are scanty. The central part, all in Norman style, the work of the
twelfth century, is the oldest; from this the building gradually
extended north, south, east, and west, as well as upwards, in the
course of the next three centuries; but the builders who enlarged did
not wantonly destroy the work of their predecessors. Probably the
chief cause of this was lack of funds; there was no shrine of saint,
nor tomb of martyr, nor wonder-waking relic to attract pilgrims,
whose alms, had they come, would have enriched the church, as many
another church was enriched, and had to pay the penalty of over-much
wealth in the form of demolition and reconstruction. Wimborne Minster
was simply enlarged; the outer walls, of course, had sometimes to be
pulled down. Thus in the thirteenth century the Norman east end,
which was probably apsidal, had to be demolished to afford space for
eastward extension, and the date of this extension is determined by
the character of the east window; the windows of the aisles proclaim
themselves to be of fourteenth century date; the western tower is a
century later. The church is one of the few that possess two towers,
set tandem fashion, one at the crossing, the other at the west end.
It is not a very satisfactory arrangement from an artistic point of
view, and has in the few instances in which it has been introduced been
unfortunate. Hereford had two towers thus placed, but the western one
fell; Wymondham, in Norfolk, has two still standing, but the east end
of the church is a ruin; Wimborne central tower was once surmounted by
a spire, but this fell. Exeter and Ottery have two towers, but these
are placed in a different manner, their bases forming the north and
south ends of the transept.
The central tower at Wimborne is the older. It is supported on four
massive Norman piers; the east and west arches beneath it are wider
than the other two; to bring the capitals from which they spring all
into one horizontal plane and the crowns of the four arches all into
another horizontal plane, the builders made the wider arches segments
of a circle less than semi-circles, and the narrower ones segments
greater than semi-circles, giving them the shape of horse-shoes. Above
this lower stage are three others—the triforium stage, with a gallery
in the thickness of the wall; above this comes the clerestory, added
later; and above it another stage, still later, because here, in place
of the simple arches seen on the outside of the lower stages, we find
interesting arches forming lancet-headed openings; above this is a
heavy, ugly parapet and set of pinnacles, erected in 1608 after the
fall of the central spire. The western tower is higher than the central
one, contains the bells, and, just outside the easternmost window, on
the north side of the belfry stage, there stands the wooden figure of a
soldier, who strikes the quarter-hours on two bells, one on each side
of him, and is known as the “Quarter Jack.”
Inside this western tower, on the face of the south wall, is a curious
clock made by Peter Lightfoot, a monk of Glastonbury, in the early part
of the fourteenth century. It tells not only the time of day, but the
day of the month and the age of the moon. The earth is represented by a
globe in the centre; the sun by a ball on a disc, which travels round
it in twenty-four hours, showing the time of day; the moon as a globe
on another disc, which revolves once in a lunar month. Half of this
globe is painted black, the other half is gilt, and the age of the moon
is indicated by the respective proportions of black and gilt shown, for
the ball itself rotates on its axis; when the moon is full the gilt
half is entirely visible; when new, the black half. The clock is still
in working order. A screen separates the lower stage of the tower from
the nave, and forms a baptistry, in which stands an octagonal font of
Norman character, large enough for baptising an infant by immersion.
From the west end, the church presents a very imposing appearance. The
nearer pillars, it is true, are rather mean; they are of fourteenth
century date, and very plain. It has been, with some probability,
conjectured that they were brought from some other church which had
been pulled down just before the time when this church was extended
westward, possibly when the western tower was built. The pillars of
the original nave are cylindrical and massive, the arches of the
main arcading resting upon them are pointed; above is a plain wall;
the division between the original and the added work is shown by
the different character of the mouldings of the arches, and of the
string-course above them, and by the fact that to the east there are
the original Norman clerestory windows, while the walls to the west are
not broken by any openings whatever.
The floor of the presbytery is raised considerably above that of
the choir, and this is itself higher than the floor of the nave, so
that the altar stands at a considerable elevation. One peculiarity is
noteworthy—there are no altar rails, but their place is taken by three
massive oaken benches, covered at all times with the “houseling linen,”
fair white cloths—the use of which goes back to very early times. The
benches which now stand across the presbytery floor, close to the
topmost of the flight of steps leading up to it, are the remains of ten
such benches, which were made in Puritan times for communicants to sit
on as they received the sacred elements. When the custom of kneeling
was revived, these benches were placed on the steps; and on “Sacrament
Sundays,” the clerk, after morning prayer, went to the lectern and
bade those who were prepared to receive the Holy Communion to draw
near, whereupon intending communicants left the nave and knelt at the
benches, or in the choir stalls, until the officiating clergy brought
them the sacramental bread and wine. In 1852, when sundry changes were
being made in the arrangements of the church, all these benches except
three were removed—the three which were in use as altar-rails.
The beautiful triplet of windows, over the altar, end the long vista
seen from the west. Beneath the presbytery floor is a vaulted crypt.
This is not, as many crypts are, dark and gloomy, but well lit by
triangular windows, which from the outside are seen to be just above
the level of the churchyard. This crypt does not retain its original
altar, but its place is marked by a piscina on the southern side; two
arches open out into the choir aisles, through which those kneeling in
the aisles might look down on the priest officiating at the altar of
the crypt.
There are several monuments worthy of notice, but by far the most
interesting is the Beaufort altar-tomb on the south side of the
presbytery. This was erected, to the memory of her father and mother,
by the Lady Margaret, foundress of Christ’s and St. John’s Colleges,
at Cambridge, well known for her many benefactions, and from the fact
that she was the mother of Henry VII. As the history of this family—the
Beauforts—is interesting, and its details little touched on by the
writers of English history, it may not be out of place, especially
as they were connected with Wimborne, to give an outline of it here.
Everyone knows that John of Gaunt was the third son of Edward III.
and the father of Henry IV., but many know only in a general way that
the House of Tudor traced through him their claim to the English
crown. John of Gaunt married Blanche, great-granddaughter of Edmund
Crouchback, second son of Henry III., who was created Earl of Lancaster
in 1257. Her father, on account of his valour in the French wars of
Edward III., had been made a Duke—a new title as far as England was
concerned, for the only English Duke that had been previously created
was the Duke of Cornwall, better known as the Black Prince. Through
Blanche, his wife, John of Gaunt succeeded to the estates of the Duke
of Lancaster, among them to the Castle of Beaufort, in Anjou. He was
himself in 1362 created Duke of Lancaster. Among Blanche’s maids of
honour was one Kate, daughter of Sir Payne Roet, and widow of Sir Owen
Swynford. When Blanche died, John married Constance of Castile, but
took unto himself Kate Swynford as his mistress; by her he became the
father of four children, all born at Beaufort Castle. As they were
illegitimate, they took the name of their birthplace as a surname.
The eldest of these was John de Beaufort, and the second, Henry, the
celebrated Cardinal Beaufort. When Constance died, these four children
were legitimatised by a Bull of Urban VI., then by Richard II., then by
Act of Parliament. The Duke then married Kate. On January 13th, 1396,
John de Beaufort was created Earl of Somerset. He died in 1410, leaving
four sons and two daughters; the eldest, Henry, did not long survive
his father, and his title and estates passed to his next brother, John.
He greatly distinguished himself in the French wars, and was made Duke
of Somerset, Earl of Kendale, Lieutenant of the Duchy of Aquitaine and
Captain-General of the whole realm of France and Normandy. In 1436
the Duke of Bedford, the Regent, died, and as the King, Henry VI.,
was still a minor, another regent had to be appointed. The Duke of
Lancaster thought he should have obtained this important post, but it
was conferred on the Duke of York, and Lancaster therefore retired from
active service, and in 1440 married Margaret, widow of Oliver St. John,
and daughter of John, Lord Beauchamp, of Bletsoe Manor, Bedfordshire.
This John, Duke of Somerset, and Margaret, his wife, are they whose
figures lie side by side in alabaster on their altar-tomb at Wimborne.
Their right hands are clasped together; angels guard their heads; his
feet rest on a dog, hers on an antelope; he is clad in complete armour,
the face and right hand alone bare; the left hand holds the right-hand
gauntlet, which he has taken off before taking the lady’s hand. On
the apex of the arch, above the tomb, hangs the helm which he, during
his life, used to wear in tournaments. Their only child was born in
1441—Margaret, of whom mention has been made. Her father died in 1444,
aged thirty-nine years, and the Duchy of Somerset became extinct in the
Beaufort family. His death took place at Kingston Lacy, an estate close
to Wimborne, belonging to the Beaufort family. His widow and daughter
went to live on the Bedfordshire property. In about four years time,
the widow married her third husband, Lord Welles. Young Margaret, when
only nine years of age, was sought by the Duke of Suffolk as a wife
for his son, John de la Pole, and by King Henry VI. as wife for his
half-brother, Edmund Tudor, Earl of Richmond, son of Catherine, the
Queen of Henry V., by her second husband, Sir Owen Tudor. Margaret was
a clever girl, well educated, knowing even then Latin and French; but
sorely distraught was she to know which of the two suitors to choose:
so she consulted an old gentlewoman, who advised her to commit the
matter to St. Nicholas. She took the advice, prayed to the saint, and
fell asleep, and about four o’clock next morning, whether sleeping or
waking she could not tell, saw one standing in her room, habited in
a bishop’s robes, who bade her accept Edmund Tudor as a husband. She
told her mother, and she was betrothed to the Earl of Richmond, and
they were married in 1455, when she was fourteen years of age and he
twenty-four. They lived at Pembroke Castle, which belonged to Jasper
Tudor, Earl of Pembroke. In 1456 her only son, Henry, afterwards Henry
VII., was born, and shortly after this her husband died. He was buried
at Caermarthen Abbey, and when the monastery was suppressed, his body
was removed to the Cathedral Church at St. David’s. His mother, anxious
to keep quite aloof from party strife (for the War of the Roses had
already broken out), lived on at Pembroke, educating her son. In 1459
she married her second husband, Sir Humphrey Stafford; widowhood, for
one of exalted rank, not being a desirable condition in those times of
war and turmoil. It has been seen that her mother was thrice married,
and Margaret followed her example, for when Sir Humphrey died in 1481,
she, at the end of a year, being then about forty years of age, married
Thomas, Lord Stanley. After fifteen years she separated from him with
his consent, in order to devote herself to a religious life, and
retired to the convent at Woking, in Surrey. It must not be supposed
that she had a peaceful or happy life. Her thoughts were centred on
her only son, and many were the years of separation from this son that
his mother had to endure. The story of his wanderings, his dangers,
his detention in Brittany, are too long to be told here—suffice it to
say that Richard III. became so odious to the chief nobles that at
last it was arranged that Henry Tudor, Earl of Richmond, Margaret’s
son, should be recognised by the Lancastrian party as their leader,
and should claim the throne; and that in order to gain the adherence
of those members of the Yorkist party who were opposed to Richard, a
marriage should take place between Henry and Elizabeth, the daughter
of Edward IV. Both the mothers agreed to the union: but the first
attempt at invasion by Richmond was a failure, and Richard seemed free
from all danger; and with a view to win over his Yorkist opponents,
he made up his mind to marry Elizabeth himself, although she was his
own brother’s child. This step led to a fresh invasion—this time a
successful one—and the death of Richard on Bosworth field virtually
placed the crown on Henry’s head (1485). So at last the Lady Margaret’s
troubles were at an end, and she saw her son crowned and wedded, and
the red and white roses twined together. It remains only to speak of
her benefactions. Those at Cambridge are well known; and the writer of
this chapter, who once held at Christ’s College one of the scholarships
she founded, cherishes the memory of the royal and pious lady with all
due gratitude. But it is of her benefactions at Wimborne that mention
must now be made. About 1498 she built the beautiful monument to her
father and mother in the Minster; founded a chantry, where, for her own
soul, and for those of her son, her parents, and ancestors, Mass was
to be duly said. She founded and endowed the Grammar School, though,
as its endowments were greatly added to by Queen Elizabeth, its name
was afterwards changed from the Lady Margaret’s to that of Queen
Elizabeth’s Free Grammar School.
The Lady Margaret just outlived her son; both died in the same year,
1509, but she rather later than he.
Of the other monuments space forbids mention of any, save that of
Anthony Etricke, if it can be called a monument, for it is really the
sarcophagus that contains the body of this eccentric magistrate, who
lived at Holt, and was recorder of Poole. He desired, for some reason,
to be buried neither above the ground nor under it, neither within
the church nor outside of it; and in order to carry out this strange
wish, he got permission to cut a niche in the south wall, partly below
the level of the surface of the churchyard, and in it fixed a slate
sarcophagus. In this he ordered his coffin to be deposited when he
died; and he made all the preparations he could beforehand, even to the
painting of the date of his death on the side of the slate coffin. He
had a presentiment that he should die in 1691, but he lived till 1703,
so that the real date of his death had to be placed on the coffin. The
other date was not obliterated, but the new one was painted on the
other, and the two may be seen there to-day. The arms of his family are
painted on the lid, and, as he left twenty shillings per annum to keep
coffin and niche in good repair, the sarcophagus is bright and smart as
paint, gilding, and varnish can make it.
[Illustration: THE CHAINED LIBRARY, WIMBORNE MINSTER.]
The chained library, as it is called, is placed in a chamber above the
vestry, rebuilt when the church was restored. It was formed by the Rev.
William Stone, Principal of New Inn Hall, Oxford, afterwards one of
the “three vicars” of the church. By his will he left some land to St.
Margaret’s Hospital, and his collection of books to the Minster. These
were brought from Oxford in 1686, and placed in what was then known
as the Treasury. They were chiefly the writings of the Fathers, with
certain other theological books, and were intended for the free use
of the people of Wimborne. In these days few would care to pore over
these dry and heavy tomes, or make use of the library, for it does not
contain any novels, standard or ephemeral; but there were days when it
was used for study. In 1725 a catalogue was made, and the number of the
books was then two hundred; when next catalogued, about one hundred
and fifty years later, the number had dropped to one hundred and
eighty-five, despite the fact that ten books not mentioned in the
former catalogue were on the shelves. There is but one MS., bearing
date 1343, “Regimen Animarum,” written on vellum, and containing some
illuminated initials. The majority of the books were printed between
1520 and 1710. The most interesting are: a Polyglot Bible (1657), a
Breeches’ Bible (1595), and Sir Walter Ralegh’s _History of the World_
(1614). No less than one hundred and four pages of this _History_ have
had a hole burnt through them. Tradition says that Matthew Prior, the
poet, was reading this book by candle light, and fell asleep; when he
awoke he found that some snuff from his candle had fallen on the book
and done the mischief. He stuck small pieces of parchment over the
hole in every page, and inserted the missing letters or words with pen
and ink. But the interesting tradition has been controverted in modern
times.
The books were originally chained to the shelves, one end of the chain
being fastened to the edge of the binding, the other to a ring which
would slide along a rod. Many of the books had got loose in the course
of years, and lay dusty and uncared for; but at the restoration, new
rods were fastened along the new shelves, and the old chains repaired
and put to their former use.
In two oaken chests in this room many deeds relating to the Collegiate
Church (the earliest dating from the time of Henry III., the latest
from that of Henry VIII.) are preserved. Among them is the deed
founding the Chantry and Grammar School, drawn up by the executors of
the Lady Margaret’s will; and also the charter granted by Charles I.
to the Governors of the church, from which they derive the powers of
appointing clergy, choristers, clerk, vergers, etc., which powers they
use to-day.
There is one other ancient ecclesiastical foundation in the
neighbourhood of Wimborne, about a quarter of a mile from the town
on the road to Blandford. It is now an almshouse, where three poor
married couples, three poor single men, and the same number of
unmarried women, are maintained; but its original purpose was to
relieve only such of the poor as were suffering from leprosy. It is
generally said to have been founded by John of Gaunt, and so to have
been another connection between that family and Wimborne. There is, it
may be said, an old kitchen at Canford which is still called “John of
Gaunt’s Kitchen”; whether he had anything to do with the building of
the kitchen or the endowment of the Lazar-house we do not know, but
it is certain that he did not found the latter, for, in the reign of
King John, Hugo of Lingiveria gave to it an acre of land, and in 1282
the Bishop of Exeter gave an indulgence to any who would contribute
to its support. A deed of the date of Henry VIII. refers to a Bull of
Innocent IV., dated 1245, in which this hospital is mentioned. Various
gifts of land, vestments, plate, etc., were bestowed on the hospital,
to which a small chapel dedicated to St. Margaret and St. Anthony is
attached. A chantry was founded here by one John Redcoddes, in order
that a priest might daily say masses for his soul’s welfare. The
chapel, the architecture of which shows that it was originally built
in the thirteenth century, still stands, and is fitted up for service.
Hither once a week one of the clergy comes from the Minster to conduct
a service, which the almshouse people attend.
Other than the buildings already mentioned, there is little mediæval
work to be seen in Wimborne. The old Free Grammar School buildings
have given place to modern ones erected in 1851, and the school is now
managed by a governing body appointed under a scheme drawn up by the
Charity Commissioners. So “the old order changeth, giving place to the
new”; but, seen from far or near, the two-towered Minster, with its
parti-coloured walls of deep red and drab stone, rises grand and old
amid its modern surroundings—a noble memorial of the mediæval builder’s
art.
FORD ABBEY
BY SIDNEY HEATH
Various authorities agree with Camden in stating that Ford Abbey
(originally in Devon, but now included in the county of Dorset),
near Chard, was founded in the year 1140, for Cistercian monks, by
Adeliza, daughter of Baldwin de Brioniis, and a grand-niece of William
the Conqueror. The circumstances of its origin are interesting and
romantic. It appears that Adeliza’s brother, Richard of Okehampton,
had given, in 1133, certain lands at Brightley, within his barony,
to an Abbey of the Cistercian Order, and had secured twelve monks
to dwell therein from Gilbert, Abbot of Waverley, in Surrey. This
small community remained at Brightley for five years, when they, “by
reason of great want and barrenness, could abide there no longer,”
and commenced a return journey to their original home in Surrey. On
their way they passed through Thorncombe, the parish wherein Ford is
situated, where they encountered Adeliza, who, hearing with great
regret of the failure of her brother’s enterprise, exclaimed: “Behold
my manor where you now are, which is very fruitful and well wooded,
which I give you for ever in exchange for your barren lands at
Brightley, together with the mansion-house and other houses. Stay there
until a more convenient monastery may be built for you upon some other
part of the estate.” The site selected by the monks for the erection
of the Abbey was in a valley, on the left bank of the river Axe, at a
place called, according to Leland, “Hertbath” (_balneum cervorum_),
and which, from its nearness to a ford crossing the river at this
spot, subsequently became known as _Ford_.
Such is the accepted origin of the splendid pile of buildings which
sprang up in this fertile and sequestered valley in 1148, and which
still, notwithstanding the pillage at its dissolution, and its many
structural alterations, commands our admiration and our attention;
although, if we except some small portion of what is known as “the
chapel,” at the eastern end of the south front, nothing now remains of
the original foundation erected by the pious Adeliza.
The original purpose of this ancient part of the building, known as
“the chapel,” is somewhat obscure. It has been commonly regarded as
that portion of the religious house which its name indicates, and
as being the burial-place of its founder and other benefactors. Dr.
Oliver, however, in the supplement to his _Monasticon_, speaks of it
as the “Chapter House”—a likely suggestion. In his _Memoir of Thomas
Chard, D.D._, Dr. J. H. Pring writes:
That except in the deed of surrender, and a short reference made to it
by Hearne, I have not been able to discover the slightest notice of
“the Church of the Blessed Virgin Mary of Ford” in any of the numerous
accounts which have been given of the abbey; though when we read of
frequent interments, some on the north, others on the south side of
the choir—others, such as that of Robert Courtenay, who, we are told,
was buried on the 28th July, 1242, in the chancel, before the high
altar, under a stately monument exhibiting the figure of an armed
knight—there can be little doubt, I think, that these took place, not
in what is now known as the Chapel, but in the Abbey Church, which
stood at the east end of the abbey, about two hundred feet above the
chapel.
[Illustration: FORD ABBEY.]