diff options
| author | Roger Frank <rfrank@pglaf.org> | 2025-10-15 02:33:53 -0700 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Roger Frank <rfrank@pglaf.org> | 2025-10-15 02:33:53 -0700 |
| commit | 5a2947b5e03a8afb87a1f8a2f68d718634428f74 (patch) | |
| tree | 342c25d60d9b16c0b37e3f837ebca423715bf129 /27102-h | |
Diffstat (limited to '27102-h')
| -rw-r--r-- | 27102-h/27102-h.htm | 4456 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | 27102-h/images/i002.png | bin | 0 -> 11363 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | 27102-h/images/i004.jpg | bin | 0 -> 60730 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | 27102-h/images/i005.png | bin | 0 -> 96846 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | 27102-h/images/i020.png | bin | 0 -> 36928 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | 27102-h/images/i025.png | bin | 0 -> 61041 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | 27102-h/images/i031.png | bin | 0 -> 34847 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | 27102-h/images/i045.jpg | bin | 0 -> 76824 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | 27102-h/images/i059.png | bin | 0 -> 45437 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | 27102-h/images/i065.jpg | bin | 0 -> 73892 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | 27102-h/images/i069.png | bin | 0 -> 56414 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | 27102-h/images/i071.jpg | bin | 0 -> 63078 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | 27102-h/images/i086.png | bin | 0 -> 89697 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | 27102-h/images/i094.png | bin | 0 -> 55642 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | 27102-h/images/i099.png | bin | 0 -> 55410 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | 27102-h/images/i102.png | bin | 0 -> 56063 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | 27102-h/images/i107.png | bin | 0 -> 95398 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | 27102-h/images/i117.png | bin | 0 -> 45522 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | 27102-h/images/i125.jpg | bin | 0 -> 60265 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | 27102-h/images/i144.png | bin | 0 -> 89626 bytes |
20 files changed, 4456 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/27102-h/27102-h.htm b/27102-h/27102-h.htm new file mode 100644 index 0000000..0a2cbc9 --- /dev/null +++ b/27102-h/27102-h.htm @@ -0,0 +1,4456 @@ +<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" + "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd"> + +<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en"> + <head> + <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=iso-8859-1" /> + <meta http-equiv="Content-Style-Type" content="text/css" /> + <title> + The Project Gutenberg eBook of The Ground Plan of the English Parish Church, by A Hamilton Thompson. + </title> + <style type="text/css"> +/*<![CDATA[ XML blockout */ +<!-- +body { + margin-left: 10%; + margin-right: 10%; +} + h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6 { + text-align: center; /* all headings centered */ + clear: both; +} + +p { + margin-top: .75em; + text-align: justify; + margin-bottom: .75em; +} + +hr { + width: 33%; + margin-top: 2em; + margin-bottom: 2em; + margin-left: auto; + margin-right: auto; + clear: both; +} + +.author {text-align: right; margin-right: 5%;} + +.pagenum { /* uncomment the next line for invisible page numbers */ + /* visibility: hidden; */ + position: absolute; + left: 92%; + font-size: smaller; + text-align: right; +} /* page numbers */ + +table {margin: auto; text-align: center; width: 35em;} +td.tdl {text-align: left; padding-right: .5em;} +td.tdr {text-align: right; padding-left: .5em;} +td.tdc {text-align: center} +td.page {font-size: 90%;} + +.fm1 {font-size: 150%; + text-align: center; + font-weight: bold; +} + +.fm2 {font-size: 125%; + text-align: center; + font-weight: bold; +} + +.fm3 {font-size: 90%; + text-align: center; + font-weight: bold; +} + +.center {text-align: center;} + +.smcap {font-variant: small-caps;} + +.caption {font-weight: bold; text-align: center;} + +/* Images */ +.figcenter { + margin: auto; + text-align: center; +} + +.transnote { background-color: #ADD8E6; color: inherit; margin: 2em 10% 1em 10%; font-size: 80%; padding: 0.5em 1em 0.5em 1em;} +.transnote p { text-align: left;} +a.correction {text-decoration: none; border-bottom: thin dotted red; color: inherit; background-color: inherit;} +a.correction:hover {text-decoration: none;} + +/* Footnotes */ +.footnotes {border: dashed 1px;} + +.footnote {margin-left: 10%; margin-right: 10%; font-size: 0.9em;} + +.footnote .label {position: absolute; right: 84%; text-align: right;} + +.fnanchor { + vertical-align: super; + font-size: .8em; + text-decoration: + none; +} + +// --> +/* XML end ]]>*/ + </style> + </head> +<body> + + +<pre> + +The Project Gutenberg EBook of The Ground Plan of the English Parish Church, by +A. Hamilton Thompson + +This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with +almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or +re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included +with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org + + +Title: The Ground Plan of the English Parish Church + +Author: A. Hamilton Thompson + +Release Date: October 30, 2008 [EBook #27102] + +Language: English + +Character set encoding: ISO-8859-1 + +*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK ENGLISH PARISH CHURCH *** + + + + +Produced by Carla Foust and the Online Distributed +Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This file was +produced from images generously made available by The +Internet Archive/American Libraries.) + + + + + + +</pre> + + +<div class="transnote"> +<h3>Transcriber's note</h3> + +<p> +In the HTML version some of the illustrations +have been moved beside the relevant section of the text. +Page numbers in the List of Illustrations reflect the position of the illustration +in the original text, but links link to current position of illustrations. +<br /><br /> +Minor punctuation errors have been corrected without notice. +<br /><br /> +An obvious +printer error has been corrected. It is indicated with a +<a class="correction" title="like this" href="#tnotes">mouse-hover</a>, +and it is listed at the <a href="#tnotes">end</a>. +<br /><br /> +All other inconsistencies are as in +the original. The author's spelling has been maintained.</p></div> + +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<p class="fm1">The Cambridge Manuals of Science and</p> +<p class="fm1">Literature</p> + +<p><br /></p> + +<h1>THE GROUND PLAN OF THE</h1> +<h1>ENGLISH PARISH CHURCH</h1> + +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<p class="fm2">CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS</p> + +<p class="fm2"><i>London</i>: FETTER LANE, E.C.</p> +<p class="fm2">C. F. CLAY, <span class="smcap">Manager</span></p> +<p class="fm2"><i>Edinburgh</i>: 100, PRINCES STREET</p> + +<div class="figcenter"> +<img src="images/i002.png" width="153" height="156" alt="fig1" title=""></img> +</div> + +<p class="fm2"><i>Berlin</i>: A. ASHER AND CO.</p> +<p class="fm2"><i>Leipzig</i>: F. A. BROCKHAUS</p> +<p class="fm2"><i>New York</i>: G. P. PUTNAM'S SONS</p> +<p class="fm2"><i>Bombay and Calcutta</i>: MACMILLAN AND CO., <span class="smcap">Ltd.</span></p> +<p class="fm3"><i>All rights reserved</i></p> + +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_iv" id="Page_iv">[iv]</a></span></p> +<p><br /></p> +<div class="figcenter"> +<img src="images/i004.jpg" width="435" height="600" alt="fig2" title=""></img> +</div> +<p class="caption"> +Hedon, Yorkshire: nave from N.W. +</p> + +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_v" id="Page_v">[v]</a></span></p> +<div class="figcenter"> +<img src="images/i005.png" width="316" height="500" alt="fig3" title=""></img> +</div> + +<p class="fm1">THE GROUND PLAN</p> +<p class="fm1">OF THE ENGLISH</p> +<p class="fm1">PARISH CHURCH</p> + +<p class="fm3">BY</p> + +<p class="fm2">A. HAMILTON THOMPSON</p> +<p class="fm2">M.A., F.S.A.</p> + +<p><br /></p> + +<p class="fm2">Cambridge:</p> +<p class="fm2">at the University Press</p> +<p class="fm2">1911</p> + + + +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_vi" id="Page_vi">[vi]</a></span></p> + +<p class="fm3"><i>Cambridge:</i></p> +<p class="fm3">PRINTED BY JOHN CLAY, M.A.</p> +<p class="fm3">AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS</p> + +<p><i>With the exception of the coat of arms at the foot, the design on the +title page is a reproduction of one used by the earliest known Cambridge +printer, John Siberch, 1521</i></p> + + + +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_vii" id="Page_vii">[vii]</a></span></p> +<h2>PREFACE</h2> + + +<p>There is as yet no book entirely devoted to the development of the plan +of the parish church in England, and the body of literature which bears +upon the subject is not very accessible to the ordinary student. The +present volume is an attempt to indicate the main lines on which that +development proceeded. It is obvious that, from necessary considerations +of space, much has been omitted. The elevation of the building, and the +treatment of its decorative features, window-tracery, sculpture, etc., +belong to another and wider branch of architectural study, in which the +parish church pursues the same line of structural development as the +cathedral or monastic church, and the architectural forms of the +timber-roofed building follow the example set by the larger churches +with their roofs of stone. To this side of the question much attention +has been devoted, and of late years increasing emphasis has been laid on +the importance of the vaulted construction of our greater churches, +which is the very foundation of medieval architecture and the secret of +its progress through its various "styles." It is expected that the +reader of this book, in which a less familiar but none<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_viii" id="Page_viii">[viii]</a></span> the less +important topic is handled, will already have some acquaintance with the +general progress of medieval architectural forms, with which the +development of the ground plan keeps pace.</p> + +<p>Some historical and architectural questions, which arise out of the +consideration of the ground plan, and have an important bearing upon it, +are treated in another volume of this series, which is intended to be +complementary to the present one.</p> + +<p>The writer is grateful to his wife, for the plans and sketches which she +has drawn for him, and for much help: to Mr C. C. Hodges and Mr J. P. +Gibson, for the permission to make use of their photographs; and to the +Rev. J. C. Cox, LL.D., F.S.A., and the Rev. R. M. Serjeantson, M.A., +F.S.A., for their kindness in reading through the proofs and supplying +suggestions of the greatest value.</p> + +<p class="author"> +<span style="padding-right: 5em;">A. H. T.</span> +</p> + +<p> +<br /> +<span class="smcap">Gretton, Northants</span><br /> +<i> 26 January 1911</i><br /> +</p> + +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_ix" id="Page_ix">[ix]</a></span></p> +<h2><a name="CONTENTS" id="CONTENTS"></a>CONTENTS</h2> +<h2>CHAPTER I</h2> +<h3>THE ORIGIN OF THE CHURCH PLAN IN ENGLAND</h3> + +<table summary="CONTENTS"> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">SECTION</td> +<td class="tdr page" colspan="2">PAGE</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">1.</td> +<td class="tdl">The basilican church plan</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_1">1</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">2.</td> +<td class="tdl">Problem of its derivation</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_2">2</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">3.</td> +<td class="tdl">Rival theories of its origin</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_3">3</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">4.</td> +<td class="tdl">The Roman basilica: old St Peter's</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_6">6</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">5.</td> +<td class="tdl">Basilicas at Ravenna</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_8">8</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">6.</td> +<td class="tdl">Tomb-churches and baptisteries</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_9">9</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">7.</td> +<td class="tdl">Centralised plans at Ravenna</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_10">10</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">8.</td> +<td class="tdl">Relative advantages of the basilican and the centralised plan</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_12">12</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">9.</td> +<td class="tdl">The basilican church at Silchester</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_13">13</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">10.</td> +<td class="tdl">Early churches in Kent and Essex</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_14">14</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">11.</td> +<td class="tdl">Bradford-on-Avon, Wilts.</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_16">16</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">12.</td> +<td class="tdl">Escomb church, Durham</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_16">16</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">13.</td> +<td class="tdl">Early Northumbrian churches</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_18">18</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">14.</td> +<td class="tdl">Wilfrid's churches at Hexham and Ripon</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_20">20</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">15,</td> +<td class="tdl">16. Brixworth, Northants: other basilican plans</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_21">21</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">17.</td> +<td class="tdl">Exceptional occurrence of the basilican plan in England</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_24">24</a></td> +</tr> +</table> + +<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_x" id="Page_x">[x]</a></span></p> + +<h2>CHAPTER II</h2> +<h3>PARISH CHURCHES OF THE LATER SAXON PERIOD</h3> + +<table summary="CONTENTS"> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">SECTION</td> +<td class="tdr page" colspan="2">PAGE</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">18.</td> +<td class="tdl">The normal pre-Conquest plan</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_27">27</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">19.</td> +<td class="tdl">The western bell-tower</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_29">29</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">20.</td> +<td class="tdl">Plans in which the ground floor of the tower forms the body of the church</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_30">30</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">21.</td> +<td class="tdl">Barton-on-Humber and the centralised plan</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_33">33</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">22.</td> +<td class="tdl">Centralised planning in England</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_34">34</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">23.</td> +<td class="tdl">The Saxon lateral porch</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_35">35</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">24.</td> +<td class="tdl">Development of the transeptal chapel</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_36">36</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">25.</td> +<td class="tdl">Towers between nave and chancel</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_37">37</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">26,</td> +<td class="tdl">27. Development of the cruciform plan</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_38">38</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">28.</td> +<td class="tdl">Influence of local material upon the aisleless church plan</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_42">42</a></td> +</tr> +</table> + +<h2>CHAPTER III</h2> +<h3>THE AISLELESS CHURCH OF THE NORMAN PERIOD</h3> + +<table summary="CONTENTS"> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">SECTION</td> +<td class="tdr page" colspan="2">PAGE</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">29.</td> +<td class="tdl">Survival and development of the aisleless plan after the Conquest</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_44">44</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">30.</td> +<td class="tdl">The nave of the aisleless church</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_46">46</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">31.</td> +<td class="tdl">Rectangular chancels</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_47">47</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">32.</td> +<td class="tdl">Churches with no structural division between nave and chancel</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_49">49</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">33.</td> +<td class="tdl">Churches with apsidal chancels</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_49">49</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">34.</td> +<td class="tdl">The quire</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_53">53</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">35.</td> +<td class="tdl">The transeptal chapel</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_54">54</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">36.</td> +<td class="tdl">Cruciform plans: North Newbald and Melbourne</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_58">58</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">37.</td> +<td class="tdl">Later developments of the cruciform plan</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_60">60</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">38.</td> +<td class="tdl">Symbolism in planning</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_62">62</a></td> +</tr> +</table> + +<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_xi" id="Page_xi">[xi, xii]</a></span></p> + +<h2>CHAPTER IV</h2> +<h3>THE AISLED PARISH CHURCH</h3> +<h3>I. NAVE, TOWER, AND PORCHES</h3> + +<table summary="CONTENTS"> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">SECTION</td> +<td class="tdr page" colspan="2">PAGE</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">39.</td> +<td class="tdl">Survival of the aisleless plan</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_64">64</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">40.</td> +<td class="tdl">The addition of aisles</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_66">66</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">41.</td> +<td class="tdl">Use of aisles for side altars</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_66">66</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">42.</td> +<td class="tdl">Twelfth century aisled plans</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_69">69</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td class="tdr">43.</td> +<td class="tdl">Ordinary method of adding aisles</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_70">70</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">44,</td> +<td class="tdl">45. Consequent irregularities of plan</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_74">74</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">46.</td> +<td class="tdl">Gradual addition of aisles</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_77">77</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">47.</td> +<td class="tdl">Raunds church, Northants</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_79">79</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">48.</td> +<td class="tdl">Conservative feeling of the builders for old work</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_81">81</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">49.</td> +<td class="tdl">Aisles widened and rebuilt</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_83">83</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">50.</td> +<td class="tdl">Rebuilding of aisles as chantry chapels: Harringworth, Northants</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_84">84</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">51.</td> +<td class="tdl">Newark, Cirencester, Northleach, and Grantham</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_87">87</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">52.</td> +<td class="tdl">Naves lengthened westward</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_92">92</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">53.</td> +<td class="tdl">The western tower in relation to the plan</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_94">94</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">54.</td> +<td class="tdl">Engaged western towers, etc.</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_96">96</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">55.</td> +<td class="tdl">Rebuilding of towers</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_98">98</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">56.</td> +<td class="tdl">Porches</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_99">99</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">57.</td> +<td class="tdl">Position of the porch in the plan</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_99">99</a></td> +</tr> +</table> + + +<h2>CHAPTER V</h2> +<h3>THE AISLED PARISH CHURCH</h3> +<h3>II. TRANSEPTS AND CHANCEL</h3> + +<table summary="CONTENTS"> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">SECTION</td> +<td class="tdr page" colspan="2">PAGE</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">58.</td> +<td class="tdl">Cruciform churches with aisled transepts</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_101">101</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">59.</td> +<td class="tdl">Addition of transeptal chapels</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_102">102</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">60.</td> +<td class="tdl">Variety of treatment of transeptal chapels</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_105">105</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">61.</td> +<td class="tdl">Transeptal chapels as a key to original ground plans</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_107">107</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">62.</td> +<td class="tdl">Incomplete cruciform plans</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_108">108</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">63.</td> +<td class="tdl">Irregular cruciform plans</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_110">110</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">64.</td> +<td class="tdl">Central towers with transeptal chapels</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_113">113</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">65.</td> +<td class="tdl">Transeptal towers</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_113">113</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">66.</td> +<td class="tdl">Lengthening of chancels</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_114">114</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">67.</td> +<td class="tdl">Encroachment of the chancel on the nave: Tansor</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_115">115</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">68.</td> +<td class="tdl">Chancel chapels</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_117">117</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">69.</td> +<td class="tdl">Churches with one chancel chapel</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_119">119</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">70.</td> +<td class="tdl">Chantry chapels attached to chancels</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_120">120</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">71.</td> +<td class="tdl">Effect of the addition of chapels on the cruciform plan</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_121">121</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">72.</td> +<td class="tdl">The aisled rectangular plan</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_124">124</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">73.</td> +<td class="tdl">Variations of the plan with aisled nave and chancel</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_126">126</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">74.</td> +<td class="tdl">Development of the aisled rectangle at Grantham</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_129">129</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">75.</td> +<td class="tdl">Deviation of the axis of the chancel</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_131">131</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr"> </td> +<td class="tdl"><span class="smcap">Index of Places</span></td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_134">134</a></td> +</tr> +</table> + +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_xiii" id="Page_xiii">[xiii]</a></span></p> +<h2>LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS</h2> + + +<table summary="ILLUSTRATIONS"> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">Hedon.</td> +<td class="tdl">Interior of nave</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_iv"><i>Frontispiece</i></a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdl"> </td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">FIGS.</td> +<td class="tdr page" colspan="2">PAGE</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">1</td> +<td class="tdl">Plan of old St Peter's</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_6">6</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">2</td> +<td class="tdl">Plan of San Vitale, Ravenna</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_11">11</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">3</td> +<td class="tdl">Plan of Escomb—typical Saxon church</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_17">17</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">4</td> +<td class="tdl">St Peter's, Barton-on-Humber</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_31">31</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">5</td> +<td class="tdl">Aisleless plan, 12th cent.</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_45">45</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">6</td> +<td class="tdl">Birkin, Yorkshire: interior</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_53">51</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">7</td> +<td class="tdl">Two aisleless plans with central tower</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_54">55</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">8</td> +<td class="tdl">North Newbald</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_57">57</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">9</td> +<td class="tdl">Sketch of older wall above nave arcade, Gretton</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_74">72</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">10</td> +<td class="tdl">Plan of Raunds church</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_81">80</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">11</td> +<td class="tdl">Plan of Harringworth church</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_87">85</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">12</td> +<td class="tdl">Two plans, nos. 1 and 2, of Grantham church</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_92">88</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td class="tdr">13</td> +<td class="tdl">Sketch of arch joining arcade to tower, Gretton</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_93">93</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td class="tdr">14</td> +<td class="tdl">Plan of 13th cent. church: W. tower, S. Porch, transeptal chapels</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_102">103</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">15</td> +<td class="tdl">St Mary's, Beverley. Interior of transept.</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_113">111</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class="tdr">16</td> +<td class="tdl">Plans of Grantham church, nos. 3 and 4</td> +<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_130">130</a></td> +</tr> +</table> + + +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_1" id="Page_1">[1]</a></span></p> +<h2><a name="CHAPTER_I" id="CHAPTER_I"></a>CHAPTER I</h2> +<h3>THE ORIGIN OF THE CHURCH PLAN IN ENGLAND</h3> + + +<p>§ 1. Side by side with the establishment of Christianity as the religion +of the Roman empire, there appeared a fully developed plan for places of +Christian worship. The normal Christian church of the fourth century of +our era was an aisled building with the entrance at one end, and a +semi-circular projection known as the apse at the other. The body of the +building, the nave with its aisles, was used by the congregation, the +quire of singers occupying a space, enclosed within low walls, at the +end nearest the apse. In the apse, raised above the level of the nave, +was the altar, behind which, ranged round the wall, were the seats for +the bishop and assistant clergy. This type of church, of which the +aisled nave and the apse are the essential parts, is known as the +<i>basilica</i>. The name, employed to designate a "royal" or magnificent +building, had long been applied to large buildings, whether open to the +sky or roofed, which were used, partly as<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_2" id="Page_2">[2]</a></span> commercial exchanges, partly +as halls of justice. It is still often said that the Christian basilicas +were merely adaptations of such buildings to sacred purposes. Some of +the features of the Christian plan are akin to those of the secular +basilica. The apse with its semi-circular range of seats and its altar +reproduces the judicial tribune, with its seats for the praetor and his +assistant judges, and its altar on which oaths were taken. The open +galleries, which in some of the earliest Christian basilicas at Rome +form an upper story to the aisles, recall the galleries above the +colonnades which surrounded the central hall of some of the larger +secular basilicas. Again, the <i>atrium</i> or forecourt through which the +Christian basilica was often approached has been supposed to be derived +from the <i>forum</i> in connexion with which the secular basilica was +frequently built.</p> + +<p>§ 2. However, while the <i>atrium</i> of the Christian basilica is merely an +outer court, the secular basilica, when planned, like the Basilica Ulpia +at Rome, with direct relation to a <i>forum</i>, was a principal building in +connexion with the <i>forum</i>, but not a building of which the <i>forum</i> was +a mere annexe. Further, when we begin to seek for a complete +identification of the Christian with the secular basilica, we are met by +the obstacle that the secular basilica had no fixed plan. If we try to +trace any principle of development in its plan, we find that this +develop<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_3" id="Page_3">[3]</a></span>ment is directly inverse to that of the Christian basilica. The +secular basilica, in earlier examples a colonnaded building with its +central space open to the sky, became at a later time a roofed hall, +either, as in the case of the basilica at Trier, without aisles, or, +like the basilica of Maxentius or Constantine in the Roman forum, with a +series of deep recesses at the side, the vaulted roofs of which served +to counteract the outward pressure of the main vault. The Christian +basilica, if it were a mere imitation of this type of building, would +follow the same line of development; but, as a matter of fact, the +highest type of Christian church is always a colonnaded or aisled +building. And, even if the Christian apse derived its arrangement from +the apse or apses which projected from the ends or sides of the secular +basilicas, there is again a difference. The apse with its altar was the +main feature of the interior of the Christian church: it was the place +in which the chief rite of Christian worship was performed before the +eyes of all. In the secular basilica the apse was devoted to special +purposes which set it apart from the main business of the body of the +building: it was an appendage to the central hall, not necessarily +within view of every part of it. In fact, the relation of the apse to +the main building was totally different in the two cases.</p> + +<p>§ 3. It seems probable, then, that the identity between the two +buildings is mainly an identity of name, and that Christian builders, +in seeking for suitable arrangements for public worship, may have<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_4" id="Page_4">[4]</a></span> +borrowed some details from the arrangements of the secular basilica. It +is natural, however, to look for the origin of a religious plan in +buildings devoted to religious purposes. The Roman temple supplied no +help for the plan of buildings which were required for public worship. +Of recent years, it has been customary to assume that the Christian +basilica took its form from the inner halls of the private houses of +those wealthy citizens who embraced Christianity in its early days. Such +halls may have been used for Christian services; and if their plan was +adopted for the Christian basilica, the mature state of the basilican +plan at its first appearance can be explained. The <i>atrium</i> or entrance +hall of the house is represented on this hypothesis by the forecourt of +the basilica; the peristyle, or colonnade round the inner room, becomes +the aisles and the space screened off at the entrance for those not +entitled to take full part in the service; the colonnade at the further +end survives in the arcaded screen which existed, for example, in old St +Peter's at Rome; the apse takes the place of the <i>tablinum</i>, where the +most sacred relics of family life were preserved; and the transept, +which is found in some of the early Roman basilican plans, represents +the <i>alae</i>, or transverse space, which existed between the <i>tablinum</i> +and the main body of the<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_5" id="Page_5">[5]</a></span> hall. But these close analogies are the result +of an assumption by no means certain. It is always probable that the +basilican plan had its origin in a plan originally aisleless. Some, +intent on its religious source, explain it as a development of the plan +of the Jewish synagogue. Others, regarding assemblies of Christians for +public worship as, in their essence, meetings of persons associated in +common brotherhood, have derived the basilica directly from the +aisleless <i>scholae</i> which were the meeting-places of the various +confraternities or <i>collegia</i> of ancient Rome. In these there is an apse +at one end of the building; and, if we imagine aisles added by the +piercing of the walls with rows of arches and columns, we have at once +the essential features of the basilican plan. Each theory has its +attractions and its difficulties; and to none is it possible to give +unqualified adherence. It may be stated, as a tentative conclusion, that +the basilican plan probably had its origin in an aisleless form of +building, and thus pursued a course directly opposite to the development +of the secular basilica. But it seems clear that, in many details of the +plan, especially as we see it in Rome, the peristyled hall was kept in +mind; while in two features, the arrangement of the apse and the +occasional appearance of galleries above the aisles, the secular +basilica was taken into consideration. The policy of the early Christian +Church, when its services were sanctioned by the state, was<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_6" id="Page_6">[6]</a></span> to adapt +existing and familiar forms where they could be suitably reproduced.</p> + +<div class="figcenter"> +<img src="images/i020.png" width="667" height="266" alt="fig4" title=""></img> +</div> +<p class="caption"> +Fig. 1. Plan of old St Peter's: (1) <i>atrium</i> or +fore-court; (2) nave with double aisles; (3) site of screen-colonnade; +(4, 4) transepts; (5) apse with crypt below.</p> + +<p>§ 4. The plan of the old basilica of St Peter at Rome, founded by +Constantine the Great, and destroyed early in the sixteenth century to +make way for the present church, explains the principal features of the +basilican plan in its developed state. (1) In common with other early +basilicas in Rome, and in other parts of western Europe, the entrance +was at the east, and the altar at the west end, so that the celebrant +faced the congregation during the divine office. (2) The church was +approached through a cloistered <i>atrium</i> or fore-court, in the middle of +which was a fountain, the place of purification for those intending to +enter the church. (3) At the west end of the cloister three doorways +opened into<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_7" id="Page_7">[7]</a></span> the nave of the church, and one on either side into the +side aisles. (4) The nave communicated with the aisles by a row of +columns beneath an entablature: there were also outer aisles, +communicating with the inner by columns bearing rounded arches. (5) The +side walls of the nave, above the entablature, were not pierced for +galleries, but were covered by two rows of mosaic pictures, one above +the other, on each side, the upper row corresponding to the height of +the space between the outer and inner roofs of the aisle. Above this, +the walls rose into a clerestory, pierced with round-headed windows at +regular intervals; and a high entablature supported the great tie-beams +of the wooden roof. (6) The quire of singers, divided from the rest of +the church by low screen walls, probably occupied the centre of the +western portion of the nave. (7) A tall open arch divided the nave from +the transept, which was of equal height with the nave, and projected +south and north as far as the walls of the outer aisles. Here probably +were places reserved for distinguished persons, near the platform of the +altar. (8) West of the transept, entered by a tall and wide arch, was +the apse. Beneath the arch was a screen, formed by a row of columns, +under an entablature which bore statues of our Lord and the apostles: +this crossed the arch at the foot of the steps leading to the altar and +seats of the clergy. (9) Beneath the altar plat<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_8" id="Page_8">[8]</a></span>form, and entered by +doorways on each side of the flight of steps, was the crypt or +<i>confessio</i>, the traditional place of martyrdom of St Peter, and the +resort of pilgrims to the tomb of the apostles. The hallowed place was +immediately beneath the altar.</p> + +<p>§ 5. The sixth century basilicas of Ravenna, Sant' Apollinare in Classe +and Sant' Apollinare Nuovo, differ in plan from the Roman basilicas (1) +in the fact that they have always had the altar at the east, and the +entrance at the west end; (2) by substituting, for a colonnaded atrium, +a closed porch or <i>narthex</i> in front of the entrance of the building. In +process of time, two of the greater Roman basilicas, San Paolo and San +Lorenzo fuori le Mura, were enlarged in a westward direction, so that +the positions of the altar and entrance were reversed; and, in several +of the early basilicas at Rome, a space near the entrance of the nave +was screened off, from which penitents and catechumens might watch the +service. But, in the first instance, the eastern chancel and the +structural <i>narthex</i> appear to have been introduced from the eastern +empire. Neither at Ravenna nor at Rome did bell-towers originally form +part of the plan of the basilica: the round <i>campanili</i> of both churches +at Ravenna are certainly later additions. It may also be noted (1) that +ordinarily the aisles were single, not double as at old St Peter's. (2) +The columned screen of the apse at old St Peter's ap<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_9" id="Page_9">[9]</a></span>pears to have been +exceptional. The ordinary screen or <i>cancelli</i>, from which is derived +our word "chancel" for the space thus enclosed, was a low wall. This is +the arrangement at the basilica of San Clemente, in which the enclosed +quire also remains. (3) The transept, even in Rome, was an exceptional +arrangement, and does not appear in the basilicas of Ravenna.</p> + +<p>§ 6. Another type of plan, however, was used in Rome for churches +devoted to the special purposes of burial and baptism. In this case the +buildings were planned round a central point, and at Rome were uniformly +circular. Recesses round the walls of the mausoleum-church contained +sarcophagi: in the centre of the baptistery was the great font. The +church of Santa Costanza, outside the north-eastern walls of Rome, +circular in plan, with a vaulted aisle surrounding the central space, +was built by Constantine the Great as a tomb-church for his family, and +was also used as a baptistery. Both these uses were direct adaptations +of pagan customs. The baptistery, with its central font for total +immersion, was simply a large bath-room, like the great rotunda of the +baths of Caracalla. The mausoleum preserved the form of which the finest +example is the tomb of Hadrian, now known as the castle of Sant' Angelo. +In the course of the middle ages, certain tomb-churches in Rome, with a +centralised plan, were turned into places of public worship. But, for +the plan of the ordinary<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_10" id="Page_10">[10]</a></span> church, the basilica, with its longitudinal +axis, was general. In the eastern empire, on the other hand, the +centralised plan was employed from an early date for large churches; and +in this way was evolved the magnificent style of architecture which +culminated in Santa Sophia at Constantinople. Here the centralised plan +was triumphantly adapted to the internal arrangements of the basilica.</p> + +<p>§ 7. The city of Ravenna, closely connected historically both with Rome +and Constantinople, contains a series of monuments which is of +unequalled interest in the history of the centralised plan. (1) The +mausoleum of the empress Galla Placidia, sister of the emperor Honorius, +who died in 450 <span class="smcaps">A.D.</span>, is a building of cruciform shape, consisting of a +square central space covered by a dome, with rectangular projections on +all four sides. The projection through which the building is entered is +longer than the others, and the plan thus forms the Latin cross so +common in the churches of the middle ages. (2) To the same period +belongs the octagonal baptistery, known as San Giovanni in Fonte. (3) In +493 <span class="smcap">A.D.</span> Theodoric the Ostrogoth obtained possession of Ravenna. To the +period of his rule belongs the Arian baptistery, also octagonal, known +as Santa Maria in Cosmedin. (4) Theodoric died in 526 <span class="smcap">A.D.</span> His mausoleum +is formed by a polygon of ten equal sides, with a smaller decagonal +upper stage, a circular attic above<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_11" id="Page_11">[11]</a></span> which bears the great monolithic +dome. In the lower story was the tomb: the internal plan is a Greek +cross, <i>i.e.</i> there is a central space with recesses of equal depth on +all four sides. (5) In the year of the death of Theodoric, the octagonal +church of San Vitale was begun. It was consecrated in 547, when Ravenna +had become the capital of the Italian province of Justinian's empire. +Its somewhat complicated plan was clearly derived from an eastern +source, but not from Santa Sophia, which was not begun till 532 <span class="smcap">A.D.</span> The +central space is almost circular. Between each of the piers which +support the octagonal clerestory at the base of the cupola is an apsidal +recess, with three arches on the ground floor opening into the +encircling aisle, and three upper arches opening into the gallery above +the aisle. On the east side of the central space this arrangement is +broken, and one tall arch opens into the chancel, which ends in a +projecting apse, semi-circular inside, but a half octagon outside. The +aisle with the gallery above thus occupies seven sides of the outer +octagon, the eighth side being occupied by the western part of the +chancel.</p> + +<div class="figcenter"> +<img src="images/i025.png" width="360" height="525" alt="fig5" title=""></img> +</div> +<p class="caption"> +Fig. 2. Plan of San Vitale, Ravenna: (1) <i>narthex</i> with +flanking turrets, as originally arranged; (2) central nave; (3) chancel +and altar.</p> + +<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_12" id="Page_12">[12]</a></span></p> + +<p>§ 8. Of the two types of plan, which can be studied so satisfactorily at +Ravenna, the ordinary basilican type is the more convenient. The long +nave provides the necessary accommodation for worshippers, the raised +apse gives a theatre for the performance of service within view of +everybody, the aisles facilitate the going and coming of the +congregation, and prevent over-crowding. The centralised plan provides, +it is true, a large central area conveniently near the altar; but the +provision of a chancel or altar-space necessitates the grafting on the +plan of a feature borrowed from the ordinary basilica, which, as at San +Vitale, breaks the symmetry of the design. At Santa Sophia, the +basilican chancel forms an indissoluble part of a centralised plan; but +this feat is beyond the reach of an ordinary architect. Even at San +Vitale the planning is highly complicated, and must be due to an<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_13" id="Page_13">[13]</a></span> +architect of some genius. In addition to complications of design, the +centralised plan raised questions of roofing which did not trouble the +builders of the long wooden-roofed basilicas. The vaulted half-dome of +the basilican apse was a simple matter, compared with the mighty dome of +Santa Sophia and its cluster of abutting half-domes. It was in the +centralised churches, with their domed vaults and the groined vaults of +their aisles, that the history of medieval vaulting began. But, even +when medieval masons had learned to regard the vaulting of their +churches as the controlling principle of their art, they left the +centralised plan almost entirely alone, and applied what it had taught +them to the work of roofing basilicas with vaults of stone. We shall +trace the influence of the centralised church as we proceed; but the +influence of the basilica will be found to predominate in the history of +medieval planning.</p> + +<p>§ 9. In England, as in other portions of the Roman empire, we might +naturally expect to find the basilican plan applied to the earliest<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_14" id="Page_14">[14]</a></span> +Christian churches. The foundations of a small Romano-British basilican +church have been discovered at Silchester in Hampshire. The apse, as in +the Roman basilicas, was at the west end. The nave had aisles, which, at +the end nearest the apse, broadened out into two transept-like +projections. The entrance front of the church was covered by a +<i>narthex</i>, the whole width of nave and aisles. This feature, as has been +shown, is of eastern rather than of Roman origin; while the projections +at the end of the aisles appear to have been, not transepts like those +at old St Peter's, but separate chambers corresponding to those which, +in eastern churches, flank the chancel, and are used for special ritual +purposes. In fact, the basilica at Silchester recalls the plans of the +early basilicas of north Africa more closely than those of the basilicas +of Rome; while it has, unlike them, the Roman feature of the western +apse. This, however, gives rise to questions which, in our present state +of knowledge, are beyond solution.</p> + +<p>§ 10. Of the seven churches which are usually connected with the +missionary activity of St Augustine and his companions, five, of which +we have ruins or foundations, certainly ended in apses; and the apse in +each case was divided from the nave, not by a single arch, but by an +arcade with three openings, which<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_15" id="Page_15">[15]</a></span> recalls the screen-colonnade at old +St Peter's. But only one church in the group, the ruined church of +Reculver, followed the plan of the aisled nave of the basilica. From the +description which remains of the early cathedral of Canterbury, +destroyed by fire in 1067, we can see that it, too, was an aisled +basilica, with its original apse at the west end. But the first +cathedral of Rochester, the plan and extent of which may be gathered +from existing foundations, was an aisleless building with an eastern +apse. The church of St Pancras at Canterbury, the lower courses of the +walls of which in great part remain, had an aisleless nave, divided from +an apsidal chancel by a screen-wall with three openings, that in the +middle being wider than the others. The foundations of two of the four +columns which flanked these openings can still be traced. The walls of +the chancel, which was slightly narrower than the nave, were continued +straight for a little way beyond the screen-wall; and then the curve of +the apse began. St Pancras also possessed a square entrance porch, much +narrower than the nave, at its west end, and two chapels projecting from +the nave on either side, half-way up its length. The church is thus +cruciform in plan. The western porch and the chapels seem to have been +added as the work proceeded, and not to have been contemplated in the +original design. The material of the building is Roman brick, and<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_16" id="Page_16">[16]</a></span> +buttress projections occur at the western angles of the nave and porch, +in the fragment which remains of the south wall of the chancel, and at +the outer angles of the side chapels. Small buttresses are also found at +the angles and on the sides of St Peter's on the Wall in Essex.</p> + +<p>§ 11. In one respect the plan of St Pancras at Canterbury is allied to +that of the church at Bradford-on-Avon in Wiltshire. At Bradford there +remains one of the two porches, which also were probably side chapels, +projecting from the sides of the nave. But at Bradford the remaining +porch is larger in proportion to the nave than is the case at St +Pancras. There is no entrance porch on the west side. Further, the +chancel at Bradford is rectangular, not apsidal. Instead of a +screen-wall with a central opening nine feet wide, the wall dividing +nave from chancel is pierced by a small arch only 3 ft. 6 in. wide. The +date of this little church is a matter of great difficulty; and the +character of its masonry seems to demand for it a later date than the +early one popularly claimed for it. The contrast with St Pancras is +accentuated further by the fact that the internal measurements of the +nave show a different scheme of proportion. The nave of St Pancras is +some three feet broader in proportion to its length than the much +shorter nave at Bradford. +</p> + +<p>§ 12. A closer parallel to Bradford-on-Avon is found in the little +church of Escomb, near Bishop Auckland. No record of the early history<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_17" id="Page_17">[17]</a></span> +of this building is known; but its masonry is almost entirely composed +of re-used Roman dressed stone-work. In this respect it presents a +contrast to Bradford. In another respect the two churches are unlike. +Both have their entrances in the side walls; but at Escomb there were no +original porches covering the doorways, while there are traces of what +may have been an entrance porch, like that of St Pancras, at the west +end. But they have these points in common: (1) the nave at Escomb is +long in proportion to its width; (2) the chancel is a rectangular +eastern projection, narrower and much shorter than the nave; (3) there +is a solid wall of division between nave and chancel, pierced by a +narrow arch, broader than that of Bradford, but very much higher in +proportion to its width. It may be added that the walls of both churches +are high in proportion to their length and breadth, and that at Escomb +the original windows are small openings with rounded and flat +lintel-heads, and with internal splays.</p> + +<div class="figcenter"> +<img src="images/i031.png" width="600" height="311" alt="fig6" title=""></img> +</div> +<p class="caption"> +Fig. 3. Plan of Escomb—typical Saxon church. +</p> + +<p>§ 13. It is, however, with the plan that we are concerned. We now have<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_18" id="Page_18">[18]</a></span> +met with three separate forms in England, viz. (1) the rare basilican +plan; (2) the "Kentish" plan of aisleless nave with apsidal chancel; (3) +the plan of aisleless nave with rectangular chancel. We also have seen +that the screen-wall is common to (1) and (2), while the single chancel +arch belongs to (3); and that side chapels and western porches are found +incidentally in (2) and (3). Now, the early date of Escomb, apart from +the evidence supplied by its masonry, can be suspected only by its +analogy to the plan of other churches of which the date is practically +certain. Two such churches remain in the same county of Durham. One is +at Monkwearmouth, now a part of Sunderland. Its nave and the lowest +stage of its western tower represent, and in great part actually are, +the nave and western porch of an early Saxon church, which is generally +identified with the church built here by Benedict Biscop for the +monastery which he founded in 672 <span class="smcap">A.D.</span> The nave was originally +aisleless, long, narrow and lofty: the entrance porch had an upper story +finished with a gabled roof, and a vaulted ground-floor with entrances +on three sides. There was evidently a chancel arch, and probably the<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_19" id="Page_19">[19]</a></span> +chancel was rectangular. The material of the building was not Roman; +but, in the decoration applied to it, Roman work was imitated. Only a +few miles further north, Benedict founded, in 680 <span class="smcap">A.D.</span>, the sister +monastery of Jarrow. The long and narrow chancel of the present church +of St Paul was the body of a church somewhat similar to that of +Monkwearmouth. Stone-work which may represent the jambs of a broad +chancel arch can be traced in the east wall; but this cannot be stated +with positive certainty. The lower part of the tower, now between the +present chancel and nave, may represent an original western porch; but, +in its present state, it is of much later date than the work east of it, +and its site must have been broadened when the tower was first planned. +At Jarrow there is no Roman stone-work; but one type of Roman masonry +has been imitated by the builders in the walls of the chancel, and small +decorative shafts, turned in a lathe after the Roman fashion, such as +exist at Monkwearmouth, have been found in the building. The inscribed +stone, recording the dedication of the church, is preserved in the wall +above the western tower-arch: the date given is 23 April, 684 <span class="smcap">A.D.</span> In +this inscription the building, though aisleless, is called a basilica. +The word was now probably used to signify a Christian church, +irrespective of its plan. A third early church in this district is that +of Corbridge, near Hexham. Here,<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_20" id="Page_20">[20]</a></span> as at Monkwearmouth, the ground story +of the tower was originally a western porch; while the lofty arch +between tower and nave is, like the chancel arch at Escomb, entirely +composed of dressed Roman masonry, and seems to have been removed from +one of the buildings of the Roman station of Corstopitum, as the arch at +Escomb was probably removed from the not far distant station of +Vinovium.</p> + +<p>§ 14. The date to which these four northern churches may be assigned is +the half century of the activity of St Wilfrid in England (664-709 +<span class="smcap">A.D.</span>). Bede's account of the architectural work of Wilfrid's friend, +Benedict Biscop, shows that he procured, for the building of the church +at Monkwearmouth, stonemasons and glaziers from Gaul, who were +acquainted with "the manner of the Romans." The account which another +contemporary, Eddius, gives of Wilfrid's church at Hexham, is clear +proof that this important building was a reproduction, in plan and +elevation, of the aisled basilicas of the continent—a fact in keeping +with Wilfrid's life-long aim of bringing English Christianity into +closer touch with the main current of historic Christianity in Rome and +Gaul. The foundations of the outer walls of most of Wilfrid's church +were uncovered when, lately, the new nave of Hexham priory church was +begun; but one of its features has been long known, and is of the +highest interest. The crypt for relics below the apse<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_21" id="Page_21">[21]</a></span> and high altar +consists of an oblong chamber, with a western vestibule, approached by a +straight stairway from the nave. In addition to the western stair, there +are two stairs which communicated with the apse. That on the south side +remains perfect, and ends in a passage and vestibule, through which the +relic-chamber is entered. The northern stairway leads through a passage +to the western vestibule, at the foot of the stair from the nave. The +crypt of Wilfrid's contemporary basilica at Ripon also remains: here the +arrangement is less complicated; but the arrangement of the main +relic-chamber is equally the chief feature of the plan.</p> + +<p>§ 15. The foundations of the Saxon church at Peterborough present many +difficulties, and may be of a later date than the foundation of the +monastery in 655 <span class="smcap">A.D.</span> But no such difficulties of date or plan exist +with regard to the large Saxon church at Brixworth, between Northampton +and Market Harborough. Its size and the fact that Roman material has +been much re-used in its building have given rise to the tradition that +it is a secular basilica applied to the purposes of a Christian church. +As a matter of fact, the Roman brick-work has been re-used in obvious +ignorance of Roman methods; so that this circumstance alone would make +the legend improbable. The date of the building can hardly be earlier +than about 680 <span class="smcap">A.D.</span>, when a monastery<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_22" id="Page_22">[22]</a></span> was founded here by a colony of +monks from Peterborough. The plan originally consisted of (1) a western +entrance porch, with a lofty western doorway, and smaller doorways on +north and south; (2) a broad nave, divided from the aisles by arches, +which spring from large square piers of plain brick-work; (3) a +rectangular presbytery, divided from the nave by a screen-wall pierced +with three arches; (4) an apsidal chancel, entered from the presbytery +by a single arch. On each side of the chancel arch, a doorway entered +into a narrow vaulted passage below the ground level, which probably +formed an aisle round a crypt below the apse. At a later date, probably +in the period of quiet following the later Danish invasions, the apse +seems to have been rebuilt, polygonal externally, semi-circular on the +inside, and the central crypt-chamber was then possibly filled up. The +western porch was also used as the foundation for a tower, and the +western arch blocked up with a filling containing a lower doorway, +through which the circular turret for the tower-stair was entered. The +aisles, either then or at a somewhat later date, having probably fallen +into ruin, were removed. The clerestory of the nave remains, with +unusually broad round-headed windows.</p> + +<p>§ 16. The original plan of Brixworth has points in common with some of +the other plans which have been noted. In its triple arched screen-wall +it re<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_23" id="Page_23">[23]</a></span>calls the Kentish type of church; its rectangular presbytery +between nave and apse is a development of the chancel space which +existed west of the spring of the apse at St Pancras. It shares its +western porch with St Pancras and two, if not four, of the northern +group of churches. In the north and south doorways of this porch it has +kinship with Monkwearmouth, and at Brixworth there are definite signs +that these doorways led into passages which may have been connected with +other buildings of the monastery, or possibly even with an <i>atrium</i> or +fore-court. The aisled nave and the traces of a crypt bring it into +relation, not merely with Hexham or Ripon, but with the historical +church plan of western Europe generally. At the same time, the plan, +regarded as that of an English church, is exceptional. The aisled plan +of the parish church was arrived at in spite, not in consequence, of the +few early aisled churches which might have supplied it with a model. +During the epoch which followed the Danish invasions the aisleless plan +was deliberately preferred: the rectangular chancel entirely superseded +the apse. No further example of the structural screen-wall occurs. In +addition to those mentioned, only three more pre-Conquest examples of +crypts are known, and such crypts as occur in parish churches after the +Conquest are exceptional, and are usually due to exigencies of site. +Only three more aisled churches of unquestion<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_24" id="Page_24">[24]</a></span>ably pre-Conquest date +exist above ground. Reculver has been mentioned. The others are Lydd in +Kent, where only indications of an arcade remain, and the complete +basilican church of Wing, near Leighton Buzzard, which has a polygonal +apse with a crypt below. Wing is probably much later in date than most +of Brixworth, but one cannot but be struck by a certain resemblance in +construction between the two naves, and in plan between the crypt at +Wing and the remains of the crypt at Brixworth.</p> + +<p>§ 17. These early churches have been treated at some length, because +they contain certain essential elements of planning in a state of +probation. The basilican plan was doubtless the ideal of English +builders during the sixth and early seventh centuries, but an ideal +which was hard to compass where good building material was not +plentiful. Thus Augustine and his companions contented themselves in +most instances with a plan which recalled the aisled basilica, without +following out its more elaborate details. It is remarkable that they +should have departed from the usual Roman custom, and made their +chancels at the east end of their churches: it is also remarkable to +find at St Pancras the western porch, the origin of which appears to be +the non-Roman <i>narthex</i>. Models existed, no doubt in the ruins of the +Romano-British churches, which they repaired; and we have seen that at +Silchester there<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_25" id="Page_25">[25]</a></span> is a regular <i>narthex</i>, while, on the other hand, +there is a western apse. These models, however, were probably all of one +general type, in which the chancel end was formed by an apsidal +projection. When Roman Christianity reached the north, it had to contend +with the efforts of Celtic missionaries; and those efforts were not met +by it effectively until, in 664, the energetic leadership of Wilfrid +secured a triumph for his party at the council of Whitby. Of the Celtic +churches of the north we know but little: it seems likely that they were +for the most part plain oratories of stone or wood, with or without a +separate chancel. The simplest form, obviously, which a church can +assume is a plain rectangle with an altar at one end. As the +desirability of a special enclosure for the altar is recognised, a +smaller rectangle will be added at the altar end of the main building, +and so the distinction between nave and chancel will be formed. There +are indications of this natural growth of plan in some of the early +religious buildings in Ireland. In remote districts, as in Wales, the +simple nave and chancel plan is general all through the middle ages; and +the smaller country churches often follow the common Celtic plan of a +single rectangle with no structural division. The ruined chapel at +Heysham in Lancashire, a work of early date, is an undivided rectangle +in plan. This is the form which would suggest itself naturally to the +unskilled builder: the<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_26" id="Page_26">[26]</a></span> division of nave and chancel into a larger and +smaller rectangle is the next step which would occur to his intelligence +in the ordinary course of things. It is possible that Wilfrid and +Benedict Biscop found that their aims would be best served by adhering +in certain instances to the familiar Celtic plan, and so, while they +hired foreign masons and craftsmen to build and furnish their earlier +churches, and to set the example of building stone churches after the +manner of the Romans, they were careful to avoid the prejudice which +insistence on a new plan would have excited. The simplicity, moreover, +of a plan like that at Escomb, which requires little architectural skill +to work upon, may have been a recommendation; and the fact that the +construction of an apse is more difficult than that of a rectangular +chancel must have weighed powerfully with English masons, both at this +time and later. The fact remains that, in the early age of our church +architecture in stone, the aisled basilica was a rare exception, and the +rectangular chancel was, in the north, at least as common as the apse.</p> + + + +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_27" id="Page_27">[27]</a></span></p> +<h2><a name="CHAPTER_II" id="CHAPTER_II"></a>CHAPTER II</h2> +<h3>PARISH CHURCHES OF THE LATER SAXON PERIOD</h3> + + +<p>§ 18. In later Saxon churches the aisleless plan and the rectangular +chancel were normal. Instances of an aisled plan after the seventh +century have been noted already: it has been seen that there are only +two definite examples, and, although there may be indications of others, +these are few and far between and uncertain. The apsidal chancel again +is exceedingly rare. We have noted it in combination with other +basilican features at Wing: the instances in which it occurs again are +very few, and in these, as in the important monastic church of +Deerhurst, there are other variations from the aisleless plan. In by far +the largest number of examples, the plan adhered to was that simple one +of which we have a complete prototype at Escomb. Late Saxon fabrics +which remain free of later additions are few; but there is a +considerable number of churches which still keep the quoins of an +aisleless Saxon nave <i>in situ</i>, although aisles have been added during +the twelfth<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_28" id="Page_28">[28]</a></span> or thirteenth centuries. Such are St Mary-le-Wigford and St +Peter-at-Gowts at Lincoln, Bracebridge in the western suburb of Lincoln, +St Benet's at Cambridge, and Wittering, near Stamford. At Winterton in +Lincolnshire large pieces of the western part of both walls of the nave +were kept as an abutment to the tower, when aisles were added. +Sometimes, as at Geddington and Brigstock in Northamptonshire, the whole +wall above the nave arcades is the upper part of the wall of the +aisleless building; and instances in which blocked window openings, of a +not improbably pre-Conquest date, remain in walls that have subsequently +been pierced with arcades, are exceedingly common. If an untouched Saxon +nave is a rare thing, an unaltered Saxon chancel is obviously rarer. The +small rectangular chancel of the large medieval church at Repton, in +Derbyshire, is practically unique; it was probably preserved for the +sake of the crypt beneath, which, at first a plain rectangular chamber, +was subsequently, but still in pre-Conquest times, vaulted in +compartments supported by columns. But at Sidbury in Devon, where there +is a small rectangular crypt, the chancel above was rebuilt in the +twelfth, and lengthened in the thirteenth century, without any reference +to the line of the walls of the crypt below it. A good example of an +unaltered late Saxon fabric is the church of Coln Rogers in +Gloucestershire. Here the western tower, built up inside the nave, is a<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_29" id="Page_29">[29]</a></span> +later addition, but the nave, rectangular chancel, and arch between +them, are still intact. The chancel arch, though by no means broad, is +yet much wider than those at Escomb and Bradford-on-Avon; and its width +probably represents the normal width of a chancel arch of this period.</p> + +<p>§ 19. An addition occurs in most of these late Saxon plans, which had a +great influence on the subsequent, and even on the contemporary, +development of the church plan. We have noted that at Rome and Ravenna +towers formed no part of the original basilican plan, but were added +later as <i>campanili</i>. In England it appears that the tower formed no +part of the plan until, at any rate, the epoch of the Danish wars.</p> + +<p>Western bell-towers were very general by the beginning of the eleventh +century. In most of these towers, the ground floor forms an entrance +porch; but it does not follow that the western tower in England was +generated by the heightening of the western porch. The porches of +Brixworth and Monkwearmouth were probably not heightened until the +western tower had come into existence elsewhere. An origin for the +western tower has been sought in the fore-buildings which occur in some +of the early German churches, and contain separate upper chambers. It +may be that, derived from this source, the western tower superseded the +porch, and, where porches existed, they were adapted to the new +fashion.<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_30" id="Page_30">[30]</a></span></p> + +<p>§ 20. The towers of Earl's Barton, Barnack, and St Peter's at +Barton-on-Humber, are perhaps the most obviously interesting relics of +Saxon architecture which we possess. All are much larger in area than +the normal western tower of the later Saxon period. Earl's Barton is a +western tower, and its ground floor has probably always served as a +porch: the rest of the church, however, is a medieval building of +various periods. At Barnack, again, the complete plan of the Saxon +church has been lost. Here, however, the western tower was something +more than a porch. The doorway is not in the west, but in the south +wall; and in the west wall, inside the church, is a niche with a +triangular head, which was certainly neither doorway nor window, but a +seat. Whether this implies that the ground floor of the tower was used +for special religious functions, or for some purpose connected with the +common life of the parish, is not clear; but it shows, at any rate, that +there was some good reason for the unusually roomy planning of the +tower. We stand on firmer ground at Barton-on-Humber. Here, again, a +large medieval church exists to the east of the tower. But upon its +western side is a small rectangular building of contemporary date, which +was not a porch in front of the tower, but a westward extension of the +body of the church, the main entrances being on either side of the +tower. The foundations of a similar projecting building have<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_31" id="Page_31">[31]</a></span> been +discovered to the east of the tower, beneath the floor of the later +nave. It is therefore clear that the ground floor of the tower, or +rather of a high tower-like building, formed the body of the church, and +that the eastern projection was the chancel. There are clear indications +at Broughton, also in north Lincolnshire, that this plan was used, at +any rate, once again. The tower at Broughton is obviously later than +that at Barton: the doorway, whose details are of a post-Conquest +character, is in the south wall; and a large circular stair-turret, like +that at Brixworth, projects from the west wall. Probably there was only +a chancel here, and no western annexe to correspond. A similar +stair-turret occurs at Hough-on-the-Hill, between Grantham and Lincoln: +the tower, now western, has a doorway in the south wall, and probably +stands mid-way in date between Barton and Broughton. It is planned on a +very ample scale, with thin walls and a large floor-space. The main +fabric of the church is altogether of a later date; and there are no +indications, at any rate above ground, of an earlier building east of +the tower. The size of the tower, the provision of a stair-turret, as at +Broughton, to leave the ground floor clear, suggest that here we may +have a third example of the plan in which the tower covered the main +body of the church. The arrangement at Barnack gives grounds for a +suspicion of something of the same kind there. In all these cases the +tower has been a tower from the beginning; but at Barton-on-Humber the +uppermost stage was added towards the end of the Saxon period.</p> + +<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_32" id="Page_32">[32]</a></span></p> +<div class="figcenter"> +<img src="images/i045.jpg" width="437" height="600" alt="fig7" title=""></img> +</div> +<p class="caption"> +Fig. 4. St Peter's, Barton-on-Humber: from S.W. +</p> + +<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_33" id="Page_33">[33]</a></span></p> + +<p>§ 21. In these buildings we seem to discover the influence of the +centralised plan, acting through the channel of German art. It would be +absurd to say that the plan of Barton-on-Humber was inspired by the plan +of the palace-church at Aachen, which was an adaptation, with some +improvement, of the plan of San Vitale at Ravenna. No masterly +intellectual effort, such as the Aachen plan shows, was necessary to +plan a rectangle with two smaller rectangles at either end. But the +church at Aachen had made the centralised plan familiar to the builders +of western Europe. In Germany and in France there are traces of its +influence; and we may reasonably suppose that the builders of +Barton-on-Humber were acquainted with the existence of an alternative to +the usual plan of the church with a longitudinal axis, and did not +arrive by haphazard at their concentration of the plan upon a central +point. One earlier example of the centralised plan is known to have +existed in England. In addition to his basilica at Hexham, Wilfrid had +built another church there in the shape of a Greek cross. The +description of it which we possess shows that the central space was the +actual church, that it was tower-like in form, and<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_34" id="Page_34">[34]</a></span> nearly circular in +shape, and that the arms were simply porch-like projections. Probably it +was a combination of baptistery with tomb-church. It is not likely that +the simple plan of Barton was derived from that at Hexham. Both were +probably the result of continental influence; but, while the church at +Hexham may have been the work of Gallo-Roman masons in direct +communication with the general current of architectural progress, the +church at Barton was probably built by Englishmen, who adapted the +centralised plan to methods natural to their comparative want of skill.</p> + +<p>§ 22. Neither at this time nor later did the centralised plan in England +develop along the lines suggested by Barton-on-Humber. No real +development on such lines was possible. In Germany, the achievement at +Aachen made possible the polygonal nave of St Gereon at Cologne and the +centralised plan of the Liebfrauenkirche at Trier, as well as many +twelfth and thirteenth century churches whose complicated parts are +planned and massed together with relation to a central tower space. In +England, however, the habit of dealing with circular or polygonal forms +made little progress; and our few "round churches," the plan of the +naves of which was a devout imitation of the church of the Holy +Sepulchre at Jerusalem, and our polygonal chapter houses, are almost all +that we have to show in the way of attempts<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_35" id="Page_35">[35]</a></span> at a definitely centralised +plan. Our church plan develops as the result of an effort to combine a +series of rectangles effectively; and, while this combination can be +attempted in several different ways, it is obvious that the rigid lines +of the rectangle do not admit of that free scope in centralised planning +which is given by the circle or polygon.</p> + +<p>§ 23. We have seen, however, that, even in the earliest days, there was +a tendency to admit additions to the simple longitudinal plan, which, in +process of time, were bound to give birth, if not to a definitely +centralised plan, to something, at any rate, in which a central point +counted for much. A feature of the early cathedral and of St Pancras at +Canterbury, was the projection of <i>porticus</i>, porches or side chapels, +from the nave. These were entered by archways pierced in the centre of +the lateral walls. In the cathedral they had outer doorways, and formed +the main entrances of the church, on the north from the monastery, on +the south from the city. The south porch contained the altar of St +Gregory, and, as Eadmer tells us, was used as a court of justice to +which litigants, in process of time, resorted from every part of +England. In the north porch, dedicated to St Martin, was held the school +of the monastery. Upon both porches towers were built at a date which +cannot be ascertained, but was probably later than the time of +Augustine. Of the use of the porches at<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_36" id="Page_36">[36]</a></span> St Pancras, which did not +contain outer doorways, it is impossible to say anything definitely. +Entrance porches, of which one remains, projected from the sides of the +church at Bradford-on-Avon: the outer and inner doorways of the north +porch are extremely narrow, and are placed west of the centre of its +north and south walls. It is possible, therefore, that there was an +altar in this porch, so that it served the double purpose of entrance +porch and side chapel.</p> + +<p>§ 24. As time went on, the western porch beneath the tower was disused +as a public entrance. The principal entrance of most churches is on the +south side, west of the centre of the aisle wall, and is usually covered +by a porch. There is a Saxon +<a name="corr1" id="corr1"></a><a class="correction" href="#cn1" title="changed from 'ex-example'">example</a> +of this at Bishopstone in Sussex, +where, as at Bradford, room seems to have been left for an altar on the +east side. However, the main entrance of the ordinary Saxon church was +at the west end, through the ground floor of the tower. The porch in the +lateral wall seems to have been regarded primarily as a side chapel; and +in some later Saxon churches the porches were dissociated from lateral +doorways, and were planned as closed projections from the eastern part +of the north and south walls of the nave. This seems to have happened at +Britford, near Salisbury, where archways remain on both sides near the +east end of the nave. At Deerhurst square<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_37" id="Page_37">[37]</a></span> projections were entered from +both sides of the nave, immediately west of the chancel arch; and it is +probable that there were somewhat similar projections at Repton. At +Worth in Sussex, where the north and south doorways of the nave are +Saxon, and there is no western entrance or original tower, there are +large Saxon chapels projecting from the eastern part of the nave, and +entered by wide arches. The cruciform plan is sufficiently marked in the +conjectural restorations of Deerhurst and Repton. At Worth it is quite +unmistakable.</p> + +<p>§ 25. At Worth, however, in spite of the dignity of the lateral arches, +the chapels are still porch-like excrescences, larger in scale than +usual, but lower in elevation than the nave. In elevation their +transept-like appearance is less noticeable than on plan. Moreover, the +length of the nave remains unbroken from west wall to chancel arch: no +central space is marked off to which these transeptal projections give +emphasis. Nevertheless, a suggestion of an intermediate space between +nave and chancel is given; and this space is definitely marked in the +plans of churches which may be quite as early in date as Worth—<i>i.e.</i> +about the first half of the eleventh century—by the admission of a +tower between nave and chancel. The eastern part of the walls of the +nave at St Mary's in Dover Castle are continued upwards as a tower, with +small rectangular chapels projecting<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_38" id="Page_38">[38]</a></span> from the sides of the ground +floor. Externally, no division between the tower and nave is noticeable; +but, inside the church, in addition to the chancel arch and the arches +into the chapels, a fourth arch is pierced in the western wall of the +tower, and so an intermediate space between tower and nave is +effectually created. At Breamore in Hants, a further step is taken. The +tower space, between nave and chancel, is of the same width as the nave; +but, in addition to the necessary internal division, an external +division is also marked by the quoins of the tower, which are complete +to the ground. Only one chapel remains at Breamore, on the south of the +tower, entered by a narrow Saxon archway; but there was originally +another on the north.</p> + +<p>§ 26. The chapels which project from these early "central" towers are, +it is to be noted, not true transepts. They are narrower than the tower, +which is built up from the ground, and not upon a system of piers and +arches which require lateral abutments in the form of transepts. The +western tower is transferred, as it were, to a point near the centre of +the church, assumes the width of the nave, and is provided with +transeptal excrescences, to communicate with which its side walls are +pierced. Such excrescences are not necessary. At Stanton Lacy, in +Shropshire, there is only one. At Dunham Magna, in Norfolk, and other +places, such as Waith in<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_39" id="Page_39">[39]</a></span> Lincolnshire, there are, or were originally, +none at all. The construction of the "central" tower upon piers +connected by arches was beyond the skill of the ordinary Saxon builder; +and its natural consequence, the development of the full cruciform plan, +with transepts of the height and width of nave and chancel, was thus out +of his reach. We know, from contemporary evidence, that one important +abbey church, that of Ramsey, had a central tower which was built upon +piers and arches as early as 974 <span class="smcap">A.D.</span>; and perhaps this was the case in +other large churches. But, even in the large church of Stow in +Lincolnshire, which is commonly taken on trust, without sufficient +historical evidence, as the cathedral church of the Saxon diocese of +Lindsey, although an advance in transeptal construction was made, the +main principle was imperfectly grasped. This church was made the home of +a community of clergy about the beginning of the reign of Edward the +Confessor, by Leofric, earl of Mercia, and his wife Godiva. It was +restored after the Conquest by Rémi, the first Norman bishop of Lincoln. +The aisleless nave and chancel are Norman work of two periods: probably +the nave was rebuilt upon Saxon foundations. The transepts, however, of +considerable length and equal height with nave and chancel, were +retained from the pre-Conquest building. The tall jambs of the arches of +the central tower also remain on all four sides.<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_40" id="Page_40">[40]</a></span> The arches which they +bear are of early Norman character; and the present tower is a late +Gothic structure, the arches and piers of which are built up on the +inner side of the older masonry. But the Saxon tower space, including +the area of the arch-jambs, is rather wider than the arms of the cross +which project from it. The tower formed a separate building, with quoins +complete from the ground, and nave, chancel, and transepts, instead of +combining to support it, were mere excrescences from it, entered by +arches in its walls. Possibly the example of Barton-on-Humber may have +had to do with this treatment of the tower as a separate central +pavilion, which may have been deliberately preferred to the arch and +pier treatment. In other respects the plan is an advance upon the plans +of Dover and Breamore. And the necessary advance upon Stow is found in +the church of Norton-on-Tees in south Durham. Here the tower, between +nave and chancel, rests on piers connected by arches. The arches have +been widened; two have been entirely rebuilt at a later date; and the +rest of the church has been subjected at different times to enlargement +and rebuilding. In spite of this, we have at Norton our earliest +surviving example of a plan in which the various portions of the +church—nave, chancel, and transepts—are gathered together in one +structural connexion. The tower is to the east of the centre of<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_41" id="Page_41">[41]</a></span> the +longitudinal axis of the church; but structurally, it is the central +point with regard to which the building is planned, and the unity of the +composition depends upon it.</p> + +<p>§ 27. We have arrived thus at a centralised plan of cruciform shape, of +which the component parts are rectangular, the central space being +approximately a square. The examples which have been given cannot be +proved to follow one another in chronological order, but they represent +successive steps in planning and construction, of which Norton-on-Tees +is the highest. The importance of the inclusion of the tower in the plan +is obvious. In its early appearances, its position is unsettled, but the +natural tendency is to place it above a main entrance; and this is +usually at the west end of the building. Where the builders aim at a +simple centralised plan, the high central rectangle will form, like the +round or octagonal central space of Wilfrid's church of St Mary at +Hexham, <i>ecclesia ... in modum turris erecta</i>, and, as at +Barton-on-Humber, will possibly be heightened by a later generation into +a real tower. The distinction of the side chapel from the entrance +porches, becoming more fully recognised, will lead to the building of +transeptal chapels at the east end of the nave; and thus an important +addition will be made to the ordinary longitudinal plan. The need of +some central building, against which these<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_42" id="Page_42">[42]</a></span> additions may abut, will be +felt. The tower will thus be introduced between nave and chancel, either +as an independent structure, or as an upward extension of part of the +side walls. The transepts thus, as at Stow, can be raised to an equal +height with nave and chancel. From this to a plan in which the component +parts are recognised as interdependent, and are closely knit together in +structural unity, is an obvious step. At this point, architectural +skill, as distinct from mere building ingenuity, comes into play.</p> + +<p>§ 28. As we proceed, we shall find survivals of old plans, even at an +advanced period in the middle ages, which prove that progress in +architecture was by no means of an uniform kind. Builders in remote, and +especially in hilly, districts, from Saxon times to the present day, +have naturally restricted themselves to plans which require as little +cost as possible to carry out. Local building material is also an +important consideration. In districts where good building stone is to be +obtained on the spot, or where money is plentiful and water carriage is +possible, the development of plan is naturally rapid, and every fifty +years or so, additions to churches will be made in which the old plan +will become entirely transformed. In woodland districts, the plan will +be controlled to no small extent by the requirements of timber +construction. In such regions, Saxon churches were<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_43" id="Page_43">[43]</a></span> probably built of +wood. The only wooden church of Saxon times which remains is that of +Greenstead in south Essex, with a rectangular chancel and aisleless nave +constructed of vertical logs placed side by side, and framed originally +into a timber plinth. However, it may be stated as a general rule, that, +whatever may be the helps or hindrances to development provided by local +materials, the real starting-point of the parish church plan of the +middle ages is in every part of the country an aisleless plan; and that +this plan consists either of a nave and chancel with a longitudinal +axis, or of a nave and chancel whose longitudinal axis is intersected by +a transverse axis across transepts. Variations, no doubt, occur; but +these will never carry us far from one or other of these fundamental +plans. The aisled basilica of the continent found no scope for itself in +Saxon England; and it was through an interval of aisleless building that +the aisled plan eventually became acclimatised, and then in a form which +bears only a superficial kinship to the basilican plan.</p> + + + +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_44" id="Page_44">[44]</a></span></p> +<h2><a name="CHAPTER_III" id="CHAPTER_III"></a>CHAPTER III</h2> +<h3>THE AISLELESS CHURCH OF THE NORMAN PERIOD</h3> + + +<p>§ 29. During the century after the Norman Conquest, the great abbey +churches and cathedrals represent the work of a foreign architectural +school, gradually acclimatising itself in England; while, on the other +hand, the parish church continued to be planned by local men, open to +receive the improvements which more skilled foreign masons had +introduced. Consequently, while local art received a continually +increasing refinement, the plan of the church developed upon traditional +lines, and not upon those novel lines which foreign masons would have +laid down for it. The chief proof of this is seen in the persistence of +the aisleless plan with rectangular chancel and western tower. The +tendency of a Norman builder would be to design his church with an +apsidal chancel, transepts, and a central tower; his practice would +vary, but this would be his favourite plan. On the other hand, the +rectangular chancel and western tower remained the favourite +terminations of the parish church in England. But,<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_45" id="Page_45">[45]</a></span> while a large number +of rubble-built, unbuttressed Norman towers, usually heightened or +otherwise altered in the later middle ages, remain in many parts of +England, their relation to the plan suffers some change. The ground +floor of the Saxon tower was, as we have noticed, the main entrance to +the church. The Norman western tower either contained no western doorway +at all, or provided merely an entrance, which was used only on special +occasions. At Caistor the ground floor was probably the main porch of +the aisleless church; and there are exceptional instances, as at +Finchingfield in Essex, where, in fairly advanced Norman work, the same +arrangement was clearly contemplated. On the other hand, at Laceby, +between Caistor and Grimsby, a south doorway, coeval with the western +tower, has always been the main entrance to the church. Similarly, at +Hooton Pagnell, and at Blatherwycke in Northamptonshire, south doorways, +of the same age as the tower, form the chief entrance. These last three +are early Norman examples; but we may go back even further, to find the +same thing in churches which are usually reckoned as late Saxon work, at +Heapham in Lincolnshire, and Kirk Hammerton, between York and +Boroughbridge. In south Yorkshire there are a few churches of the middle +of the twelfth century whose western towers are noticeably derived, in +their plan and general construction, from the Saxon type—Birkin, +Brayton, and Riccall. But in all three, the main entrance to the church +was made through a south doorway, the arch of which is covered with +elaborate late Norman ornaments. The western tower was thus reduced to +the state of a bell-tower at one end of the church, and, while +increasing in size and in magnificence, was actually a less +indispensable part of the plan than before.</p> + +<div class="figcenter"> +<img src="images/i059.png" width="486" height="295" alt="fig8" title=""></img> +</div> +<p class="caption"> +Fig. 5. Aisleless plan: 12th century.</p> + + +<p>§ 30. The nave of the Norman aisleless church was usually short, and,<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_46" id="Page_46">[46]</a></span> +where the church was entirely rebuilt, rather wide in proportion to its +length. The naves of churches like Garton-on-the-Wolds or Kirkburn in +Yorkshire, give the effect of spacious halls, of no great length, but +wide and lofty. It cannot be doubted, however, that the fabric of the +Saxon church was frequently kept, or that the church was rebuilt upon +Saxon foundations. It is not unusual, as already stated, to find Saxon +quoins still existing at the angles of naves to which aisles have +subsequently been added. Evidences, on the other hand, of the westward +lengthening of a Saxon nave in the Norman period appear to be rare. At +North Witham in south Lincolnshire, the south and (blocked) north<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_47" id="Page_47">[47]</a></span> +doorways are Norman work, in the usual position near the west end of the +nave. East of them, however, in the centre of the nave walls, there are +distinct traces of the inner openings of a north and south doorway, +which may belong to the late Saxon period. That we have here a case of +the twelfth century lengthening of an earlier nave may be inferred. The +probability is increased by the fact that, in the neighbouring church of +Colsterworth, where aisles were added during the early Norman period to +a late Saxon fabric, the nave and aisles, towards the end of the twelfth +century, were certainly extended a bay westward. As little architectural +work is done without a precedent, we may assume that the builders at +Colsterworth were following the example of North Witham.</p> + +<p>§ 31. The great majority of Norman rectangular chancels have been +lengthened and enlarged; for the plain "altar-house" at the east end of +the nave was too small for the purposes of the ritual of the thirteenth +and fourteenth centuries, and afforded<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_48" id="Page_48">[48]</a></span> no intermediate space between +nave and chancel. However, short and approximately square chancels were +by no means invariable; and, before the middle of the twelfth century, +oblong chancels of considerable length in proportion to their width were +being built. There is a good early twelfth century example at Moor +Monkton, in the Ainsty of York; and the chancel of the middle of the +twelfth century at Earl's Barton, Northants, is of considerable depth, +and was of ample size for all later purposes. At Earl's Barton the +eastern portion was the chancel proper; while the western portion +supplied that space for a quire which was not provided in less elongated +plans. In by far the larger number of cases, the rectangular chancel had +a wooden roof. There is, however, a fair number of churches in which the +system of ribbed vaulting, as employed in larger buildings, was used. +Thus at Heddon-on-the-Wall, Northumberland, there is a small square +chancel with a ribbed vault. At Warkworth, there is a long vaulted +chancel of two bays, built during the first quarter of the twelfth +century; and at Tickencote, Rutland, two bays are combined in one by the +use of sexpartite vaulting. In these cases the chancel arches are wide, +forming the western transverse arches of the vaulting: that at +Tickencote is of remarkable magnificence.<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_49" id="Page_49">[49]</a></span></p> + +<p>§ 32. There are certain cases in which the chancel was of the same width +as the nave, and no structural division existed between them. At Askham +Bryan and at the chapel of Copmanthorpe, near York, the plan, externally +and internally, is a plain undivided oblong. At Tansor, Northants, the +chancel was rebuilt about 1140, when the side walls were set back in a +line with those of the nave. In St Mary's in the Castle at Leicester, +the long and very narrow nave was, as may still be clearly seen, +continued eastward without a break into the long and narrow quire and +chancel. Here the eastern half was used, no doubt, by the college of +dean and canons, while the western half was the parish church. The +beautiful church of St Peter, Northampton, built towards the end of the +third quarter of the twelfth century, gives us a complete example of an +undivided plan, aisled throughout save in the eastern bay, which forms a +projecting chancel east of the aisles of the choir.</p> + +<p>§ 33. Hitherto we have dealt merely with the rectangular chancel. But +there are also churches which end in an eastern apse. These are +comparatively few and exceptional. In Yorkshire, where the number of +Norman rectangular chancels is large, and buildings such as Adel exhibit +the aisleless church in its highest state of architectural development, +the number of apsidal chancels can<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_50" id="Page_50">[50]</a></span> be counted on the fingers of one +hand. In Sussex, where Caen stone was largely used, and we should expect +foreign influence to be noticeable, the proportion of apsidal chancels +is small. In Gloucestershire, the Cotswold district contains several +small Norman churches, which have been little altered: the rectangular +chancel is universal. These are typical districts; and, to state a +general rule, we may say that, while the apsidal chancel is foreign to +no part of England, and occurs in unexpected places, as in the chapel of +Old Bewick, Northumberland, it is never general in any single region. +Its rarity is an important fact. Were our parish churches the work of +masons sent out from the larger churches and monasteries, we should +expect to find it a common feature; for in those buildings the apsidal +plan prevailed. But, in the hands of local masons, its sparing +employment is easily explained. To build an apse needs skill, not only +in planning, but in stone-cutting. The question of vaulting the apse +increases the difficulty and the expense. These difficulties would not +trouble masons who had worked at the building of Durham or Ely or +Winchester; nor would expense trouble the monasteries, which, according +to the popular idea, were so ready to lavish money on the fabrics of +parish churches. Many apsidal chancels have disappeared, no doubt; but, +if we take the bulk of +<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_51" id="Page_51">[51]</a></span> +those which remain into account, we shall find +that they have a habit of occurring in small groups, as in Berkshire, +where three occur together within a single old rural deanery, and that +the large majority of the churches in which they are found were not +monastic property. A few belonged to preceptories of Knights Templars in +their neighbourhood; and perhaps we may see in their apses a reference +to the circular form of the Holy Sepulchre. But, as a rule, we may say +that a band of masons in certain neighbourhoods developed some skill in +building apses, that money was forthcoming, and that so a few examples +came into existence. In one curious instance, Langford in Essex, which +is within easy distance of four or five other apsed churches, there is +an apse at the west, and there are foundations of another at the east +end of the building. For this church a Saxon origin has been claimed: +the plan, at any rate, indicates a survival of a plan once common in +western Christendom, and especially in the German provinces. In apsed +churches, like Birkin in Yorkshire, the apse does not spring from points +directly east of the chancel arch. The arch is wide and lofty; behind it +is a nearly square rectangular space, which is divided from the apse by +another arch. At Birkin the apse has ribbed vaulting, which allows the +walls to be pierced freely for windows. At Copford in Essex, Old +Bewick, and other places, the roof is a half-dome without ribs: this +allows for the display of mural painting, but admits of less light.</p> + +<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_52" id="Page_52">[52]</a></span><br /> +<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_53" id="Page_53">[53]</a></span></p> +<div class="figcenter"> +<img src="images/i065.jpg" width="436" height="600" alt="fig9" title=""></img> +</div> +<p class="caption"> +Fig. 6. Birkin, Yorkshire: interior.</p> + +<p>§ 34. The most important feature in the apsidal plan is the provision of +the distinctly marked quire space between the nave and chancel. This +space also occurs in plans where the chancel is rectangular; but in such +cases it becomes the ground story of a tower. There are famous examples +of this at Iffley, near Oxford, and Studland in Dorset, where the +chancels are vaulted. Coln St Denis in Gloucestershire, where the tower +is of very wide area, and projects noticeably north and south of nave +and chancel; and Christon in Somerset, are further instances of the +plan. The tower between nave and chancel, without transepts, is seldom +found in an apsidal plan. It occurs at Newhaven in Sussex, where there +is a small apse. Here the plan is virtually that of some small parish +churches in Normandy, such as Yainville, near Jumièges. The majority of +such plans in England, however, end in a rectangular chancel. Precedent +for the plan is, as we have seen, to be found in Saxon churches. At St +Pancras, Canterbury, we have noticed the westward prolongation of the +apse: at Brixworth a definite presbytery or quire space was planned, on +a large scale, between apse and nave. In later Saxon churches, where the +chancel was rectangular,<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_54" id="Page_54">[54]</a></span> a tower, with or without transeptal chapels, +was sometimes built between nave and chancel; and here, although +externally the division was not always clearly marked, an internal quire +space was divided off from the nave by the western arch of the tower. +The aisleless plan, therefore, with a tower above the quire, and a +rectangular chancel, points to a development along old-fashioned lines, +even in churches in which, as at Iffley, the builders have acquired +great skill in expressing themselves in Norman terms. In certain +districts, as in Gloucestershire, this plan was a favourite one. Even in +the fourteenth century, Leckhampton church, near Cheltenham, was rebuilt +in faithful adherence to this tradition. Here the tower is narrower than +the small chancel, and the nave has a south aisle.</p> + +<div class="figcenter"> +<img src="images/i069.png" width="573" height="484" alt="fig10" title=""></img> +</div> +<p class="caption"> +Fig. 7. Two aisleless plans with central tower: (1) tower +between nave and chancel; (2) tower over crossing of transepts with nave +and chancel.</p> + +<p>§ 35. In the cases of Dover, Breamore, Stow, and Norton, we have watched +the gradual evolution of the cruciform plan with central tower. It must<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_55" id="Page_55">[55]</a></span> +be noted once more that to the cruciform plan the central tower built on +piers and arches is essential. It is possible, as in the Gloucestershire +churches of Almondsbury and Avening, to pierce the north and south walls +of a tower and add transeptal chapels: the plan will have a cruciform +appearance, but will still be only an elongated plan with lateral +additions. It is possible, in a church where there is no central tower +at all, to extend the side walls at right angles north and south, and +so form transepts; but here again the transepts have no structural +reference to a central point in the plan, but are mere widenings of the +nave or aisles. The thirteenth century aisleless churches of Potterne, +in Wiltshire, and Acton Burnell, in Shropshire, are both cruciform in +plan. The church at Potterne was planned throughout with reference to<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_56" id="Page_56">[56]</a></span> +the crossing of transepts, nave, and quire, above which its central +tower rose: the tower space is the central point of the whole. But, at +Acton Burnell, there is no central tower or space: the body of the +church consists of a long aisleless nave and an aisleless chancel +beyond; and the transeptal chapels are simply stuck on, as it were, to +the eastern part of either wall of the nave. This is at once noticeable +in elevation, when the chapels are seen to be mere excrescences, with +roofs lower than the nave. Moreover, where there is a true central +crossing, with a tower above, such as we find in almost all our +cathedrals, a transept on either side is necessary for the support of +the tower. The transepts need not be wholly symmetrical, although in +most cases they are; but they must be there. On the other hand, where +there is no central tower, and the crossing is merely apparent, symmetry +of treatment is quite unnecessary. While there are two transeptal +chapels of similar size at Acton Burnell, or at Achurch in +Northamptonshire, there are far more instances in which a less regular +treatment was adopted. Thus, at Childs Wickham in Gloucestershire, and +Montacute in Somerset, there is only one transeptal chapel, in each case +on the north side. At Corbridge in Northumberland, transeptal chapels, +extended outwards from the aisle walls, are of different lengths. At +Medbourne in Leicestershire,<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_57" id="Page_57">[57]</a></span> a long aisleless transeptal chapel was +built out from the north side of the nave in the thirteenth century. +Within the next fifty years a south chapel was built, but, instead of +copying the proportions of the northern chapel symmetrically, the +builders gave their new chapel a much greater width, and placed its +altars in an eastern aisle. The plan is thus accidentally cruciform. At +Acton Burnell and Achurch it is, no doubt, designedly cruciform; at +Montacute and Childs Wickham, imperfectly cruciform. But all three +varieties belong to one class, the longitudinal plan with transeptal +extensions. The structural feature which makes the truly cruciform plan, +the central tower upon arches and piers, is wanting. And this +distinction between churches planned from a centre, and churches whose +plan follows a longitudinal axis, although often overlooked, is +essential.</p> + +<div class="figcenter"> +<img src="images/i071.jpg" width="422" height="600" alt="fig11" title=""></img> +</div> +<p class="caption"> +Fig. 8. North Newbald, Yorkshire: tower arches, chancel +and S. transept, from N.W.</p> + +<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_58" id="Page_58">[58]</a></span></p> +<p>§ 36. A noble example of a Norman cruciform church, whose plan has +suffered little alteration, exists at North Newbald in the east Riding +of Yorkshire. At each angle of the crossing are masses of shafted piers, +connected by wide and lofty rounded arches. The nave, as is usual, is +the longest arm of the four, so that the plan is a Latin cross. It has +north and south doorways: there are also doorways in the end walls of +the transepts, placed in the western part of each wall. In the east +wall of each transept is an arch, now blocked up, the filling being +pierced with fifteenth century windows. These arches are the openings of +original apses, which contained the transept altars. The chancel, +probably always rectangular, was rebuilt in the fifteenth century. As a +corollary of the true cruciform plan, the four arms are all of equal +width. At Bampton-in-the-Bush, Oxon, where the plan of the church was +greatly altered in the thirteenth century by the addition of aisles, the +Norman plan was very similar to that of North Newbald. The cruciform<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_59" id="Page_59">[59]</a></span> +plan of Melbourne, Derbyshire, with its aisled nave, was probably +inspired more directly by continental examples. The aisleless chancel +was vaulted, and ended in an apse, which was squared in later times by +the addition of a rectangular piece east of its springing points. Out of +the east walls of the short transepts opened wide apses, the walls of +which joined the western ends of the walls of the chancel. Thus, +externally, the plan of the eastern part of the church was closely +allied to the plan with three apses which, in some of our larger +churches, was derived from Normandy. At Melbourne, however, there are +important variations from this plan. The chancel is short, there are no +quire aisles, and the transept apses were rounded externally. In the +larger churches of Normandy, the side apses were at the end of the quire +aisles, and were usually squared<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_60" id="Page_60">[60]</a></span> externally, while the apses projecting +from the east walls of the transepts, as at +Saint-Georges-de-Boscherville, were left rounded. At Newbald and Bampton +there seems to have been no attempt to give complete unity of design, as +at Melbourne, to the rectangular chancel and transeptal apses. In any +case, transeptal apses were the exception in the plans of our Norman +cruciform churches, although their convenience for holding altars is +obvious.</p> + +<p>§ 37. The cruciform plan, beautiful as it is, was never generally +adopted. It was inconvenient for purposes of public worship, as long as +the rounded arch remained fashionable. In our own day, even in churches +where the central tower is carried on high pointed arches, and the view +of the altar is practically unhindered, the chancel is cut off from the +nave by the crossing, and the acoustic problem, which in modern church +planning is so necessary a consideration, is almost insurmountable. In +the middle ages, this problem was not so acute; but it was undesirable +that the interior of the chancel should be nearly invisible from the +nave. At Newbald the tower arches are planned upon a liberal scale: at +Bampton, on the other hand, where the eastern tower arch is left, the +others having been rebuilt in the thirteenth century, it is very low. +The low tower arches at Burford, Oxon, and the narrow arches at St +Giles,<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_61" id="Page_61">[61]</a></span> Northampton, are examples of the way in which the supports of +the Norman central tower interfered with the internal convenience of +churches. It was not until much later that this difficulty was solved, +and then only in one or two cases, when the cruciform plan had become +exceptional. The plans of Bampton, Burford, and Witney, show how the +builders of west Oxfordshire experimented in cruciform planning. The +division between chancel and nave is felt much less at Witney than in +the other two churches; for the great thirteenth century tower and +spire, resting upon massive piers joined by pointed arches, throw a +considerable portion of their weight upon nave and transept arcades, +whose exceptional massiveness gives unity to the whole design. In the +fifteenth century, however, the rebuilders of the aisleless church of +Minster Lovell, between Witney and Burford, solved the problem by +removing the supports of their square central tower from the angles of +the crossing to points entirely within the church, and building arches +from the piers thus formed to the angles of the crossing. The +comparatively light piers, instead of hindering the view, allow of easy +access from the nave to the transepts, and there is hardly a point in +the body of the church from which seeing and hearing alike are in any +way impeded. With the earlier builders, however, the natural course was +to leave the piers where they were, and endeavour to lighten them as<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_62" id="Page_62">[62]</a></span> +far as possible; and, in aisled churches, the difficulties involved +often led to the abandonment of the complete cruciform plan.</p> + +<p>§ 38. The cruciform church gives occasion for a brief remark on one +aspect of medieval building which is often exaggerated. The revival of +interest in medieval architecture, in the early part of the nineteenth +century, was accompanied by an insistence on symbolism in the plan and +design of churches. A minute symbolism, which often was the fruit of +pious imagination, or was derived from the fancies of post-medieval +writers on ritual, was read into every detail of the medieval church +fabric. It is true that, as has been said, some builders worked +imaginatively, imitating in the round naves of a few churches the +rotunda of the Holy Sepulchre. Other instances of devout imitation might +be found, if we looked for them. But the imitation of a concrete model +is a different thing from translating abstract mysteries into the plan +and elevation of a building. And, although the ground plan with nave, +transepts, and chancel, certainly forms a cross; and, although, as time +went on, the resemblance to the chief symbol of the Christian faith was +no doubt recognised and valued, the plan itself, as we have shown, came +into being from entirely natural causes. Where the central tower was +introduced, the plan was dictated by structural necessity. Where there +was no central<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_63" id="Page_63">[63]</a></span> tower, transeptal chapels provided accommodation for +altars, for which the body of the church afforded no convenience. In +this and in other cases, medieval builders were impelled by practical +common sense and the requirements of the services of the church; and +symbolism, if it was a consideration at all, was purely secondary.</p> + + + +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_64" id="Page_64">[64]</a></span></p> +<h2><a name="CHAPTER_IV" id="CHAPTER_IV"></a>CHAPTER IV</h2> +<h3>THE AISLED PARISH CHURCH</h3> +<h3>I. <span class="smcap">Nave, Tower, and Porches</span></h3> + +<p>§ 39. The variations of the aisleless plan, which have been indicated, +are all of which it is capable. Naturally, after the twelfth century, +many aisleless churches were still built, and are common in country +districts. In their humblest form we find them in the small churches of +highland regions, the masonry of which is so rough that their date is +often a matter of doubt. Sometimes they have been rebuilt, with a +lengthened chancel, as at West Heslerton, near Scarborough. In many +instances, we have aisleless country churches rebuilt in the fourteenth +and fifteenth centuries, with western towers. This, uncommon in no part +of England, is especially common in Norfolk and Suffolk; and some of +these churches, like Ranworth in Norfolk, have much dignity and +spaciousness of proportion. In some late Gothic churches the structural +division between nave and chancel is left out, and the building has been +deliberately planned as a spacious aisleless rectangle,<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_65" id="Page_65">[65]</a></span> of which the +eastern bay is allotted to the chancel. This happens at Temple Balsall +in Warwickshire and the chapel of South Skirlaugh in Yorkshire. +Aisleless plans with one or two transeptal chapels are to be found all +through the middle ages: Acton Burnell represents a thoroughly +symmetrical employment of this type. On the other hand, aisleless +cruciform plans with central towers are by no means common after the +twelfth century. Potterne is a perfect development of this plan in the +thirteenth century. There is a complete aisleless cruciform plan at +Othery, near Bridgwater, where the tall central tower is quite out of +proportion to the humble church above which it rises, and has +necessitated substantial outer buttressing. Here probably the church was +rebuilt on earlier foundations, transepts being possibly added. In many +instances an aisleless cruciform church seems to have been rebuilt on +the lines of a complete Norman plan. This was with little doubt the case +at Acaster Malbis, near York, where the church is planned with direct +relation to the central space, but without a tower; and the foundations +of earlier walls can be traced all round the building, at the foot of +the walls built in the fourteenth century. The absence of the tower is +an anomaly, but is one method of solving the problem of the connexion +between nave and chancel in the cruciform plan.<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_66" id="Page_66">[66]</a></span></p> + +<p>§ 40. Thus, if here and there we can detect novelties which make for +improvements upon the aisleless plan, the plan itself is subject to no +general development upon its own unelastic lines. The real course of +development is to be traced in the gradual addition of aisles to the +church. Just as the basilica may have come into existence by the +addition of aisles to an aisleless building, so the parish church was +enlarged by the piercing of its walls for columns and arches, and the +incorporation of aisles with the main building. The usefulness of aisles +is at once apparent. They afford greater space for the distribution of +the congregation. The aisleless church may be inconveniently crowded +from wall to wall: on the other hand, where spaces are left between the +nave and side walls, the congregation will mass itself in the nave, but +the aisles will be left free until the nave is filled, and thus there +will be free access through the side doorways for as long a time as +possible. Aisles also afford a clear space for processions, and allow +them to turn inside the church at a certain point and without +difficulty. In addition to this, aisles form a convenient situation for +the smaller altars of a church, and, from an early date, were added with +this view.</p> + +<p>§ 41. A parish church usually contained more than one altar, even if +served by a single priest. In the small aisleless church of Patricio in +Breconshire,<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_67" id="Page_67">[67]</a></span> in addition to the altar in the chancel, there were two +smaller altars, which still remain in place, on either side of the +central doorway of the rood screen. Such altars were dedicated in honour +of various saints; and mass would be said at them on the festivals of +those saints and on other occasions. The various popular devotions which +came into being in the middle ages, led to the multiplication of special +altars and chapels. In cathedral and abbey churches, where there were +many priests, the provision of a number of altars was, from the first, a +necessity. To this is due the adoption, from the beginning, of the +aisled plan in our larger churches, where it is a direct inheritance +from the basilican plan. At Norwich and at Gloucester, for instance, the +apse was provided with an encircling aisle, which gave access to small +apsidal chapels. The transepts also had eastern chapels ending in apses. +At Durham each transept had an eastern aisle, containing a row of such +chapels; and the abnormal development of the transepts in thirteenth +century churches, as at York, Lincoln, and Salisbury, and the occasional +provision of an eastern transept, or of a great transverse eastern arm, +like the Nine Altars at Fountains and Durham, was made with a view to +the continually growing number of altars and daily masses. In Cistercian +abbeys, the churches of which were wholly devoted to the uses of the +monastery,<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_68" id="Page_68">[68]</a></span> the aisles of the nave were divided into chapels by +transverse walls. In the secular cathedral of Chichester, where the +aisles had to be left free, outer aisles, similarly divided, were made. +Great French cathedrals, like Amiens, not only have a complicated series +of chapels opening from the aisles of the apse, but have their naves +lined with chapels, which were formed by removing the outer walls of the +aisles to a level with the outer face of the buttresses. The ordinary +parish church had no need of these elaborate arrangements, although in +towns and in districts where money was plentiful and its possessors +recognised its true source, plans hardly less spacious than those of the +cathedral and monastery churches came into being. But it is obvious +that, in a church where there were no more than two or three altars, +space would be gained by removing them from the body of the church to +the end of the aisles. In some twelfth century churches there were +probably altars against the wall on either side of the narrow chancel +arch; and, in later days, as at Ranworth and Patricio, when the rood +screen filled the lower part of a broad arch, altars were placed against +the screen. In the first case, the chancel arch might have been widened; +in the second case, the sides of the screen would have been freed, by +the addition of aisles into which the altars could have been removed.<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_69" id="Page_69">[69]</a></span></p> + +<p>§ 42. The most common plan of the aisled church is formed by an aisled +nave with a long aisleless chancel, western tower, and south porch. So +common is this that it may be spoken of as the normal plan of the larger +English parish church. There must have been, we already have said, a +very large number of aisleless churches in England at the time of the +Conquest. Where Norman builders reconstructed parish churches, they +showed a distinct preference for the aisleless plan. But, in many +churches, built about or soon after the beginning of the twelfth +century, aisles were planned and executed. The walls of earlier churches +were entirely taken down, and new arcades built in their place, not +necessarily on the precise line of the old foundations. Aisled twelfth +century naves on a magnificent scale may be seen, for example, at +Melbourne in Derbyshire, and Sherburn-in-Elmet, between York and Leeds. +Both places were important episcopal residences: Melbourne belonged to +the bishops of Carlisle; the manor of Sherburn was the head of a barony +of the archbishops of York, who, all through the middle ages, did much +to promote architecture on their domains. Another twelfth century nave +of great magnificence is that of Norham-on-Tweed, which belonged to the +cathedral priory of Durham; and, although we must not assume that it was +built at the expense of the monastery, it doubtless owes its stately<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_70" id="Page_70">[70]</a></span> +proportions to the influence of the mother house. Less imposing in +elevation, but richer in refined detail, are such aisled naves as those +of Long Sutton in south Lincolnshire, and Walsoken in west Norfolk, +which belong to the later part of the twelfth century. The plans in each +case are very regular; and the new arcades were probably built, at any +rate in part, on older foundations. These naves reach the extent, +unusual in a parish church, of seven bays. The nave of Norham is of five +bays. Melbourne has five bays, but the plan of the church was as +exceptional at the west as at the east end. Western towers were planned, +but not completed, at the end of either aisle: this feature, probably +imitated from Southwell minster, was also contemplated at Bakewell in +Derbyshire. Between the towers was an extra western bay of the nave, +divided into two stories, the lower forming a vaulted return aisle, the +upper forming a gallery. There are only four bays at Sherburn, but here +the aisles were continued as far as the western face of the tower. The +tower is thus engaged within the aisles, and its vaulted ground floor +forms, like the western bay at Melbourne, a return to them.</p> + +<p>§ 43. But, when the question of adding aisles to a church arose, the +builders were met by the difficulty that the church was wanted +constantly for service. The taking down of the walls and the building of +new<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_71" id="Page_71">[71]</a></span> arcades interfered with this necessary use of the fabric. In our +own day a congregation, driven out by builders or restorers, can resort +to a school room or mission room. In the middle ages, these alternatives +were unknown; and the church was positively indispensable. With this in +view, the builders were obliged to add their aisles without touching +more of the main fabric than they could help. Usually, then, they took +the length of the existing aisleless building for the length of their +aisles. They then set out the aisles upon either side of the church, +building the outer walls, and dividing them into bays by external +buttresses. Then, opposite each buttress, they proceeded to break +through the walls of the church. Leaving a piece of the old wall to +serve as a footing for each column, they built up the columns in the +thickness of the wall, the masonry being gradually removed as each rose +in height. The arches were made in the same way, the wall being removed +by degrees until the two sides of each arch met at the key-stone. The +aisles were then roofed, and, finally, the masses of wall which still +remained beneath each arch were broken down, and the nave and aisles +thrown into one. The old masonry could be removed through the doorways +of the aisles; and sometimes one of the end walls of either aisle was +left unbuilt to the last, so that the masons could have free entrance +for new, and exit for old, material.<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_72" id="Page_72">[72]</a></span> The old walls of the nave, above +the columns and arches, were left untouched. In this way the upper parts +of the walls of several Saxon naves—more, probably, than we have +opportunity of discovering—remain to us. The north wall at Geddington +in Northamptonshire is the most striking instance.<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_73" id="Page_73">[73]</a></span> The practice was so +common as to be general. In hundreds of country churches the plinths on +which the columns of the nave rest are probably pieces of the foundation +of the older wall, refaced, or even left in the rough. Instances are +nearly as common in which the heads of the new arches have blocked +earlier windows; for, in the eleventh and twelfth centuries, when glass +was rare and expensive, and the openings were usually closed by latticed +shutters, the windows were set high in the wall. There is a remarkable +example of the retention of old work at Seamer, near Scarborough. To +this fine twelfth century aisleless church a north aisle was added in +the fifteenth century. The builders, possibly wishing to avoid expense, +employed the old method, which in those days of prosperity and general +rebuilding had fallen into disuse. In order not to interfere with the +older windows, they deliberately made their arches very low: the result +is that, from the interior of the aisle, one can see that the old wall +was almost entirely kept, the new columns being built up on the line of +the flat pilaster buttresses, which were left unaltered above the +capitals. Sometimes, the connexion between nave and aisles was made by +cutting arches at intervals in the wall, without building columns. The +north arcade at Billingham in Durham, and the thirteenth century arcades +at Tytherington in Gloucestershire consist of arches with large masses<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_74" id="Page_74">[74]</a></span> +of the earlier wall left between them. Such a method was economical, as +much less dressed stone was required; and we find it employed at Copford +in Essex, where good building stone was hard to get. Nevertheless, it +prevented the free circulation of light from the windows of the aisles, +and practically shut off the aisles from the church.</p> + +<div class="figcenter"> +<img src="images/i086.png" width="341" height="480" alt="fig12" title=""></img> +</div> +<p class="caption"> +Fig. 9. Gretton, Northants: arcade of nave showing +blocked window head.</p> + +<p>§ 44. There is one obvious consequence of the setting out of aisles on +either side of an existing building which, although an imperfection in +itself, contributes greatly to the variety of the parish church plan. +The builders cannot see both their aisles at one and the same time: the +older church comes in between. In fact, until the nave and aisles are +actually joined, at the close of the work, by the breaking down of the +walls beneath the arches, there can be no opportunity of appreciating +the full effect of the work. There is a famous instance at Beverley +minster of the mistakes to which the presence of the older building may +lead. The aisles of the nave were set out in the fourteenth century on +either side of an older and shorter nave. The south aisle was set out +first, the width of the eastern bay being measured from a new buttress +in the angle of nave and transept. On the north side there was a +thirteenth century buttress in this position: the builders, in setting +out their north aisle, overlooked the fact that this buttress was of +less projection than the newly built one on<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_75" id="Page_75">[75]</a></span> the other side, with the +result that their buttress measurements throughout varied on both sides, +while the standard of width between the buttresses, which had been +employed on the south side, was retained. Consequently, as the columns, +in a vaulted church, have to be built in line with the buttresses of the +corresponding aisle walls, the columns were not opposite one another, +and the discrepancy increased as the church advanced westward. When the +builders got clear of the intervening building, in the western bays of +the nave, they were able to rectify their mistake slightly; but the +effect is unpleasantly noticeable in the obliquity of the transverse +arches of the vaulting.</p> + +<p>§ 45. If errors like this could take place in churches where the width +of the bays of the aisles was calculated, they were much more likely to +take place where builders worked with less accurate ideas of +measurement. In an unvaulted church, where the pressure of the roof is +not a serious factor in the construction, the exact correspondence of +pier to buttress need not be taken into account; and there are many +churches in which the spacing of the aisles is quite independent of that +of the arcades. This happens at Melbourne, where the church was not +planned for stone vaulting. The builders seem to have thought that they +could get in six bays between the transept and the space planned for<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_76" id="Page_76">[76]</a></span> +one of the western towers; but found that, on the measurements they had +adopted, there was room only for five. They corrected their +miscalculation by broadening the division of the wall between the fourth +and fifth bay of the aisles. When they came to build the arcades, they +were conscious of their previous error, and planned them in five equal +bays irrespective of the plan of the aisles. In churches of the +fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, especially in districts like Norfolk +or south Lincolnshire, where much rebuilding was done, the regularity of +plan is often remarkable. The nave of the famous church of Heckington, +near Sleaford, was planned with an exact correspondence between aisles +and arcades: pier is opposite buttress, window opposite window. Islip +and Brampton Ash in Northamptonshire show an equal accuracy. But, while +such agreement is desirable, it is neither necessary nor general. And, +where the arcades are broken through earlier walls, the correspondence +is seldom very precise. The central line of the east walls of the +aisles, as set out first, will usually correspond to a line drawn across +the centre of the chancel arch: similarly, the line of the west walls +will be an extension of the west wall of the nave, or of a line drawn +across the tower arch. The aisles will be spaced into as many equal, or +nearly equal bays, as can be got in between the buttresses at either +end. When, however, the building of the<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_77" id="Page_77">[77]</a></span> arcade is taken in hand, the +responds or half-piers at either end will seldom be built directly +against the piers of the chancel arch, or against the west wall of the +nave; but projecting pieces of the old walls will be left as a backing +to them. It follows that, although the arcade may be divided into the +same number of bays as the aisles, the standard of spacing will be +different, and consequently, unless a very regular system of planning is +adopted, the piers will not be exactly opposite the solid portions of +the aisle walls, and consequently the centres of the arches will be out +of line with the centres of the windows. Again, it may be that, by +accident or design, the backing for the responds may project more on one +side of the nave than on the other, at either or both ends. The result +will be that the piers of one arcade will be out of line with those of +the arcade opposite. That discrepancies of this kind were sometimes the +result of intention cannot be denied; but there is generally some +practical reason to be found for the intention, and the discrepancies +themselves were a <i>pis aller</i> which the builders would have avoided, if +they could. That deliberate irregularity with which medieval masons are +sometimes credited is a fancy, which careful consideration of the +circumstances will dispel.</p> + +<p>§ 46. Hitherto we have spoken of the aisled nave as though both aisles +were planned at one and the same time. This, however, was by no means +always<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_78" id="Page_78">[78]</a></span> the case. At Gretton in Northamptonshire, the north aisle was +built soon after the beginning of the twelfth century: the south aisle +followed twenty or thirty years later. The north arcade at Northallerton +is of massive twelfth century work, with rounded arches: the south +arcade was added in the thirteenth century, and has slender columns with +pointed arches. In such cases, the north aisle may have been built +first, to avoid interference with the burial ground south of the church. +Very often only one aisle was added. The little church of Whitwell, +Rutland, has a south aisle, added in the fourteenth century, with a +chapel at its east end. No north aisle was built: but a drain in the +north wall of the nave shows that there was a third altar against the +north side of the rood screen. Usually, when one aisle was built long +after another, the spacing of the new arcade was made to correspond with +that of the old. If the old arcade had heavy twelfth century columns, +the new one, with its lighter columns, would have broader arches. But it +sometimes happens that the old spacing was disregarded, for very good +reasons. The north arcade of Middleton Tyas church, in north Yorkshire, +consists of six bays: the columns are heavy, the arches low and round +headed, and very narrow. The interior of the church must have been very +dark; and the builders of the south aisle, in the fourteenth century, +aimed at throwing more light upon it. They therefore planned<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_79" id="Page_79">[79]</a></span> their new +arcade, with broad pointed arches springing from octagonal columns, in +four instead of six bays, and so, from broad windows in the aisle, +introduced the necessary light. Something of the same kind happened at +Theddingworth in Leicestershire: the effect is, of course, one-sided, +but in both cases the light admitted enhances the merits of the earlier +arcade, which, until then, had to be taken on trust.</p> + +<p>§ 47. But there are further instances—and these, perhaps, are the most +instructive—where aisles were not merely built at two different +periods, but where the growth of one or both aisles was gradual. As an +instance of this, may be cited the beautiful church of Raunds in +Northamptonshire. Raunds seems to have been one of those cases in which +the Norman chancel and nave were of the same width, and possibly were +undivided by any chancel arch. In the thirteenth century the west tower +and spire were built, and a broad south aisle was added to the nave. +This aisle was of four bays, and the point at which it stopped probably +marked the dividing line between the nave and chancel. However, the +builders certainly intended to carry on the aisle eastward, as a south +chapel to the chancel, which they now rebuilt and lengthened. Early in +the fourteenth century, the south aisle was continued eastward, an +arcade of five bays being added to the four bays already existing. The +new bays were made rather narrower<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_80" id="Page_80">[80]</a></span> than those in the earlier part of +the arcade. A strange feature of the new work was the insertion of a +chancel arch, the south pier of which bisects one of the new arches. +Thus, while three bays and a half of the new arcade belong to the +chancel and quire, a bay and a half belong to the nave. The arch +dividing the south aisle from the chancel chapel springs from the pier +between the end of the old arcade and the inserted pier of the chancel +arch. At the same time, the outer wall of the south aisle seems to have +been practically rebuilt, although much of the older work was retained. +There may have been a thirteenth century north aisle as well. Whether +this was the case or no, a new north aisle and arcade were built<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_81" id="Page_81">[81]</a></span> during +the fourteenth century. The aisle was set out in seven bays, six of +which contained broad three-light windows, while a north doorway was +made in the third bay from the west end. The east wall was built on +foundations in a line with the chancel arch, while the west wall was in +a line with the tower arch and west wall of the south aisle. It is +obvious, therefore, that the planning of the new aisle was totally +different from that of the older aisle and chapel. However, when the +builders came to their arcade, instead of building it in seven bays, as +the new aisle demanded, they built it in five, setting their new columns +in a line with those on the opposite side. But while, on the south side, +there was an awkward half-bay between the end of the arcade and the +chancel arch, a solid piece of wall was left between the north pier of +the chancel arch and the eastern respond of the new arcade. A compromise +was thus effected between the aisles, and an appearance of regularity +was ensured. Directly, however, one begins to examine the plan of the +church, and to trace the transverse lines from window to window, and +buttress to buttress, it will be found that only in one place can a line +be drawn which will pass straight from the centre of one buttress to +that of the buttress opposite, and will pass through the centre of the +intervening columns on its way.</p> + +<div class="figcenter"> +<img src="images/i094.png" width="672" height="381" alt="fig13" title=""></img> +</div> +<p class="caption"> +Fig. 10. Plan of Raunds church, Northants.</p> + +<p>§ 48. It already has been shown that builders were very unwilling, in +making their additions to churches, to destroy old work altogether. At<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_82" id="Page_82">[82]</a></span> +times they displayed an extraordinary conservatism in their re-use of +old material in their new work. This was not invariable. In the splendid +churches of south Lincolnshire, during the fourteenth century, their aim +seems to have been complete rebuilding; and such examples as the +magnificent nave at Swaton, near Sleaford, or the neighbouring church of +Billingborough, show how old work must have been swept away by the +enthusiasm for lofty arcades, elaborately traceried windows, and walls +of dressed stone-work. On the other hand, half the charm of the hardly +less beautiful churches of Northamptonshire is the result of the clever +way in which the masons dove-tailed all the old stone-work which was +worth preserving into their new additions. Such churches as Tansor and +Oundle are, for that reason, unexcelled in interest, offering, as they +do, almost inexhaustible problems as to the development of their plan. +In all parts of England we find that builders, whatever else they +destroyed, carefully kept, as a general rule, the doorways, and +especially the south doorway, of the buildings which they enlarged. This +accounts for the large number of handsome Norman doorways which remain +in the walls of aisles obviously later than the doorways themselves. At +Birkin in Yorkshire, the south aisle was not built till the middle of +the<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_83" id="Page_83">[83]</a></span> fourteenth century, but the doorway was removed to its new position +from the wall of the aisleless church. One very exceptional case occurs +at Felton in Northumberland. Towards the beginning of the thirteenth +century, the west part of the south wall of the church was cut through, +a chapel was added, and, east of the chapel, a porch was built. Rather +more than fifty or sixty years later, it was determined to add a south +aisle the full length of the nave. The width of the aisle was taken from +that of the existing chapel and porch. To connect the chapel with the +new work, the side walls of the porch were cut through. The outer +doorway of the porch became the new south doorway, while the inner +doorway was kept unaltered, as an arch in the new arcade.</p> + +<p>§ 49. Features which have been touched upon in connexion with Raunds +bring us to two new features in the plan—the rebuilding of aisles and +the lengthening of churches westward. In most parish churches, aisles, +when they were added at first, were extremely narrow. The west wall of +Hallaton church in Leicestershire, for example, shows that, in the +fourteenth century, originally narrow aisles were heightened and +widened. The roof lines of the earlier aisles remain; they were clearly +under the same roof as the nave of the church, and had very low side +walls. This was not always the case. At Raunds the thirteenth century +south aisle was always broad and<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_84" id="Page_84">[84]</a></span> lofty, and must have had its own roof +from the first. And, as the principles of Gothic construction became +more familiar, and the larger churches began to exercise a more +wide-spread influence upon the parish church, aisles began to increase +in breadth and elevation. The small and narrow windows of churches of +the twelfth and early thirteenth centuries gave way to the broad +mullioned and traceried windows of fully developed Gothic work. For +these, with their advantage of increased light, more headway was +necessary. Aisle walls were consequently heightened or altogether +rebuilt. The acutely pointed roof of the nave could no longer be +continued downwards to cover these higher aisles. The aisle was +consequently covered with a lean-to roof, or with a separate gabled roof +of its own. A free increase in width was thus possible. The church of +Appleton-le-Street in Yorkshire has a short nave with north and south +aisles. The north aisle, added in the early part of the thirteenth +century, is narrow, and the roof of the nave was continued over it. The +south aisle, which was probably rebuilt a little before 1300, is broader +and has a separate lean-to roof. The wide east window of this aisle +could not have been introduced, had the south aisle been built to match +the scale of the north aisle.</p> + +<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_85" id="Page_85">[85]</a></span></p> +<div class="figcenter"> +<img src="images/i099.png" width="700" height="438" alt="fig14" title=""></img> +</div> +<p class="caption"> +Fig. 11. Plan of Harringworth church, Northants.</p> + +<p>§ 50. The introduction of more light, however, was not the only reason +for the rebuilding and +heightening of aisles. The east end of an +<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_86" id="Page_86">[86]</a></span> +aisle, as has been said, provided a convenient place for one of the side +altars of the church. This was the case even in the narrow aisles of the +twelfth and thirteenth century, many of which, like the north aisle of +Great Easton church in Leicestershire, provided with a drain, aumbry, or +a corbel for a statue, bear witness to the existence of a contemporary +altar. At Harringworth in Northamptonshire there had been an aisleless +church, to which a tower had been added at the end of the twelfth, and +aisles early in the thirteenth century. On 24 October 1305 Edward I +granted letters patent to William la Zouche, by which he had licence to +assign a certain amount of land to two chantry chaplains in the chapel +of All Saints. This may have been his private chapel, but was possibly +in the church. A little earlier than this, to judge by the character of +the architecture, a new north aisle had been built, with a new altar at +the east end. Very soon after the granting of the licence, it would +appear that the whole of the south arcade was taken down, and a new +south aisle and arcade built. The work was done in a very conservative +spirit, for the old thirteenth century porch and inner doorway were +rebuilt on the new site, and an old string-course was re-used +internally, beneath the new windows. The piscina and the three sedilia, +which belonged to the altar at the end of the aisle, remain in the +south wall, and there are corbels for statues on either side of the east +window. However, rebuilding did not stop here; for it seems that, during +the next few years, the north arcade was entirely rebuilt so as nearly<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_87" id="Page_87">[87]</a></span> +to match that on the south. Thus the work, beginning with the north +aisle, and extending over some thirty or forty years, finished on the +side on which it began. Numerous examples of a closely parallel kind, +fortified by documentary evidence, might be given.</p> + + + +<p>§ 51. The rebuilding of the south aisle, about 1313, at Newark, was the +prelude to an entire rebuilding of the church, which extended over many +<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_88" id="Page_88">[88]</a></span> +years. The builders began by setting out their aisles as usual, and by +the middle of the fourteenth century the south aisle was finished, and +the lower courses of the north aisle and the new aisled chancel were +built. However, in 1349, the Black Death interrupted the work. The north +aisle and chancel were not completed, and the new arcades of nave and +chancel were not built until the fifteenth century. In this case there +were certainly older, and almost certainly narrower aisles. The +rebuilding included aisles on a larger scale, and new internal arcades +whose spacing corresponded to the spacing of the aisle walls. All +systematic rebuilding, in the full development of Gothic art, began with +the planning of the aisles. The naves of Cirencester and Northleach +churches, rebuilt at the end of the middle ages, are examples of this +method. The arcades at<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_89" id="Page_89">[89]</a></span> Cirencester are known to have been built about +1514-5; but the aisles were obviously completed first, and their +remodelling may have been begun in the second quarter of the fifteenth +century. At Northleach the nave was finished about 1458; and there seems +to have been a break of some years between the building of the aisles +and the destruction of the older church which, no doubt, lay within +them. But it did not always happen that the full intention of the +builders was carried out. One of the most splendid schemes which we +possess for the enlargement of a parish church was the great enterprise +begun at Grantham soon after the middle of the thirteenth century. An +aisleless Norman church had been enlarged at the end of the twelfth +century by the addition of aisles to the nave, the connexion being +formed by arcades of rounded arches springing from very elegant +clustered columns. Above the arcades were low clerestories, lighted by +round-headed windows. About 1230, the neighbouring church of Newark was +taken in hand by masons, who built a new west tower up to a certain +height, and, as an afterthought, planned aisles to engage the tower +completely. As we have seen, the building of the aisles at Newark upon +their present scale did not begin till much later. The work of +rebuilding at Grantham was clearly inspired by that already begun at +Newark. A tower was planned on a site much to the west of the nave,<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_90" id="Page_90">[90]</a></span> and +was engaged within very broad aisles. The tower and north aisle were set +out first. The north aisle was divided into seven bays, with a large +traceried window in each bay, the western bay being much wider between +the buttresses than the rest, owing to the greater space taken up by the +tower and its piers internally. The remaining six bays were set out with +equal widths between the buttresses, the middle bay of the aisle being +covered by a porch. The eastern bay overlapped the western part of the +aisleless chancel, its western buttress being in a line with the +division between chancel and nave. The western bay of the south aisle +was set out about the same time, and there was, no doubt, an intention +of proceeding with the rest on the same lines as in the north aisle. +There can also be little doubt that the builders intended to take down +the old arcades, and build new arcades, with spacing corresponding to +that of their aisles, and to lengthen the chancel eastwards, while +bringing its western portion into the nave. The tower and north aisle +were built on the intended scale; and, when the tower had risen to a +certain height, the ambition of the builders was fired to add to it an +extra stage, hitherto uncontemplated, below the spire with which it was +to be crowned. This project of giving their church a tower and stone +spire, which remained, for many years, the loftiest in England, +evidently curtailed the full<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_91" id="Page_91">[91]</a></span> accomplishment of their earlier plan. The +columns of the old arcades were kept, and the tower was connected by +arcades of two bays with the angles of the west wall of the old church; +while an arch was pierced through the north wall of the chancel, to give +access to the east bay of the new aisle. The new arches were pointed: in +order to match them, the older round-headed arches were taken down, and +pointed arches built, which cut into and blocked the clerestory windows. +This change was made with great economy of material, the springing +stones of some of the old arches being kept to afford footing for the +new. When the south aisle was seriously begun, about 1300, similar +economy was shown. Four bays, in addition to the western bay, were +spaced out, without regard to the plan of the north aisle. The fourth +bay from the west was covered by a porch, smaller than that on the north +side; and the east wall of the aisle was probably built on a line with +the division between nave and chancel. Half a century later, the east +wall was taken down, and the south aisle was extended to the full length +of the chancel; but this later development was not contemplated by the +thirteenth century builders. These hesitations and changes, consequent +upon the expense entailed by the north aisle and by the alteration in +the elevation of the tower and spire, make Grantham second to no English +church in interest.<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_92" id="Page_92">[92]</a></span></p> + +<div class="figcenter"> +<img src="images/i102.png" width="542" height="600" alt="fig15" title=""></img> +</div> +<p class="caption"> +Fig. 12. Plans of Grantham church: (1) probable +arrangement about 1190; (2) at beginning of 14th century.</p> + +<p>§ 52. Grantham also provides us with a lengthened nave. The position of +its earlier west wall is clearly shown by the masses of masonry which +occur between the eastern bay of the new, and western bay of the old, +arcade on either side. The responds on the eastern side of these pieces +of wall are twelfth century work: on the west side, they belong to the +later part of the thirteenth century. Such lengthening was probably very +common in later Gothic times, and we may surmise that it took place in +many instances where arcades were entirely rebuilt, and no visible trace +of the process was left. However, there are many churches in which one +or more extra bays have been added to the nave, and the join of the old +and new work is marked as at Grantham. Whaplode church in south +Lincolnshire had its early twelfth century nave lengthened by three bays +about 1180. At Colsterworth, near Grantham, a western bay was added to +the nave about the same time, and an earlier north aisle lengthened. +Above the piece of wall which occurs between the older and newer work, +the quoins of the aisleless church remain entire. Usually, as at +Grantham, the lengthening of the nave was undertaken in connexion with a +new western tower, which was built up outside the church, and then +connected with it by one or two bays of arcading. Almost contemporary +with the tower and spire of Grantham are those of Tilney All Saints, +near<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_93" id="Page_93">[93]</a></span> Lynn. Here a single bay was added west of the late twelfth century +nave; and, as no new aisles were contemplated, the old arcades, with +their rounded arches, were left intact. Bubwith in Yorkshire, and +Caunton in Nottinghamshire, are later examples of churches where the +tower was built west of the end of an earlier nave, and a bay was built +to connect it with the older work. Sometimes, as at Gretton in +Northamptonshire, where the slope of a steep hill forbade extension far +to the west, a new tower was built only a few feet beyond the limit of +the old nave. In such a case, the side walls of the nave might be +carried solid westwards to meet the tower, or, as happened at Gretton, +narrow arches might be made between the tower and the west end of the +older wall. The beautiful tower and spire at Oundle were built just +outside the west wall of the thirteenth century nave; and were doubtless +intended to be followed by a complete rebuilding of the arcades—such a +rebuilding as took place at Lavenham in Suffolk, towards the end of the +fifteenth century. The idea, however, was abandoned, and the space +between the arcades and the tower filled in solid with rather rough +masonry.</p> + +<div class="figcenter"> +<img src="images/i107.png" width="400" height="398" alt="fig16" title=""></img> +</div> +<p class="caption"> +Fig. 13. Gretton, Northants: extension of 12th century +arcade to meet 15th century tower.</p> + +<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_94" id="Page_94">[94]</a></span></p> +<p>§ 53. The position of the western tower in the plan is normally at the +west end of the nave, with which it is connected by an arch, low at +first, but loftier as time goes on, until, in later Gothic churches, its +height frequently is nearly that of the whole nave. The remaining three +walls are usually external, and clear of the aisles. But sometimes, +owing to a freak of planning, or, more frequently, owing to the +conditions of the site, the tower is, as at Bibury, at the west end of +one of the aisles. At Gedling in Nottinghamshire the tower and spire are +at the end of the north aisle. The tower of St Michael's,<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_95" id="Page_95">[95]</a></span> Cambridge, is +at the west end of the south aisle: probably the western extension of +the church was prevented by the neighbourhood of the street, a +circumstance which often accounts for the irregularity of plan in some +town churches. At St Mary Redcliffe, Bristol, built on the edge of the +"red cliff" from which it takes its name, the tower and spire are at the +end of the north aisle: had they been planned in the usual place, a full +bay of the nave would have been sacrificed. The tower at Spalding was +planned, in the first instance, to stand against the south wall of the +west bay of the south aisle: subsequently a new south aisle was built +east of it. One of the most curious instances is that of St Mary's at +Leicester, where the tower, subsequently, as at Spalding, heightened by +a spire, was planned in the thirteenth century, outside a very narrow +south aisle. A tower at the west end of the nave would have encroached +upon the inner ward of the adjacent castle. The chancel of St Mary's was +used for collegiate services, and parochial accommodation was limited. +Towards the end of the thirteenth century, a very wide south aisle, a +parish church in itself, was built the full length of the nave, and +overlapping the chancel at the east end. The tower was left standing on +piers entirely within the west end of the new aisle. It may be added +that, where towers occur at the end of aisles, they seldom project +beyond the west wall of the nave,<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_96" id="Page_96">[96]</a></span> but open into the nave by an arch in +the north or south wall, as the case may be. Plans with two western +towers, as at Melbourne or St Margaret's at Lynn, are of very rare +occurrence; and, where they are found, the plan was probably designed on +more ambitious lines than those of the ordinary parish church.</p> + +<p>§ 54. The plan in which the western tower is engaged within the +aisles—that is, where the aisles are brought up flush with the west end +of the church—is not very common. Still, instances occur in all parts +of England. At Grantham, the plan is deliberate. It was imitated, as has +been said, from Newark, where the side walls of the tower had been +pierced with arches as an after-thought. Newark, in turn, may have taken +the design from Tickhill in south Yorkshire; and the design at Tickhill +may have been taken from the early and unpretentious example at +Sherburn-in-Elmet. Grantham probably suggested other similar designs, +such as Ewerby, near Sleaford. Several of our finest late Gothic +churches, like St Nicholas at Newcastle, have plans in which the aisles +are continued up to the west face of the tower. The method affords full +development to the aisles, and, as at Sileby in Leicestershire, has an +imposing interior effect. Outside, however, the aisles crowd the base of +the tower too much, and the fine effect of a lofty, free standing tower +is lost. Some<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_97" id="Page_97">[97]</a></span>times aisles were extended westwards, so as to engage an +earlier tower, as at Sleaford, where the low tower and spire are almost +overwhelmed by a pair of wide fourteenth century aisles. At Brigstock +and Winterton, late Saxon towers have been left without alteration +inside aisles which have been brought westward in the thirteenth and +fourteenth centuries. The nave of Holy Trinity, Cambridge, was much +widened in the fourteenth century, and a small tower and spire of +earlier date were brought entirely within the new nave, as happened in +the south aisle at St Mary's, Leicester, and were left without +sufficient abutment. As a consequence, the arches of the ground story +had to be strengthened about a century later with additional masonry. +Cases occur, as at Coln Rogers in Gloucestershire, where a tower has +been built within the west end of an earlier church. In most of such +instances, the churchyard boundary probably allowed of no further +building westward. The nearness of the churchyard boundary also seems to +have given cause to a peculiarity which may be seen at Wollaton, near +Nottingham, Dedham in Essex, and in a few other places, where the west +tower is in its usual position, but is pierced from north to south by an +archway. It is possible that this gave facility to processions, which +could thus pass round the church without leaving consecrated ground. The +tower of old All Saints, Cambridge, now destroyed, projected<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_98" id="Page_98">[98]</a></span> over the +public foot-way of the street, which passed through its ground story; +while St John's, Bristol, is built on the city wall, and the tower and +spire, which it shared with the adjoining church of St Lawrence, are +over the south gate of the city.</p> + +<p>§ 55. Sometimes, as at Oundle, the tower was rebuilt with a view to the +reconstruction of the whole church. But, as also at Oundle, the design +was often abandoned, or was altered. The magnificent tower of St +Michael's, Coventry, was built, between 1373 and 1394, at the west end +of an older nave: its spire was not begun till 1430. Whether the +rebuilding of the nave was contemplated when the tower was begun, it is +impossible to say. A new nave was actually begun in 1432, and finished +in 1450. A thoroughfare immediately south of the church prevented +extension on that side. The old south porch was retained in place as the +principal entrance, so that the line of the wall of the south aisle +follows closely that of the original church. The new south arcade was +set out, not in a line with the south-east buttress of the tower, but +somewhat to the north of it, so that the buttress is external; while, +for the width of the nave, a space approximating to twice the internal +breadth of the tower was taken. The tower is thus placed almost wholly +south of the central axis of the nave produced westward. Here, once +more, we may note the influence of site on the plan.<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_99" id="Page_99">[99]</a></span></p> + +<p>§ 56. The people's entrance to the church was ordinarily through a +porch, covering the north or south doorway of the nave. The south +doorway is usually covered by a porch. Frequently, as at Hallaton in +Leicestershire, or Henbury in Gloucestershire, there is a north as well +as a south porch. At Warmington, near Oundle, where there is a beautiful +doorway in the west tower, the vaulted south porch is the principal +entrance; but there is also a somewhat smaller north porch, also +vaulted. The chief porch at Grantham is on the north side; but there is +also a large porch on the south. At Newark, there is only a south porch, +on the side of the church next the market place. The south porch of St +Mary Redcliffe, at Bristol, is the ordinary entrance of the church; but +the chief entrance of the building, until the fifteenth century, was on +the north side, at the head of the abrupt slope towards the city. In the +fourteenth century, this entrance was covered by a large and lofty +octagonal porch, approached by a flight of steps. There is an octagonal +south porch at Chipping Norton, and a hexagonal south porch at Ludlow. +The magnificent porches of the fifteenth century, as at Burford in +Oxfordshire, Northleach in Gloucestershire, Worstead in Norfolk, +Walberswick in Suffolk, St Mary Magdalene's at Taunton, or Yatton in +Somerset, are usually on the south side of the church.</p> + +<p>§ 57. The positions of the porch and doorway in the wall of the aisle +vary. At St Nicholas, Newcastle, where the west tower is engaged within<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_100" id="Page_100">[100]</a></span> +the aisles, there is a porch in the western bay of each aisle. Usually, +however, the porch will be found in the second bay of one of the aisles, +counting from the west end. Sometimes, especially in larger churches, +the porch occurs a bay further east. At Warmington and at Grantham, the +two porches of either church are nearly opposite each other, and project +approximately from the centre of the walls of the aisles. Where the +porch has been pushed eastward in this way, the west end of the aisle +seems to have been occupied by one or more chapels. There are +indications of this at Warmington; while, in the neighbouring church of +Tansor, where the porch is in the usual place, but the aisle has been +lengthened somewhat to the west, there was certainly an altar west, as +well as east, of the porch. There was at least one chantry chapel west +of the south porch at Grantham. The south porch at Ludlow covers the +wall of the third bay of the aisle from the west: here there were two +chapels in the western part of the aisle. There was another chapel at +the west end of the north aisle. It can hardly be proved that the +position of porches was actually planned with this use of the aisles in +view; but there can be no doubt that advantage was frequently taken of +the space thus added to the aisle.</p> + + + +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_101" id="Page_101">[101]</a></span></p> +<h2><a name="CHAPTER_V" id="CHAPTER_V"></a>CHAPTER V</h2> +<h3>THE AISLED PARISH CHURCH</h3> +<h3>II. <span class="smcap">Transepts and Chancel</span></h3> + + +<p>§ 58. The aisled nave, with its usual appendages of porch and tower, has +now been described at length. Before we proceed to the development of +the chancel, the transepts or transeptal chapels of the parish church +invite discussion. The distinction between true transepts, in churches +with central towers, and the transeptal chapels which are nothing more +than northern and southern extensions of the aisles, has been made +already; and it has been seen that the cruciform plan with central tower +reached a very full state of perfection during the twelfth century. +Further dignity was given to some cruciform churches by the addition of +aisles to the transepts. St Mary Redcliffe at Bristol, the plan of which +is that of a large collegiate or cathedral rather than a parish church, +has transepts with eastern and western aisles: there is no central +tower, but the transepts form a definite cross-arm to the church, which +was designed with regard to the<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_102" id="Page_102">[102]</a></span> central point formed by the crossing of +a longitudinal and a transverse axis. There are few churches in England +as beautiful as that of Melton Mowbray, with its aisled transepts and +tower above the crossing: had the chancel only been planned on a larger +scale and with aisles, the unrivalled beauty and dignity of St Mary +Redcliffe might have been approached here. The cruciform plan with +central tower is the most noble of all church plans, when carried out by +builders with large ideas. Churches like Ludlow, Nantwich, Holy Trinity +and St John's at Coventry, St Mary's at Beverley, excite an admiration +which is the natural result of the fact that the plan, instead of +straggling in the ordinary way from east to west, is brought to a focus +beneath the central tower.</p> + +<div class="figcenter"> +<img src="images/i117.png" width="667" height="376" alt="fig17" title=""></img> +</div> +<p class="caption"> +Fig. 14. Plan of 13th century church: west tower, south +porch, unequal transeptal chapels.</p> + +<p>§ 59. Apart, however, from the tower above the crossing, the transept +had a value of its own. It gave additional room for the side altars of +the church. The transeptal chapels at Worth allowed of greater width for +the chancel arch: the altars, which naturally would have stood against +the wall on either side of the chancel arch, could be placed within +these excrescences from the north and south walls of the church, and the +central space was thus left clear. This method of extension of the +church by adding north and south chapels to the nave was pursued +throughout the middle ages. The thirteenth century plan of Acton Burnell +is virtually identical with the<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_103" id="Page_103">[103]</a></span> tenth or eleventh century plan of +Worth. In aisled churches, such transeptal additions are simply +outgrowths of the aisle walls, and were not necessarily planned with any +regard to the spacing of the arcades of the nave. They may, of course, +be placed symmetrically at the east end of the aisles, the width of each +chapel corresponding to the width of the arch of the arcade which is +opposite its opening. Thus Exton church in Rutland, rebuilt about the +beginning of the thirteenth century, has north and south transeptal +chapels whose width is that of the eastern bay of each arcade. A +transverse arch was thrown across each aisle at its junction with the +adjacent chapel. Here<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_104" id="Page_104">[104]</a></span> the chapels form quasi-transepts in perfect union +with the design of nave and aisles. Symmetrical plans in which it is +clear at a glance that the transeptal chapels are developments of the +aisles, and have no necessary relation to the nave, are those of +Kegworth in Leicestershire, rebuilt in the fourteenth century, and +Aylsham, Cawston, and Sall in Norfolk, which belong to the fifteenth +century. But even more obvious than these are the plans in which +transeptal chapels have been thrown out at different periods, or even at +one and the same period, without the least regard to symmetry. A small +aisleless nave at Stretton in Rutland received a north aisle about the +beginning of the thirteenth century. Soon after, the eastern part of the +side walls was taken down, and chapels built out to north and south. The +width of the south chapel was determined by that of the old chancel +arch, which was rebuilt between the chapel and the nave, there being no +aisle on that side. The north chapel, on the other hand, was formed +simply by returning the wall of the aisle northward, and throwing a +transverse arch across the aisle from the wall above the arcade. Its +width corresponds roughly with that of the south chapel, but has no +correspondence with that of the adjacent bay of the arcade. Examples of +this form of growth of plan, dictated by convenience and the necessity +of the moment, are common in every part of England.<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_105" id="Page_105">[105]</a></span></p> + +<p>§ 60. It is quite clear that the transeptal chapel, being nothing more +than an excrescence from the wall of a nave or aisle, is a feature which +may be treated with some freedom. Its width and length are dependent +upon the convenience and will of the builders. The north chapel of the +aisleless church of Clapton-in-Gordano, Somerset, is entered by an arch +in the east part of the north wall: the chapel itself, however, extends +some distance westward, so that its longer axis is parallel to the +longer axis of the nave. The south chapel, again, at Lowick in +Northamptonshire has its longer axis from east to west, although its +roof is at right angles to that of the adjacent aisle. Externally, its +transeptal character is apparent; internally, it has the appearance of +an additional south aisle. A chantry was founded in this chapel in 1498. +Very often, where special chantry chapels were built, they took the +position of transeptal chapels. Cases in point are the late Gothic +chantry chapels in All Saints and St Lawrence's at Evesham. Such chapels +may obviously be lengthened westward, like the chapel at +Clapton-in-Gordano, so that they become additional aisles. The Milcombe +chapel at Bloxham in Oxfordshire, the Greenway aisle at Tiverton in +Devonshire, and the side chapels of the north and south aisles at St +Andrew's, Plymouth, and Plympton St Mary are the logical outcome of the +habit of adding transeptal chapels to the plan. Two<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_106" id="Page_106">[106]</a></span> transeptal chapels +of the ordinary type are found in other Devonshire churches rebuilt in +the fifteenth century, as at East Portlemouth: the Kirkham chapel at +Paignton, famous for its carved stone-work, is transeptal. From this it +is but a step to the chapels at Plymouth and Plympton, with their longer +axes from east to west: while the aisle at Tiverton (1517) develops +naturally, in the churches of Cullompton (1526) and Ottery St Mary +(before 1530), into a vaulted aisle the full length of the nave. At +Bloxham, on the other hand, the Milcombe chapel, which extends from the +east wall of the south aisle as far as the porch, was probably grafted +upon an earlier and smaller transeptal chapel. A comparison with the +neighbouring church of Adderbury shows that the fabric of the transeptal +chapels at Adderbury is largely of the twelfth century. The north chapel +at Bloxham is, in its present state, much later; but the similarity of +plan to that of Adderbury leads to the justifiable conclusion that it +was rebuilt on old foundations, and that there was a similar south +chapel. About 1290 the aisles at Bloxham were widened, and a beautiful +arcade of two bays was built at the east end of the north aisle, between +it and the north chapel. Within the next few years, the aisles at +Adderbury were also widened, and arcades similar to that at Bloxham, +though coarser in detail, were built at the east end of either aisle. +The projection of the<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_107" id="Page_107">[107]</a></span> transeptal chapels from the side walls was now +very slight; and, in the fifteenth century, the projection of the south +chapel at Bloxham was absorbed by the building of the Milcombe chapel, +between which and the south aisle an arcade of two bays was made. There +is more intrinsic interest in this gradual development of plan than in +the Devonshire plans we have noticed, which are all due to fifteenth +century rebuildings; and the mutual influence exercised throughout the +middle ages by two neighbouring churches like Bloxham and Adderbury +gives us an insight into the progress of local art which the energy of +fifteenth century masons in certain districts has somewhat obscured. +From the arrangement of the south transept at Adderbury, there appear to +have been two altars in each of the chapels.</p> + +<p>§ 61. Transeptal chapels occasionally appear in unusual positions. For +example, at Branscombe in south Devon, there is a tower between nave and +chancel. There are, however, no transepts; but transeptal chapels are +built out from the walls of the aisleless nave, west of the tower. These +chapels appear to be enlargements of earlier transeptal chapels; while +the tower seems to have been built over the chancel of the earlier +church. Heckington church in south Lincolnshire was rebuilt in the +fourteenth century. The nave has aisles with transeptal chapels, very +regular and symmetrical in plan, but<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_108" id="Page_108">[108]</a></span> is continued beyond the opening of +the transeptal projections by an aisleless bay, east of which comes the +chancel arch. At Bottesford in north Lincolnshire, where much rebuilding +was done in the thirteenth century, the transeptal chapels open from the +bay east of the chancel arch. In the case of Heckington, the earlier +church was probably cruciform: when the rebuilding came to pass, the +ground plan of the western portion of the church was kept, while the +chancel was built on an extended plan, and the site of the western part +of the old chancel thrown into the nave. The case of Bottesford is +probably accounted for in the opposite way: the site was not enlarged +eastwards, but the chancel was lengthened by the absorption of the +eastern part of the old nave.</p> + +<p>§ 62. There are a number of cases in which transeptal chapels have been +kept from an earlier cruciform plan, in which they may have formed true +transepts. The fine church of Oundle, whose western tower and spire +already have been mentioned as built about 1400, has very fully +developed transeptal chapels. The nave and aisles, and the greater part +of the chapels, are, in their present state, work of the thirteenth +century; but the eastern bay of the present nave was entirely remodelled +about 1350, when a clerestory was added. This bay had evidently been +designed to carry a central tower: the nave arcades stop west of it, and +there is a thick piece of wall between them<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_109" id="Page_109">[109]</a></span> and the arches opening from +it into the chapels. These arches and the chancel arch were entirely +reconstructed at the time just mentioned. The western arch, however, was +removed, and an original crossing was thus converted into a bay of the +nave. Whether there ever was a central tower is, of course, an uncertain +point; but the building of a west tower on a new site not many years +after this reconstruction is a fact which makes the previous existence +of a central tower probable. The removal of a central tower would be due +to one of two causes. Either its supports were weak, or it blocked up +the space between nave and chancel too much. The central tower of +Petersfield in Hampshire was taken down; but its east wall still remains +between nave and chancel. However, if there are cases in which a central +tower was removed, and a west tower built, there are probably more in +which a central tower was planned, and then abandoned. Campsall church, +near Doncaster, has unmistakable signs of a projected cruciform plan +with a central tower, and has a regular crossing with transepts. But it +is probable that the builders changed their minds before the nave was +finished; and, although they doubtless left the arches, which were +intended to bear their tower, for a later generation to remove and +rebuild, they went westward and built a tower at the other end of the +nave. This tower was finished towards the end of the third quarter of<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_110" id="Page_110">[110]</a></span> +the twelfth century. The builders of Newark church, who were peculiarly +susceptible to after-thoughts, apparently planned a central tower in the +later part of the twelfth century. It is difficult to explain otherwise +the slender clusters of shafts which project into the nave from the +first pier west of the chancel arch on either side. Such piers were +hardly capable of bearing the weight of a tower; and so the builders +must have thought. Early in the thirteenth century, they began the +present west tower, the first stage of a rebuilding which, with long +intervals, continued into the sixteenth century. The final step by which +the church reached its present plan was the addition of a transeptal +chapel to either aisle, opposite the site which, more than three +centuries before, had been chosen for the piers of the abandoned central +tower.</p> + +<p>§ 63. Even in strictly cruciform churches, transepts were sometimes +treated with a freedom which was more appropriate to the transeptal<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_111" id="Page_111">[111]</a></span> +chapel. It is not unusual to find one transept longer than the other, as +at Felmersham in Bedfordshire. Here, however, the transepts are not only +of different lengths, but the south transept is loftier, as well as +shorter, than the north, which is little more than a chapel-like +excrescence from the tower. At Witney in Oxfordshire both transepts are +of great projection, but the north transept is slightly longer than that +on the south.<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_112" id="Page_112">[112]</a></span>Both have considerable traces of thirteenth century +work; but, in the fourteenth century, the north transept was lengthened +by an addition divided into two stories, the upper of which was a +chapel, while the lower was probably a vaulted bone-hole. The south +transept was also lengthened; and a chapel was built, projecting from +its east wall near the south end. Both transepts have western aisles: +that of the north transept, which stops short of the two-storied +extension, contained an altar near the north end. There are traces of at +least three other altars in the transepts, so that there was excellent +reason for their somewhat unusual projection. At St Mary's, Beverley, an +eastern aisle was added to the south transept in the fifteenth century, +to provide more room for altars. The north transept already had a large +chapel of two stages upon its eastern side, so that the plan was treated +unsymmetrically. The tower of St Mary's at Stafford rests on heavy piers +and narrow arches, and is flanked by north and south transepts. However, +while the south transept, of good thirteenth century work, is rather +small and short, the north transept was rebuilt with great magnificence +in the fourteenth century, and its internal effect is that of a large +side chapel rather than a transept. Aisled transepts are never common, +even in large churches. Instances in which a transeptal chapel is aisled +are even less common. The<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_113" id="Page_113">[113]</a></span> aisled south chapel at Medbourne in +Leicestershire has been mentioned in an earlier chapter. Oakham and +Langham churches in Rutland have large transeptal chapels with western +aisles: the north chapel at Langham was removed in the fifteenth +century, when the aisles of the nave were widened.</p> + +<div class="figcenter"> +<img src="images/i125.jpg" width="450" height="600" alt="fig18" title=""></img> +</div> +<p class="caption"> +Fig. 15. St Mary's, Beverley: arcades of quire and S. +transept, from S.W.</p> + +<p>§ 64. Reference has also been made to those plans in which the side +walls of a tower between chancel and nave have been pierced with arches, +and quasi-transepts have been constructed. This is very noticeable at +Almondsbury in Gloucestershire, where the transeptal chapels, turned at +a later date into burial-places for two local families, are very large +and roomy. The cross-plan of Burford church in Oxfordshire was formed in +this way, early in the thirteenth century. Plans like this, in which the +chapels grow out of the central space, instead of being planned from the +first in relation to it, are imperfectly cruciform; but are highly +characteristic of the irregular methods of development pursued by the +builders of medieval parish churches.</p> + +<p>§ 65. Towers above transeptal chapels are not uncommon. The two +transeptal towers at Ottery St Mary in Devon were doubtless copied from +the arrangement at Exeter cathedral: there was an altar against the east +wall of each chapel. The tower at Coln St Aldwyn, Gloucestershire, rises +above a south chapel projecting from an aisleless nave. This<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_114" id="Page_114">[114]</a></span> addition +was made in the fifteenth century. At Duddington in Northamptonshire the +ground floor of the tower virtually forms, in its present state, an +eastward extension of the south aisle parallel to the western part of +the chancel: the original plan was probably similar to the present plan +of Coln St Aldwyn. The noble church of Whaplode had transeptal chapels +projecting from the east end of either aisle: the thirteenth century +tower is above the south chapel. At Clymping in Sussex the arrangement +is very peculiar. The church, which is almost entirely of the thirteenth +century, has north and south transeptal chapels, and only a south aisle +to the nave. The tower, which is at the end of the south chapel, is +earlier than the rest of the building, but is clearly in its original +position.</p> + +<p>§ 66. The early progress of Gothic art in parish churches was marked by +a general lengthening of chancels, analogous to that elongation of the +eastern arm which is characteristic of cathedrals and monastic churches. +This may be seen very clearly at Iffley, near Oxford, and Avening in +Gloucestershire, where vaulted chancels of the twelfth century were +lengthened in the thirteenth century by an eastern bay. Sometimes, as at +St Mary's, Shrewsbury, where successive generations of builders were +very faithful to the remains of earlier work, the old sedilia of a +twelfth century chancel have been left in place.<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_115" id="Page_115">[115]</a></span> But, as a rule, the +enlargement of the chancel implied an entire reconstruction, or the +entire transformation of old work by the insertion of new windows or +buttresses. From the end of the twelfth century onwards, the normal +chancel of the parish church has a length which is from a half to +two-thirds of the length of the nave, the nave being slightly broader +than the chancel. This is the case with most of those Norfolk churches, +which may be regarded as the ideal examples of parish church planning. +Room was in this way secured both for the altar and the quire stalls, +for which the ordinary rectangular chancel offered a very restricted +space.</p> + +<p>§ 67. Sometimes a new chancel encroached upon the nave. This happened at +Skipwith in Yorkshire, where the church underwent some alteration about +the middle of the fourteenth century. The new chancel was made of the +same width as the nave; and apparently the old chancel arch was entirely +removed, and its site, with the part of the nave immediately west of it, +made into an extra bay of the chancel. No new chancel arch was built. +One of the most curious and perplexing instances, in which additional +westward room has been given to the chancel, and there is no structural +division between chancel and nave, is at Tansor in Northants. The +perplexity which arises here is due to the plentiful re-use of old work +by the builders, the presence of<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_116" id="Page_116">[116]</a></span> which in unexpected places makes the +history of the building a nearly insoluble puzzle. The church reached +its present length about 1140, when probably the Saxon nave was left as +the west part of a church, which was now of the same width the whole way +through, and had no chancel arch. Some forty years later, narrow aisles +of three bays were added to the nave; and, about the same time, a +transeptal chapel may have been thrown out from the south wall, +immediately east of the south aisle. As the church stands on southward +sloping ground, there seems to have been no room for another chapel on +the north side. In the thirteenth century, the aisles were lengthened +eastwards, to flank the western part of the chancel. The builders moved +back the eastern responds of the old arcades to the points from which +the lengthened arcades were to start. They set themselves, however, a +difficult problem when they reserved a space at the end of the north +aisle for a sacristy, and set the respond on the west side of this +narrow bay. Their north aisle thus consisted of five bays and a very +narrow eastern bay for the sacristy. On the south side no space +corresponding to the sacristy was marked out, although the eastern +respond was placed in a line with the east side of the opening of the +sacristy. The number of bays on the south side had to be five, as there +was no room for six. The result is that the pillars of the arcades, +with<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_117" id="Page_117">[117]</a></span> the exception of those of the two bays furthest west, which were +left unaltered, are not opposite each other. In the meantime, the old +transeptal chapel was left standing between a south aisle and a short +south chapel of the chancel. About 1300, the aisle and chapel seem to +have been widened to the full length of the transeptal chapel, and thus +a broad south aisle was formed. In this plan, the chancel proper +projects for some distance east of the aisles; but, for ritual purposes, +the eastern part of the nave, corresponding to the eastern bay of the +north aisle and the sacristy bay beyond, forms, and has formed since the +twelfth century, a western extension of the chancel.</p> + +<p>§ 68. The addition of aisles to chancels was an even more gradual +process than the addition of aisles to naves; and, as a rule, the aisles +were at first mere chapels. Chancel aisles or chapels of twelfth century +date are not very common in smaller churches. But a plan like that at +Melbourne, where the apsidal chapels east of the transepts flank the +chancel very closely, leads naturally to the provision of chapels +communicating directly with the chancel. The logical consequence of such +a plan is seen at Oundle, at the close of the twelfth century, where +rectangular chapels were built along the north and south walls of the +western part of the chancel. The walls were pierced with broad, low +arches, and arches were built between the chapels and the transepts. The +chapels,<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_118" id="Page_118">[118]</a></span> in this instance, are at the back of the quire stalls; and a +long projecting piece of aisleless chancel was left beyond them, to +which, in the fifteenth century, a large northern vestry was added. This +plan, where both chancel chapels were added at much the same time and on +the same scale, is symmetrical. But, as a rule, chancel chapels were +built just when they were needed. At Arksey, near Doncaster, where, as +at St Mary's, Shrewsbury, the walls of late twelfth century transepts +have been largely preserved inside the church in spite of many +alterations, the chancel is a long aisleless twelfth century building +east of a central tower. Towards the end of the thirteenth century, the +north chancel wall was pierced, and a narrow chapel built, which was one +bay shorter than the chancel itself. In the fourteenth and fifteenth +centuries the nave was enlarged, and the south aisle was widened to the +full length of the south transept. A south chapel was added to the +chancel: its outer wall was continued from the south wall of the +transept, and carried eastwards for a little distance beyond the east +wall of the chancel. Thus chancel, south chapel, and north chapel, are +all of three different lengths and breadths, the south chapel being the +longest and widest. When the south chapel was built, a considerable +portion of the old chancel wall was left untouched on its north side. It +is obvious that the methods of building employed<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_119" id="Page_119">[119]</a></span> in such additions were +those which have been described in connexion with the addition of aisles +to a nave. It is no uncommon thing to enter, as at Tamworth, a chancel +aisle or chantry chapel, and find substantial remains of the old outer +wall of the chancel, which has been pierced with one or more arches of +communication.</p> + +<p>§ 69. As the relative dates and proportions of chancel chapels vary so +greatly, it is obvious that in many cases only one will be found. We +frequently meet with churches which have only one aisle to the nave; but +these are for the most part small buildings, and one aisle usually, in +larger buildings, presupposes another, although symmetry of proportion +need not be expected. However, many important churches have one chancel +chapel, and no more. Raunds in Northamptonshire, and Leverington in +Cambridgeshire, have south, but not north, chapels. Stanion in +Northamptonshire, and Hullavington in Wiltshire, have north, but not +south chapels. In both these last cases, the chapels are simply +continuations of the aisles, without a break or intermediate arch; and +the chapel at Stanion is neither more nor less than a second chancel. As +the dedication of Stanion church is to St Peter and St Paul, it is not +unlikely that the prominence given to the north chapel may be due to the +provision of altars for both saints. The same consideration may have +influenced the building of<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_120" id="Page_120">[120]</a></span> the church at Wisbech, which is also +dedicated to St Peter and St Paul. Here, the twelfth century chancel had +a south chapel; but when, at the end of the thirteenth century, the +chancel was lengthened, the south chapel was also enlarged into what is +practically a second chancel. Not only this, but the south aisle of the +church was rebuilt on the scale of a second nave, a second south aisle +was built out beyond it, and the whole church, which afterwards was +enlarged towards the north and otherwise altered, was more than doubled +in size.</p> + +<p>§ 70. Where chantry chapels are attached to one side or other of a +chancel, their variations in size and plan are almost infinite. In the +smallest examples, they are mere projections from the wall of the +chancel, and little more than tomb recesses, such as the Cresacre chapel +at Barnburgh, near Rotherham, or the Booth chapel on the south side of +the chancel at Sawley in Derbyshire. The little north chapel of the +chancel at Clapton-in-Gordano in Somerset may have served as a vestry. +At Brancepeth, near Durham, where there is a long chancel and an aisled +nave with transeptal chapels, a south chantry chapel adjoins the east +side of the south transeptal chapel, while a north chantry chapel forms +an independent excrescence from the north wall, and is shut off from the +chancel by a doorway. Brigstock in Northamptonshire has a very large +north chancel chapel,<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_121" id="Page_121">[121]</a></span> which is virtually the eastern portion of a +widened aisle: the south chapel, on the other hand, is of much later +date, and is so small that there must have been room in it for an altar +and little more. These smaller chantry chapels, like the beautiful south +chapel at Aldwinkle All Saints, Northants, have often great +architectural beauty of their own, and give great variety to the plan of +the church. But chancel chapels are often larger and more important, +like the fourteenth century south chapel at Leverton, near Boston, which +is practically a separate building, separated from the chancel by a wall +without an arcade, or like the very spacious north chapel of the priory +church at Brecon. The south chapel of the chancel at Berkeley in +Gloucestershire, and the Clopton chapel at Long Melford in Suffolk, are +shut off from the adjacent parts of the church, and belong to that class +of chantry chapel of which our cathedrals furnish many examples. In this +case, the chapel is a small separate building, attached to the fabric of +the church, but hardly forming an integral part of it.</p> + +<p>§ 71. One very important consequence of the addition of aisles and +chantry chapels to chancels, at any rate on a large scale, is seen where +they are applied to plans originally cruciform. We have already seen +that at St Mary's, Shrewsbury, and at Arksey, although much of the +fabric of the old transepts was left, broad chancel chapels tended to +obliterate<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_122" id="Page_122">[122]</a></span> the cruciform character of the building. The transepts at +Spalding almost escape notice, owing to the double aisle on the south +side of the nave, the aisle and north chapel on the opposite side, and +the large chapel east of the south transept. Moreover, when, in the +fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, aisles were rebuilt or widened, +there was always, as at Tansor, a tendency to decide the width of the +aisle by the length of an existing transept or transeptal chapel, and to +build the new outer wall flush with its gable wall. In this case, the +aisle would be planned to communicate with the transept, and the west +wall of the transept would have to be cut through. Where, as at Arksey, +there was a central tower, the old transept was structurally necessary, +and only as much of its masonry would be removed as was absolutely +necessary. But we have seen that there were cases in which it was +thought advisable to take down the central tower altogether, and build a +new one at the west end, in which case the transepts were of no +structural use; and there were far more cases in which the transeptal +excrescences were merely projecting chapels. In these instances, the +transept was felt to intervene awkwardly between the aisles of nave and +chancel. Accordingly, its side walls and gabled roof were taken down, +its end wall was remodelled, and it was placed under one roof with the +adjacent aisles, in which it became merged.<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_123" id="Page_123">[123]</a></span> The cruciform plan was thus +lost in certain churches, becoming absorbed in the ordinary elongated +plan, with aisles to nave and chancel. Tamworth church in Staffordshire, +and Marshfield in Gloucestershire, had twelfth century central towers. +These were removed or destroyed, at Tamworth in the fourteenth, at +Marshfield in the fifteenth century, and the aisles and chancel chapels +were widened to the original length, approximately, of the transepts. +The north and south arches of the crossing, however, remain in a blocked +condition, and tell the tale of what has happened. Wakefield cathedral +is another instance of a large parish church whose aisleless cruciform +plan has gradually disappeared within the aisles, until the plan is—or +was till the additions of a few years ago—an aisled rectangle, the +origin of which is certainly not obvious at first sight. The +transformations here described must clearly be understood not to apply +to cruciform churches generally, but merely to churches which, with an +originally cruciform plan, needed enlargement. Many handsome late Gothic +buildings, like the churches of Rotherham and Chesterfield, or St Mary's +at Nottingham, are regular cruciform churches with central towers; and +sometimes, as at Newark, transeptal chapels were the latest of all +additions to a church. But, where the transeptal chapel cramped +necessary space, it had to disappear. At St Margaret's, Leicester, the +arches into the<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_124" id="Page_124">[124]</a></span> transeptal chapels remain; but the chapels themselves +have entirely disappeared, and the arches merely form part of the arcade +between the nave and its broad aisles.</p> + +<p>§ 72. The aim of restorers and rebuilders from the middle of the +fourteenth century onwards was to convert the church into a rectangle +with aisles. As we have seen, the chancel was constantly, in late Gothic +churches, an aisleless projection from the main fabric; but, where it +was aisled, the old haphazard methods were often abandoned, and the +aisles were made of approximately equal size. The old distinction +between nave and chancel, marked by the chancel arch, and the arches +between chapels and aisles, begin to vanish. Where the chancel arch was +kept, as at Long Sutton in Lincolnshire, new chancel chapels were +prolonged westward on each side of the nave, in place of the old nave +aisles. Fairford church in Gloucestershire was rebuilt towards the end +of the fifteenth century, to contain the splendid stained glass which +had just been acquired for it. A central tower was built on strong +piers, as a concession to the old plan; but the aisles of the nave were +continued on either side of the tower and along the sides of the chancel +till within a bay of the east end. But, in a great many churches, not +merely the aisles, but the nave and chancel also became continuous, +without a structural division. This feature, common in East<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_125" id="Page_125">[125]</a></span> Anglia and +the south-west of England, was the result of the importance of carved +and painted wood-work in late Gothic churches. The rood screen, +stretching across nave and aisles, appeared to full advantage, when +unbroken by the chancel arch. The splendid timber roofs of nave and +aisles gained in effect, if they formed, as at Southwold, or in the +churches of Norwich, an unbroken covering to the church from end to end. +In Norfolk and Suffolk, where the work of rebuilding began in the +fourteenth century, as at Cawston, Worstead, or Tunstead, the chancel +arch was often kept. At Worstead and other Norfolk churches the method +pursued by the builders was precisely opposite to that which we have +seen employed by Gloucestershire masons at Cirencester and other places, +and may see in most of the fifteenth century churches of Somerset. The +arcades were rebuilt first, and the aisles followed. Many of these +churches were doubtless enlarged from much smaller buildings. The south +aisle at Ingham was probably the nave of the earlier church, to which +the present nave, north aisle, chancel, and west tower, were added. The +aisles in most cases continued at a uniform width eastward as chancel +chapels. The north aisle at Worstead was continued by a two-storied +sacristy to the level of the east wall of the chancel. The south aisle +stops at a bay short of the east wall, leaving the end of the chancel +projecting as an altar space. Whether the chancel<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_126" id="Page_126">[126]</a></span> arch was retained or +not, the projection of this aisleless eastern bay became a very general +feature of the larger churches of East Anglia, and, in churches like +Trunch, Southwold, and Clare, its tall side windows flood the space with +light The most striking example of this plan is at Long Melford in +Suffolk, where there is no chancel arch, and the actual chancel projects +beyond the aisles. Here, however, it is flanked on the north by the +Clopton chapel, and on the south by the vestry, which forms a covered +way to the detached lady chapel further east. The Long Melford plan, +with a projecting altar space, and without a chancel arch, is nearly +universal in Cornwall, and is common in south Devon, where, as at +Totnes, the aisles of the chancel are usually little more than +comparatively short chapels, and sometimes, as at West Alvington, near +Kingsbridge, extend only a bay beyond the screen. Its great advantages, +apart from the display of wood-work which it permits, are the gain of +internal space permitted by the reduction of the solid portions of the +building to a minimum, the additional light admitted by the same means, +and the long uninterrupted clerestory which forms a wall of glass, with +thin stone divisions, on each side of the upper part of the church.</p> + +<p>§ 73. The tendency to give the whole church aisles of equal width +throughout, and extending along its whole length, was irresistible, +especially in East<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_127" id="Page_127">[127]</a></span> Anglia. The church of North Walsham, rebuilt towards +the end of the fourteenth century, is a great rectangle of three +parallel divisions, with axes from east to west, and of nearly equal +breadth. The chapel of St Nicholas at Lynn, rebuilt in 1419, is an even +more striking example of the same design: in both cases the simple and +somewhat monotonous plan is varied by the projection of a handsome south +porch. At Lynn, the thirteenth century west tower, with a spire, was +kept at the south-west corner of the aisled building. But the aisled +rectangular plan, if it attained its highest development in East Anglia, +had been reached already in other parts of England by gradual methods. +It has sometimes been fathered upon aisled naves of friary churches, +which, like the great nave of the Black friars at Norwich, afforded +space for large congregations who came to hear sermons. But it is +probable that the first churches which followed the course of expansion +into the aisled rectangle were directly influenced by the example of the +larger churches, like Lincoln, or, at a later date, York, which, in +extending their eastern arms, aisled their quires, presbyteries, and +eastern chapels, right up to the east wall. Thus the whole quire and +chancel of Newark, with aisles extending their whole length, were +planned in the early part of the fourteenth century, when the great +eastern chapel, the "Angel Quire," of Lincoln, was little more than a +generation<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_128" id="Page_128">[128]</a></span> old; and, although the progress of the work was long +delayed, the eventual arrangement, in which the high altar was brought +two bays forward from the east wall, and a spacious chapel was left at +the back, exactly recalls the arrangements of Lincoln and York. +Similarly the quire and chancel of the cruciform church of Holy Trinity +at Hull are aisled to their full length: the arrangement, again, is that +of a cathedral rather than a parish church. The influence of cathedral +plans is clearly visible in St Mary Redcliffe at Bristol, and in the +collegiate churches of Ottery St Mary and Crediton: but here the type +followed is not that of Lincoln and York, but that more usual in the +west and south of England at Hereford, Wells, Salisbury, Exeter, and +elsewhere, where the aisles of the chancel are returned at the back of +the east wall, and form a vestibule to a projecting aisleless lady +chapel. This type of plan occurs outside its regular district at +Tickhill, on the borders of Yorkshire and Nottinghamshire. But it is +naturally exceptional, and would be used only where there was plenty of +money and space to spare: it demands for its full effect a considerable +elevation, involving a large clerestory, and a church could seldom, if +ever, be found whose original plan invited expansion on these lines. On +the other hand, the aisling of the chancel throughout was simply the +logical development of the ordinary church plan: if the plans of +cathedrals may have suggested the later<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_129" id="Page_129">[129]</a></span> developments at churches like +Newark or Hull, the simple aisled rectangle, with its three parallel +divisions, and without any clerestory to distinguish the nave from the +aisles—a plan remarkably characteristic of Cornwall—came into +existence in the ordinary course of things, by an extension of the wings +of the building until they flanked the whole of the nave and chancel.</p> + +<p>§ 74. The work done at Grantham in the fourteenth and fifteenth +centuries illustrates the purely natural development of the ordinary +aisled church into the aisled rectangle. We have seen, in an earlier +chapter, that, soon after 1300, the church consisted of an aisleless +chancel, which was, however, overlapped at the west end by the north +aisle of the nave; a nave, the north and south aisles of which followed +different systems of spacing; a western tower and spire, engaged within +the aisles; and north and south porches. Several chantries were founded +in the church during the fourteenth century. Not long after the Black +Death of 1349, the south aisle was extended eastward to the whole length +of the chancel. The south wall of the chancel was pierced by an arcade; +and the lady chapel thus formed was raised upon a double crypt. It was +not until more than a century later that the east wall of the north +aisle was taken down, and the "Corpus Christi chancel" built out, +continuing the north aisle without a break, and completely flanking<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_130" id="Page_130">[130]</a></span> +the north wall of the chancel, through which an arcade was made. Here +the reason of expansion was obviously the growth of chantry chapels; and +the expansion follows the simplest course. The last addition to the +fabric was the present vestry, in which was a chantry founded by the +Hall family. This was built out at right angles to the north aisle, at +the point where the old work was met by the later extension. Not until +the church had been fully aisled, and afforded no further room for new +altars, were chantry chapels usually added in the shape of excrescences +from the fabric.</p> + +<div class="figcenter"> +<img src="images/i144.png" width="512" height="700" alt="fig19" title=""></img> +</div> +<p class="caption"> +Fig. 16. Plans of Grantham church: (3) about 1350; (4) +present day.</p> + +<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_131" id="Page_131">[131]</a></span></p> + +<p>§ 75. One interesting feature in the planning of chancels, which has +been much discussed, is worth a note. This is the fact that the axis of +the chancel is frequently out of line with the axis of the nave, and +generally has a slight northward inclination. Sometimes, as at Henbury +in Gloucestershire, the inclination is very considerable, so that, from +the west end of the church, nearly a quarter of the east wall is out of +sight. Usually, the inclination is very slight; and there are many cases +in which it is not northward, but southward—Sidbury and Salcombe Regis, +near Sidmouth, Eastbourne in Sussex and Aldwinkle St Peter in Northants, +are cases in point. The popular explanation is that it symbolises the +leaning of our Saviour's head upon the cross. Like most symbolical +explanations, this is founded entirely upon fancy: the<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_132" id="Page_132">[132]</a></span> inclination is +by no means confined to churches with cross plans, and, if it were, the +theorists who argue from this standpoint confound the symbolism of the +cross-plan between the cross itself and the Body which it bore. Others +have sought to explain the phenomenon by suggesting that the orientation +of the chancel followed the direction in which the sun rose on the +morning of the patronal feast. A succession of visits at sunrise to +churches on appropriate dates has not hitherto been attempted upon a +comprehensive scale: if it were undertaken, it probably would be found +that the sun, instead of rising obediently opposite the middle light of +every east window, as the theory requires, would have many puzzling +exceptions in reserve. The marked divergence of axis at Henbury is +explained by the site of the building, which is on a gentle slope, with +the axis of the nave distinctly from south-east to north-west. When the +chancel was rebuilt in the thirteenth century, the masons kept as high +upon the slope as they could, and so twisted the axis of the chancel a +little further east. But we must also remember that, when chancels were +lengthened and rebuilt, the work was done while the old chancels were +still standing. The axis of the old chancel might be out of line with +that of the nave. Unless very careful measurements were taken, the new +east wall would probably be not quite parallel with the old east wall of +the chancel. The side walls would be<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_133" id="Page_133">[133]</a></span> set out at right angles to the new +east wall; and thus, when the new chancel was joined to the church, the +divergence of axis would be more palpable than before. Or, for the same +reason, a divergence of axis might be created for the first time. This +seems to be the common sense explanation of a very common feature. But +it must be added that there are instances in which the inclination is so +decided that one is tempted to conclude either that the masons had very +crooked sight, or that they were playing tricks with their perspective. +The feature, where it is at all marked, is something of a deformity. In +our own day it has been introduced, apparently by design, into the plan +of Truro cathedral. In medieval work, however, it will seldom be found +in a chancel where no enlargement upon an early site has taken place; +and it seems safe to conclude that, like so much else in medieval +building which is irregular, it generally arises from the rebuilding of +a fabric upon an encumbered site.</p> + + + +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_134" id="Page_134">[134]</a></span></p> +<h2>INDEX OF PLACES</h2> + + +<p> +Aachen, Rhenish Prussia, palace church, <a href='#Page_33'>33</a>, <a href='#Page_34'>34</a><br /> +<br /> +Acaster Malbis, Yorks., <a href='#Page_65'>65</a><br /> +<br /> +Achurch, Northants., <a href='#Page_56'>56</a>, <a href='#Page_58'>58</a><br /> +<br /> +Acton Burnell, Salop., <a href='#Page_55'>55</a>, <a href='#Page_56'>56</a>, <a href='#Page_58'>58</a>, <a href='#Page_65'>65</a>, <a href='#Page_102'>102</a><br /> +<br /> +Adderbury, Oxon., <a href='#Page_106'>106</a>, <a href='#Page_107'>107</a><br /> +<br /> +Adel, Yorks., <a href='#Page_49'>49</a><br /> +<br /> +Africa, basilicas in north, <a href='#Page_14'>14</a><br /> +<br /> +Aldwinkle, Northants., All Saints, <a href='#Page_121'>121</a>;<br /> + St Peter, <a href='#Page_131'>131</a><br /> +<br /> +Almondsbury, Glouces., <a href='#Page_54'>54</a>, <a href='#Page_113'>113</a><br /> +<br /> +Alvington, West, Devon, <a href='#Page_126'>126</a><br /> +<br /> +Amiens, France (Somme), cathedral, <a href='#Page_68'>68</a><br /> +<br /> +Appleton-le-Street, Yorks., <a href='#Page_84'>84</a><br /> +<br /> +Arksey, Yorks., <a href='#Page_118'>118</a>, <a href='#Page_121'>121</a>, <a href='#Page_122'>122</a><br /> +<br /> +Askham Bryan, Yorks., <a href='#Page_49'>49</a><br /> +<br /> +Avening, Glouces., <a href='#Page_54'>54</a>, <a href='#Page_114'>114</a><br /> +<br /> +Aylsham, Norfolk, <a href='#Page_104'>104</a><br /> +<br /> +<br /> +Bakewell, Derby, <a href='#Page_70'>70</a><br /> +<br /> +Bampton-in-the-Bush, Oxon., <a href='#Page_59'>59</a>, <a href='#Page_60'>60</a>, <a href='#Page_61'>61</a><br /> +<br /> +Barnack, Northants., <a href='#Page_30'>30</a>, <a href='#Page_32'>32</a><br /> +<br /> +Barnburgh, Yorks., <a href='#Page_120'>120</a><br /> +<br /> +Barton-on-Humber, Lincs., St<br /> +<br /> +Peter, <a href='#Page_30'>30</a>, <a href='#Page_32'>32</a>, <a href='#Page_33'>33</a>, <a href='#Page_34'>34</a>, <a href='#Page_40'>40</a>, <a href='#Page_41'>41</a><br /> +<br /> +Berkeley, Glouces., <a href='#Page_121'>121</a><br /> +<br /> +Beverley, Yorks., minster, <a href='#Page_74'>74</a>, <a href='#Page_75'>75</a>;<br /> + St Mary, <a href='#Page_102'>102</a>, <a href='#Page_111'>111</a>, <a href='#Page_112'>112</a><br /> +<br /> +Bewick, Old, Northumb., <a href='#Page_50'>50</a>, <a href='#Page_52'>52</a><br /> +<br /> +Bibury, Glouces., <a href='#Page_94'>94</a><br /> +<br /> +Billingborough, Lincs., <a href='#Page_82'>82</a><br /> +<br /> +Billingham, Durham, <a href='#Page_73'>73</a><br /> +<br /> +Birkin, Yorks., <a href='#Page_46'>46</a>, <a href='#Page_51'>51</a>, <a href='#Page_52'>52</a>, <a href='#Page_82'>82</a>, <a href='#Page_83'>83</a><br /> +<br /> +Bishopstone, Sussex, <a href='#Page_36'>36</a><br /> +<br /> +Blatherwycke, Northants., <a href='#Page_46'>46</a><br /> +<br /> +Bloxham, Oxon., <a href='#Page_105'>105</a>, <a href='#Page_106'>106</a>, <a href='#Page_107'>107</a><br /> +<br /> +Bottesford, Lincs., <a href='#Page_108'>108</a><br /> +<br /> +Bracebridge, Lincs., <a href='#Page_28'>28</a><br /> +<br /> +Bradford-on-Avon, Wilts., <a href='#Page_16'>16</a>, <a href='#Page_29'>29</a>, <a href='#Page_36'>36</a><br /> +<br /> +Bradwell-juxta-Mare, Essex, St Peter's on the Wall, <a href='#Page_16'>16</a><br /> +<br /> +Brampton Ash, Northants., <a href='#Page_76'>76</a><br /> +<br /> +Brancepeth, Durham, <a href='#Page_120'>120</a><br /> +<br /> +Branscombe, Devon, <a href='#Page_107'>107</a><br /> +<br /> +Brayton, Yorks., <a href='#Page_46'>46</a><br /> +<br /> +Breamore, Hants., <a href='#Page_38'>38</a>, <a href='#Page_40'>40</a>, <a href='#Page_54'>54</a><br /> +<br /> +Brecon, priory church, <a href='#Page_121'>121</a><br /> +<br /> +Brigstock, Northants., <a href='#Page_28'>28</a>, <a href='#Page_97'>97</a>, <a href='#Page_120'>120</a>, <a href='#Page_121'>121</a><br /> +<br /> +Bristol, St John Baptist, <a href='#Page_98'>98</a>;<br /> + St Lawrence, <a href='#Page_98'>98</a>;<br /> + St Mary Redcliffe, <a href='#Page_95'>95</a>, <a href='#Page_99'>99</a>, <a href='#Page_101'>101</a>, <a href='#Page_102'>102</a>, <a href='#Page_128'>128</a><br /> +<br /> +Britford, Wilts., <a href='#Page_36'>36</a><br /> +<br /> +Brixworth, Northants., <a href='#Page_21'>21</a>, <a href='#Page_22'>22</a>, <a href='#Page_23'>23</a>, <a href='#Page_24'>24</a>, <a href='#Page_29'>29</a>, <a href='#Page_32'>32</a>, <a href='#Page_53'>53</a><br /> +<br /> +Broughton, Lincs., <a href='#Page_32'>32</a><br /> +<br /> +Bubwith, Yorks., <a href='#Page_93'>93</a><br /> +<br /> +Burford, Oxon., <a href='#Page_60'>60</a>, <a href='#Page_61'>61</a>, <a href='#Page_99'>99</a>, <a href='#Page_113'>113</a><br /> +<br /> +Caistor, Lincs., <a href='#Page_45'>45</a><br /> +<br /> +Cambridge, All Saints, <a href='#Page_97'>97</a>, <a href='#Page_98'>98</a>;<br /> + St Benedict, <a href='#Page_28'>28</a>;<br /> + Holy Trinity, <a href='#Page_97'>97</a>;<br /> + St Michael, <a href='#Page_94'>94</a>, <a href='#Page_95'>95</a><br /> +<br /> +Campsall, Yorks., <a href='#Page_109'>109</a>, <a href='#Page_110'>110</a><br /> +<br /> + Canterbury, Kent, cathedral, <a href='#Page_15'>15</a>, <a href='#Page_35'>35</a>;<br /> + St Pancras, <a href='#Page_15'>15</a>, <a href='#Page_16'>16</a>, <a href='#Page_23'>23</a>, <a href='#Page_24'>24</a>, <a href='#Page_35'>35</a>, <a href='#Page_36'>36</a>, <a href='#Page_53'>53</a><br /> +<br /> +Caunton, Notts., <a href='#Page_93'>93</a><br /> +<br /> +Cawston, Norfolk, <a href='#Page_104'>104</a>, <a href='#Page_125'>125</a><br /> +<br /> +Chesterfield, Derby, <a href='#Page_123'>123</a><br /> +<br /> +Chichester, Sussex, cathedral, <a href='#Page_68'>68</a><br /> +<br /> +Childs Wickham, Glouces., <a href='#Page_56'>56</a>, <a href='#Page_58'>58</a><br /> +<br /> +Chipping Norton, Oxon., <a href='#Page_99'>99</a><br /> +<br /> +Christon, Som., <a href='#Page_53'>53</a><br /> +<br /> +Cirencester, Glouces., <a href='#Page_87'>87</a>, <a href='#Page_88'>88</a>, <a href='#Page_89'>89</a>, <a href='#Page_125'>125</a><br /> +<br /> +Clapton-in-Gordano, Som., <a href='#Page_105'>105</a>, <a href='#Page_120'>120</a><br /> +<br /> +Clare, Suffolk, <a href='#Page_126'>126</a><br /> +<br /> +Clymping, Sussex, <a href='#Page_114'>114</a><br /> +<br /> +Coln Rogers, Glouces., <a href='#Page_28'>28</a>, <a href='#Page_29'>29</a>, <a href='#Page_97'>97</a><br /> +<br /> +Coln St Aldwyn, Glouces., <a href='#Page_113'>113</a>, <a href='#Page_114'>114</a><br /> +<br /> +Coln St Denis, Glouces., <a href='#Page_53'>53</a><br /> +<br /> +Cologne, Rhenish Prussia, St Gereon, <a href='#Page_34'>34</a><br /> +<br /> +Colsterworth, Lincs., <a href='#Page_47'>47</a>, <a href='#Page_92'>92</a><br /> +<br /> +Constantinople, Sta Sophia, <a href='#Page_10'>10</a>, <a href='#Page_12'>12</a>, <a href='#Page_13'>13</a><br /> +<br /> +Copford, Essex, <a href='#Page_52'>52</a>, <a href='#Page_74'>74</a><br /> +<br /> +Copmanthorpe, Yorks., <a href='#Page_49'>49</a><br /> +<br /> +Corbridge-on-Tyne, Northumb., <a href='#Page_19'>19</a>, <a href='#Page_20'>20</a>, <a href='#Page_56'>56</a><br /> +<br /> +Corstopitum, <i>see</i> Corbridge-on-Tyne<br /> +<br /> +Coventry, Warwicks., Holy Trinity, <a href='#Page_102'>102</a>;<br /> + St John Baptist, <a href='#Page_102'>102</a>;<br /> + St Michael, <a href='#Page_98'>98</a><br /> +<br /> +Crediton, Devon, <a href='#Page_128'>128</a><br /> +<br /> +Cullompton, Devon, <a href='#Page_106'>106</a><br /> +<br /> +<br /> +Dedham, Essex, <a href='#Page_97'>97</a><br /> +<br /> +Deerhurst, Glouces., <a href='#Page_27'>27</a>, <a href='#Page_36'>36</a>, <a href='#Page_37'>37</a><br /> +<br /> +Dover, Kent, St Mary in the Castle, <a href='#Page_37'>37</a>, <a href='#Page_38'>38</a>, <a href='#Page_40'>40</a>, <a href='#Page_54'>54</a><br /> +<br /> +Duddington, Northants., <a href='#Page_114'>114</a><br /> +<br /> +Dunham Magna, Norfolk, <a href='#Page_38'>38</a><br /> +<br /> +Durham, cathedral, <a href='#Page_50'>50</a>, <a href='#Page_67'>67</a>, <a href='#Page_69'>69</a><br /> +<br /> +<br /> +Earl's Barton, Northants., <a href='#Page_30'>30</a>, <a href='#Page_48'>48</a><br /> +<br /> +Eastbourne, Sussex, <a href='#Page_131'>131</a><br /> +<br /> +Easton, Great, Leices., <a href='#Page_86'>86</a><br /> +<br /> +Ely, Cambs., cathedral, <a href='#Page_50'>50</a><br /> +<br /> +Escomb, Durham, <a href='#Page_17'>17</a>, <a href='#Page_18'>18</a>, <a href='#Page_20'>20</a>, <a href='#Page_26'>26</a>, <a href='#Page_27'>27</a>, <a href='#Page_29'>29</a><br /> +<br /> +Evesham, Worces., All Saints, <a href='#Page_105'>105</a>;<br /> + St Lawrence, <a href='#Page_105'>105</a><br /> +<br /> +Ewerby, Lincs., <a href='#Page_96'>96</a><br /> +<br /> +Exeter, Devon, cathedral, <a href='#Page_113'>113</a>, <a href='#Page_128'>128</a><br /> +<br /> +Exton, Rutland, <a href='#Page_103'>103</a>, <a href='#Page_104'>104</a><br /> +<br /> +<br /> +Fairford, Glouces., <a href='#Page_124'>124</a><br /> +<br /> +Felmersham, Beds., <a href='#Page_110'>110</a><br /> +<br /> +Felton, Northumb., <a href='#Page_83'>83</a><br /> +<br /> +Finchingfield, Essex, <a href='#Page_45'>45</a><br /> +<br /> +Fountains abbey, Yorks., <a href='#Page_67'>67</a><br /> +<br /> +<br /> +Garton-on-the-Wolds, Yorks., <a href='#Page_46'>46</a><br /> +<br /> +Geddington, Northants., <a href='#Page_28'>28</a>, <a href='#Page_72'>72</a><br /> +<br /> +Gedling, Notts., <a href='#Page_94'>94</a><br /> +<br /> +Gloucester, cathedral, <a href='#Page_67'>67</a><br /> +<br /> +Grantham, Lincs., <a href='#Page_88'>88</a>, <a href='#Page_89'>89</a>, <a href='#Page_90'>90</a>, <a href='#Page_91'>91</a>, <a href='#Page_92'>92</a>, <a href='#Page_96'>96</a>, <a href='#Page_99'>99</a>, <a href='#Page_100'>100</a>, <a href='#Page_129'>129</a>, <a href='#Page_130'>130</a>, <a href='#Page_131'>131</a><br /> +<br /> +Greenstead, Essex, <a href='#Page_43'>43</a><br /> +<br /> +Gretton, Northants., <a href='#Page_72'>72</a>, <a href='#Page_78'>78</a>, <a href='#Page_93'>93</a>, <a href='#Page_94'>94</a><br /> +<br /> +<br /> +Hallaton, Leices., <a href='#Page_83'>83</a>, <a href='#Page_99'>99</a><br /> +<br /> +Harringworth, Northants., <a href='#Page_85'>85</a>, <a href='#Page_86'>86</a>, <a href='#Page_87'>87</a><br /> +<br /> +Heapham, Lincs., <a href='#Page_46'>46</a><br /><br /> +Heckington, Lincs., <a href='#Page_76'>76</a>, <a href='#Page_107'>107</a>, <a href='#Page_108'>108</a><br /> +<br /> +Heddon-on-the-Wall, Northumb., <a href='#Page_48'>48</a><br /> +<br /> +Henbury, Glouces., <a href='#Page_99'>99</a>, <a href='#Page_131'>131</a>, <a href='#Page_132'>132</a><br /> +<br /> +Hereford, cathedral, <a href='#Page_128'>128</a><br /> +<br /> +Heslerton, West, Yorks., <a href='#Page_64'>64</a><br /> +<br /> +Hexham, Northumb., priory church, <a href='#Page_20'>20</a>, <a href='#Page_21'>21</a>, <a href='#Page_23'>23</a>;<br /> + St Mary, <a href='#Page_33'>33</a>, <a href='#Page_34'>34</a>, <a href='#Page_41'>41</a><br /> +<br /> +Heysham, Lancs., <a href='#Page_25'>25</a><br /> +<br /> +Hooton Pagnell, Yorks., <a href='#Page_46'>46</a><br /> +<br /> +Hough-on-the-Hill, Lincs., <a href='#Page_32'>32</a><br /> +<br /> +Hull, Yorks., Holy Trinity, <a href='#Page_128'>128</a>, <a href='#Page_129'>129</a><br /> +<br /> +Hullavington, Wilts., <a href='#Page_119'>119</a><br /> +<br /> +<br /> +Iffley, Oxon., <a href='#Page_53'>53</a>, <a href='#Page_54'>54</a>, <a href='#Page_114'>114</a><br /> +<br /> +Islip, Northants., <a href='#Page_76'>76</a><br /> +<br /> +<br /> +Jarrow-on-Tyne, Durham, St Paul, <a href='#Page_19'>19</a><br /> +<br /> +Jerusalem, Holy Sepulchre, <a href='#Page_34'>34</a>, <a href='#Page_52'>52</a>, <a href='#Page_62'>62</a><br /> +<br /> +<br /> +Kegworth, Leices., <a href='#Page_104'>104</a><br /> +<br /> +Kirkburn, Yorks., <a href='#Page_46'>46</a><br /> +<br /> +Kirk Hammerton, Yorks., <a href='#Page_46'>46</a><br /> +<br /> +<br /> +Laceby, Lincs., <a href='#Page_45'>45</a><br /> +<br /> +Langford, Essex, <a href='#Page_52'>52</a><br /> +<br /> +Langham, Rutland, <a href='#Page_113'>113</a><br /> +<br /> +Lavenham, Suffolk, <a href='#Page_94'>94</a><br /> +<br /> +Leckhampton, Glouces., <a href='#Page_54'>54</a><br /> +<br /> +Leicester, St Margaret, <a href='#Page_123'>123</a>, <a href='#Page_124'>124</a>;<br /> + St Mary in the Castle, <a href='#Page_49'>49</a>, <a href='#Page_95'>95</a>, <a href='#Page_97'>97</a><br /> +<br /> +Leverington, Cambs., <a href='#Page_119'>119</a><br /> +<br /> +Leverton, Lincs., <a href='#Page_121'>121</a><br /> +<br /> +Lincoln, cathedral, <a href='#Page_67'>67</a>, <a href='#Page_127'>127</a>, <a href='#Page_128'>128</a>;<br /> + St Mary-le-Wigford, <a href='#Page_28'>28</a>; St<br /> + Peter-at-Gowts, <a href='#Page_28'>28</a><br /> +<br /> +Lowick, Northants., <a href='#Page_105'>105</a><br /> +<br /> +Ludlow, Salop., <a href='#Page_99'>99</a>, <a href='#Page_100'>100</a>, <a href='#Page_102'>102</a><br /> +<br /> +Lydd, Kent, <a href='#Page_24'>24</a><br /> +<br /> +Lynn, King's, Norfolk, St Margaret, <a href='#Page_96'>96</a>;<br /> + St Nicholas, <a href='#Page_127'>127</a><br /> +<br /> +<br /> +Marshfield, Glouces., <a href='#Page_123'>123</a><br /> +<br /> +Medbourne, Leices., <a href='#Page_56'>56</a>, <a href='#Page_58'>58</a>, <a href='#Page_113'>113</a><br /> +<br /> +Melbourne, Derby, <a href='#Page_59'>59</a>, <a href='#Page_60'>60</a>, <a href='#Page_69'>69</a>, <a href='#Page_70'>70</a>, <a href='#Page_75'>75</a>, <a href='#Page_76'>76</a>, <a href='#Page_96'>96</a>, <a href='#Page_117'>117</a><br /> +<br /> +Melford, Long, Suffolk, <a href='#Page_121'>121</a>, <a href='#Page_126'>126</a><br /> +<br /> +Melton Mowbray, Leices., <a href='#Page_102'>102</a><br /> +<br /> +Middleton Tyas, Yorks., <a href='#Page_78'>78</a>, <a href='#Page_79'>79</a><br /> +<br /> +Minster Lovell, Oxon., <a href='#Page_61'>61</a><br /> +<br /> +Monkwearmouth, Durham, <a href='#Page_18'>18</a>, <a href='#Page_19'>19</a>, <a href='#Page_20'>20</a>, <a href='#Page_23'>23</a>, <a href='#Page_29'>29</a><br /> +<br /> +Montacute, Som., <a href='#Page_56'>56</a>, <a href='#Page_58'>58</a><br /> +<br /> +Moor Monkton, Yorks., <a href='#Page_48'>48</a><br /> +<br /> +<br /> +Nantwich, Cheshire, <a href='#Page_102'>102</a><br /> +<br /> +Newark-on-Trent, Notts., <a href='#Page_87'>87</a>, <a href='#Page_89'>89</a>, <a href='#Page_96'>96</a>, <a href='#Page_99'>99</a>, <a href='#Page_110'>110</a>, <a href='#Page_123'>123</a>, <a href='#Page_127'>127</a>, <a href='#Page_128'>128</a>, <a href='#Page_129'>129</a><br /> +<br /> +Newbald, North, Yorks., <a href='#Page_57'>57</a>, <a href='#Page_58'>58</a>, <a href='#Page_59'>59</a>, <a href='#Page_60'>60</a><br /> +<br /> +Newcastle-on-Tyne, Northumb., St Nicholas, <a href='#Page_96'>96</a>, <a href='#Page_100'>100</a><br /> +<br /> +Newhaven, Sussex, <a href='#Page_53'>53</a><br /> +<br /> +Norham-on-Tweed, Northumb., <a href='#Page_69'>69</a>, <a href='#Page_70'>70</a><br /> +<br /> +Northallerton, Yorks., <a href='#Page_78'>78</a><br /> +<br /> +Northampton, St Giles, <a href='#Page_60'>60</a>, <a href='#Page_61'>61</a>;<br /> + St Peter, <a href='#Page_49'>49</a><br /> +<br /> +Northleach, Glouces., <a href='#Page_87'>87</a>, <a href='#Page_88'>88</a>, <a href='#Page_89'>89</a>, <a href='#Page_99'>99</a><br /> +<br /> +Norton-on-Tees, Durham, <a href='#Page_40'>40</a>, <a href='#Page_41'>41</a>, <a href='#Page_54'>54</a><br /> +<br /> +Norwich, cathedral, <a href='#Page_67'>67</a>;<br /> + church of Black friars, <a href='#Page_127'>127</a><br /> +<br /> +Nottingham, St Mary, <a href='#Page_123'>123</a><br /> +<br /> +<br /> +Oakham, Rutland, <a href='#Page_113'>113</a><br /> +<br /> +Othery, Som., <a href='#Page_65'>65</a><br /> +<br /> +Othona, <i>see</i> Bradwell-juxta-Mare<br /> +<br /> +Ottery St Mary, Devon, <a href='#Page_106'>106</a>, <a href='#Page_113'>113</a>, <a href='#Page_128'>128</a><br /> +<br /> +Oundle, Northants., <a href='#Page_82'>82</a>, <a href='#Page_94'>94</a>, <a href='#Page_98'>98</a>, <a href='#Page_108'>108</a>, <a href='#Page_109'>109</a>, <a href='#Page_117'>117</a>, <a href='#Page_118'>118</a><br /> +<br /> +<br /> +Paignton, Devon, <a href='#Page_106'>106</a><br /> +<br /> +Patricio, Brecon, <a href='#Page_66'>66</a>, <a href='#Page_67'>67</a>, <a href='#Page_68'>68</a><br /> +<br /> +Peterborough, Northants., Saxon abbey church, <a href='#Page_21'>21</a>, <a href='#Page_22'>22</a><br /> +<br /> +Petersfield, Hants., <a href='#Page_109'>109</a><br /> +<br /> +Plymouth, Devon, St Andrew, <a href='#Page_105'>105</a>, <a href='#Page_106'>106</a><br /> +<br /> +Plympton St Mary, Devon, <a href='#Page_105'>105</a>, <a href='#Page_106'>106</a><br /> +<br /> +Portlemouth, East, Devon, <a href='#Page_106'>106</a><br /> +<br /> +Potterne, Wilts., <a href='#Page_55'>55</a>, <a href='#Page_56'>56</a>, <a href='#Page_65'>65</a><br /> +<br /> +<br /> +Ramsey, Hunts., Saxon abbey church, <a href='#Page_39'>39</a><br /> +<br /> +Ranworth, Norfolk, <a href='#Page_64'>64</a>, <a href='#Page_68'>68</a><br /> +<br /> +Raunds, Northants., <a href='#Page_79'>79</a>, <a href='#Page_80'>80</a>, <a href='#Page_81'>81</a>, <a href='#Page_83'>83</a>, <a href='#Page_84'>84</a>, <a href='#Page_119'>119</a><br /> +<br /> +Ravenna, Italy, Mausoleum of Galla Placidia, <a href='#Page_10'>10</a>;<br /> + of Theodoric, <a href='#Page_10'>10</a>, <a href='#Page_11'>11</a>, <a href='#Page_12'>12</a>;<br /> + Sant' Apollinare in Classe, <a href='#Page_8'>8</a>, <a href='#Page_9'>9</a>;<br /> + Sant' Apollinare Nuovo, <a href='#Page_8'>8</a>, <a href='#Page_9'>9</a>;<br /> + San Giovanni in Fonte, <a href='#Page_10'>10</a>;<br /> + Sta Maria in Cosmedin, <a href='#Page_10'>10</a>;<br /> + San Vitale, <a href='#Page_11'>11</a>, <a href='#Page_12'>12</a>, <a href='#Page_13'>13</a>, <a href='#Page_33'>33</a><br /> +<br /> +Reculver, Kent, <a href='#Page_15'>15</a>, <a href='#Page_24'>24</a><br /> +<br /> +Repton, Derby, <a href='#Page_28'>28</a>, <a href='#Page_37'>37</a><br /> +<br /> +Riccall, Yorks., <a href='#Page_46'>46</a><br /> +<br /> +Ripon, Yorks, cathedral, <a href='#Page_21'>21</a>, <a href='#Page_23'>23</a><br /> +<br /> +Rochester, Kent, cathedral, <a href='#Page_15'>15</a><br /> +<br /> +Rome, Basilica of Maxentius, <a href='#Page_3'>3</a>;<br /> + Basilica Ulpia, <a href='#Page_2'>2</a>;<br /> + Baths of Caracalla, <a href='#Page_9'>9</a>;<br /> + Castle of Sant' Angelo, <a href='#Page_9'>9</a>;<br /> + San Clemente, <a href='#Page_9'>9</a>;<br /> + Sta Costanza, <a href='#Page_9'>9</a>;<br /> + San Lorenzo fuori le Mura, <a href='#Page_8'>8</a>;<br /> + San Paolo, <a href='#Page_8'>8</a>;<br /> + old St Peter's, <a href='#Page_4'>4</a>, <a href='#Page_6'>6</a>, <a href='#Page_7'>7</a>, <a href='#Page_8'>8</a>, <a href='#Page_14'>14</a>, <a href='#Page_15'>15</a>;<br /> + <i>scholae</i>, <a href='#Page_5'>5</a><br /> +<br /> +Rotherham, Yorks., <a href='#Page_123'>123</a><br /> +<br /> +<br /> +St-Georges-de-Boscherville, France (Seine-Inf.), <a href='#Page_60'>60</a><br /> +<br /> +St Peter's on the Wall, <i>see</i> Bradwell-juxta-Mare<br /> +<br /> +Salcombe Regis, Devon, <a href='#Page_131'>131</a><br /> +<br /> +Salisbury, Wilts., cathedral, <a href='#Page_67'>67</a>, <a href='#Page_128'>128</a><br /> +<br /> +Sall, Norfolk, <a href='#Page_104'>104</a><br /> +<br /> +Sawley, Derby, <a href='#Page_120'>120</a><br /> +<br /> +Seamer, Yorks., <a href='#Page_73'>73</a><br /> +<br /> +Sherburn-in-Elmet, Yorks., <a href='#Page_69'>69</a>, <a href='#Page_70'>70</a>, <a href='#Page_96'>96</a><br /> +<br /> +Shrewsbury, Salop., St Mary, <a href='#Page_114'>114</a>, <a href='#Page_118'>118</a>, <a href='#Page_121'>121</a><br /> +<br /> +Sidbury, Devon, <a href='#Page_28'>28</a>, <a href='#Page_131'>131</a><br /> +<br /> +Silchester, Hants., <a href='#Page_14'>14</a>, <a href='#Page_24'>24</a>, <a href='#Page_25'>25</a><br /> +<br /> +Sileby, Leices., <a href='#Page_96'>96</a><br /> +<br /> +Skipwith, Yorks., <a href='#Page_115'>115</a><br /> +<br /> +Skirlaugh, South, Yorks., <a href='#Page_65'>65</a><br /> +<br /> +Sleaford, Lincs., <a href='#Page_82'>82</a>, <a href='#Page_97'>97</a><br /> +<br /> +Southwell, Notts., cathedral, <a href='#Page_70'>70</a><br /> +<br /> +Southwold, Suffolk, <a href='#Page_125'>125</a>, <a href='#Page_126'>126</a><br /> +<br /> +Spalding, Lincs., <a href='#Page_95'>95</a>, <a href='#Page_122'>122</a><br /> +<br /> +Stafford, St Mary, <a href='#Page_112'>112</a><br /> +<br /> +Stanion, Northants., <a href='#Page_119'>119</a><br /> +<br /> +Stanton Lacy, Salop., <a href='#Page_38'>38</a><br /> +<br /> +Stow, Lincs., <a href='#Page_39'>39</a>, <a href='#Page_40'>40</a>, <a href='#Page_42'>42</a>, <a href='#Page_54'>54</a><br /> +<br /> +Stretton-in-the-Street, Rutland, <a href='#Page_104'>104</a><br /> +<br /> +Studland, Dorset, <a href='#Page_53'>53</a><br /> +<br /> +Sutton, Long, Lincs., <a href='#Page_70'>70</a>, <a href='#Page_124'>124</a><br /> +<br /> +Swaton, Lincs., <a href='#Page_82'>82</a><br /> +<br /> +<br /> +Tamworth, Staffs., <a href='#Page_119'>119</a>, <a href='#Page_123'>123</a><br /> +<br /> +Tansor, Northants., <a href='#Page_49'>49</a>, <a href='#Page_82'>82</a>, <a href='#Page_100'>100</a>, <a href='#Page_115'>115</a>, <a href='#Page_116'>116</a>, <a href='#Page_117'>117</a>, <a href='#Page_122'>122</a><br /> +<br /> +Taunton, Som., St Mary Magdalene, <a href='#Page_99'>99</a><br /> +<br /> +Temple Balsall, Warwicks., <a href='#Page_65'>65</a><br /> +<br /> +Theddingworth, Leices., <a href='#Page_79'>79</a><br /> +<br /> +Tickencote, Rutland, <a href='#Page_48'>48</a><br /> +<br /> +Tickhill, Yorks., <a href='#Page_96'>96</a>, <a href='#Page_128'>128</a><br /> +<br /> +Tilney All Saints, Norfolk, <a href='#Page_92'>92</a>, <a href='#Page_93'>93</a><br /> +<br /> +Tiverton, Devon, <a href='#Page_105'>105</a>, <a href='#Page_106'>106</a><br /> +<br /> +Totnes, Devon, <a href='#Page_126'>126</a><br /> +<br /> +Trier, Rhenish Prussia, basilica, <a href='#Page_3'>3</a>;<br /> + Liebfrauenkirche, <a href='#Page_34'>34</a><br /> +<br /> +Trunch, Norfolk, <a href='#Page_126'>126</a><br /> +<br /> +Truro, Cornwall, cathedral, <a href='#Page_133'>133</a><br /> +<br /> +Tunstead, Norfolk, <a href='#Page_125'>125</a><br /> +<br /> +Tytherington, Glouces., <a href='#Page_73'>73</a><br /> +<br /> +<br /> +Vinovium, <i>see</i> Escomb.<br /> +<br /> +<br /> +Waith, Lincs., <a href='#Page_38'>38</a>, <a href='#Page_39'>39</a><br /> +<br /> +Wakefield, Yorks., cathedral, <a href='#Page_123'>123</a><br /> +<br /> +Walberswick, Suffolk, <a href='#Page_99'>99</a><br /> +<br /> +Walsham, North, Norfolk, <a href='#Page_127'>127</a><br /> +<br /> +Walsoken, Norfolk, <a href='#Page_70'>70</a><br /> +<br /> +Warkworth, Northumb., <a href='#Page_48'>48</a><br /> +<br /> +Warmington, Northants., <a href='#Page_99'>99</a>, <a href='#Page_100'>100</a><br /> +<br /> +Wells, Som., cathedral, <a href='#Page_128'>128</a><br /> +<br /> +Whaplode, Lincs., <a href='#Page_92'>92</a>, <a href='#Page_114'>114</a><br /> +<br /> +Whitwell, Rutland, <a href='#Page_78'>78</a><br /> +<br /> +Winchester, cathedral, <a href='#Page_50'>50</a><br /> +<br /> +Wing, Bucks., <a href='#Page_24'>24</a>, <a href='#Page_27'>27</a><br /> +<br /> +Winterton, Lincs., <a href='#Page_28'>28</a>, <a href='#Page_97'>97</a><br /> +<br /> +Wisbech, Cambs., <a href='#Page_120'>120</a><br /> +<br /> +Witham, North, Lincs., <a href='#Page_47'>47</a><br /> +<br /> +Witney, Oxon., <a href='#Page_61'>61</a>, <a href='#Page_110'>110</a>, <a href='#Page_112'>112</a><br /> +<br /> +Wittering, Northants., <a href='#Page_28'>28</a><br /> +<br /> +Wollaton, Notts., <a href='#Page_97'>97</a><br /> +<br /> +Worstead, Norfolk, <a href='#Page_99'>99</a>, <a href='#Page_125'>125</a><br /> +<br /> +Worth, Sussex, <a href='#Page_37'>37</a>, <a href='#Page_102'>102</a>, <a href='#Page_103'>103</a><br /> +<br /> +<br /> +Yainville, France (Seine-Inf.), <a href='#Page_53'>53</a><br /> +<br /> +Yatton, Som., <a href='#Page_99'>99</a><br /> +<br /> +York, cathedral, <a href='#Page_67'>67</a>, <a href='#Page_127'>127</a>, <a href='#Page_128'>128</a><br /> +<br /> +Ythanceaster, <i>see</i> Bradwell-juxta-Mare<br /> +</p> + +<hr style="width: 45%;" /> + +<p class="fm3">CAMBRIDGE: PRINTED BY JOHN CLAY, M.A. AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS</p> + +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> + + +<div class="transnote"><a name="tnotes" id="tnotes"></a> +<h3>Transcriber's note</h3> + +<p>In the HTML version some of the illustrations +have been moved beside the relevant section of the text. +Page numbers in the List of Illustrations reflect the position of the illustration +in the original text, but links link to current position of illustrations. +<br /><br /> +Minor +punctuation errors have been corrected without notice. +<br /><br /> +An obvious +printer error has been corrected, and it is listed below. +<br /><br /> +All +other inconsistencies are as in the original. The author's spelling has +been maintained.<br /><br /> + +Page 36: "a Saxon ex-example" changed to "a Saxon +<a name="cn1" id="cn1"></a><a href="#corr1">example</a>".</p> +</div> + + + + + + + + +<pre> + + + + + +End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of The Ground Plan of the English Parish +Church, by A. Hamilton Thompson + +*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK ENGLISH PARISH CHURCH *** + +***** This file should be named 27102-h.htm or 27102-h.zip ***** +This and all associated files of various formats will be found in: + http://www.gutenberg.org/2/7/1/0/27102/ + +Produced by Carla Foust and the Online Distributed +Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This file was +produced from images generously made available by The +Internet Archive/American Libraries.) + + +Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions +will be renamed. + +Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no +one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation +(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without +permission and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules, +set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to +copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to +protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark. Project +Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you +charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission. If you +do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the +rules is very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose +such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and +research. They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do +practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks. Redistribution is +subject to the trademark license, especially commercial +redistribution. + + + +*** START: FULL LICENSE *** + +THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE +PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK + +To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free +distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work +(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project +Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project +Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at +http://gutenberg.org/license). + + +Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic works + +1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to +and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property +(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all +the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy +all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession. +If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the +terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or +entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8. + +1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be +used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who +agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few +things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works +even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See +paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement +and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic +works. See paragraph 1.E below. + +1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation" +or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the +collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an +individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are +located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from +copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative +works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg +are removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project +Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by +freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of +this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with +the work. You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by +keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project +Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others. + +1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern +what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in +a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check +the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement +before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or +creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project +Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no representations concerning +the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United +States. + +1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: + +1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate +access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently +whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the +phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project +Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, +copied or distributed: + +This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with +almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or +re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included +with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org + +1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived +from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is +posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied +and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees +or charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a work +with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the +work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 +through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the +Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or +1.E.9. + +1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted +with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution +must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional +terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked +to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the +permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work. + +1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm +License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this +work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm. + +1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this +electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without +prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with +active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project +Gutenberg-tm License. + +1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, +compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any +word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or +distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than +"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version +posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org), +you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a +copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon +request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other +form. Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm +License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. + +1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, +performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works +unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. + +1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing +access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided +that + +- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from + the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method + you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is + owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he + has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the + Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments + must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you + prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax + returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and + sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the + address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to + the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation." + +- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies + you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he + does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm + License. You must require such a user to return or + destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium + and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of + Project Gutenberg-tm works. + +- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any + money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the + electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days + of receipt of the work. + +- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free + distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works. + +1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set +forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from +both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael +Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark. Contact the +Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below. + +1.F. + +1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable +effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread +public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm +collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic +works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain +"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or +corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual +property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a +computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by +your equipment. + +1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right +of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project +Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project +Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all +liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal +fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT +LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE +PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH F3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE +TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE +LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR +INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH +DAMAGE. + +1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a +defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can +receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a +written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you +received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with +your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with +the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a +refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or entity +providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to +receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy +is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further +opportunities to fix the problem. + +1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth +in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS' WITH NO OTHER +WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO +WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. + +1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied +warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages. +If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the +law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be +interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by +the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any +provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions. + +1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the +trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone +providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance +with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production, +promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works, +harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, +that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do +or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm +work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any +Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause. + + +Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm + +Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of +electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers +including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists +because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from +people in all walks of life. + +Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the +assistance they need, is critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's +goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will +remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project +Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure +and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations. +To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation +and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 +and the Foundation web page at http://www.pglaf.org. + + +Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive +Foundation + +The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit +501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the +state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal +Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification +number is 64-6221541. Its 501(c)(3) letter is posted at +http://pglaf.org/fundraising. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg +Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent +permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws. + +The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S. +Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered +throughout numerous locations. Its business office is located at +809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email +business@pglaf.org. Email contact links and up to date contact +information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official +page at http://pglaf.org + +For additional contact information: + Dr. Gregory B. Newby + Chief Executive and Director + gbnewby@pglaf.org + + +Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg +Literary Archive Foundation + +Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide +spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of +increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be +freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest +array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations +($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt +status with the IRS. + +The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating +charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United +States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a +considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up +with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations +where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To +SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any +particular state visit http://pglaf.org + +While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we +have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition +against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who +approach us with offers to donate. + +International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make +any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from +outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. + +Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation +methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other +ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. +To donate, please visit: http://pglaf.org/donate + + +Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic +works. + +Professor Michael S. Hart is the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm +concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared +with anyone. For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project +Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support. + + +Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed +editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S. +unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily +keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition. + + +Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility: + + http://www.gutenberg.org + +This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, +including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary +Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to +subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. + + +</pre> + +</body> +</html> diff --git a/27102-h/images/i002.png b/27102-h/images/i002.png Binary files differnew file mode 100644 index 0000000..53f98c3 --- /dev/null +++ b/27102-h/images/i002.png diff --git a/27102-h/images/i004.jpg b/27102-h/images/i004.jpg Binary files differnew file mode 100644 index 0000000..d6c4189 --- /dev/null +++ b/27102-h/images/i004.jpg diff --git a/27102-h/images/i005.png b/27102-h/images/i005.png Binary files differnew file mode 100644 index 0000000..f15b070 --- /dev/null +++ b/27102-h/images/i005.png diff --git a/27102-h/images/i020.png b/27102-h/images/i020.png Binary files differnew file mode 100644 index 0000000..b8edb60 --- /dev/null +++ b/27102-h/images/i020.png diff --git a/27102-h/images/i025.png b/27102-h/images/i025.png Binary files differnew file mode 100644 index 0000000..dce5bc2 --- /dev/null +++ b/27102-h/images/i025.png diff --git a/27102-h/images/i031.png b/27102-h/images/i031.png Binary files differnew file mode 100644 index 0000000..42101a8 --- /dev/null +++ b/27102-h/images/i031.png diff --git a/27102-h/images/i045.jpg b/27102-h/images/i045.jpg Binary files differnew file mode 100644 index 0000000..2c698ee --- /dev/null +++ b/27102-h/images/i045.jpg diff --git a/27102-h/images/i059.png b/27102-h/images/i059.png Binary files differnew file mode 100644 index 0000000..d484501 --- /dev/null +++ b/27102-h/images/i059.png diff --git a/27102-h/images/i065.jpg b/27102-h/images/i065.jpg Binary files differnew file mode 100644 index 0000000..452bd84 --- /dev/null +++ b/27102-h/images/i065.jpg diff --git a/27102-h/images/i069.png b/27102-h/images/i069.png Binary files differnew file mode 100644 index 0000000..52099a1 --- /dev/null +++ b/27102-h/images/i069.png diff --git a/27102-h/images/i071.jpg b/27102-h/images/i071.jpg Binary files differnew file mode 100644 index 0000000..fd65b71 --- /dev/null +++ b/27102-h/images/i071.jpg diff --git a/27102-h/images/i086.png b/27102-h/images/i086.png Binary files differnew file mode 100644 index 0000000..967d2b2 --- /dev/null +++ b/27102-h/images/i086.png diff --git a/27102-h/images/i094.png b/27102-h/images/i094.png Binary files differnew file mode 100644 index 0000000..83ade67 --- /dev/null +++ b/27102-h/images/i094.png diff --git a/27102-h/images/i099.png b/27102-h/images/i099.png Binary files differnew file mode 100644 index 0000000..fccadfa --- /dev/null +++ b/27102-h/images/i099.png diff --git a/27102-h/images/i102.png b/27102-h/images/i102.png Binary files differnew file mode 100644 index 0000000..bf937c1 --- /dev/null +++ b/27102-h/images/i102.png diff --git a/27102-h/images/i107.png b/27102-h/images/i107.png Binary files differnew file mode 100644 index 0000000..603595d --- /dev/null +++ b/27102-h/images/i107.png diff --git a/27102-h/images/i117.png b/27102-h/images/i117.png Binary files differnew file mode 100644 index 0000000..8437c93 --- /dev/null +++ b/27102-h/images/i117.png diff --git a/27102-h/images/i125.jpg b/27102-h/images/i125.jpg Binary files differnew file mode 100644 index 0000000..8a33431 --- /dev/null +++ b/27102-h/images/i125.jpg diff --git a/27102-h/images/i144.png b/27102-h/images/i144.png Binary files differnew file mode 100644 index 0000000..66c6fa6 --- /dev/null +++ b/27102-h/images/i144.png |
