"In
the foundations of the church were placed the stones, not only of the great
palace, built by Bishop Henry, but of the entire wall which surrounded
the court of the monastery.
"Great
part of the ecclesia major having been built, the rest would have
been beautifully completed had the Lord prolonged the king's life. But
alas, covetous death snatched him away too hastily, and the monks, just
recovering breath from their last misfortune, were smitten with a heavier
wound, for he died on the 6th of July 1189, after reigning for 35 years.
"He
was succeeded by his son Richard, whose warlike tastes diverted his attention
from the building of Glastonbury church. Wherefore the work stopped, because
no funds were forthcoming to pay the wages of the workmen."
AD
1189 to 1193 As
the fire happened in 1184, the work had only proceeded for five years.
The abbot at this period was. Henry de Soliaco, nephew of Henry II.; "but
he lent not his hand to the work of rebuilding, and quarreled with the
convent." The monks therefore set about to raise money by the usual expedient
of "sending preachers selected from their brethren through various
provinces with relics" and pontifical indulgences, to solicit alms for
the carrying on of the work." Thus says the historian.
It
may be remarked in this place that the old church of St. Mary had
preserved up to the time of the fire the arrangements of the Saxon church.
The body of St. Patrick (who died in 472) rested in a stone pyramid at
the south or right side of the altar, which pyramid the historian tells
us had been subsequently plated handsomely with gold and silver.
St.
Gildas remained in front of the altar, as he was buried beneath the pavement
in 512. The martyr St. Indractus and his companions had been translated
hither by King Ina. The former was placed in a stone pyramid at the left
of the altar, the others buried under the pavement. Beside these, a quantity
of relics of innumerable saints are mentioned which were placed above the
altar or elsewhere. When the fire happened, Malmsbury expressly declares
that it consumed the greater part of the relics, a phrase which may be
supposed to include the latter class; for those which were enclosed in
tombs or buried under the pavement must have escaped. There were also many
shrines and relics in the great Norman church which must have suffered.
It
was in perfect accordance with the practice of the period at which this
fire took place, that the monks should remove the remains of these saints
from their tombs and from under the pavement, and place them in coffers
or shrines as they were called. Domerbam expressly states that "at this
time," that is to say, during the reconstruction of the church, "the bodies
of the saints, Patrick, Indractus and Gildas, were dug up in the vetusta
ecelesia, and placed in shrines;" which manifestly admitted of being
removed to make way for the work of rebuilding and also of being displayed
at the proper time for the attraction of offerings.
But
sudden difficulties require extraordinary remedies, and I have often had
occasion to point out that in the middle ages the raising of funds for
the rebuilding of churches, after great conflagrations or the sudden ruin
of a tower, has been promoted by the opportune production of a new and
attractive saint, or of some monkish marvel, that served to direct popular
attention to the church and bring offerings to the treasury.
Accordingly
it happens that at the very period we are considering the monks produced
the relics of St Dunstan, and the abbot disinterred King Arthur and his
queen. These afterwards ranked amongst the greatest attraction and ornaments
of the Abbey church.
I
will relate the leading particulars concerning the relics of St. Dustin
on the authority of
The
monks of Glastonbury asserted that, after the Danish sack of Canterbury
in 1011, while that church remained desolate for many years, a party was
dispatched from their monastery to steal the body of Dunstan. They broke
open his tomb, carried off his bones, his ring, and other relics, and were
received with great joy on their return to Glastonbury. This translation,
as they termed it, took place in 1012. But when they began to consider
the case coolly, they perceived that possibly, after the country had recovered
its prosperity and the church of Canterbury its authority, the Archbishop
might insist upon the restoration of the abstracted relics. They therefore
commissioned two of the older brethren to undertake the deposit of the
holy bones in some secure place known only to themselves. This secret to
be handed over to another only when the last possessor was on the point
of death, so that one person only should possess it until the time came
when it could be safely revealed. These trustees enclosed the bones in
a box with proper inscriptions, and hid it in a hole which they dug under
the pavement of the great church, near the holy water at the right hand
of the entrance, and there it remained undisturbed for one hundred and
seventy-two years, as Malmsbury or his interpolator declares.
But
although the hiding place was concealed, the possession of these relics
was not forgotten, for about a century after these transactions the monks
began to boast that Dunstan was in their possession, and immediately a
strong letter was written from Canterbury by Edmer, reproaching them for
their dishonesty, and ridiculing their pretensions, on the ground that
fifty years before, he himself had witnessed the translation of Dunstan's
coffin inviolate, upon the occasion of the building of Lanfranc's cathedral.
This letter seems, to have produced no result.
When
the fire happened in 1184, and the monks were dolefully collecting their
scorched relics, and trying to make the most of them, they became anxious
to find Dunstan. It soon appeared that the secret of the hiding place was
known to most of the monks. Two, bolder than the rest, raised the stone
near the holy water stoup and found the box beneath, strongly bound with
iron.
The
prior and convent assembled, the relics and the ring were found, as well
as the inscriptions, painted by those who concealed the box., which declared
the remains to be those of St. Dunstan.
The
monks now took courage to produce the relics for the first time to the
world, and accordingly they were placed in a shrine handsomely clothed
with silver and gold. The arm and forearm of St. Oswald, king and martyr,
were enclosed in the shrine, which was removed to the great church, and
as Malmsbury's interpolator states, great miracles and cures were wrought
upon the worshippers.2
That
it was, up to the Reformation, one of the principal shrines of the great
church, is proved by the second correspondence which took place between
the authorities of Canterbury and Glastonbury upon the subject, in the
16th century.3 This
throws so much light upon the nature and intensity of relic worship in
the middle ages, that I will extract some particulars from it.
A
formal scrutiny of the shrine of St. Dunstan was made at Canterbury in
1508 in presence of Archbishop Warham and Prior Goldston. They report to
the Abbot of Glastonbury that their shrine contained all the principal
bones, and as much of the body as could possibly have remained entire after
so many centuries, besides a leaden plate bearing the name of the saint
and other matters. Also that it exhibited no appearance of having been
ever opened. The archbishop therefore requires the abbot and rest of the
convent to abandon their pretensions to the possession of St Dunstan, and
no longer to offer the relies for the adoration of the people. The Abbot
of Glastonbury (Bere) replies, amongst other things, that if any bones
remain in the shrine of Canterbury, they must have been left behind by
those who removed the relics to Glastonbury; and declares that for more
than two hundred years the shrine of their patron St. Dunstan has been
set up in the church under the sanction and authority of the Bishop of
the Diocese, with power to remove it from place to place.4
That yearly, on the feast of their patron, all the parishioners, laying
aside domestic work, keep holiday, and come to the abbey church, both men
and women, with the greatest veneration. And should any one refuse to do
so, and continue to attend to his work or affairs, nothing prospers with
him in that year, and grave injury results to his property and his family.
And this, he declares, perpetually happens. Whoever, he adds, saw the earnest
concourse of people daily supplicating at this shrine with bare feet, and
garments cast aside, would say, "Let them alone, lest haply we be found
even to fight against God"....5
The
reply of the Archbishop, after enlarging in strong terms upon the indecent
phenomenon of two churches claiming respectively the possession of the
body of the same saint, declares that unless the Abbot transmits to him
before All Saints' Day, evidences to satisfy him of the genuineness of
these relics, the strongest legal measures shall be put in action to terminate
this scandal.
I
will now, without stopping to discuss doubtful points, simply relate the
leading parts of the history of the disinterment of King Arthur's remains,
as I gather them from the best authorities.6
It
happened that King Henry the Second, on occasion of his expedition for
the conquest of Ireland, 7 embarked
with his army from Milford Haven. But while waiting at Menevia (St. David's)
for that purpose, he was entertained at his feasts, after the manner of
the country, by the songs of the Bards with their harps.
One,
the most learned of these, sang the praises and history of the renowned
King Arthur, comparing him with the future conqueror before whom he stood,
who lost not a word, but listened with the most intense gratification and
pleasure, and dismissed the Bard with a munificent reward.
From
him he learnt the traditional particulars of Arthur's mortal wound at the
battle of Kamlen in Cornwall,8
and how he was conveyed by water to the monastery of Avalonia, and buried
near the old church there, in a wooden coffin, deep in the ground. Also,
that the spot was marked by two pyramids richly sculptured, and set up
to his memory.
The
king earnestly pressed upon his nephew Henry de Soliaco, then, or soon
after, abbot of Glastonbury, the importance of removing the remains of
King Arthur to a more honourable position, within the church, in accordance
with the ideas and practice of that time. But it was at the beginning of
the reign of Richard I9
that the abbot, on a certain day, commanded the place indicated between
the pyramids, to be surrounded with curtains and excavated. Everything
happened in accordance with the legends of the British Bard. They dug sixteen
feet downwards, and then came to a wooden sarcophagus of enormous size,
made out of a hollowed oak.
When
raised to the surface and opened, its cavity was found to be divided into
two parts. The one which occupied two thirds of the length from the head,
contained the bones of a man of immense stature, so great, that the legbone,
or tibia, set upright on the ground, reached to the middle of the thigh
of a tall living man.
In
the shorter cavity were deposited the bones of a female, supposed to be
those of his queen Ginevra; and there was seen a tress of flaxen hair,
preserving its form and colour. But a certain monk snatching at this too
hastily, in the attempt to raise it from its recess, it immediately fell
to dust.
They
also found a leaden cross with a Latin inscription, declaring that "Here
lies buried, in the island AVALONIA, the renowned King Arthur."
The
relics were removed to the great church, built by Henry II., and placed
in a chapel in the south aisle, 'through which is a passage to the almery.10
Afterwards they were transferred to a black marble mausoleum, divided within
into two parts, as in the original receptacle. The king's relics at the
head of the tomb, the queen's at the foot, towards the east. This was placed
in the middle of the presbytery; and finally, in 1276, Edward I. and his
queen visited Glastonbury, and the sarcophagus was opened for their inspection.
The separated bones of the king, of marvelous magnitude, were seen. The
sepulcher was ordered to be placed before the high altar. The skulls of
the king and queen to remain outside for the devotion of the people. Leland
saw the tomb at the latter end of the 15th century.
Malmsbury
(p. 306) mentions the burial of Arthur and his queen between two pyramids
in the monks, cemetery, which Worcester saw on the south side of the chapel.11
But Malmsbury describes two other pyramids12,
which, he says, stand several feet distant from the vetusta ecelesia,
and
in front of the monks' cemetery. The nearest to the church is 26
feet, the other 18 feet, high; and he describes their ornaments and unintelligible
inscriptions. He professes entire ignorance of the origin of these pyramids
and their meaning, but suggests that they contain bones deposited in cavities
within the stones; and that the words inscribed upon them, are the names
of the persons.
AD 1303 to 1322 We
may now return to the large church, great part of which was built, as we
have seen, when King Henry died in 1189, and the monks were driven to their
wits' end to raise money for completing it. This was dedicated in the time
of Abbot Galfridus Fromond, and must therefore have been roofed in and
completed in all essential parts.
Walter
de Tantonia, his successor, died eleven days after he was consecrated abbot.
He was previously prior. "He made the pulpitum (or choir screen)
of the church, with ten images, and set up the great rood with the crucifix,
Mary and John13"'
This must have been done when he was prior, and probably before the dedication,
as necessary for the completion of the fittings of the church. Leland notes
that he was buried in the transept "before the crucifix, that is to say,
in front of his work, as was very usual.
AD
1322 to 1335 The
next abbot, Adam de Sodbury, "vaulted nearly the whole of the nave, and
ornamented it
This
abbot also gave organs of wondrous magnitude and endowed the Lady chapel
with four additional priests, of which more below. He also decorated the
high altar with an image of the Virgin in a tabernacle of the highest workmanship.15
The
eastern part of the church, according to this history, appears to have
been now completed for service, but was soon subjected to alterations and
improvements, for the record of which we are indebted to Leland alone,
for although John Glaston's Chronicle is continued down to the year
1493, it contains no allusions to the works in question.
A.D. 1341 to 1374 Leland
says, writing in Latin, that Abbot Walter Monington, buried in the choir,
made the
In
a subsequent page we find "There be vj goodly windows in the top of eche
side of the Est part of the Church. There were 4 of old Time sins 2 addid
and the Presbyterie enlonggid by Gualter Monington Abbate." William of
Worcester confirms this, by a note that "in each part of the choir are
six great high windows, glazed ... and in each side of the aisles of the
choir 8 windows."
AD 1493 to 1524 No
other works about the church are men t tioned till we pass over more than
a century, to Abbot Richard Beere. Leland's visit to this abbey was made,
as he tells us,17
in the time of Beere's successor, Richard Whyting, the last abbot, and
he records his works in the following memoranda:
"Abbate
Beere buildid Edgares Chapel at the Est End of the Chirch but Abbate Whiting
performed sum part of it.
"
Bere Archid on bothe sides the Est part of the Church that began to cast
out.
"Bere
made the Volte O the Steple in the Transepto and under 2 Arches like S.
Andres Crosse els it had fallen.
"Bere
made a rich Altare of Sylver and Gilt and set it afore the High Altare.
"
Bere cumming from his Embassadrie out of Italie made a Chapelle of our
Lady de Loretta joining to the north side of the Body of the church.
"He
made the Chapelle of the Sepulcher in the South End Navis Eccl. whereby
he is buried sub plano marmore yn the South Isle of the Bodies of
the Church."18
Thus
ends the recorded history of the building of the great church. It was rich
in monuments and saints. In the presbytery the monument of King Arthur
and his queen was placed in front of the high altar, with King Edmund the
Elder on the north side, and Edmund Ironside on the south, as founders
of the church. King Edgar, another founder, had a chapel allotted to him,
apparently at the east end, for he was a saint, and his bones were translated
to a shrine.
The
dedications of the chapels have been lost, but we may suppose that they
were appropriated to St. Dunstan, St. Patrick, St. Benignus, St. Gildas,
and the other saints, to whose entire bodies the history of the abbey lays
claim.
The
monuments of benefactors to the works of building and ornamentation are
remarkable, as I have endeavored to shew, for the numerous examples they
present of being placed in contiguity with the works themselves.
Malmsbury
or his interpolator 1.
with
splendid painting." He was buried in the nave, also under his work. "He
gave the great clock, which was remarkable for its processions and spectacles14,"
after the manner of that period. Leland records the position of the clock,
at the south part of the transept, and the inscription on it:. "Petrus
Lightfote, monachus, fecit hoc opus," which gives the maker's name. The
clock itself, or rather great part of its automatic mechanism, is in Wells
cathedral to this day, whither it was transferred after the fall of Glastonbury;
this automatic clock is the oldest on record as a clock, self-striking
hours with a count wheel, the next being Walingford's, at St Alban's, 1326
to 1334, and the next the Horloge du Palais at Paris, made by a
German, Henri de Vic, In 1370.
vault
of the choir and presbytery, and enlarged the length of the presbytery
by two arches.16
This is another example of a benefactor buried in the place of his work.