DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.6914#0129
WOODEN CHURCHES OF THE ANGLO-SAXONS. 97
Monks' ^rT00^' at v*^age °f Doultinge, in Somersetshire, and says, that the
Elmham° GlaSt°nbury rebuilt it of stone.44 AtSharnburn, in Norfolk, and also at
in er ■' Wooden churches, or chapels.45 Timber was used, instead of stone,
part ^ a sacred building at Bedricesworth (Bury St. Edmund's), in the early
Anglia tWelfth century, into which the body of St. Edmund, King of East
find a * removed from Hoxne.46 And even after the Norman Conquest we
YorkshTr00^611 C^Urcn mentioned in Domesday Book, as standing at Begeland, in
USe °f tlj011^1 ^e eai^est Saxon churches were sometimes built of wood, and the
those • niatei"ial was, in a few instances, continued for some centuries, yet
nsed in th^ ^ certam^ mistaken who assert, that timber alone was generally
°IJinion 6 C°nstructi°n °f the Saxon churches and monasteries. This erroneous
antiqUarWaS advanced by S. Daniel,48 the historian, and Somner, the celebrated
the Norman^ adoPted b.v Warton49 and others. Somner says, " Before
All the S ac^vent> most °f our monasteries and church-buildings were of Wood.
^Wsbur^^* *** my rmlm ^Saith King EdSar' in his Charter to the Abbey of
l>ut worm ^' ^atec^ tne year °f Christ, 974), to the outward sight are nothing
Timber fab^" rotten timber and boards. Upon the Norman Conquest, such
arches, a f ° ' °Ut °^ USe' an(^ ^ave P^ace to Stone buildings, raised upon
Caen, jn ^ °^ structure introduced by that nation, furnished with stone from
^0es not - °rmandy-"so The passage on which Somner chiefly founds his assertion,
Dut may ^ni^ ^at the monasteries were nothing but worm-eaten and rotten boards,
tne monast m°re correctly translated, " like moss-grown and worm-eaten boards,
intended t ^ v*sd:dy decayed, even to the beams;" which probably was
hy neglec? ^ the
roofs of the ecclesiastical buildings, being destroyed
beams n ' °r V1°h2nce, the timber-work in general was decayed, even to the
ngest parts. Somner also adverts to the statement of Stow, that the
" An
" Curtly1^ ,SaCra'" Pars P- 23- " Spelman's " Posthumous Works," fol. 1727, p. 189.
*' Vide Sec"R!fist- Batt<%" p. 124.
46 " Befo °0nd " General Report from the Commissioners of Public Records," Appendix.
En81and to°th thlS ^1087) the churches were most of timber."—See " Collections of the History of
,9 Warton brkfl °f He"ry IIL" 4th ediU M' 1650' P- 27'
^anconstri »• ^ 8ays' "The churches, before the Conquest, were of timber, or otherwise of very
Action."_<< r\u .
" Antin u- uoservations on Spenser's Fairy Queen."
Wl^ofCa„tefl)w.y, P. ^86, Battels edit.
Monks' ^rT00^' at v*^age °f Doultinge, in Somersetshire, and says, that the
Elmham° GlaSt°nbury rebuilt it of stone.44 AtSharnburn, in Norfolk, and also at
in er ■' Wooden churches, or chapels.45 Timber was used, instead of stone,
part ^ a sacred building at Bedricesworth (Bury St. Edmund's), in the early
Anglia tWelfth century, into which the body of St. Edmund, King of East
find a * removed from Hoxne.46 And even after the Norman Conquest we
YorkshTr00^611 C^Urcn mentioned in Domesday Book, as standing at Begeland, in
USe °f tlj011^1 ^e eai^est Saxon churches were sometimes built of wood, and the
those • niatei"ial was, in a few instances, continued for some centuries, yet
nsed in th^ ^ certam^ mistaken who assert, that timber alone was generally
°IJinion 6 C°nstructi°n °f the Saxon churches and monasteries. This erroneous
antiqUarWaS advanced by S. Daniel,48 the historian, and Somner, the celebrated
the Norman^ adoPted b.v Warton49 and others. Somner says, " Before
All the S ac^vent> most °f our monasteries and church-buildings were of Wood.
^Wsbur^^* *** my rmlm ^Saith King EdSar' in his Charter to the Abbey of
l>ut worm ^' ^atec^ tne year °f Christ, 974), to the outward sight are nothing
Timber fab^" rotten timber and boards. Upon the Norman Conquest, such
arches, a f ° ' °Ut °^ USe' an(^ ^ave P^ace to Stone buildings, raised upon
Caen, jn ^ °^ structure introduced by that nation, furnished with stone from
^0es not - °rmandy-"so The passage on which Somner chiefly founds his assertion,
Dut may ^ni^ ^at the monasteries were nothing but worm-eaten and rotten boards,
tne monast m°re correctly translated, " like moss-grown and worm-eaten boards,
intended t ^ v*sd:dy decayed, even to the beams;" which probably was
hy neglec? ^ the
roofs of the ecclesiastical buildings, being destroyed
beams n ' °r V1°h2nce, the timber-work in general was decayed, even to the
ngest parts. Somner also adverts to the statement of Stow, that the
" An
" Curtly1^ ,SaCra'" Pars P- 23- " Spelman's " Posthumous Works," fol. 1727, p. 189.
*' Vide Sec"R!fist- Batt<%" p. 124.
46 " Befo °0nd " General Report from the Commissioners of Public Records," Appendix.
En81and to°th thlS ^1087) the churches were most of timber."—See " Collections of the History of
,9 Warton brkfl °f He"ry IIL" 4th ediU M' 1650' P- 27'
^anconstri »• ^ 8ays' "The churches, before the Conquest, were of timber, or otherwise of very
Action."_<< r\u .
" Antin u- uoservations on Spenser's Fairy Queen."
Wl^ofCa„tefl)w.y, P. ^86, Battels edit.