eastern piers of the crossing. It is approached by a broad stone step,
wider at the southern than at the northern end. It is a solid screen-wall
with a central passage, having on the north side a staircase leading to
the loft above, and on the south side a door to a small room (in the same
position as in the _Lincoln Minster_ screen), lit by three quatrefoils
into the nave. The western face of the screen consists of three recesses,
with wide ogee-headed arches, cusped internally, and ending in finials
which run straight up to the cornice of the loft and are there cut off.
There is a string-course at the apex of the arches; the intervening
spaces are filled with shallow panels, having arched and cusped heads.
The northern and southern ends of the screen are chamfered off, and there
are traces of some pedestal and tabernacle work in the broken stonework
about the height of the string-course, and again below the spring of the
arches. The whole of this west front is finished off with a cresting of
Tudor flowers. The central doorway takes up one of the recesses, the oak
doors being mainly original, though great hooks for hinges still exist in
the stonework behind them. The other two recesses exhibit very evident
manifestations of having once contained altars, there being small pillar
piscinæ in the south side of each recess, and marks of where the altar
slabs were fitted to the work behind. They were in the same position as
those at Bishop Le Hart’s screen at Norwich, at the beautiful screen in
Glasgow Cathedral, at Eton College, at the eastward screen of Gloucester
Cathedral, and at Roche Abbey. Altars in the same position still exist
abroad, as at Lierre, Aerschot, Dixmude, and Brou. At Louvain (St.
Pierre) the side arches have, unfortunately, been opened out, and the
altars removed, and the same process has been gone through with the side
arches at Exeter Cathedral.
[Illustration: HOLY TRINITY CHURCH, TATTERSHALL.]
On the eastern side of the screen at _Tattershall_, facing the chancel,
is a doorway with a four-centred arch, square-headed above, with the
spandrils filled in with the Tudor rose. Above the doorway, as at
_Lincoln_, only here in stone, is a projecting three-sided feature
ornamented with a band of panelling which extends across the whole width
of the screen, and is similar to those already described on the western
side. Below the band the screen-wall is blank, no doubt for the canopied
stalls, of which there are some fragments as well as the stone bases left
in the church. The upper edge of this front of the screen is finished off
with Tudor flowers, which, however, are not pierced through completely as
they were on the nave side. The loft is protected on each face, east and
west, by a solid wall, 4 feet 7 inches in height, with a coped projecting
portion behind the Tudor cresting on the west side. In the projection
into the chancel there are two stone book-rests, one in the middle, 2
feet long by 1 foot 3 inches high, occupying the space behind the three
middle Tudor flowers; it is 3 feet 7 inches from the floor, and has a
ledge about 1½ inches wide at the lower edge to hold the book safely. The
second one faces north-east, and occupies the space behind the two outer
Tudor flowers; it is a couple of inches less in length. An example of
much the same kind—a stone book-rest—can still be seen at the east side
of the loft of the Jubé in the monastic church of Valleria at Sion, in
the Rhone valley.
The rood-beam and rood probably stood across the chancel arch, above the
loft, as there are marks on both pillars of considerable damage about two
feet below the capitals.
From the south end of the loft a doorway gives access to a turret
staircase leading up to the roof; the turret has evidently been higher,
and has probably served as the bell turret for the _Sanctus_ bell. The
date of the screen has been supposed to be settled by an inscription
recorded by Holles:—
ORATE PRO ANIMA ROBERTI DE WHALLEY HUJUS COLLEGII, QUI HOC OPUS
FIERI FECIT ANNO DOMINI MCCCCCXXVIII, CUJUS ANIMA PROPICIETUR
DEUS. AMEN.
He seems to have been buried beneath its archway.[104] But the work
is evidently contemporaneous with the rest of the church, as shown
especially by the staircase turret, and there is no trace whatever of
any Renaissance feeling. Probably the inscription refers rather to some
decoration, colour or the like, on the screen. It is curious that this
screen possesses the only instance of cusped arches in the church.
PARISH CHANCEL-SCREENS
Simple—as the beginnings of all artistic work are—are the earliest
chancel-screens of this country, and the progress from simple forms
to the very rich and complex ones of the Perpendicular Period is as
evident in wooden screen-work as it is in the history of tracery in
stone. Probably the earliest wooden screen-work in the country exists
in the Church of St. Nicholas, Compton, Surrey. The eastern end of this
church, of Late Norman date, is in two storeys, the lower one forming
the sanctuary, vaulted, and opening to the west with a rich Late Norman
semicircular arch. Railing off the upper floor above this arch is a
screen, consisting of a series of semicircular arches springing from
cylindrical or octagonal shafts, with moulded bases and caps, almost
certainly of twelfth-century date, and thus coëval with the Late Norman
or Transitional portions of the church. In the exquisite little chapel at
_Kirkstead_ is the earliest wooden screen-work in the county (and, saving
Compton, in the country), which has probably been the upper portion of
a choir-screen, in the back of two pews. It is composed altogether of
thirteen bays, divided equally between the seats. Each bay consists of
a lancet-headed trefoil supported by octagonal pillars with moulded
capitals and bases. The total height of the work is 2 feet 9 inches,
and it consists of oak throughout. This screen was considered by the
late Bishop of Nottingham to be coëval with the chapel itself—_i.e._ to
have been made about the first quarter of the thirteenth century. In
Rochester Cathedral is (or was) some screen-work of the same date and
character. In Thurcaston Church, Leicestershire, is a screen consisting
of plain panel-work in the lower part, and of a series of open arches
above, trefoiled in the heads, and springing from slender cylindrical
shafts, with moulded bases and caps, being almost identical (save in
having cylindrical pillars) with the example from _Kirkstead_. In Stanton
Harcourt Church, Oxfordshire, is a very similar screen, only with
circular annulated pillars; this is considered to be forty or fifty years
later in date—_i.e._ about 1260, about the same date as the screen at St.
Andrew’s, Chinnor, in the same county.
[Illustration: ROOD-SCREEN AND BASE OF LOFT, SLEAFORD CHURCH (ST.
DENIS’).]
The screens of Decorated and Perpendicular date may be taken together
in general description, more especially as the essential feature of
_Lincolnshire_ screens—an ogee arch—appears in both and in nearly every
instance.
Firstly, then, a beam runs transversely and horizontally across from
pillar to pillar of the chancel arch, or in front thereof, sometimes
supported by corbels at either end, as has been the case at _Heckington_
and _Wellingore_. This may or may not be the rood-beam (_i.e._ the beam
on which the rood stood). In some cases the rood-beam was quite separate
from and independent of the screen, as at _Claypole_, where there are
corbels for it on each side of and high up on the chancel arch; at
_Legbourne_, where the same arrangement is made, and in the _Morning
Chapel, Lincoln Minster_. At _Blyton_ the rood-beam remains above the
chancel arch; above the upper side of the beam the wall is recessed,
probably to allow of a boarded and panelled background to the rood and
the other two figures. Further support to this beam (of the screen)
is afforded by a number of stout uprights from the floor (where is
sometimes a horizontal wooden or a stone base) to the rood-beam, dividing
the screen into bays, varying in number with the size of the screen,
whereof the middle one is generally the largest, though at _Frampton_,
_Stixwould_, _Mumby_, _Middle Rasen_, _Lusby_, and _Miningsby_ it is of
the same size as the others.
The middle bay is as 13 to 11, for example, at _Cotes_, as 2 to 1 at
_East Kirkby_, as nearly 5 to 4 at _Moulton_, as 3½ to 2 at _Bratoft_,
and as 3 to 2 at _Thorpe St. Peter’s_. These uprights are often formed
into small pillars in the front, and occasionally on the eastward aspect
also, or, in more Perpendicular work, they are fashioned as slender
buttresses, _Cotes_ and _Sleaford_ giving examples of the former, while
_East Kirkby_ does so of the latter method. From these uprights, at about
two-thirds of their height, spring more or less pointed arches, with
their apices at the beam or just below it. Generally, the lower third of
the screen is composed of solid panelling, sunk and with foliated and
traceried heads; though at _Barrow-on-Humber_, at _Spalding_, and at
_Alford_ the panels are perforated, probably this is not original. Along
the upper border of these panels often runs a scroll or vignette of open
work, as at _Winthorpe_ and at _East Kirkby_, and of Tudor flowers at
_Croft_, while it is embattled at _Westborough_ and _Yarburgh_.
From the middle of the transom (if it may be so termed), which runs
along from upright to upright, below the open portion of the screen, in
a number of Lincolnshire examples, arises a mullion up to the spring of
the arch, and there divides into two ogee arches, as at _Theddlethorpe_,
_Saltfleetby_ (_All Saints’_), _Mumby_, _Ulceby_ (_St. Nicholas_), and
_Marsh Chapel_. In some of these cases the mullion divides up into two
pointed arches above the ogees, and at _Middle Rasen_, where there are
three ogees and two mullions in each bay, the arches intersect and are
carried through the spandrils, which are now open (probably an effect of
restoration). In other instances the mullion divides up into two almost
semicircular arches, which form the lower and outer portion of a large
ogee, as at _Cotes_, _Denton_, _Stixwould_, _Scrivelsby_, _Miningsby_,
_Swineshead_, _Scotter_, and _Folkingham_. At _St. Peter’s, Barton_,
there are two of these ogees in each bay. At _Swineshead_, _Leverton_,
and _Friskney_, these arches beneath the ogees are more pointed in
character. At _Miningsby_, on the west front of the mullions, are slender
round pillars rising from the transom up to the point of the ogee, and
there finishing in tiny crocketed pinnacles, capped by a finial. At
_Claypole_ and _Althorpe_ the arrangement is much the same as at _Cotes_,
but the mullions are absent; whether this is original or not seems
uncertain. There are no traces of them on the transom of either screen.
At _Cotes_ and elsewhere the quatrefoil space between the heads of the
arches and the upper part of the ogee is filled by a shield. Another
form, which seems like a development of the _Claypole_ scheme (although
it almost certainly is much earlier in date), has no mullions, and no
inner halves of the arches; from their outer halves springs an ogee,
making an outline which has been called—not inaptly—the fleur-de-lis
form. An excellent example of this is given by the _East Kirkby_ screen.
Where there is no central mullion, the ogee simply springs from the
uprights and terminates in a finial at the rood-beam, as at _Sleaford_,
_Ewerby_, _Saxilby_, _Moulton_, _Winthorpe_, _Croft_, and _Fishtoft_, and
in thirteen other instances. The same arrangement is found at _Spalding_,
but the ogee is very depressed, and so the finial ends much lower than in
the screens just mentioned. At _Bratoft_ there is an almost semicircular
arch beneath the ogee, freely cusped internally, somewhat the same as at
_Thorpe St. Peter’s_, _All Saints’_, _Benington_ (where the upper edge of
the arch forming the base of the ogee is embattled), and _Addlethorpe_
(tower arch screen). These ogees are profusely crocketed, generally, of
course, owing to their date, with the square-shaped leaves which mark the
Perpendicular Period, and they are also more or less elaborately cusped
internally. Special notice should be taken of the crockets at _Thorpe
St. Peter’s_ and at _Burgh_ (now across tower arch), which represents
pelicans in various attitudes.
The middle bay partakes of the character of the lateral ones, though it
is usually so different in width. Thus at _Cotes_ it has a flattened
wider ogee, with the descending mullion cut off; at _Alford_ (where
there are no mullions), a flattened wider ogee, with a depressed arch
under it; at _Miningsby_ (where all the bays are of the same width) the
inner halves of the sub-arches disappear as well as the central mullion;
at _Denton_, a flattened wider ogee; and at _Swineshead_, a larger and
taller ogee. At _Lusby_ the central bay ogee is identical with those
of the sides; the same is true of _Stixwould_, with the absence of the
descending mullion—also, in a different style, of _Mumby_; while at
_Theddlethorpe_, _Saltfleetby_, and _Moulton_, this bay has a depressed
arch with three ogees on it, the last named being also remarkable for
having “a series of five shallow hoods or canopies groined in miniature
underneath, to simulate vaulting.”[105] At _Barton_ there are two ogees,
at _Middle Rasen_ three. At _Sleaford_ and _Ewerby_ there is the same
kind of arch, with two ogees upon it, but in the centre the vaulting
continues downward to a cap and shaft, which ends on the arch; also at
_Spalding_, only without the ogees.
At _Claypole_ and _Althorpe_ the central shaft is carried down much below
the spring of the ogees, and ends on a four-centred arch. _East Kirkby_
has two ogees on an ogival arch beneath. At _Saxilby_ the central feature
takes the form of a round-headed arch in a square-headed bay with the
spandrils filled with circles, surmounted by seven small bays, each
containing a crocketed ogee terminating in a finial. At _Barrow_ there is
a pointed arch, with pierced spandrils. At _Benniworth_ there is a large
ogee with curious tracery over it (? modern), entirely different from the
lateral bays. At _Ewerby_, already mentioned, this bay has on the inner
side of each ogee a beautiful wheel; on the outer side a fine network of
tracery. At _Folkingham_ the centre arch is carved and crocketed with
grapes and vine-leaf ornament. At _Scrivelsby_, between two ogees is a
large wheel of tracery, with two smaller ones filling in the spaces on
each side.
All screens probably had a door or doors, though but few of these are
left in Lincolnshire. At _Westborough_ the original doors exist; they are
square-headed, with tracery above and panelling below, similar to that
of the side bays. _Cotes_, _Spalding_, _Theddlethorpe_, _East Kirkby_,
_Moulton_, _Helpringham_, _Thorpe St. Peter’s_, and _Barton_ still retain
their doors, but only the lower panels are left.
Also slender buttresses have been mentioned above, as being moulded out
of the uprights. Occasionally there were to the front (western face) of
these uprights, especially on each side of the central doorway, flying
buttresses with crocketed attachments. Remains of these are still to
be seen at _East Kirkby_, _Moulton_, _Fishtoft_, _Thorpe St. Peter’s_,
_Bratoft_, _Croft_, _Legbourne_, _Crowland_, and _Mumby_. At _Grimoldby_,
where the lower half of the screen exists, two buttresses project some
way westward and are well panelled. The extreme form of these, where the
upright part of the buttresses was fashioned into a candlestand, may be
exemplified by Ranworth screen (Norfolk), where the buttresses, panelled
as to their lower two-thirds, separate the central passage from an altar
on either side.
The intervening spaces between the ogee and the confining arch will be
filled in with delicate tracery, varying of course in style with the
age and locality of each particular screen. Whatever the faults of
Perpendicular work may be in stone, the repetition of similar forms,
the richness of the detailed ornament, and the lightness of the tracery
make Perpendicular _wooden_ screens, more perhaps than any others, the
best representatives of the _Cancelli_ (lattice-work), and very valuable
portions of the furniture of a church.
In some churches, as at Laughton-en-le-Morthen, there was a low _stone_
screen, buttressed, which would carry a lighter screen of wood. Instances
of a similar arrangement may be seen at Nantwich and _Morton-by-Bourne_,
and there is a preparation for it at _Wellingore_ and _Boston_.
If the 200 churches mentioned in Mr. E. Peacock’s English Church
Furniture be taken as a fair sample of _Lincolnshire_ churches, as they
well may be, almost every one possessed a rood-loft, which may now be
described.
Westwards generally (but eastwards only at Worstead) from the beam,
which often forms a kind of breast summer to the gallery about to be
described, would extend a platform of varying width (at Selattyn in
Shropshire it is 10 feet wide, usually about 4 feet), supported by a
coved cornice, ornamented by ribs which intersect sometimes in a very
complicated pattern, as at _Sleaford_, and with—as vignette—a band of
carving, such as vine-leaf and grape, along the front. On very many
screens, which have lost their gallery, traces can be seen where the ribs
and springers for its support have been attached. The eastern portion
of the gallery remains at _East Kirkby_, starting from the top of the
screen, and being coved independently thereof. From both sides—east and
west (or only one _west_)—of this platform would rise up a panelled
screen, which sometimes, as at Upper Sheringham, consisted of open work.
This gallery—the rood-loft—would be approached by one or more staircases
in the piers of the chancel arch or in the north or south walls of the
aisles. There are two of these staircases at _Boston_, _Sleaford_, and
_Grantham_, while _Spalding_, _Heckington_, and most of the other
churches in the county have but one.
[Illustration: ROOD-SCREEN AND LOFT, ST. EDITH’S CHURCH, COTES-BY-STOW.]
The only complete mediæval rood-loft in the county is in the little
church of _Cotes by Stow_. It has been carefully repaired, with foliated
and traceried panels, and a vignette of grapes and vine-leaves along
the lower border. The central projection is interesting and original,
and here is evidently not for the crucifix, as that would be fixed at
the eastern side of the loft. A similar projection will be seen at
_Sleaford_, and probably both were used for preaching. They are exactly
reversed in position from those at _Lincoln Minster_ and _Tattershall_,
and from that mentioned in the contract for the rood-loft at Great St.
Mary’s, Cambridge, in 1521, “wyth a pulpete into the mydds of ye quyer.”
There are several screens which yet retain the hang-over, making the
floor of the rood-loft. The reason for this at _Sleaford_ is given in Mr.
Peacock’s book: “Itm̅—the rode lofte taken downe all save the florthe
wc̅h remayneth standing wc̅h we cannot take doune for yt is a waie
frome one house to another so yt̅ we have noe passadge but that waie to
ytt”—which may mean from chapel to chapel, or from aisle roof to aisle
roof.
A few varieties of screens, with or without lofts, may most conveniently
be noticed here before dealing at greater length with the rood-loft
and its accessories. Screens are met with which most certainly have
had rood-lofts, the evidence of which is the existence of remains of
the springers or ribs for the coved support of the loft on one or both
sides of the screen, and the rough framework above, whence the rood-loft
floor has been stripped. But no trace can be found in the church either
of rood-loft staircase, doors thereto, or of corbels to support the
rood-loft. Also the screen may not fit its place. Of course, in some
instances, the rood-loft staircase may have been entirely concealed or
taken away. But it is almost certain in other instances that the screen
is not in its original church. Most probably an example of this is the
_Ewerby_ screen, which is too wide for the chancel, and has evident
traces of having had a rood-loft. This screen has in all likelihood
come from the neighbouring priory of _Haverholme_. Very likely the same
applies to the wooden screen in the north aisle of _Crowland Abbey_;
it does not fit (has been removed eastwards within this century), has
evidence of having had a rood-loft, and there are no signs of anything
of the kind in that part of the church. It may have been the rood-screen
in the nave, or the very one mentioned, of the year 1413, below. And at
_Cadney_, near _Brigg_, is a screen said to have come from _Newstead on
Ancholme_.
In other churches, on the contrary, we may find abundant evidence in
the shape of rood-loft staircase and doors, and corbels, for the former
existence of a rood-loft. The screen, too, may seem quite to fill its
position and not show any trace of having had a rood-loft on it, and this
not merely from having had the coving neatly removed (as may possibly
have been the case in some churches), but by the style altogether of
the upper portion of the screen. There is no coving, and therefore no
pointed arch over the ogee between each upright, forming consequently a
square-headed aperture instead of a pointed one.
[Illustration: ROOD-SCREEN, ST. MARY’S CHURCH, WINTHORPE.]
At _Winthorpe_, for example, there is no trace of a loft on the existing
screen, while some four feet or so westwards are putlog holes and
corbels for the front of the rood-loft, as well as a complete rood-loft
staircase on the north side of the chancel. _Grainsby_, _Friskney_, and
_Leverton_ are instances of similar treatment. The explanation is that
the rood-loft has been made on the same plan as that at Upper Sheringham
in Norfolk. Here a screen of the square-headed kind described, and with
good Perpendicular tracery, fills the chancel arch to about the height
of ten feet. Four or five feet westwards of this screen extends the
rood-loft, not supported apparently by the screen, but just touching it.
Two uprights support the front of the loft, with the spandrils filled on
the north side with a pelican, on the south with a dragon. The gallery,
which has an elegant open traceried front, runs across in front of the
chancel arch and is reached by a staircase in the north wall. Much the
same arrangement has been at East Budleigh. A feature of minor interest
in Sheringham is the diversity of tracery; thus in the rood-loft seven
and a half bays have the same, while three more are quite different, and
in the screen the number of differences is still more marked.
There are also some screens which show no trace on their westward face of
a rood-loft, and yet have or have had one. Of these, Worstead may stand
for an example.
Again, occasionally a screen is found, certainly old, certainly in its
original position, and yet with no signs on it or in the church of any
rood-loft at all. It is fair to suppose in these cases that there never
has been a rood-loft, but that the screen itself has carried the rood.
Such a screen was the one at _Salmonby_, now removed, and the existing
elegant Perpendicular ones at _Wickenby_ and _Scrivelsby_. At West
Tarring and Broadwater (Sussex) the low screens bristle with spikes,
probably contemporaneous, which show that there never was any upper
tracery or loft. Also we can have a rood-loft alone, without a screen, as
seems to have been the case at Avebury (Wilts). A superb example of this
kind abroad still exists in the Church of St. Etienne du Mont, Paris, of
sixteenth-century date, with two spiral staircases.