Wiltshire notes and queries . nd Queries. present writer, that the one Church of 55. Mary and Me horns(still the Parish Church of Amesbury) was (excepting theChapel of the Infirmary) the only consecrated building belong-ing to the Monastery ; and that (as at Edington) its easternportion served as the Monastic Church, the western portionbeing appropriated to parochial In the nave of Amesbury Church, as it now stands, thereare some architectural remains, at least of the early Norman period,2 which may possibly havebeen part of the Church givento Font Evrault in 1177, orre-built at about t
Wiltshire notes and queries . nd Queries. present writer, that the one Church of 55. Mary and Me horns(still the Parish Church of Amesbury) was (excepting theChapel of the Infirmary) the only consecrated building belong-ing to the Monastery ; and that (as at Edington) its easternportion served as the Monastic Church, the western portionbeing appropriated to parochial In the nave of Amesbury Church, as it now stands, thereare some architectural remains, at least of the early Norman period,2 which may possibly havebeen part of the Church givento Font Evrault in 1177, orre-built at about that chancel, tower, and tran-septs (used by the nuns) belongto the Early English style (13thcentury), the north and southwalls of the chancel each con-tain a Decorated window, an in-sertion of somewhat later nave and its south aisle,include the earlier Normanremains, re-modelled during thePerpendicular period (15th cen-tury). The west window of thenave (removed in 1S53) is repre-sented in the annexed of the south aisle, where there are traces of a piscina; and an altar veryprobably stood here. It was called Jesus Chapel, no doubt, from thr Jd ?•*service said in it; but this would not necessarily be its actual dedication. 1 No person, with a practised eye it) such matters, who has carefuliylooked at Edington Church, and carried the same eye into that 61 Amesbury,will have failed to sec in both, distinct traces of one and the same arrange-ment in mediaeval times. 2 These remains seem to have been overlooked by Sir Richard Floarc,who remarks that the church cannot boast of any Norman architect arc.(Amcsburi/ Hundred, p. 7:5.) They were probably plastered over, and k»Hvisible in his time than at present. The von considerable inclination ofthe chancel to the north also appears to have escaped the notice oi SwRichard, and is not shown in his ground plan of the building. Notes on Amcsbury Monastery. 3°5 The east window of the chancel (also removed in 1S5
Size: 1733px × 1441px
Photo credit: © The Reading Room / Alamy / Afripics
License: Licensed
Model Released: No
Keywords: ., bookcentury1800, bookdecade1890, bookidwiltshirenotesqu3118unse
