British Archaeological Association. Central Commit.

The Archaeological journal (Volume v. 34) online

. (page 21 of 54)
Online LibraryBritish Archaeological Association. Central CommitThe Archaeological journal (Volume v. 34) → online text (page 21 of 54)
Font size
QR-code for this ebook

I propose shortly to discuss the evidence upon which

these theories rest.

As regards the Roman theory. I wish I could sub-
scribe to this idea, and that the evidence of the building
pointed to its being an undoubted Roman basilica.

That the walls are erected of Roman materials there
can be no question, for undoubtedly the old Roman walls
formed the quarry from which they w^ere raised, and upon
comparison, the materials, Roman tiles, septaria, and
rubble stone are identical in each case, but the mode of
putting them together is very different. In the Roman
wall, as can be seen by the sketch of the fragment left,
the iii^st course consisted of a layer of tiles, then about
eighteen inches of septaria and rabble, then three courses
of tiles, then eighteen inches of septaria and rubble, again
three courses of tiles, and again the septaria and rubble ;
and wherever the walls were of sufficient heig-ht to show
any construction this arrangement of materials was carried
out ; and I would remark that the construction of the
walls of the Roman villa, which was discovered in
Chelmsford in 1849, were exactly of the same character
as the walls of this castrum. '

With regard to the cons traction of the chapel walls the
tiles are, as a rule, reserved for jambs of openings, or for
quoins, the main part of the wall being built of the sep-
taria and rubble without the intervening bands of tiles.

It must be remembered that the walls of the castrum
were 12 feet thick, and the builders meant that it should
be a stronghold in every sense of the word. We know
how the Romans excelled in military engineering. Can
it be believed that they would commit such a wretched
engineering mistake as :

1. To build out upon their wall of defence any building
not forming absolutely a building of defence, such as a
tower to watch from, or to enable them to sweep the face
of the wall A^dth some of the engines of defence ; and

2. To make a break of 21 feet in a wall of 12 feet in

1 A precisely similar mode of constiniction occurs at Burgh Castle. See article
on Porchester Ca.stle in the Winchester volume. — Ed.


thickness, and for that 21 feet to trust solely to a wall
2 ft. 4 in. thick.

I submit therefore that upon the evidence of the
construction of the walls not coinciding with the con-
struction adopted by the Romans in works of a similar
character, and the interpolation of such a building with
walls not much thicker tlian would be put up by a
speculative builder of the present day in the centre of a
wall of huge strength meant for defensive purposes, the
Roman tlieory must fall to the ground.

As regards the Saxon claim there can be no doubt
that after the exodus of the Roman legions the whole
country was in a disturbed state, and we are informed
that the sea kings of the North amused themselves
from time to time by swooping down upon the Eastern
coast of England, and carrying off such loot as they
could secure. Any building, therefore, of a military or
defensive character would no doubt be preserved — and
in such an exposed position as this Castrum occupied,
the shelter it would afford would be peculiarly valuable.
The military argument against the erection of the
building by the Romans would therefore have equal
force as regards the Saxons, but in addition there is
an absence in the building itself of the chief charac-
teristic of Saxon work, namely, the long and short
quoins — and there is a pecidiarity about the quoins which
I shall point out presently in deahng vdth a later period
which I apprehend will take it clearly out of the Saxon
period. I may also mention that the presence of buttresses
is an additional piece of evidence against the Saxon claim.

We now come to the Norman period. In a building
which is absolutely devoid of mouldings, and about
which there is not a fragment of carved or moulded
work, it is somewliat difhcult to fix upon any feature
by which to determine its precise date, but there
is one feature about this building which I think will
afford strong evidence that its erection could not have
been before a certain period, although we may not be able
satisftictorily to fix any subsequent date. I allude to the

Of these there are altogether seven. It has fallen to
my lot to have to do with a great many of the old parish


churches of Essex, and in very many of them I have found
remains of Norman work. Indeed it is not all an unusual
thing to find the shell of the building of the Norman or
transition from Norman to the Early English period with
windows and doors of later insertion. I might instance
Great Waltham, Broomfield, and Great Canfield as
examples, l:>ut I have invariably noted an entire absence
of buttresses of the Norman period in these buildings.

I do not mean to say that there are no Norman build-
ings with buttresses, because T beheve even in this
county there are one or two examples, but they are the
exceptions rather than the rule. The quoins are square,
and in very many instances formed of Roman tiles or
bricks, and I would here remark that from the large
number of Roman bricks and septaria which I have
found worked up in some old churches throughout the
county, the buildings left by the Romans must have
been far more numerous than we have any idea of;
because, in addition to their serving as quarries for
any new building, they were too irresistible to be
neglected by the road maker. And not only in Essex do
we find a general absence of buttresses in buildings of this
class but in other counties as Avell, and where buttresses
in buildings of a larger class are used, the projection is so
slight that the wall space between has more the appearance
of being recessed than the buttresses of being projected.
And again when buttresses were used they generally
covered the angle.

Now in this building we find the buttresses of consider-
able projection, and although from time and rough usage
they have been much defaced, there is still sufficient
evidence to prove that originally they projected at least
2 ft., thus indicating a period of erection coinciding with
what we understand as the Early English period, or at
any rate Transitional Norman ; but there is still another
feature which was certainly not in use prior to the Early
English period, and that is the position of the angle
buttresses. They are not exactly at the angle, but the
quoin of the building is shewn for some few inches before
the buttress breaks out. I should not like to make the
sweeping assertion that in no building previous to the
Early English period does such a feature exist. All I can


216 ST. Peter's on the wall,

say is, I have never met with an example, and I think
I am justified in saying, that it is a feature admittedly of
a later date than the Early Norman period.

I may be met with the suggestion, that these buttresses
have been added, but upon a very close examination I
could not find any evidence in su]3port of this theory.
The work is of the same character and materials as the
bulk of the walls, and is, I think, unquestionably bonded
in. I have met with many instances where buttresses
have been added to buildings of an earlier date, but there
has always been a marked difference between the work of
the original wall and that of the buttress ; I think a
tolerably conchisive piece of evidence as to the buttresses
forming part of the old work is the fact of their crumbUng
away to within a very few inches of the face of the wall,
if they had been added they would in many cases have
left the old work bodily from the rough usage they have
undoubtedly received.

It is most unfortiuiate that we have no documentary
evidence upon the subject of this building. It is true
that Camden cites Bede, and Ralph Virgil, monk of
Coggeshall , to show that Cedd l)uilt a chapel in the city of
Mancester ; but in addition to the arguments I have before
named upon this point, I apprehend that the chapel was
built in the city and not in the fortress, and therefore the
chapel thus alluded to was destroyed with the city.

The only other mention we have of this building is by
Morant, who informs us that in 1442, a jury found that
this building, which was then undoubtedly used as a
chapel, had a chancel, nave, and small tower with two
bells, that it was burnt, and the chancel was repaired by
the Hector and the nave by the parishioners, but when
it was founded and by whom they know not. The nave
only now exists, but when the excavations to which I
have before alluded took place, we found a confirmation
of this return by the jury of 1442, and I have marked
upon the general plans the foundations of an apse at the
east end, no doubt the chancel alluded to, and at the west
end the foundations, no doubt of the tower, which were
then exposed, and are now again all covered up ;
in further confirmation of the former existence of
the apse, I would refer to the broken walls at the east


end, clearly proving that the buildmg was in some form
or another continued in that dii-ection.

This semi-circular apse is strongly relied upon by some
as proving its undoubted Norman character, but I tliink
we must not place too much reliance upon this point, for
it must be remembered that in old time the abbey of St.
Valery, in Picardy, held one half of this parish. We also
know that the round apse was very commonly adopted in
France, even at a later ]jeriod than that corresponding with
our Norman work ; and it is possible that the architect
may have been of foreign extraction, and takmg into con-
sideration the very remote position of Bradwell, far away
from the great thoroughfares of the county, access by
sea was probably as convenient as that by land, and thus
the introduction of the apse may be accounted for. There
is one other point in connection with this apse which
may be worth a passing thought.

It is clear that the old Roman wall was strengthened
with at least one circular tower, and these towers may
possibly have had narrow openings either for look-out or
purposes. May not the materials thus worked to a
defensive circular face have suggested their re-production
in a circular form in the new building to be erected ?

The absence of windows has been commented upon. If
there is one feature of our Norman and Early English
Churches in this district more decided than another, it
is the extreme smallness of the windows, generally not
more than six inches wide outside, but splaying off, of
course, to a much greater width inside. These windows
would, when the building was converted into a barn, be
useless, and therefore I can readily imagine that they
would be widened to the width of the inner splay or
thereabouts, and converted into loops to enable the
labourers to load the bays of the barn with corn. I
apprehend that two of these narrow windows on either
side, together with those in the apse, would be considered
tpiite sufficient for lighting purposes.

A very curious feature is the starting of an arch at the
east end. One would naturally expect to find the remains
of an arch which ^^'Ould cover the Avhole width of the nave,
but if this arch is completed in a semi-circidar form it
would scarcely cover half the width; it would seem, there-


fore, that if tliere was only one arcli it must have l)een
very flat at the top or four- centred. The other alternative
seems to be a double arch with a pier in the centre — a
feature which, if I rememljer rightly, is to be seen in the
so called chapel at Beeleigh Abbey.

Taking a survey of the whole building, both as regards
the visible, and what is now the invisible parts of it, and
relying mainly upon the buttresses which I might almost
say are the only architectural features left, I would
submit that the date of this building may be fixed at the
latter end of the twelfth century, and that it was built
for ecclesiastical purposes.





During the autumns of 1 875 and 1876,1 paid visits to the
church of Slapton,a small village four miles from Towcester,
and to that of Raunds, a few miles from Higham Ferrers,
both in the county of Northampton. And it is but
right to state, that, in both places, I was the guest of the
incumbent, with much kindly hospitality. The church
of Raunds has Litely been restored by Sir Gilbert Scott,
and it was through him that I first became acquainted with
the discovery of the extraordinary series of paintings in
that church. The paintings of Slapton were discovered by
the exertions of the late rector and his lady, Mr. and Mrs.
Edman, the latter herself having worked in removing the

As time after time, these discoveries are made, it is
found, that there is a recurrence of the same subject,
therefore to avoid a tedious repetition of description,
it is now necessary to classify and to generaUze, as
well as to allude to the principles, which governed the
decoration of our churches during the middle ages. A
most useful list of the paintings discovered and record-
ed has been drawn up under the editorial care of our
friend Mr. Soden Smith, and published by the authorities
of South Kensino-ton Museum. This hst I hold to be
valuable in more ways than one, and I consider it nuist
be appealed to by those, who, in future, would study the
religious teaching of our ancestors. Briefly let me state,
one fact, that subjects from the Bible are rare, and one of
the most so is that of the " Last Supper." Instead of
ilhistrating the doctrine of the Euchaiist by that, it is
preferred to do so by an illustration of the story of St.
Gregory's Mass, and this is significant, because it enforces


the doctrine of transubstantiation. The subjects, mostly
found, are taken from legends of saints, and from a class to
which we must give the name of moralities. Some of the
legends of the saints we must look u^Don as parables or
apologues, and, as such, they have in them much beautiful
teaching. Turn them into real histories and you degrade
them. If we would comprehend these paintings in the
spirit in which they were intended, which in all justice to
our forefathers we ought to do, we must never forget what
the ecclesiastical writers say of them from the eighth to
the fifteenth century, viz., that they are for instruction, for
the use of those who cannot read — in fact, the " Book of
the ignorant." Any criticism which does not recognise
this is unsound and unjust.

Now, of all subjects, St. Christopher is the most com-
monly found, and is always placed where it can be most
readily seen by the worshipper on entering the church,
usually, therefore on the north waJl. The next most in
favour in England was St. George, our patron saint,
generally placed on the south wall, often opposite to that
of St. Christopher. The legends of both these saints are
typical. Both are unquestionably apologues and nothing
more. The story of St. Christopher is fully illustrated in
an article of mine, published in the collections of the
Surrey Archaeological Society,' and to that I must refer
for full details.

Among the female saints, the most popular was St.
Katharine of Alexandria, and her legend is of frequent

Of the so called moralities, there are two, which are
mostly found. One is '' Soul weighing," the history of
Avliich carries us back into the remotest antiquity. Then
comes that of " The three Kings dead and the three Kings
living," which subject has been fully illustrated by myself
in an Article on the Paintings in Battell Church, Sussex,''
and also in one by our late friend, Albert Way, in the
Journal of this Society. But of this no example, yet
discovered, can compare in importance with that at Baunds.
Not only is it finer for the art it displays, but its size is
grand and imposing, the figures being much beyond the

' Vol. iii.
* Journal of Britiah Archtuological Association, Vol. ii. 152.


size of life. It is on the north wall of the nave, filling
up spaces between the spandriJs of the arches. A
figure of St. Christopher separates it from the symbohc
representation of the " Seven Deadly Sins," and altogether
it makes the most complete and effective decoration, yet
discovered in any of our mediajval churclies. The whole
of this series, excepting the figure of St. Christopher, is
dedicated to the exemplification of the sin of pride, and
instability of all worldly things, with the moral that all
ends in death. I will begin my description with the
painting of the " Seven Deadly Sins." (Vide Plate I.)

It represents a female in rich attire having the long
flowing garments of the fifteenth century. A closely fitting
corse is at her waist, worn over a richly embroidered gown,
and she wears an ample mantle lined with ermine. She is
crowned, and holds a sceptre in each hand. Her face
has somewhat of a scornful look, the eyes looking half
shut: her neck, with a necklace around it, is ba're, as
well as her bosom. Beneath her is the yawning mouth
of a monster, signifying Hell, out of which flames are
issuing, and in the midst is a figure representing a soul in
torment. ^ At her head, on each side, is a demon. From
her body issue six demoniac forms winged, each vomitino-
forth figures, illustrative of each sin; and these are
accompanied by another figure, a shade, which seems
to point the moral. Over the head of the principal
figure IS a scroll; some few letters remaining suggest,
thatit may have been "Imago Superbia3 et Inanis
Glorise " Over each of the groups are other scrolls, on
which has been written the name of the sin symbolised.
Then, at her right hand, is a hideous cadaverous figure of
Death, holding a lance in knightly fashion, with which he
pierces the woman's side.

This composition is intended to illustrate the sin of
Pride, as the mother of all the other sins, and the moral
that all ends in death and punishment hereafter. That
this view is not based on mere conjecture, I shall now
proceed to show, and to give a history, as far as possible
oi the of the ideas embodied, as far as I can
trace them in the Christian Church, and particularly in
mediaeval theology.

First, let me direct attention to the writings of


the monk Cfesarlus/ who hved in the twelfth and thir-
teenth century, to whom I have often referred. In his
dialogue on "Temptation," is a chapter entitled "Pride
and her Six Daughters."

In the preceding one he says "Seven are the principal
vices springing from one virulent root, that is to say,
Pride, from which almost all temptations proceed. The
first vice of Pride succeeding to it is " Empty Glory."
The second is "Anger;" third, "Envy;" fourth, "Sloth;"
fifth, "Avarice;" sixth, "Gluttony" (Gula vel Gastri-
margia) ; seventh, "Luxury." He then classes these.
He calls some spiritual, as " Empty Glory," " Anger,"
and " Envy ;" others corporal, as " Gluttony " and
"Luxury;" some mixed, as "Sloth" and "Avarice."
He proceeds to say, Lucifer, ejected from Heaven on
account of Pride, diffused himself in the human heart,
darkened by mortal sins ; and, that the sins were desig-
nated by the seven devils ejected from Mary Magdalene.
He then minutely defines "Pride" as being of two kinds
— one within, as in elation of the heart ; the other with-
out, as in works of ostentation. He then defines "Anger,"
quoting many passages of Scripture. " Anger," he says,
"is a fire." "Envy," he continues, "is born of anger;
" indeed, an inveterate anger, and is a hatred of another's
" felicity. This vice makes a devil of an angel, and was the
" cause of man being ejected from Pai^adise." The next vice,
" Sloth" (Accidia) he states to be much too importunate
to religious men. The Novice asks, " What is the
meaning of Accidia?" it having a somewhat barbarous
sound. The question is interesting, for our Monk is a
scholar, and fond of quoting the classics. He explains
the word as being " quasi acidia," rendering spiritual
works acid and insipid, as malice, rancour, pusillanimity,
desperation, a torpor concerning the commandments, a
wandering of the mind about unlawful things. We now
come to " Avarice," which he calls an insatiable and
immoderate appetite of having all things, and he quotes
the Aj)ostle, "The root of all evils is Avarice."'^ The
sixth vice is "Gluttony" (Gula), which he styles the

1 Dlahffus Miraculonim. C<esarius Konigswinter on the Ithinc.
was a monk of tho Cistercian Order of ^ Timothy vi, 10: " Love of money,"

tho Monastery of Hcistorbach, near in our Version.


immoderate cause and appetite of eating and drinking.
Last and seventh, "Luxiny" (Luxuria), the which he
minutely describes, and which in mediaeval theology
siofnifies illicit affections.

Having thus given the theology, I will now proceed to
describe the emblematical fissures in ao-reement with it.
It will be observed that these, w^hich represent the six
daughters of Pride, are arranged on each side the principal
figure. On her right, first comes " Avarice," and un-
fortunately some details here are indistinct ; but the demon
seems to issue from the head, as possibly indicating, that it
was a vice peculiar to the mind. The figure also appears to
be holding, what must be intended to represent, sacks or
purses of money, but this is somewhat defaced. Next,
beneath this, is " Ira" (Anger), and here the figure from the
demon's mouth exhibits drops of blood issuing from tire
breast ; and another figure, like a shade or shadow, stands
by pointing at the w^ound, as probably showing the
dangerous effects of Anger. Beneath this comes "Invidia"
(Envy), tearing her breast, as it appears, — the shade again
stands by pointing.

We now pass to those on the left side, which show the
vices mostly corporal. First is " Gula," in which the
figure has lost its distinctive emblem, and tlie shade seems
to be an animal,' but is too defaced to speak with certainty.
The next is " Luxuria," shown in a most unmistakable
manner : lastly " Accidia ;" here the figure seems as if
wearily stretching, and the shade, apparently, quickly
moving towards it with uplifted switch.

We must not for one moment suppose that in this
curious and interesting composition, we get the work of
an individual mind. It is the result of a series of develop-
ments, doubtless handed down from very early times.
Though by far the most complete and the finest of the
various illustrations of the "' Seven Deadly Sins," with
which we are acquainted, it will be well to make a com-
parison with others. One discovered a few years ago at
Wisborough Green, in Sussex, gave a large nude female
figure with a series of winged demons or dragons issuing
from the different parts of the body, in which each sin is
supposed to reside, or to be affected by. In this we get

1 The emblematical animal usually given to Gula is a hog.


another version but by no means so complete nor so full of
thought as that at Raunds. On a screen at Catfield, in
Norfolk, remain representations of three of the deadly sins,
viz., Pride, a figure with a mirror and comb ; Anger, with
two knives in the breast, from which issue bloody drops ;
and Avarice, holding out two money bags.' Each issue
from a yawning mouth. ^ At Ingatestone, in Essex, the
*' Seven Deadly Sins" are represented in the form of a
wheel, the subjects being between the spokes. Pride is
a lady seated, attiring by the assistance of a maid. Anger
is a fight between two persons. Luxury, a man kissing
a girl. Sloth, a man in bed, seemingly in a monastery.^
Avarice, a miser with his money. Ghittony, men and
women drinking in a cellar. Envy, scene before a justice,
witnesses swearing falsely. In the centre is Hell's mouth.
In the early ages of Christianity there was no such
classification as the " Seven Deadly Sins." This belongs to
a later time, and was possibly due to the spread of monas-
ticism. Amongst the poems of the poet Prudentius, who
lived in the fourth century, and was the contemporary of
St. Ambrose, is one entituled " Psychomachia," v/liich
arrays the Virtues in a struggle with the Vices. It is
too classical in its allusions to help us much in the history
of our subject; but it serves to point out the changes, which
a later time had developed. Here are Superbia, Ira, and
Avaritia. There is also Luxuria, but it is as we understand

Online LibraryBritish Archaeological Association. Central CommitThe Archaeological journal (Volume v. 34) → online text (page 21 of 54)