Appendix A
THE plan and architectural drawings of Heddon Church, which Mr. W. H. Knowles has most kindly allowed to be used as illustrations of this paper, did not, unfortunately, reach me till my verbal description of the church was already in the press. A few words in explanation of the Plates may be of service.
Plate XXV. The two elevations of the east wall of the south aisle show the "long and short" quoins of the south-east angle of the ancient nave and the three lines of water-tabling. The monumental tablet is that to the memory of the Brown children, p. 286, n. 145.
The south side of the chancel is represented by Mr. Knowles with such fidelity that the points at issue with Mr. Boyle can be almost as well understood as on the spot. The western double-lancet is, I insist, an undoubted insertion, and this insertion has greatly disturbed the surrounding masonry; but that the course of masonry above that window, and the door with the plain tympanum to the left of it, are the most decided Norman cannot, in my opinion, be gainsayed.
Plate XXVI. In this view of the interior of the chancel the old semi-circular door-head is seen over the new vestry door on the left. An external door in the north wall of a chancel is an unusual feature ; there was one at Jarrow. On the right it will be noticed that the courses of masonry continue perfectly level under both the arch and the window to the west of it. An iron ring for a lamp yet remains in the key-stone of the groined vault. The floor of the whole chancel was originally almost as high as the middle of the second altar step.
Plate XXVII. This is a sketch of the northern cluster of triple pillarets that support the arch in the chancel. As is mentioned in the text, the capitals differ from those of the southern cluster by the short stems that protrude between the scallops.
Plate XXVIII. The primary object of this plan was to show the Norman bay at the east end of the chancel ; this is given in black. The quoins at the east of the south aisle are marked by Mr. Knowles (judging independently) as those of the ancient nave. The rest of the shading merely shows old work without discriminating between the diversities of style. Perhaps it is as well that this should be the case, so long as the west bay of the chancel is made the subject of controversy ; but it must be remembered that the piers formed by the responds of the chancel arch and of those of the nave are anything but homogeneous masonry. Portions, too, of the porch are ancient.
Plate XXV. The two elevations of the east wall of the south aisle show the "long and short" quoins of the south-east angle of the ancient nave and the three lines of water-tabling. The monumental tablet is that to the memory of the Brown children, p. 286, n. 145.
The south side of the chancel is represented by Mr. Knowles with such fidelity that the points at issue with Mr. Boyle can be almost as well understood as on the spot. The western double-lancet is, I insist, an undoubted insertion, and this insertion has greatly disturbed the surrounding masonry; but that the course of masonry above that window, and the door with the plain tympanum to the left of it, are the most decided Norman cannot, in my opinion, be gainsayed.
Plate XXVI. In this view of the interior of the chancel the old semi-circular door-head is seen over the new vestry door on the left. An external door in the north wall of a chancel is an unusual feature ; there was one at Jarrow. On the right it will be noticed that the courses of masonry continue perfectly level under both the arch and the window to the west of it. An iron ring for a lamp yet remains in the key-stone of the groined vault. The floor of the whole chancel was originally almost as high as the middle of the second altar step.
Plate XXVII. This is a sketch of the northern cluster of triple pillarets that support the arch in the chancel. As is mentioned in the text, the capitals differ from those of the southern cluster by the short stems that protrude between the scallops.
Plate XXVIII. The primary object of this plan was to show the Norman bay at the east end of the chancel ; this is given in black. The quoins at the east of the south aisle are marked by Mr. Knowles (judging independently) as those of the ancient nave. The rest of the shading merely shows old work without discriminating between the diversities of style. Perhaps it is as well that this should be the case, so long as the west bay of the chancel is made the subject of controversy ; but it must be remembered that the piers formed by the responds of the chancel arch and of those of the nave are anything but homogeneous masonry. Portions, too, of the porch are ancient.
