch, with traces of colour as a finishing
touch, evidently intended to be seen, before the woodwork of the stalls
was placed in front of it. I may here mention that the date of the stone
screen has been generally considered to be about 1320, and that of John
of Welbourn’s choir-stalls about 1380. This projection is coved, and
some of the ribs run down to the doorway, but it is curiously and mainly
supported by horizontal beams running westward from the projection for
half their length over the floor of the loft, and being bolted through
that floor at their western ends. Four uprights pass downwards from the
floor of the projection, two of them to the floor of the choir, which two
are stopped by responds at each side of the stone archway. On reaching
the loft, there is a broad seat of stone extending the whole length
of the loft on the western side, above that a broad band of elegant
diaper-work, surmounted by a parapet pierced with trefoils alternately
erect and inverted, and finished with a battlemented cresting.

The eastern face of the screen is guarded by a coped wall of about the
same height as that just mentioned, _i.e._ about 4 feet. In the middle,
for about 8 feet, this wall is cut away down to the level of the floor of
the projection over the eastern doorway, in order to give access to that
floor. As already mentioned, the joists of this floor (the floor-boarding
probably only dates from 1826) lead backwards, _i.e._ westwards, over
a beam laid in the wall north and south, and in their completed state
would form a half octagonal platform. On each side of the break in the
parapet wall were found, in the course of the alterations in the organ
and organ case (in 1897-98), three stone steps. They are broken across,
and removed towards the middle of the space, but they have evidently
formed part of a half octagon, as the stone floor of the loft within
this mark, made by completing the figure, is of a different colour to
that outside. These steps, then, have obviously led up to the complete
polygon, half within the projection and half westwards of it, over the
floor of the loft. These fragmentary steps were noticed to have been much
worn with use. The interior of the projection, apparently, is original
work, and it is interesting to find in Wild’s plate, published in 1819
before the changes in the organ, that it is boarded round and finished
with a plain moulding. J. J. Smith, the late clerk of the works at the
Minster, was satisfied that there was a desk running round the inside of
this projection.

[Illustration: “PULPITUM” OF LINCOLN MINSTER, FROM THE EAST.]

Canon Christopher Wordsworth, in the Introduction to the second part
of the _Lincoln Cathedral Statutes_, says that there was a rood altar
(Sanctæ Crucis) under the lantern, either on the screen over the door,
or before the entrance of the choir. He also adds, “there was, _circa_
1520-1536, a ‘Jhesus Mass,’ but whether this involved a special Jesus
altar I cannot say.” And again, “Holy Rood or altar of St. Cross, which
may have stood on the choir-screen.” An altar with this title appears to
have existed in the time of Matthew Paris, _circa_ 1250, as he says that
Remigius was buried in front of it; “in prospectu altaris Sanctæ Crucis”
are Giraldus Cambrensis’ own words. Therefore, as the Minster was partly
used as the Parish Church of St. Mary Magdalene, on whose site it was
built, and a presbyter was deputed by the Dean and Chapter to minister
sacraments and sacramentals to the parishioners, “in certo loco ipsius
ecclesiæ Cathedralis,” till Oliver Sutton erected the church on its
present site in Exchequer Gate, it is probable that there was a Jesus
altar for parochial purposes and a rood-screen across the western piers
of the lantern, or even farther west in the nave. In this connection,
the description of the rood-screen at the entrance to the choir given in
the _Metrical Life of St. Hugh_, will be of much interest. It was almost
certainly written between the years 1220 and 1235:—

    “_De crucifixo, et tabulâ aureâ in introitu chori._

    Introitumque chori majestas aurea pingit;
    Et proprie propriâ crucifixus imagine Christi
    Exprimitur, vitæque suæ progressus ad unguem
    Insinuatur ibi. Nec solum crux vel imago
    Immo columnarum sex, lignorumque duorum
    Ampla superficies, obrizo fulgurat auro.”

On which my friend, the late Precentor Venables, remarked, “The meaning
is not free from obscurity, but we see that the rood-screen consisted
of six pillars—three, we may suppose, either side the entrance to the
choir—supporting two beams, on which stood the crucifix, the whole being
gilt.”

This, then, may have been the screen on which the rood stood. Abroad,
as can be seen at the present day (_e.g._ at Louvain St. Pierre), it
frequently stands upon the screen itself. In other cases it may be
supported by a beam above the screen. At Canterbury Cathedral, in
Lanfranc’s time, we learn from Gervase that “above the loft, and placed
across the church, was the beam which sustained the great cross, two
cherubim, and the images of St. Mary and St. John the Apostle.” In later
times it probably stood on the existing arch (built by Prior Goldstone
II. about 1495 to 1517) inserted under the western arch of the central
tower. At Exeter Cathedral the rood stood on a separate bar of iron, high
above the screen, and was erected in 1324, after the screen was finished.
The rests for it, cut out of the narrow arches on either side, were
brought into view recently. At Nuremberg the same arrangement prevails,
or prevailed. At Winchester Cathedral the second easternmost bay of the
nave from the chancel-screen was occupied by a rood-loft, on which stood
the “magna crux cum duabus imaginibus sc. Mariæ et Johannis et illas cum
trabe vestitas auro et argento copiose,” &c., made and set up by Bishop
Stigand, who was buried at Winchester in 1069. At Glastonbury Abbey we
read of William de Taunton, Abbot (1322-1335), making the “front of the
choir, with the curious stone images, where the crucifix stood.” Also
at St. Edmondsbury, in the earliest part of the thirteenth century,
Hugh the Sacrist “pulpitum in ecclesiæ ædificavit, magna cruce erecta,”
showing the close connection between the rood and the loft. At Worcester
Cathedral there are stone brackets for the rood-beam on the western
pillars of the lantern, 28 feet from the floor of the nave. There seem to
be no traces of rood or rood-beam in _Lincoln Minster_.

In the Hereford Consuetudines, one of the duties of the Thesaurarius
was to keep three lamps burning day and night, one of which was “in
pulpito ante crucem.” The same officer was ordered in the Liber Niger
of _Lincoln_, “Minutam etiam candelam invenire in choro et in pulpito
et alibi in ecclesia quandocumque necesse fuerit,” the Eastern use
differing from the Western on the score of economy! There seems to be
no reasonable doubt that the pulpitum and platform already described
was the one from which the Gospel and Epistle were read or intoned,
and other portions of the pre-Reformation services sung or said. Dr.
Hopkins[102] says: “For the accommodation of the singing monks there was
a projecting gallery or pulpit, as it was sometimes termed, standing out
from the centre of the east front of the rood-loft, near to the organ.”
The author of The Rites of Durham speaks of “the pair of organs over the
Quire dore” in the eastern screen. No doubt there were variations in
what was read, sung, or chanted from the rood-loft in different dioceses
and different cathedrals. According to Wild, at High Mass, as soon as
the reading of the Epistle by the sub-deacon was ended (at the altar,
we may presume) the deacon, leaving the altar, preceded by the crucifix
and taper-bearers, and holding the book of the Gospels conspicuously
elevated in his hands, walked slowly and processionally along the south
side of the choir (while the choristers sang the _graduale_) to the steps
leading to the rood-loft, where, being arrived and kneeling under the
great crucifix usually erected there, he addressed the bishop or priest
in these words, “Jube, Domine, benedicere,” to which the officiating
clergyman answered, “Evangelium Domini Nostri Jesu Christi,” or some
other benediction. And then the deacon would read the Gospel from the
rood-loft and would return to the altar. From this custom, especially in
France, the gallery over the screen obtained the name of Jubé. The Liber
Niger, or Statutes of _Lincoln Cathedral_, have the following directions
for this use:—

    “Vnde incepto _Jube domine benedicere_ none leccionis dabit
    ille benediccionem qui propinquior fuerit dignitate. et iste
    modus seruetur omni tempore nisi ita sit quod omnes canonici
    sint absentes. tunc suus clericus incipiet _Jube_ et cetera et
    ipsemet lector dicat benediccionem. Deinde leget” (p. 372).

Also we find the following references to the use of the rood-loft:—

    “_Gloria_, ergo incepto; Eat principalis subdiaconus in
    pulpitum per dexteram partem chori subdiacono (secundario)
    librum portante precedente, Vnde si contingat leccionem aliquam
    precedere sicut in natali Domini siue in septimana Pentecostes
    iiijᵒʳ temporum; secundus subdiaconus leget, et sacerdos cum
    suis ministris dicet _epistolam_. et _Gradale_ et _Alleluia_
    et _Sequenciam_ et hijs dictis eat ad suum sedile et ibi dicet
    oraciones. Lecta epistola in pulpito recedet subdiaconus
    principalis ex sinistra parte chori socio suo prenotato
    precedente et librum portante,” &c. (p. 377).

The following passage has against it in the margin:—

    “_De modo eundi ad euangelium in magno pulpito._ Et preparent
    se omnes ministri altaris ad eundum pro euangelio lecturo
    scilicet iij diaconi et iij subdiaconi Principalibus diacono
    et subdiacono textus portantibus et ij turiferarij et ij
    ceroferarij et ij clerici pueri ferentes cruces et hij omnes
    per chorum exeant Set in eundo ad euangelium diaconi ire
    debent ex parte dextra chori precedentibus vno turiferario
    et ceroferario et vna cruce et subdiaconi ex sinistra
    precedentibus vno thuriferario et ceroferario cum cruce, Vnde
    incepto evangelio stabunt coram diaconis subdiaconi omnes et
    clerici cruces portantes principali subdiacono portante textum
    ante pectus Lecto evangelio ibunt ad altare modo contrario quia
    diaconi ibunt ex parte sinistra et subdiaconi ex parte dextra.
    Vnde semper quando aliquis vel aliqui venient in pulpitum
    magnum ad legendum euangelium siue epistolam siue exposicionem;
    venient in dextra et recedant in sinistra et dabit sacerdoti
    euangelium ad osculandum,” &c. (p. 379).

Again—

    “Completorium pulsatur” in a given way. “Vnde sciendum quod
    quando iij cantant ad lectrinam in choro siue in magno
    pulpito.... Nota quod quandocumque canonicus leget siue cantet
    in magno pulpito siue in choro sequetur eum ministrando
    vicarius siue clericus in habitu nigro nisi chorus capis
    induatur sericis” (p. 382).

Later, _i.e._ in 1236, there are directions for the choir to face the
altar whilst the Gospel is being read at the altar, we may presume, for
the next sentence runs thus: “Et dum legitur in pulpito debet chorus se
convertere ad lectorem euangelij donec euangelium perlegatur.”

There seems to be little doubt that the principal organ (if the church
possessed more than one) was frequently placed on the rood-loft, or
“pulpitum,” and the smaller one in the choir. There was an organ as
late as Hollar’s time over the “Den” in the fourth bay of the north
side of the choir at _Lincoln_. By the extracts already quoted from The
Rites of Durham, there was evidently one pair of organs (meaning one
complete organ) on the north side of the choir, and another pair on the
pulpitum there, and from Henry VI.’s “owne avyse” we learn that it was
expressly ordered that the Eton College rood-loft should likewise serve
as an organ-gallery. Among the many interesting items in the accounts of
_Louth_ steeple, dating from 1501-1518, is this:—

  “For setting up the Flemish organ in the rood-loft by four days xx_d._”

So that the present position of several of our cathedral organs (which
is fully justified by convenience and æsthetic satisfaction as being
thoroughly Gothic) is only a survival of a very tolerably ancient
practice. Playing the organ (“cuilibet cantancium organum, trahenti
organa”) is mentioned in the Black Book, already quoted from, in 1322.
Canon Christopher Wordsworth[103] considers that the terms _organizacio_,
_organizare_, apply apparently to vocal music at the lectern in choir at
the end of evensong and lauds. Canon Maddison mentions that one of the
vicars received a fee as late as 1536 for playing the organ at the “Jesus
Mass.” On the 10th September 1442, an order for 5 marcs from the fabrick
chest was made for new organs in the great choir, to be constructed by
one Arnold, “organer,” of Norwich, in the best manner possible. On 14th
October (of the same year, I think), Robert Patryngton is commissioned
to find with all speed “a scientific man” who has skill to make the new
organs in Lincoln choir. The organ, which was remodelled and enlarged in
1897-8, was the work of Allen, the case being designed by the late E. J.
Willson in the year 1826.

A word or two must suffice to describe the side screens of the choir,
which separate it from the north and south choir aisles. Very probably,
in addition to other uses, these screen-walls were built to connect
together the piers of the choir arcades, at least in the three western
bays, and so help to take off some of the thrust produced by the central
tower, and were constructed after its fall. The north screen-wall has
an arcade or triple shafts, ornamented with dog-tooth, and with twisted
bosses like the rounded head of a drill or a coil of rope at the
springing of the arches. The fourth bay eastwards is of later date, the
capitals much under-cut, and the corbels at the apex of the string-course
having birds among natural foliage. The fourth bay on the south side is
very similar; the next has later work inserted again, for the shrine of
Little St. Hugh, the second bay being like the northern three, and the
first taken up with the staircase for the constable of the close, and
a square grated window lighting the room in the organ-loft, already
described. Only those who have seen the magnificent sculptured work on
the side screens of the choir of Chartres, Amiens, and Notre Dame can
appreciate what _can_ be done in decorating these screens.

The last stone screen to be described is in _Tattershall Collegiate
Church_, founded in 1439 by Ralph, Lord Cromwell, Lord Treasurer of
England.

The pulpitum, or choir screen, is of stone, and is situated between the
eastern piers of the crossing. It is approached by a broad stone step,
wider at the southern than at the northern end. It is a solid screen-wall
with a central passage, having on the north side a staircase leading to
the loft above, and on the south side a door to a small room (in the same
position as in the _Lincoln Minster_ screen), lit by three quatrefoils
into the nave. The western face of the screen consists of three recesses,
with wide ogee-headed arches, cusped internally, and ending in finials
which run straight up to the cornice of the loft and are there cut off.
There is a string-course at the apex of the arches; the intervening
spaces are filled with shallow panels, having arched and cusped heads.
The northern and southern ends of the screen are chamfered off, and there
are traces of some pedestal and tabernacle work in the broken stonework
about the height of the string-course, and again below the spring of the
arches. The whole of this west front is finished off with a cresting of
Tudor flowers. The central doorway takes up one of the recesses, the oak
doors being mainly original, though great hooks for hinges still exist in
the stonework behind them. The other two recesses exhibit very evident
manifestations of having once contained altars, there being small pillar
piscinæ in the south side of each recess, and marks of where the altar
slabs were fitted to the work behind. They were in the same position as
those at Bishop Le Hart’s screen at Norwich, at the beautiful screen in
Glasgow Cathedral, at Eton College, at the eastward screen of Gloucester
Cathedral, and at Roche Abbey. Altars in the same position still exist
abroad, as at Lierre, Aerschot, Dixmude, and Brou. At Louvain (St.
Pierre) the side arches have, unfortunately, been opened out, and the
altars removed, and the same process has been gone through with the side
arches at Exeter Cathedral.

[Illustration: HOLY TRINITY CHURCH, TATTERSHALL.]

On the eastern side of the screen at _Tattershall_, facing the chancel,
is a doorway with a four-centred arch, square-headed above, with the
spandrils filled in with the Tudor rose. Above the doorway, as at
_Lincoln_, only here in stone, is a projecting three-sided feature
ornamented with a band of panelling which extends across the whole width
of the screen, and is similar to those already described on the western
side. Below the band the screen-wall is blank, no doubt for the canopied
stalls, of which there are some fragments as well as the stone bases left
in the church. The upper edge of this front of the screen is finished off
with Tudor flowers, which, however, are not pierced through completely as
they were on the nave side. The loft is protected on each face, east and
west, by a solid wall, 4 feet 7 inches in height, with a coped projecting
portion behind the Tudor cresting on the west side. In the projection
into the chancel there are two stone book-rests, one in the middle, 2
feet long by 1 foot 3 inches high, occupying the space behind the three
middle Tudor flowers; it is 3 feet 7 inches from the floor, and has a
ledge about 1½ inches wide at the lower edge to hold the book safely. The
second one faces north-east, and occupies the space behind the two outer
Tudor flowers; it is a couple of inches less in length. An example of
much the same kind—a stone book-rest—can still be seen at the east side
of the loft of the Jubé in the monastic church of Valleria at Sion, in
the Rhone valley.

The rood-beam and rood probably stood across the chancel arch, above the
loft, as there are marks on both pillars of considerable damage about two
feet below the capitals.

From the south end of the loft a doorway gives access to a turret
staircase leading up to the roof; the turret has evidently been higher,
and has probably served as the bell turret for the _Sanctus_ bell. The
date of the screen has been supposed to be settled by an inscription
recorded by Holles:—

    ORATE PRO ANIMA ROBERTI DE WHALLEY HUJUS COLLEGII, QUI HOC OPUS
    FIERI FECIT ANNO DOMINI MCCCCCXXVIII, CUJUS ANIMA PROPICIETUR
    DEUS. AMEN.

He seems to have been buried beneath its archway.[104] But the work
is evidently contemporaneous with the rest of the church, as shown
especially by the staircase turret, and there is no trace whatever of
any Renaissance feeling. Probably the inscription refers rather to some
decoration, colour or the like, on the screen. It is curious that this
screen possesses the only instance of cusped arches in the church.


PARISH CHANCEL-SCREENS

Simple—as the beginnings of all artistic work are—are the earliest
chancel-screens of this country, and the progress from simple forms
to the very rich and complex ones of the Perpendicular Period is as
evident in wooden screen-work as it is in the history of tracery in
stone. Probably the earliest wooden screen-work in the country exists
in the Church of St. Nicholas, Compton, Surrey. The eastern end of this
church, of Late Norman date, is in two storeys, the lower one forming
the sanctuary, vaulted, and opening to the west with a rich Late Norman
semicircular arch. Railing off the upper floor above this arch is a
screen, consisting of a series of semicircular arches springing from
cylindrical or octagonal shafts, with moulded bases and caps, almost
certainly of twelfth-century date, and thus coëval with the Late Norman
or Transitional portions of the church. In the exquisite little chapel at
_Kirkstead_ is the earliest wooden screen-work in the county (and, saving
Compton, in the country), which has probably been the upper portion of
a choir-screen, in the back of two pews. It is composed altogether of
thirteen bays, divided equally between the seats. Each bay consists of
a lancet-headed trefoil supported by octagonal pillars with moulded
capitals and bases. The total height of the work is 2 feet 9 inches,
and it consists of oak throughout. This screen was considered by the
late Bishop of Nottingham to be coëval with the chapel itself—_i.e._ to
have been made about the first quarter of the thirteenth century. In
Rochester Cathedral is (or was) some screen-work of the same date and
character. In Thurcaston Church, Leicestershire, is a screen consisting
of plain panel-work in the lower part, and of a series of open arches
above, trefoiled in the heads, and springing from slender cylindrical
shafts, with moulded bases and caps, being almost identical (save in
having cylindrical pillars) with the example from _Kirkstead_. In Stanton
Harcourt Church, Oxfordshire, is a very similar screen, only with
circular annulated pillars; this is considered to be forty or fifty years
later in date—_i.e._ about 1260, about the same date as the screen at St.
Andrew’s, Chinnor, in the same county.

[Illustration: ROOD-SCREEN AND BASE OF LOFT, SLEAFORD CHURCH (ST.
DENIS’).]

The screens of Decorated and Perpendicular date may be taken together
in general description, more especially as the essential feature of
_Lincolnshire_ screens—an ogee arch—appears in both and in nearly every
instance.

Firstly, then, a beam runs transversely and horizontally across from
pillar to pillar of the chancel arch, or in front thereof, sometimes
supported by corbels at either end, as has been the case at _Heckington_
and _Wellingore_. This may or may not be the rood-beam (_i.e._ the beam
on which the rood stood). In some cases the rood-beam was quite separate
from and independent of the screen, as at _Claypole_, where there are
corbels for it on each side of and high up on the chancel arch; at
_Legbourne_, where the same arrangement is made, and in the _Morning
Chapel, Lincoln Minster_. At _Blyton_ the rood-beam remains above the
chancel arch; above the upper side of the beam the wall is recessed,
probably to allow of a boarded and panelled background to the rood and
the other two figures. Further support to this beam (of the screen)
is afforded by a number of stout uprights from the floor (where is
sometimes a horizontal wooden or a stone base) to the rood-beam, dividing
the screen into bays, varying in number with the size of the screen,
whereof the middle one is generally the largest, though at _Frampton_,
_Stixwould_, _Mumby_, _Middle Rasen_, _Lusby_, and _Miningsby_ it is of
the same size as the others.

The middle bay is as 13 to 11, for example, at _Cotes_, as 2 to 1 at
_East Kirkby_, as nearly 5 to 4 at _Moulton_, as 3½ to 2 at _Bratoft_,
and as 3 to 2 at _Thorpe St. Peter’s_. These uprights are often formed
into small pillars in the front, and occasionally on the eastward aspect
also, or, in more Perpendicular work, they are fashioned as slender
buttresses, _Cotes_ and _Sleaford_ giving examples of the former, while
_East Kirkby_ does so of the latter method. From these uprights, at about
two-thirds of their height, spring more or less pointed arches, with
their apices at the beam or just below it. Generally, the lower third of
the screen is composed of solid panelling, sunk and with foliated and
traceried heads; though at _Barrow-on-Humber_, at _Spalding_, and at
_Alford_ the panels are perforated, probably this is not original. Along
the upper border of these panels often runs a scroll or vignette of open
work, as at _Winthorpe_ and at _East Kirkby_, and of Tudor flowers at
_Croft_, while it is embattled at _Westborough_ and _Yarburgh_.

From the middle of the transom (if it may be so termed), which runs
along from upright to upright, below the open portion of the screen, in
a number of Lincolnshire examples, arises a mullion up to the spring of
the arch, and there divides into two ogee arches, as at _Theddlethorpe_,
_Saltfleetby_ (_All Saints’_), _Mumby_, _Ulceby_ (_St. Nicholas_), and
_Marsh Chapel_. In some of these cases the mullion divides up into two
pointed arches above the ogees, and at _Middle Rasen_, where there are
three ogees and two mullions in each bay, the arches intersect and are
carried through the spandrils, which are now open (probably an effect of
restoration). In other instances the mullion divides up into two almost
semicircular arches, which form the lower and outer portion of a large
ogee, as at _Cotes_, _Denton_, _Stixwould_, _Scrivelsby_, _Miningsby_,
_Swineshead_, _Scotter_, and _Folkingham_. At _St. Peter’s, Barton_,
there are two of these ogees in each bay. At _Swineshead_, _Leverton_,
and _Friskney_, these arches beneath the ogees are more pointed in
character. At _Miningsby_, on the west front of the mullions, are slender
round pillars rising from the transom up to the point of the ogee, and
there finishing in tiny crocketed pinnacles, capped by a finial. At
_Claypole_ and _Althorpe_ the arrangement is much the same as at _Cotes_,
but the mullions are absent; whether this is original or not seems
uncertain. There are no traces of them on the transom of either screen.
At _Cotes_ and elsewhere the quatrefoil space between the heads of the
arches and the upper part of the ogee is filled by a shield. Another
form, which seems like a development of the _Claypole_ scheme (although
it almost certainly is much earlier in date), has no mullions, and no
inner halves of the arches; from their outer halves springs an ogee,
making an outline which has been called—not inaptly—the fleur-de-lis
form. An excellent example of this is given by the _East Kirkby_ screen.

Where there is no central mullion, the ogee simply springs from the
uprights and terminates in a finial at the rood-beam, as at _Sleaford_,
_Ewerby_, _Saxilby_, _Moulton_, _Winthorpe_, _Croft_, and _Fishtoft_, and
in thirteen other instances. The same arrangement is found at _Spalding_,
but the ogee is very depressed, and so the finial ends much lower than in
the screens just mentioned. At _Bratoft_ there is an almost semicircular
arch beneath the ogee, freely cusped internally, somewhat the same as at
_Thorpe St. Peter’s_, _All Saints’_, _Benington_ (where the upper edge of
the arch forming the base of the ogee is embattled), and _Addlethorpe_
(tower arch screen). These ogees are profusely crocketed, generally, of
course, owing to their date, with the square-shaped leaves which mark the
Perpendicular Period, and they are also more or less elaborately cusped
internally. Special notice should be taken of the crockets at _Thorpe
St. Peter’s_ and at _Burgh_ (now across tower arch), which represents
pelicans in various attitudes.

The middle bay partakes of the character of the lateral ones, though it
is usually so different in width. Thus at _Cotes_ it has a flattened
wider ogee, with the descending mullion cut off; at _Alford_ (where
there are no mullions), a flattened wider ogee, with a depressed arch
under it; at _Miningsby_ (where all the bays are of the same width) the
inner halves of the sub-arches disappear as well as the central mullion;
at _Denton_, a flattened wider ogee; and at _Swineshead_, a larger and
taller ogee. At _Lusby_ the central bay ogee is identical with those
of the sides; the same is true of _Stixwould_, with the absence of the
descending mullion—also, in a different style, of _Mumby_; while at
_Theddlethorpe_, _Saltfleetby_, and _Moulton_, this bay has a depressed
arch with three ogees on it, the last named being also remarkable for
having “a series of five shallow hoods or canopies groined in miniature
underneath, to simulate vaulting.”[105] At _Barton_ there are two ogees,
at _Middle Rasen_ three. At _Sleaford_ and _Ewerby_ there is the same
kind of arch, with two ogees upon it, but in the centre the vaulting
continues downward to a cap and shaft, which ends on the arch; also at
_Spalding_, only without the ogees.

At _Claypole_ and _Althorpe_ the central shaft is carried down much below
the spring of the ogees, and ends on a four-centred arch. _East Kirkby_
has two ogees on an ogival arch beneath. At _Saxilby_ the central feature
takes the form of a round-headed arch in a square-headed bay with the
spandrils filled with circles, surmounted by seven small bays, each
containing a crocketed ogee terminating in a finial. At _Barrow_ there is
a pointed arch, with pierced spandrils. At _Benniworth_ there is a large
ogee with curious tracery over it (? modern), entirely different from the
lateral bays. At _Ewerby_, already mentioned, this bay has on the inner
side of each ogee a beautiful wheel; on the outer side a fine network of
tracery. At _Folkingham_ the centre arch is carved and crocketed with
grapes and vine-leaf ornament. At _Scrivelsby_, between two ogees is a
large wheel of tracery, with two smaller ones filling in the spaces on
each side.

All screens probably had a door or doors, though but few of these are
left in Lincolnshire. At _Westborough_ the original doors exist; they are
square-headed, with tracery above and panelling below, similar to that
of the side bays. _Cotes_, _Spalding_, _Theddlethorpe_, _East Kirkby_,
_Moulton_, _Helpringham_, _Thorpe St. Peter’s_, and _Barton_ still retain
their doors, but only the lower panels are left.

Also slender buttresses have been mentioned above, as being moulded out
of the uprights. Occasionally there were to the front (western face) of
these uprights, especially on each side of the central doorway, flying
buttresses with crocketed attachments. Remains of these are still to
be seen at _East Kirkby_, _Moulton_, _Fishtoft_, _Thorpe St. Peter’s_,
_Bratoft_, _Croft_, _Legbourne_, _Crowland_, and _Mumby_. At _Grimoldby_,
where the lower half of the screen exists, two buttresses project some
way westward and are well panelled. The extreme form of these, where the
upright part of the buttresses was fashioned into a candlestand, may be
exemplified by Ranworth screen (Norfolk), where the buttresses, panelled
as to their lower two-thirds, separate the central passage from an altar
on either side.

The intervening spaces between the ogee and the confining arch will be
filled in with delicate tracery, varying of course in style with the
age and locality of each particular screen. Whatever the faults of
Perpendicular work may be in stone, the repetition of similar forms,
the richness of the detailed ornament, and the lightness of the tracery
make Perpendicular _wooden_ screens, more perhaps than any others, the
best representatives of the _Cancelli_ (lattice-work), and very valuable
portions of the furniture of a church.

In some churches, as at Laughton-en-le-Morthen, there was a low _stone_
screen, buttressed, which would carry a lighter screen of wood. Instances
of a similar arrangement may be seen at Nantwich and _Morton-by-Bourne_,
and there is a preparation for it at _Wellingore_ and _Boston_.

If the 200 churches mentioned in Mr. E. Peacock’s English Church
Furniture be taken as a fair sample of _Lincolnshire_ churches, as they
well may be, almost every one possessed a rood-loft, which may now be
described.

Westwards generally (but eastwards only at Worstead) from the beam,
which often forms a kind of breast summer to the gallery about to be
described, would extend a platform of varying width (at Selattyn in
Shropshire it is 10 feet wide, usually about 4 feet), supported by a
coved cornice, ornamented by ribs which intersect sometimes in a very
complicated pattern, as at _Sleaford_, and with—as vignette—a band of
carving, such as vine-leaf and grape, along the front. On very many
screens, which have lost their gallery, traces can be seen where the ribs
and springers for its support have been attached. The eastern portion
of the gallery remains at _East Kirkby_, starting from the top of the
screen, and being coved independently thereof. From both sides—east and
west (or only one _west_)—of this platform would rise up a panelled
screen, which sometimes, as at Upper Sheringham, consisted of open work.
This gallery—the rood-loft—would be approached by one or more staircases
in the piers of the chancel arch or in the north or south walls of the
aisles. There are two of these staircases at _Boston_, _Sleaford_, and
_Grantham_, while _Spalding_, _Heckington_, and most of the other
churches in the county have but one.

[Illustration: ROOD-SCREEN AND LOFT, ST. EDITH’S CHURCH, COTES-BY-STOW.]

The only complete mediæval rood-loft in the county is in the little
church of _Cotes by Stow_. It has been carefully repaired, with foliated
and traceried panels, and a vignette of grapes and vine-leaves along
the lower border. The central projection is interesting and original,
and here is evidently not for the crucifix, as that would be fixed at
the eastern side of the loft. A similar projection will be seen at
_Sleaford_, and probably both were used for preaching. They are exactly
reversed in position from those at _Lincoln Minster_ and _Tattershall_,
and from that mentioned in the contract for the rood-loft at Great St.
Mary’s, Cambridge, in 1521, “wyth a pulpete into the mydds of ye quyer.”

There are several screens which yet retain the hang-over, making the
floor of the rood-loft. The reason for this at _Sleaford_ is given in Mr.
Peacock’s book: “Itm̅—the rode lofte taken downe all save the florthe
wc̅h remayneth standing wc̅h we cannot take doune for yt is a waie
frome one house to another so yt̅ we have noe passadge but that waie to
ytt”—which may mean from chapel to chapel, or from aisle roof to aisle
roof.

A few varieties of screens, with or without lofts, may most conveniently
be noticed here before dealing at greater length with the rood-loft
and its accessories. Screens are met with which most certainly have
had rood-lofts, the evidence of which is the existence of remains of
the springers or ribs for the coved support of the loft on one or both
sides of the screen, and the rough framework above, whence the rood-loft
floor has been stripped. But no trace can be found in the church either
of rood-loft staircase, doors thereto, or of corbels to support the
rood-loft. Also the screen may not fit its place. Of course, in some
instances, the rood-loft staircase may have been entirely concealed or
taken away. But it is almost certain in other instances that the screen
is not in its original church. Most probably an example of this is the
_Ewerby_ screen, which is too wide for the chancel, and has evident
traces of having had a rood-loft. This screen has in all likelihood
come from the neighbouring priory of _Haverholme_. Very likely the same
applies to the wooden screen in the north aisle of _Crowland Abbey_;
it does not fit (has been removed eastwards within this century), has
evidence of having had a rood-loft, and there are no signs of anything
of the kind in that part of the church. It may have been the rood-screen
in the nave, or the very one mentioned, of the year 1413, below. And at
_Cadney_, near _Brigg_, is a screen said to have come from _Newstead on
Ancholme_.

In other churches, on the contrary, we may find abundant evidence in
the shape of rood-loft staircase and doors, and corbels, for the former
existence of a rood-loft. The screen, too, may seem quite to fill its
position and not show any trace of having had a rood-loft on it, and this
not merely from having had the coving neatly removed (as may possibly
have been the case in some churches), but by the style altogether of
the upper portion of the screen. There is no coving, and therefore no
pointed arch over the ogee between each upright, forming consequently a
square-headed aperture instead of a pointed one.

[Illustration: ROOD-SCREEN, ST. MARY’S CHURCH, WINTHORPE.]

At _Winthorpe_, for example, there is no trace of a loft on the existing
screen, while some four feet or so westwards are putlog holes and
corbels for the front of the rood-loft, as well as a complete rood-loft
staircase on the north side of the chancel. _Grainsby_, _Friskney_, and
_Leverton_ are instances of similar treatment. The explanation is that
the rood-loft has been made on the same plan as that at Upper Sheringham
in Norfolk. Here a screen of the square-headed kind described, and with
good Perpendicular tracery, fills the chancel arch to about the height
of ten feet. Four or five feet westwards of this screen extends the
rood-loft, not supported apparently by the screen, but just touching it.
Two uprights support the front of the loft, with the spandrils filled on
the north side with a pelican, on the south with a dragon. The gallery,
which has an elegant open traceried front, runs across in front of the
chancel arch and is reached by a staircase in the north wall. Much the
same arrangement has been at East Budleigh. A feature of minor interest
in Sheringham is the diversity of tracery; thus in the rood-loft seven
and a half bays have the same, while three more are quite different, and
in the screen the number of differences is still more marked.

There are also some screens which show no trace on their westward face of
a rood-loft, and yet have or have had one. Of these, Worstead may stand
for an example.

Again, occasionally a screen is found, certainly old, certainly in its
original position, and yet with no signs on it or in the church of any
rood-loft at all. It is fair to suppose in these cases that there never
has been a rood-loft, but that the screen itself has carried the rood.
Such a screen was the one at _Salmonby_, now removed, and the existing
elegant Perpendicular ones at _Wickenby_ and _Scrivelsby_. At West
Tarring and Broadwater (Sussex) the low screens bristle with spikes,
probably contemporaneous, which show that there never was any upper
tracery or loft. Also we can have a rood-loft alone, without a screen, as
seems to have been the case at Avebury (Wilts). A superb example of this
kind abroad still exists in the Church of St. Etienne du Mont, Paris, of
sixteenth-century date, with two spiral staircases.

To return to the rood-loft staircases, which, and the doorways to them,
are met with constantly, over one hundred instances being found in
_Lincolnshire_ alone. Usually, of course, they cut through more ancient
work, as at _Stow_, where a Saxon pier has been cut through (the Saxon
piers of the eastern tower arch are likewise cut and channelled to allow
of the insertion of the beams of a rood-loft); at _Normanton_, where a
Transitional arch has been cut into; at _Frieston_, where the third pier
from the west of the Norman north arcade of the nave has been replaced
by a square mass of stonework containing the rood-loft stairs, with a
Perpendicular rebate for the parish rood-screen; or as at _Whaplode_,
where the fine Norman chancel arch has been cut across for the rood-loft,
to which a Tudor staircase gave access.

It will have appeared from the quotations already given that at
Canterbury, Winchester, and Beverley there were rood-lofts (_pulpita_) as
early as the eleventh century. At Peterborough Cathedral, too, we learn
that there was a new rood-loft set up by Abbot Benedict before 1193. At
_Sibsey_ (St. Margaret’s) there is a Norman nave and aisle arcades, with
lofty circular pillars, square abaci and scalloped cushioned capitals.
The easternmost arch of the south arcade is narrower than the others, to
admit of a turret staircase formerly giving access to the rood-loft, and
its respond has some later detail than the others. The rood-loft doorway
at _Colsterworth_ is among the earliest known. It has an abacus on which
the nail-head ornament exists. This was probably the original rood-loft
entrance, which was subsequently altered when the Perpendicular chancel
arch was erected, as this must have partly blocked up the entrance. The
builders therefore destroyed the right side of the original doorway and
made a side entrance. At East Shefford Church (Berks), in the north wall,
are two Early English windows for lighting the rood-loft, the entrance
to the staircase for which still remains. At St. Nicholas, _Skirbeck_,
the nave is of Early English date, and in consequence of the rood-loft
staircase, the north arcade has narrower bays than the southern. At
_Bratoft_, the aisle arcade, of Decorated date, has the easternmost arch
much narrower than any of the others to allow of the rood-loft staircase.
The little staircase at _Cotes_ is in the thickness of the south wall.
The entrance doorway is moulded in wood, and near the top a tiny
two-light window, cut in alabaster, lights the stair. At _St. Lawrence_,
_Sedgebrook_, the rood-loft apparently was carried across the aisles,
as was the case at _Corby_ and _Carlton Scroop_ (and at _Grantham_);
and access to it was supplied by a newel staircase on the south side
of the church in a turret, in which a sancte-bell formerly hung. This
arrangement of a staircase turret leading on to the nave or aisle roof,
and ending in a sancte-bell cot, was obviously convenient, and is not
very infrequent. Probably this was the case at _Grantham_, where the
octagonal turrets finish in a spirelet, at _Leake_, at _Fishtoft_,
at _Swineshead_, at _Langtoft_, at _Helpringham_, _Quadring_, and at
_Tattershall_, though in the last-named the turret-stair begins from
the stone rood-loft. Leverington Church (Cambs) has a rood-loft turret
crowned with a spirelet at the south-east angle of the nave, which forms
a sancte-bell cot and still retains its bell. At _Sleaford_ there are
two rood-loft stairs in the north and south piers of the chancel arch,
and running up with the northern one is a separate staircase leading on
to the aisle roof. No rood-loft turrets, as far as I have been able to
ascertain, date back previous to the thirteenth century. Curiously, at
St. Antony in Kirrier, Cornwall, there is only an _external_ doorway to
the rood-loft staircase.

Another convenient position for the sancte-bell cot was at the apex of
the eastern gable of the nave, and the earliest example of this form
seems to be a Norman one at Bledington Church in Gloucestershire. In
_Tallington Church_ there still hangs a bell (probably original) in this
position; and Seamer Church, near Scarborough, still possesses both
bell and gable sancte-bell cot. At _Welbourn_ is a pretty hanging bell
cot corbelled out beneath an excellent gable cross. _Tydd St. Mary’s_
is another instance of both features, while _Gedney_, _Claypole_,
_Winthorpe_, _Boston_, _Aslackby_, _Sibsey_, and _Spalding_ have the
gable bell cot alone. _Butterwick_ has a gable bell cot as well as a
rood-loft turret (of good circular brickwork), as have also _Benington_
and _Wrangle_. _Holbeach_ has had two gable sancte-bell cots, the first
dating from 1453; this was replaced at a remarkably late date—that of the
Laudian revival, I suppose, in 1629. As well as the sancte-bells which
have been already mentioned, at _Aslackby_ is a small bell (unhung in
the tower), dated 1611, which is thought to be the sanctus-bell. _St.
Mary’s, Sutterton_, is a small bell of thirteenth-century date, inscribed
in Lombardic lettering, “Symon de Hotfelde me fecit.” _St. Peter and St.
Paul, Algarkirk_, has also probably a sancte-bell, as well as _Bicker_,
_Ingoldmells_, _East Halton_, _Sutterton_, _Hacconby_, _Great Hale_, and
_North Witham_.

To return to the rood-loft: on it (or above it) would stand the great
rood, often with the ends of the cross finished with heads or emblems of
the Four Evangelists. Occasionally the crucifix would be sustained partly
by chains from the roof, as can be seen abroad—_e.g._ at Louvain—to this
day. In the crown of the chancel arch of _Boston Parish Church_ are the
sockets for the two chains to support the rood, and at _Billinghay_ a
central mark for a hook. On either side of the rood would be an image of
St. Mary the Virgin and St. John the Evangelist.[106]

Not infrequently the whole of the chancel arch was boarded up, and the
rood, with attendant figures, stood in front of this, or were painted on
it. Just above and behind (_i.e._ eastwards of) the rood-loft at _Cotes_
the chancel roof is shut off by oak boarding. On each side figures can be
dimly discerned, that on the north having a nimbus, and scattered over
the boarding are flowers with leaves, most probably meant for lilies.
There is a large blank space in the middle, against which, no doubt, the
crucifix was fastened. And it is interesting to note that at “Thorpe
in parochie de Heythar” (_Culverthorpe_, near _Haydor_, probably), in
April 1555, the churchwardens state: “Itm̅ we had noe Roode nor other
Imageis but that were painted on the wall, and thei are defaced and
put oute,” &c.[107] Besides the rood and the images of St. Mary and
St. John, which are mentioned in almost every one of the 200 parishes
in Mr. Peacock’s book as having been destroyed in 1566, often as “the
Rode Marie and John with all other Imageis of papistrie,” there are
specific references in several cases to other images and tabernacles on
the rood-loft. Their fate seemed to be almost invariably to be burnt.
Thus at “_Asbye juxa Sleford_—Imprimis o̅r Images of the Rood Mary and
Jhon w̅th all other Images burned Ao̅ iijᵒ Elizabeth.” At _Belton_, in
_Axholme_ (after mentioning the rood Mary and John), “Itm̅ one Rood-loft
with a tabernacle whearin Imageis stood;” at _Folkingham_, “The Images
belonging to the same roode-loft as the Image called the roode Marie and
John w̅th an other other (_sic_) Image called St. Andrewe (vppon the w̅ch
the parish church of ffolkinghm̅ drewe his name).” At _Corbie_, besides
the customary three, there was “the Image of St. Johnne the Evang ...
of the churche.” At _Gretford_, again, “roode w̅t marie and Johne and
the Image of saincte martine the Patrone.” At _Kelby_, a “picture of St.
Peter” occurs in the same connection. At _North Witham_, after mentioning
the “roode Marie and Johnne,” there are also specified “iij Images of ye
rood-lofte.” It will be noted that some of these extra figures are of
the patron saints of the various churches. In the rood-loft staircase of
_Anwick Church_ was found a statue of the Virgin and Child, with traces
of colour on it.

All wooden screens (and probably all the stone ones also) were almost
certainly coloured and gilt. The receding parts, or cavettos, of the
mouldings are darkened with red or blue, the more prominent white, with
often a small diaper. Round mouldings have spiral or wavy lines to show
that the feature was circular. The most prominent parts were gilt, as
were carved capitals. Gold, too, was often used as star or diaper on a
blue or red ground. The mouldings are sometimes all blue and green, while
the hollows are red foliage gilt on red ground, with all recessed parts
red. A will leaving money to gilding the trelyse has already been given;
Sir Richard Bozon, who died 25th March 1524, bequeathed 20s. towards the
gilding of the rood-loft at _All Saints’, arrowby_. Thus, on _Lincoln
Minster_ screen can still be seen traces of colour, and a little scarlet
blue and gold on cavettos and on crockets on that at _Saltfleetby All
Saints’_. At _South Somercotes_ the round mouldings are in spirals and
black and gold, the spandrils of the panelling white or gold, alternate
cavettos green and red, crockets gilt. In the portions of the screen
at _Billinghay_ the Tudor roses in the spandrils are coloured red and
blue. At _Addlethorpe_ the cavettos are red, finials and crockets gilt
(in the north chantry chapel screen the cavettos are red and blue). At
_Croft_ the border of the panels is spirally in blue and gold, and the
square flowers along the top are gilt. At _Crowland_ the pillars of the
uprights are spirally black and white, the ogees ending in finials gilt,
and the cusping of the lower panels also gilt. In the beautiful screen at
_Alford_ the cavettos are red, and the leaves in the spandril gilt.

But, as well as the lavish decoration of the rood-screen and loft,
which has just been described, there was very frequently some special
colouring and embellishment of those parts of the church in more
immediate proximity to it. The roof of the nave often has the eastern
bay alone painted, as at Rainham (Kent), or that part more gorgeous
than the rest, as at Southwold, where all the roof seems to have been
coloured; but the eastern bay of the nave above the rood-loft has been
most highly decorated with angels, with scrolls, and the implements of
the Passion. In a very large number of churches was a representation of
“The Doom,” or “Day of Judgment,” the most frequent place for this being
over the chancel arch. “The final separation of the Church Triumphant
from everything that defileth was almost invariably represented by
the Great Doom painted in fresco over the rood-screen.” At Trinity
Church, Coventry, and many other places mentioned by Keyser, this
still exists.[108] Over the chancel arch in _Caythorpe Church_ is a
rude representation of the Last Judgment, with the Archangel Michael
weighing souls, and at _Swaton_ were paintings above and on each side
of the chancel arch of scenes from the life of our Lord. “The Doom”
also appears on a set of panels above the chancel arch at Mitcheldean,
Gloucestershire, and at St. Michael’s, St. Albans; the Day of Judgment,
with the crucified Saviour in the centre, is partly over the chancel
arch and partly on a panel filling in the head of the arch. A somewhat
similar condition has been noticed above at _Cotes_, and over the
rood-loft in Snetterton Church, Norfolk, is a defaced panel-painting of
the Day of Judgment. (Pugin gives a view of a similar arrangement at
Arnes, near Bergen, now destroyed, I believe.) The most notable of these
is the one at Wenhaston, Suffolk, discovered in 1892. This piece of
panelling blocked off the chancel (there being no chancel-arch) above the
rood-beam, and measured 17 feet 3 inches by 8 feet 6 inches. The position
of the crucifix is clearly seen, and the spaces left for the figures of
St. Mary and St. John on either side. In the triforium at Gloucester
Cathedral is preserved another “Doom” on panel.

Along the upper edge of the rood-screen or rood-loft would be placed
basins and spikes for candles, which would be lighted on special
occasions. Hence comes the name of “candlebeam,” as before mentioned,
and Gibbons[109] has given seven wills which illustrate this: _e.g._
Thomas Hadstoke leaves “To the Crucifix light in the Roode-lofte xx_d._
in Hycchyn church,” Thomas Buck to the “Rode lighte viij_d._ in Dorney
Church,” William Gybbons to “the rode light” in Hamilden Church, and
Thomas Fissher of Wooborn,“To thre lightes upon the rode beame vj_d._”
(probably one for the rood and one each for St. Mary and St. John). Also,
in the continuation of that history of _Crowland_ which passes by the
name of Ingulph’s, we read as follows (1413): “In the Chapel of the
blessed Mary, which had been previously prepared on the south side of
the church, he (Brother Simon Eresby) most devoutly erected at his own
expense two perks, which were becomingly prepared for the arrangement of
the wax tapers thereon, together with a screen of considerable height,
which terminated the said chapel below.” By the royal injunctions of
1538, no candles, tapers, or images of wax were thenceforth to be set
before any image or picture, “but onelie the light that commonly goeth
about the crosse of the church by the rood-loft,” &c.

[Illustration: ROOD-SCREEN, ST. PETER’S CHURCH, MIDDLE RASEN.]

Then, in connection with the parish church rood-screen and rood-loft,
there was an altar or altars. A favourite position for these, when the
width of the church allowed, was on either side of the central door of
the screen, against the western face of the screen. Those at Ranworth
have been mentioned already; at Patricio, in South Wales, are two stone
altars, one placed on each side (beneath the rood-loft) of the entrance
into the chancel, westward of and against the screen supporting the
loft. On either side of the entrance into the apse of Peterchurch,
Herefordshire, is a stone altar—probably the rood-screen altars; on the
western side of the stone screen of St. Mary Berkeley, on the north,
an altar to St. Mary the Virgin, the piscina of which remains; on the
south, one to St. Andrew. At _Limber Magna_ the steps to the rood-loft
are quite perfect, and exactly under where the rood-loft was placed there
is on both sides the trace of what looks like a piscina, but no marks
of any altar-slab have been discovered. At _St. James’, Castle Bytham_,
at the restoration in 1900, were found at the east end of the nave, on
either side of the chancel arch, remains of shallow, semi-circular-headed
recesses, bearing traces of coloured decoration, forming the reredoses of
the two small altars. At _Winthorpe_, close to the rood-screen, on the
south side, is an aumbry, most probably for use in connection with an
altar on the western front of the screen. Below the rood-loft staircase
at _Colsterworth_ is a little aumbry. In the base of a pier close by the
rood-loft staircase at _Barkston_ is a small hollow, possibly intended as
a piscina or stoup for the service of a rood-altar. Mention has been made
of an altar on the rood-loft of the perished screen at _Grantham_. At
_Frampton_ a beautiful little quatrefoil window, just under the roof at
the south end of the rood-loft, has been opened out, as well as a hole in
the wall beneath it, probably for an office book.

The fate of the roods and rood-lofts has been mentioned above; since
those days much damage has been done to the screens which were left, by
actual destruction, accident, ignorance, and neglect. Fortunately, in the
last thirty years opinion has got educated somewhat, and many of the old
screens have been restored, repaired, and (where necessary) replaced,
while new ones, designed by the first architects of the day, are
furnishing our churches. “Le bon temps viendra” for screens, and indeed
has already come in part.

       *       *       *       *       *

In domestic chapels of any size it is not unusual to find a chancel
screen, as at The Mote, Ightham, figured by J. H. Parker. Also, in not
a few instances, the western part of the chapel thus shut off has been
divided into two storeys, the upper chamber being for the use of the
lord and his family, the lower one for the domestics. This arrangement,
according to J. H. Parker, continued to be usual in the fifteenth
century, and even later, as at East Hendred, Berks, at Studley Priory
and at Godstow Nunnery, in Oxfordshire. The chapel at Markenfield Hall,
Yorkshire, has also been an example of the same. At East Hendred, the
screen to both upper and lower chambers still exists; at Berkeley Castle
the screen in front of the upper chamber is original, though altered,
that of the lower one is modern. Here, as not infrequently, there is
a fireplace in the upper chamber. At Chibburn, Northumberland, and at
Trecarrel House, Cornwall, the same arrangement has prevailed. “In
Hawarden Castle, Flintshire (said the same authority), the chapel is very
small, and must have been merely a private oratory, or, as seems more
probable, the chancel or sacrarium only, separated by a screen from the
principal chamber in the keep, and with also a ‘squint’ or opening from
the passage in the thickness of the wall, to enable persons thus placed
to see the elevation of the Host.”

In the _Chancery at Lincoln_, at the north end of what was the Hall
(pulled down by Chancellor Maundeville in 1714), are three pointed
doorways of fourteenth-century date, the easternmost of which leads to
the buttery, the western one to the cellars, while the middle one leads
up a flight of steps with a timber-framed plaster partition on each
side, and at the top of these stairs a door on the right hand (easterly,
therefore) leads into a room which almost certainly was the chapel. On
the eastern side of the partition is a screen of three double bays, open
from the middle upwards, with contemporary ironwork. In the opposite side
of the partition are two double loops, all being probably, according to
the late E. J. Willson, of Henry VIII.’s date.

In hospitals also, a somewhat similar arrangement obtained, the chapel
being equal in height to two storeys, and separated from a room above
and below by a screen. These rooms were dormitories, so that the sick
could, as it were, attend service while they were in bed. In _Browne’s
Hospital at Stamford_, the chapel is open to the roof, and on the ground
floor it is separated at the west, from a common room once a dormitory,
by a handsome oak screen with doors groined over on both sides. There
are returned stalls on the east side thereof. In the ancient hospital at
Chichester, the chapel consists of a sacrarium only, and is separated
from the hall or principal chamber by an open screen with a curtain. In
the almshouses, Sherborne, Dorset, is or has been a similar arrangement.

       *       *       *       *       *

NOTE.—Considerations of space, unfortunately, have prevented any allusion
to Chantry Chapel Screens.




LINCOLNSHIRE AND THE GREAT CIVIL WAR

BY REV. EDWARD H. R. TATHAM, M.A.


In three successive centuries Lincolnshire has been the scene of civil
disturbances, which were closely connected with the general history of
the country. The rebellion against Edward IV. headed by Sir Robert Welles
of Belleau, the “Lincolnshire Captain,” was closed by the defeat of his
force of 30,000 men on March 12, 1470, near Empingham in Rutland. The
rising at Louth and Horncastle, which followed on the dissolution of
the monasteries in 1536, was quelled within a fortnight; and the only
lives lost were those of officials who were killed by the mob, and of
the mob-leaders, who were promptly executed. But in the Great Civil War
of the seventeenth century, Lincolnshire played a great part, though in
ordinary English histories, and even in Clarendon, the struggle within
its borders is passed over lightly. It was the debatable ground between
the Royalism of the North and the stern Puritanism of the Eastern
Association. “From the summer of 1643 to the summer of 1644,” says Lord
Morley,[110] “the power of the northern army and the fate of London and
the Parliamentary cause turned upon Lincolnshire, the borderland between
Yorkshire and the stubborn counties to the south-east.” Here, in the
first two years of the war, Cromwell found a favourable training-ground
for his invincible Ironsides.

Before the war actually began, the temper of this county, as of some
others, was rather hesitating and uncertain. It is doubtful whether,
out of the twelve members for the shire and its boroughs, the proportion
of ten to two against the King truly represented the popular feeling.
Under the then existing system an altogether unfair preponderance was
given to the towns, which returned ten out of the twelve members; and in
London and the eastern towns Puritanism was for the moment all-powerful.
The Militia Ordinance of Parliament, which brought matters to a crisis,
and was doubtless an encroachment on the King’s prerogative, raised a
constitutional question that few could understand. In March 1642, when
the dispute on this point had reached an acute stage, a deputation
from the Lincolnshire gentry in sympathy with the Parliament presented
a petition to the King at Newark on his journey north, in which the
question of the moment is not even mentioned. This petition simply prayed
the King to reside near his Parliament and listen to their counsels; and
in view of their determination to wield the power of the sword, it is
not surprising that the King in his reply, delivered at York, asserted
that Lincolnshire had been misled, and that he was being driven from
his Parliament. The city of Lincoln, though it returned two reforming
members, was probably not so Puritan as the other boroughs. It has been
well pointed out[111] that a large number of the county gentry, many
of whom were Royalists, then possessed houses in Lincoln; and their
opinions would naturally be reflected among the tradesmen, who benefited
by their presence. At this time the two sides were evenly matched
among the members of the City Council; but the Mayor, John Beck, was
a Parliamentarian, though his father, Robert, who preceded him in the
office, belonged to the opposite camp.

A crisis was reached in April, when Sir John Hotham, the Governor of
Hull, refused the King admittance to the town. In Lincoln, which had
much trade with Hull, the King’s attempt upon that place was not viewed
with favour; and on April 27, Parliament appointed a committee of the
county members of both Houses (on which of course no Royalist sat) to
carry out the Militia Ordinance in Lincolnshire. Francis, Lord Willoughby
of Parham, a young noble of under thirty, with Presbyterian sympathies,
had just been appointed Lord-Lieutenant of the county, and proceeded,
with an alacrity which might well arouse the King’s suspicions, to call
up the militia for training. He summoned the constables to meet him at
Lincoln on May 31, and render an account of the arms in their district,
and all but two or three responded; but he complains that the King’s
proclamation forbidding the muster had been “officiously fixed” upon
the door of the inn where the committee met. On June 6 he arranged to
review the militia from Lincoln and the adjoining villages; and on
the same morning received a letter by express messenger from the King
at York, dated two days before, charging him upon his allegiance to
take no further action, and warning him that if he did so, he would be
proceeded against as a disturber of the public peace. Lord Willoughby’s
answer, which he penned on the spot, is a curious mixture of humility
and defiance. He alleges the opinions of certain eminent lawyers (which
they afterwards disavowed) in favour of the legality of the ordinance,
and trusts that, if he has offended, his “want of years” may excuse his
“want of judgment.” “Nothing,” he says, “hath yet passed by my commands
here, or ever shall, but what shall tend to the preservation of the
peace of your kingdom.” And yet, within three months, he had accepted
the command of a troop of horse in the Parliamentary army. The Mayor and
Corporation attended the Lincoln muster; and about eighty of the hundred
members of the trained band appeared. When the constable was asked to
explain the absence of the remainder, he gave the excuse that they durst
not venture down hill owing to the prevalence of plague in the lower
city. The committee, however, attributed their non-appearance to the
influence of the Royalist Recorder, Mr. Charles Dalison. Volunteers
were obtained to supply their place; and at Boston the Lord-Lieutenant
was met on arrival by 100 well-armed volunteers, who showed that they
had profited by their self-imposed training. But other musters were
not to pass off without incident. Lord Willoughby had taken the strong
measure of removing William Booth of Killingholme from the command of a
company in the Caistor contingent on account of his Royalist views. But
Booth, though related to the Lord-Lieutenant, was not disposed to take
his supersession tamely. On the day of the muster at Caistor he read the
King’s proclamation against the ordinance to the soldiers at a tavern,
and dissuaded them from showing their arms. He also said openly that
things would never go on well “while King Pym governed,” and expressed
a hope that King and Parliament would be separated. For this conduct he
was put under arrest, and taken to Louth in custody. On his appearance
before the committee next day at Horncastle, he was dismissed upon
making submission; but he drew up a petition to the King, supported by
an affidavit, protesting against the whole proceeding as illegal; and
the King’s reply promised him full satisfaction if his statements were
true. This petition was brought to the notice of the Commons by Sir
Christopher Wray, one of the members for Grimsby, who disputed some of
its allegations; and on his evidence, and that of others present at
Caistor, the House found that Captain Booth “had abused His Majesty” with
a petition that was “false, scandalous, and malicious.” This incident,
though it had no further consequences, shows that a situation, in which
King and Parliament were contradicting each other in rival proclamations,
was rapidly becoming impossible.

Other events of the same fateful month of June illustrate this still more
plainly. The King had appointed Robert Earl of Lindsey Lord-Lieutenant
of the county, and directed the High Sheriff, Sir Edward Heron, not to
suffer any stores of ammunition to pass out of his custody without an
order from himself or Lord Lindsey. The latter ignored the direction
of Parliament to bring in his patent of Lieutenancy, and was forthwith
declared by the Lords a public enemy, and orders were issued for his
apprehension (June 8). The Lincoln magazine, which lay in the outer
Exchequer Gate opposite the Castle, was in the custody of the Mayor, and
he, upon request, handed the key to Lord Willoughby, who placed a guard
over it. The Mayor was at once summoned by the King to York to account
for this, and for his refusal to read the King’s proclamation. The royal
messenger was promptly put under arrest, and sent with the Mayor under
a military escort to Parliament. But on reaching Grantham the messenger
persuaded the Mayor to change his mind; they escaped from the guard and
proceeded to York, where on June 17 the Mayor made his submission to
the King. He received pardon on condition that he at once returned to
Lincoln and published the proclamation, which he did. It does not appear
whether Parliament called him to account for this; but on July 5 they
made an order restraining the publication of royal proclamations, and on
the 7th they declared that the King might not require the attendance of
any of his subjects except such as were bound to him by special service.
The King’s reply to this was to order the arrest of two Lincoln Aldermen
for exercising the militia, and they were actually taken in custody to
Beverley, but afterwards released under Habeas Corpus. Meanwhile, on June
19, Lord Willoughby reported to Parliament that he had completed his
inspection of the county militia, at which “very few or none” failed to
appear. He reports them deficient in arms, but this defect he proposed
to supply from the magazine at Hull. With his report he forwarded a copy
of an address signed by “many thousand hands” of the gentry freeholders,
&c., of Lincolnshire; it was of a rather colourless complexion, but
protested against any separation of King and Parliament. On the 24th he
received fresh orders from the King to desist from his proceedings “as
he would answer the contrary at his utmost peril.” In forwarding this
letter to Parliament Lord Willoughby complains that a certain captain
from York (Edward Middlemore of Lusby) is trying to “aliene” the hearts
of the county from Parliament, assuring the people that His Majesty would
shortly come among them.

This report proved true, though Charles’s decision was somewhat sudden.
After visiting Newark on July 12, he arrived at Lincoln on Wednesday,
July 13, with the Prince of Wales, the Earl of Lindsey, and a numerous
suite. His progress for the last four miles along the road was “a
throng,” and the people rent the air with “peals of shouts and vocal
acclamations,” such as “A King, a King!” The attendant gentry drew
their swords, and the clergy, who attended to the number of two or
three hundred, redoubled their gratulatory salutations with “_Vivat
Rex!_” The Mayor and Corporation, with their Recorder and the trained
bands, came out to meet the Sovereign, so that in the opinion of the
local pamphleteer, “Wednesday was the funeral of the new militia.” In
some large open space, which is not specified, Mr. Charles Dalison, the
Recorder, made a speech of welcome to the King, in which he alluded to
his promise to defend the established Protestant religion, and offered,
on his own behalf and that of the civic body, their “persons, estates,
and fortune.” The King in his reply, which was read by Sir John Monson,
states as the object of his coming to assure the people of his intention
to defend their religion, laws, and liberties, and to certify them that
the pretended Militia Ordinance is unwarranted by his authority. If any
should presume to execute it, he should treat them as actual rebels and
in arms against himself. He speaks most bitterly of the action of Sir
John Hotham in excluding him from Hull, but bids the people still their
fear that their county will be the seat of war. “The seat of war will be
only where persons rise in rebellion against me; that will not, I hope,
be here, and then you shall be sure of my protection.” For that end he
announces that he has appointed Commissioners of Array for the county,
and promises to “live and die” in defence of their religion, and the just
privilege and freedom of Parliament.

The King’s Commission of Array included a number of the loyal knights and
gentry who had assembled to greet him—its principal members being the
Earl of Lindsey and his son Montagu Lord Willoughby D’Eresby (already a
baron in his own right), the Earl of Newcastle, Sir Francis Fane, and
Sir Peregrine Bertie. On Thursday, July 14, a body of the gentry, headed
by Lord Willoughby D’Eresby, sought an audience of the King, who was
probably staying at Deloraine Court, and requested permission to form a
regiment of horse within the county in support of his cause. In reply the
King renewed his protest that he only desired their assistance in defence
of their “religion, laws, interests, and the just rights of Parliament.”
On the withdrawal of the deputation a written undertaking was drawn up,
in which it was declared that Parliament, having put the kingdom “into a
posture of war,” had given occasion to the signatories of the document
to furnish a number of horse “for the defence of His Majesty’s person,
the true Protestant religion, and the just rights of Parliament against
all opposition whatsoever.” These horse were to be disposed of within the
county for three months from the 20th July. The document was signed by
seventy-five persons, who volunteered to contribute 172 horses; but the
regiment was ultimately to consist of 400. Among the signatories were the
Dean, Dr. Topham, promising four horses, the Precentor and the Chancellor
three each, and the Archdeacon two. There were to be four captains of
troops, who were probably Sir Peregrine Bertie, Dr. Farmery, Chancellor
of the diocese, Mr. John Hussey, and the City Recorder, now Sir Charles
Dalison, for on this visit the King conferred upon him the honour of
knighthood.[112] On Friday, the 15th, the King left for York by way of
Beverley, where he had arranged to meet a deputation from the two Houses.

But before his departure his chief supporters had met to decide on the
terms of a petition to Parliament, which was described as from the
baronets, knights, &c., of Lincolnshire. Among other suggestions it
proposes—(1) That Hull be given up to the King; (2) that all forces be
disbanded and the Militia Ordinance waived; (3) that Parliament issue
no orders without the King’s consent; (4) that Church government as
it stands be put in execution and a national synod summoned; (5) that
the licentiousness of press and pulpit be restrained and tumultuous
assemblies forbidden; and (6) that Parliament adjourn to some other
place where the King can come. The signatories especially desire the
retention of “the Protestant religion as now established among us.” This
petition, it seems, was, after general discussion, drafted by the two
lawyers, Sir John Monson and Sir Charles Dalison. Its proposals, although
they have been described as “more bold and audacious than had hitherto
been ventured upon by any county,”[113] differ little, except in being
more moderate, from the conditions laid down by the King at Beverley
the following week in replying to the two Houses. It was addressed to
the House of Commons, and ought, of course, to have been presented by a
member; but the only county member available, Mr. Gervase Holles, M.P.
for Grimsby, had recently been “disabled” from sitting, and therefore
the petition was addressed to the Speaker, and sent up by one of the
serving-men of the High Sheriff. On Monday, July 18, the Speaker informed
the House that he had received a letter from the Sheriff of Lincolnshire,
enclosing a petition “of a very strange nature and language,” from divers
gentlemen, “most of whom were papists.” This description, unless the
term was then considered applicable to all members of the Church of
England, was, in face of the wording of the petition, a flagrant abuse of
language. A special committee was appointed the same day to consider the
petition, and on the 21st reported that it was “false, scandalous, and
malicious, and a high breach of the privilege of Parliament.” The High
Sheriff was ordered to be sent for as a delinquent, and as he did not
appear, a warrant for his arrest was issued on August 30.

Before the King left Lincoln, he had directed the Sheriff to search for
concealed arms and to make himself master of all the county magazines.
The Lincoln magazine had been secured by Lord Willoughby of Parham, who
had wisely removed it before the King came. In many cases the local
magazines were in the charge of the county gentry; and two of these—Sir
Philip Tyrwhit of Stainfield and Sir William Pelham of Brocklesby—had
declined to deliver them up to Lord Willoughby according to Parliament’s
injunctions. The Sheriff now proceeded by warrant to search the houses
of members of Parliament opposed to the King; and a store of muskets was
seized at the house of Sir Edward Ayscough at South Kelsey and sent to
the Bishop’s Palace. A warrant was also issued to seize Captain Lister of
Coleby, who had accepted a commission in the Parliament’s forces; and he
was taken by a troop of horse, who forced an entrance into his house, to
the King at Nottingham. Shortly after, while the Sheriff was engaged in
conveying a magazine to Lincoln, he was himself arrested by a superior
force under Sir Anthony Irby, M.P. for Boston, and carried to London,
where, being examined at the bar of the House on October 8 as to his late
proceedings and his part in the petition, he was committed to the Tower
on the charge of high treason. Here he remained for over three years,
being unable to pay the fine of £2000 which was imposed upon him; but in
1645 he obtained his liberty under an exchange of prisoners.

If the Sheriff was arrested near the end of September (the date is
uncertain), his taking a magazine to Lincoln would imply that the city
remained Royalist for over two months after the King’s visit. Clarendon
says that Charles passed through it once more about August 20, two
days before he set up his standard at Nottingham, and that he helped
himself to some of the arms of the Lincoln trained bands. Apparently the
increasing certainty of war was doing much to cool the ardour of some
of his supporters. The force which he had raised on his first visit was
limited, no doubt by the stipulations of the more cautious, to three
months’ service, and that only within the county. But his more eager
partisans saw from the first that this would be useless, and presented
a petition to him at York that Lincolnshire might co-operate with other
counties in his support. This petition was published as a tract with a
view to committing the subscribers of the undertaking to more extended
service; but it was answered by a counter-tract,[114] in which the writer
pleads the necessity for the formation of a regiment (1) to keep order in
a time of slack government; (2) to protect the sea-coast against foreign
invasion; and (3) to ward off incursions from soldiers in neighbouring
counties. He states that Sir John Hotham’s Hull garrison had already
committed acts of violence in the north of the county; but protests that
those like-minded with himself were not “malignant, either against the
King or Parliament.” A similar tract[115] of the same month expresses the
views of those who, like the Corporation of Lincoln, after supporting
the measures of Parliament, joined in the acclamations of welcome to the
King. It declares that the commonalty of the county would “march with
the King” and loyally obey his just commands; but if he should command
them to “put anything in execution against the Parliament,” they would
not only forbear themselves, but “hazard their lives” in opposing him.
Of the reservations of these sitters on the fence Charles, at the time
of his two visits, probably knew nothing; and when his presence was
withdrawn, this party gradually gained the upper hand. We do not know
the exact date of Lincoln’s second change of mind. While the King was in
the neighbourhood, Lord Willoughby and his friends were content to lie
low; but at the Michaelmas election of Mayor, that office was filled by
William Marshall, a strong Parliamentarian, who probably carried the city
with him.

The fen country about Boston was most devoted to the cause of Parliament.
Even at the end of July a band of volunteers was diligently training in
the fields near Boston; and that town, so “eminent in disloyalty,”[116]
sent reinforcements to Sir John Hotham at Hull. On August 29 the Boston
troops seized a Royalist sloop, which had put into a creek near Skegness
with arms and stores—Sir William Ballingdon and ten other Cavaliers who
were in charge being taken. The King’s party threatened revenge upon
Boston, and King’s Lynn sent over for its defence five pieces of ordnance
and 1000 volunteers, but no attempt was made upon the town. A month later
(September 30) Lord Willoughby received orders from Parliament to arrest
and bring to London sixteen of the Royalist gentry, who are described as
“divers Popish and ill-affected persons, who have armed and assembled
themselves within the city and county of Lincoln.” Of these all but three
had been signatories of the Lincoln Petition in July; but many of them
were out of reach, having armed their dependants and joined the King’s
forces. Lord Willoughby was directed to disarm all “Popish recusants”; he
was also to requisition tents, waggons, horses, &c., from all “dangerous
and ill-affected persons, as well clergymen as others,” who had sent
money and stores for the King. The Lord-Lieutenant’s exertions kept him
so long in the county that he was too late for the battle of Edgehill
(Sunday, October 23), in which he should have commanded a troop of horse.
The general of the King’s army was at first a Lincolnshire peer, the
Earl of Lindsey; but as Charles foolishly exempted Prince Rupert and the
cavalry from his orders, he declined the position, telling his friends
that he would lead his own regiment “and there find his death.” His
forecast was too true, for he was mortally wounded and died the next day.
A Lincolnshire knight, Sir Gervase Scrope of Cockerington, who commanded
a troop by his side, received sixteen wounds and was left for dead upon
the field from Sunday afternoon to Tuesday evening, when he was found by
his son, tended by the famous Dr. William Harvey, and conveyed to Oxford,
where he wonderfully recovered.

During the winter following this indecisive battle, the air was full of
rumours of peace; but neither side was disposed to yield upon the real
points at issue. On January 9, 1643, Parliament appointed Lord Willoughby
Sergeant-Major-General for the county, and ordered the removal of the
prisoners in Lincoln Castle to the Bishop’s Palace for greater security,
placing the Castle in the keeping of the Earl of Lincoln. Early in the
year a stand was made for the King in the heart of the Parliament’s
country. The men of Crowland, who were royal tenants, set to work in
January to fortify their watery stronghold. They were undeterred by a
friendly warning sent them by Mr. Ram, the Puritan minister at Spalding;
and, being unmolested for two months, they made a raid on March 25 upon
the defenceless town of Spalding, and carried off their censor and two
or three more as prisoners to Crowland. Mr. Ram, in his account of the
proceedings, shows much ill-feeling towards his captors, and not without
reason if his statements can be trusted. When the prisoners were
brought into the place, all the people were gathered together to triumph
over them, “which put me in mind of Samson’s entertainment when he was
taken by the Philistines.” Mr. Ram has to admit that their “usage was
indifferent good” during their five weeks’ imprisonment, but complains
of some “insolencies” that were offered them. The chief officers of the
garrison were Captain Stiles and a Captain Cromwell (one of Oliver’s
cousins); but Parson Stiles of Crowland, a very zealous Royalist, himself
held command on the western front. On April 13 some Parliamentary forces
beleaguered the place, and the prisoners were carried to the point of
attack and pinioned in the line of fire. This is said to have happened
more than once, but they were not hit, although the bullets flew fast
about their ears. Many of the garrison were armed with “hassock knives,
long scythes, and such-like fennish weapons”; and a “great water, broad
and deep,” surrounded the works, except where it was crossed by three
approaches or banks. On the failure of the first attack, the besiegers
retired; and the garrison assembled in the Abbey Church to return thanks
for their success. But on April 25 a much larger force appeared under the
command of Colonels King, Dodson, and Oliver Cromwell, and attacked the
town on three sides. Heavy rains, which made the place unapproachable,
delayed their success for the moment; but the assault was renewed on the
27th, and next day the garrison laid down their arms. It was scarcely
worthy of Mr. Ram to accuse his foes of using “poisoned bullets”; no
charge of the kind seems to have been preferred against the leaders, who
“were clapt in prison” at Ipswich, Colchester, and other places.

Near the western border of the county the important fortress of Newark
was held by Sir John Digby for the King; and it proved a thorn in
the side of Parliament throughout the struggle. Early in February a
combined attack upon it was made by the forces of Notts, Derbyshire,
and Lincolnshire; and, according to Mrs. Hutchinson,[117] this was only
foiled by the suspiciously half-hearted conduct of one Ballard, who
commanded the Lincolnshire contingent of 1000 men. He refused to follow
up the first successes of the besiegers, and ordered a retreat when
the other two counties were anxious to attack. We may perhaps see here
an indication of the unwillingness of the Lincolnshire troops to take
service beyond the borders of the county. Encouraged by this success,
the Newark garrison, about a month later, decided to take the offensive.
Among their number were some troops of horse commanded by Colonel
Charles Cavendish, a brave cavalry officer and a general favourite. On
March 22 he appeared before Grantham, which yielded to his summons; he
took 360 prisoners (with officers) and three loads of ammunition. This
exploit opened the way into the county for the King’s Commissioners of
Array, who had spent an inactive winter at Newark. On April 4, with a
military escort, they left that place for Stamford, and held another
session on April 11 at Grantham. Here, while business was proceeding, a
“rebel” force was reported to be approaching, and Colonel Cavendish drew
out his troops and faced them half a mile from the town with the river
between. The enemy, who had 800 horse and 200 dragoons (a kind of mounted
infantry) were in superior strength; but Cavendish, leaving three troops
to cover the town, crossed the Witham by a neighbouring bridge and forced
the enemy to retreat. On Ancaster Heath, five miles from Grantham, they
made a stand, dismounting their dragoons and drawing up the horse in
three divisions. But on Cavendish charging with his best cavalry, the
dragoons threw down their arms and begged for quarter. Thereupon the
horse took to flight, and were pursued for six miles, over 300 prisoners
with twelve officers being taken. The Royalist pamphleteer[118] says
that they were commanded by Captain Hotham (son of Sir John), who had
arrived at Lincoln the previous day from Yorkshire with four troops of
“grey-coats,” and had boasted that he would surprise Grantham and capture
the King’s Commission. If this were so, it can hardly be true (as stated)
that Lord Willoughby of Parham was present and escaped only by the
speed of his horse; for, as his rank was higher than Hotham’s, he would
necessarily have been in command.

This skirmish probably had two important results. It hastened the arrival
of Cromwell in West Lincolnshire, and it impelled Hotham, whose influence
over his father was unbounded, to meditate treachery to the Parliament.
On May 3 Cromwell, who had been scheming for a combined movement with
Lord Grey of Groby and others against Newark, wrote from Stamford to
the Lincoln Committee, entreating them to send their forces for that
purpose to rendezvous at Grantham. But his efforts were fruitless. Lord
Grey was anxious to protect Leicester, and the Lincoln troops were slow
to move. Early in May Colonel Cavendish gained another small success
near Grantham, surprising the “rebels” in their quarters and taking
many prisoners; but within a week he suffered a reverse at the hands of
Cromwell and his newly-trained cavalry, though they had but twelve troops
to his twenty-five. The encounter took place on the Grantham and Newark
road, and is thus described by Cromwell himself:—

    “After we had stood a little above musket-shot, the one body
    from the other, and the dragoons had fired on both sides for
    the space of half an hour or more, they not advancing towards
    us, we agreed to charge them. And advancing the body after
    many shots on both sides, we came on with our troops at a
    pretty round trot—they standing firm to receive us, and our
    men charging fiercely upon them, by God’s providence they were
    immediately routed and ran all away, and we had the execution
    of them two or three miles. We took forty-five prisoners ...
    and rescued many prisoners whom they had lately taken of ours,
    and we took four or five of their colours.”[119]

One consequence of this fight seems to have been that Grantham, whose
real sympathy had been shown by its electing two of the stoutest Puritan
members, returned to its allegiance to Parliament. With some of the
wisdom that is born of the event, Dr. Gardiner says that “the whole
fortune of the Civil War was in this nameless skirmish.”[120] But the
statement of a biographer of Cromwell,[121] in magnifying the victory,
that “never again did the Newarkers range the country with impunity,” is
plainly false. The “wasps’ nest” itself remained unattacked; and a month
later (June 11) we find Cavendish and his men in Mid-Lincolnshire taking
toll of the household stuff, deer, and cattle of Sir William Armyne, one
of the Grantham members, and “damnifying him” to the extent of £500.[122]
In the same month they had a brush with the enemy at Louth, where the
parish register records the burial of “three strangers, being souldgeres
slaine at a scrimish”; and perhaps this was the occasion when Sir Charles
Bolle of Thorpe Hall, an ardent Cavalier, only escaped capture by hiding
under the bridge near the gaol, over which the Roundhead troopers
galloped in search of him.

Cromwell remained only about a fortnight near Grantham, and was then
ordered to Nottingham to concert measures with the Midland commanders
for the support of the Fairfaxes, who were hard pressed by the Earl of
Newcastle in Yorkshire. He found a concealed traitor in the camp. Within
four days of his defeat at Ancaster (April 15), young Captain Hotham
had opened a correspondence with Newcastle, in the course of which he
volunteered to betray Hull and Lincoln to the King. But he seems to have
been a bad conspirator. When the news arrived of a small success of
Sir T. Fairfax at Wakefield, he persuaded the other commanders to send
Fairfax a message that their help would not now be needed. He began to
correspond directly with the Queen, who arrived at Newark on June 16;
but Cromwell and Colonel Hutchinson, who had long suspected him, procured
an order for his arrest (June 18). He was committed to a guard for
conveyance to London, but on the way succeeded in escaping to Lincoln,
where he evidently had supporters, and whence he wrote to the Speaker to
complain that Cromwell had employed an Anabaptist against him. On June
27 the Queen wrote to the King that she was delaying two days for the
fulfilment of “young Hotham’s” promise to render up Hull and Lincoln;
but, before the two days were over, the conspirator and his father were
both arrested at Hull and sent up by sea to London, where they were
executed on Tower Hill early the next year. Three days later (July 2) the
attempt upon Lincoln was made, and completely failed. Two brothers named
Purefoy, agents of the Hothams, introduced sixty Cavaliers disguised as
“market-folk” into the city, where they were concealed in the Deanery.
In the nick of time a letter from the Mayor of Hull caused the arrest of
the Purefoys, but their accomplices sallied out and endeavoured to secure
the magazine. However, the discharge of a cannon by an inexperienced
countryman killed some of them, and the rest were dispersed or taken.

In the month then opening events followed thick and fast. On the last
day of June the Fairfaxes were badly beaten at Adwalton Moor; and on
July 4 Sir Thomas, whose wife had fallen into the enemy’s hands, arrived
at Barton-on-Humber, hotly pursued and with the enemy in sight, but
fortunately found a vessel to convey him into Hull. The way now lay
open for the advance of Newcastle’s large force of over 6000 men into
Lincolnshire. The town of Gainsborough, which was moderately fortified,
had been occupied by the Earl of Kingston for the King. This nobleman
had long hesitated which side to choose, and in the winter had openly
declared that, when he joined either party, “let a cannon-ball divide me
between them!” He had but just descended on the royal side of the fence,
when Lord Willoughby of Parham, whose home was at Knaith, three miles
from Gainsborough, surprised the town with a small force on July 20, and
made him prisoner, though he fought till his house was in flames around
him. Being a person of importance, he was at once put on board a pinnace
and sent down the Trent to Hull for safe custody. On the way the boat was
challenged by a Royalist party of horse; and upon his showing himself on
deck, “a cannon-bullet,” in Mrs. Hutchinson’s words, “divided him in the
middle, according to his own unhappy imprecation.”[123] Lord Willoughby’s
position, however, was none too secure, for he was threatened not only
by the advance of Newcastle, but by a strong body of the Newark troopers
under Colonel Cavendish. Orders were therefore at once sent to Sir John
Meldrum at Nottingham and to Cromwell in South Lincolnshire to join
forces and advance to the relief of Gainsborough. Cromwell had just been
gaining fresh laurels. He had forced a body of Cavaliers, who had taken
Stamford, to retreat into Burleigh House, and there, after a single day’s
siege (July 19), he received their unconditional surrender, and sent
them under guard to be interned at Cambridge. A week later (July 26), by
executing a forced march from Stamford, he joined the Nottingham troops
at Grantham the same day, and a body from Lincoln at North Scarle on
Thursday, and on Friday (28th) he encountered at Lea the mounted troops
under Cavendish. Thereupon ensued a cavalry action, which, as described
by himself,[124] severely tested the mettle of his newly-trained troops.
The fight took place on a sandy plateau, overlooking a marshy tract of
low land called the Humble Car. Up the steep ascent to the plateau,
which was riddled with rabbit holes, and had to be gained in face of the
enemy, the Lincolners led the van. After a hand-to-hand contest with
the advanced guard, Cromwell routed them; but seeing a large body of
horse under Cavendish in reserve, he kept back part of his men from the
pursuit, and on Cavendish routing the Lincolners, charged him in the rear
and forced him down the steep into a quagmire, where Captain James Berry
slew him “with a thrust under his short ribs.” This description of the
end of the dashing young leader does not sound too chivalrous, and to his
own side his loss was great. His body was conveyed to Newark, where he
was universally lamented.

After bringing a store of powder into Gainsborough, Cromwell drew out
his force to reconnoitre from an adjoining hill, and suddenly found
himself faced by the whole army of Newcastle. His foot regained the town
with some loss; and the retreat of his few squadrons of horse, which
were holding the enemy, was accomplished in masterly fashion by Major
Whalley. As Cromwell’s horse could be of no service behind defensive
works, he at once drew them off and retreated with such speed that his
letter of the following Monday (31st) was dated from Huntingdon. After
his departure Lord Willoughby made but a faint show of resistance, and
surrendered the town on Sunday, the 30th. He had liberty to withdraw his
men, but they were first disarmed—contrary, as he alleged, to the terms
of surrender, though it is difficult to believe that such terms would be
accepted by a far superior force. The Royalist prisoners, on being set
free, began to plunder the town, in which they were joined by Newcastle’s
soldiers against the express orders of their commander, who soon drew
off his army, leaving Colonel St. George as governor of the place. Lord
Willoughby retreated on Lincoln; but he decided that the defences of the
city were too slight for successful resistance, and so retired to Boston,
whence he wrote despairingly to Cromwell:—

    “Since the business of Gainsborough the hearts of our men
    have been so deaded that we have lost most of them by running
    away.... If the enemy get this town, which is now very weak for
    defence for want of men, I believe they will not be long out of
    Norfolk and Suffolk.”

On receiving this letter Cromwell withdrew his cavalry from Stamford, and
made Peterborough his headquarters; but he stationed some companies of
foot at Spalding as a support to Boston. Lincoln was very soon occupied
by the Cavaliers, who appointed Sir William Widdrington of Blankney
governor, and made Richard Somerby mayor in place of Marshall. The
troopers are said to have plundered the city, and tried to seize Mr.
Reyner, the Sunday lecturer in St. Peter at Arches, but he escaped by the
vestry window.

At this juncture, if Newcastle could have thrown his whole force upon
the Associated Counties in concert with an advance of the King from the
West after the capture of Bristol (July 26), the issue of the war might
have been different. But his Yorkshire levies objected to leaving Hull
unsubdued in their rear. So, after dallying unaccountably during August,
he laid siege to that town on September 2—a fatal error, for it was
impossible to reduce it by blockade, as the Parliament commanded the sea.
On land, however, they were in woeful plight. The town of King’s Lynn, in
the very heart of the Association, revolted against them in August; and
the Earl of Manchester, newly appointed General of the Eastern Army, laid
siege to it and took it on September 16. But all the commanders were in
dire straits for money; and the reasons for adding Lincolnshire to the
six Associated Counties by an ordinance of September 20 were probably in
part financial. The weekly assessment for the county was fixed at £812,
10s., though in the following year this was raised to £1218. The cruelty
of such a tax upon Royalists, who were perhaps secretly supplying the
King with funds and yet had to pay this tax or suffer sequestration of
their estates, is evident enough. Those landlords who were absent with
the King did not escape, for the money was exacted from their tenants who
were to deduct it from the rent. The ordinance was to be administered by
a county committee sitting either at Lincoln or Boston, and consisting
at first of 70, afterwards of 105 members. But the practical work was
done by a “standing committee,” which might meet anywhere—five to be a
quorum and fresh members to be summoned every fortnight.

At the date of this ordinance the hold of Parliament on the county was
most insecure. But a change was at hand. News had come from Hull that
the cavalry of Sir Thomas Fairfax was useless within the walls, and that
their horses were dying from the brackish water. It was determined to
bring this body of twenty-one troops across the Humber into Lincolnshire;
and Cromwell, with Lord Willoughby, executed a daring march through the
Wolds, then infested with Newarkers, to Barton, whither some of the
cavalry were transported on September 18. But it seems to have been
thought inadvisable to bring across the whole body in full view of the
besieging army. On the 23rd both commanders were in Hull, bringing
powder and provision for the garrison; and on the 26th the greater part
of the cavalry were put on shipboard and landed, apparently the same
evening, at Saltfleet Haven. At this old-world seaport there still
stands a manor-house, then the property of Lord Lindsey, but somehow—by
sequestration or otherwise—at the disposal of his kinsman of Parham,
where Cromwell and Fairfax passed the night with their host. It is
full of ancient furniture, and “Cromwell’s bed” is still pointed out
to the credulous. With the dawn the troops were on the move, and had
some difficulty in eluding a force of 5000 Cavaliers, who endeavoured
to intercept them. At Louth, where Cromwell is said to have slept on
the 27th, he would be joined by the contingent from Barton; and here,
perhaps, a few troops were detached with Fairfax for scouting purposes
round Horncastle. On the 28th Cromwell was in Boston, “weeping” that
there was no money for his soldiers, and pushed on to Lynn to hasten the
advance of Manchester and his infantry.

On Monday, October 9, that commander drew out from Boston; and his
advanced guard of foot, under Major Knight, summoned Bolingbroke Castle,
but received for answer that “bugbear words must not win castles and
should not make them quit the place.” That night the foot was quartered
in three detachments at Stickney, Stickford, and Bolingbroke; and in the
morning preparations were made to mount a mortar on Bolingbroke church
tower, which would have rendered the castle untenable. During the day its
defenders fired upon their assailants to some purpose, for some of the
latter were killed, and Quartermaster Vermuyden, son of the famous Dutch
engineer, was bruised by a shot. The cavalry, whose troops were scattered
throughout the neighbouring villages, were ordered by Manchester to
rendezvous at Horncastle; but Fairfax, who commanded that way, had his
outposts at Thimbleby and Edlington driven in. The former troop tried to
get into Horncastle, but found it barricaded by the Royalists; and on
their joining Fairfax at Kirkby, whither Manchester rode that day, the
first order was countermanded, and the rendezvous fixed at Kirkby and
Bolingbroke. On Wednesday the 11th, the foot was drawn up at the latter
place; but the horse under Fairfax and Cromwell—who was unwilling to
fight on account of the hard duty of the last few days—advanced two miles
through Asgarby to the higher ground at Winceby, five miles south-east
of Horncastle. The Cavaliers, under Sir John Henderson, arrived at
the same point from Horncastle by the hill road through High Toynton,
their object being the relief of the besieged castle; and it is said
that neither party expected to meet its opponents so soon. The King’s
troops had seventy-four colours of horse and twenty-one of dragoons,
with some infantry in the rear; and the “rebel” horse were as numerous,
though their companies were fewer. The passwords for the two sides are
variously given as for the King “Cavendish” and “Newcastle,” and for
the Parliament “Religion” and “Truth and Peace.”[125] The armies met on
a high plateau—one of the highest points of the Southern Wolds; on the
north-east was a deep ravine, now called the Ramshaw, which prevented
the free manœuvring of the Royalist cavalry. A strategist like Cromwell
would see his advantage at a glance; and about midday, with the vanguard
singing their battle-psalm, he charged the Royalist left wing under
Henderson, after their dragoons had fired the first volley. He was
received, however, with a second, which killed the horse under him; and
as he rose to his feet he was knocked down by Sir Ingram Hopton,[126]
who called to him to yield. But his assailant was speedily killed in
the rush, while he himself secured another horse from a trooper. The
fight had lasted about half-an-hour, when the Royalist right and centre
under Sir W. Saville were seized with panic at a charge from Fairfax,
and broke in flight. The disadvantage of the ground was now apparent.
The Royalist horse were driven back upon the foot, which had no room
to deploy and let them pass; and tradition says that at the boundary
between Winceby and Scrafield—along what is still known as “Slash Lane”—a
closed gate intercepted their headlong flight, and here the Roundhead
troopers, pressing upon the confused multitude, did terrible execution.
Their victory was complete; and the pursuit was continued, in spite
of the tired horses, beyond Horncastle. Eight hundred prisoners were
taken, and the number of the dead, some of whom were drowned in crossing
the fens, is variously placed between 500 and 1000. The Parliament’s
loss was trifling, and included but a single officer. The affair was
entirely a cavalry action, for Manchester’s foot was not engaged, and
the Royalist infantry seem to have run away without striking a blow. If
the scythes now displayed on the walls of Horncastle Church were carried,
as tradition says, by some of the foot at Winceby, it seems that many of
them were peasant levies, indifferently armed.

The consequences of the victory, for the moment at least, were
far-reaching. A Puritan chronicler[127] could truthfully exclaim:
“Yorkshire is discouraged, Lincolnshire is delivered, Cambridge is
secured.” On the very day of Winceby some of Newcastle’s forts at Hull
were captured by the garrison; and the following day he raised the siege
and retreated to York. On the 20th Lincoln capitulated to Manchester, who
soon after laid siege to Gainsborough.[128] Manchester did his best by
persuasion to win back the county to Parliament; and a number of Royalist
gentry changed sides from a rumour that the King was bringing over an
army of native Irish. The scare of “Popery” was always the Parliament’s
strongest card. Their own alliance at this time with the equally foreign
Scots, which really changed the fortune of the war, aroused no such
feeling. Late in the year a force of 800 Danes, sent by the King’s
uncle, Christian IV., landed on the Lincolnshire coast, and met with a
warmer reception than their pirate forefathers. The trained bands were
called out, and killed about fifty of them, forcing the rest back upon
their ships. Winter set in early, and there was much snow in November.
The force besieging Gainsborough suffered much privation; and an Essex
officer among them writes:[129] “Our lying in the field hath lost us more
men than have been taken away either by the sword or bullet.” He adds
that at the time of writing he had only two shillings, and his troop was
without money, even for shoeing their horses, repairing saddles, &c. The
perseverance of Fairfax, who was in command, was at length rewarded by
the surrender of the town on December 20.

In the following month (January 1644), the Newark people addressed
a “remonstrance” to the King on the condition of Lincolnshire. They
represented that the whole county “is now in possession of the Rebels,”
mentioning in particular “that seditious town of Boston,” and urged
that, unless a diversion was made by his Majesty’s troops elsewhere,
the whole force of the county, which was “above 5000 foot and twenty
troops of horse,” would be “poured down” upon them. About the same time
a hot dispute arose in Parliament about the Lincolnshire command. Lord
Willoughby had much resented his supersession by the Earl of Manchester,
which in his opinion lacked the authority of Parliament. Cromwell, as
usual, was ready with the first blow. He moved that Lord Willoughby cease
to be Major-General in Lincolnshire, as he had abandoned Gainsborough
and Lincoln in the summer without necessity, and had permitted loose
and profane conduct among his soldiers. These charges caused much
ill-feeling. Sir Christopher Wray warmly defended Willoughby, who
challenged Manchester to a duel; and three of Wray’s sons went so far as
to cudgel one of the Earl’s officers. Cromwell’s motion, however, was
carried; and with much difficulty Willoughby was induced to serve under
Manchester. With the Lincolnshire levies he appears to have taken part
in the siege of Newark in March; and, according to Mrs. Hutchinson, the
brilliant feat of Prince Rupert in relieving the place and capturing
most of the besieging force (March 22), was only rendered possible by
the cowardly flight of the Lincoln men. This exploit caused such a panic
that within three days Lincoln, Sleaford, and even distant Crowland
were abandoned by their garrisons, and the defences of Gainsborough were
dismantled. In his remonstrance to the House of Lords on April 8 the Earl
of Essex himself used the words—“Lincolnshire is lost.” Two days before,
however, Crowland had been recovered; and in three weeks Manchester and
Cromwell were advancing against Lincoln. On May 3, with his army drawn
up at Canwick, Manchester summoned the city by trumpet, and, on being
denied, sent two regiments of foot against it, while Cromwell with 2000
cavalry held in check a relieving force. The garrison were expelled from
the lower town and retreated into the Castle, after attempting to set
fire to many houses. The assault on the Castle, which was delayed two
days by heavy rain, took place on Monday, the 6th; and the infantry came
on with such ardour that, despite the slippery state of the hill, the
works were taken in a quarter of an hour. The Royalist loss was 900 in
killed and prisoners—the latter including the governor, Sir Francis Fane,
and Sir Charles Dalison. The upper town, having been taken by storm,
was given over to the soldiers for pillage. It was on this occasion
that the Cathedral suffered most at the hands of Puritanism. Pleading a
recent ordinance of Parliament, the troopers tore up all the sepulchral
brasses, damaged the carvings, and smashed the painted windows. If we
are to believe “Aulicus,” the Oxford newswriter, whose statements are
disputed, they even stabled their horses in the nave. Other churches were
much injured in the assault. St. Swithin’s was destroyed by fire; St.
Martin’s and St. Michael’s were much damaged by cannon; and St. Botolph’s
fell down two years later through the injuries which it now received. Two
extra-mural churches, St. Nicholas’ and St. Peter’s Eastgate, had already
been demolished by Lord Willoughby’s order as interfering with the city’s
defences.

The whole county had now been reoccupied for the Parliament; and
Manchester, throwing a bridge across the Trent at Gainsborough, marched
with the army of the Eastern Association to besiege Newcastle in York.
The victory of Marston Moor on July 2 decided the fate of the North
and East of England. But in the next few weeks the King gained marked
successes in the West; and on the return of Manchester to Lincoln
on August 6, there were divided counsels among the Parliamentary
commanders, which developed later into an open breach between Cromwell
and Manchester. For four weeks the latter lay inactive at Lincoln, though
Cromwell vehemently urged him to besiege Newark. When at length he moved
southwards on September 4, the Newark garrison resumed their activity,
and appeared before Sir Robert Carr’s fortified house at Sleaford, the
defenders of which had to retire upon Lincoln. On October 5 a force of
500 Cavaliers captured and taxed Stamford; and perhaps it was part of
the same band which, a day or two later, once more occupied Crowland for
the King. This daring move brought the Fen men out in strength, though
at the time the pay of the Boston garrison was four months in arrear;
and by October 12 a force of 4000 men of the trained bands, under Sir
T. Fairfax and Fleetwood, had assembled to block up the watery citadel.
But rain fell in torrents, and most of the besiegers had to be sent back
to their counties, although the approaches to Crowland were carefully
guarded. On October 29, the water having subsided, a closer investment
became possible; and a body of horse under Colonel Hacker was detached
to confront a relieving force from Newark. The two bodies came into
collision at Denton, when, in Colonel Hacker’s words, his men “shouted
as if the skies would have fallen” and fell upon the enemy, who fled,
leaving 400 prisoners. Three weeks later another attempt at relief was
frustrated by a Royalist repulse near Grantham; and on November 6 an
ordinance of Parliament provided for the erection of three forts against
Crowland at a cost of £600. In the first week of December the famished
garrison of 275 men, whose besiegers had been subsisting comfortably on
fish and wild fowl, were allowed to march off to Newark without their
arms.

The campaign of 1645 was almost wholly unfavourable to the King. When
the two armies faced each other at Naseby on June 14, for the decisive
struggle, Colonel Rossiter, with the Lincolnshire troops, arrived just
in time to take part in Cromwell’s charge on the Royalist left wing. The
King retreated eastward after his defeat; but in August he was again
approaching the Associated Counties with an army of about 3000 men. In
that month the Newarkers made two raids upon Stamford, and carried off
some of their opponents; and on the 23rd the King himself passed through
the town. But his cause was declining rapidly; and on April 27, 1646, he
left Oxford in disguise to take refuge with the Scots before Newark. The
night of May 3—his last as a free man—he passed at Stamford in the house
of Mr. Wolph; and with the surrender of Newark by his command on May 6,
two days after he reached the Scots, the first Civil War ended.

In the second Civil War of 1648 Lincolnshire took little part. Early
in June an attempt was made by Michael Hudson, rector of Uffington—the
chaplain who had guided the King in disguise through the eastern
counties—to raise a Royalist force. Accompanied by Stiles, the Crowland
parson, he occupied Woodcroft House, near Stamford, where he was soon
besieged. On the surrender of the place he was denied quarter, and,
having been thrown into the moat, was “barbarously knocked on the
head.” A more serious rising took place at the end of the month. A body
of Cavaliers from Pontefract, 600 strong, entered the Isle of Axholme
and pushed on to Lincoln, where they doubtless hoped to find arms and
ammunition, but the magazine had been removed to Hull. After plundering
the houses of the chief Parliamentarians, they attacked the Bishop’s
Palace, whither the little garrison of a hundred had retired, and
reduced it in three hours; they then wrecked and burnt the building,
leaving it in ruins. But their commander, Sir Philip Monkton, found it
impossible to hold the town, and on July 4 his force was defeated and
dispersed near Nottingham by Colonel Rossiter, who commanded for the
Parliament in Lincolnshire.

At the outset of the struggle the feeling of Lindsey inclined towards
the King; but the insecurity produced by the constant forays from Newark
turned the balance the other way. Holland and Kesteven, especially the
fen district, supported the Parliament. The nobility and gentry were
about evenly divided. Of the two chief peers, Montagu Bertie, second Earl
of Lindsey, followed the King through all his misfortunes, and was one of
the few who attended his funeral; Theophilus Clinton, Earl of Lincoln,
who held Tattershall Castle for the Parliament throughout the war,
changed sides, like Lord Willoughby, in 1647, and with him was impeached
and thrown into the Tower, when the Independents gained the upper hand.
Of the principal county families (besides those already mentioned),
the Dymokes, Heneages, Husseys, Nevilles, Skipwiths, and Thorolds were
for the King; the Brownlows, Fitzwilliams, Massingberds, Nelthorpes,
Trollopes, and Whichcotes for the Parliament; and the Andersons,
Cholmeleys, Harringtons, Listers, and Pelhams were divided. According to
one list,[130] the number of persons in the county compounding for their
estates was 180, and the total amount of their compositions was £80,800.
This, however, does not include the sums set aside for the maintenance of
ministers in parishes where the compounder possessed an impropriation.
In some instances where the composition-fine could not be paid in full,
the estates were either let or sold outright to some supporter of the
Parliament at a ruinous loss. This happened to the estates of the Earl
of Lindsey near Alford; his mansion and lands at Belleau were sold below
their value to Sir Harry Vane the younger, who was residing there in
1655, when he was sent for by Cromwell and imprisoned in Carisbrooke
Castle. Nor was it only persons of influence and large holders of
property who were subject to fine. Anthony Gurley of the Close, Lincoln,
had to pay £1, which was assessed upon “his books and apparel.” Sutton
Dalton, who had some landed property, was fined £100 for spending only
two days in Newark garrison. Sir William Clarke, of North Scarle, used
to go to Newark on market-days, and for this offence was imprisoned
for six months and had to pay £21. Of the seven Associated Counties,
Lincolnshire, which had suffered the most heavily by the war, contributed
to the Treasury by far the greatest sum in fines inflicted upon Royalist
estates.

The Church history of the county would require a separate chapter;
but much of the material has been lost beyond recall. When Walker was
compiling his “Sufferings of the Clergy,” in Anne’s reign, he could
not get proper returns from Lincolnshire; and the number of ejected
clergy which he gives (37) must be far below the true figure. Bishop and
Dean-and-Chapter had been abolished in November 1643, and the cathedral
was served by a Sunday-lecturer, who, though he may have been episcopally
ordained, yet in sympathy, like Hudibras,

    “Was Presbyterian true blue.”

In 1644 the Earl of Manchester, who presided over a commission for
purging the Association of “scandalous” ministers, appointed committees
for the separate counties; but the minutes of the Lincolnshire Committee
have not survived; perhaps they were not kept; for the business was done
by sub-committees of five, who would not allow the accused clergyman
to be present “lest it should discourage the witnesses,” and made him
pay even for a copy of the depositions. The clergy of Stamford were all
deprived for Royalism; and when Paul Prestland, the rector of Market
Deeping, fled to avoid arrest, his wife and children had to spend many
months first in a barn and then in the belfry of the church. Thomas
Gibson, vicar of Horncastle, a man of exemplary piety, was imprisoned
five times, once spending four months in Tattershall Castle, and on his
release had to maintain himself by teaching. Several clergy were ejected
simply for going to His Majesty’s garrisons; against one, the rector of
Hykeham, it was even made a charge that he had by him many copies of the
Oxford “Aulicus” gazette. Some were deprived for using the prayer book,
or complying strictly with its directions; the rector of Hareby lost his
living for “preaching but seldom, and not being above half-an-hour in
the pulpit, and having no books.” Though many of the clergy must have
taken the Covenant, there is little trace that the Presbyterian “Classis”
system was ever adopted within the county. In fact, the ease with which
Anglicanism was restored, after eighteen years of persecution, is strong
proof that even the most Puritan districts were weary of ecclesiastical
chaos.




DODDINGTON HALL

BY REV. R. E. G. COLE, M.A.


Some six miles to the south-west of Lincoln, well within view of
the great Minster on its sovereign hill, but on the very border of
Nottinghamshire, stands the little village of Doddington, otherwise
Doddington-Pigot, situated on the slightly rising ground which here
forms the watershed between the valleys of the Witham and the Trent. Its
most notable feature is the Elizabethan mansion, known as Doddington
Hall, which is the more prominent, inasmuch as it is not secluded in
any surrounding park, but stands guarded only by its own picturesque
gate-house, in close and friendly proximity to church, and rectory, and
village.

Needless to say, the place had a long history before the present Hall
was built. Already at the time of the Domesday Survey it had its church
and priest, and its manor had been given by Ailric, its owner in Edward
the Confessor’s reign, as an endowment to the newly built Abbey of
Westminster. Mention is especially made of the woodland, which still is
such a feature of the place, and which then formed an unbroken tract, a
mile and a half in length, and half a mile in breadth. No other property
was held by the Abbey in Lincolnshire, and doubtless the distance
made its personal management by the Abbot and convent difficult and
inconvenient. At all events, from very early times the manor was held
under them, for a fee-farm rent of £12 per annum, by the knightly family
of Pigot, whose long tenure, lasting for some ten generations, attached
their name to that of the place, to distinguish it from the several
other parishes so-called. Even so, difficulties at times arose; and
in 1303 the Abbot had to make complaint in the King’s courts that Sir
Baldwin Pigot had failed to render the customary rents and services, and
that when he caused his beasts at Doddington to be seized, the knight
and his men had rescued them and assaulted the Abbot’s servants. As a
rule, however, this fixed rent of £12 continued to be paid by successive
tenants to the monastery until the Dissolution. It then passed into
possession of the Crown; in 1661 it was sold with other Crown rents by
Charles II. to Sir Edmund Turnor, and from his direct descendant it was
redeemed by the late owner of Doddington in 1860, after a continuous
payment of some 700 years.

It is not our purpose here, however, to trace the early history of the
place. It will be sufficient to say that as early as 1194 John Pigot
asserted against the Abbot his right to hold not only the manor, but
the advowson of the rectory, the patronage of which has remained to
his successors down to the present day. Another Sir John Pigot in 1275
claimed to have not only right of free chase and warren in his woods
at Doddington, but also his own gallows there—a right which he pleaded
that his ancestors had exercised for a hundred years past. The last of
the family, yet another Sir John Pigot, was High Sheriff of Lincolnshire
in 1433, and died without surviving issue in 1450. His widow not only
retained possession of the estate, in spite of two remarriages, but
contrived to sell the reversion of it after her death to her neighbour,
Sir Thomas Burgh, Knt.

Sir Thomas Burgh, who was summoned to Parliament in 1487, and in the same
year was created K.G., became the owner of Doddington in 1473, and the
inheritance of it continued in his family for some 110 years. Their chief
Lincolnshire manor place, however, was at the Old Hall, Gainsborough, and
Doddington was an outlying possession with which they had little personal
connection. We cannot wonder, therefore, that when Thomas, 5th Baron
Burgh, also K.G., fell into difficulties, chiefly owing to the burdens
entailed by his honourable offices as Governor of Brill and Lord Deputy
of Ireland under the thrifty Queen Elizabeth, Doddington was the first of
his estates sold to meet his expenses.

This was in 1586, and the purchaser was John Savile, Esq., son of
Sir Robert Savile, of Howley, co. York. At this time he was M.P. for
Lincoln, and doubtless found it convenient to have a residence in the
neighbourhood; and as John Savile of Doddington he held the office of
High Sheriff of Lincolnshire in 1590. Later he became “the famous Sir
John Savile,” who was several times Knight of the Shire for Yorkshire,
and was created Lord Savile of Pontefract in 1628. His son Thomas, born
at Doddington in 1590, became Comptroller and Treasurer of the Household
to Charles I., and was created Earl of Sussex in 1644.

In 1593 Mr. Savile, having ceased to represent Lincoln, sold his
Doddington estate. It was bought by Thomas Tailor, gent., who for many
years had been Registrar to the Bishops of Lincoln, and whose neat
handwriting may still be seen in the diocesan registers, dating from
at least 1570. His residence hitherto had been in the parish of St.
Martin, Lincoln, in which his two wives and others of his family were
buried. The first of these wives was a daughter of Sir William Hansard,
of South Kelsey, Knt.; the second a daughter of Martin Hollingworth,
Mayor of Lincoln in 1560. Evidently the office of Episcopal Registrar
was a lucrative one, for it appears by the inquisition taken after his
death that, besides Doddington, he had purchased five other Lincolnshire
manors, with messuages and lands in other parishes to the extent of
nearly 10,000 acres.

Whatever the ancient manor-house at Doddington may have been like—and it
had at least served as a residence for one of Mr. Savile’s position—we
must suppose that it had become out of date, and not suited for the
requirements of a man of Thomas Tailor’s wealth. And if we wish to see
what sort of mansion was considered suitable, when Elizabeth was Queen,
as the residence of a man of means, wishing to retire and set up as a
country gentleman, we may find one in the present Hall, which remains
in all essentials in its original state as it was built by him between
the years 1593, when he purchased the estate, and 1607, when he died.
Probably the date 1600 on a leaden plate at the top of the central
cupola, marks the year of its completion.

Its site, closely adjoining the parish church, was doubtless that of
the former manor-house. The principal entrance is on the east, through
a three-gabled gate-house, two storeys high, standing back from the
public road. Coped walls of brick connect this gate-house with the Hall
itself, and enclose a quadrangle, which appears in 1700 as an open grassy
court, but is now well-nigh filled by four stately cedars of Lebanon. A
similarly walled quadrangle on the west is laid out as a flower garden.
Between these courts is placed the house itself, facing east and west,
and rising in three storeys to the height of 52 feet, surmounted by a
plain parapet and flat roof of lead, from which rise three octagonal
turrets of brick, capped with leaden cupolas. Roughly speaking, its
ground plan is of that E-shape, fancifully said to represent the initial
letter of the great Queen’s name, with projecting wings at either end,
and a smaller projection in the centre, the lowest storey of which forms
an entrance porch on either side. Its extreme length from north to south
is 160 feet, and its greatest breadth at the wings is 75 feet. The house,
as well as the gate-house and connecting walls, is built of brick,
with stone groins, string-courses and coping, and has large square,
stone-mullioned windows. Many of the small-sized bricks, made in fields
close by, and of unsifted clay, are over-burnt and black; these are built
in alternately with the others, or in parts are arranged so as to form a
diamond pattern.

We may be permitted here to quote the description of the house as given
by such an authority on the architecture of the period as Mr. Gotch.
“Twelve years later,” he says, than Barlborough in Derbyshire, “we get
Doddington in Lincolnshire (1595), a plan which reverts to the type of
Montacute. It has the usual characteristics of the simplest kind—wings
one room thick—the entrance at the end of the hall, leading on the
left to the buttery, pantry, and kitchens; the parlour at the head of
the hall, and the principal staircase adjacent. Here, however, as at
Montacute, the hall is only one storey in height; it has a room above
it, the great chamber, and on the top floor the gallery extends over the
whole central part from wing to wing.

“There is an entrance court in front of the house, enclosed by a wall. It
is approached through one of the quaint gate-houses of the time, which
were a reminiscence of a more turbulent state of society, when it was
necessary for all who went to the house to do so under the porter’s eye,
but which in the calmer times of Elizabeth were occupied by some of the
numerous functionaries who ministered to the pleasures of the rich. The
detail at Doddington is of the plainest, the only attempt at richness
being round the front door. The windows are of reasonable size, the
strings are narrow, and are all of the same quasi-classic profile. The
parapet is perfectly plain, and the roof is without gables, the sky-line
being broken, as at Barlborough, with turrets, formed by carrying up
the porch and the two projections in the internal angles of the front.
The house is an example of a plain and businesslike type, which may be
accounted for by the fact that it was built for a business man, one
Thomas Tailor, Registrar to the Bishop of Lincoln.”[131]

[Illustration: DODDINGTON HALL.]

What style Thomas Tailor kept up in his stately mansion we cannot tell,
but that he had not impaired his fortune in the building of it is
evident from his will, proved at Lincoln, 30th November 1607, in which
he disposes of considerable sums of money, while the inquisition taken
after his death sets forth in detail his numerous landed estates. Though
his two wives and most of his children had been buried at St. Martin’s
Church, Lincoln, he willed his “bodie to be buried in the parishe church
of Doddington.” He was buried there on 26th November 1607, as we learn
from the transcript of a former parish register, though there is nothing
to mark the place.

He was succeeded by his only son, a second Thomas Tailor, born at Lincoln
in 1580, who seems to have been a somewhat eccentric character, if we may
judge from the following stories related of him, which were taken down
from the mouth of an old inhabitant of Doddington:—“Tommy Tailor once
told his steward who was going to Lincoln to market to bring him a goose.
On his return he asked about it, and the man told him they were so dear
he had not got one. So Tommy shut him up in a room with a lot of money on
the table, and kept him there two days, asking him when he came out if he
had now discovered that the use of money was to buy what one wanted, not
to keep to look at. Another day he met a woman on the road carrying some
butter; he asked what it was a pound. The woman told him, and he bought
it of her, taking it and putting it on the branch of a tree. She walked
on, but soon turned back to take it away. However, he was lying in wait,
and pounced on her just as she had taken it down, and said he had bought
and paid for it, and he should put it where he liked. Another person
on whom he played the same kind of trick took away the chicken he had
bought, threw his money at him, and called him _an owd fule_. He kept his
money in a great chest, and hid it away, and, unfortunately, died very
suddenly of smallpox before he explained where he had put it.” Some have
fancied that his ghost still walks the Hall in anxiety for his hidden
money; and it was commonly believed of a late owner of Doddington, who
was fond of employing his leisure in working in the woods, that he was in
search of “Tommy Tailor’s _chist_.”

As Thomas Tailor of Doddington-Pigot, he held the office of High Sheriff
of Lincolnshire in 1620, and in the visitation of the county in 1634 he
signs the short pedigree of his family, comprising only two generations.
It was, perhaps, a mark of his eccentricity that, though he had served
as High Sheriff, he had not cared to apply for a grant of arms, and the
herald has appended to the pedigree a note: “He had been high shreife,
but had no coate.” It is doubtful whether he had ever married; but, at
all events, he left no issue, and in his nuncupative will, declared 13th
December 1652, he acknowledges his niece, Elizabeth, Lady Hussey, to be
his heiress.

Thomas Tailor had lived through all the stress of the Civil War, without
either himself or his house having apparently been affected by it. In
the course of it Lincoln had been twice besieged and taken; Cromwell’s
forces had encamped on the neighbouring moor of North Scarle, and must
have passed within sight of Doddington as they marched thence to defeat
the Royalists at Gainsborough. The house and parish must have been well
within reach of the Parliamentary forces at Lincoln, as well as of the
King’s troops at Newark, who on one occasion extended their forays past
it as far as Kettlethorpe, and on another burnt the very similar hall of
the Jermyn family at Torksey, which was garrisoned by the Parliamentary
troops. Yet he and his estates seem to have escaped unscathed. It was far
otherwise with the family into whose possession Doddington now passed.

Elizabeth, Lady Hussey, who now inherited it, was the only child of the
first Thomas Tailor’s daughter, Jane, by her marriage with George Anton,
Esq., Recorder of Lincoln, 1598-1612, and M.P. for that city in 1588 and
1592. She married Sir Edward Hussey, of Honington, Knt. and Bart., and so
added Doddington to the possessions of that distinguished Lincolnshire
family. Sir Edward, her husband, was eldest son of Sir Charles Hussey,
of Honington, Knt., and grandson of Sir Robert Hussey, who was a younger
brother of John, Lord Hussey of Sleaford, beheaded by Henry VIII. for his
supposed complicity in the Lincolnshire rising of 1536. He was already a
knight at the time of his father’s death in 1609, having received that
honour at Whitehall in 1608, and shortly afterwards, on 29th June 1611,
he was advanced to the dignity of baronet. The original bond, cancelled
by being cut into shreds, by which he bound himself to furnish £1095 by
three yearly instalments for the maintenance of thirty foot soldiers in
Ireland for three years, is still preserved at the Hall. He was High
Sheriff in 1618 and 1637, and Knight of the Shire in the Parliament
summoned to meet at Westminster, 13th April 1640. When the Civil War
broke out he exerted himself zealously on the Royalist side as one of
the King’s Commissioners of Array; and in 1642, when the loyal gentry
of Lincolnshire resolved to provide horses for the King’s service, Sir
Edward undertook to supply six, his brother Sir Charles Hussey, of
Dunholme, providing two. Later he and his brother and other Lincolnshire
loyalists assembled at Newark for its defence, and there Sir Charles
Hussey died. Shortly before its surrender by the King’s order in 1646,
we find Sir Edward at Honington endeavouring to make his peace with
the Parliament. He was very aged and infirm, he says; he had taken the
Covenant; his estates had been sequestered; and he asks that his wife may
be allowed to compound for him. In spite of his pleading, the great fine
of £10,200 was imposed. This was finally reduced to £8750, of which £4500
was raised and paid in December 1647, and three months later Sir Edward
Hussey died. His eldest son, Thomas Hussey, some time M.P. for Grantham,
had predeceased him in 1641; the next brother, Captain John Hussey, had
been slain in the fight with the Parliamentary troops at Gainsborough in
1643. It was left to his widow, and to his eldest son’s widow, Rhoda, now
remarried to Ferdinando, 2nd Baron Fairfax, to clear the impoverished
estates, and to raise the remainder of the fine, which was finally paid
off in 1650. For this purpose Lady Hussey had to sell her jointure, and
it must have been a relief to her when, on her uncle’s death at the end
of 1652, she inherited Doddington and his other estates. She enjoyed
them, however, for no more than six years, dying early in 1658.

She was succeeded in the ownership of Doddington by her grandson, Sir
Thomas Hussey, Bart., born in 1639, whose long minority, with the
addition of his grandmother’s inheritance, must have done much to repair
the shattered fortunes of the family. At the Restoration we find him,
with his mother, Lady Fairfax, then a second time a widow, living at
Doddington, and contributing, himself £60, and Lady Fairfax £30, towards
a loan for the restored King.

In 1662, 20th February, the marriage took place at Great St. Helen’s,
London, of “Sir Thomas Hussey, Bart. of Doddington, bach., and Sarah
Langham, aged twenty-one, daughter of Sir John Langham, Knt. and Bart.,
of Cottesbroke, Northants.” Portraits of Sir Thomas and Lady Hussey still
look down on the gallery of their former home; and what the house itself
resembled in their time we may see from the engraving of it, which was
executed by John Kip, after a drawing by Leonard Knyff, _c._ 1700. It
represents the Hall and gate-house much as they are at present, with an
open grassy court between. Gardens formally laid out, and orchards of
young trees in rows, surround the house; but we cannot tell how much of
this is due to the artist’s imagination.

Sir Thomas Hussey was High Sheriff of Lincolnshire in 1668, and Knight
of the Shire 1681-95. As such he took a prominent part in the reception
of a new charter granted to the city by Charles II. in 1685. On this
occasion Sir Thomas Hussey, driving in, we must suppose, from Doddington,
was met at the entrance of Lincoln by the Mayor and Corporation, who
received the new charter from him on the green against St. Katharine’s.
After this Sir Thomas, with the Mayor and aldermen, walked up the city
to the Guildhall, with bands playing and bells ringing, and the conduits
running claret wine, that all might drink the King’s and the Duke of
York’s health. At the Guildhall the charter was read publicly by the
town-clerk, Mr. Original Peart, and the ceremony terminated with a great
dinner at the Mayor’s, and more drinking of healths. Towards the charges
of renewing the charter, the Bishop of Lincoln gave £20, and Sir Thomas
Hussey and three other gentlemen £10 a-piece.

Sir Thomas Hussey died 19th December 1706, and was buried, as his wife
and many children who died young had been, in the vault of the Hussey
family in Honington Church. There his monument, with his bust in marble,
may still be seen; but it is in their house of Doddington that the
portraits of himself and Dame Sarah, his wife, and their three surviving
daughters have been preserved. The church, too, possesses a memorial of
him, in the shape of a handsome silver paten and flagon, bearing his
coat-of-arms, and the date 1707. His niece Rhoda, daughter of his sister,
Rhoda Hussey, by her marriage with John Amcotts, of Aisthorpe, Esq., had
already presented to the church a silver alms-dish in 1671, engraved with
the Amcotts arms. As he left no male issue, his baronetcy passed to his
cousin, Sir Edward Hussey, of Caythorpe, who already held the baronetcy
conferred by Charles II. on his father in 1661.

His three surviving daughters became co-heiresses of his estates. The
eldest of these was Rebecca Hussey, who “after a life spent principally
in devotion and acts of charity, died unmarried, 21st August 1714.” She
took care that her charities should not end with her life. Two at least
of these—Rebecca Hussey’s Book Charity, and Rebecca Hussey’s Charity for
the Relief of Poor Debtors—have kept her name in remembrance down to the
present day. The latter was paid for many years out of the Doddington
estate, but is now represented by an invested sum of £3192. The youngest
was Elizabeth, who in 1714 married Richard, son and heir of Sir William
Ellys, of Nocton, Bart., sometime M.P. for Grantham, but who died
childless in 1724, and is commemorated with her mother and sister Rebecca
on a monument in Honington Church.

Between these came Sarah, who had been already married at the age of
twenty-two, at St. Margaret’s, Westminster, in 1700, during her father’s
lifetime, to Robert Apreece, Esq., of Washingley, co. Hunts. In a
partition of their father’s estates between her and her sister Elizabeth,
in 1717, Honington had fallen to her share, but under her sister’s
will in 1724 she became possessed of Doddington also for her life,
with remainder to her son and daughter as tenants in common. Her son,
Thomas Apreece, inherited Washingley and Honington, and was the father
of Sir Thomas Hussey-Apreece, created a baronet in 1782. But Mrs. Sarah
Apreece bought up her son’s contingent share of Doddington, and by her
will, dated 1747, she settled the whole estate on her daughter Rhoda,
the wife of Captain Francis Blake-Delaval, R.N., the owner of the great
Northumbrian estates of Seaton-Delaval, Ford Castle, and Dissington. It
was evidently her wish to secure the continuance of her father’s name
and estate, for she strictly entailed Doddington on the second son of
her daughter’s marriage, enjoining that he should take the name and
arms of Hussey, and resign Doddington to his next brother, if he should
succeed to his father’s estates. We are told that amongst their many
seats Captain and Mrs. Blake-Delaval resided chiefly at Seaton-Delaval
and at Doddington, and we may well believe that it was to Mrs. Delaval’s
affection for her family, and her desire to perpetuate their memory in
the house that was her own inheritance, that we owe the many family
groups of her children, which seem to have been designed for the places
they occupy on its walls.

She died in 1759, leaving a numerous and distinguished family of eight
sons and four daughters, remarkable for their good looks and talents,
which made them of note in the society of the day. Especially was this
the case with the eldest son, Sir Francis Blake-Delaval, K.B., who
inherited his father’s great estates in Northumberland, and made himself
conspicuous in the annals of the time for his wit and gallantry, his
reckless extravagance and dissipation. He, however, was not otherwise
connected with Doddington than as a visitor to the house, to which
he brought his theatrical friend Foote in 1752, and where his own
full-length figure, painted by Sir Joshua Reynolds, may still be seen.
We are more concerned with his next brother, on whom Doddington had
been entailed. This was John Delaval, born in 1728, who, in accordance
with Mrs. Apreece’s will, assumed the name of Hussey on his mother’s
death in 1759, and became successively Sir John Hussey-Delaval, Bart.,
in 1761, Baron Delaval of Redford in the peerage of Ireland in 1783,
and Baron Delaval of Seaton-Delaval in the peerage of Great Britain in
1786. He represented Berwick in Parliament from 1754 to his elevation
to the British peerage. In 1750 he had married Susannah, widow of John
Potter, Esq., Under-Secretary of State for Ireland; she was his first
cousin, her mother having been Margaret Delaval, his father’s sister.
The young couple at once made Doddington their country residence, John
Delaval acting as virtual owner of the mansion and estate, both of which
showed signs of energetic management and lavish expenditure. New marble
mantelpieces were bought for the more important rooms of the hall in
1760, and to the same date we may ascribe the classic broken architraves
with which they and many of the doors are surmounted. The present
great staircase was put up in 1761, and the long gallery refloored at a
cost of £500, under the direction of Mr. Lumby, the surveyor of Lincoln
Cathedral. At the same time the enclosure of the moorlands on the estate
was vigorously carried on, many thousand plants of quick being purchased
for enclosure, and labourers continuously employed in dyking and fencing
and paring sods. Another improvement was the formation of a hop-garden of
twenty-six acres in the parish—the only one, it is said, in Lincolnshire.
In this Lady Delaval took especial interest, and part of it was known as
My Lady’s Acre. In 1770, on the death of his eldest daughter Rhoda at the
age of eighteen, he undertook the restoration of the church, adding to it
the present south aisle and west tower, and giving it the shape which it
retains to-day. He showed his good taste, when church architecture was
at its lowest ebb, by copying, though unskilfully, in his additions the
fourteenth century work which remained in the older part.

In 1771, however, his eldest brother, Sir F. B. Delaval, died, and Sir
John Hussey-Delaval succeeded to the great Northumberland estates.
According to the settlement, Doddington ought to have passed from him
to his next brother, Edward Hussey-Delaval, Esq., but a compromise was
agreed to by which he retained possession of Doddington on condition of
paying his brother an annuity of £400. A consideration for this mentioned
in the deed is that he found the mansion and offices in a very ruinous
and decayed condition, and had laid out upwards of £17,000 in building
farm-houses, planting timber, making fences, and draining and enclosing
the moors.

Naturally, with his accession to these more important estates, his
interest in Doddington declined. The restoration of the church, begun
so energetically in 1770, was not completed till 1775. On Sunday, 18th
June 1775, the church was reopened in the presence of 800 people, the
Sub-dean of Lincoln, the Rev. Robert Dowbiggin, taking the chief part
in the ceremony. By that time, however, Sir John’s only son was dying
at Bristol, and none of the family were present. In their absence, the
rector, the Rev. R. P. Hurton, entertained at dinner at the Hall “thirty
gentlemen and ladies of the first fashion in the county, including the
Champion of England, both Neviles (_i.e._ of Thorney and of Wellingore),
Mr. Amcotts (of Kettlethorpe), &c.” Refreshments were liberally provided
for the other less distinguished guests.

The very first funeral that took place in the newly-opened church was
that of Sir John’s only son and heir, John Hussey-Delaval, who died at
the Hotwells, Bristol, on 7th July 1775, in the twentieth year of his
age. On Sunday, 15th July, his body, in charge of a Bristol undertaker,
arrived at Newark, where it was met by Mr. Portes, the Doddington
steward. Next morning they left at ten o’clock, and were met between
Newark and Collingham by all the servants in black hat-bands and gloves.
Within half a mile of Doddington they were met by the labourers, six
of whom in black cloaks, hat-bands, and scarves, acted as bearers. On
arrival at Doddington at 2 P.M. the body was laid in the White Hall till
5 P.M. Again none of the family were present, but the rector and Mrs.
Hurton, with eight others, followed next the body. Then came the tenantry
and a large concourse of people. We learn that “there was a very good
collation and great plenty of victuals, with a very well furnished table
in the Low Paper Parlour, where Mr. Hurton and the other clergymen and
several more dined. The tenants dined in the steward’s room: 4 bottles
of rum, 4 of brandy, 18 of white and 18 of port wine were consumed, and
there was ale enough in the cellar.” The charge of the Bristol undertaker
was £203, 8s. 9d., “besides the local bills, some £43 more.” His father
began to build a handsome mausoleum in the grounds at Seaton-Delaval, but
this was never used, and his body, with that of his sister Sophia, Mrs.
Jadis, who died in 1793, still remains in the vault beneath the church,
in which the only memorial of him consists of the blackened walls which
were so coloured for his funeral.

In the cellars of the Hall there is still some ale which was brewed at
the time of young John Delaval’s birth, 26th May 1756, and was bottled in
order to be drunk at that coming of age which never took place. Some of
the bottles bear the Apreece arms; others a stamp with the name of Sir J.
H. Delaval, Bart., or the initials J.H.D.

After his son’s death Lord Delaval, as he shortly after became, not being
on good terms with Edward Delaval, his brother and next male heir, cut
down all the timber at Doddington that would fetch any money. In the
engraving of the Hall in Sir Thomas Hussey’s time we may see a row of
young elms standing along the churchyard wall. An old man, employed as a
carpenter on the estate, who died, aged 95, in 1858, recollected cutting
these down. It blew hard at the time, and Lord Delaval looked out of a
window of the gate-house, and gave directions how they should fall. They
were then very large, beautiful trees, and the wood quite sound and red.
He recollected also fine oaks all over the lordship, but all were cut
down for bark and “kids.” This is fully confirmed by the estate accounts
of 1775 and the following years, and is the reason why there are no very
old trees on the estate, those now in the extensive woods having grown up
since Lord Delaval’s time.

On June 3, 1780, Lord Delaval’s youngest daughter, Sarah Hussey-Delaval,
then only sixteen, was married by special licence at Grosvenor House,
her father’s London residence, to George Carpenter, second Earl of
Tyrconnel. He is said to have been the handsomest man of his time, while
she is spoken of as “the wild and beautiful Countess of Tyrconnel,” and
as “the lovely Lady Tyrconnel, who had hair of such luxuriance that when
she rode, it floated upon the saddle.” The following month they visited
Doddington. “I am delighted,” writes Lord Tyrconnel, “with Doddington; it
has an air of grandeur and solitude about it which pleases me extremely;
it is a cruel hardship upon it that you should have two other places
which you prefer to it. We have this evening been to Lady Delaval’s hop
ground. We had such a game of Blindman’s Buff in the Hall: Mr. and Mrs.
Hurton and Mrs. Grant were of the party.”

An elder daughter, Frances, had married in 1778 John Fenton-Cawthorne,
Esq., of Wyerside, co. Lanc., who represented Lincoln in Parliament
from 1784 to 1793. Lord Delaval exerted his interest actively in his
favour, and we hear of Lincoln freemen being entertained at dinner at
Doddington, while his steward’s letters to his lordship treat frequently
of electioneering matters at Lincoln, of Mr. Cawthorne’s visits there at
the time of the races, of his dining with the Hunting Club and “at what
they call the Lunitick Club,” and with the aldermen on the day of the
Mayor’s election, of his distribution of coals among the freemen, and of
the three rival candidates in 1790 walking the streets with their colours
flying.

Another of Lord Delaval’s daughters, Elizabeth, was married 21st May
1781, to George, Baron Audley. This marriage also was by special licence
at her father’s town house, which at this time was in Hanover Square. The
rector of Doddington, Mr. Hurton, of whom we have already spoken, went up
to London to perform the ceremony. Lady Audley only lived till 11th July
1785.

Lord Delaval himself died at Seaton-Delaval, 17th May 1808, at the age of
eighty, being found dead in his chair in the breakfast-room. His remains
were conveyed in state from the north, and interred in the family vault
which he had made in St. Paul’s Chapel in Westminster Abbey, in which
his wife Susannah Lady Delaval had already been buried in 1783, and his
favourite daughter, Sarah Hussey, Countess of Tyrconnel, in 1800. The
_Gentleman’s Magazine_ of the day makes mention of “the great funeral
pomp and splendour” of his interment: this may well have been the case,
as the cost of it was no less than £2300. No other monuments, however,
than plain flat stones, with short inscriptions and almost obliterated
coats-of-arms, mark the place of their burial; while above them hang the
tattered banners, begrimed with the London dirt of a hundred years, on
which the arms of Delaval, Blake, and Carpenter (Tyrconnel) may still be
distinguished. At Doddington his only memorial is the hatchment in the
church, which was fixed to the front of the Hall on his death.

He bequeathed Ford Castle to his granddaughter, Lady Susannah Hussey
Carpenter, the only surviving child of his favourite daughter Sarah,
Lady Tyrconnel, whose marriage in 1805 to Henry de la Poer Beresford,
2nd Marquis of Waterford, brought it to that family, in whose possession
it has continued nearly to the present day. Doddington, however, with
Seaton-Delaval and other entailed estates, descended to his next brother,
Edward Hussey-Delaval, the only survivor of that band of eight brothers
on whom Doddington had been successively settled, and not one of whom
left a son to succeed him. As a young man he had been a Fellow-Commoner,
and afterwards a Fellow of Pembroke College, Cambridge. Here he was a
contemporary and friend of the poet Gray, who makes frequent mention of
him in his letters. Later he established himself in a house which he
had built for himself on his own plan and designs on a piece of ground
leased to him by the Crown in Parliament Place. Its site is now covered
by the Houses of Parliament, but two views of it taken from opposite
points, painted by his friend G. Arnold, A.R.A., now hang in the Library
at Doddington, and show its gardens running down to the river-side,
with Westminster Bridge in the near distance. Here he devoted himself
to philosophical and chemical pursuits, being a Fellow of the Royal and
other learned societies, both home and foreign, and gaining their gold
medals and other honours by his various papers and treatises published in
their Transactions, or as independent works. Late in life he had married,
and had an only daughter.

He was in his eightieth year when he succeeded to the family estates,
and seems to have concentrated all his care and interest on Doddington,
buying up, as far as possible, the reversionary interests of his sisters
in it, so as to leave it to his wife and daughter. During the years
1809-12 the whole of the mullioned windows of the Hall were repaired
by him, new stonework and glass being inserted where required. The
Great Fishpond was laid out and its banks planted in 1811, and all the
detached buildings in the Hall yard—laundry and brew-house, stable and
coach-house—were rebuilt in 1814 and 1815. An expert was employed by him
to survey and restore the woods, which Lord Delaval had so devastated
that no timber could be supplied from the estate. Various articles of
furniture, pictures, and ornaments were brought here from Seaton-Delaval.
A survey and valuation of the estate made in 1812 states that the
mansion-house and buildings are in excellent repair.

After six years’ ownership Mr. Delaval died, at the age of eighty-five,
the last legitimate male heir of his ancient family. His death took
place at his house in Parliament Place, 14th August 1814, and he too
was buried in Westminster Abbey, not in the family vault, but in the
nave among the philosophers, the place being simply marked by the name
E. H. DELAVAL, cut on one of the stones of the pavement. In Doddington
Church, which was repaired at his expense in 1810, his hatchment hangs
side by side with that of his brother. Many portraits of him remain at
the Hall representing him either in the family groups, or as a young man
in his gold-tufted college cap, or seated with a greyhound by his side,
or in middle age with the artificial jewels of his making, or as a
white-haired old man of eighty-five sitting at the window of his house
overlooking the Thames.

Seaton-Delaval and his other entailed estates devolved on his nephew, Sir
Jacob Astley, Bart., son of his eldest sister Rhoda, by whose descendants
they are still possessed. But he had bought up the greater part of the
reversionary interests in Doddington, so as to settle them on his wife
and daughter. The latter had married in 1805 James Gunman, Esq., who was
possessed of considerable property in the neighbourhood of Dover and
Coventry, and who was the last of a family singularly devoted to the sea,
which had produced a succession of noted naval captains. The fact that
he died without issue, leaving all his property to his wife, and the
subsequent destruction of his Dover mansion owing to the extension of the
town, has added a fresh strain of interest to the Elizabethan Hall, by
the removal to it of the journals and other memorials of several of these
seamen, including the portrait of Captain Christopher Gunman, the first
of the line, who was captain of the yacht of the Duke of York, afterwards
James II., as well as pictures of the yacht itself, and of the sea-fights
with the Dutch in which he was engaged.

By the wills of Mrs. Gunman, who died in 1825, and of her mother, Mrs.
Hussey-Delaval, who survived till 1829, all their property was left to
their friend, Lieut.-Colonel George Ralph Payne Jarvis, who had served
in the Peninsular War and in the expedition to Walcheren. He came into
residence at the Hall in 1829, and bought up the remaining portions of
the estate, which is now in the possession of his grandson, George Eden
Jarvis, Esq., J.P. and D.L.

Having thus sketched the history of its successive owners, let us enter
the house itself. We shall find it still peopled with their memories,
their portraits looking down on the rooms in which so much of their
lives was passed. Passing through the triple-gabled gate-house which
forms the main entrance, we find ourselves in the east garden or fore
court, now well-nigh filled with four stately cedars of Lebanon. These
might seem coëval with the house itself, but in fact they are coëval
only with the latest family of its owners, having been planted here
about 1829. Fronting us is the central porch on which more elaboration
has been bestowed than on any other part of the building. This admits
us directly into the hall, a room 53 feet in length by 22 feet in
breadth, filling up the whole width of the body of the house. Originally
its floor was plaster, and from this and the general whiteness of its
walls and furniture it was known as the White Hall. But in 1861 it was
refloored with oak grown on the estate, and furnished with more regard
to comfort and suitableness as a general sitting-room for the family. At
one end hangs a fine picture by Guido of the Angel appearing to Hagar
and Ishmael in the wilderness, its purchase and presence here being due
to Mr. Edward Hussey-Delaval’s artistic tastes. The marble mantelpiece
is one of those bought by Lord Delaval in 1761, and over it are ranged
steel caps and helmets; and among these an iron branks or scold’s bridle,
with a projecting spike before the mouth, used as a punishment for
scolding women. Near it is another grim relic of the past—the headpiece
of the irons in which a man, commonly known as Tom Otter, was gibbeted
on Saxilby Moor in 1806 for the murder of his wife. Here, too, we may
see several of the oak carvings, framed as pictures, and remarkable for
their depth of cutting and multiplicity of figures, that were executed by
Colonel Jarvis in his later life.

Passing out of the hall into the northern wing, we enter on the left the
dining-room, panelled in oak, now freed from the white paint with which
it was formerly coated. Over the marble mantelpiece is a portrait of
the late owner of the house, G. K. Jarvis, Esq., painted by Lutyens in
1868. Opposite are the portraits of Mr. Edward Hussey-Delaval with the
artificial gems of which we have already spoken, and of his daughter
Sarah, afterwards Mrs. Gunman, the latter painted by Sir Thomas Lawrence.
Amongst other pictures hanging here are a three-quarter length likeness
of James I. in a quaint drab suit; and a small one of Prince Henry, his
eldest son. At the end of the room the square mirror with deeply carved
gilt frame was brought from the residence of the Gunman family at Dover,
and hung formerly in the _Anne_, the royal yacht of the Duke of York,
by whom it was presented to Captain Christopher Gunman in 1671. Near it
is a portrait on panel of the Infanta Donna Maria, “_ætatis suæ_ 19,
1617,” daughter of Philip III., the Princess on whose account Charles I.
made his adventurous expedition to Spain. The massive oak table below
was originally a plain table in the servants’ hall, but was fashioned by
Colonel Jarvis’s skill in carving into a handsome side-board. It shows
the size of the oaks that grew on the estate before Lord Delaval cut them
down.

Opposite the dining-room, at the east end of the wing, is the Library,
formerly known as the Green Parlour. Here may be seen an oil painting of
the Duke of York’s yacht, which Captain Gunman commanded from 1670 to
1675. Here, too, hang the pair of landscapes representing views up and
down the Thames, taken from Mr. Delaval’s house in Parliament Place. They
were painted by his friend G. Arnold, A.R.A., the figures of Mr. Delaval
seated in the one, and of Mrs. Delaval and their daughter in the other,
being put in by G. F. Joseph, A.R.A., who painted the full-length picture
of Mrs. Delaval in a similar red velvet dress, which is now in the Long
Gallery.

[Illustration: THE LONG GALLERY, DODDINGTON HALL.]

Between these two rooms the main staircase is carried in a projection of
the house on the north, a broad flight to the first landing, returning in
narrower flights on either side to the first floor. Its plain banisters
and heavy mahogany rail show that it is of later date than the house,
and, in fact, it was put up by Lord Delaval in 1761. On the landing on
either side are portraits of Mr. Edward Hussey-Delaval, and of his
daughter, Mrs. Gunman. The former, taken in 1813, represents him at the
age of eighty-five as a white-haired old man, seated at the window of his
house in Parliament Place, looking out on the Thames, with St. Paul’s in
the distance, and on the table before him many of his scientific works,
including his report on the best means of preserving St. Paul’s from
lightning, and its translation into Italian in 1779, which was done by
the order and at the expense of the Emperor Joseph II. Following the
returns of the staircase, we have on the one side portraits of Rhoda
Apreece, the heiress of Doddington, as a girl with a goldfinch, and
in later life as Mrs. Rhoda Blake-Delaval. Next beyond is the seated
figure of her aunt Elizabeth, youngest daughter of Sir Thomas Hussey,
and wife of Richard Ellys, Esq. of Nocton (died 1724), painted by Sir
Godfrey Kneller, probably the picture of her “sister Betty,” bequeathed
by Rebecca Hussey to her niece, Rhoda Apreece, in 1714. On the opposite
flight of stairs are ranged portraits of Colonel G. R. P. Jarvis, to whom
Mrs. Gunman left the Doddington estate in 1825; of George Eden Jarvis,
Esq., his grandson, and its present owner; of Martha Lowth (_b._ 1710,
_d._ 1796), sister of Bishop Lowth, as a girl, and of her future husband,
Dr. Robert Eden (_b._ 1702, _d._ 1759), Archdeacon of Winchester.

On the landing between these flights of stairs is one of the most
pleasing pictures in the house, representing a family group of the
three youngest sons and three youngest daughters of Francis and Rhoda
Blake-Delaval. We may notice that the heads have been painted separately
and inserted in the canvas. These were painted by the eldest sister,
Rhoda, who married Edward, afterwards Sir Edward Astley, Bart., while
the background and figures and draperies were added by Van Hacken,
a celebrated painter of the day. The seated figure of the boy with
portfolio is George, and the two with musical instruments are Henry and
Ralph, who were twins, and so alike as scarcely to be known apart. These
three died young, Henry only surviving till 1760, when he was killed in
India. Of the daughters, the standing figure is Ann, afterwards the wife
of Sir William Stanhope, K.B.; the next Elizabeth, who died young; and
the least Sarah, afterwards Countess of Mexborough, who died the last
survivor of her generation of the family, at the age of eighty, in 1821.

From this landing we enter the drawing-room, which is on the first
floor, above the hall and of the same dimensions with it, with windows
opening to the east and west. Here on all sides are portraits of the
Delaval family. Over the mantel itself is the portrait of Mrs. Rhoda
Blake-Delaval, with a corresponding one of her husband, Captain Francis
Blake-Delaval, opposite. Another picture of her at full length, seated,
painted by Arthur Pond, occupies the south part of the eastern wall,
while the two ends of the room are filled with groups by the same artist,
one of four, the other of seven figures of her sons and daughters;
the taller lady in the centre is said to have been a cousin. Similar
pictures exist also at Seaton-Delaval. On either side of the fireplace
are full-length seated figures, also painted by Pond, of the second of
these sons, John Hussey-Delaval, Lord Delaval, who inherited Doddington
from his mother in 1759, and died in 1808, and of his wife Susannah,
Lady Delaval, who died in 1783. The remaining space on the east wall is
occupied by the likeness of the eldest son, Sir Francis Blake-Delaval,
K.B., by Sir Joshua Reynolds, who has represented him in his red
Volunteer uniform, standing musket in hand on the French coast, with
villages burning in the background. Similar portraits of him are found
at Seaton-Delaval, and Methley Park, Yorkshire, and at Ford Castle, and
it has been engraved in a series of portraits by Sir Joshua Reynolds,
published in 1865. Over the doorways are four smaller portraits, one
representing Edward Hussey-Delaval, in his tufted college cap; and a
second, the eldest sister, Rhoda, Mrs. Astley; whilst a third, if it
is rightly said to represent Lady Tyrconnel, is the only one of Lord
Delaval’s children now at Doddington.

Beyond the drawing-room on the south is a bedroom which still retains its
ancient tapestry. On it are depicted scenes from the Trojan War, but with
its former bright colours sadly faded. To the picture of a dog over the
door the following story is attached. It belonged to Mr. Henry Stone, of
the adjoining parish of Skellingthorpe, and it is said to have pulled his
master three times away from a tree under which he had taken shelter from
a thunderstorm. At the third time the tree was struck by lightning, and a
pheasant pictured on it was killed. Mr. Stone died in 1693, leaving his
estate at Skellingthorpe of more than 3000 acres to Christ’s Hospital,
London. He was buried just inside the churchyard at Skellingthorpe, and
his dog, it is said, close to him, just outside the consecrated ground.

Returning through the drawing-room to the north wing, we find two other
bedrooms with their original tapestry hangings. One is known as the Holly
Room, from the great holly tree on which its windows open; the other as
the Tiger Room, from the wild beasts depicted on its Flemish tapestry,
dating from about 1600. This has retained more of its original bright
colouring than the other, which is of English manufacture, made probably
at Mortlake, _temp._ Charles I., in the costume of whose time the figures
on it are represented. In the Holly Room the ancient crewel work of the
bed hangings deserves attention; while the lofty four-post bedstead in
the Tiger Room, upholstered in crimson damask, is said to have been that
occupied by Henry Frederick, Duke of Cumberland, when entertained by Lord
Delaval at Seaton-Delaval in 1771. A quaint picture over the mantelpiece
represents Nebuchadnezzar in his state of degradation grazing among the
beasts.

Mounting thence to the third storey, we find on the uppermost landing
another portrait of Mr. Edward Hussey-Delaval, as a young man, seated,
with a greyhound by his side—one doubtless of the breed for which
Seaton-Delaval was famous in his brother Sir Francis’s time. On either
side the bedrooms, above those just described, retain their original
plaster floors. In one is the portrait of Admiral Sir Ralph Delaval,
“coasting admiral in the time of Charles II.,” painted in armour, with
flowing wig, who died in 1691. In the same room a naval picture, brought
from the Gunman mansion at Dover, represents the royal yacht, the _Anne_,
Captain Christopher Gunman, passing the Castle of Kronenborg at Elsinore,
without striking topsails, and receiving the cannon-fire of the castle,
as recorded by Captain Gunman’s log-book under 23rd September 1670. Yet
another represents the wreck of Sir Cloudesley Shovel in his flagship,
the _Association_, on the Scilly Isles, on the night of 22nd October
1707. This also was brought from Dover, Captain James Gunman, R.N.,
having been with the fleet in command of the _Weasel_ sloop, but happily
escaping the wreck.

Here we enter the Long Gallery, 96 feet long by 22 feet wide. It has two
fireplaces, and windows only on the western side, and fills the whole
centre of the house, extending over the drawing-room and two bedrooms
beyond. As we enter let us turn, and, beginning at the north-west
corner, let us note the more interesting pictures in their order. This
white-haired old man, painted on panel, in blue coat and buff sword-belt,
is said to represent John, Lord Hussey of Sleaford, beheaded at Lincoln
in 1537 for complicity in the Lincolnshire rising. Occupying the centre
of this northern end of the gallery is the full-length figure of Captain
Christopher Gunman, in a rich costume. In the background is represented
the royal yacht, of which he was captain, as well as of several ships of
war. We may notice the empty sleeve of his left arm, which he lost in an
engagement with the Dutch, while in command of the _Orange_ frigate,
3rd August 1666. A picture of this sea-fight with two Dutch men-of-war
is in one of the bedrooms. Higher up on this same wall is the portrait
of Thomas Tailor, registrar to the Bishops of Lincoln, who bought
Doddington in 1593, and built the hall before his death in 1607. He is
characteristically represented as dressed in brown, with wide lawn collar
and cuffs, seated at a table with a pen in his hand and an official
document before him. On either side, over the doors, are the portraits
of Sir Thomas Hussey, the second baronet, who died 1706, and of Sarah
(Langham) Lady Hussey, his wife, who died 1697.

Turning now to the long eastern wall, and passing pictures of Lady
Frances Howard, by Sir Peter Lely, and of Charles XII. of Sweden,
perhaps by David Kraft, we come to the full-length figure of Mrs. Sarah
Hussey-Delaval, died 1829, the wife of Edward Hussey-Delaval, Esq. It
was painted in 1815 by G. F. Joseph, A.R.A., who has represented her in
a crimson velvet dress, with a macaw by her side. Next to her is the
likeness of Rebecca Hussey, daughter of Sir Thomas Hussey, Bart., painted
by Sir Godfrey Kneller. She died unmarried in 1714, but her name is still
well known as the foundress of Rebecca Hussey’s Charities. The boy, in
a red dress trimmed with silver, is shown by the coat-of-arms to have
been a son of Sir John Delaval, of Dissington, who died 1632, by his
second wife, Elizabeth, daughter of Sir George Selby, whom he married in
1612. Passing the central door which opens into the little room in the
projection over the entrance porch, we have yet another portrait of Mrs.
Rhoda Blake-Delaval, died 1759, a duplicate of which is at Ford Castle.
Near her is one of Charles I., and beyond these, as a companion picture
to that of Rebecca Hussey, also painted by Sir Godfrey Kneller, the
full-length likeness of her sister Sarah, daughter of Sir Thomas Hussey,
Bart., and wife of Robert Apreece, Esq. She was born at Doddington in
1672, and died 1749, having become the sole heiress of her father’s
estates after her sisters’ death. The next picture in all probability
represents Mary of Modena, the Queen of James II. Beyond it, the lady in
black is Ann Hussey-Delaval, sister of John, Lord Delaval, and of Edward
Hussey-Delaval. We have seen her before as a girl in the family groups,
but she is here represented in the character of the _Fair Penitent_,
which she acted with other members of the family, and Edward, Duke of
York, at their private theatre at Westminster in 1767. She married in
1759, at the age of twenty-two, Sir William Stanhope, next brother
to the Earl of Chesterfield, who was fifty-seven; and Horace Walpole
writes of the match: “I assure you her face will introduce no plebeian
charms into the faces of the Stanhopes.” Naturally the ill-assorted
marriage turned out badly, and in 1763 Horace Walpole writes again to his
correspondent in Paris: “We sent you Sir William Stanhope and my lady,
a fond couple; you have returned them to us very different. When they
came to Blackheath, he got out of the chariot to go to his brother, Lord
Chesterfield’s, made her a low bow, and said, ‘Madame, I hope I shall
never see your face again.’ She replied, ‘Sir, I will take all the pains
I can, you never shall.’” She had been brought up by her grandmother,
Mrs. Apreece, of Honington and Doddington, and a share of Doddington had
been settled upon her, but she sold her reversion of it to her brother
Edward in 1810.

[Illustration: DINING-ROOM, DODDINGTON HALL.]

Filling the centre of the south end of the gallery is the striking
picture by Sir Joshua Reynolds, in 1762, of Lord and Lady Pollington,
later Earl and Countess of Mexborough, in their coronation robes, with
their son and heir, John Savile, afterwards second Earl, as a child,
between them. She was the youngest of the Delaval family, and is
represented as a girl in the family groups below. She married in 1760
John Savile, Lord Pollington, created Earl of Mexborough in 1765, and
died in 1821, the last survivor of that generation of her family. The
child is represented as reaching up to the coronet which his mother is
holding in her hand; and the story is told “that when Reynolds began to
paint this picture he tried the effect of setting the coronet on her
head, but being dissatisfied with the effect he placed it in her hand. It
was shown to the little boy, and he was offered a choice of the crown or
an apple. He preferred the former, and within a year inherited it on his
father’s death.” In fact, however, his father did not die till 1778, when
his son was seventeen, and the anecdote can only be reconciled with dates
by supposing it to refer to the child’s succession to the courtesy title
of Pollington, when his father became Earl in 1765.

If we pass out at the southern end of the Long Gallery, the well-like
back staircase, carried up from the bottom to the top of the house in a
projection of the southern wing, will bring us through the southernmost
gazebo on to the flat-leaded roof, on which the two other gazeboes open.
Here is plainly seen the ground-plan of the house; and by looking over
the parapet we may observe the squared leaden spout-heads, most of them
bearing the initials and the Ram’s Head crest of Sir John Hussey-Delaval,
with the date 1765. A few bear the date 1733, thus going back to the
ownership of Mrs. Apreece. Close in front of the Hall, encouraged by its
shelter, a broad-leafed magnolia has out-topped the Hall itself, while in
the north-west corner stands the great holly, measuring 12 feet round the
hole, but with half its massive head now split off by a great storm, 24th
March 1895. Tradition says that it once saved the life of a young lady
who was pursued to the roof by a too ardent admirer, and who jumped into
it from the roof to escape his embraces.

Round the mansion lie its old-fashioned walled gardens, and on the
north the orchard with a picturesque group of three gnarled old Spanish
chestnuts. Eastward the eye rests on Lincoln, with its houses climbing
the steep, crowned by the triple towers of the Minster; and in the nearer
foreground are the massive oak-woods of Doddington and Skellingthorpe,
the immemorial breeding-place of herons. To the westward the hills of
Nottinghamshire rise across the Trent, the hidden course of whose stream
is marked only by the clumps of trees at Spalford Bank and Marnham
Ferry. Amid such surroundings the great house has stood for full three
hundred years, and has sheltered generation after generation of those
whose portraits now adorn its walls. Here to all appearance it may stand
for three hundred years to come, if only it escapes that doom of fire
to which Seaton-Delaval itself and so many other ancient mansions have
fallen a prey.




LINCOLNSHIRE FAMILIES

BY REV. CANON MADDISON, M.A., F.S.A.


It is quite impossible within the limits of a short paper to give an
exhaustive account of the Lincolnshire Families. They can be classified
as—1st, Baronial; 2nd, Knightly; 3rd, Gentle.

With the baronial, which includes such names as Darcy, Kyme, de Roos,
Trehampton, &c., I do not concern myself. Their pedigrees are given, for
the most part, in works of reference. Of the great baronial families I do
not think a single one exists at the present day in the male line. The
Neviles now seated in Lincolnshire belong to the Nottinghamshire branch
of that great family. The Lincolnshire Neviles, which have been a puzzle
to genealogists, have long since been extinct.

Perhaps the Watertons may be taken as an almost solitary instance of the
survival of a family which held a very high position in the county in the
twelfth century. The great Lincolnshire estates, it is true, passed to
the Welles family in the fifteenth century, but a junior branch continued
at Walton in Yorkshire down to recent times. Walton has been sold, but
the late Mr. Edmund Waterton became possessed of property in St. James
Deeping, where the original manor of Waterton was, and was “of Waterton
Deeping.” Still, although descended from this ancient race, his line,
for many hundreds of years, was connected rather with Yorkshire than
Lincolnshire.

But the Langtons, of Langton by Spilsby, are an instance, quite unique in
this county, of a family retaining possession of the manor and advowson
of their estate from the thirteenth century. They seem to have held a
higher position then than they did in later times. Strange to say, no
Langton was Sheriff of the county till 1612.

The Thorolds must be content to give up the legend of being descended
from a Saxon sheriff. It is surely enough to be able to say they hold
property which came to them from a Lincolnshire heiress in the fourteenth
century, and led them to leave Yorkshire for Marston in Lincolnshire.

The Heneages have held Hainton since the early part of the fifteenth
century, and there is no doubt they were connected with it long before.
What, however, is doubtful is whether their position was quite so high
as a pedigree drawn up in the eighteenth century gives them. The really
great person at Hainton in 1398 was Lord de la Warr, who was lord of the
manor, and who in his will, proved 1st August 1398, directs that Edward
of the Hill and John Heneage should immediately after his death hold
conjointly his manors of Hainton for the term of their lives, and then
that the reversion of the said manors should be sold, and the proceeds
distributed among the poor. He also leaves 100 marks to John Heneage
for a certain mansion within his (Lord de la Warr’s) demesne. He leaves
Richard Wolmer his manor of Albryghton for life, and makes him, John
Heneage and others, executors. When we find the Heneages afterwards in
possession of the manor of Hainton, and the Wolmers of the manor of
Bloxholm (also de la Warr property) it is not unreasonable to suppose
that they became possessors by purchase. The Wolmers have long since
passed away.

The Massingberds held land in Sutterton as early as the reign of Edward
I., but moved to Burgh, Gunby, and Bratoft later on, having married a
succession of heiresses. The estates have passed by marriage to cadets of
the Langton and Mundy families, and the present rector of Ormsby, who has
been the historian of his parish and family, is the heir male.

The Dymokes of Scrivelsby came originally in the fourteenth century from
Gloucestershire. Every one knows their peculiar tenure of that manor
which carries with it the right of the Championship. Every one, however,
does not know the strange vicissitudes of the family—how that before
the death of the old Champion, Lewis Dymoke, in 1760, he had to choose
between two branches of his family as his heirs; the one in trade in
London, the other in the ranks of the yeomanry in Lincolnshire. He chose
the former, which was really the junior of the two, and yet, after more
than a century, it became extinct, and the yeoman branch holds Scrivelsby.

The Smyths of Elkington hold an estate which they acquired in the
fifteenth century. The pedigree has not been fully worked out, but it
would seem that they originally were what their name implies—“Johannes
Faber,” being “John the Smith.”

The Cracrofts of Hackthorn are a genuine old Lincolnshire race. They
held in early times the manor of Cracroft Hall in Hogsthorpe. Warinus de
Cracroft is witness in a deed of the early twelfth century. This manor
passed away late in the sixteenth century, but a junior branch held land
in Burgh in the marsh at the beginning of that period, and by a fortunate
marriage with an heiress of the Grantham family became possessed about
1616 of the present estate of Hackthorn. Robert Cracroft had a licence
for an oratory in his house of Cracroft in 1345. The family was once one
of the most widely spread in Lincolnshire, but it is now seldom to be
found.

The Welbys of Denton cannot prove their descent from the Moulton Welbys,
though there is very strong reason for thinking it probable. They own
Welby, but it was acquired by purchase.

Any one who has read Lady Elizabeth Cust’s admirably written _Records of
the Cust Family_ cannot fail to be struck with the facts she has gleaned
from the muniments at Belton. A yeoman race, connected with Pinchbeck
for six centuries, holding estates with title-deeds dating from 1479,
and which was not “armigerous” till the seventeenth century, is now
represented by Earl Brownlow, the direct male descendant.

What of the Irbys? They undoubtedly are extant, represented by Lord
Boston, although he is not resident in the county. They begin to rise
in position about the middle of the sixteenth century in the person
of a lawyer who accumulated property round Boston. If they really are
traceable to an Irby of Irby, they would rank among the oldest families;
but the Visitation Pedigree of 1562 is not altogether satisfactory, and
needs proof.

The Monsons were at Market Rasen as early as 1378. They, like so many
other families of the age, became large landowners in the fifteenth
century, having accumulated wealth by being merchants of the Staple
of Calais. Lord Monson holds estates which have descended to him from
the early part of the sixteenth century. The old original property at
Owersby, near Market Rasen, was sold in 1834.

The Whichcotes came from Shropshire in the fifteenth century. They were
“of that ilk” in the county, and what brought them to Lincolnshire
was the marriage of John Whichcote with an heiress of the Tyrwhits of
Harpswell. The present head of the family, Sir George Whichcote, still
possesses Harpswell, though he resides at Aswarby, near Sleaford. His
great-great-grandfather, Sir Christopher, married the heiress of the
elder line, and united the estates of Harpswell and Aswarby.

The Maddisons came from the district of Weardale, in Durham, where
they held a manor under the Bishop, by the marriage of a cadet with a
Lincolnshire heiress of the Angevine family in 1452. They, like the
Monsons, invested money, made by being merchants of the Staple of Calais,
in Lincolnshire land. The estates acquired in this way passed out of the
family, through co-heiresses of the elder line, in 1672. The junior line
has still male representatives, and a remnant of the estates, bought by
Sir Ralph Maddison in the reign of James I., still remains with them.

Lord Lindsey is the direct male descendant of Richard Bertie, the
fortunate Sussex gentleman who wooed and won the heiress of the
Willoughbys, the Duchess of Suffolk. The Alingtons of Swinhope are
a cadet branch of the Alingtons of Horsheath, Colambridge, who were
ennobled in the seventeenth century, and are represented in the female
line by Lord Alington. They settled in Lincolnshire in the reign of
Elizabeth, and retain a portion of the property then acquired.

The Andersons are now represented by Lord Yarborough, the male line at
Lea having terminated with the death of the late Sir Charles Anderson.
The family was virtually founded by the Lord Chief-Justice in Queen
Elizabeth’s reign, who presided at the trial of Mary Queen of Scots.
Francis Anderson of Manby, a gentleman of moderate estate, married Mary
Pelham, who was born at Brocklesby in 1671. Her brother, Charles Pelham,
the last of his race, selected as his heir, in 1763, her descendant
Charles Anderson, who took the name of Pelham in addition, and was raised
to the peerage. The name of Anderson has been dropped by the present Earl
and his brothers.

Up to this point I have been considering only those families who are
extant in the male line, and retain in some degree the estates acquired
by their ancestors, from the twelfth to the sixteenth centuries. The
seventeenth century brought in a decidedly changed condition of things.
Changes had indeed taken place before, for the Wars of the Roses and the
suppression of the monasteries had caused a vast quantity of land to
change hands; but nothing shows the effect of this economic convulsion
more clearly than a comparison of the Visitations of Lincoln in 1562
and 1592 with that of 1634. The number of families that had sprung up
from the yeoman and mercantile classes is very remarkable. Then came the
Commonwealth families—those who had taken the side of the Parliament in
the Civil War, and had bought up the estates of “malignants” at an easy
price.

A glance at the lists of sheriffs in the sixteenth century serves to
show who were the leading families. The Ayscoughs, Dymokes, and Tyrwhits
occur most frequently. The Copledikes had begun to decline in importance
during the latter half of the century, owing no doubt to litigation; and
the Skipwiths of South Ormsby by no means filled the same position they
had done in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. A change was taking
place. The Monsons and Heneages were rising in importance. Families
of comparatively humble rank in the preceding century had acquired
land on easy terms after the suppression of the monasteries, when the
land-market was glutted with monastic property. Towards the close of
Elizabeth’s reign we see the Trollopes beginning to come forward and
purchase land; Casewick was bought from the Evingtons in 1621. In 1642
a baronetcy was granted, and in recent times a peerage—_i.e._ Kesteven.
The Listers, formerly of Burwell, still survive in the male line. They
came into Lincolnshire in the seventeenth century. So also do the
Scropes of Cockerington. Their connection with Lincolnshire is not of
much older date, but in point of splendour of ancestry they are in the
first rank. The present Mr. Scrope of Danby, in Yorkshire, still owns
Cockerington, though it is no longer a place of residence. The Cholmeleys
of Easton and Norton Place are also still represented in the male line.
They, of course, are really a Cheshire family, but came into this
county in the sixteenth century. The Fanes of Fulbeck, a cadet branch
of the Westmoreland family, hold the estates they acquired early in the
seventeenth century.

Up to this point I have considered families which are still extant in
the male line and connected with the county. It would take far too much
space if justice were done to the numerous families now represented in
the female line—such as the Skipwiths, Ayscoughs, Wrays, Saundersons,
Copledikes, St. Pauls, Meres, Fitzwilliams, Granthams, Armynes,
Angevines, Amcotts, Asfordbys, Billesbys, Husseys, Ogles, Tournays, and
many others. It may be enough to say that in the fifteenth century the
Skipwiths, Copledikes, and Tyrwhits took the lead in county matters,
at any rate in the Lindsey division; while in the Isle of Axholme
the Sheffields, who became eventually Dukes of Buckinghamshire, were
paramount. The Skipwiths and Copledikes dwindled down to extinction in
the seventeenth century, and the Tyrwhits in the eighteenth, so far as
Lincolnshire is concerned, though Skipwiths and Tyrwhits still hold
baronetcies, but in other counties.

The Monsons, Heneages, and Wrays came into prominence in the sixteenth
century. The seventeenth witnessed the Civil War, which rivalled the
Wars of the Roses in its effects on families and their estates. A
new class sprang up as the old families succumbed to the fines and
sequestrations which befell them as a consequence of being on the Royal,
_i.e._ the losing side. On turning to the list of High Sheriffs after the
Restoration this is very evident. In 1670 Thomas Browne of Saltfleetby,
of a family which was distinctly a yeoman one before the Commonwealth,
served that office. The names of Lodington, Hatcher, Rothwell, Toller,
all belong to families which had only recently risen from the ranks of
the yeomanry.

With the eighteenth century the same change may be observed. Henry
Andrews, High Sheriff in 1728, was of a family which had grown rich in
trade. Joseph Banks of Revesby, High Sheriff in 1736, was a successful
attorney; so also was Coney Tunnard in 1737; while St. John Wells, in
spite of his aristocratic Christian name, had been a tanner. Richard
Popplewell in 1740 belonged to an Isle of Axholme family of no high
standing; so also Henry Herring in 1744. To multiply more instances would
be needless.

But the eighteenth century witnessed also a change almost as striking
as that produced by a convulsion like the Civil War; and this was the
formation of a great estate on the North Lincolnshire Wolds which
engulfed a number of manors belonging to impoverished families sinking
under the weight of mortgages and incumbrances. In 1763 Charles Pelham
of Brocklesby died childless, leaving his estates, which during his long
life had been greatly increased, to his great-nephew Charles Anderson of
Manby, who was then a child. During his minority the trustees bought up,
by degrees, what at last constituted a magnificent property, greater than
that of any other family in Lincolnshire. But this was not done without
the inevitable disappearance of many families of the lesser gentry.

It has often been noted as a disastrous circumstance that the
yeomanry, as a class, has vanished out of the country, and certainly
the contemplation of the long list of those under that category, who
contributed towards the defence of the country against the Spanish Armada
in 1588, gives rise to many reflections and regrets. It may also be a
subject of reflection how many of what might be called the lesser gentry
have also ceased to exist. Here and there a small manor-house, now turned
into a farmhouse, attests the previous habitation of an ancient family
which never perhaps rose to the rank of what is now called a county
family, but which had been in the county a great deal longer than many
who were much higher in the social state. The name of Newcomen suggests,
of course, the idea of a “Newcomer,” but the race under the name of “le
Newcomen” were in Lincolnshire as early as the twelfth century. They
never rose to be High Sheriffs, nor were any knighted, but they put out
several branches which all possessed landed estates, and sent to Ireland
a branch which was graced with a Baronetcy and Viscountcy. Not one of
these branches is now to be found. The very name in Lincolnshire is
almost extinct.

In writing the above paper one is conscious of not having by any means
done justice to the subject. To give an exhaustive list of all the old
families in this county, and to trace their fortunes, would be absolutely
beyond the scope of this paper. All that can be done is to give a
sketch of those families which still survive in the male line after the
vicissitudes of several centuries. They are not numerous. Others, such as
the Turnors of Stoke Rochford, the Sibthorps of Canwick, the Nelthorpes
of Scawby, came in with the Commonwealth. A multitude sprang up in the
eighteenth century, and have been largely recruited in the nineteenth.
It may be questioned whether Gervase Holles would recognise many of the
names which would meet his eye in the lists of magistrates. It is still
more open to question whether a herald of 1562 would not “respite for
further proof” a good deal of modern heraldry. To bear another man’s
coat-of-arms because you happen to be of the same name would scarcely
pass muster with a sixteenth century herald, but it is an innocent
appropriation by no means uncommon at the present day.

I may add a word on the subject of the extinction of old mediæval
families. Are they really extinct? Names are found among the peasantry
which at first sight suggest a negative to that question, but I have
never yet met with an authentic instance of such descent. The one that
occurs to me as most probable is that of the Bushey family. Families of
that name were at Leverton, Leake, and Friskney three hundred years ago,
and doubtless there are descendants in the male line. The name Bushey is
identical with Bussy; in fact, the pronunciation of the name at the time
of the execution of Sir John Bussy, Richard II.’s favourite, in 1398, was
undoubtedly Bushey, as the punning rhymes made upon it by writers of
that day testify, _e.g._—

    “Ther is a _busch_ that is forgrow,
    Crop hit welle and hold it lowe,
      Or elles it wolle be wilde.”

There is therefore some ground for supposing that these yeoman families
may have descended from cadet branches of this race which held so high a
position in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, though positive proof
is wanting.

It would be extremely interesting to trace, if possible, the descent of
such families, but the difficulties are very great. The absence of wills
of yeoman families prior to the fifteenth century is one great obstacle;
the dearth of documents in that century is another.




SPALDING GENTLEMEN’S SOCIETY

BY MARTEN PERRY, M.D.

    “_If thou hast gathered nothing in thy youth, how canst thou
    find anything in thy age?_” (Motto on title-page of 1st vol. of
    S.G.S. Minutes.)


At the very commencement of the eighteenth century, a number of gentlemen
interested in antiquarian pursuits were in the habit of meeting weekly
in London at various coffee-houses in the vicinity of the Temple. At one
of these places Maurice Johnson was introduced by John Gay, the poet, to
Pope, Addison, Steele, and other learned men. The _Tatler_ was here read
and discussed, but one of the principal subjects for discussion seems to
have been the resuscitation of the London Society of Antiquaries. It was
then agreed that, so soon as sufficient funds should be obtained, a start
should be made. Among other arrangements, Maurice Johnson was designated
its first librarian.

Johnson, however, having completed his studies, and been admitted a
member of the Inner Temple, removed to his native town of Spalding.

Born in this town (baptized June 26, 1688), a member of a very
influential family in Lincolnshire, he soon met with several professional
and other appointments. These led him into the society of many eminent
men. He also continued in touch with his friends in London, and retained
his love for antiquarian pursuits.

In 1709 he took up his residence in Spalding, and the same year married
Elizabeth, daughter of Joseph Ambler, and granddaughter of Anthony
Oldfield, who was lineally descended from Sir Thomas Gresham. He,
perforce, exchanged the society of the wits at Buttons’ Coffee-house and
of antiquaries at the Temple ’Change, for the ordinary society of a small
country town. So great, however, was his love of learning and science
that he at once entertained the bold design of establishing a literary
society in the very heart of the Fens of Lincolnshire. It was, as he
very truly said, “an endeavour new and untried before.” Those to whom he
looked for assistance “were unaccustomed to such a mode of spending an
evening.” He took care not to alarm the country gentlemen by premature
mention of antiquities, but endeavoured to allure them into the more
flowery paths of literature.

The _Tatler_ came into service; it was read at a coffee-house in the
Abbey Yard to some friends who were induced to meet him there.

    “These papers being universally approved as both instructive
    and entertaining, they order’d ’em to be sent down thither when
    they were read every Post-day, generally aloud to the whole
    company, who could sit and talk over the subject afterwards.
    This insensibly drew the men of sense and letters into a
    sociable way of conversing, and continued ye next yeare,
    1710, until the publisher desisted to their great regret,
    whose thoughts being by this means bent towards their own
    improvement in knowledge, they again in like manner heard some
    of the _Tatlers_ read over, and now and then, a Poem, Letter,
    or Essay upon some subject in polite literature; and it being
    hapily suggested that as they take care to have these papers
    kept together, it would be well worth their while to take into
    consideration the state of the Parochial Library, where there
    were some valuable editions of the best authors in no very
    good condicon, and they did accordingly agree to contribute
    towards the repairing of the old and adding new books to it.
    But being by ye two worst enemies to understanding, Ignorance
    & Indolence, prevented doing much for it, they turned their
    beneficial intention towards the royal and ffree Grammar
    School, in which there was at that time a large but empty
    desk capable of being made a press or class on wᶜʰ ye one
    only solitary volume then belonging to the school lay (viz.)
    ‘Langius Polyanthæa,’ bestowed upon it by Sir John Oldfield,
    Bart., some years before, & to this these Gentlemen did now
    voluntarily add several other Authors in Gram̅atical, Critical,
    or Classic learning, wᶜʰ was to ye great pleasure & convenience
    of the worthy Master.”

The use of both these Libraries was, however, reserved for the members of
the Society.

According to the Society’s book-plate, which was engraved by George
Vertue, after a design submitted to him by Maurice Johnson, the date of
the institution of the Society is 1710. This date is also frequently
referred to by the founder as that of its institution.

In March 1711, the _Spectator_ came out, and was duly read here as the
_Tatter_ had been.

    “From the time of its first foundation in 1709,” says Johnson,
    “it was only a meeting at a coffee-house upon trial, how such
    a designe might succeed, to the time when it was fixed upon
    yᵉ rules signed and subscribed in 1712. Yet I constantly kept
    every paper communicated to the company, and read and left
    there, tho’ these being for the most, part printed papers no
    minutes were made thereof. Upon the proposal being signed or
    subscribed, I attempted taking minutes, that some account
    might appear to be serviceable for conducting this good design
    and assisting other gentlemen, my acquaintance and friends in
    Lincoln City, Peterborough, Stamford, Boston, Oundle, Wisbech,
    and elsewhere, to institute and promote the like design and
    hold correspondence with us. In some places this succeeded.”

Proposals for the carrying on of the Society having been submitted on
November 3, 1712, the same were on that day agreed to, and the Rev.
Stephen Lyon, minister of Spalding and rector of Mereworth, in Kent, was
elected the first president. On January 5, 1712/3, Mr. William Ambler
was, on the proposal of Mr. Lyon, elected to succeed him; and, it having
been proposed to elect a secretary “to minute their proceedings, and keep
all papers, &c., in good order for the furtherance of their laudable
design,” the Society elected to that post Mr. Maurice Johnson, “who very
willingly accepted that office.” At the meeting held on 2nd February
the Rev. John Wareing, headmaster of the Grammar School, was elected
president for the month of February; but, he being much indisposed, Mr.
Johnson, senr., was on the 25th elected president for a month. The Rev.
S. Lyon was again chosen to act as president from 25th March, but on the
30th of the same month it was decided that, as so frequent a change was
not beneficial to the Society, the president should remain in office
“_quam diu se bene gesserit_.”

This year the _Lay Monk_ and _Memoirs of Literature_ were taken in. A
resolution was also passed for the admission of extra-regular or honorary
members, to the number of fourteen, each of whom was to give to the
library of the church a book or books to the value of one pound.

In 1715-16 a little room in the old part of the parsonage-house was
fitted up, and by favour of the Rev. Timothy Neve (subsequently
Prebendary of Lincoln and of Peterborough, and Archdeacon of Huntingdon),
who hired that part, the Society met there at the usual times, until the
number of members having increased they were obliged to find a larger
room, and agreed to take one in the “Markett-stead.”

    “The Society, having resumed their intention of advancing the
    Parochial Library, effected it with vigour answerable to their
    strength; and the books belonging to it were by these gentlemen
    removed from a damp, little, and inconvenient room, with a
    chimney difficult of access, and deposited in the Vestry.”

After the death of the Rev. John Wareing, the Society purchased from his
widow the very valuable collection of books which he had formed, and
divided them between the libraries at the church and Grammar School.

Papers called the _Englishman_, _Guardian_, _Entertainers_, and _Lovers_
were taken in, and (so long as they meddled not with politics) were read;
as were also the _Honest Gentleman_ and the _Spyes_, so far as they were
non-political.

At first the various acts and regulations of the Society were recorded on
odd sheets of paper of various sizes and shapes. These were subsequently
bound together and entitled “the first book of Minutes or the Institution
Book.” Subsequently other volumes of minutes were duly kept; the sixth
volume being in use at the time of the death of the founder. The entries
in these books are chiefly by Maurice Johnson, and the illustrations are
numerous, and several of them beautifully coloured by him. Each is bound
in vellum, and has a book-plate engraved by Vertue. A motto, differing in
each case, is affixed to each of the first four volumes. They form some
of the most valued works belonging to the Society.

The varied nature of the communications received by the Society is
indicated by the earliest of those recorded in the Institution Book.
Thus, on November 10, 1712, there is a sketch of “The forme of a Tomb in
the Cemetery of the Cathedral Church in Peterborough, in the County of
Northᵗᵒⁿ on the south side near the choir, with yᵉ inscription thereon—

    ✠ AI̅A IOHANNIS DE SC̅O IVONIS QND̅M P̅ORIS Ꝑ MIÃM DI̅ IN PACE
    REC̅ESCAT. MDXII.

    Anima Johannis de Sancto Ivone Quandam Prioris per
    Misericordiam Dei. In pace requiescat. M.D.xij.”

At the next meeting, held on 17th November, Mr. Maurice Johnson
communicated to the Society “2 copies of Verses from the Revᵈ Mr.
Francis Curtis, the one an Epistle from a Gentleman at Eaton to his Fʳᵈ
at Cambridge, in Latine Hexametre and Pentametre; the other in English
upon the D. of Marlborough’s goeing for Germany, where he commanded the
Allyd army agᵗ the French and their allies.” He also gave a list of
materials for painting in miniature, &c., collected from the directions
of Albert Dürer and others, with the method of preparing them. The next
week’s proceedings were of great interest. A Spalding halfpenny of 1667,
showing a view of the old Town Hall, was exhibited by the secretary. The
Rev. J. Wareing gave a “Description of a Journey to Bath, and of the
Antiquities and Natural Curiosities of the City of Bath, in several Latin
Epistles, attended with Drawings.” Next followed the “Exhibition of an
Impression in Wax of a Brass Seal of Elizabeth Lady, Dutchess of Severki,
in Poland.” This shows the figure of a lady seated on a side-saddle,
with a hawk perched on her left hand, and a lure in her right hand.
Thereupon followed a dissertation on hawking, on ladies’ habits, and
on side-saddles, with reference to their introduction into England in
1382, by Queen Anne (daughter of Charles II. of Bohemia and Emperor of
Germany), the wife of our King Richard II. Lastly comes “Inscriptum
Picturæ Reverendi Martyrologistæ et S.T.P. Dni Johannis Foxij, Anno
Domini 1509. Ætatis 70, penes Johan. L. Toley. Armiger apud Boston, ubi
idem doctiss. Autor natus fuit.”

The admission of regular members was very strictly guarded.

    “Persons proposed to be elected and admitted members, whose
    names, titles, degrees, and places of residence must be
    certified in writing by the regular member proposing them, with
    any two other members signifying also their assent thereto,
    must be minuted, notified, and put up by the Secretary at the
    two next succeeding meetings, and be balloted on the third.
    The proposer to be answerable for the donation of a guinea,
    or to that value, and for the first 12 months payment of such
    person or persons proposed, if a resident and elected member,
    at 12d. a month; saving all noblemen and gentlemen invited
    by the Society to become members, and of all foreigners,
    for the honour of the institution and carrying on a learned
    correspondence.”

It is evident that the Society was now in a most flourishing condition,
and had obtained a position seldom, if ever, equalled by any Society in
a provincial town. Extraneous assistance was, however, needed to sustain
the interests of its members and maintain its prosperity. Papers were
contributed, valuable books given, and interesting letters written by
many who were not resident in the neighbourhood. These donations are
still preserved with religious care. Some of the communications, _e.g._
from such men as Roger and Samuel Gale, Stukeley, the Earl of Oxford, Sir
John Clarke, and others are of considerable interest. Four portfolios of
drawings and engravings, several ancient manuscripts as well as books
of reference, and many books printed in the fifteenth, sixteenth, and
seventeenth centuries are still in the library. A commencement was also
made towards forming a museum.

The Society annually added to its list of members the names of some of
the most learned men of the day. Amongst these we find Sir Isaac Newton,
Sir Hans Sloane, Edward Harley (Earl of Oxford), Roger and Samuel Gale,
Dr. Stukeley, Beaupré Bell, Dr. Jurin, Dr. Mortimer (Sec. R.S.), Dr.
Massey, Archdeacon Neve, Joseph Banks (father of Sir Joseph Banks),
Samuel Wesley, Rev. Dr. Desaguliers (mathematician, a noted Freemason),
Dr. Richard Bentley (at that time Master of Spalding Grammar School,
but soon afterwards preferred to the Mastership of Trinity College,
Cambridge), William Bogdani, George Vertue, R. Collins and Samuel Buck
(the engravers), Lord Coleraine (Pres. Soc. Ant.), Dr. Dodd, Emanuel
Mendez da Costa, Charles Jennings (Solyman the Magnificent), Dosithæus
(Archimandrite, Abbot of the Monastery of Pantocrateras on Mount Athos),
Martin Folkes (the numismatist), Captain John Perry (engineer to the
Czar, Peter the Great, but about that time engaged in the drainage of
Deeping Fen), Archdeacon Sharp, Rev. Richard Southgate, Thomas Sympson
(of Lincoln), Chancellor Taylor, Browne Willis, John Grundy (engineer),
and many others of eminence, who are too numerous to mention separately.

The attention of the Society was not confined to antiquities, but
was also given to discoveries in natural history, to literature, to
chemistry, to paintings, sculpture, mathematics, music, and, in fact,
anything worthy the attention of cultured men of that period. It had
a valuable collection of electrical apparatus. It possessed a physic
garden. “We deal,” says Johnson to Archdeacon Neve in 1745-46, “in all
the arts and sciences, and exclude nothing from our conversation but
politics, which would throw us all into confusion and disorder.”

Antiquarian pursuits, however, are shown by the minute books to have
been the favourite study. Scarcely a single meeting was held at which
some antique specimen was not exhibited, or an address given on some
antiquarian subject. Not only were papers concerning the monastic
remains of the district and the architecture of its churches eminently
interesting, but the secretary had inherited from his ancestor, Sir
Richard Ogle, several manuscripts which had formerly belonged to the
mitred Priory of Spalding. He had access also to many other documents
in public and private collections. From these and other sources he was
able to produce a history of the Priory, with an account of each Lord
Prior in succession. This account was entered _in extenso_ in the minute
books. It is also recorded that he wrote an account of his native town.
He exhibited charters of the Priory and various documents belonging to
other places. He had an ample collection of ancient coins, some of which,
judging by the illustrations in the minute books, were of considerable
value. These were at times shown to the members, and his remarks thereon
must have been of great interest. He wrote an essay on the Mint at
Lincoln, which was published. He also wrote a lengthy account of the
coins of Carausius and Allectus, which is in MS. in the keeping of the
Society, as are also many other of his dissertations.

Encouraged by Mr. Secretary Addison, and Captain (afterwards Sir
Richard Steele), Maurice Johnson prepared “a true, succinct, historical
account of the Royal Society, as also of the restoration of our
Antiquarian Society of London. These documents were obtained from him
by Dr. Mortimer, under the assured promise of publishing them, and so
introducing the better and fuller knowledge of us to the learned world,
in a dedication, preface, or preamble to some volume of the Philosophical
Transactions, wherein he proposed to give an account of all the Societies
of Great Britain and Ireland, restored, re-established, or founded
since the Royal Society.” It appears that the Society of Antiquaries
was pleased with this account (and desired a copy of it), as was also
the Royal Society. Dr. Mortimer, however, never published the account,
and Maurice Johnson was unable to obtain the paper back again, though
he several times applied for its return both personally and through his
friends.

Another member who contributed much towards the success of the Society
was Dr. William Stukeley. A native of Holbeach, he became a member of
Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, graduated M.B. in 1709, commenced
to practice medicine at Boston in 1710, was admitted F.R.S. in 1717,
graduated M.D., Cantab., in 1719, and became F.R.C.P., London, in 1720.
Dr. Stukeley removed to Grantham in 1725; he then forsook the medical
profession, and was ordained in 1729. He became vicar of All Saints’,
Stamford, with St. Peter’s attached, in 1730. We find his name as one of
the founders of the Egyptian Society in 1741, and in 1747 he accepted
the rectory of St. George’s, Queen’s Square, London, on the presentation
of the Duke of Montagu. The Society still possesses some forty of his
communications, nearly all being illustrated. In this collection are a
set of drawings of the figures on the west front of Croyland Abbey, and
of the triangular bridge. These are now of value as showing the state of
those structures in the year 1746. When in London in 1740 to 1750, he
used to go to the meetings of the Royal Society, and on his return in
the evening he wrote down what he could remember of the debates. In this
manner he filled five small volumes, which were sent down to Spalding.
These volumes were bound in vellum, and are still carefully preserved.

Stukeley’s publications were very numerous, and they contain many
references to this Society. His _Itinerarium Curiosum_ is dedicated to
Maurice Johnson, to whom he was much indebted for assistance in composing
his _Medallic History of Marcus Aurelius Valerius Carausius_.

Browne Willis, Roger Gale, and Beaupré Bell wrote many letters and
essays which were read at the weekly meetings. George Vertue, among
many other benefactions, presented to the Society a copy of “_Justes
at Westmʳ_, the 12th of Febʳ., by the KING, my Lord of DEVON, Sir Tho.
Knyvet, and Edw. Nevill, Aᵒ 1ᵒ H. viij.” It was long unknown who was
the engraver, but the S.G.S. minute books prove that it was the work of
Vertue himself. John Grundy, jun., engineer for the Deeping Fen drainage,
drew the map of Spalding, surrounded by views of twelve ancient buildings
in the neighbourhood of the town, which still adorns the Society’s room.
This map has been since engraved, and even reproduced, by a firm at
Chicago, to illustrate a volume on the family of Spalding in America.
Dr. Bolton, of Boston, gave some engravings of Albrecht Dürer, Heinrich
Aldegreve, and Callot, which were purchased by him in Holland.

Imitation being the most sincere form of flattery, other societies
were formed upon the same model at Stamford, Boston, Peterborough,
Oundle, and Wisbech. At Lincoln, Worcester, Doncaster, and Dublin
similar institutions also arose. Most of these soon became extinct. The
Peterborough Society, established by Archdeacon Neve, lived sufficiently
long to enable it to complete two or more volumes of minutes, becoming
known as the Peterborough Book Society in 1810. It has now ceased to
exist. The Brazenose Society at Stamford, established by Dr. Stukeley,
did not long prosper, and an effort to revive it some time afterwards
appears to have completely failed. Of the other societies little, if
anything, is known. The Gentlemen’s Society at Spalding is probably the
only survivor.

The esteem in which this Society was held is proved, not only by a number
of letters written by leading men of the day, notably by Kortholt (Epist.
ad Kappium de Soc. Ant. Lond. Lips. 1730, p. 6), but also by the action
of the Royal Society who, by order of the president, showed its approval
by sending their Transactions. The Society of Antiquaries also ordered
all their works, “as published,” to be sent by their Directors. They also
exchanged their papers, after having been read in London, for those read
at Spalding. On the minutes of the Society of Antiquaries are recorded
several of these communications, but the minute books of the Gentlemen’s
Society show that a still larger number were sent up.

To the end of his life (obiit Feb. 7ᵒ, sepult. Feb. 11ᵒ, 1755, as
recorded in the Register at Spalding Parish Church) Maurice Johnson
continued to be the mainstay of this Society. As long as he lived the
Society flourished. The greater part of the communications were made by
him, or obtained through his activity. The minute books were chiefly his
penmanship, and the beautiful illustrations therein mainly his handiwork.
To the library he gave many of its most valuable books, and the museum
owed much to his liberality. Even to the very last he showed his love for
the Society, by providing in his will an endowment for the chaplain of
Wykeham, who was, previous to his appointment, to undertake the duties of
librarian and take charge of its _supellex literaria_.

Before his death Johnson, with reference to the state of this Society,
observed in a letter to his friend Gale, “realms and all communities
have their periods.” Nevertheless, as Gale in return assured him, “the
_supellex literaria_ of the Society still remains a glorious monument of
the public spirit and learning of its founder, and the record of a noble
attempt, which otherwise would scarcely be credited by posterity.”

After Johnson’s decease a change comes over the scene; the Society
continued to meet every week, and the accounts were duly kept, but the
minute book ceased to be used, little was added to the library or museum,
and the Physic Garden was given up. It is not, however, to be supposed
that the objects for which the Society was established were entirely
neglected. The “Books of Accompts” contain several instances of money
having been spent for the purchase of books, &c., but its activity
decidedly slackened.

A further evidence that the Society was not defunct is shown by the
following extract from the will of Mr. Michael Cox, an apothecary and the
“Operator” to the Society:—

    “I do hereby order that neither my said wife nor the said John
    Motson, or his heirs, nor the person or persons to whom they
    shall sell the same estates, shall have power to discharge or
    eject the Gentlemen of the Literary Society in Spalding from
    the occupation of the room they now hold of me, with whatever
    Liberty’s they now enjoy ... they continuing well, duly and
    faithfully to pay the Annual Rent of Five pounds and to occupy
    the same as and for a Literary Society room only.”

This room remained in the occupation of the Society until, in the year
1878, the Improvement Commissioners, being anxious to widen the street
near the High Bridge, made an offer of £100 for its interest therein.
This sum was accepted, and the contents of the library and museum were
removed to a room in Double Street until the trustees of the Johnson
Hospital, which had recently been erected, offered the use of the
Board-room and other accommodation at a small rental.

The “Books of Accompts” above referred to are three in number. Each
volume is bound in parchment and is 16 inches high by 6½ inches wide.
They are ruled by hand, and have on each page a debit and credit
account side by side. The entries therein are very conclusive as to the
continuity of the Society, as they contain the weekly expenditures and
annual contributions of the members. The election of new members and
of the officers of the Society are recorded, although omissions are
evidently numerous. In order to show that the original objects of the
Society were not overlooked, the following items, taken at different
periods, will suffice:—

On August 21, 1760, a payment is made to Mr. E. Kingston for experiments
in electricity. On June 11, 1761, a reflecting telescope is paid for. On
December 24, 1767, seven guineas are given for an electrical machine.
On December 27, 1789, there is an entry of payment for repairs to the
telescope. On January 1, 1805, an order is made to have the books,
manuscripts, prints, &c., catalogued. This order was carried out, and
several copies of “A Catalogue of the Spalding Gentlemen’s Society, by T.
Albin, 1808,” still exist. On January 1, 1811, is the last entry in the
account books. This is a revised set of “Rules and Regulations,” wherein
the following items are noticeable:—

    “All books, maps, prints, papers, medals, curiosities,
    furniture, &c., already in the possession of the Society, or
    which may hereafter be purchased by or be bequeathed to them,
    shall be considered the joint property of all the existing
    members, and no person shall claim a separate right to them.”

(Needless to say, this rule remains unrepealed.) At the same meeting a
sub-librarian was appointed and his duties defined; regulations were
made as to the issue of books to the members; ladies were to be admitted
to the Society, but were not to have votes; and minutes were to be
entered in a book to be provided for that purpose. These minutes were
signed by the Rev. Maurice Johnson as president, and by fifteen other
members. Possibly this new book was never procured, as from this time
neither minutes nor accounts are anywhere to be found, until 1828, when
the entry of minutes was resumed in the old book (vol. vi.), and this
book continued in use up to the 15th July 1889, when another volume was
commenced.

On the 18th of February 1828, Dr. Maurice Johnson resigned the office of
president, and the Rev. Dr. William Moore was elected to succeed him. The
Rev. J. H. Marsden, then an assistant curate of Spalding, was appointed
librarian and secretary. At that time the number of members was only
fifteen, but seven others were admitted at the same meeting.

At the next meeting, on February 25, the secretary was requested “to
examine the Society’s records in order to ascertain the terms upon which
certain books were deposited in the church and school.” He gave in his
report on March 3, and the members present were unanimously of opinion
“that the books appear to have been a free gift.” At this meeting a
committee was appointed for the purpose of examining and arranging the
museum.

From this time the election of members and the gifts of books to the
library are duly recorded. The meetings, however, do not appear to
have been held regularly, but all the entries refer to the work of the
Society—_e.g._ on 25th July 1838, “examined Mr. Grundy’s plan of the town
of Spalding, the same being in a state of dilapidation, and resolved that
it will be advisable to obtain a lithographic fac-simile.” This order was
duly carried out, and copies were sold at fifteen shillings each. It was
then arranged that the meetings should be held quarterly.

On 14th June 1848, Sir Charles Anderson wrote asking permission to
have the minute books sent to Lincoln for inspection at the meeting
of the Archæological Institute which was then being arranged. This
request was complied with, and accompanied by a paper entitled “The
Gentlemen’s Society at Spalding: Its Origin and Progress.” This paper
was subsequently printed by the Institute, and afterwards reprinted as a
pamphlet by Pickering in 1851. After the meeting, Mr. Albert Way wrote as
follows:—

                               “WONHAM, REIGATE, _August 19, 1848_.

    “DEAR SIR,—I have the honor to convey to you, and to request
    you to communicate to the Gentlemen composing the Spalding
    Society, the hearty thanks of the Central Committee of the
    Institute for the kindness with which you have been pleased
    to transmit the memorials of the Society to Lincoln for the
    gratification of our members during the late meeting. I hope
    that these precious documents have safely reached you: they
    were committed to the custody of Mr. Swan’s clerk in the
    absence of that gentleman.

    “The Committee request me also to express their acknowledgment
    and thanks for your interesting and valuable notice of the
    Society of Spalding, and the character of its early labors
    in the field of Archæology. The Committee would hail with
    the utmost satisfaction the re-establishment in full vigor
    of such a Society in your County for the examination and
    preservation of historical memorials and ancient monuments or
    antiquities. They would hope that the names of Maurice Johnson
    and his contemporaries might yet form the watchword to rally
    round the Gentlemen of Spalding all those who cherish the
    memory of ancient times in your County, so rich in historical
    recollections and examples illustrative of ancient usages or
    arts. The Committee would most thankfully have esteemed your
    kindness had it been compatible with the safe custody of the
    valuable memorials of the Spalding Society sent to Lincoln, to
    permit any more detail’d examination of them than was feasible
    at that time, or had it been practicable to select any portion
    of their curious contents which might have been given in the
    Lincoln volume about to be published. The memoir, however,
    which we owe to your kindness and hope you will permit me to
    publish in that volume, will excite curiosity regarding the
    labors of the Antiquaries of Spalding, which we would hope
    you may feel disposed, on some future occasion, to gratify by
    further notices and extracts.—I have the honor to be, Dear Sir,
    your obliged and obedient Servant,

                                            ALBERT WAY, _Hon. Sec._

    “The Rev. Dr. MOORE.”

The minute book contains reference to, or has copies of correspondence
with, several other antiquaries of note. Amongst them occur the names of
Pishey Thompson, the author of the “History of Boston”; Admiral Smyth,
author of “A Descriptive Catalogue of a Cabinet of Roman Coins, belonging
to His Grace the Duke of Northumberland”; William Hopkinson of Stamford;
John Yonge Akerman, Secretary to the Society of Antiquaries; Rev. A.
Poole, &c.

Several valuable books were given to the Society, and papers on local
antiquities and other subjects read by the members of the Society, and
entered _in extenso_ by Canon Moore, who also wrote memoirs of some of
the members, viz.: John Richard Carter, Maurice Johnson of Blundeston
(the fifth in lineal descent from the founder), Dr. W. Moore, and Dr.
Cammack.

A vacancy having occurred in the presidency by the death of Dr. Moore
in 1867, Thomas Cammack, F.R.C.P., was appointed to that office, which
he retained until his death. On November 22, 1872, Canon Edward Moore,
F.S.A., was chosen president. He was eminent as an architect, the
restorer of the fine Parish Churches of Spalding, and of Weston St.
Mary, and the preserver of the west front of Crowland Abbey. The three
Churches of St. John Baptist, St. Paul, and St. Peter, Spalding, were
built under his auspices, as was also the new Grammar School and the
Johnson Hospital. Canon Moore was well versed in archæology, and added
much to the minute books of S.G.S. He died on 13th May 1889.

Between the years 1828 and 1889, although the meetings were held at
infrequent and varying intervals, much interest must have been taken
in the Society. The valuable papers read by Canon Moore, Dr. Cammack,
Rev. R. Hollis, and others, and the communications from such men as
Bishop Trollope, Matthew Bloxham, and Professor Marsden show that the
Society still retained a considerable amount of energy. In addition to
those whose names appear above, the list of members of this period gives
those of Joseph Banks of Revesby (father of Sir Joseph Banks); Bertie,
Lord Brownlow; Yarrard, the miniature painter; Count Montalembert, Lord
Boston, Sir Gilbert Scott, T. J. Pettigrew, F.R.S.; J. J. Howard, Joseph
Toynbee, F.R.S.; J. Russell Jackson, &c.

On July 15, 1889, the few remaining members met in the library, then
situate in Double Street, and decided that an earnest effort should be
made to revivify the Society. A president was elected, and a committee
appointed to consider the rules and report thereon. A paper, _In
Memoriam_ Canon Edward Moore, was read. Several articles were exhibited
and some donations made.

The next meeting was held on September 30 following, when the rules
drawn up by the committee were adopted. A treasurer, a librarian, and a
secretary were elected. A paper on “Numismatics” was read and some books
were presented for the library.

Thus, again, working order was re-established; and from that date
quarterly meetings have been held without a single intermission. At these
meetings one or more papers have been read, gifts and purchases of books
and specimens announced, and articles of interest exhibited.

For some years past the quarterly meetings have been supplemented by
monthly ones, and at these also useful work has been accomplished. Summer
excursions to places of antiquarian interest have also been organised.

Since 1889 many hundreds of volumes have been added to the library and
the donations to the museum have been of considerable value.

The Society of Antiquaries of London continues to show its interest
in the Spalding Gentlemen’s Society, by presenting annually its
_Proceedings_ and _Archæologia_.

The Society has purchased several valuable books at auction and other
sales, _e.g._ from the late Joseph Philips, Esq., Colonel Moore, T. H.
Brogden, Esq., and especially from Mrs. M. Johnson, widow of Maurice
Johnson, Esq., of Ayscoughfee Hall and Blundeston, Suffolk. Most of these
last-named works formerly belonged to our founder and have his book-plate
inside the cover. The following extract from a Spalding newspaper will
show their value:—

“LIBRARY OF MAURICE JOHNSON, Esq., F.S.A.—As the sale of this library
by public auction has been a subject of considerable interest in the
town, on account of the intimate connection of its original owner with
Ayscoughfee Hall, we are pleased to learn from Dr. Perry that the
Spalding Gentlemen’s Society, which was instituted by Maurice Johnson
in the year 1710, has been able to secure the following books and
manuscripts which formerly belonged to their venerated founder, in
addition to the large number of similar works which have been in the
possession of the Society from the beginning of the last century. Most
of the books are in a very satisfactory state, and the officers of the
Society will have pleasure in showing them to any one interested in book
lore. The works are:—

    Sir Lawrence Myntling’s Court Book, containing calendars of
    the bond tenants, constitutions, orders, customs, &c., of the
    Priory of Spalding. MS., _circ._ 1455. This book was also
    formerly in possession of Sir Richard Ogle.

    Registrum Brevium, Statuta Vetera, Summaria legis. MS., _circ._
    A.D. 1300.

    Middlecot’s Exchequer Records of Lincoln Holland, &c. MS.

    Rental in Comitate Lincoln, by various writers. MS.

    Catalogus Librorum Societatis Generos; Spalding, by Maurice
    Johnson. MS.

    Of Sewers in Lincoln—Johnson’s collection.

    Statute of Sewers, principally MS., collected by Maurice
    Johnson. This contains Callis’ original manuscript, signed by
    himself.

    Pleas of the Crown, together with a large treatise of the
    Clergy, by M. Johnson. MS.

    Rerum Anglicarum Scriptorum Veterum. Quorum Ingulphus nunc
    primum integer, ceteri nunc primum prodeunt. Oxoniæ (1684).

    A Survey of the Cathedrals of Lincoln, Ely, Oxford, and
    Peterborough, by Browne Willis. S.G.S.S. (1730).

    Harrington’s History of Croyland, translated by Sir Thomas
    Lambert. MS.

    Roberti de Avesbury Historia de Mirabilis Gestis Edwardi III.
    Oxonii (1720).

    Mariani Scoti Chronica; cum Martini Poloni Historia (1559).

    Aristotelis de Reip bene administrandæ Ratione Libri Octo. cum
    commentariis domini Richardi Ogle Equitis Aurati (1567).

    Antiquitates Rutupinæ, auctore Joanne Battely. Oxoniæ (1711).

    Chronicon Saxonicum et MSS. Codicibus nunc primum integrum ac
    Latinum fecit Edmundus Gibson, Episc. Lincoln. Interleaved and
    containing many MS. observations by M. Johnson, F.S.A. (Oxon.
    1692).

    Fines inter Abbes de Burgo et de Croyland, VII. Regis Johannis
    (A.D. 1205); Ibid. inter Croyland et Burgo XXXI. Henrici
    Filii Johannis (A.D. 1247); et conventio inter iidem Abbes.
    Manuscript on vellum (13th century).

    Tracts, viz.: Lewis’ Antiquity and use of Seals (1740); Sale
    Catalogue of the collection of Statues, &c., of Edward (Harley)
    Earl of Oxford, S.G.S.S.; Sale Catalogue of Coins of the same
    (1741-42); Marmor Sandvicense cum Commentario et Notis Tayleri,
    folding plates (1743); Sannazerius, The Oziers, translated by
    Beaupré Bell, S.G.S.S. (1724); The First and Second Satires
    of the Second Book of Horace, by Alexander Pope (1st Edition)
    (this was given by Pope, who was a member of the S.G.S., to his
    friend Maurice Johnson, 1734); Solomon, de Mundi Vanitate, by
    Matthew Prior (1735).

    Another book of Tracts, containing Croyland’s Chronicle,
    compiled from the Charters, &c., by Sir John Harrington,
    Knight, in Latin, and translated into English by Sir Thomas
    Lambard, Knight, with additions by Maurice Johnson, Steward of
    the Manor of Crowland; Speeches by King Charles I. and others
    (1640); The Bedford Level Act (1662); Deeping Fenn Act (1664);
    The Allotment made out of the Fenns, by John Johnson and
    Timothy Tubbs, 1ᵒ July 1669.

    Madox Thomas—History and Antiquities of the Exchequer of the
    Kings of England (1711).”

Gifts of books have been made by the Rev. A. W. G. Moore, Rev. E. Adrian
Woodruffe-Peacock, Rev. R. Hollis, Rev. J. Conway Walter, Rev. Dr.
Astley, Rev. Canon Hemmans, Rev. James Penny, Rev. H. Larken, Rev. H.
Kenelm Smith, Canon Atkinson, W. E. Foster, Esq., W. H. Wheeler, Esq.,
H. Peet, Esq., A. K. Maples, Esq., G. L. Nussey, Esq., The President,
S. H. Perry, Esq., and others. The donation of “Sir Laurence Myntling’s
Court Book of the Priory of Spalding” (MS., _circ._ 1455) by Alexander
Peckover, Esq. (now Lord Peckover of Wisbech.), deserves special mention.
His Majesty’s Stationery Office has given a large number of the Master of
Rolls Series.

The books in the Grammar School library have been returned to S.G.S., as
the Headmaster found they were becoming more and more dilapidated. Those
books which were given to the Church library by S.G.S. have also been
sent back for greater security. The other books in the Church library
were removed to the Parsonage.

To the museum have been added various specimens, including coins, tokens,
seals, casts, pottery, glass, ironwork, &c., of dates from the Roman
period downwards.

The number of members has considerably increased, and their interest in
the work and well-being of the Society is manifest.

The names of the present officers of the Society, and dates of their
election, are as under:—

  _President_—MARTEN PERRY, M.D., F.R. Numismatic
    Society, M.R. Archæological Inst., &c.           _elected_   1889
  _Treasurer_—HAROLD STANLEY MAPLES, Esq.                ”       1889
  _Librarian_—Rev. E. M. TWEED, M.A.                     ”       1895
  _Hon. Sec._—ASHLEY K. MAPLES, Esq.                     ”       1899
  _Hon. Operator_—E. M. M. SMITH, Esq.                   ”       1907

In consequence of the additions made to the library and the museum, and
with a special view of celebrating its bicentenary, it was resolved that
an effort be made to secure a permanent home for the Society, and with
that object in view an urgent appeal was issued to the members in 1908.
As a result a sum of £1150 was received. An appeal to non-members was
made in the spring of 1909, with the result of a further addition being
made to the funds.

During the present year (1910) the members have made additional
contributions. The Society has purchased a site, and commenced the
erection of a structure to serve as a library, museum, caretaker’s
residence, &c. The foundation stones were laid on July 9, 1910, by
Everard Green, Esq., F.S.A., Rouge Dragon; Major Wingfield; Alderman F.
Howard, High Sheriff of Lincolnshire; M. Perry, M.D.; E. M. E. Welby,
Esq.; H. S. Maples, Esq.; Edward Gentle, Esq.; W. S. Royce, Esq.; E. E.
E. Welby-Everard, Esq.; A. K. Maples, Esq.; G. L. Nussey, Esq.; Rev. S.
Yates; Dr. S. H. Perry; and Rev. P. L. Hooson. The building is dedicated
to the memory of the worthy founder of the Society.


POSTSCRIPT

The following quotation from the _Publications of the Surtees Society_,
vol. lxxvi. p. 321, gives Dr. Stukeley’s opinion of the value of the work
done by Maurice Johnson:—

    “20th February 1755.—At the Antiquarian Society I gave them
    Samuel Gale’s MS. of Cornu Ulphi, with the Latin translation by
    himself, and the copper plate of a Runic inscription relating
    to it, which they might print if they thought fit. I gave them
    an account of Maurice Johnson’s death, and the eulogium I wrote
    of him that morning, in the following terms: On Saturday,
    8th February 1755, dyed Maurice Johnson, Esq., of Spalding,
    Lincolnshire, Councellor at Law, a fluent orator, and of
    eminence in that profession, but to an extravagant acquisition
    of riches which he ever had in his power, he preferred the
    serene sweets of a country life, learned leisure, study, and
    contemplation. He is one of the last of the founders of the
    Antiquarian Society, London, begun in the year 1717, the
    only survivors being Brown Willis, Esq., and Dr. Stukeley.
    What is singular in Mr. Johnson’s praise is that he is the
    founder of the Literary Society in Spalding, which memorable
    transaction happened on 3rd November 1712. This Society,
    through his unwearied endeavors, interest, and applications
    of every kind, by his infinite labors in writing, collecting,
    methodizing indexes, and the like, has now subsisted in great
    reputation for these 40 years, and excited such a spirit of
    learning and curiosity in that level part of Lincolnshire,
    called South Holland, as probably will never be extinguished.
    By this means they have got an excellent library, and all
    conveniences for their weekly meeting, have established a most
    extensive correspondence even to both Indies; are very exact
    in answering all communications; have made vast collections
    of MSS. letters, written historys, coins, medals, antiquities
    of every denomination; fossils, all kinds of natural and
    artificial curiosities, drawings, surveys, prints and the like.
    They keep exact minutes of everything that appears before
    them, have members in every branch of knowledge, try useful
    experiments and improvements tending to the common benefit or
    entertainment of mankind. Mr. Johnson was a great lover of
    gardening and planting, had an admirable collection of flowers,
    flowering shrubs, fruit-trees, exotics, an excellent cabinet
    of medals, in which he had great knowledge and judgment. Many
    years ago, particularly, he made large collections of memoirs
    of the history of Carausius, which he sent to me last summer,
    and is still in my custody, as a generous assistance in my work
    on that head, together with all his coins of that emperor, and
    one coin especially, which he always took to be Carausius’
    son, of which I give a sketch. The face is like that of the
    young Tetricus, but singular in this, that the legend begins
    with Cæsar, the name Silvanvs, or whatever else, obliterated,
    which is the more to be regretted. Mr. Beaupré Bell, a young
    gentleman of most excellent learning and knowledge in medals,
    now dead, to the great loss of science, was confident that the
    coin belongs to Carausius’ son. In general, the antiquities
    of the great mitred Priory of Spalding, and of this part of
    Lincolnshire, are for ever obliged to Mr. Johnson’s care and
    diligence, being rescued and preserved from oblivion thereby.
    Thus much I thought proper to commemorate concerning the just
    eulogium of my friend and countryman.”




FOOTNOTES


[1] _Scenery of England_, p. 85.

[2] Professor Boyd Dawkins, _Early Man in Britain_, p. 224 and ff.

[3] March 1909, by Rev. E. H. Mullins.

[4] Since the above was written, a fine specimen of River Drift Man’s
handiwork has been found by the author in the River Trent Gravels, June
21, 1910.

[5] _Early Man in Britain_, p. 315.

[6] _Nature_ for December 1907, p. 103.

[7] _Early Man in Britain_, by Boyd Dawkins, p. 434.

[8] Kemble’s _Horæ Ferales_, pl. 17.

[9] _Celtic Art_, by Bowdly Allen, p. 77.

[10] Introduction to _The History of Lincolnshire_, “Pike’s Series.”

[11] _Celtic Britain_, pp. 30, 288.

[12] _Vit. Agric._ c. 20.

[13] “Richard of Cirencester” says that there were nine colonies in
Britain, including Chester and Caerleon; and the statement is still often
repeated, though no confidence can be placed in it.

[14] The date is unknown, but the original must be older than the
eighteenth century, as neither T. Sympson nor Stukeley speaks of a double
gate.

[15] Another milestone of his reign has been discovered in Wales, and
his coins are not uncommon; so we have here fresh proof that the Gallic
usurpers in the time of Gallienus were acknowledged in Britain.

[16] His see is given as Colonia “Londinensium,” and the reading
“Lindensium” is the best hitherto suggested for a word that is evidently
corrupt.

[17] _Roman Roads in Britain_, p. 384.

[18] It is once called in the _Itinerary_ “Isubrigantum.”

[19] Herodian, iii. c. 14.

[20] _The Fenland, Past and Present._ By S. H. Miller and S. B. J.
Skertchly, p. 181.

[21] Skertchly, _op. cit._, p. 142, and Miller, p. 28 and pp. 43-54.

[22] W. H. Wheeler, _Fens of South Lincolnshire_, p. 7.

[23] Miller, _op. cit._, p. 47.

[24] Of the name of “Cold Harbour,” which is generally associated with
ruined buildings near Roman roads, there are at least ten instances in
the county, and probably more. Five of these are in or near the Wolds of
East Lindsey.

[25] The statue, altar, and milliary can still be seen at Ancaster
Vicarage.

[26] This view has survived the discredit now attaching to the forged
_Itinerary_ of “Richard of Cirencester,” in which alone is found the
positive statement that this province was beyond the Humber.

[27] So it is termed by Mr. Codrington in his _Roman Roads in Britain_,
p. 225.

[28] Mr. R. Brown, jun., F.S.A., in his _Earlier History of
Barton-on-Humber_, vol. i. p. 12, supposes that this road kept to the
heights, leaving Yarborough to the east, and ended at South Ferriby. But
if the Barton earthwork be really Roman, as Yarborough unquestionably is,
a road connecting both with Caistor seems not unlikely.

[29] Geoffrey gives its British name as “Caer Corrie”—strangely corrupted
by Camden into “Caer Egarry.” The name suggests a connection with the
Coritani; but it occurs only in this mass of fantastic legend.

[30] E. A. Freeman, _English Towns and Districts_, 1883, pp. 210, 211.

[31] The Church of St. Peter “ad Fontem,” which Picot, son of Coleswegen,
gave to St. Mary’s Abbey at York (see notice of grant _ap._ Dugdale,
_Mon. Angl._, ed. Caley, &c., 1846, vol. iii. p. 549), was in the eastern
suburb of the city. Here, then, we must place that “wasta terra” which
King William gave to Coleswegen, and the two churches which Coleswegen
endowed there (_Domesday Book_, Lincolnshire _fac-simile_, f. 2_b_).

[32] See plan of Barton-on-Humber and conjectural elevation of the
original building, _ap._ Baldwin Brown, _Arts in Early England_, 1903,
vol. ii. p. 210. An account of Broughton, with views of the tower arch,
follows, pp. 211 _sqq._

[33] The wooden stair at Brigstock has been replaced by a ladder, but
the holes for the stair-logs remain in the inner wall of the turret. The
stone stair at Broughton has been supposed to be an afterthought of the
builders, but the present writer is very doubtful about this.

[34] An illustration and description of this tower will be found in
_Assoc. Archit. Societies’ Reports_, vol. xxix., 1907, p. 70, at the end
of an article in which the present writer has collected the results of
his observation of towers in the neighbourhood of Grimsby and Caistor.

[35] The present belfry stage of the tower is of the fifteenth century,
and is built on piers and arches placed against the inner face of the
older tower walls. For plan of the older tower, see Baldwin Brown, _op.
cit._, ii. 240.

[36] Twenty-six is the exact number of towers which may be said to be
unquestionable members of the group. But the number may be raised by the
inclusion of a few more possible examples.

[37] The roof-line, visible on the eastern wall of the tower, is that of
the mediæval church before the addition of the clerestory.

[38] Hough-on-the-Hill, as noted later, is the only example in which the
details of the quoining really approximate to those at Barton; but at
Hough there is no strip-work.

[39] A kindred example of strip-framing finished off in this way is the
north doorway at Laughton-en-le-Morthen, near Rotherham. At Skipwith,
near Selby, the tower arch has strip-framing. Both these churches lie
within the area to which the Lincolnshire group may be said to belong.
The present writer has dealt briefly with the Yorkshire churches in this
area in an article on “The Village Churches of Yorkshire,” in _Memorials
of Old Yorkshire_.

[40] Historical evidence which points to this conclusion has been
summarised by Dr. Mansel Sympson (“Where was Sidnaceaster?”—_Assoc.
Archit. Soc. Reports_, vol. xxviii., 1905, pp. 87 _sqq._). A charter
of Edward the Confessor, preserved at Peterborough, which contains the
grant of the church, &c., at Fiskerton to the Abbey of Peterborough, is
witnessed by several bishops and nobles, including Wulfwig, Bishop of
Lindsey, who signs himself “Lincolie episcopus.” The charter, however,
appears to be a copy of the original, in which “Lincolie” may have been
written by error for “Lindisse.” But, if “Lincolie” is right, the use
of the title by a bishop whose see was at Dorchester-on-Thames points
to the fact that he looked on Lincoln as his true episcopal city.
And the conviction of the present writer, on other grounds, is that
“Sidnaceaster,” whose site was unknown even to writers of the Norman
period, is simply a careless MS. corruption of “Lindaceaster,” or some
allied Saxon form of “Lindum Colonia.”

[41] The old archdeaconry of Stow comprised the deaneries (now subdivided
to some degree) of Aslackhoe, Corringham, Lawres, and Manlake—in fact,
the original district of Lindsey, east of Trent and west of Ancholme.

[42] The dedicatory inscription on the tower of St. Mary-le-Wigford,
while clearly pointing to its English origin, must not be taken as
indicative of any positive date.

[43] Baldwin Brown, _op. cit._, vol. ii. chap. ii.

[44] See the article on this subject by Dr. J. H. Round, _Feudal
England_, pp. 317 _sqq._ How far the influence of Normans in England
before the Conquest may have affected work in masonry is a point which
may be left to the judgment of the individual reader. The foreigners who
threw up their own characteristic earthworks at the “Pentecost’s Castle”
and “Richard’s Castle” of the Chronicle cannot be certainly credited with
any influence outside their own branch of work; and the appearance of
“Norman” technique at Westminster does not imply its general acceptance
in the provinces.

[45] There is a concise account of the lords of Grantham in the Rev. B.
Street’s _Historical Notes on Grantham and on Grantham Church_. To this
book the writer is indebted for much of the historical matter of the
present chapter, but has carefully checked it by his own research, adding
where necessary references not noticed or imperfectly given by Street and
his eighteenth-century predecessor, Edmund Turnor, author of the _History
of Grantham_. Much research into the mediæval history of the town is
still necessary.

[46] _Rotuli Hundredorum_ (Record Commission), vol. ii. pp. 259, 288. The
jurors, who suffered from bad memories, called the original grantee Ralph
instead of William.

[47] See Street, _Notes on Grantham_, pp. 30, 31. The facts and dates
given there are not wholly consonant with history, and the names and
relationships of the owners of the manor are entirely wrong, Ranulf de
Blundeville, Earl of Chester, being confused with Ranulf de Glanville,
and the descendants of his sister Mabel with those of his sister Maud.

[48] Patent Rolls, 37-8 Henry III., pt. i., m. 8 (1253-4, 14 February,
Bazas): grant to Edward of Stamford and Graham [Grantham] with its honour
(cf. ibid., m. 3, 1254, 14 April, Meilhan); ibid., pt. ii., m. 8 (1254,
26 August, Bordeaux): notification supplementary to assignment in dower
to Eleanor. They had been assigned to her 1254, 20 July, at St. Macaire
(ibid., m. 10).

[49] See Close Rolls, 18 Edw. II., m. 12 (1324-5, 18 March, Westminster):
order to deliver goods of Aymer de Valence to his executors, towns of
Stamford and Graham [Grantham], &c., excepted; ibid., 19 Edw. II., m. 31
(1325, 28 July): escheat of manor.

[50] Patent Rolls, 19 Edw. II., pt. ii., m. 8 (1326, 17 May): grant;
Close Rolls, 19 Edw. II., m. 4 (1326, 29 May): order to deliver; ibid.,
m. 3_d_ (1326, 7 May): enrolment of release on quit-claim.

[51] Patent Rolls, 12 Edw. III., pt. ii., m. 22 (1338, 20 June).

[52] The date is given on the strength of Street’s notes; but Street adds
that the grant was made on the marriage of Edmund with Isabel of Castile,
which did not take place till 1372. Possibly the grant was made in 1373.

[53] In 1402 Edmund, Duke of York, was said to hold Grantham immediately
of the King, warrant unknown (Subs. Rolls, box 106, No. 105, &c., ap.
_Inquisitions and Assessments relating to Feudal Aids_, vol. iii., 1904,
p. 252).

[54] Patent Rolls, 1 Edw. IV., pt. iv., m. 1 (1461, 1 June).

[55] It may be noted that the authority for the existence of this cross
is no earlier than Weever’s _Ancient Funerall Monuments_ (1631). There is
some reason for supposing that the funeral procession travelled by way
of Newark and the old road, known as Sewstern Lane, and did not touch
Grantham. The cross destroyed at Grantham in the seventeenth century, and
known as the Queen’s Cross, was not necessarily an “Eleanor” cross.

[56] Charter Rolls, 11 Henry III., pt. i., m. 20 (1226-7, 17 March,
Westminster): grant to abbey and convent of lands which they hold in
the town of Graham, and manses and land which Colegrim granted. For
privileges claimed by the abbey see _Placita de Quo Warranto_ (Record
Commission), p. 394, col. 2.

[57] This was a chapel to the parish church of St. Wulfran, mentioned in
the interesting _inspeximus_ and confirmation of the agreement between
the Abbot and Convent of Vaudey and Roger de Wolsthorp and Richard de
Saltby (1349, 16 October; Pat. Rolls, 23 Edw. III., pt. iii., m. 22) as
the Chapel of St. Peter in the south street (_in australi vico_) of the
town.

[58] There is a document relating to the Friars Minors of Grantham, Close
Rolls, 19 Edw. II., m. 11 (1325-6, 6 March, Leicester).

[59] Grantham lay on the way to Boston, the great port for the export of
wool. Allusions to the connection with Boston are common: see, _e.g._,
Patent Rolls, 42 Henry III., m. 9_d_, where the mayor and bailiffs of
various Lincolnshire towns, including (the bailiff of) “Graham,” are
ordered to provide carts at the King’s cost to carry the King’s wines
from Boston Fair to Chester. It will be remembered how at a later date
local merchants, members of the Staple of Calais, built their houses in
villages near the town.

[60] This was Mr. Street’s idea, and it seems fairly probable.

[61] It is mentioned in the grant to Prince Edward from Bazas (see note
1, p. 134), and is said to be mentioned in the grant to Edmund of Langley.

[62] _e.g._ on 30th and 31st August 1291 (Pat. Rolls, 19 Edw. I., mm. 7,
6).

[63] Street, _Notes_, pp. 121, 122, quotes the earliest minutes of this
ceremony from the Corporation Records (21 October 1634).

[64] The Abbot and Convent of St. Mary at York presented to Belton; the
Abbot and Convent of Croyland to Sapperton.

[65] _Rot. Hund._, Edw. I., vol. i. p. 290, col. 2.

[66] The institution of Bononius, on the presentation of William de
Yngoldesby, canon of Salisbury, to the vicarage of the prebend of [North]
Grantham, occurs in Bishop Hugh of Wells’ roll for Lincoln Archdeaconry,
m. 3. The last entry but one on the same membrane is the institution of
Richard de Newerc, chaplain, on the presentation of Geoffrey de Boclond,
canon of the south prebend of Grantham, to the vicarage of that prebend.
Brief definitions of the vicarages follow each entry: the vicarage of
South Grantham is said to consist in a moiety of the altarage of Grantham
and Gonerby, and in all the fruits of the altars of Horton (Houghton)
and Bresteby (Braceby). Each vicar had to pay a pension of 100 shillings
yearly to his prebendary.

[67] A very full account of Grantham Church, by the late Bishop (then
Archdeacon) Trollope, compiled for the Lincoln Diocesan Architectural
Society’s meeting at Grantham in 1867, is printed in _Assoc. Arch. Soc.
Reports_, vol. xi. pp. 1-12. Sir Gilbert Scott’s brief summary of its
architectural history will be found in the same publication, vol. xiii.
pp. 28-35. Turnor’s _History of Grantham_ and Street’s _Notes_ contain
accounts of the building; and a small pamphlet by the Rev. D. Woodroffe,
called _Half-an-Hour in Grantham Church_, may also be mentioned. The
present writer, while mentioning these, has been led in some instances by
his own study of the building to somewhat different conclusions.

[68] The carving is allied to that of the capitals in the Castle Hall at
Oakham and in Twyford Church, Leicestershire, but is somewhat smaller in
scale and less bold in outline. The foliage of some of the capitals was
much mutilated by the introduction of galleries in the eighteenth century.

[69] No doubt the builders intended to rebuild the nave arcades in
conformity with this new spacing. The design, however, was abandoned.

[70] The study of Newark Church is a necessary complement to the study
of Grantham. From what happened there in and after 1313, probably as a
result of the great extension at Grantham, we may gather that, as an
initial part of such an extension, the lower courses of the new walls
were first built, and that then the masons, beginning at the east end
of one aisle, worked westwards, and left the other aisle, in which they
worked eastwards, to the last. This would account for some differences in
the masonry of the upper and lower parts of the walls of the south aisle.

[71] The top stage of the tower was probably added as an afterthought,
and not designed until the stage below had been completed.

[72] A mill-stone was placed on the top, and the new vane mortised into
it.

[73] The chantry returns of Edward VI.’s commissioners (Roll 33, Nos.
91-96) enumerate the chantries of the Holy Trinity, founded by John de
Orston; Corpus Christi, by the same John and others; St. Mary, by William
Gunthorp and others; St. John Baptist, by Richard Saltbie and others;
St. Peter, by Robert Stonesbie; and Curteys’ Chantry, by the executors
of Richard Curteis for two priests. No. 97 is a return relating to the
endowment known as the “Deacon’s Land”; and No. 113 is the certificate
of the Guild of the Name of Jesus, which held its services in Grantham
Church. These chantries, with the exception of “Curteys Chantry,” were
all of fourteenth century origin; and their foundation took place between
1346 and 1362. The early history of the Guild is obscure, until the
endowment of a chaplain by the will of Robert Pacie of Barkston in 1494.
Seven returns of Grantham guilds, in pursuance of the Act of 12 Richard
II. (1388) appear among the Chancery Guild Certificates (Nos. 109-115).

[74] For the reference, see note 1, p. 136. The document deals with the
endowment and appointment of three chaplains, one at the altar in the
rood-loft; another in St. Peter’s Chapel in the South Street; and a third
in the chapel of St. Thomas the Martyr in the churchyard. Their duties
are carefully detailed; and the Abbot and Convent of Vaudey, in return
for benefits conferred on them by the founders of the chantries (Roger de
Wolsthorp and Richard de Saltby), charge themselves with the maintenance
of the chaplains. St. Peter’s Chapel, mentioned here, was, as already
noted, distinct from the parish church; and the chantry of St. Peter (see
note 1, p. 149) may have been endowed in this building, and not in St.
Wulfran’s. It is possible that the Haryngtons, whose tomb is in the south
aisle, west of the doorway, may have been founders or co-founders of a
chantry there, the position of the chapel of which may be indicated by
the bell-cot at the west end of the aisle. The licence for the foundation
of the chantries at the Holy Trinity and Corpus Christi altars bears date
18 August 1392; and on the same date William Gunthorp and others had
licence to alienate land, &c., in augmentation of the chantries of St.
John Baptist and St. Mary (Patent Rolls, 16 Rich. II., part i., mm. 13,
12).

[75] Evidence of the existence of relics of St. Wulfran here is given by
a churchwarden’s minute in 1565: “Item, a sylver and copper shryne called
seint Wulfrane shryne was sold, and bought with the pryce thereof a
silver pott full gilt and an ewer of sylver for the mystification of the
holye and most sacred supper of owre lorde Jhesus Christ, called the holy
comunyon” (Peacock, _Monuments of Superstition_, p. 88, quoted in Bishop
Trollope’s account, _u.s._).

[76] Colonel Welby suggests that the niches, of which traces remain in
the east wall of the outer part of the north porch, were intended for a
holy-water stoup and almsbox at the foot of the stair. They have also
been supposed to indicate the presence of an altar in this part of the
porch; but this is less probable.

[77] The foundation-wall of the screen was discovered in the nineteenth
century across the entrance to the chancel. No similar walls existed
across the aisles. This points to the probability that the screen was
built after the cessation of work in the south aisle of the nave, and
before the building of the south chapel of the chancel (_i.e._ between
1320 and 1360). No screen could thus be continued across the south
aisle, as the wall came in the way; and a light wooden screen would be
sufficient for the single bay of the north aisle east of the nave. At
the same time the evidence of the wide eastern bay of the nave points to
some enlargement or rebuilding of the screen, or at any rate to a desire
to free the rood and its beam of the eastern wall of the nave, against
which they had not improbably been placed up to this time. The dislike of
chancel arches in districts where elaborate screens are common will be
remembered.

[78] A paper by Precentor Venables (_Assoc. Arch. Soc. Reports_, vol.
xiii. pp. 46 _sqq._) summarises the history of the controversy, and
explains the part which Bishop Williams took in it more satisfactorily
than other accounts within the writer’s knowledge.

[79] This, in 1662, was filled with armorial glass, as we learn from
Gervase Holles’ notes on the heraldry of Grantham Church, in the Harleian
MSS.

[80] A memorandum relating to the erection of the organ and position of
the altar in 1640, containing a copy of a petition to Parliament from the
Corporation against Puritan objections, is printed from the Corporation
Records at the end of Precentor Venables’ article (see note 1, above).

[81] There is an interesting account of the history and contents of
the library, by the late Canon Hector Nelson, in the _Lincoln Diocesan
Magazine_ for December 1893 and March and April 1894. Canon Nelson is
responsible for the catalogue of the library.

[82] Particularly to the Rev. S. C. Tickell, author of a _Guide to
Old Stamford_ (1907), and Henry Walker, author of _Stamford with its
Surroundings_ (Homeland Handbooks), 1908.

[83] Having been granted as a _barony_ to the Abbot of Peterborough.

[84] The conjectural identification, which appears in several accounts,
of Causennæ or Gausennæ with Great Casterton (a village two miles north
of Stamford and the site of a Roman camp) will not bear the test of
comparison with the distances given in the Fifth Antonine Itinerary.

[85] Mackenzie Walcot, _Memorials of Stamford_, p. 2.

[86] There is some little uncertainty whether the “Stanforth” mentioned
by Wessington can be positively identified with the Lincolnshire
Stamford. Cf. _Vict. Cty. Hist. of Lincs._, vol. ii.

[87] Cf. _Vict. Hist. Northants_, vol. i. p. 256.

[88] Peck.

[89] E. W. Lovegrove, M.A., in the chapter on “The Churches of Stamford,”
in the “Homeland” _Handbook to Stamford_, by H. Walker (1908), from whose
admirable notes on the architecture of Stamford much of the present
account has been taken.

[90] For this information the writer is indebted to the Rev. E. A. Irons,
rector of North Luffenham, who has long made a special study of the
records of the diocese and district.

[91] An interesting account of this fight, and the circumstances which
led up to and followed it, is to be found in an article entitled “An
Unnoticed Battle” in _Rutland Magazine_, vol. i. p. 186 _et seq._

[92] Lincolnshire Topographical Society, 1843.

[93] Chequée _or_ and _gu._, over all a bend _erm._

[94] _Sa._ semée with cinquefoils _arg._, a lion rampant _arg._

[95] _Lincoln Cathedral Statutes_, vol. ii. p. 447.

[96] According to Gough (Camden’s _Britannia_) the stained glass of the
church was taken out in 1737 to save the vicar wearing spectacles!

[97] _Chancel Screens_, A. Welby Pugin, p. 14.

[98] Pugin, p. 22.

[99] See plan and view in Gally Knight.

[100] Published by J. D. of Kidwelly, MDCLXXII.

[101] _York Fabric Rolls_ (Surtees Society), p. 300-1.

[102] _Archæological Journal_, vol. xlv. p. 429.

[103] In the _Lincoln Diocesan Magazine_, 1895.

[104] In this respect resembling Chaucer’s Wife of Bath’s third husband,
who “lith y grave under the rode-beme,” and an Alderman H. Philyp, who
wished “to be buried in the Church of Seynt Petres, in the Baylly of
Oxford, under the Rode.”—A. Gibbons, _Early Lincoln Wills_, pp. 87-8.

[105] Aymer Vallance, “Rood-Screen of Moulton Church,” _Archæological
Journal_, vol. lxvi. p. 264.

[106] At _Grimoldby_, _Addlethorpe_, and _Winthorpe_ still exist the
pulley holes for working the lights in front of the rood-screen,
according to “A. V.,” _Church Times_, July 29, 1910.

[107] _English Church Furniture_, E. Peacock, 1866, p. 151.

[108] Mason and Webb, _Durandus’ Symbolism of Churches_, p. civ. ed. 1893.

[109] _Early Lincoln Wills_, A. Gibbons. The bequests seem to begin
early in the fifteenth century. There is only one instance (Jas. Burton,
of _Horncastle_, 1536, to the Rood light xij_d._) in Canon Maddison’s
collection of _Lincolnshire_ wills of the sixteenth century.

[110] _Oliver Cromwell_, p. 141.

[111] J. G. Williams, _Linc. Notes and Queries_, vol. viii. p. 101.

[112] On this occasion, probably, the Lincoln Corporation received from
the King’s hands its third sword.—Williams, _Linc. Notes and Queries_,
viii. p. 155.

[113] J. G. Williams, _Linc. Notes and Queries_, viii. p. 140.

[114] _True Intelligence from Lincolnshire, presented to the view and
consideration of the peaceably-minded_, 15th August 1642.

[115] _Joyful Intelligence from Lincolnshire_, quoted in _Linc. Notes and
Queries_, viii. p. 154.

[116] Clarendon’s _History of the Rebellion_, book v.

[117] _Memoirs of Colonel Hutchinson_, ed. 1892, pp. 143-45.

[118] _Relation of a Fight in the County of Lincoln_, &c., 1643.

[119] Carlyle, _Letters of Cromwell_, Part II. x.

[120] _Great Civil War_, i. p. 143.

[121] A. Paterson, _Oliver Cromwell: his Life and Character_, p. 51.

[122] Calendar of MSS. of the House of Lords, vii. App. i., quoted in
_Victoria History of Lincolnshire_, vol. ii. p. 282.

[123] _Memoirs of Colonel Hutchinson_, pp. 150, 154.

[124] Carlyle, Part II. p. 123 (to the Committee of the Associated
Counties).

[125] Possibly, as suggested in the _Victoria History of Lincolnshire_
(vol. ii. pp. 284-85), the first password in each case was for Tuesday,
the second for Wednesday.

[126] He was younger brother of Ralph, Lord Hopton, the Royalist
commander in the West. Cromwell is said to have visited Horncastle after
the battle to see that the body of this “brave gentleman,” as he styled
him, was fitly interred. It is possible that he owed his life to Hopton’s
forbearance at a critical moment.

[127] Scottish Dove, E. 75, 24.

[128] Mr. E. Peacock, F.S.A. (_Lincs. Architectural Society’s Reports_,
vol. viii. p. 265), thinks that no move was made against Gainsborough
till after the capture of the fort at Burton-on-Stather on December 18.
But the letter of the Essex soldier (below) disproves this; and I suggest
that a force from Lincoln invested the place till it was compelled to
retire by the severity of the weather.

[129] Barrington MSS. quoted in Kingston’s _East Anglia and the Civil
War_, p. 147.

[130] In Oldfield’s _Wainfleet and Candleshoe_, Appendix No. 6, pp.
12-16. The list is not complete, for the names of Sir John Monson and
others are omitted.

[131] J. A. Gotch, _Early Renaissance Architecture in England_,
1500-1625, pp. 69, 70.




INDEX


  Abbey, Crowland, 217-219, 238

  ⸺ Croyland, 85, 327

  ⸺ of Bardney, 114, 119

  ⸺ of Kirkstead, Cistercian, 81, 84, 180

  ⸺ Peterborough, 132, 135

  ⸺ Spalding, 85

  Addison, 319

  Adelfius, 32

  Aisby, tessellated pavement at, 44

  Aldred, last Saxon Archbishop of York, 210

  Alington of Swinhope family, 313

  Alkborough church, 72, 73

  All Saints’ Church, Stamford, 167, 170

  “All Saints in the Mercat” Church, 167

  All Saints’, Stamford, brasses in, 199, 200

  Alnwick tower, Lincoln, 190

  Alnwick’s visitation, Bishop, 194

  Altar tomb of Sir Humphrey Littlebury, 108

  ⸺ with inscription, Roman, 32

  Altars, rood-screen, 246

  Ambler, William, 321

  Ancaster, 44

  ⸺ Heath, 262

  ⸺ Roman camp at, 26

  Anderson family, 313

  “Angel Inn,” Grantham, 136, 137, 139, 157

  “Angel Quire,” Lincoln, 145

  Apple Cross, Grantham, 137, 138, 158

  Archbishop of Sens, St. Wulfran, 150

  Arrow points, flint, 12

  Atwater, Bishop, 194

  Austinian Priory, Newstead, 168

  Axholme, Isle of, 2, 51, 276, 315

  Aymer de Valence, Earl of Pembroke, 134

  Ayscough, Sir Edward, 257

  Ayscoughfee Hall, 335


  Bardney, Abbey of, 114, 119

  Barrowe, Abbot of Bardney, Roger de, 114

  Barrows, Long, 7, 9, 20, 21

  ⸺ Round, 7, 9, 20, 21

  Barton, carved stone slab, 210

  Barton-on-Humber, 265

  Barton, St. Peter’s Church, 53-56, 61, 63, 65-67, 69, 70

  ⸺ “Street,” 50

  Bassingthorpe, 161

  Bede, 120

  Bedehouse, Stamford, Lord Burghley’s, 167, 173

  Bell, Beaupré, 327

  Belton fight, 157

  Belvoir Castle, 157

  ⸺ vale of, 160

  Benedictine Nunnery, St. Mary’s, 167

  Bertie, Richard, 313

  ⸺ Sir Peregrine, 255

  Bishop Alnwick’s visitation, 194

  ⸺ Atwater, 194

  ⸺ of Grantham, 155

  ⸺ of Lincoln, Fleming, 121

  ⸺ ⸺ Hugh of Wells, 141

  ⸺ ⸺ Sanderson, 158, 159

  ⸺ of Winchester, 185, 195

  ⸺ ⸺ Richard Foxe, 153, 154

  ⸺ Trollope, 142

  ⸺ Williams, 155

  Black Death, 151

  Bladud, 163

  Blake-Delaval, Francis, 290

  Blyton rood-beam, 232

  Bolingbroke Castle, 270

  Book-plate, Spalding Society’s, 321

  Books at Grantham, chained, 159

  Boring tools, flint, 13

  Boston, 259

  ⸺ Church, 120-130

  ⸺ ⸺ brasses in, 199, 200

  ⸺ “seditious town of,” 273

  ⸺ tower, 78

  Botulf, 120

  Bourn, 160

  ⸺ birthplace of William Cecil, 154, 176

  Bracebridge, 64, 65, 69, 70, 76, 78

  ⸺ chancel arch, 209

  Branston stone rood, 209

  ⸺ tower, 79, 80

  Brass of Hugh de Gondeby, Tattershall, 193

  ⸺ of “William Palmer wyth ye stylt,” 204

  Brasses in Tattershall Church, 197-200

  ⸺ of civilians, 202

  ⸺ of knights, 201

  ⸺ of ladies, 201, 202

  ⸺ of priests, 201

  ⸺ provincial, 203

  ⸺ sepulchral, 198-205

  Brazenose knocker at Stamford, 175

  ⸺ school, Stamford, 175

  Brigantian capital, 33

  Broad Tower, Lincoln, 138

  Bronze Age, 3, 18-21

  ⸺ burials, 20

  ⸺ pottery, 19, 20

  Broughton chancel arch, 68

  ⸺ tower, 56, 67-69, 75

  Brown, Professor Baldwin, 74, 75

  Browne, founder of Stamford Hospital, William, 202

  Browne’s Hospital, Stamford, 172, 248

  “Bull running,” Stamford, 173

  Burgh, 49

  ⸺ Sir Thomas, 281

  Burghley House, 177

  ⸺ Lord, William Cecil, 154, 176

  Burton, 156

  Bushey family, 317, 318

  Butcher’s _Survey of Stamford_, 162


  Caistor, 34, 50, 77

  Camp at North Kyme, Roman, 40

  ⸺ Redstone Gowt, Roman, 42

  Campden Lecture, Grantham, 157

  Camps, Roman, 26

  Camulodunum, 28

  “Candlebeam,” 244

  Canons of Sempringham, Gilbertine, 168

  Canterbury, choir of, 207, 208

  Canwick Church, 32

  Capitulation of Lincoln, 272

  Cardyke, 39, 40, 42-44

  Carmelite Friary, Stamford, 168

  Casterton, Roman Camp at, 26

  “Castle Dike,” Barton, 50

  ⸺ Grantham, 138, 139, 156

  ⸺ Lincoln, 29, 274

  ⸺ Stamford, 165, 166, 175

  ⸺ Tattershall, 179-193, 277

  Cavendish, Colonel Charles, 262

  Cecil family, 176, 177

  ⸺ ⸺ tombs, Stamford, 171, 172

  “Celery” stalk foliage, Kirkstead Chapel, 83

  Chained books at Grantham, 159

  Chancel-screens, parish, 230-248

  ⸺ solid, 213

  Chancery at Lincoln, 248

  Chantry House, Grantham, 154

  Chapel, Kirkstead, 81-84

  ⸺ of St. Mary, Boston, 121

  ⸺ of St. Mary Magdalene, 167

  ⸺ of SS. Peter and Paul, Boston, 121

  Charles I. arrives at Lincoln, 254

  ⸺ at Grantham, 138

  ⸺ at Stamford, 177

  Charter, 1268, Croyland, 102-104

  ⸺ Grantham, 139

  ⸺ of Wolfere, King of Mercia, 164

  ⸺ Stamford, 174

  Chisels, flint, 13

  Cholmeleys of Easton and Norton Place, 314

  Church, Alkborough, 72, 73

  ⸺ at Stow, Saxon, 53, 58, 59, 63, 71

  ⸺ St. Paul’s, Lincoln, 53

  ⸺ St. Peter’s, Barton, 53, 54-56, 61, 63, 65-67, 69, 70, 72-75

  Churches of Stamford, 168-172

  ⸺ some South Lincolnshire, 85-113

  Cibber, Colley, 154

  Cinerary urns, 50

  Cistercian Abbey of Kirkstead, 180

  Civil war, 156, 177

  ⸺ ⸺ Lincolnshire and the, 249-279

  Claypole, Lenten veil at, 209

  ⸺ screen, 231

  Clee tower, 67, 70

  Coleswegan, 54, 72

  College, All Saints’, Stamford, 167

  Colsterworth, rood-loft doorway at, 240

  ⸺ Saxon cross, 209

  Commission of Array, 255, 262

  Complete mediæval rood-loft, 237

  Coney, Thomas, 161

  Copledike family, 315

  Coritani tribe, 25, 38, 41

  Corringham moulded tower arch, 76

  Cot, position of sancte-bell, 241

  Cotes-by-Stow, complete mediæval rood-loft, 237

  Count of the Saxon Shore, 47, 51

  Cox, Michael, 330

  Cracroft of Hackthorn family, 311

  Cranwell, 64

  Cromwell, Baron, 182

  ⸺ family of, 182

  ⸺ Oliver, 182, 261, 263-266, 273

  ⸺ Ralph, 182

  Cross brasses, 203

  Cross, Grantham High, 137, 138, 158

  ⸺ Queen’s, Grantham, 135

  Crowland Abbey, 217-219, 238

  ⸺ occupied for the King, 275

  ⸺ royal tenants of, 260

  Croyland Abbey, 85, 327

  ⸺ Charter, 1268, 102-104

  Curious inscriptions, 204, 205

  Cust family, 311, 312


  Danish “Five Burghs,” 165

  Decorated font, Tattershall Church, 193

  Description of Tattershall Castle, 186-193

  Doddington Hall, 280-308

  Domesday Book, entry of Grantham in, 132

  Doors, screen, 235

  Doorway, Kirkstead Chapel, 83

  Double window-opening, 63, 66

  Durham, The Rites of, 214, 226

  Dwelling places, pygmy, 14, 15

  Dymoke of Scrivelsby family, 311


  Earliest wooden screen-work, Kirkstead, 231

  Earliest wooden screen-work, 180

  Early English screen, Kirkstead Chapel, 83

  _Early Lincoln Wills_, 245

  Easter Sepulchre, Heckington, 118

  Easton, Roman camp at, 26

  Edenham, brass at, 204

  Edward I. at Grantham, 138

  Effigy of Robert de Tatesale and Kirkstead, 180

  ⸺ of Sir Richard de Boselyngthorp, 200

  ⸺ Purbeck marble, Kirkstead Chapel, 83

  Eleanor Cross, Stamford, 175

  Ellys, Anthony, 161

  Empingham, defeat of Lancastrians at, 176

  Endowments of Boston Church, 126, 127

  Entrenchments of Iron Age, 21, 22

  Eolithic period, 3

  Ermine Street, 26, 28, 30, 33-37, 42, 44-46, 163

  Essential feature of Lincolnshire screens—ogee arch an, 231

  Ethelmund, king of East Anglia, 120

  Eudo, son of Spirewic, 180

  Ewerby Church, 115, 116

  ⸺ screen, 238


  Fairfax, Sir Thomas, 265, 269

  Families, Lincolnshire, 309-318

  ⸺ principal county, 277-318

  Fane of Fulbeck family, 314

  Fenland flats, 160

  Fen mounds, Boston, 41

  Fens, Roman engineering in the, 39

  Fireplace, Tattershall Castle, stone, 189-191

  First Charter, Stamford’s, 174

  Fishing hooks, flint, 13

  Fishtoft Church, 216

  “Five Burghs,” Danish, 165

  Fleet, Church of St. Mary Magdalene, 85, 108

  Fleming, Bishop of Lincoln, 121

  Flints, pygmy, 11-14

  Flying buttresses of screens, 235

  Font, Grantham, 153

  Forest dwellers, 15

  Fortescue of Wear Gifford, Hugh, 184

  Fossdyke, 37

  Foss Way, 28, 35, 37

  Foxe, Bishop of Winchester, Richard, 153, 154

  Franciscans, 136

  Freiston Priory, 216

  Friary of SS. Mary and Nicholas, Stamford, 168

  ⸺ Stamford, Carmelite, 168

  ⸺ ⸺ Franciscan, 168

  Furnaces, pre-Roman smelting, 22


  Gainsborough, occupation of, 265

  Gainsthorpe, 34

  Gale, Roger, 327, 329

  Galleries, upon the machicolations, Tattershall, 192

  Gaunt, Gilbert de, 114

  Gay, John, 319

  Gedney, Church of St. Mary Magdalene, 85, 109-111

  General description of Boston Church, 124, 125

  Gentlemen’s Society, Spalding, 319-339

  Geoffrey of Monmouth, 51

  Gilbertine Canons of Sempringham, 168

  Grammar School, Grantham, 153

  ⸺ ⸺ Stamford, 176

  Grantham Church, 190, 217

  ⸺ Cromwell at, 264

  ⸺ High Cross, 137, 138, 158

  ⸺ tower, 78

  ⸺ town and church of, 131-161

  Great Casterton, 163

  ⸺ Ponton, 161

  ⸺ ⸺ Church, 131

  Greetwell, Roman residence at, 32

  Gresham, Sir Thomas, 319

  Grey Friars, 136, 137

  Gunman, James, 298


  Haceby, tessellated pavement at, 44

  Hand rail, Tattershall Castle, stone, 190

  Harlaxton, 160

  Harrowby hills, 160

  Harvey, Sir William, 260

  Haryngtons, 144

  Heckington, Church of St. Andrew, 114-119

  ⸺ Lenten veil at, 209

  ⸺ screen, 231

  ⸺ tower, 78

  Heneage family, 315

  ⸺ of Hainton family, 310

  “Herring-bone” masonry at Marton, 69, 76

  ⸺ masonry, Grantham, 142

  Heylyn, 156

  High Cross, Grantham, 137, 138, 158

  History of Boston Church, 120-124

  _History of Holbeach_, Macdonald’s, 106

  Holbeach, Church of All Saints’, 85, 105-108, 110

  ⸺ Church, 152

  Holland, 38, 41, 42

  Hopkin’s Hospital, Stamford, 173

  Horncastle, 35, 46

  Hospital, Browne’s, Stamford, 172, 218

  ⸺ of St. Leger, 168

  ⸺ of SS. John and Thomas, Stamford, 167, 173

  Hough-on-the-Hill, 57, 73, 75

  Houghton Church, 140

  House of the Holy Sepulchre, 167

  Hugh of Wells, Bishop of Lincoln, 141

  Hussey, Rebecca, 289

  ⸺ Sir Edward, 287, 289

  ⸺ Sir Thomas, 288

  ⸺ Thomas, 287

  Hussey-Apreece, Sir Thomas, 290

  Hussey-Delaval, Edward, 296

  Hussey-Delaval, Sir John, 291


  Icanho (Ox Island), 120

  Images on the rood-loft, 243

  Infirmary, Stamford, 168

  Inscriptions, curious, 204-205

  Irby family, 312

  ⸺ Sir Anthony, 257

  Irnham, 161

  Iron Age, entrenchments of the, 21, 22


  Jarvis, George Eden, 298

  ⸺ George Ralph Payne, 298

  Jessopp, Dr., 208

  Johnson, Maurice, 319, 321, 323, 329, 331, 335

  Jubé, 225


  Kesteven forest, 24

  ⸺ Roman villa sites in, 51

  Kirby Hall, 190

  Kirkstead Abbey, 81-84

  ⸺ Cistercian Abbey of, 180

  Kirton, 181

  Knights Hospitallers, 121

  Knives, flint, 13


  Lady Chapel, Grantham, 151, 152

  Langton of Langton by Spilsby family, 309, 310

  Leland, 45, 49

  Leverton, Lenten veil at, 209

  Liber Niger, or Statutes of Lincoln Cathedral, 225

  Libraries, Grantham Church, 159

  ⸺ Spalding, 320, 322

  Licence to erect Tattershall Castle, 180, 181

  Lincoln, 160

  ⸺ Alnwick tower, 190

  ⸺ “Angel Quire,” 145

  ⸺ Broad tower, 138

  ⸺ capitulation of, 272

  ⸺ Castle, 29, 274

  ⸺ chancery at, 248

  ⸺ choir screen at, 208

  ⸺ diocese of, 155, 163

  _Lincoln Excursion_, Sharpe’s, 89, 102, 109, 113

  Lincoln, Fleming, Bishop of, 121

  “Lincoln Gap,” 26, 36

  Lincoln, Hugh of Wells, Bishop of, 141

  ⸺ Lord Clinton, Earl of, 184

  ⸺ Minster, reredos-screen, 211

  ⸺ Petition, 259

  ⸺ St. Hugh’s shrine, 145

  ⸺ St. Paul’s Church, 53

  ⸺ Sanderson, Bishop of, 158, 159

  ⸺ stone screen, 220-23, 227, 228

  ⸺ tessellated pavements found in, 32

  ⸺ Theophilus Clinton, Earl of, 277

  _Lincoln Wills, Early_, 245

  “Lincolnshire Rising,” 175

  Lindsey, 36, 41, 48, 49, 51, 71

  ⸺ Lord, 313

  ⸺ Montagu Bertie, Earl of, 277

  ⸺ Robert, Earl of, 252, 269

  ⸺ Roman villa sites in, 51

  Lindum, 27, 28, 31-33, 36

  List of places where Barrows have been found, 8

  ⸺ ⸺ where Bronze Age specimens have been found, 19

  ⸺ ⸺ where Neolithic implements have been found, 5

  Littlebury, altar tomb of Sir Humphrey, 108

  “Long and short” quoining, 61-65, 73

  Long Barrows, 7-9, 20, 21

  Lord Treasurer, Ralph Cromwell, 182, 184, 193

  Louth tower, 78

  Lyndewodes, brasses of the two, 202

  Lyon, Rev. Stephen, 321


  Maddison family, 312

  Manchester and Cromwell advance against Lincoln, 274

  Manton Common, pygmy flints found at, 10

  Market Cross, Grantham, 137, 138, 158

  Marton by Stow, Saxon stone rood, 209

  Marton, “herring-bone” masonry at, 69, 76

  Massingberd family, 310

  Maud, Empress, 141

  Mediæval rood-screens and rood-lofts, 206-248

  Merlin of Caledonia, 163

  Middle bay of screens, 234

  Mid-wall shaft, 66, 70

  Milestone, Victorinus, 30

  Minster, 54

  Mint, Stamford, 165

  Monson family, 312, 315

  _Monumental Brasses_, Macklin’s, 205

  Monumental brasses, Tattershall Church, 197, 199, 200

  Monuments in Boston Church, 125-126

  More, Henry, metaphysician, 154, 159

  Moulton, Church of All Saints, 85, 89, 91, 92-100, 102, 103, 105,
        107, 111, 113


  Names of the rood-loft, 212, 213

  Nelson, Canon Hector, 160

  Nelthorp of Scawby family, 317

  Neolithic boats found in Lincolnshire, 6

  ⸺ burial places, 4, 7-9

  ⸺ implements, 5

  ⸺ period, 3

  ⸺ pottery, 7

  Neve, Rev. Timothy, 322, 328

  Newark Castle, 157

  ⸺ “remonstrance,” 273

  ⸺ siege of, 273

  Newcome, Dr. John, 159

  Newcomen family, 316, 317

  Newel staircase, Tattershall Castle, 190

  “Newport” arch, 29, 31

  Newton, Sir Isaac, 154, 158

  Nicholson, W. A., 184

  North Kyme, Roman camp at, 40

  Nunnery, St. Mary’s Benedictine, 167


  Onion fair, 150

  Organ, playing the, 227


  Paleolithic period, 3

  Palimpsests, 203

  Parish chancel-screens, 230-248

  Patten of Wainfleet, William, 185, 195

  Pavement at Aisby, tessellated, 44

  ⸺ at Haceby, tessellated, 44

  Pavements found in Lincoln, tessellated, 32

  Peck, Francis, 162, 166

  Peddar’s Way, 48

  Pelham of Brocklesby, Sir William, 257

  Perpendicular tower, Spalding Parish Church, 89

  Peterborough Abbey, 132, 135

  ⸺ Cromwell’s headquarters at, 268

  ⸺ diocese of, 163

  Picot, son of Coleswegan, 54

  Pigot, knightly family of, 280, 281

  Pinchbeck Church, 85

  Piscina, Heckington, 118, 119

  ⸺ Kirkstead Chapel, 83

  Plan of Spalding, Grundy’s, 332

  ⸺ of Tattershall Castle, 186

  _Polyglot_, Philip II.’s, 159

  Pope, 319

  Potesgrave, Richard de, 115, 117

  Pottery, Bronze Age, 19, 20

  ⸺ of the Neolithic period, 7

  Prehistoric Iron Age, 3, 22, 23

  Priory Church, Stamford, 166

  ⸺ Freiston, 216

  ⸺ of Spalding, 326

  ⸺ St. Leonard’s, Stamford, 164, 166, 167

  ⸺ St. Mary’s, Newstead, 168

  ⸺ St. Michael’s, Stamford, 167

  “Protecting Mothers,” statues of, 45

  Prynne, 156

  Pulpitum, Tattershall stone, 228-230

  Pygmy period, 3, 10-18

  ⸺ race of man in Lincolnshire, 10-18

  ⸺ races, 17

  ⸺ sites, stations or dwelling-places, 14, 15


  Queen’s Cross, Grantham, 135

  Quoining, “long and short,” 61-65


  Rectors and Vicars of Boston Church, 127-130

  Redstone Gowt, oblong camp at, 42

  Regalia, Stamford, 174

  Reredos-screen, Lincoln Minster, 211

  Restoration of Boston Church, 123

  Richard III. at Grantham, 139

  Rites of Durham, The, 214, 226

  Roman altar, with inscription, 32

  “Roman Banks,” 41

  ⸺ camp at North Kyme, 40

  ⸺ ⸺ at Redstone Gowt, 42

  ⸺ camps, 26

  ⸺ engineering in the Fens, 39

  ⸺ occupation, 2

  ⸺ occupation of Stamford, 163

  ⸺ period, 3

  ⸺ remains at Winterton, 34

  ⸺ residence at Greetwell, 32

  ⸺ salt works, 43, 51

  ⸺ sea-walls, 3

  ⸺ sepulchral slabs, 32

  ⸺ villa at Scampton, 33

  ⸺ villa sites in Kesteven and Lindsey, 51

  Romans in Lincolnshire, 24-52

  Rood-beam above the altar, 210

  Rood-loft, complete mediæval, 237

  ⸺ staircases, 239

  ⸺ turret, with spirelet, 241

  Rood-screen, Grantham, 158

  Rood-screens and rood-lofts, mediæval, 206-248

  Roods carved in stone, 209

  ⸺ metal or wood, 210

  Ropsley, 64

  ⸺ birthplace of Bishop Foxe, 154

  Rothwell tower, 65, 68, 73

  Round Barrows, 7, 9, 20, 21


  St. George’s Church, Stamford, 171

  St. Giles’ Lazar House, Stamford, 167

  St. Hugh’s shrine, Lincoln, 145

  St. John’s Church, Stamford, 170

  St. Leonard’s Priory, Stamford, 164, 166, 167

  St. Martin’s Church, Stamford, 167, 171, 196

  St. Mary-le-Wigford, 64, 67, 72, 76

  St. Mary’s Benedictine Nunnery, 167

  ⸺ Church, Stamford, 170

  ⸺ Minster, Stow, 72

  ⸺ Priory, Newstead, 168

  St. Michael’s Church, Stamford, 171

  ⸺ Priory, Stamford, 167

  St. Osmund, 140

  St. Paul’s Church, Lincoln, 53

  ⸺ ⸺ Stamford, 167, 171

  St. Peter-at-Gowts, 64, 67, 69, 70, 76, 78

  St. Peter’s Church, Barton, 53, 54-56, 61, 63, 65-70, 72-75

  St. Wulfran, Archbishop of Sens, 150

  Saltebys, 144

  Salters Ford, 135

  Saltfleet Haven, 269

  Saltworks, Roman, 43, 51

  Samian pottery, 49

  Sancte bell cot, position of, 241

  Sanderson, Bishop of Lincoln, 158, 159

  Sarum, Church of, 141

  Savile, Sir John, 282

  Saxon cathedral at Sidnaceaster, 71

  ⸺ chancel arches, 208

  ⸺ churches in Lincolnshire, 53-80

  ⸺ tower, Barton, 55

  ⸺ towers, 65

  Scampton, Roman villa at, 33

  Scartho, 78

  Scott, Sir Gilbert, 158

  Scotton, pygmy flints found at, 10

  Screen, Crowland Abbey, 217, 218, 238

  Screen, Early English, Kirkstead Chapel, 83

  Screen of old St. Peter’s, description of, 206, 207

  Screen, Tattershall stone choir, 228-230

  Screens, ogee arch an essential feature of Lincolnshire, 231

  Scrope of Cockerington family, 314

  ⸺ ⸺ Sir Gervase, 260

  Scunthorpe, pygmy dwelling-places at, 15

  ⸺ pygmy flints found at, 10, 12

  Sedilia, Heckington, 118, 119

  Sepulchral slabs, Roman, 32

  Sepulchre, Heckington Easter, 118

  Sheffield family, 315

  Shrine, Lincoln, St. Hugh’s, 145

  Sibsey, St. Margaret’s, 240

  Sibthorp of Canwick family, 317

  Sidnaceaster, Saxon cathedral at, 71

  Siege of Newark, 273

  Sites, pygmy, 14, 15

  Skegness, 49

  Skin scrapers, flint, 13

  Skipwith family, 315

  Skipworth, Edward, 159

  Skirbeck wapentake, 120

  Sleaford, 46

  Smyth of Elkington family, 311

  Society, Spalding Gentlemen’s, 319-339

  Solid chancel-screens, 213

  Spalding, 42

  ⸺ Abbey, 85

  ⸺ Church of St. Mary and St. Nicholas, 85, 86-90

  ⸺ raid upon, 260

  Spire, Grantham, 138, 161

  Spittlegate Church, 131, 140

  Springthorpe tower, 67

  Staircases, rood-loft, 239

  Stamford, 160, 162-178

  “Stamford Baron,” 163

  _Stamford, Survey of_, Butcher’s, 162

  Stations, pygmy, 14, 15

  Statues of “Protecting Mothers,” 45

  Steele, 319

  Stone of Skellingthorpe, Henry, 303

  Stone rood-screen at Grantham, 217

  ⸺ screen, Lincoln, 220-223, 227, 228

  Stow rood-beam, 210

  ⸺ Saxon church, 53-59, 63, 71

  ⸺ tower, 67, 69, 75, 76

  Strip-work decorations, 63, 70

  Stukeley, Dr. William, 40, 45, 111, 177, 327, 328

  Sutton St. Mary, Church of, 85, 102, 103, 111-113

  Swinhope, Long Barrow at, 7

  Syston, 160


  Tailor, Thomas, 282-286

  Tatesale and Kirkstead, effigy of Robert de, 180

  Tateshale, first Baron de, 181

  Tattershall Castle, 179-193, 277

  ⸺ Church, 171, 193-197

  ⸺ stone screen, 228-230

  Tessellated pavement at Aisby, 44

  ⸺ ⸺ at Haceby, 44

  ⸺ pavements found in Lincoln, 32

  Thimelby, Richard, 161

  Thorold family, 310

  Tickell, Rev. S. C., 162

  Tinwell, 163

  Titley, Peter, 155

  Tombs, Stamford, Cecil family, 171, 172

  Tower arches, variations of, 68, 69

  Tower, Boston, 78

  ⸺ Branston, 79, 80

  ⸺ Broughton, 56, 67-69, 75

  ⸺ Clee, 67, 70

  ⸺ Grantham, 78

  ⸺ Heckington, 78

  Tower-le-Moor, 193

  Tower, Louth, 78

  ⸺ Perpendicular, Spalding Parish Church, 89

  ⸺ Rothwell, 65, 68, 73

  ⸺ Springthorpe, 67

  ⸺ Stow, 67, 69, 75, 76

  ⸺ Waith, 57, 58, 75, 76

  ⸺ Winterton, 67, 69, 70, 76

  Towers, Saxon, 65

  ⸺ Stamford, 165

  Transitional capitals, Grantham, 143

  Trigg, Francis, 159, 160

  Trollope, Bishop, 142

  ⸺ family, 314

  Turnor of Stoke Rochford family, 317

  Tyrconnel, Countess of, 294

  Tyrwhit family, 315

  Tyrwhit of Stainfield, Sir Philip, 257


  Variations of tower arches, 68, 69

  Vertue, George, 328

  Vicars and Rectors of Boston Church, 127-130

  Victorinus milestone, 30


  Wainfleet saltworks, 43

  Waith Church, 57, 58, 75, 76

  Walker, Henry, 162

  Wareing, Rev. John, 321-323

  Warren, William, Earl, 173

  Wash, 42

  Waterton family, 309

  Watling Street, 25, 37

  Weapons, prehistoric Iron Age, 22

  Welby of Denton family, 311

  Welland, 162, 164

  Wellingore screen, 231

  Wells, ancient, 137

  Weston, Church of St. Mary, 85, 90-92, 111, 113

  Whaplode, Church of St. Mary, 85, 91, 100-105, 107, 110, 111, 113

  Whichcote family, 312

  Williams, Bishop, 155

  Willoughby of Parham, Francis, Lord, 251, 252, 257, 259, 263, 266,
        269, 273, 277

  Willis, Browne, 327

  _Wills, Early Lincoln_, 245

  Winceby, fight, 270, 271

  Winchester, Bishop of, 185

  Wingfield Manor House, 183

  Winteringham “station,” 35

  Winterton, Roman remains at, 34

  ⸺ tower, 67, 69, 70, 76

  Winthorpe screen, 238

  Witham, 28, 39

  Wolfere, King of Mercia, 164

  Wooden screen, Crowland Abbey, 238

  ⸺ screen-work, Kirkstead, earliest, 231

  Woolsthorpe, birthplace of Sir Isaac Newton, 154

  Wray family, 315

  ⸺ Sir Christopher, 273

  Wren, 160


                   Printed by BALLANTYNE, HANSON & CO.
                           Edinburgh & London




Selections from George Allen & Sons’ List


MEMORIALS OF THE COUNTIES OF ENGLAND

GENERAL EDITOR

REV. P. H. DITCHFIELD M.A., F.S.A., F.R.S.L., F.R.HIST.S.

_Beautifully Illustrated. Demy 8vo, cloth extra, gilt top. Price 15s. net
each._


Memorials of Old Oxfordshire.

Edited by the Rev. P. H. DITCHFIELD, M.A., F.S.A. Dedicated by kind
permission to the Right Hon. the Earl of Jersey, G.C.B., G.C.M.G.

“This beautiful book contains an exhaustive history of ‘the wondrous
Oxford,’ to which so many distinguished scholars and politicians look
back with affection. We must refer the reader to the volume itself ...
and only wish that we had space to quote extracts from its interesting
pages.”—_Spectator._


Memorials of Old Devonshire.

Edited by F. J. SNELL, M.A. Dedicated by kind permission to the Right
Hon. Viscount Ebrington.

“A fascinating volume, which will be prized by thoughtful Devonians
wherever they may be found ... richly illustrated, some rare engravings
being represented.”—_North Devon Journal._


Memorials of Old Herefordshire.

Edited by the Rev. COMPTON READE, M.A. Dedicated by kind permission to
Sir John G. Cotterell, Bart.

“Another of these interesting volumes like the ‘Memorials of Old
Devonshire,’ which we noted a week or two ago, containing miscellaneous
papers on the history, topography, and families of the county by
competent writers, with photographs and other illustrations.”—_Times._


Memorials of Old Hertfordshire.

Edited by PERCY CROSS STANDING. Dedicated by kind permission to the Right
Hon. the Earl of Clarendon, G.C.B.

“The book, which contains some magnificent illustrations, will be warmly
welcomed by all lovers of our county and its entertaining history.”—_West
Herts and Watford Observer._


Memorials of Old Hampshire.

Edited by the Rev. G. E. JEANS, M.A., F.S.A. Dedicated by kind permission
to His Grace the Duke of Wellington, K.G.

“‘Memorials of the Counties of England’ is worthily carried on in this
interesting and readable volume.”—_Scotsman._


Memorials of Old Somerset.

Edited by F. J. SNELL, M.A. Dedicated by kind permission to the Most Hon.
the Marquis of Bath.

“In these pages, as in a mirror, the whole life of the county, legendary,
romantic, historical, comes into view, for in truth the book is written
with a happy union of knowledge and enthusiasm—a fine bit of glowing
mosaic put together by fifteen writers into a realistic picture of the
county.”—_Standard._


Memorials of Old Wiltshire.

Edited by ALICE DRYDEN.

“The admirable series of County Memorials ... will, it is safe to
say, include no volume of greater interest than that devoted to
Wiltshire.”—_Daily Telegraph._


Memorials of Old Shropshire.

Edited by the Rev. THOMAS AUDEN, M.A., F.S.A.

“Quite the best volume which has appeared so far in a series that has
throughout maintained a very high level.”—_Tribune._


Memorials of Old Kent.

Edited by the Rev. P. H. DITCHFIELD, M.A., F.S. A., and GEORGE
CLINCH, F.G.S. Dedicated by special permission to the Right Hon. Lord
Northbourne, F.S.A.

“A very delightful addition to a delightful series. Kent, rich in honour
and tradition as in beauty, is a fruitful subject of which the various
contributors have taken full advantage, archæology, topography, and
gossip being pleasantly combined to produce a volume both attractive and
valuable.”—_Standard._


Memorials of Old Derbyshire.

Edited by the Rev. J. CHARLES COX, LL.D., F.S.A. Dedicated by kind
permission to His Grace the Duke of Devonshire, K.G.

“A valuable addition to our county history, and will possess a
peculiar fascination for all who devote their attention to historical,
archæological, or antiquarian research, and probably to a much wider
circle.”—_Derbyshire Advertiser._


Memorials of Old Dorset.

Edited by the Rev. THOMAS PERKINS, M.A., and the Rev. HERBERT PENTIN,
M.A. Dedicated by kind permission to the Right Hon. Lord Eustace Cecil,
F.R.G.S.

“The volume, in fine, forms a noteworthy accession to the valuable series
of books in which it appears.”—_Scotsman._


Memorials of Old Warwickshire.

Edited by ALICE DRYDEN.

“Worthy of an honoured place on our shelves. It is also one of the
best, if not the best, volume in a series of exceptional interest and
usefulness.”—_Birmingham Gazette._


Memorials of Old Norfolk.

Edited by the Rev. H. J. DUKINFIELD ASTLEY, M.A., Litt.D., F.R.Hist.S.
Dedicated by kind permission to the Right Hon. Viscount Coke, C.M.G.,
C.V.O.

“This latest contribution to the history and archæology of Norfolk
deserves a foremost place among local works.... The tasteful binding,
good print, and paper are everything that can be desired.”—_Eastern Daily
Press._


Memorials of Old Essex.

Edited by A. CLIFTON KELWAY, F.R.Hist.S. Dedicated by kind permission to
the Right Hon. the Earl of Warwick.

“Will be one of the most essential volumes in the library of every man
and woman who has an interest in the county.”—_Southend Telegraph._


Memorials of Old Suffolk.

Edited by VINCENT B. REDSTONE, F.R.Hist.S. Dedicated by kind permission
to the Right Hon. Sir W. Brampton Gurdon.

“Will be found one of the most comprehensive works dealing with our
county.”—_Bury and Norwich Post._


Memorials of Old London.

Edited by the Rev. P. H. DITCHFIELD, M.A., F.S.A. Dedicated to Sir John
Charles Bell, Bart., late Lord Mayor of London. Two vols. Price =25s.=
net.

“They are handsomely produced, and the history of London as it is
unfolded in them is as fascinating as any romance.”—_Bookman._


Memorials of Old Lancashire.

Edited by Lieut.-Colonel FISHWICK, F.S.A., and the Rev. P. H. DITCHFIELD,
M.A., F.S.A. Two vols. Price =25s.= net.

“These fascinating volumes, re-picturing a vanished past, will long
afford keen pleasure.”—_Manchester City Press._


Memorials of Old Middlesex.

Edited by J. TAVENOR-PERRY.

“Closely packed with well-digested studies of the local monuments and
archæological remains.”—_Scotsman._


Memorials of Old Sussex.

Edited by PERCY D. MUNDY. Dedicated to the Most Hon. the Marquess of
Abergavenny, K.G.

“There is hardly a page which will not gratify the lover of the
county.”—_Antiquary._


Memorials of Old Yorkshire.

Edited by T. M. FALLOW, M.A., F.S.A. Dedicated to Sir George J. Armytage,
Bart., F.S.A.

“The book well maintains the high standard so conspicuously illustrated
in the many previous volumes.”—_Bookseller._


Memorials of Old Staffordshire.

Edited by the Rev. W. BERESFORD. Dedicated to Right Rev. the Hon.
Augustus Legge, D.D., Lord Bishop of Lichfield.

“Complete and most useful history of ancient Staffordshire, full of
interest and sound information.”—_Morning Post._


Memorials of Old Cheshire.

Edited by the VEN. THE ARCHDEACON OF CHESTER and the Rev. P. H.
DITCHFIELD, M.A., F.S.A. Dedicated to His Grace the Duke of Westminster,
G.C.V.O.

“Very interesting and popular work of considerable merit.”—_Spectator._

“The book is packed with information.”—_Pall Mall Gazette._


Memorials of Old Durham.

Edited by HENRY R. LEIGHTON, F.R.Hist.S.


Memorials of Old Leicestershire.

Edited by ALICE DRYDEN.


Memorials of Old Lincolnshire.

Edited by E. MANSEL SYMPSON, M.A., M.D.


Memorials of Old Surrey.

Edited by the Rev. J. CHARLES COX, LL.D., F.S.A.


_The following volumes are in preparation_:—


Memorials of Old Gloucestershire.

Edited by the Rev. P. H. DITCHFIELD, M.A., F.S.A.


Memorials of Old Worcestershire.

Edited by F. B. ANDREWS, F.R.I.B.A.


Memorials of Old Nottinghamshire.

Edited by P. W. P. PHILLIMORE, M.A., B.C.L.


Memorials of North Wales.

Edited by E. ALFRED JONES.


Memorials of Old Berkshire.

Edited by the Rev. P. H. DITCHFIELD, M.A., F.S.A.


Memorials of Old Monmouthshire.

Edited by Colonel BRADNEY, F.S.A., and J. KYRLE FLETCHER.


Dinanderie: A History and Description of Mediæval Art Work in Copper,
Brass, and Bronze.

By J. TAVENOR-PERRY. With 1 Photogravure, 48 Full-page Illustrations,
and 71 Drawings in the Text. Crown 4to, Specially Designed Cloth Cover,
=21s.= net.

Dinanderie was the name used to denote the various articles used for
ecclesiastical purposes with which the name of Dinant on the Meuse was so
intimately associated.

No attempt has hitherto been made to describe adequately the art of the
Coppersmith, although our Museums and the Continental Church Treasuries
abound in beautiful examples of the work.


Country Cottages and Homes for Small and Large Estates.

Illustrated in a Series of 53 Designs and Examples of Executed Works,
with Plans Reproduced from the Original Drawings, including 3 in Colour,
and Descriptive Text. By R. A. BRIGGS, Architect, F.R.I.B.A., Soane
Medallist; Author of “Bungalows and Country Residences.” Demy 4to, cloth,
=10s. 6d.= net.


Venice in the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Centuries. From the Conquest of
Constantinople to the Accession of Michele Steno, A.D. 1204-1400.

By F. C. HODGSON, M.A., Fellow of King’s College, Cambridge. 664 pages,
21 Full-page Illustrations, Crown 8vo, cloth, =10s. 6d.= net.

This volume is the result of several years’ research, and is a
continuation of the Author’s previous work entitled “Early History of
Venice.”


Egypt and the Egyptians: Their History, Antiquities, Language, Religion,
and Influence over Palestine and Neighbouring Countries.

By the Rev. J. O. BEVAN, M.A. With Preface by Sir GEORGE DARWIN. 336
pages, Crown 8vo, cloth, =5s.= net.

“We can recommend this compact volume to any who wish to obtain a general
knowledge of the subject.”—_Westminster Gazette._


THE BRITISH EMPIRE

The aim of this new series of books is to give the public at home and
in the Colonies an absolutely trustworthy, authentic, and up-to-date
description of British interests, resources, and life throughout the
Empire, which, with its great problems of government, self-defence,
finance, trade, and the representation of the coloured races, forms
a subject of at least as great and live value as any of the subjects
studied at school and university.

_Large Crown 8vo, Cloth, gilt top, with Map, 6s. net per Vol._


Yesterday and To-Day in Canada.

By HIS GRACE THE DUKE OF ARGYLL.


Modern India.

By Sir J. D. REES, K.C.I.E., C.V.O., M.P. Sometime Additional Member of
the Governor-General of India’s Council.


South Africa.

By the Right Hon. JOHN XAVIER MERRIMAN of Cape Colony.


_Other Volumes in Preparation_


COUNTY CHURCHES

General Editor: REV. J. CHARLES COX, LL.D., F.S.A.

_Foolscap 8vo, Cloth, 2s. 6d. per vol. net; each Volume Illustrated with
Half-tone and Line Illustrations_

A new series of small handy guides to all the Churches in each of the
Counties of England. All written by expert authors, drawing attention
to the main Architectural features, and to the Fonts, Pulpits, Screens,
Stalls, Benches, Sedilia, Lectern, Chests, Effigies in Brass and Stone,
and other Monuments. The initial date of the Registers will also be given.

The following volumes will be published immediately:—


Norfolk.

(Two Vols., 3s. each, 6s. net). By J. CHARLES COX LL.D., F.S.A.


Surrey.

By J. E. MORRIS, B.A.


Sussex.

By P. M. JOHNSTON, F.R.I.B.A., F.S.A.


Isle of Wight.

By J. CHARLES COX, LL.D., F.S.A.


Cambridge.

By C. H. EVELYN-WHITE, F.S.A.

_Other Volumes are being arranged_


Old English Gold Plate.

By E. ALFRED JONES. With numerous Illustrations of existing specimens
from the collections belonging to His Majesty the King, the Dukes of
Devonshire, Newcastle, Norfolk, Portland, and Rutland, the Marquis of
Ormonde, the Earls of Craven, Derby, and Yarborough, Earl Spencer, Lord
Fitzhardinge, Lord Waleran, Mr. Leopold de Rothschild, the Colleges of
Oxford and Cambridge, &c. Royal 4to, buckram, gilt top. Price =21s.= net.

“Pictures, descriptions, and introduction make a book that must rank
high in the estimation of students of its subject, and of the few
who are well off enough to be collectors in this Corinthian field of
luxury.”—_Scotsman._


Longton Hall Porcelain.

Being further information relating to this interesting fabrique, by
the late WILLIAM BEMROSE, F.S.A., author of “Bow, Chelsea, and Derby
Porcelain.” Illustrated with 27 Coloured Art Plates, 21 Collotype Plates,
and numerous line and half-tone Illustrations in the text. Bound in
handsome “Longton-blue” cloth cover, suitably designed. Price =42s.= net.

“This magnificent work on the famous Longton Hall ware will be
indispensable to the collector.”—_Bookman._


Old English Silver and Sheffield Plate, The Values of, from the Fifteenth
to the Nineteenth Centuries.

By J. W. CALDICOTT. Edited by J. STARKIE GARDNER, F.S.A. 3000 Selected
Auction Sale Records; 1600 Separate Valuations; 660 Articles. Illustrated
with 87 Collotype Plates. 300 pages. Royal 4to, buckram. Price =42s.= net.

“A most comprehensive and abundantly illustrated volume.... Enables even
the most inexperienced to form a fair opinion of the value either of a
single article or a collection, while as a reference and reminder it must
prove of great value to an advanced student.”—_Daily Telegraph._


Old English Porcelain and its Manufactures, History of.

With an Artistic, Industrial, and Critical Appreciation of their
Productions. By M. L. SOLON, the well-known Potter-Artist and Collector.
In one handsome volume. Royal 8vo, well printed in clear type on good
paper, and beautifully illustrated with 20 full-page Coloured Collotype
and Photo-Chromotype Plates and 48 Collotype Plates on Tint. Artistically
bound. Price =52s. 6d.= net.

“Mr. Solon writes not only with the authority of the master of
technique, but likewise with that of the accomplished artist, whose
exquisite creations command the admiration of the connoisseurs of
to-day.”—_Athenæum._


Manx Crosses; or The Inscribed and Sculptured Monuments of the Isle of
Man, from about the end of the Fifth to the beginning of the Thirteenth
Century.

By P. M. C. KERMODE, F.S.A.Scot., &c. The illustrations are from drawings
specially prepared by the Author, founded upon rubbings, and carefully
compared with photographs and with the stones themselves. In one handsome
Quarto Volume 11⅛ in. by 8⅝ in., printed on Van Gelder hand-made paper,
bound in full buckram, gilt top, with special design on the side. Price
=63s.= net. The edition is limited to 400 copies.

“We have now a complete account of the subject in this very handsome
volume, which Manx patriotism, assisted by the appreciation of the public
in general, will, we hope, make a success.”—_Spectator._


Derbyshire Charters in Public and Private Libraries and Muniment Rooms.

Compiled, with Preface and Indexes, for Sir Henry Howe Bemrose, Kt., by
ISAAC HERBERT JEAYES, Assistant Keeper in the Department of MSS., British
Museum. Royal 8vo, cloth, gilt top. Price =42s.= net.

“The book must always prove of high value to investigators in its own
recondite field of research, and would form a suitable addition to any
historical library.”—_Scotsman._


Dorset Manor Houses, with their Literary and Historical Associations.

By SIDNEY HEATH, with a fore-word by R. Bosworth Smith, of Bingham’s
Melcombe. Illustrated with 40 drawings by the Author, in addition to
numerous rubbings of Sepulchral Brasses by W. de C. Prideaux, reproduced
by permission of the Dorset Natural History and Antiquarian Field Club.
Dedicated by kind permission to the Most Hon. the Marquis of Salisbury.
Royal 4to, cloth, bevelled edges. Price =30s.= net.

“Dorset is rich in old-world manor houses; and in this large, attractive
volume twenty are dealt with in pleasant descriptive and antiquarian
chapters.”—_Times._


How to Write the History of a Parish.

By the Rev. J. CHARLES COX, LL.D., F.S.A. An Outline Guide to
Topographical Records, Manuscripts, and Books. Revised and Enlarged,
Fifth Edition. Crown 8vo, cloth, =3s. 6d.= net.


Church Plate of the Diocese of Bangor.

By E. ALFRED JONES. With Illustrations of about one hundred pieces of Old
Plate, including a pre-Reformation Silver Chalice, hitherto unknown. Demy
4to, buckram. Price =21s.= net.

“This handsome volume is the most interesting book on Church Plate
hitherto issued.”—_Athenæum._


Church Plate of the Isle of Man.

By E. ALFRED JONES. With many Illustrations, including a pre-Reformation
Silver Chalice and Paten, an Elizabethan Beaker, and other important
pieces. Crown 4to, buckram. Price =10s. 6d.= net.

“A beautifully illustrated descriptive account of the many specimens of
Ecclesiastical Plate to be found in the Island.”—_Manchester Courier._


Cathedral Church and See of Essex.

By the Rev. J. CHARLES COX, LL.D., F.S.A. This book contains an outline
story of the founding of Christianity in the Kingdom of the East Saxons
in the seventh century, and the history of the Church in Essex. Crown
8vo, with many illustrations. Paper covers, =1s. 6d.= net; cloth gilt,
=2s.= net.

“To Churchmen generally the little book before us should prove especially
interesting.”—_Church Family Newspaper._


Garden Cities in Theory and Practice.

By A. R. SENNETT, A.M.I.C.E., &c. Large crown 8vo. Two vols.,
attractively bound in cloth, with 400 Plates, Plans, and Illustrations.
Price =21s.= net.

“... What Mr. Sennett has to say here deserves, and no doubt will
command, the careful consideration of those who govern the future
fortunes of the Garden City.”—_Bookseller._


Corporation Plate and Insignia of Office of the Cities and Towns of
England and Wales.

By the late LLEWELLYNN JEWITT, F.S.A. Edited and completed with large
additions by W. H. ST. JOHN HOPE, M.A. Fully illustrated, 2 vols., crown
4to, buckram, =42s.= net. Large paper, 2 vols., royal 4to, =63s.= net.

“It is difficult to praise too highly the careful research and accurate
information throughout these two handsome quartos.”—_Athenæum._


_Completion of the Great Edition of Ruskin_

The whole of Ruskin’s works are now for the first time obtainable in a
complete, Uniform, Annotated, Illustrated, and Indexed Edition. This has
just become possible through the completion of

THE LIFE, LETTERS, AND WORKS OF RUSKIN

EDITED BY

E. T. COOK AND ALEXANDER WEDDERBURN

The Final Volume, consisting of a Complete Bibliography and an Index to
the Whole Work, with 100,000 references, is in preparation. Its inclusion
will make this more than ever the One Reference and Library Edition of
Ruskin’s Works. With about 1800 Illustrations from drawings by Ruskin.
For full particulars of the 38 Volumes, for =£42= the set, or in Monthly
Instalments, see Prospectus.

                    George Allen & Sons, Ruskin House
                         Rathbone Place, London