I appear to have spent a lot of time recently chasing the
dead. Chasing after notes, fragments and details of the long dead - and looking
at the tiny, and sometimes immaterial, monuments they have left behind them.
Many of course left nothing. The majority of the medieval population of England
have no memorials, no monuments to lives well lived - or otherwise - but passed
through this world leaving not a single lasting mark upon it. The dead and
unseen of the past. The brasses and monumental marble effigies were for the
rich; those who could afford the cash and time to ensure that they would, in
name at least, be remembered. The less wealthy, but still well off, gave money
towards church improvements or the gloriously painted rood screens and stained
glass that still grace many of our churches. Their names inscribed into the
churchwardens records, and often the object itself, to stand as a permanent
testament to their three score years and ten. For the rest, in an age before
gravestones and burial registers, the most they could hope for was a decent
send off with family and friends. A few candles and masses, should they be
lucky enough to belong to a local guild that supported such activities, and
bread and ale distributed to the needy poor after they had taken their place
back in the deep soil of their parish.
There was, however, one group of individuals that left their
mark all over the parish churches of England, cut deep in to the stonework of
piers, walls and doorways - the merchant classes. The rising middle class of
the late middle ages or, to give them their more recent title amongst trendy
post-revisionist historians, the 'middling sort'. Don't ask me what a 'post
revisionist historian', or eventhe
earlier model 'revisionist historian', actually is.I don't know. Along with 'multi-vocality' it
is a closed book to me.
The merchant classes of the later middle ages were
ambitious. Ambitious people in an aspirational church. Where wealth and status
were sought not as a means to an end, even a spiritual end, but as the end in
itself. One need only read the accounts of people such as Margery Kempe or
Chaucer's Wife of Bath prologue to realise that wealth and status were, for
some, their own reward. Eyes that should have gazed heavenward in search of
salvation darted to left and right instead, undoubtedly costing to the nearest
penny the Alderman's wife's new gown or checking to see that everyone had
noticed your own new attire. And for the most ambitious of this middling sort,
those who made their chinks in trade and industry, the rewards of this
generation were sometimes not enough. Those who really made their way in the
world, and piled away the gold and silver, could expect to buy a marriage for
their children that took them way above the expectations of their own humble
birth and in to the lower ranks of the gentry. If they were ambitious enough, and
rich enough, their grandchildren would be born in to the nobility. Had they
lived long enough then, in all likelihood, they'd not have been welcome guests
at their own grandchildren's weddings.
However, as with all ambitions, great oaks from small acorns
grow. The ambitions of the merchant classes had many, many outlets - and their
need for memorialisation was only one amongst many that jostles for position.
In terms of church graffiti the most obvious symbol is the 'Merchants Mark' - a
device or motif supposedly unique to an individual merchant that acted in much
the same way as a logo does for a modern company. A symbol that was easily
recognised by both the literate and illiterate alike, and one that was
associated with one particular merchant. Merchants used these marks to mark
their goods, to sign documents and even to adorn their houses. For those that
made it in to the ranks of the very rich these same marks are found adoring
their own memorial brasses or alabaster tombs. A small but proud mark of the
humble trading origins of a merchant of note. They were, in effect, a type of
heraldry for those of too low a class to be entitled to have their own coat of
arms. The ultimate in aspirational motifs.
I come across a great many merchant's marks scattered across
the walls of our medieval churches and cathedrals. Neatly executed and
bordering on the 'professional' they are often to be found in small groups, huddled
together against a mass of surrounding inscriptions. In some cases they are to
be found in distinct patterns, concentrated around areas that might be deemed
spiritually significant; side altars, image niches and shrines. Here they
cluster like notes upon a prayer tree; each a little request for the benevolence
of the Almighty to fall upon the owner of the mark. A prayer for an ambition
achieved. And yet here is the thing. Many of these merchant's marks, these
unique identifiers, are just that - unique. They don't adorn the brasses and
tombs of rich merchants. They don't decorate large timber framed merchants
hall, and they don't appear in the port books or alderman's records of the
great trading towns. In many cases they are the only example of that particular
mark; the symbol of ambitions that never bore fruit and fortunes that were
never made. They are the last mark on this world of hopes that were dashed by either
misfortune or ill chance. The last message of a shattered dream.
I spend a lot of time chasing the dead. Sometime they leave
far too little to find...
In terms of medieval graffiti
there are certain churches that are simply legendary. Churches that are just so
damned good that they have become a Mecca for graffiti hunters everywhere.
Places where you would fight hostile churchwardens and evangelical happy-slappy
guitar playing vicars simply to be allowed to step over the threshold. These
are the GREAT graffiti churches. The churches such as Lidgate, Blakeney and
Bedingham. However, all these amazing churches pale into insignificance at the
mention of one particular church. It's very name makes graffiti hunters go weak
at the knees and dribble to leak from the corners of the mouth in anticipation.
It is the cream of graffiti churches, the best of the best. The one graffiti
church that has been subject to intense study - and it is Ashwell in
Hertfordshire.
I'm a contrary sod at the best of
times. You say black and I will invariably say white. It isn't really just to
disagree with you - more just to see what the reaction will be. A bit like
licking you fingers and then sticking them in a power socket. You know it's
wrong - but can't help wondering just what will happen (2nd degree burns as it
turns out). Or the time I experimented with using gun powder as a deterrent for
moles - all in the interests of healthy experimentation and being a contrary
bugger. The mole experiment, just in case you want to try this at home, wasn't
a great success. However, I did learn that it was possible to sleep through the
night with your hand in a bucket of cold water. Right... where was I? Ah, yes,
Ashwell church. Well, here's the thing, if somebody tells me that a church is
THE greatest graffiti church in England then I will immediately take such a
statement with a really, really big pinch of salt. I will, to be blunt, blow
raspberries in their general direction and assume that they don't know what the
hell they are talking about. Sure, Ashwell might be good - but have they been
to Lidgate? To Blakeney? To Bedingham?
So, finally, this week I went to
Ashwell. I have been before, but that was many years ago - before I really knew
what I was looking at - so a return trip was in order. I had to go across to
Oxford earlier this week to give a lecture at the university (I know, I know...
it isn't Cambridge - but beggars can't be choosers etc) and Ashwell was sort of
on the way. Give or take.
So there I was, camera and torch
in hand, faced by what the world has come to think of as the 'great' medieval
graffiti church. I had about an hour to wander round and, if I was lucky,
should get in a good deal of sneering and bad comparisons in that time. I
ventured inside...
Ok. So it is good. One of the
best. Actually quite superb... Holy crap I was shaking after ten minutes of
running a torch across the surface of the stone walls! It was, not to put too
fine a point upon it, immense. Just about every single surface I looked at was
covered in a mass of early graffiti. The tower, the piers, the western wall -
everywhere. Layer upon layer of inscriptions and symbols. I was, quite simply,
in graffiti OMG heaven. Here's the thing. Ashwell IS the best known graffiti
church, and certainly the most extensively written about. It has been studied
by Hine, Coulton and Sherlock, and had TV archaeologists and historians crawling
through its nave. However, they've all been getting terribly excited for
completely the wrong reasons.
Ashwell is really known for the
massive number of medieval text inscriptions to be found in the church - and it
does contain a really unusually high number of early Latin inscriptions. They
range from the inscription in the tower, which records the arrival of the Black
Death in this small Hertfordshire village, to a tiny inscription in the south
aisle which records the peasants revolt. There are texts of moralising verse -
and Latin insults describing the Archdeacon as 'an ass'. There are excerpts
from the bible and comments upon the quality of the mason's workmanship. You
name it - it's there - and they are wonderful. However, the text inscriptions,
all of which are open to interpretation, are a tiny, tiny fragment of what else
is there. Probably less than 1%.
Ashwell church is full of early
graffiti. Images of people, faces, buildings, animals and ritual protection
marks galore. 'vv' markings cover one side of the tower arch, compass drawn
designs are everywhere - and a hand raised in the act of blessing adorns the
pier at the eastern end of the south aisle. Wherever you look there are
devotional markings; the hopes, fears and dreams of the medieval congregation
etched deep in to the walls of the parish church. The text inscriptions are
good too - but they are an embellishment. The gilding of the lily. Even without
them, and their multiple and enigmatic interpretations, Ashwell would still be
a jewel in the crown of graffiti studies everywhere.
Being
someone who stares at the walls rather more than most people, and someone who
believes that graffiti has a certain value as a historic record, it is rather
odd when I am confronted with the most obvious question - why study graffiti?
It happened a couple of days ago in the city of York, that noble tourist magnet
and coffee shop haven of the north. I was in the city to fill the civic parking
meters with cash, deliver chocolate to members of the Council for British
Archaeology (Thorntons - no messing about!) and take some pictures of the
graffiti in the minster. As you'll probably already know I was in the city a
month or so back leading some lovely American academics on a tour of the
medieval graffiti in the minster. Much was found, pics were taken - some of
which were subsequently found to be 'rather poor'. I blame the previous evenings
visit to the Yorkshire Terrier. As a result new pictures were required and
chocolate delivery seemed a perfect pretext (just so you know - the CBA now
'demand' that ALL visitors supply them with chocolate - cookies at a push - but
not the yucky ones with smarties on the top).
So I went to
the minster. I crept in the back door (there isn't one - don't bother looking)
and began to shine a torch on the walls and take a few pics. Now the first
thing that usually happens is that a cathedral guide will sidle up and ask what
you are up to? Their role, as custodians of the 'public' face of the
minster/cathedral, is to check that you are...
a) sober
b) not a
complete nutter
c) not a
spot check by the diocese (which may involve a combination of the above)
A quick
mention of mason's marks and 'lovely' C18th graffiti (which they know about) is
usually enough to send them happily on their way - leaving you to scour the
walls for the really interesting stuff. However, if you shine a light on the
walls of a minster, church or cathedral it does tend to attract a certain
amount of attention. The kids will be the first. They will drag their reluctant
parents towards you, demanding of them to know exactly what you are doing.
Let's face it, for many of them this is the most exciting thing that's going to
happen in the building until they get to blow months of hard earned paper-round
money in the gift shop. Are you looking for cracks? Is the whole thing about to
tumble down around their ears? Will they get a chance to post the pics on
facebook/tumblr/twitter etc? The parents are obviously reluctant to ask. After
all, every modern city dweller has spent decades training themselves to ignore
the weird guy talking to the walls/light fittings/invisible aliens in the
tin-foil hats. Why start now - after all, they're on holiday? However,
eventually, pressured by the un-ending questions from little Jimmy/Emma/Jordan,
and aware that the weird wall staring guy 'can' actually hear them, they will
sidle across and ask what you are looking for.
This is the
point it gets interesting. You tell them. You explain all about medieval
graffiti, how much of it still lays undiscovered, how it can tell us a great
deal about the people who built and worshiped in this building, what some of it
means. Suddenly they are engaged. Graffiti - now that is something they can
relate to. They understand the concept. It isn't some weird academic concept
involving ancient liturgy - but an immediate and tangible point of access to
'real' medieval people. It is at about this point that you should read them the
health warning - that states that
medieval graffiti hunting can be, upon occasion, more addictive than crack
cocaine, Ginsters Cornish pasties after one pint too many and those odd purple
jelly babies - all combined together.
However,
this time was different. This time there was the girl. Actually, let me
rephrase that. This time there was THE GIRL. Early teens I'd say, American from
the accent (east coast) - and obviously destined to be either a nuclear
scientist or civil rights activist who will be the bane of all right wing
western government. She was obviously smart. I mean really smart. Her parents
were obviously dragging her around the cultural sites of Europe in the hope of
widening her education, or perhaps to distract her from beginning her own left
wing civil rights movement at her obviously expensive private school.
Mum and Dad
were the first to come across to see what I was up to. Both just a little too
keen to be honest. A little too loud. A little too 'gee whiz'. Both obviously
trying to interest THE GIRL and get her to put down the iphone and 'take an
interest'. So, we got to talking...
THE GIRL did
eventually put down the phone and listen. In fact by the look of concentration
on her face she appeared to be listened pretty darned hard. It was clear that,
as far as she was concerned, if her parents found the wall staring guy fascinating
then she wasn't going to be fascinated. She, intent on showing off her
remarkable and expensively acquired intellect, was going to utterly destroy him
and all he had to say. So she was going to listen, find the faults in the
arguments and then DESTROY!
The problem
was, of course, that she couldn't. I'm not trying to brag here about what I do,
it's just that there aren't really any arguments to debate. We simply show them
what's there, make it available to them, and let them think it through
themselves. After ten minutes even THE GIRL was running her hands across the
stonework, feeling for inscriptions that haven't really been seen for over five
centuries, and asking questions. And then it came. Just as they were leaving.
THE GIRL, who had by this time become 'the girl', drew herself up, remembered
that she was in fact a teenager and therefore, without question, NOT interested
- asked the question. "Why", she asked, "is this stuff
important? I mean, like, these people have been dead for centuries - so what
does it matter what they wrote on the walls? There are hundreds of people dying
in the world - in Gaza (parents frowned), Iraq and Syria - why is this old
stuff important?"
BLOODY good
question really. One I've asked myself a lot recently, I can tell you. Surely
all the graffiti volunteers, and myself, and every other community
archaeologist out there, would be far better off devoting our time, talents and
energy to working in a food bank or relief agency? Surely it is better to try
and help the living than recording the graffiti of the long dead?
But this is
the answer I gave her. The people who left the marks on this wall were just
like you and me. Just like the people suffering today in Gaza and the Middle
East. They too had hopes, dreams and fears. They too had joy and suffering.
However, unlike some of the people today their story remains untold. They had
no internet, no facebook and no twitter - just the walls. So they scratched
their messages here - laid down their prayers in the stonework - in the hope
that someday God or someone would take note. For many of those long dead people
these markings may be the only thing they have left on this planet. The only
mark that they have left upon this world. Their only testament to existence.
They left these messages in many cases in the hope that they would be read -
much like the people of Gaza are leaving messages on the walls today. And
perhaps, just perhaps, by beginning to understand just a little bit more about
those people of the past we will try and not replicate their mistakes. Perhaps.
It's what I
told her - and she nodded, put her iphone in her pocket and wandered off after
her parents - undoubtedly exiting via the gift shop. And if still not sure that
it was the right answer...
Following on from the last 'rant' about the mass dials, or scratch
dials, I thought it worth expanding upon a couple of themes I touched upon
earlier. Well, to be honest, it's probably just going to end up being another
rant if truth be told. I blame the BBC. No, honestly, I do!
Last weekend the lovely BBC (God bless 'em. Worth every penny, etc etc)
ran a pretty big story about the medieval graffiti surveys. Despite the focus
being on the lovely Lincolnshire survey we all got a good deal of feedback.
Hundreds of thousands of hits on the websites, hundreds of emails, a card from
my mum - that sort of thing. However, apart from drowning the start of my week
in replying to lovely emails, it had a less obvious downside. It got people
talking about medieval graffiti. Chatting on facebook, tweeting on twitter and
generally talking about the subject in a way we rarely see. Hardly a bad thing
you'd think? Certainly not. The only downside was to see repeated, time and
time again, the same old fallacies, the same old clichés and misconceptions.
It was bound to happen I guess. I'm generally too busy looking at
images of graffiti to jump in on every debate going on, and being generally a
technophobe whose idea of programming a computer involves an axe, I usually
only get to see the debates long after they have taken place. Which rather
leaves the field clear for the other 'experts' to wade in.
You've probably all come across them. The type that see a question
unanswered and, having once read a book on the subject, or at least having
thought about borrowing it from the library, feel they have to answer it. The
type of person who, armed with a selection of 1960s text books, spends their
spare time editing wiki entries - removing anything put there by recent
scholars because "if it isn't in the book...". Does that sound
bitter? Sorry. Actually some of my best friends are wiki editors. Obviously
they are all academics who fill wiki full of complete nonsense just to keep
their students on their toes (don't smirk - this happens. A good percentage of
wiki entries are factually incorrect 'for a reason'. There is also a reason Wiki's logo is a jigsaw with bits missing... just saying...).
Sorry, where was I? Ah,
yes... and so it was last weekend I saw the old chestnuts well and truly
brought out to get a good airing. In no particular order we have 'bored
choirboys', 'crosses around doorways were made by pilgrims', 'masons marks were
so the master mason knew how much to pay his men' and, yes you guessed it, 'the
daisy wheel is an ancient sun symbol, proving that the pagan religion survived
well in to the middle ages'. Actually I could name a few more - but will spare
you this evening as I have a glass of wine and am feeling vaguely generous.
Now obviously I fully realise that this is MY fault and my fault alone.
If we'd been getting our message across in a more efficient manner all talk of
choirboys, excepting amongst certain specialist interest groups, would be a
thing of the past. As it is we are putting out about five or six academic
articles each year, have a book out next year and try and get our message out
via popular media and events as much as possible. Last year I personally did
over 35 talks, Colin and Pat also handled a good number, we attended over a
dozen major events, two conferences - and we were all over the national and
regional press - but this is obviously not enough. Terry's suggestion that we
make individual home visits, armed with powerpoint projectors and laminated
overlays, simply isn't practical, and Jeff's suggestion that we begin with the
choirboys themselves is... frankly suspicious.
So here's the plan. We knock down each and every fallacy, every untruth
and every misconception one by one. We'll pull the bricks out until the whole
thing collapses, and then rebuild the story stone by stone. We aren't planning
on rebuilding any great monumental truth, but what we can do is help people
question the truths they 'thought' they knew, and hopefully, like the idea that
medieval knights had to be winched on to their horses due to the weight of
their armour, such misconceptions will eventually fade away. Eventually. No
promises eh...
So where to begin? Well I guess the most obvious place is with the choirboys
(steady there Jeff!). It is after all the story that probably gets repeated
most.People see graffiti in a church
and the assumption is that was the work of those mischievous little chaps in
the white gowns howling at the front of the church. A story repeated in church
guides, websites and by tour leaders. Church graffiti equals bored choirboys.
So why is this? Why is the assumption made in the first place and why is it so
universal? Well actually I believe that this touches upon one of the most
fundamentally difficult questions relating to medieval graffiti - that of
legitimacy.
We view the church graffiti, even that created five centuries ago, with
modern eyes and modern sensibilities. To us today graffiti is seen as something
bad; something anti-social and inherently destructive. The bane of our
underpasses (joke- I live in Norfolk) and bus shelters. Vandalism pure and
simple. Therefore ALL graffiti is viewed in the same way; and church graffiti
must also be destructive and anti-social. It certainly can't have been
something that was either accepted or encouraged - and therefore must have been
created illicitly by those urchins in white who carry the name 'choirboys'.
Well, to state the obvious, there are a few problems with this
interpretation long before we begin to look at the graffiti in any detail.
Firstly there is the dating of much of the graffiti - created in many cases
long centuries before the church even had choirboys. Churches certainly had
singers, and often groups of 'singing men', but boy choirs are actually a
pretty recent innovation in all but a very few high status chapels. Secondly,
if these early inscriptions were the work of choirboys then, at the very least,
their schoolmasters are to be congratulated. Their knowledge of Latin,
including the use of contractions and abbreviations, is excellent, their
handwriting often superb, and their knowledge of astrology and geometry
certainly boast a very high level of learning! Indeed, given the level of
education and the obvious amount of time they spent at their books, it is
rather surprising that they actually had any time to create graffiti (for those
readers for whom English is not their first language this was a poor attempt at
the use of sarcasm).
So if not the choirboys then who? Who felt the need to scratch their
names, prayers, hopes and fears into the very fabric of their village church?
Well here the graffiti itself begins to tell its own tale.In the case of Ashwell, Ludham and Wood
Norton it was the parish priest. In the case of Troston it was the lord of the
manor. In the case of Lidgate it was, perhaps, a monk and medieval poet. In
short, it was just about everyone, from just about every level of society. At
Wiveton and Blakeney it was the rich merchants. At Cley it was a builder and
his labourers. At Parham it was a musician and organ enthusiast. And at Stoke
by Clare it may even have been the singing men... not the choirboys... but
their ancient forebears who left their musical portraits scattered across the
church walls.
And the reason all these people left their marks on the walls? Quite
simple really. Graffiti wasn't seen in the same way as we see it today.
Graffiti wasn't seen as destructive and anti-social. It wasn't frowned upon or
prohibited. Given that the majority of the early inscriptions we record
actually have a spiritual dimension, and many are clearly prayers, it would
appear that these inscriptions were far more than just tolerated. They were
both accepted and acceptable. As much a part of the everyday experience of the
church as the mass.
So, next time you hear a church guide dismissing graffiti inscriptions
as the work of bored choirboys, passing quickly over to look at the 'lovely'
Victorian glass, remember that the problem lies with them. It is their views,
their experience and their preconceptions that make it so. Now if they would
open their eyes just a little wider, and actually 'read' what was written on
the walls, then they, like myself, would realise that sometimes questions are
far more interesting than answers...
The problem with spending quite so much time immersed in medieval
graffiti is that, despite my very best intentions, it does tend to raise far
more questions than it answers. What once appeared relatively simple and
straightforward suddenly becomes, under the weight of masses of new evidence,
highly questionable. Although, in retrospect, describing any of this as
straightforward in the first place is probably pushing it a bit. Or a lot.
I suppose this is the same problem that faces anyone working in a
relatively new area of study. A severe lack of reference points - and those
that do exist, you discover, are built upon foundations of sand. If you are
lucky. Whenever I give a talk or present a paper I always make a joke of the
point that I tend to use the term 'the current theory is', or 'it appears
likely', rather a lot. Sadly I'm not joking. Think about it. Here we are, faced
with a massive new corpus of medieval material, with almost no reference
points. There's only ever been one book published on the subject; and even the
author herself admitted that that particular work was hardly blemish free. We
are blindfold, in the dark, groping from one hand-hold to the next. Can it get
any more difficult? Well, yes, it can actually. It gets worse at the point when
you realise that the hand-holds you were using to guide you actually turn out
to be as insubstantial as smoke. That all the 'taken as reads' haven't been,
and that all the accepted wisdom actually refers to the same untruth or
misconception just being repeated long enough and often enough.
So where do we start? At which point do we begin to pull out bricks and
see just how many we can remove before the structure collapses around our ears?
Mason's marks? Pilgrim crosses? Medieval board games on the walls? Nope. Let's
begin where it all began. Where the study of graffiti inscriptions, in a rather
odd manner, actually began - with Mass Dials.
Now just about everybody who has taken the time to wander around a few
medieval churches will have come across these distinctive little markings. Also
known as 'scratch dials', they are most usually to be found on the south side
of the church, scratched in to a buttress, sometimes near the priest's door
into the chancel and quite often inside the porch. The traditional
interpretation is that these are simple sundials; designed to inform the
congregation of the time that the daily mass would begin. They are also one of
the few areas of inscriptions in church fabric that have received any level of
formal study. Indeed, there is a whole sub-group of the British Sundial society
that goes around and records these early timepieces - and therein lies part of
the problem.
Putting aside the question of dating these inscriptions, where
tradition states that the cruder the manner of execution the earlier they are
likely to be (based upon absolutely no evidence whatsoever as far as I can
see), the real problems begin to occur when you examine the traditional
interpretation as to their use. They are, in many instances, very clearly
sundials - designed to mark off the hours. However, there are rather a lot of
examples that simply don't fit the pattern - and raise some really quite
interesting questions. In the first place there are those actually found within
porches - most usually carved into the framework of the south door. The
traditional interpretation is that these were actually in place prior to the
porch being erected. Then there are those on the north side of the church;
where tradition states that the stone has most probably been moved or re-used.
Then there are those found inside the church itself - where tradition states
that the stone has again been moved or re-used. That, in short, is rather a lot
of 'tradition' - and appears to be a very convenient way of avoiding asking
some really quite important questions.
Just examining one particular site can highlight exactly how weak the
traditional interpretation really is. Let's take one church - Worthing in
Norfolk - a tiny and isolated church set in the Wensum valley. The church is an
ancient one, with a round tower and many early Norman features, that has seen
much change and alteration over the centuries. On the south side, now covered
by a late medieval porch, is a most striking and beautiful early Norman doorway
- into which are inscribed at least three mass dials. Yes, you heard me - at
least three. Ok, so let us agree with a little tradition - and assume the mass
dials were inscribed prior to the porch being built (see, I can be reasonable).
Why then are there three identical dials? All appear to be to the same
standard, and incised in a similar manner - so why do you need more than one?
What are they doing? Showing the time in London, Rome and Jerusalem? I think
not.
And it isn't just at Worthing that these supposedly simple dials don't
fit in to the traditional story. I see too many examples of multiple dials,
dials set on the north side of the church, or even inside, to believe that all
of these are re-used or moved bits of stone. The weight of actual observed
evidence would appear to be leaning against a convenient tradition. Yes, many
of these are simple time-keepers located in the right place - but many, many
others don't fit the pattern.
So what is going on? What was the function of these familiar markings
on our medieval churches? Well, to be honest, I really can't say. I can make a
few suggestions based upon what I have observed, but I don't have any hard and
fast answers. Not yet anyway. All I can say is that the traditional and
accepted ideas associated with them are no longer, if you'll excuse the pun,
set in stone. We have to throw tradition out of the tracery window and begin to
look at the actual evidence with fresh eyes. We have to begin to question what
has remained unquestionable and no longer accept 'accepted wisdom'.
And don't even get me started on pilgrim crosses...
So Seahenge
has a sister. The Bronze Age timber circle found on the North Norfolk coast,
and excavated amongst scenes of tense confrontation, wasn’t alone. For those of
you in the UK the news has been spread all over various media platforms for the
last few weeks. Those in Norfolk trumpeting the fact that yet another major
archaeological discovery has been made in the region (they’d have appropriated
the Staffordshire hoard given half a chance) where the past forms such an
integral part of the present. The new timber circle was ‘discovered’ only a
short distance from the original circle and this time, much to everyone’s
relief, it is to be left to gradually erode away and fall prey to the cycle of
erosion and renewal that makes the North Norfolk coast the dynamic landscape
that it is.
Now I’ll let
you all in on a little secret. The circle isn’t actually a new discovery at
all. The timber trunks at its centre, flattened on one face, were clearly
visible at the time that the original circle was excavated, and sections of the
outer palisade had been exposed to the air only a few months before the
original Seahenge became the centre of such a media driven confrontation. In
short, we’ve known it was there, along with a whole range of other artefacts,
for nearly two decades. How do I know this you may well ask? I could after all
just be saying this now to look incredibly wise and intelligent after the fact –
nodding sagely when anyone mentions timber circles eroding from the peat beds
of Holme. What the hell does the graffiti guy know about Bronze Age Norfolk?
Well, here I’ll let you in to another little secret – which isn’t really a
secret – just part of my past I’ve tried (with little success) to put behind
me.
You see,
back at the end of the last millennia, I wrote a little book – Seahenge: a
contemporary chronicle – that documented the whole sorry story from the initial
discovery, through the media shit-storm to the eventual excavation and
confrontation. It wasn’t a great book. One of the main drawbacks was that I
knew absolutely sod all about Bronze Age archaeology. I’ve always been a
medievalist at heart, and my knowledge of the Bronze Age was largely confined
to generations old books handed down from Wiltshire archaeologist A. D.
Passmore (but that’s another story). However, putting aside the dodgy
archaeology, the book turned out to be rather an interesting exercise in the
study of archaeology and conflict – not something you usually get to study in
this country.
For those of
you who didn’t follow the original story, or where busy being born or potty
trained at about that time, the basics are this. Back in the late 1990s a local
man, John Lorimer, became fascinated with various timber structures that keep
appearing and disappearing on the wide open stretches of Holme beach. John wasn’t
an archaeologist, but he was fascinated by history and recognised that these
structures were unusual. After the discovery of a Bronze Age axe head nearby
John reported all his discoveries and findings to the local archaeology unit.
Archaeologists came out to investigate and the general consensus was that the
timber monuments were early – most probably Bronze Age. The decision was taken
to record the site – but then leave it to gradually erode away with the passing
years and tides. So this is what happened. Limited excavation took place,
samples were taken for dendrochronological dating, and a short press release
was issued. Local radio covered it briefly. Everyone agreed it was a
fascinating site – and back to the site hut for a cuppa!
And then the
storm broke! Michael McCarthy, the environmental correspondent for the Independent
stumbled across the story and decided to follow it up with a bit of background
research – in particular with a chat to one of Britain’s leading experts on the
Bronze Age, Francis Pryor. Pryor described the discovery to McCarthy as one of “the
most extraordinary archaeological discoveries” he had ever seen and that “it
must be preserved”. The little story that had filled a few minutes air time on
Radio Norfolk suddenly found itself splashed all over a national newspaper (one
of the ones that people tended to believe) under the title ‘Shifting Sands
reveal Stonehenge of the Sea’. Well you can imagine what happened next. Every
other newspaper and TV news channel rushed up to the Norfolk coast to catch a
glimpse of this ‘internationally important’ discovery – largely to genuine disappointment
by the journalists that it was so small and rather uninspiring. However, that
didn’t stop the trickle of news reports which, egged on by a campaign by a
local regional newspaper, soon became a flood – and the ‘Stonehenge of the Sea’
soon became ‘Seahenge’. *
And questions
were being asked too. Well, one question in particular. If this site was so
important, if it really was of international significance, then why wasn’t it
being excavated? Why wasn’t it being saved for the nation? Who had made the
decision to let it simply slide into the waves and be lost forever? Distinct
signs of embarrassed mumbling, red faces and shuffling of feet amongst certain
local and English Heritage archaeologists took place. Finally, pressured by the
media, the decision was reversed – and it was decided that Seahenge would be
fully excavated and preserved forever for a grateful population! A mistake had
been made – but now it was to be rapidly rectified. What could possibly go
wrong with that???
The trouble
of course is that tides of opinion, like the real waters of the coast, ebb and
flow. When the decision was announced that the site was to be excavated, and
the timbers removed from Holme beach, the media storm of the previous month
paled into insignificance when compared to the storm of outrage and protest
that suddenly crashed upon the archaeological world. The local people of North
Norfolk, and a large section of the New Age movement (as well as the odd
archaeologist), simply didn’t want this to happen – and were prepared to stop
it by any means possible. What was worse was that the local media, once so
supportive of the excavation idea, read the way public opinion was leaning and
began to quietly drift away from the archaeological side. After all, the New
Age druids, chanting on the beach and blowing trumpets across the central oak,
was a far better story than a simple archaeological excavation.
The senior archaeologists,
isolated and pressured, then went on to make a catalogue of media and public
relations errors that are actually too numerous to repeat. Court cases,
exclusion orders and media own goals cast them in a pretty poor light. The
locals were even describing senior archaeologists (not from Norfolk I might
add) as bully-boys. Not too many miles from the truth. Perhaps the best example
that I came across was when a certain senior EH archaeologist called a meeting
of all sides in the village hall, to supposedly discuss the future plans for
the site – and whilst all the protestors were gathered there used the
opportunity to move all the heavy equipment down to the beach! What was worse
was what was being experienced by the actual diggers on the site. None of the
mistakes had been theirs and yet they were subject to intense pressure and, it
must be said, intimidation and hostility each and every day. They were, after
all, just trying to do their (badly paid) jobs. Particularly difficult as archaeologists tend to view themselves as the good guys (and girls - well mostly girls these days) used to fighting to protect our heritage. To find themselves cast into the role of villain really didn't sit too well with most of them. They were used to having the public on their side - not in their face. All in all it was a superb case
study of how not to handle an archaeological excavation in the face of public
hostility. Oh, and don’t even TALK about the trauma of Time Team getting
involved!
So was it right to excavate the original Seahenge monument? Well, looking back after nearly 20 years there were, and still are, arguments for and against. To begin with the archaeological community was actually happy to leave the site to be eroded - and only changed its standpoint after strong media pressure. However, the timbers of Seahenge, or Holme1 as it is known in archaeological circles, have allowed us to discover a great deal more about how it was constructed and the numbers of people involved; knowledge that would have been lost if the site had not been excavated. But there are always two sides to every story. There are people who believe that the circle represented a sacred boudary; a boundary better life and death, land and sea - and that perhaps we should have let seahenge slip over that boundary one last time...
So that is
how I am spending my Day of Archaeology. Revisiting Holme beach and revisiting
some old memories and old beliefs. The landscape on this part of the coast is
ever changing. The storm surge that took place just before Christmas has
altered things once again. Large areas that were once sand and shingle now see
the black mass of exposed peat showing through; the peat that has aided in the
preservation of these four thousand year old timbers. The site has change a
great deal since 1998, but then again, so has archaeology.
*It isn’t a
henge. Never has been, never will be. It also wasn’t a fish trap, beacon for
ships crossing the wash, lunar observatory – or any of the other weird and
wacky ideas that anybody comes up with after a few pints and a few idle
moments. It was, most probably, an excarnation site. A place where the dead
were laid out so that the flesh could deteriorate from their bodies, with the
help of our charming local seagulls, before the bones were collected together
later. The word ‘ritual’ is probably involved. Makes you think twice before
feeding chips to the gulls on Wells quay doesn’t it…**
**Oh, and it
wasn’t built by the sea either. Local erosion is such that it was probably
nearly a mile inland when first built, in the salt marshes that sat behind
the coast.
If tomorrow’s
headline in newspapers, newsfeeds and websites read ‘MEDIEVAL ARTWORKS
DESTROYED IN BRITISH MUSEUM’ I’d expect there to be a bit of an outcry. I’d
expect there to be murmurings of disquiet in middle England, and questions
raised in the House of Lords. Paxman would undoubtedly be immediately brought
out of retirement to jab pointed questions at those responsible and BBC would
immediately commission a special documentary. However, replace the words ‘British
Museum’ with ‘East Anglian Churches’ and it would pass largely unnoticed – and it
isn’t tomorrow’s headline – but today’s.
So what’s
the problem? Are we seeing our churches invaded by hordes of big booted vandals
intent on destruction? Have the iconoclasts of the 17th century
returned to deface, smash and destroy all that they overlooked the last time?
No. The answer is that our churches are increasingly becoming home to colonies
of small, rather cute, flying mammals. Bats.
I may sound
as though I am overstating the case here. What harm can a few bats and their
droppings do to so many churches. We have 650 in Norfolk alone. Surely a few
bats can’t be too much of a problem. Well you only have to go and see for
yourself. Bat urine is highly corrosive and it isn’t simply a case of being
able to wipe away the damage. It actually eats into the surface upon which it
lands. Medieval wall paintings, memorial brasses, ledger stones, rood screens
and alabaster monuments are all being affected. It isn’t simply damage we are
seeing, which can be fixed by costly and clever conservation – but their slow, relentless
and irreversible destruction. I have seen the surface of alabaster memorials
simply crumbling away and ledger stones etched and pock marked by bat
droppings. I have seen the glorious medieval paintings that grace our East
Anglian rood screens dripping in bat droppings that eat into the pigment. And
once these things are gone – they are gone forever.
Don’t
misunderstand me. I actually rather like bats. Fascinating little creatures
that we still have so much to learn about. Indeed, it was only very recently
that we discovered that the Pipistrelle bat was not one species, as we’d previously
assumed, but actually two. Now here is the real problem though. Both the bats
and the medieval artworks are protected by legislation. To harm a bat or
disturb its roost can result in prosecution and a very hefty fine, in the same
way that damaging a designated heritage asset can.
Which rather
leaves those who care for our medieval churches in something of a catch 22
situation. They cannot in any way disturb the bats but, by allowing them to
continue their incontinent infestation, they are failing in their own duty of
care to the medieval building and the artworks they contain. Damned if you do
and damned if you don’t.
But surely
this is nothing new I hear you ask (I have very good hearing) - and you would
be right. We have always had bats in certain churches - bats in the belfry.
However, the problem is growing at an extremely alarming rate. The number of
churches being used as bat roosts is growing and the number of bats at
established roosts also appears, from the quantity of crap they are leaving
across our medieval monuments, to be on the increase too. Why should this be
so? Well, to some extent it is a result of the success of bat legislation. The
legal protection now afforded to bats has seen their numbers rise significantly
– which is unquestionably a good thing. However, this rise in the number of
bats has corresponded with a massive loss in traditional bat roosting sites.
The traditional farm buildings, barns and outbuildings that once littered the
East Anglian countryside, and played host to numerous bat roosts, are all but
gone; either converted to housing, or demolished to make way for buildings more
suited to modern farming and farm vehicles. The decline in use of harmful
pesticides, coupled with wider field margins and uncut roadside verges, has led
to an increase in insects – essentially making the growth of bat populations
sustainable. As a result the bats are moving wholesale into our medieval
churches – leaving them rather sticky and crunchy underfoot.
And the solution?
Well there isn’t a cheap or simple one. Whilst certain churches have taken to
covering almost every surface in plastic sheeting, cleared away only for
services, this can cause as many problems as it solves. The sheeting causes
condensation beneath, causing further damage to medieval artworks already
damaged by bat droppings. No, like the last late night drunk at the bar, the
bats need to be firmly and politely asked to vacate the premises. If this means
building expensive and purpose built bat roosts in our churchyards, already a
haven for wildlife, then so be it. In the long run it will surely be cheaper
that trying to repair the damage being done to our medieval heritage.
However, if
we sit back and do nothing, letting this low-key and gentle crisis continue unabated,
then I urge you all, every one, to go and visit the wonders of medieval art
that still sit in our glorious East Anglian churches. They won’t be there too
much longer…
It is the evening of the 5th of June. The summer
sun has barely dipped below the rim of the world and the glow still sits on the
western horizon across East Anglia. Real darkness never comes at this time of
year as the days merge quietly into one another with only the very briefest of
respite.In a few short hours it will be
light again. A new day. A new dawn. Tonight is an evening of quiet peace across
the countryside. Nothing much stirs. The air is clear, the wind has dropped and the breeze does
little more than nudge the trees into a creeping ripple of movement, almost
lost in the shadows. Sounds carry across the fields as a fox barks in the edge
of woodland, and I can hear the seemingly weary cries of the oyster catchers
skimming down by the river - refugees from the tourist covered coastline a few miles to the north. The distant revving of engines marks no great
undertaking, beyond the boy-racer attempting to impress the unimpressed young
woman - who is rather thinking that she should, against all her expectations, have
actually listened to her parents.
Seventy years ago it was a different story. On the evening
of the 5th of June the East Anglian countryside was awash with
activity and the sky full of planes. One of the greatest military operations in
the history of mankind was building up to a bloody climax that would break with
the dawn. A dawn that would see either victory or defeat but, either way, would
see the ending of countless young men’s lives. D-day, the allied invasion of
mainland Europe, was underway. Bombers, gliders and fighter aircraft were
strung out across East Anglian airfields awaiting permission to begin the
largest air operation in history, launched in support of the largest seaborne
invasion ever undertaken.The sounds of
engines drowned out the foxes calls. To most people the build up to invasion
meant different things. An awareness of increased activity, and a hushed
expectation that time was now too short for so many things.
Tomorrow morning my 13 year old son, proudly wearing his air
cadets beret and his great-grandfather’s medals, will stand alongside his
uncle, my little brother, and watch the sun come up over the Normandy beaches.
They are there on a pilgrimage of sorts. A pilgrimage to honour those young men
who never had the chance to become fathers, let alone great-grandfathers. They
are there to pay their respects, to lay a wreath or two and, I hope, to understand
just a little more about the sacrifices and determination that are required if
freedom from tyranny is to mean more than a few empty words and political
rhetoric. To pay their respects to the past.
Last Friday evening I too came face to face with that
determination. I met it, ran my fingers across its surface and smelt the stink
of old, cold steel, ancient oil and centuries old timber. I was in the Suffolk
village of Mendlesham to give a talk in the local church on the subject of
medieval graffiti (no need to feign surprise). Mendlesham is an odd church,
even by Suffolk’s eccentric standards. It is a rare gem that has had the
benefit of the great love of generations lavished upon it. More recently is has
been the decades old home for a very singular vicar. A man who loves the church
- past, present and future. However, the real treasure of the church, a
treasure that is a unique survival in England, was one that was safely lodged
here for countless generations before the vicar assumed his post many decades
ago.
In a small timber lined room above the porch, behind a thick
iron-bound door, lies a secret. A secret the parish has kept largely to itself
for countless generations. Here, in a small and ill lit chamber overlooking the
churchyard, survives the only Tudor parish armoury anywhere in the country.
From the wooden pegs in the walls, placed there over five centuries ago, hang
suits of armour, helmets, powder flasks, the remains of muskets - and one of
only four Elizabethan longbows to be found anywhere in this once longbow
crowded island.
Parish armouries were once commonplace. Each parish was
required to provide its own militia force, brought out for training on a regular
basis, and to provide them with the basic arms and armour laid down in statute
by monarch after monarch. They represented a last line of defence. A last line
in the sand. In the event of foreign invasion, which was an all too present
threat for Tudor England, this was the reality of home defence. Local lads in
ill fitting armour, trained to a barely minimum standard, to stand up to the
threatening hordes of Spanish veterans. Each parish keeping the tools of such
defence locked safe and in good repair in their own parish armoury. Records of
them are extensive. Accounts of the purchase of helmets and handguns, gunpowder
and body armour, feature heavily in the documentary histories of the English
parish.Monies collected to pay for
goods and monies expended to keep them in repair. They are a staple of anyone
who spends their time, as I often do, searching through the medieval and Tudor
parish records of England.And yet, for
all the paperwork they have left behind them, the armouries now are empty. The
armour long since rusted away or sold off as scrap. The handguns, powder flasks
and pike-shafts all succumbed to woodworm and the passing of the centuries. All
except here – in this quiet corner of Suffolk.
Around the walls of the Mendlesham armoury sit unique pieces
of Tudor armour, enough to make most military historians dribble with envy.
They are not great works of art, they are not the best that could be made –
they are simply serviceable and good quality. The best the parish could afford
to protect their own loved ones should that terrible day ever arrive when the
armour would be donned in earnest. And come it did.
In the Summer of 1588 another great invasion fleet rode the
waves of the English channel. However, unlike the mass of ships that spread out
across the water in June 1944, this fleet was not heading towards the blood,
sand and slaughter of Normandy – instead it was heading towards England. The Armada
of Philip of Spain was the largest seaborne invasion fleet that had, until that
time, been seen in Western Europe. An undertaking on a massive scale to bring rebellious
little England into line with the religion of the Catholic Church. A crusade to
bring redemption and salvation to the heathen English. Under threat of invasion
the parishes of the south and east of England were mobilised. The men of
Mendlesham, along with all the neighbouring parishes, drew together and donned
their armour, gathered their muskets, cleaned their swords – and marched off to
face a threat that would, in all likelihood, result in their own deaths.
As all the history books tell us, things turned out rather
differently. The Spanish invasion fleet never reached these shores, beaten by
the weather, bad planning and the bloody-minded English sailors who harried
them up the channel. God blew and they were scattered. And so, along with
neighbours, friends and family, the men of Mendlesham eventually marched back
to their homes and hearths – to hang their armour back on the pegs in the
little timber lined room above the church porch. And there it hangs still.
Generations have passed - and yet there it remains. A fragment of a memory of
less stable times. A relic of an invasion that never came and a war that was
never fought.
It will, I dearly hope, remain there for centuries yet to
come. A relic of a bygone age that faced the same hopes and fears that we too
face today.And as the sun comes up
tomorrow morning over the beaches of Normandy I hope that, like the men of
Mendlesham, my 13 year old son will never have to face the same challenges and
threats that our little island has faced before. I hope that, like the armour
that hangs above the porch, he too will never be called up to test his steel
against war, invasion and the chaos of bloodshed. And unlike many thousands of
those who launched themselves from boats and landing craft onto the so foreign,
yet so familiar, beaches of France – that he will come safe home.
We were back at Norwich cathedral today to continue our
survey work after a break of some months. A windy cold day, with the rain
showers driving mist and spray across the cloister garth to splatter messily
against the weathered stones. Not a great beginning. However, in the months we’ve
been away a transformation has taken place at the cathedral. On the north side
of the building three very new, and very modern, stained glass windows have
been installed. They are not quite what you would expect in a medieval
cathedral I suppose. All bright oranges, blues, purples and geometric shapes.
They flood the north side with colour, spreading strange glowing hues across
the stonework, changing as the light changes throughout the day. They add a
level of mystery and wonder to an area of the cathedral which was largely a
featureless thoroughfare. They bring out the warmth of the stone and highlight
details and features that, in the past, I and millions of others would have
just walked past without a second glance. They bring the dead stones to life.
As you can probably tell, I rather like the new windows.
Didn’t really expect to that much, spending most of my time staring at the
wonders of the medieval church, but I do. I like them a very great deal indeed
(those who know me will tell you that, for me, such praise is gushing! I haven’t
been this enthusiastic since they announced the return of Dr Who – and I was
prepared to hate that too). During the day I made a point of returning to walk
past the area of the new windows on several occasions. Watching how the light subtly
changed as the sun moved around and how it, in turn, changed how I viewed the
stonework. It was like watching a small miraculous evolution move across the
cathedral walls.
However, I soon came to realise that my love for the new
windows wasn’t shared by all the visitors to the cathedral, and that my
passionate liking for the way the light changed was just as passionately
disliked by some. Overheard comments, snatches of conversation, disparaging
remarks all made it clear that to certain visitors the new glass was as welcome
as an unemployed Romanian migrant at a UKIP conference.
It was the change that seemed to cause most problems. One
older male visitor was explaining to his companions (a couple of very long
suffering women of a certain age and a very bored looking teen girl who was
continually glancing down at the mobile in her hand – willing the signal to
return) that it was almost criminal to have placed such modern designs into the
medieval cathedral. It was making a mockery of the original building. He
finished by asking his companions what the original builders of the Norman
cathedral would have thought of the new glass?Another visitor, a woman I recognised as a reasonably well known local ‘personality’,
was overheard telling her female companion that the windows were lovely – but should
be in an art gallery, or the forum, rather than in the cathedral. They were, in
her words, “a bit much”. If there is a more a damning judgement to be handed
out by the middle classes I’ve yet to hear it.
It was rather an odd experience really. A few years ago I’m
pretty sure I would have been one of the ‘bit much’ brigade. Seeing the installation
of the new glass within the medieval setting of Norwich cathedral as a ‘desecration’.
The work of those who care little for our medieval past and wish only to
memorialise themselves and their works in the present. But I don’t – and I
began to wonder why?
I came to the conclusion that it was probably because I have
come to know Norwich cathedral so very well over the last few years. In the
last two years, whilst we have been surveying the walls for early graffiti
inscriptions, I have come to know a very great deal about that particular ‘medieval’
pile of rocks – as have all the volunteers. We have peered, pried and poked
around in areas that most people walk past without a second glance. We have
followed fabric changes along lines of 500 year old mortar, compared masons
finishing techniques from centuries past and numbered the very stones
themselves. We have unravelled the story of Norwich cathedral wall by wall and stone
by stone. And we have all come to realise that the story of Norwich cathedral
is not the story I once believed it to be.
The problem I suppose is one of attitude and perception. To
the average visitor, and even the regular churchgoer, the cathedral is seen as
a vast and unchanging monument to the medieval religious world. Shades of Ken Follet’s
grubby masons still haunt the darker corners, and each carved corbel and
decorated niche reflect a medieval thought, idea and ambition. It is a grade 1
museum piece that is as it was – and as it ever should be. An aspic preserved, deep
pickled, gherkin of the medieval mindset. The problem is that this perception,
this idea, simply isn’t true. It isn’t true at Norwich cathedral - and it isn’t
true of any other cathedral anywhere either.
What my close involvement with the fabric of the cathedral
has taught me is that the building is a constantly evolving vessel of worship,
practical needs and ambition. Whilst we talk of it as being one of the greatest
surviving Norman cathedrals in England there are actually whole sections that
you are rather challenged to identify even a single original Norman stone. It
has been burnt down, struck by lightning, remodelled, rebuilt and re-shaped in
just about every century since it was first built. Each new generation of
custodians oversees an evolutionary process to match the building to the needs
of their own times. The whole of the east end has been remodelled, the façade has
been replaced, the aisles altered and in the cloister it is actually quite
difficult to even find areas of complete medieval stonework.
In the 15th century the spire collapsed, starting
fires and bringing down the whole timber roof crashing into the nave and
crossing beneath. The result was the new stone vaulted roof of Bishop Lyhart,
with its world renowned roof bosses. Over 250 medieval roof bosses depicting
scenes from the old and new testament that are unequalled anywhere in England.
They are now one of the unique treasures of the cathedral, with visitors
travelling from all over the world to crane their necks upwards and admire
their painted beauty. Which is rather my point I suppose. Were there people in
the 15th century who looked upwards at the new pale stonework in
dismay? Where there those who felt that the warmth of the timber roof had been
lost beneath the cold hard stone of the ambitious Bishop? Probably. There
always are. But that new roof was simply one of many, many changes the
cathedral has seen as it has evolved down the centuries. It is not, and never
has been, a static building. It has never been finished and will never be
complete. It will continue to evolve long after the teen girl gazing at her
mobile has become a grandmother – and watched her own grandchildren wander
through the soaring stonework of the cathedral.
And that is rather the point to remember here. The process
is one of evolution – not revolution. The cathedral has changed once again. It
will change again in the future. Long years after my dust has blown across the
stones of a church somewhere in East Anglia, a new generation will be making
changes to Norwich cathedral. Some people will love those changes; others will
hate them. They’ll happen nonetheless and add a new chapter to the history of
one of England’s finest buildings.