FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   25   26   27   28   29   30   31   32   33   34   35   36   37   38   39   40   41   42   43   44   45   46   47   48   49  
50   51   52   53   54   55   56   57   58   59   60   61   62   63   64   65   66   67   68   69   70   71   72   73   74   >>   >|  
e fenestris Pulchraque porticibus fulget circumdata multis, Plurima diversis retinens solaria tectis, Quae triginta tenet variis ornatibus aras. It is plain that this church, wherever it was, and the poem does not mention its locality, was a very important one. It was very lofty, and had many porches, or apses (_porticus_ may mean either), and thirty altars. Just before this passage in the poem there is an account of altars set up by the archbishop, probably in the cathedral. Professor Willis thinks that if the church referred to immediately after were the cathedral, an account of altars set up in it would not be given before an account of the building of the church itself. But, as Professor Freeman points out, it is most improbable that two writers, the chronicler and Flaccus Albinus, should allude to a church other than the minster without giving its name. It is, of course, just possible that Albert set up his altars before rebuilding the cathedral, in which case Professor Willis' contention would lose its force. It is curious that no other chronicler mentions either the fire or the rebuilding of the church, but this omission would be almost equally strange whether the building in question were the minster or some important church in the diocese. On the whole, therefore, it is perhaps most probable that the church referred to by Flaccus Albinus was the minster. If that is so, this church remained until it was ruined by the Danes in 1069. Then it was certainly either wholly or partially burnt down. Thomas, the first Norman archbishop, appointed in 1070, found the minster, the city, and the diocese, all waste and desolate. At first he was satisfied with roofing in what remained of the cathedral and otherwise restoring it as best he could. Afterwards, before 1080, he began to rebuild it. It is uncertain whether he rebuilt the whole church, or merely the nave and transepts. Stubbs on this point seems to give two different accounts. "Thomas," he states, "restored the canons of the church after he had rebuilt it as well as he could." Afterwards he says, "He built the church as it now is from its foundations." Probably, this first passage refers to the immediate repairs which Thomas found necessary in 1070, and the second to his ultimate rebuilding of the church. William of Malmesbury says that he began the church from its foundations and finished it. In the face of this positive testimony it is p
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   25   26   27   28   29   30   31   32   33   34   35   36   37   38   39   40   41   42   43   44   45   46   47   48   49  
50   51   52   53   54   55   56   57   58   59   60   61   62   63   64   65   66   67   68   69   70   71   72   73   74   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

church

 

cathedral

 

minster

 

altars

 
Professor
 

rebuilding

 

Thomas

 

account

 

referred

 

rebuilt


Willis

 

remained

 

Albinus

 
chronicler
 
diocese
 
Flaccus
 

building

 

Afterwards

 

archbishop

 

foundations


important

 

passage

 

appointed

 
finished
 

Norman

 

Malmesbury

 
ultimate
 
desolate
 

William

 
positive

ruined
 

testimony

 
partially
 

repairs

 
wholly
 

Probably

 

accounts

 
uncertain
 

states

 

rebuild


restored

 
Stubbs
 

transepts

 

probable

 
canons
 

roofing

 

satisfied

 

refers

 
restoring
 

porches