Page images

Pettycannos of the said Churche.

Richard Carlton, bacch. in musicke.
Willñ Bambrigg, bacch. in lawe.
Tho. Thwaites, noe grad.

Dysse, an old man.
Thomas Atkinson.


John Staller, Rec. of St Augustines in Norweh and

Drayton in Taverham denrie, M. of artes. Thomas Plombe,l Rec. of St Michaells of Coslanie and

Heigham, M. of artes, preacher. Willñ Parrye, Rec. of St Clementes, M. of artes, pcher. Willñ Grenewaye, Rec. of St Edmundes, an old inan. Robert Wythers, Rec. of Alsainctes in Beer Street,

M. of arte, preacher. John [Holden,*] M. of artes, Rec. of St Michaells at Plea [

] preacher. Thomas Thwaites, Rec. of St Symond and Jude and

psone of Thorpe next Norweh, noe grad. John Alricke, Rec. of Sc Margaretes, noe graduate. Thomas Woodward, Rec. of St Julians, noe graduate. John Lowe, Curate of St Giles, noe graduate. Willñ Wells, Curate of St Georges of Colgate, M. of

artes, preacher.

... Lynnye, Curate of St Peters Pmontergate, noe

graduate, able to preache. Thomas Mellys, Curate of St M'tyns at Palace, noe grad. Willñ Calthrope, M. of artes, Curate of St Johns of

Muttermarkett, preacher. George flood, M. of artes, Curate of St Peters of

Mancroft, publique preacher. Raphe ffurnes, bacch. in devinitie, Curate of St Andrewes,

publique preacher.

1 See p. 90.

? The original is eaten away.

Thomas Heathe, Curate of St Maries, bacc. of artes. Sethe Burton, Curate of St Stephens, bacc. of artes, able

to preache. Nicholas Gylman, psonne of St James in Pockthorpe,

noe grad.

... Nune, Curate of St Gregories, preacher, M. of

artes. Thomas Atkinson, Curat of St Saviors. Raphe Barloe, Curate of St Lawrence, Beheth in his

owne pishe.

The Ancient See of Elmbam.



I have been asked to take up the vexed question still pending between the archæologists of Norfolk and Suffolk as to the See of the ancient Bishopric of Elmham, with a view to ascertaining whether there is enough evidence to settle it. I now think that there is, and that when the matter has been presented in due form and order it will become clear that the verdict must be given in favour of our Norfolk Elmham, not of South Elmham in Suffolk.

Put concisely, the question is whether one of the ancient bishops of East Anglia, let us say Bishop Ælmar, sitting in his manor house at Elmham in Norfolk, would have said that he was called Bishop of Elmham not from that place, but from another of the same name in Suffolk.

The late Mr. Harrod is of course my chief opponent, but he has been re-inforced within the last few years by Mr. St. John Hope. The latter gentleman has made

1 Suffolk Institute of Archæology, vol. iv., p. 7.

2 Speech reported in the Norfolk Chronicle, September 2nd, 1905. VOL. XVIII.]


a light-hearted contribution to the array of arguments against me, apparently deriving his opinions from the stated views of the late Mr. J. T. Mickleth'waite. I do not accept what he has said; but on the other hand I have not space to deal with it in detail in this paper. Mr. Hope, or perhaps I should rather say Mr. Micklethwaite, asserts that, in the middle of the collection of parishes now called South Elmh'am in Suffolk, there are the ruins of a seventh-century church in the centre of a possibly Roman, but more probably Anglo-Saxon defensive earth work.

Mr. Micklethwaited founded his opinion mainly on the existence of a round-ended presbytery nearly as wide as the nave, and on considerations of the improbability that only one arch of about 201 feet span would have been thrown by the builders of Anglo-Saxon days over the entrance to the presbytery. He pointed to the existence of a sleeper-wall which might have supported the pillars of two or three arches. A construction of this kind would, he said, have placed the church in the same group as St. Martin and St. Pancras at Canterbury, Lyminge, and some other churches certainly of the seventh century.

On the other hand so high an authority as Professor Baldwin Brown? inclines to the view that the building is a Norman apsidal chapel, and compares it with the chapel at Castle Rising and the Wells chapel near Blythburgh.

Finally the late Mr. T. Butterick of Leeds, who probed the whole question with great acumen, alluding to the rough construction of the Old Minster, remarked that, while "some of the best Saxon architecture is of the seventh century, rude architecture points rather to later Saxon or early Norman times."! He cited, too, a late Saxon church at Worth' in Sussex which "has a noble chancel arch' 19 feet 8 inches wide.”

| Archæological Journal, vol. liii., p. 293, and vol. lv., 2 The Builder, October 27th, 1900.

P. 342.

The opinions of the best recent authorities are thus widely divergent as to the date of the Old Minster; but so busy are these gentlemen with this single point that they leave untouched the question whether the building was ever completed. This is, for my purposes, a specially important matter, while differences of two or three centuries in date scarcely affect my argument."

Let us then agree that we have at South Elmham the ruins, or the beginnings, of a small Anglo-Saxon church of venerable antiquity, and let us further agree that this small church, the centre of the nine parishes forming the district now called South Elmh'am, might have been for a time, if it was ever finished, the ecclesiastical home of the successors of Felix, driven inland from Dunwich to seek a place less accessible to the wild North'mien. But Mr. Woodward decides that the Minster never was finished. The holes for the scaffolding still remain unfilled, and no antiquities, he says, have been found within the enclosure immediately round it. If so, the Danes did their work quickly, and the Old Minster was no more than a mere name for an unfinished church. Mr. St. John Hope, who clearly has

1 From papers kindly placed at my disposal by Mr. Butterick's family. It is regrettable that he published so little of the results of his investigations into the architectural remains of the Saxon period.

? Mr. Woodward, after consulting Mr. J. H. Parker, dated the building circa a.d. 1000; yet the fact that the construction was not resumed points rather to the long Danish occupation from about 870 than to a passing raid. The latter seems the more probable date, for the ground-plan is clearly of a very ancient character.

Suffolk Institute of Archæology, vol. iv., p. 4. The next paper this volume is Mr. Harrod's. One says that the Minster was never finished, the other that it was the sedes of the Bishop of Elmham,


« PreviousContinue »