Bell's Cathedrals: The Cathedral Church of Gloucester.

by H. J. L. J. Ma.s.se.

PREFACE

This series of monographs has been planned to supply visitors to the great English Cathedrals with accurate and well ill.u.s.trated guide-books at a popular price. The aim of each writer has been to produce a work compiled with sufficient knowledge and scholarship to be of value to the student of Archaeology and History, and yet not too technical in language for the use of an ordinary visitor or tourist.

To specify all the authorities which have been made use of in each case would be difficult and tedious in this place. But amongst the general sources of information which have been almost invariably found useful are:--(1) the great county histories, the value of which, especially in questions of genealogy and local records, is generally recognised; (2) the numerous papers by experts which appear from time to time in the Transactions of the Antiquarian and Archaeological Societies; (3) the important doc.u.ments made accessible in the series issued by the Master of the Rolls; (4) the well-known works of Britton and Willis on the English Cathedrals; and (5) the very excellent series of Handbooks to the Cathedrals originated by the late Mr John Murray; to which the reader may in most cases be referred for fuller detail, especially in reference to the histories of the respective sees.

GLEESON WHITE, E. F. STRANGE, _Editors of the Series._

AUTHOR'S PREFACE

I wish to express my great obligations to Mr F. S. Waller (the Cathedral Architect) for his courtesy and kindness in allowing me to make the fullest use of his "Notes and Sketches" of the Cathedral, a book which is now, unfortunately, out of print; to Mr W. H. St. John Hope, F.S.A., for permission to quote from his "Notes on the Benedictine Abbey of St.

Peter at Gloucester," published in the Records of Gloucester Cathedral; also to the Records of Gloucester Cathedral.

To Mr E. J. Burrow I owe special thanks for permission to use blocks made from his black-and-white drawings, one of which has not been published before; to the Very Rev. the Dean for much useful information and a.s.sistance; and lastly to the Sub-Sacrist, Mr T. W. G. Cooke, whose help has been at all times ungrudging and invaluable.

H. J. L. J. M.

GLOUCESTER CATHEDRAL

CHAPTER I

HISTORY OF THE BUILDING

It is neither possible, nor desirable, within the limits of a book of this size and scope, to go fully into the question, interesting though it be, of the relative claims of Aldred and Serlo to the honour of the first building of the Abbey of Gloucester. Professor Willis, in his lecture addressed to the meeting of the Archaeological Inst.i.tute, held at Gloucester in 1860, after giving various reasons for believing that the crypt dates back no further than 1089, when the foundation-stone was laid by Abbot Serlo, goes on to state that he was "clearly of opinion that when the foundations of the cathedral were laid, the crypt was planned to receive the existing superstructure and no other."

Professor Freeman, in his lecture published in the "Records of Gloucester Cathedral," says: "The first thing we do know for certain is, that in the year 1089, thirty-one years only after the dedication of Ealdred's church, Serlo, the first Norman Abbot, began the building of a new church, which was itself dedicated in 1100."

From the record quoted by Mr W. H. Hart ("Chartulary," i. 3), the first mention of the abbey is in 681, when it was founded by Osric, viceroy of King Ethelred. It was dedicated to St. Peter, and Kyneburga (the sister of Osric) was the first Abbess of a double foundation for monks and nuns. She died in 710.

Osric himself was buried in his church in 729 (Hart, i. 5), and his sister was buried near him, in front of the altar of St. Petronilla, which was on the north side of the then existing church.

The second Abbess was also a lady of royal descent, and widow of Wulphere, King of the Mercians. She died in 735, and with Eve or Eva, or Gaffa, her successor, who died in 769, the monastery came to an end.

In 823 a new _regime_ began--viz. that of secular priests, introduced by Beornwulf, King of Mercia, and the _Monasticon Anglicanum_ (Caley, i.

563) says that he found the monastery "_spoliatum et ruinosum_" and therefore rebuilt it. He also changed its const.i.tution, by introducing secular priests, of whom many were married to lawful wives, and who were very little different in their way of living to other secular Christians. This state of things went on till 1022, when c.n.u.t, as Leland says, "for ill lyvynge expellyd secular clerks, and by the counsell of Wolstane (Wulfstan), Bysshope of Wurcestar, bringethe in monkes." The monks introduced by c.n.u.t were of the Benedictine rule, or Black monks, as Parker calls them in his "Rhythmical History of the Abbey."

This change was effected about the same time in many other places in England, but was not generally popular, and certainly was not so in Gloucester. Abbot Parker, in his rhyming account of the founding of the abbey, says that in 1030

"A lord of great puissance, named Ulfine Le Rewe, Was enjoyned by (the Pope) for ever to finde Satisfying for the seaven priests that he slew, 7 monkes for them to pray world without minde."

Mr Hope, in his "Notes on the Benedictine Abbey of St. Peter at Gloucester," 1897, p. 2, says: "The Benedictines thus introduced by c.n.u.t do not seem to have been a success, and after an existence of thirty-seven years under a weak Abbot, whose long rule was marked by great decay of discipline, the '_Memoriale_' (Dugdale, i. 564) says: 'G.o.d permitted them to be extirpated, and the monastery in which they were established to be devoured by the fiercest flames, and the very foundations and buildings to be rent asunder, razed to the ground, and utterly destroyed.'"

"The monastery was next taken in hand by Aldred, Bishop of Worcester, who in 1058 re-established the monks. He also began to build a new church from the foundations, and dedicated it in honour of St.

Peter."[1]

"Until now the monastery seems to have occupied the same site throughout its chequered history; but the '_Memoriale_' states that Aldred began the new church 'a little further from the place where it had first stood, and nearer to the side of the city.'"

The language of these authorities is quite plain, but the interpretation thereof is not so evident. As Professor Freeman said: "By the time when the oldest church, of which we have any part remaining, came into being, the Roman Wall, or at least this corner of it, must have pretty well pa.s.sed away." It seems clear that the "_side of the city_" cannot refer to the Roman Wall. To quote Professor Freeman again: "The existing church is something more than near to the Roman Wall. It actually stands over its north-west corner."

"Even under Aldred's auspices the monastery did not altogether flourish.

But this time it was through the fault of Aldred himself, for, on his translation to York in 1060, he retained very many of the possessions of the abbey that had been pledged to him on account of his expenses in repairing and re-edifying the church."

In 1072, Wilstan (Wulstan), the Abbot consecrated by Aldred in 1058, died, and was succeeded by Serlo, who found the convent reduced to two monks and eight novices. Through his energy the monastery increased to such an extent that in about fifteen years' time it became necessary to rebuild the monastery.

This rebuilding was begun exactly thirty-one years after Aldred had built his church, _de nova_ and _a fundamentis_. Why was this necessary?

Professor Freeman says: "The reason is not very far to seek for any one who has really mastered the history of architecture during the eleventh century.... The simple fact is that the Norman prelates pulled down and rebuilt the English churches, mainly because they thought them too small." Further on he says: "This proves that, of the two types of church which were in use side by side in the days of the Confessor, Aldred had followed the older type. He had not conformed to the new Norman fashions, vast size among them, which were coming in after the example of the king's own church at Westminster.... His church was built in the Primitive Romanesque style, the style common to England, with Germany, Italy, and Burgundy, not in the newly-developed style of Northern Gaul. Therefore, neither its scale nor its style suited the ideas of Abbot Serlo.[2] It was condemned, and the minster that now stands was begun."

In the MS. Lives of the Abbots in Queen's College Library, Oxford, it is stated that "in A.D. 1089, on the day of the festival of the Apostles Peter and Paul, in this year were laid the foundations of the church (ecclesia) of Gloucester, the venerable man Robert, Bishop of Hereford, laying the first stone, Serlo the Abbot being in charge of the work."

(So, too, Hart, i. 11.)

In August 1089 there was an earthquake, which did serious damage to the then existing building. Eleven years after this (1100), in the last year of the reign of William Rufus, "the church," as Florence of Worcester wrote, "which Abbot Serlo, of revered memory, had built from the foundations at Gloucester, was dedicated (on Sunday, July 15th) with great pomp by Samson, Bishop of Worcester; Gundulf, Bishop of Rochester; Gerard, Bishop of Hereford; and Herveas, Bishop of Bangor." This dedication under Serlo's _regime_ is the last authentic record for some years.

Nothing is known exactly as to how much of the building was completed by 1100. Professor Freeman points out that eleven years was quite long enough for its building, and that there is no hint in the local chronicle of any additions being made to the building dedicated in 1100.

Probably part of the church was finished for the dedication, such as the presbytery, choir, the transepts, the Abbot's cloister, the chapter-house, and the greater part, at any rate, of the nave.

The nave, though so different in scale as compared with the original choir, must have been built very early in the twelfth century, and, like the rest of the building, originally had a wooden roof.

In 1101 or 1102 damage was done to the building by fire, notably the chapter-house, and again in 1122. Possibly in this latter fire the nave roof was destroyed, and of this fire the piers in the nave show traces.

Of the same date must be much of the strengthening masonry in the crypt, the Prior's lodging, the chapel, and the slype beneath it.

The whole of the Abbey buildings were surrounded by Abbot Peter with a stone wall, and the necessary gates--viz. the great gatehouse on the west, another on the south, and a third more to the east. All these can be identified from the small plan of the monastic buildings, reproduced (p. 103), by permission of Mr F. S. Waller. The Saxon Chronicle tells us that in 1122, while the monks were singing ma.s.s, fire burst out from the upper part of the steeple, and burnt the whole monastery. Some time between 1164 and 1179 one of the western towers, probably the south-west tower, fell down. Fire in 1190 is said to have destroyed the greater part of the city, as well as almost all the buildings in the outer court. Helias, the sacrist, also made new stalls for the monks in the choir. Of these Early English stalls, a fragment has been thoughtfully and carefully preserved behind the seat of the Canon in residence.

In 1222 we learn from Hart, i. 25, that the great eastern tower was built under the direction of Helias of Hereford, the sacrist. Of this tower no traces now remain. Helias built his superstructure on the Norman work that we see in the nave.

The Early English Lady Chapel was said to have been built between the years 1224-1227 by Ralph of Wylington, and Olympias his wife, and endowed with lands.

The church was dedicated again in 1239, in Abbot Foliot's time, by Walter of Cantelupe, "the patriot prelate who, six-and-twenty years later, stood by Earl Simon on the day of martyrdom at Evesham."

Three years after the dedication in 1242 alterations in the triforium of the nave were made, and the stone vaulting was done by the monks themselves. It was a very laudable object, but they effectually spoiled the nave. The same year saw the beginning of the rebuilding of the south-west tower, and it was finished before 1246. If this was the tower that collapsed in 1170, the monks would seem to have somewhat neglected their duty to the fabric. The Norman refectory or "frater" was demolished in 1246, and the new one begun. This building stood to the north of the cloisters, and was pulled down at the Dissolution. Of the Early English infirmary or "farmery" traces remain near the Bishop's Palace.

In this place we may refer incidentally to Gloucester Hall, Oxford, which college was founded in 1283 as a residence for thirteen monks, to be chosen out of the brotherhood at Gloucester, and sent to study at Oxford. The hall was empowered later on to receive students from other Benedictine foundations, and the buildings were enlarged for this purpose in 1298.

Fire again ravaged the Abbey and its precincts in 1300, on the feast of the Epiphany. "It began in a timbered house in the great court, from which it spread to the small bell-tower, the great camera, and the cloister" (Hope, 36). Mr Hope thinks this bell-tower was either a single western tower, as formerly there was at Hereford, or else a Norman north-west tower, and that the great camera was part of the Abbot's house, now the Deanery. Professor Freeman thinks that the small bell-tower or _parvum campanile_ was so called as being less in height than the south-west tower rebuilt in 1245-6.