Inside Front Cover Q3 3/6/2003 2:13 Pm Page 1
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Cover Q3 3/6/2003 2:11 pm Page 1 ECCLESIOLOGY TODAY Journal of the Ecclesiological Society, successor to the Cambridge Camden Society of 1839 Registered Charity no. 210501 Issue 31, May 2003 Inside Front Cover Q3 3/6/2003 2:13 pm Page 1 CHAIRMAN’S COMMENTS Members who have been with the Society for some time will be saddended to hear of the recent death of Anna Zaharova, who was very active in the Society’s affairs in the 1980s.We hope to carry an appreciation of her work for the Society in our next issue. Now for an apology, or set of apologies. I have been a bit of a bottleneck in the Society’s affairs of late, for a variety of reasons. As a result, the promised new format of Ecclesiology Today has not yet been finalised - we need to get the details right, and I have held matters up. Nor have we yet transferred all the stock of the Society’s publications up to Whitby, where Dr Ockelton is setting up shop for members wanting to buy back copies; she has, however, been kept busy selling very sastisfactory numbers of Kenneth Richardson’s book on Southwark churches. Finally, as I write, the Society’s annual conference on 4th October is still being shaped: I hope the success of our previous conferences will encourage you to book, even though full details are not yet available. Now, two appeals for help. First, we are reviewing our visits policy, as attendance at these is highly erratic and sometimes too low for comfort. If you have any views about how we should set about organising our visits programme in future, please drop me or Christopher Webster a line. Secondly, we are looking for someone who has some experience as a researcher and writer, lives in London, has access to a computer for word-processing, and would like to write an article on some aspect of the history of the Society since 1879 (when the current Society was founded).This is for our 125th anniversary next year.We can point you to the relevant archives and give guidance. Contact me or Dr James Johnston if you’d like to find out more. Finally,as you’ll see from the enclosure, our AGM is on the 2nd July.The business part of the evening is normally carried out pretty briskly,so that the centre of gravity remains the lecture and informal reception.We should have a pleasant evening, and I and other members of Council look forward to seeing you there. Trevor Cooper May 2003 Cover picture:All Saints’, Margaret Street, London, Baptistery window by O’Connor c.1857 (Michael Kerney). See page 47. Eccles 31 ver 2Q3B 3/6/2003 1:52 pm Page 1 CONTENTS ‘UNLUCKY EXPERIMENTS IN STATUES’: RESTORING THE WINCHESTER GREAT SCREEN 3 Geoff Brandwood THE VICTORIAN CHURCH 13 A TRAFFIC IN PIETY:THE LURE OF CONTINENTAL 14 CHURCH FURNITURE IN THE EARLY 19TH CENTURY Charles Tracy BOOKS FOR SALE 22 FATHER CLIVE LUGET & THE VISIONS OF MIDDLETON 23 Robert Halliday THE HISTORY OF ILAM CROSS, STAFFORDSHIRE 30 Phil Mottram BOOK REVIEWS 37 ODDS & ENDS 44 LETTERS 47 TYNTESFIELD 47 CHURCH VANDALISM 48 CHURCH CRAWLER REPORTS 51 Phil Draper 1 Eccles 31 ver 2Q3B 3/6/2003 1:52 pm Page 2 Sedding’s overall design for the Great Screen published as part of the obituary tributes to the architect (Builder, 10 October 1891). 2 Eccles 31 ver 2Q3B 3/6/2003 1:52 pm Page 3 ‘UNLUCKY EXPERIMENTS IN STATUES’: RESTORING THE WINCHESTER GREAT SCREEN.1 Geoff Brandwood PHILIP JACOB was the Archdeacon of Winchester from 1860.2 He became a much-loved figure in the city and the diocese and, after his death on 28 December 1884, thoughts turned immedi- ately to creating a suitable memorial to him.A public meeting in early January decided this should take the form of restoring the enormous 15th-century reredos at the east end of the Cathedral, usu- ally referred to as the ‘Great Screen’.3 A Memorial Committee was set up to collect funds and thus began a project that was to last fourteen years, occupy two of the key architects of the late Gothic Revival, and was, in its earlier stages, to be attended by a catalogue of unhappiness and misunder- standings bordering (with hindsight) on the comical. The medieval screen and its fate. The Great Screen was part of wider scheme for the east end which may have been planned under Cardinal Henry Beaufort (bishop 1404-17).4 It was carried out under his successor, Bishop William Waynflete (1447-87) and involved three inter-related schemes – the erection of Beaufort’s chantry,a new shrine to St Swithun in the retrochoir, and the building of the Great Screen itself as a division between the retrochoir and the chancel. Work went on for about twenty-five years and was complete (or very nearly so) by the time St Swithun’s relics were translated in 1476. Within less than a century the screen had been depopulated of its numerous statues and denud- ed of its rood group.The exact timing of removal is unclear but, at the latest, they would have all gone under the extreme Protestant Bishop Horne whose Injunctions of Bishop Horne of 1571 ordered the demolition of all ‘superstitious images’.5 The only figure carvings to survive in situ were the four angels in the spandrels over the doors on either side.6 In the 17th century, under Bishop Curle (1632-47) a large baldacchino was erected and about 1750 the screen was classicised by the installation of urns in the niches: then, if not earlier, the canopies over the niches in the lowest and middle tiers (other than over the doorways) were removed.7 The urns and and baldacchino were themselves removed, probably about 1820 and for most of the 19th century the Great Screen pre- sented a bare, forlorn appearance. It is hardly surprising that the restoration of the screen to its for- mer glory became a Victorian ambition. Restoration – the first phase In 1885 the idea of restoring the screen was by no means new. Owen Carter (1806-59), the Winchester architect under whom G. E. Street had trained, produced a picture of the screen restored but nothing came of this.8 In 1878 G. G. Scott was approached for his opinion.9 Thus he might have added this scheme to his vast portfolio of cathedral works had not death intervened the same year.Then, in 1880, Street was consulted and pointed out that quite substantial repairs would be needed before new statues could be installed since the screen was in ‘a most mutilated and unfin- 3 Eccles 31 ver 2Q3B 3/6/2003 1:52 pm Page 4 ished condition’.10 Once again death (in 1881) precluded any action and, furthermore, the then Dean, John Bramston, felt his age sapped his energies for what he knew would be a huge undertaking. By the time the Jacob Memorial project came into being there was a new Dean, George William Kitchin, appointed in 1883, and who had pre- viously taught history and classics at Oxford. It was he who set up a Cathedral Committee in 1884 (before Jacob’s death) to advise him and the Chapter on matters concern- ing the fabric. This also involved the laity, notably Lord Henry Scott (Baron Montagu of Beaulieu from 1885) and Meville Portal of Laverstoke Park, both of them strong- minded individuals whom we shall encounter later. In an attempt to draw up clear lines of responsibility, the Cathedral Committee minutes set out that, for the screen restoration, there must be sufficient funds available (£3,500), that the architect and artists were to be appointed by the Dean and Chapter, and that Dean and Chapter were responsible for whatev- er was done.11 Ultimate responsibili- ty, therefore, for the care of the fabric lay, as it always had done, with the From a carte de visite, c.1870 (author’s collection). Dean and Chapter. The Jacob Memorial Committee set about fund-raising but found the £3,500 target impossible to achieve. A closing date of Easter was set but by early March only £1,880 was in (including £300 from the Dean and Chapter) and this trickled up to a final total of £2,055.14.3 so a full restoration was out of the question, even just of the central part.12 The question now was which architect to appoint. The names of G. F. Bodley (‘who has achieved architectural honour in Oxford and elsewhere’) and J. D. Sedding (whose reredos for St Clement, Boscombe was cited) were put forward to the Dean and Chapter 4 Eccles 31 ver 2Q3B 3/6/2003 1:52 pm Page 5 although, as so often with the selection of architects, we do not know exactly by whom or how the choice was made.The job fell to Sedding in March and once again we do not know why this rising star was selected over his older and more eminent rival. How Bodley felt at being set aside for a man whose only previous major work was St Clement’s, over a decade before, we will, of course, never know.Sedding, who would normally have expected to earn 10% commission on such a job, agreed to settle for 5% plus travelling expenses.13 At the outset, and, as it were, emblematic of the future problems, there was the complicating fac- tor of John Colson. Colson had served loyally as Cathedral architect since 1858 and a vague hope was expressed by the Memorial Committee and the Dean and Chapter that Colson ‘might be asked to give his taste and local knowledge to the work’ and ‘have some share and charge under [Sedding] in the Restoration.’14 The idea developed that Sedding should pay Colson a gratuity but there is no indication that the latter contributed to the project or received any payment.