•i,

;"''>/•¦('

tf' /

$*i

•,.j&.

','^^AtiMdffi'H ' <\'^ }^ '^\' ^''*,

'.I*.
^^
' • ' «
*-e1 ,«.v.
' ^ Si-''*
k*^ s
J'?..!-'
f'f*i'i'
i%W
?i^
)«j»-v
r/ ^^ -. ^.^ ^^,
Kl-
a^-
1
'f-^-^-S
>!*' 1.
-t
'%;¦
B
P''
'**
«-„
'•-ji<:- ?•
W
.;,/:'5
BRITISH ART
REFERENCE I
A/ A .TV 7/
.> ft »«
/v in
.' ' r
^
\&
, -ii
^¦1 ^'^ ''^ .-i..^ .1., ^ {
Vv "ir-j"^'.'' iT ' ft ' .-
ft V'-^-'Cr.r. ^ - , -'. ! - -'-
/ 1
Yale Center for British Art and British Studies

CMpt^Hd ^\iunk

By Major HBALES, F.S.A. M.R.S.L.

WITH ILLUSTRATIONS.

LONDON :
WYMAN A: SONS, 74-5, GBEAT QUEEN STUEET,
LISCOLN'S-INN FIELDS, W,C.
1880.

OHIPSTEAD CHURCH.
By MAJOR HEALES, F.S.A., M.R.S.L.

CHIPSTEAD CHURCH may, in an arch^ological
point of view, be ranked amongst the more im
portant examples in the county, and has the specially
good fortune to remain fairly free from the hands of the
restorer. I trust that under the appreciative care of the
rector it may long be preserved from injury.
Nearly thirty years ago a paper was read at Cam
bridge, before the Ecclesiological Society,^ by our eminent
member, Mr. Street, in which he broached a theory that
the churches of Chipstead, Gatton, Merstham, and
Merton, in this county, and that of Cliffe at Hoo, in the
neighbourhood of Gravesend, were all the work of the
same architect. The paper was the result of a careful
observation and comparison of these buildings, in the
examination of which many very curious points of resem
blance were noted ; though whether, taken altogether,
they warrant more than a " perhaps," may be open to
further consideration ; and probably the author of the
paper, if now called upon to write upon the subject, might
feel that the evidence in favour of the theory then sug
gested is less conclusive than it seemed at the time.
He assumes that the architect commenced with the
font at Merstham, though adding this was perhaps, and
more probably, earlier ; if so, the Church of Chipstead
was the first of the works in this series.
It would scarcely be within the scope of my present
duty to enter upon the points of similarity in detail —
points which could scarcely interest or be appreciated by
those who have not made mediaeval architecture a special
1 The Ecclesiologist, N. S. Tin. p. 31 (1850),
B

CHIPSTEAD CHURCH.

study ; but which together, when very carefully examined
and compared, led to the opinion expressed. But those
amongst us who happen to 
be acquainted with Merstham
Church will at once recognize
the resemblance of the door
way in the north transept
here ^ to the west doorway at
Merstham,^ which is of some
what earlier date, and is or
namented with the dog-tooth
ornament such as occurs here
as an enrichment of the round-
headed doorway on the north
. T n . T mi J. J- Section or Noeth Dookway-Head.
Side of the nave. The transept-
doorway, as seen from the exterior, is, in fact, one of a

Cleeestokt Window, now within the building.
rather rare type, but specimens may be found elsewhere,
such as one Avhich occurs at Kidlington, in Oxfordshire.^
^ See wood-engraving, 2}ost.
3 Engraved in the Collections of this Society, vol. iii. p. 1, in illus
tration of a Paper on Merstham Church, delivered by the present writer
on the occasion of the Society's visit to that locality.
3 Doorway at Kidlington, Oxfordshire, engraved in the Glossary of
Architecture,'''vo\. ii. pi. 48, with date c. 1220,

CHIPSTEAD CHURCH. 6
There is also a singular similarity in the clerestory of
quatrefoil windows in the churches of Chipstead and
Merstham, which until a recent restoration of the latter
under the careful superintendence of Lord Hylton, Avere
both within the building, in consequence of the wall of
the aisle and pitch of its roof having been raised — so
that these openings, which originally gave additional
light to the nave, became at a subsequent period simply
ornamental. The earliest part of the church is evidently the nave.
The west door may well be ranked as of the Norman
period; yet the north doorway, which is rather more
elaborate, though round-headed, is (as previously men
tioned) ornamented with the dog-tooth moulding, and
clearly of the transitional period, or near the end of the
12th century ; and the lancet window near it must be
referred to the same date.
It is part of Mr. Street's theory that the
ground-plan of the church, as originally de
signed, consisted of a nave and chancel (a
plan, indeed, of which the county furnishes
abundant examples), and that while the work
was in progress it was determined to enlarge
the building by the addition of an aisle, and
the adoption of an entirely different ground-
plan — the cruciform, with central tower.
"Whether this was so or not we can never
hope to prove.
I The south side of the
J nave has a character
0- _ which leads us to give
it a date rather later ^, ,^^
than that of the north >¦'*-
side ; and the section of
nave - arches perfectly
accords with that of the
Section oe Nave Aech. ^^Qy^^Qj. . archeS and the
north transept doorway, while the design of ^^^ ^ ^^^^ ^^
the interior of the latter must be deemed nave-Pillak
coeval with the range of chancel lancets, (s.sibe).
B 2

CHIPSTEAD CHUKCH,

The mouldings of the nave pillars are simple, but possess
ing a distinct character. The south chancel is modern ;
the original south transept was destroyed (it is believed)
by a fire in the 17th century, and the views given in the
work of our great county historians, Manning and Bray,
show that its destruction had taken place previously to
1794. It remained for the late rector, the father of the
present rector, to rebuild it, which was carefully done in
1855, taking the north transept as the general model.

Tkansepx Doorway: Exteeiob.
It will be noted that the triplet at the end of the
north transept has a very modern appearance ; possibly
cleaning and renovation may account for its present bran-
new look, but its style is anything but accordant with the
rest of the building. The work by which it acquired its
present appearance was performed in 1854, at the ex
pense of Mr. Cattley, the father of the present church
warden. Here we must refer to the doorway in the
transept. Considering that the church already had
two, if not three entrances in the nave, one might deem

CHIPSTEAD CHUECH,

another hardly necessary; but probably the transept
served as a chantry screened off by a
parclose from the rest of the church, and
belonging to the Lord of the Manor
or some other great family, a suggestion
which is strengthened by the fact of
there being an aumbry or cupboard con
structed near the east wall, and most
likely a piscina will be found in the east
wall or south-east corner whenever the
plaster is stripped off.
Before proceeding further, attention
will be drawn to the simple but effective
arches and piers of the tower and to the beautiful

Section oe Head of
Teansept Doorway :
Exteeiok.

Teansept Doorway: Inteeiok.
groining of the tower. Nothing can be more simple,

Plan of N. W. Pier oe Towee.

Chamfee-Stop, Towee Piee.

and yet nothing can be more careful than the ma-

6 • CHIPSTEAD CHURCH.
sonry, especially of the vaulting ribs, and the carved
foliage of the central boss. I learn with regret, that
the tower has shown signs of weakness, and it is con
sidered scarcely safe to ring the peal of bells. Bell-
ringing is a science which, as now practised, was
unknown until about the 17th century, or no doubt the
strength of many a tower which has been injured or
destroyed by the oscillation, caused by the swinging of
the bells, would have been adapted to the requirement ;
but at the same time it is only fair to the art or science,
as we may term it (for a peal, properly so called, is a
matter of singular intricacy, as well as some manual
dexterity), to advert to the fact that the damage to
towers usually arises in consequence of the improper
wedging of the bell-frames.
In the year 1553 there were four bells in the steeple,^
and now we find that there are five, but none of them so
ancient, the oldest (the tenor) bearing the date 1595.
They bear the following legends : —
OVRE HOPE IS IN THE LORD. 1595.

R. oir E,

(Bnv i)ope 10 in tfte Iortr» 1607.
OVRE HOPE IS IN THE LORD.
JOHN HODSON MADE ME. 1658.
W. <# H.

JOHN HODSON MADE ME. 1658.
OVRE HOPE IS IN THE
LORD.

THE REVEREND JOHN GRIFFITH RECTOR. MESS''^-
SIMON ROSE & ELIAS FEW OH. WARDENS.
WILLIAM MEARS OF LONDON FECIT 1785.

R. B. is Richard Eidridge of Chertsey, a very eminent
bell-founder, whose initials and stamp occur at dates
1 Surrey Church Goods, Surrey Archceological Collections, iv. p. 181.

CHIPSTEAD CHURCH. /
between 1592 and 1623, and the motto was a favourite
one of his, as for instance, at West Chiltington, Sussex,
dated 1602, and also in black letter.^ John Hodsonwas
a great London bell-founder, whose initials are often
found in Surrey, Kent, and Middlesex, and his name in
full at Hailsham, Sussex, in 1663 and 1668,^ and the
firm of Mears still flourishes.
The south doorway is a rather plain example of per
pendicular work, with its arch scarcely pointed, and
under a square head ; in the jambs are roughly cut
I. T. L., 1638, and P. L., 1636. '
At the end of the aisle will be seen a doorway, pro
bably formerlyreached by wooden steps — more convenient
and permanent than the present ladder — and leading by
a stone staircase through the thickness of the wall, across
the end of the aisle, into the tower just above the vault
ing, whence any further ascent must be made by a ladder.
Generally speaking, one would expect to find such a
staircase on the eastern side of the transept in order to
make it available for access to the rood-loft on the top
of the screen across the arch to the chancel ; but here
we are, at present, left in uncertainty as to how the
rood-loft was reached, perhaps from the north transept
near its junction with the chancel.
Proceeding now into the chancel or the transept, a
very singular feature will be noticed ; the actual lancet-
headed opening of the windows being set as it were in a
frame with a triangular or pedimental head constructed
of two slabs, the splay following the same form. The
inner side of the transept door is also triangular-
headed, as seen in the previous illustration. Pos
sibly, instances may be found elsewhere ; but, except
in spire lights which are subject to different consider
ations, and the pedimental canopies over pointed arches,
which are of quite a separate type, I do not remember
ever to have seen another example, or even a reliable
drawing of one, built during the period of Gothic archi
tecture and subsequent to the Saxon date. The eminent
1 Tyssen's Church Bells of Sussex, p. 69, ^ Ibid. p. 27.

8

CHIPSTEAD CHURCII.

arch^ologist, Mr. Freshfield, thinks that the original
church was Saxon, and that these are remains of that
structure adopted and adapted by the early English
builder. It may have been so, butas there is no mention
in Domesday Book of a church then existing here, the
presumption is great that none existed ; and I do not
remember to have seen any Saxon heads very closely

iHi

\

\

Chancel Windows. Scale, 3 feet to 1 inch.
corresponding with these. In spite of the singularity of
the form I do not think there is sufficient ground for
assigning to them any other date than that of the
windows themselves, which are clearly Early English.
Probably they will not be adopted as a pattern, since
there is a little awkwardness where the lancet window
head and triangular splay contrast.
At all events these triangular heads of windows and

CHIPSTEAD CaURCH.

9

door form so singular and striking a feature in the design
that I must run a risk of rashness in doubting Mr. Street's
conclusions (which if I were an architect I might hardly
venture to do) . I think that if the architect of this church
had also designed the other churches with which Mr.
Street has associated it, he would infallibly have intro
duced similarly-constructed window and door heads in at
least some of them as well as here, and the similarity of
his design would not have been limited to various, but by
comparison unimportant, matters of detail.
The priest's door in the chancel I suspected, and have
since found from Cracklow's view, to be modern, as there
was no doorway at that date.^
The next work was to raise the tower a story ; the walls
of the aisle were heightened at a late date, and in conse
quence of the aisle-roof being of necessity also raised, the
clerestory windows came within the church to which they
had before given light. Another very unusual
feature in the church is pre
sented by the sediha being
a stone bench against the
wall, instead of either re
cesses in the thickness of

Stone Bench-end.

Piscina.

the masonry or formed by cutting down a window-sill to
a convenient level; the carving of the elbows is very
singular, and might be of a very early date. The piscina
will also be noted on account of its unusual and not in
elegant form ; near it is a large aumbry.
^ Cracklow's Surrey Churches, 1823.

10 CHIPSTEAD CHURCH.
The font is a large octagon, with panels of decorated
tracery rather rudely cut in each face. The font may be
of that date, or perhaps earlier, with the panelling sunk
at that period.
The chancel screen is a good one, of Perpendicular date
—towards the end of the loth century. About the same
date a large window took the place of the three detached
lancets, which we may assume to have probably occupied
the east end of the chancel in the original design : this
fact appears from the bases of the jamb shafts.
The stained glass will next attract attention, and the
Society will hear with surprise that much of it is the
work, both in painting and firing, of the present rector
and Mrs. Aubertin, whose sviccessful skill and taste render
it unsafe to define, without a close examination, what is
old and what is modern. The remainder of the
glass consists of fragments collected by him
from time to time, and at various localities, as
opportunity occurred, and set in the lead with
his own hands. It is stated by Cracklow, that
there was at one time some good old stained
glass still existing in the church, but at his
date (1823) there were very few fragments

remaining. As regards the ancient church-goods there jg^gjjQj,j,^g.j,
is little to be said. A very clear sweep of ob- Window,
jects of value seems to have been made early J-^^'i^-SnAFT.
in King Edward VI. 's reign ; for when the second set
of Royal Commissioners were sent in his seventh year
to complete the sacrilegious work of plunder, they found
only 2 chalices, one of which, as well as the 4 bells in the
steeple, they received "unto the kynge's use." There
was one vestment left for the Communion-table cloth,
while the other ornaments had been sold for 22s. 8d. ;
copper-gilt articles, weighing 3^ lbs., reahsing 21 pence,
and 3 lbs. of other manufactured copper-work having
been sold for 6 pence.
The pulpit is late in the Jacobean style ; and this is
so often the case that I come to the conclusion that pul
pits seldom existed in ordinary parish churches during

CHIPSTEAD CHURCH. 11
the Gothic age. I am, of course, aware of sundry exam
ples of pulpits of the Perpendicular period, but they are
very exceptional : most of those which we see of Gothic
carving have been simply constructed by cutting up
screen-work and patching it together.
There are few monuments to which I need call atten
tion. At the east end of the aisle, broken in two, is a
stone cofiin-lid sloping in width from head to foot, and
its ridge marked by a simple floriated cross in relief,
dating perhaps early in the 14th century. Outside the
church, to the west of the porch, is another now ex
posed to the destructive influence of weather.
Manning and Bray mention a flat stone, with a par
tially-obliterated inscription, bearing the date 15th March,
1475, and the rector informs me that a brass was stolen
some years ago.
Next is the little brass in the chancel-floor, consisting
of a small female effigy, and the following inscription : —
Here lyeth the body op Lucie Roper y" davghter of Lac-
TANSivs Roper & granchild to Hvmphrie Hvntley Citizen
AND IeEMONGER OF LONDON WHO DEPARTED THIS LIFE Y"=
XXIIIl"! DAYE OF FeBRVARY An" 1614. BEINGE ABOVTE THE
AGE OP XXIIII YEAEES.
Christvs MIHI vita; Mors Mihi lvcrvm.
It is in fair preservation, but not specially remark
able. There are also several incised inscriptions, beginning
with that to John Hamden, D.D., Rector, who died 26th
January, 1631, aged 55. One to Alice, daughter of Dr.
Hooker (best known as " The Judicious Hooker"), who
died 20th December, 1649 ; and several, somewhat later,
to members of the families of Pigeon and Stephens.
A helmet and armorial banner hang in the chancel.
It is proper to advert to two stones, each bearing the
date 1253 in Arabic numerals, very rudely scratched :
they were found in the jambs of the east window, into
which they had been built ; and in one of the two the
date, set inwards in the wall, was protected by a piece of
lead. Such numerals were not in use in England till a
period far later, nor is there anything to warrant the

12 CHIPSTEAD CHURCfi.
belief in the high antiquity of the execution of these
scratchings. I should suggest that there may have been
a dedication inscription in the chancel (which from its
architecture we may ascribe to about that date) ; that
such inscription was removed and destroyed in the 15th
or early in the 16th century, when the present east
window was inserted ; and that the then rector, or the
workmen, with a - conservative feeling not usually ex
hibited, in order to preserve the recoi^d, roughly cut the
date in these stones. Mr. Freshfield informs me of an
instance at St. Christopher le Stocks, London, of the
care with which some fragments of glass, discovered in
1590, were preserved and the date appearing on them
was recorded with a note of the circumstances in the
vestry-book. In this age of " restoration " (so called ironically, I
suppose), it is uncommon to meet with a church of any
size or architectural pretension that has not suffered
more or less severe injury from the efforts of restorers,
which, well-intentioned though they be, will be bitterly
regretted hereafter, and will inflict a lasting disgrace
upon the present age. I may, fortunately, make this
remark on the present occasion without risk.
It now only remains to add a few remarks upon the
parish register.
The existing Register Book commences in 1656, but
for some time it is evidently a very imperfect record.
Thus of Christnings, there is in that year but one entry
(which is dated 5th February), while in the following-
year there are eleven ; in 1661 there is but one entry, in
1663 only two, and in 1664 but four, including one " at
London " relating to the Pigeon family. The Buryalls
commence in the same year, but there are only two or
three per annum. The record of marriages we must
assume to have been kept by the registrar appointed by
the Commonwealth Parliament, at all events up to the
Restoration ; but after that we find no record till 1670,
and then only one or two per annum for many years,
showing clearly that the register was very imperfectly
kept. And of this there is further evidence in the form of

CHIPSTEAD CHUECH. 13
entry : thus, on an opposite page, instead of in the
sequence of date, is this record —
" 1663. Thomas Sparkes and Anne Matthew were marryed upon all
Souls day in this year "; and
" 1664. M'' George Evelyn, son of y" right worshipful S'' John Evelyn,
late of Godstone, Knight, & M'^ Mary Longly, of Colsden,
were here marryed by M'' Hampton, of Blechingly, Sept. 8"'."
Why they came here or how they acquired a domicile
does not appear. Burials of persons dying in other
localities were not uncommon, as from London, Reigate,
Chaldon, and Merstham.^
The famihes of Pigeon and of Stephens (better known
as of Epsom) are the only other noticeable names up to
the year 1700 (beyond which would be out of place in
an archgeological paper), and they appear thus : —
" 1693. M's Margaret Stephens, wyfe of M'' Anthony Stephens, of
Epsom, was buryed June 10*'', who dyed June 7*, and was
wrapt in Linnen.
" 1695. Anthony Stephens, Esq'''=, of Epsom, was buryed May 10"",
and was wrapt in Linen."
The note about wrapping in linen was in consequence
of the Act of Parliament, 18 Charles IL, cap. 4 (1666),
for " the encouragement of the woollen manufactures
of this kingdom, and prevention of the exportation of
the monies thereof for the buying and importing of
linen." A singular Act for protective duties — which
prohibited the burial from and after 25th March, 1667,
of any person " in any shirt, shift, or sheet, made of or
mingled with flax, hemp, silk, hair, gold, or silver, or
other than what shall be made of wool only " ; or that
any person should be put into any coffin lined or faced
with any such material, under a penalty of £5, to be
employed to the use of the jooor in providing a stock or
work-house for the setting them at work ; the only excep
tion being in the case of any one dying of plague. The
Act proved unsatisfactory in its working and was re
pealed and its intention re-enacted more carefully by the
1 e.g. 1693. "M'' Matthew Atkinson, of London, Goldsmith, was
buried July 4*'', who dyed June 29*, and was wrapt in Woollen."

14 CHIPSTEAD CHURCH.
Act 30th Charles II. , cap. 3 ; but it seems to have been
little regarded after a few years, and was abrogated
by the Act 54th George III., cap. 108.
Connected with the parish we may note the entries
respecting Mr. Ingram, who was appointed to the rectory
by the King, by lapse, on 27th February, 1678-9. He
apparently was curate of the parish, and perhaps in
charge, for some time previously, for we find in the
Register Book the following entry : —
1675. John Ingram, Minister of this parish, and M''^ Elizabeth
Pigeon were marryed Aprell 29*'', at Christ Church parish, at
y^ Bank side, Surry.
Whether this was or was not a clandestine marriage
does not appear, but it proved very prolific, as shown
by the Register, where are the entries of the following
baptisms : —
Mary, daughter of John Ingram, Curate of this parish, and Elizabeth
his wife, born 9^"^ March, baptized 19"' March, 1676.
Hannah, daugliter of John Ingram, Rector, born 27"' July, baptized
14"' August, 1679.
John, born 13"' January, baptized 18"' January (24 January, inter
lined), 1681.
William, born 20*'' March, baptized 4*'' September, 1683.
Samuel, born 2'"* November, baptized 11*'' November, 1684.
Elizabeth, born 9"' May, baptized 13"' May, 1686.
Anna, born 17"' July, baptized 22"'' July, 1687.
Thomas, born 5*'' January, baptized 24**' January, 1688.
Sarah, born 27"' October, baptized 20"' November, 1690.
James, born 20"' July, baptized 4"' August, 1692.
Judith, born 12"' July, baptized 26"' July, 1694.
Mfs Ingram died on the 14*'' November, and was buried on the 19"'
November, 1714, wrapt in woollen.
Up to this date all the entries in the Register Book
during Mr. Ingram's period are apparently in his own
handwriting, but after that date he appears to have
given it up, as the handwriting was thenceforth quite
different and wanting in its former regularity ; he, him
self, died on 1st and was buried on 5th February, 1717 :
it seems as though overwhelmed by his loss, he gave up
his customary task and died after a lapse of little more
than two years.
Of surnames there do not appear any specially worthy

CHIPSTEAD CHURCH. 15
of mention, though naturally a few well-known in the
neighbouring parishes appear here, such as Best and
Bonwick ; of unusual Christian names in the 17th century
may be noted Eusebiah, Emanuel, Thumper, and Sen-
tentia. In conclusion, I have to acknowledge with sincere
thanks the facihties which the Rev. Peter Aubertin, M. A.,
the Rector, has been good enough to afford for visiting
the church by the Society, and by myself on its behalf,
and for examining the Registers, as also for his informa
tion as to the work which has been done to the church
during the long period of the incumbency of himself and
his father.

YALE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY

3 9002 08854 1280

iP!3?^>^

A»

>n'

'-1 '

l\H

i*?,j

gt'Ssrf
X, ^'^^V*^'^''^
.i-** /.i
i
.fc^«.
> /y
'^f
^^\'-
!,S^S-^
^^
»>l
WJ
i/^.
WJ
»&«'
1 ','.»!<
«»>«
-•Wf
mi
f^
i<
f^ii
¦«il;
ffiti *^*/-. v^tL
?>e
U J'd..!'^
si*,!
"^
*'^^
f&
^^
1 V '
%'
'¦^-a?# ...
•W . ¦*!
. *.?.
<«55«j,-
,4"
'A
.!t» i^-
V,
u'fO.