Part 10
The original Norman chancel was destroyed about the year 1320, when a new chancel was built, of which little now remains, worked into the present one, and one bay of the north wall, with a pillar, a part of the east-end wall, and the jambs of the arch at the east end of the north aisle.
The Transitional aisles were taken down, and the present ones, with the north transept, were erected about 1420. At the same time the clerestory was heightened, and the present windows were inserted. Fortunately the builders did not destroy the Transitional work.
When the wider aisles of Whaplode were erected, the builders, as at Moulton, preserved the original Transitional south doorway and re-erected it, and also the west doorway, which was erected in 1180, and is, with the two doorways at Moulton, the oldest in the district.
The north and south porches are post-Reformation.
The roof of the nave, now being repaired, is a good example of the Rectilinear Period.
The font is a creditable imitation of a Norman one, but is of post-Reformation work.
The area of this church is so great that only the eastern portions of the nave (the Norman portion) and aisles are fitted with open seats; the rest of the church is entirely open, which gives it a cathedral appearance. There is a fine seventeenth-century monument to Sir Antony Irby and his wife, ancestors of the Right Hon. Lord Boston. There were formerly three chapels in the church. Colonel Holles, when he visited the church about 1641, found memorials to the families of Fitzwalter, Littlebury, Rye, Beke, Quaplod, Venables, Kyrketon, Haultoft, Walpole, Pulvertoft, Welby, Ogle, and others.
ALL SAINTS’, HOLBEACH
Of this large and beautiful church little need be written. It is a fine Curvilinear building, though merging into Rectilinear in the tower and spire. It belongs to the latter part of the period, and is the only church in the neighbourhood which is built in one style of architecture. The work of erecting the edifice was practically continuous from beginning to finish. It was built in the reigns of Edward III. and Richard II., probably between 1340 and 1380.
The present church is not the first church at Holbeach—one would be inclined to believe it was the third; the first would be a small Saxon church, and the second a small Norman one, but a more substantial structure than the first.
With regard to the earlier church or churches at Holbeach, we have considerable documentary evidence, although we find few if any of their remains in the present church, unless the Norman capital which lies on the floor at the south-east corner of the nave, and some few of the very numerous corbel heads at the terminations of the hood-moulds of the clerestory windows, which are grotesque and rude enough to have been the production of Norman workmen, formed parts of the earlier Norman church.
There is no mention of a church at Holbeach in the Domesday Survey, but Pope Alexander in 1177 addressed a deed to Spalding Abbey confirming the possessions of the Priory (in this district), and amongst them we find it held “the Church of Holbeach with all pertaining unto it.”
Again, in 1189, we find Thomas de Multon, Lord of Holbeach, and others, who conspired against the Abbot of Croyland, meeting in the Church of Holbeach.
In 1194, on the morrow of the Holy Trinity, a settlement was arrived at between Fulco d’Oiri, who claimed the advowson of the Church of All Saints, Holbeach, and the Chapel of St. Peter in Holbeach; and he made over the advowson to Conan, fil Elie de Holbeche, and his heirs for 21s. rent in Holbeche, and for one “calcaria de aurata” (a pair of gilt spurs) at Easter for all services.
The advowson of Holbeach, prior to the Bishop of Lincoln acquiring the same, had belonged to the Multon family, a member of whom in King Henry III.’s reign had a grant of a weekly market and also fairs at Holbeach. The various legal suits brought to recover the advowson of Holbeach are most interesting reading, and are given in Macdonald’s _History of Holbeach_, a work well worth consulting.
In 1332, however, the church had a new patron—Henry, Bishop of Lincoln. By deed dated at Stone, in the county of Northampton, “on the nearest Wednesday after the feast of St. Martin,” the Bishop, in the sixth year of the reign of Edward III. (1332), William de Harcourt, Knt., for the sum of £500, made over to Henry, by divine permission Bishop of Lincoln, the advowson of the Church of Holbeach; and in the Lincoln Register there is a charter given in 1332 by William de Harcourt, Knight, appointing two attorneys to put the Bishop in possession of Holbeach Church.
The Pope in 1334 despatched a papal bull to the Bishops of Hereford, Ely, and Durham, directing that the Church of Holbeach, the patronage of which the Bishop of Lincoln had lately acquired, should be appropriated to the see of Lincoln.
On 5th February 1334, 7 Edward III. (dated at Nettleham), the Bishop of Lincoln granted a charter to Dominus Thomas de ... appointing him his (the Bishop’s) attorney to receive seisin of the Church at Holbeach.
In 1335 a licence was granted to William de Goseberkyrk, the newly appointed Vicar of Holbeach, to hear confessions in reserved cases.
It appears that almost directly the Bishop of Lincoln obtained possession of the advowson, and had placed his nominee into the vicarage, he at once set about building the present church at Holbeach, which then excelled the two neighbouring churches of Moulton and Whaplode. This doubtless led the monks of Spalding and Croyland to enlarge their respective churches, and rekindled the church-building energy of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries.
The visitor will not fail to notice the north porch. In appearance it is more in keeping for a baronial castle than a church porch. It is no part of the original design or building, and was added years afterwards. It was flanked at the north-east and south-east angles with massive circular towers, one of which leads to the parvise above, and the other appears to have been used as a cell or porter’s lodge.
Previously to being erected at Holbeach it had, we believe, formed part of the manorial castle of the Multon family at Moulton. A mere glance at the structure will show it was never designed for an ecclesiastical building. It was probably removed from Moulton when the castle fell into decay in the fifteenth century. The Multon family had died out for want of males, and their property had been divided among co-heiresses.
The south porch and door are part of the original building; the door is a beautiful example of the woodwork of the period. The font is also a good example of the period.
The church has been well restored in recent years, and several painted glass windows have been inserted. The work of restoration commenced when the late Rev. Arthur Brook was the vicar, and has been continued in the time of the present vicar, the Rev. Canon Hemmans. The church well deserves a visit.
There is a fine altar tomb to the memory of Sir Humphrey Littlebury, and when about the year 1640 Colonel Holles visited the church he found armorial bearings and inscriptions to members of the families of Littlebury, Kirketon, Calow, Welby, Leyke, and others.
There are chimes in the tower, erected in 1776 by Edward Arnold of St. Neots, and a fine ring of eight bells.
ST. MARY MAGDALENE, FLEET
This church was built in the Curvilinear Period; it is chiefly notable for its detached south-west tower with spire, which, though of no great size, are well-proportioned and of good design. The spire is perfectly plain. There are some well-carved corbel heads serving as supports to the timbers of the roof.
This church has its origin from the laity, most probably from members of the Multon family, who were lords of the manor, or from the Fitzwalters and Haringtons, who divided the Multon family properties through marrying the co-heiresses of that family.
The church has been wisely and well restored.
ST. MARY MAGDALENE’S, GEDNEY
This church, like Holbeach, is a beautiful fabric, and many think the clerestory is the finest in the district. The history of the church is written in stone—the tower gives it.
“Of the original building,” writes Mr. Sharpe, “nothing but the lower part of the west tower now remains. It is not improbable, however, that the pair of double lancet openings, now forming a lower storey of the present cell chamber, was the belfry-stage of the original tower; and that three different roofs, of which the weatherings still remain on its east wall, have at different times abutted against it. If this be so, the history of this church and its three principal changes of form are written on this wall. The first roof, the ridge of which was below the sill of these lancet windows, covered a low church of the Lancet or Transitional Period. The second roof was that of the more pretentious Curvilinear nave, when the whole church received a new character, a lofty ground storey and spacious side aisles. The third roof, rising high up into these lancet windows, marks the epoch when the handsome Rectilinear clerestory was added and the tower raised another stage, in preparation for a lofty spire that was never executed.”
In the Curvilinear Period the spacious chancel, with its large plain three-light windows, was erected. The ground storey of the nave and the side aisles were shortly afterwards built. The south doorway is of good workmanship for a village church of this period. The twelve three-light clerestory windows are of the Rectilinear Period, as are also the battlemented parapet and pinnacles, also the upper storey of the tower.
The south porch and parvise are of this period, as is also the nave roof and the small square-headed window—low side window in the south wall of the chancel.
On the south door, which is a fine specimen of the period, is this inscription—
PAX XTI SIT HUIC DOMUI ET OMNIBUS HABITANTIBUS IN EA HIC REQUIES NOSTRA.
The east window of the north aisle contains old stained glass. The church is now undergoing restoration, but as there are some of the original oaken open benches still in the church, the restorers should have no difficulty in putting in suitable woodwork.
Dr. Stukeley, the Holbeach antiquary of the eighteenth century, states: “This church was built by the abbots of Croyland, who had a stately house on the north side of it and vast possessions in the parish. The upper part of the tower is of the same date as the church, but built upon older work; both were no doubt built by the abbots—assisted by charitable donations. In the chancel window is a religious in his habits.”
In the account of Holbeach Church we saw how Fulko de Oiri in 1194 parted with the advowson of Holbeach, and there is little doubt that he had the advowson of the church at Gedney, though Croyland had a manor in that parish.
As stated in the account of Whaplode Church (1253-1281), Ralph Mershe, the Abbot of Croyland, at great expense and after long suits at law, gained the _manor_ of Gedney and the church at Whaplode, but it does not follow he had, at the time, the advowson of Gedney—on the contrary, the following pedigrees from the Plea Roll of 7 Edw. III. and 8 Edw. III. clearly show he had not:—
PLEA ROLLS (_De Banco_, Easter, 7 Edw. III.).
Lincoln—
James de Ros sues the Abbot of Croyland for the advowson of the Church of Gedeneye (Gedney).
Falk de Oyry, _temp._ Henry III. | Emecina. | Giles de Gousille, 35 Henry III. | Peter. | Ralph. | Ralph. | Margaret = Philip le Despenser.
In the following year, in the suit in _Coram Rege_, Hilary, 8 Edw. III.:—
Lincoln—
The King sues James de Roos for the next presentation to the Church of Gedeneye, which he claimed as guardian of Ralph de Goushill.
Fulk D’Oyry, _temp._ Henry III. | Emytine. | Giles de Goushill, 35 Henry III. | Peter. | Ralph. | Ralph under age in charge of the King.
There is in the Lincoln Will Registry the will of a Philip Goushill of Gedney, dated in the year 1401.
Eleanor de Clare, who was the granddaughter of Edward I. by his wife Eleanor of Castile, married Ralph le Despenser, who was hung in 1326, and their fourth son Philip, who died in 1313, married Margaret, daughter and heiress of Ralph le Goushill; and when Colonel Holles visited Gedney Church about 1640 he found the arms and monuments to the families of Despensers, Roos, Clare, D’Oyry, Goushill, Welbys, and others.
Doubtless Stukeley is correct in stating the Curvilinear church of Gedney was built under the direction and influence of Croyland, aided by the laity; but one should be disposed to consider the earlier churches were not built by the monks of Croyland. However, it is too long a subject to discuss in this article.
SUTTON ST. MARY
We have, in our accounts of the churches of Moulton, Whaplode, and Weston, frequently referred to the fabric of the Church of Sutton St. Mary and to the interesting Transitional work it contains.
The origin of the church is clearly shown by a charter, given at the close of the twelfth century (about 1180), by which the site was conveyed to the monastery of Castle Acre in Norfolk.
“Know all men present and to come, that I, William son of Erneis, by the permission of Nicholaa, my wife, give and grant and by this my charter confirm, to God and S. Mary of Acre and the monks serving God, three acres in Sutton, in the field which is called ‘the old fenland,’ near a road, to build a parish church, as a free and perpetual gift for the salvation of my soul and of Nicholaa, my wife, and for the soul of my father, Robert son of Erneis, and the soul of my mother, and for the souls of all my ancestors, and for the soul of Richard de Haia, and for the souls of all his ancestors. And I desire that the previous wooden church of the same town, as soon as the said new church is built, be taken away, and the bodies there buried be carried into the burial ground of the new church and there reinterred, and the old burial ground utterly destroyed.
“Witnesses: John the Chaplain, Doun Bardolph, Radulph Travers, and others.”
It appears that Robert de Haia, about half a century previously, had come into possession of the manor of Sutton, in Holland, through his wife, and had built the small church referred to in the charter.
It is probably through Nicholaa that the monks of Castle Acre were enabled to find the funds to build the Transitional-Lancet work in the present church, as she was a large benefactress to the abbey.
John of Gaunt possessed the manor of Sutton through marriage with Blanche of Lancaster, but whether he contributed to the funds for enlarging the church there is no evidence to show, but one may assume the lords of the large manor of Sutton aided the monks.
The Guild of St. Thomas of Canterbury, founded in the reign of Henry IV., had a chapel in the church, in which masses were said for the souls of Henry IV., his Queen, and John of Gaunt.
Viewing the church from the exterior, one sees no signs of any part of the early Transitional church—the Rectilinear work completely covers it; but on entering we at once observe the interesting early Transitional work of the nave and lower clerestory.
The seven compartments of the nave (ground and clerestory) remain nearly perfect, but in a somewhat altered condition, for the nave walls and roof having been raised, and higher aisles added, the Transitional clerestory now only serves as a blind storey to the later Rectilinear superstructure.
The piers and pier arches should be compared with those at Whaplode, Moulton, and Weston, with which they make an instructive lesson.
The tower and spire are quite early Lancet work. Mr. Sharpe remarks:—
“Unquestionably one of the earliest and most remarkable designs of the Lancet Period in the kingdom—scarcely clear of Transitional influence, erected indeed at the very commencement of the period, and standing originally completely clear of the church on four noble arches, crowned, moreover, by a lofty wooden lead-covered spire flanked by four similar wooden lead-covered pinnacles—it must have been, at the time it was erected, one of the most striking structures in the country.
“It is especially valuable to us as conveying an idea of the manner in which many of the towers of our cathedrals and parish churches of this period, now deprived of their spires, were originally finished; and it is remarkable as one of the very few which, having escaped fire and decay, remains still in its original position.”
The westmost part of the south aisle, with its windows, is of the Curvilinear Period, so is the small building at the north-east corner of the chancel.
In the following period (the Rectilinear) are the lofty side aisles and the north and south porches.
The font is the original Norman one, though it has been new-worked.
THE CHURCH OF ST. ANDREW, HECKINGTON
BY W. G. WATKINS, A.R.I.B.A.
Five miles east from the market town of Sleaford, just where the rolling uplands dip down into the great fen stretching out to Boston and the Wash, lies the village of Heckington; it is mentioned in Domesday as Heckintune, where one Gilbert de Gaunt held land, and there was a priest and a church. This same Gilbert de Gaunt had accompanied William the Conqueror to England, and for his services was rewarded with large grants of land in this and many other counties; he rebuilt the Abbey of Bardney, on the banks of the river Witham, about nine miles from Lincoln; richly endowed it; and was there buried in 1094, leaving his son Walter to further enrich the abbey, amongst other endowments, with all the tithe of corn and hay of his land in Heckington. In 1345 it is recorded that Roger de Barrowe, the then Abbot of Bardney, obtained a royal licence to appropriate the Church of Heckington; and it is interesting to note that, among other tomb slabs revealed by the excavation of the abbey church in 1909, was that of this same Roger de Barrowe, while the foundations of the choir and transept showed that they were part of the same Norman church which the piety of Gilbert de Gaunt had raised.
At the time Roger de Barrowe was obtaining his licence one of those waves of building activity that swept over certain localities in the Middle Ages seems to have reached the district round Heckington. The naves of Sleaford, Silk Willoughby, Billingboro, Swayton, and Helpringham, and the whole Church of Ewerby, were rising white from the masons’ chisel in the new and graceful Curvilinear style; but it was at Heckington that this local school, through the resources of the rich and powerful abbey, were able to crown their work by one of the finest and most complete parish churches to be found in this or any other one period. The exact date at which the work was commenced is uncertain, but it appears that closely subsequent to the appropriation of the church by the abbey in 1345 the old fabric was swept away, and the foundations of the new structure laid. Richard de Potesgrave, presented to the living by King Edward in 1307, was the then vicar; his effigy lies under an arched recess on the north side of the chancel, the usual position for the founder’s tomb, and an inscription, now lost, recorded that he built the chancel of the church in honour of the Blessed Mary, St. Andrew, and All Saints, which may not necessarily mean that he provided the funds, but that the work was done under his care, just as we say that Bishop Hugh built the choir of Lincoln Cathedral.
Except in the great Perpendicular structures of East Anglia, it is comparatively rare to find a parish church built at one effort, in one style, and untouched by subsequent accretions, as at Heckington—so rare, in fact, that the picturesqueness and irregularity arising from the association of various styles and dates in the majority of our churches has almost come to be looked upon as an essential part of our Gothic architecture, and one of its leading characteristics; and though it is true that the mediæval builder excelled in the charming _naïveté_ with which he superimposed his own work upon and adapted it to that of his predecessors, yet when the opportunity occurred of starting _de novo_, he built with dignity and symmetry, and devoid of intentional irregularity or straining after what we call picturesqueness. So at Heckington Church we find a perfectly symmetrical and dignified plan of apparently orthodox cruciform type, and with a western tower; while a more critical examination shows that the transepts are not in their usual position immediately west of the chancel, but separated therefrom by a short bay of aisleless nave, being, as a matter of fact, not really transepts at all, but attached chapels. And their position is therefore logical, for here the tower is, very properly for a small parish church, at the west end, while the true cruciform plan demands, nay requires it, on the crossing.
How well this apparent eccentricity and departure from the orthodox was justified by results is shown as the church is approached from the south-west, whence the nave may be seen continuing through and past the transepts, which are kept on a lower level than the nave, and thus break up the structure into a beautiful piece of grouping, without in any way detracting from its apparent length.
The tower and spire, 97 feet high to the parapet, and 182 feet to the top of the vane, is an interesting example of the transition stage between the early broach spire and the pinnacle and flying buttress treatment of the Perpendicular Period; for here are both pinnacles and broaches, the former hexagonal in plan, and attached to the broaches by gablets, through which openings are pierced, forming a continuous walk behind the parapet. The pinnacles are too high and the general grouping at the base of the spire too heavy for its height, and it seems likely that the architect used the proportions he had been accustomed to in a broached spire and parapetless tower as at the neighbouring Church of Ewerby (possibly by the same hand), and failed to allow for the shortening effect of the parapet and pinnacles. The outline of the spire has no “entasis” or swelling to counteract the drooping effect of the converging straight lines, but the same result has been achieved by the gablets of the eight “lucarnes,” or spire lights, which add bulk, and at the same time break the continuity of the outline; at Ewerby, which has no spire lights, the entasis is distinctly noticeable. Sometimes this refinement was carried to excess, as at Leadenham in this county, where the result has been to produce a grotesque resemblance to a sugar-loaf. No doubt the elaborate crocketing of the angles of later spires was another expedient to the same end.