English Cathedrals Illustrated / Second and Revised Edition

by Francis Bond

II. At some later period—perhaps in the eighth or ninth century—the foundation was converted into one of secular canons, married priests taking the place of the nuns (cf. Ely). The secular canons themselves in turn gave way to monks, and these in 1111 to regular canons—i.e., canons living in monastic fashion under the rule (regula) of St. Augustine, as at Bristol, Ripon, and Carlisle.

The first business, probably, of the secular canons was to house themselves—i.e., to build themselves the usual cloister, with its appanages of chapter-house, refectory, dormitory, etc. Of the chapter-house which they built, c. 1125, the doorway still remains.

In 1004 King Ethelred had rebuilt the Saxon church; and probably it was found possible to put this church into such repair as would allow the services to be held in it for the time being. At any rate, it was not till 1158 that they commenced the present cathedral, which they finished in 1180, leaving not a stone standing of Ethelred’s cathedral. Of the theory that the present cathedral is in the main the one built in 1004, I would prefer to say nothing, had it not been adopted in a recent history of the cathedral; suffice to say that, like the sister theory that Waltham Abbey was built in 1060, it is an absolute impossibility. The hands of the archæological clock cannot be turned 160 years back in this preposterous fashion.

The twelfth-century church was very remarkable in plan. Not only had it an aisled nave and an aisled choir, but it had the architectural luxury, unparalleled in our Norman architecture except in the vast churches of Winchester and Ely, of eastern and western aisles to its transepts. The site, however, was cramped to the south, and so the southern transept was shorter than the northern one; moreover, this short transept later on lost its west aisle, which was lopped off to allow the cloister to be extended. For the same reason—lack of room—the slype, or vaulted passage, which in all monastic institutions connected the cloister with the cemetery, instead of being built between the transept and the cloister, was built inside the church, as at Hexham, curtailing still further the floor area of the north transept. It was therefore because the church was so cramped to the south, that the other transept was given aisles on both sides. Instead of an eastern aisle, the south transept had merely a square chapel projecting eastward.

But the canons wanted also a Lady chapel, for the church seems to have been dedicated originally to the Holy Trinity, St. Mary and St. Frideswide. The normal position of a Lady chapel was to the east of the sanctuary. But here also the canons were cramped; for quite close to the east end of the church ran the city wall. To get in a Lady chapel, therefore, they had to build an additional aisle north of the north aisle of the choir. This was three bays long. It was probably walled off from the transept, but opened into the north choir-aisle by three Norman arches, reconstructed later on. The same arrangement is found at Ripon. There was also a short chapel projecting eastward from the northernmost bay of the east aisle of the north transept.

The east end, as at Rochester and Ripon, was square. The present east end is a fine composition by Scott, more or less conjectural. The work commenced, as usual, at the east, as is shown by the gradual improvement westward in the design of the capitals. The evidence of the vaulting, too, points in the same direction. In the choir-aisle the ribs are massive and heavy; in the western aisle of the north transept they are lighter; in the south aisle of the nave they are pointed and filleted.

The transepts are narrower than the nave and choir; the tower, therefore, is oblong, and, as at Bolton Priory, its narrow sides have pointed arches: semicircular arches would have been too low. The faces of the piers of the towers are flat, because the stalls of the canons were placed against them and in the eastern bays of the nave, leaving the whole eastern limb as sanctuary.

The clerestory walls are only 41½ feet high; therefore, to have adopted the usual Norman design—viz., triforium on the top of pier-arcade—would have made the interior look very squat: so, instead of building the triforium above the pier-arcade, it was built beneath it. The lofty pier-arches, thus gained, add greatly to the apparent height and dignity of the interior. The lower arches, however, which carry the vault of the aisle behind, are corbelled into the piers in very clumsy fashion. The design is not original; it was worked out at Romsey in a single bay of the nave, but, being thought ugly, was promptly abandoned. It is worked out more successfully in Dunstable Priory church and Jedburgh Abbey. The clerestory windows of the nave would be built not much before 1180; naturally, therefore, they are pointed. The capitals of all the twelfth-century work are full of interest. Indeed, Transitional capitals—each an experiment, and all differing—partly conventional, partly naturalistic, with a dash of Classic—are to me much more interesting than any of the Gothic capitals, except perhaps the naturalistic capitals of the later Geometrical period. There is a great sameness about the foliated capitals of the Early English, Curvilinear, and Perpendicular periods. I need hardly say that no one of these capitals came from Ethelred’s church.

The whole church is exceedingly interesting. It fills a niche in the history of English architecture all by itself. It is not the plain and austere Transitional work of the Cistercians. On the other hand, it has not yet the lightness and grace of Ripon; still less the charm of Canterbury choir, Chichester presbytery, Wells and Abbey Dore—Gothic in all but name. In spite of its foliated capitals, in spite of a pointed arch here and there, it is a Romanesque design; yet not so Romanesque as Fountains, Kirkstall, Furness.

III. In the Lancet period (1190-1245) the works went on apace. An upper stage was added to the tower, and on that the spire was built—the first large stone spire in England. It is a Broach spire: i.e., the cardinal sides of the spire are built right out to the eaves, so that there is no parapet. On the other hand, instead of having broaches at the angle, it has pinnacles. Moreover, to bring down the thrusts more vertically, heavy dormer-windows are inserted at the foot of each of the cardinal sides of the spire: altogether a very logical and scientific piece of engineering, much more common in the early spires of Northern France than in England.