Evaluating English Pews
Informing the Re-ordering Debate
Charles Tracy
| |
 |
|
| |
St Mary's Church, Haddenham, Buckinghamshire (above) and pew detail
(below right) |
|
Describing the changes that
were made to English parish
churches over 100 years ago, Frank
Howard and Fred Crossley wrote:
It is amusing to note how, when an almost
complete clearance of the old benches has been
made, the few survivors have been relegated
to the rear [of the church] for the use of the
poorer parishioners, while the aristocracy of
the village use the new and hideous seats, or
naked chairs, which have taken their place.
This somewhat jaundiced statement was
published in 1917 as the wholesale or partial
destruction of several of the finest Gothic
cathedrals in northern France, along with their
historic furnishings, was taking place. The
events described by Howard and Crossley and
those occurring in First World War France
retain a certain currency today. They represent
the two extremes of church furnishings lost
either voluntarily by those responsible for them
or violently against their will. Of course, these
are not new concerns; English parish churches
have been subject to decay, destruction and
re-ordering since the day they were built.
Naturally, a furniture historian
deprecates the degradation of a church’s
historic environment whatever its cause,
but sometimes the evolving liturgy, and
perhaps the very survival of the building as
a functioning space, has to take precedence.
Thankfully, churches continue to be visited
by all manner of folk, and church tourism
makes a financial contribution to the upkeep
of many of them. Moreover, most clergy are
aware of their responsibilities in caring for an
outstanding collection of historic furnishings.
If, for any number of liturgical or
practical reasons, a parish decides that
it needs to move or remove an object or
group of objects, specialists can be called
in to evaluate the artefacts concerned. The
clearer understanding of the historical and
artistic significance of a church’s furniture
that such experts can provide is vital to an
informed and sensitive reordering debate.
The three recent case histories discussed
below may provide some insights into the
delicate and sometimes controversial process
of evaluating church furniture. People are often
surprised at the specimens of ecclesiastical
joinery that are sometimes singled out for
preservation. Historicity, artistic quality and
conservation are not mind-sets readily accessed
by everyone, but, in combination, they will
reveal the kernel of a robust significance rating.
In general, parishes are unlikely to seek to
remove objects of well-established historical
or artistic importance. The churchwardens of
Fressingfield or Ufford in Suffolk, or Alternan
in Cornwall will know that permission for
the removal of their benches would never
be granted. As objects of considerable pride in the parish and beyond, their presence is
integral to the way that parishioners and
visitors experience and enjoy these churches.
More problematic are the sets of
furniture which could be designated as
having considerable significance or some
significance. In these cases there is likely
to be a high restoration content. After 400
years or so of constant use, even with regular
maintenance and repair, original benching
would become completely unserviceable.
A valid significance rating usually hinges on
an archaeological evaluation of the quality and
authenticity of the furniture en masse. A sound
judgment requires the assessor to burrow
beneath the carapace of the furniture’s design
and decoration. A good bench is a satisfying
blend of architectural design, sculptural
ornament and skilled joinery. It incorporates
several different components: bench-ends, seats,
seat backs, and fronts. Joinery principles are a
key factor in a value assessment. In the highest
ranked examples, the quality and refinement of
the joinery should be on a par with the design
and decoration. If a bench-end is decorated,
the quality of its carving is as important as its
subject matter and iconography. Heraldry on
benches can open a window onto patronage
and date of manufacture, and supplement the
body of information upon which a rating can
be based. A grasp of the maker’s background,
affiliation and level of ability can also be
illuminating: the finest church furniture is
the product not only of artful execution
but also of access to specialist knowledge,
aesthetic sensibility and exceptional design
skills. A specialist assessor, weighing all these
factors together should be able to establish
whether the furniture was made by an urban or
itinerant workshop, or by the village carpenter.
Ancient benches are nearly always a
patchwork of historic restoration, the quality of
which can be variable. The ubiquitous Victorian
and early 20th-century refurbishments of
our forefathers usually set a high standard
in competency and discernment. At that
time great efforts were usually made, as
far as contemporary tools would allow, to
follow the original construction principles,
even when it was feasible only to retain a
few of the ancient components. One could
describe this factor as ‘historical integrity’.
The first of this article’s case
studies concerns St Mary, Haddenham,
Buckinghamshire. Here the monumental late
13th-century village church was found to be
still almost fully pewed-out. The parish had
proposed to remove most, if not all, of the
nave benches. It was suggested that some of
the oldest pews could be retained, by being
placed ‘either along the side walls or along the
side of the chancel area’. In fact, they were all
of the same age, and comprised a complete set,
formerly en suite with the displaced chancel
screen. A compromise along these lines is often
proposed, but, in practice, is rarely satisfactory.
| |
 |
|
| |
Decorative 17th-century panel assemblage in the chancel choir-stall desking at St Andrew, Kildwick,
West Yorkshire (Photo: Charles Tracy) |
|
| |
 |
|
| |
Oak chest at St John the Evangelist, Leeds (Photo: The Churches Conservation Trust) |
|
It was calculated that the nave seating
capacity would originally have been in
excess of 274 places. Given that the parish
population in around 1525 was probably
little more that 100, one would wish to
investigate this historic gross over-provision.
The benches in the smaller eastern blocks of
the nave showed more evidence of restoration
than those in the western block, which is,
perhaps, not surprising. Many are wholly 19thcentury
replacements. A major refurbishment
was carried out in about 1860, when the central
and side aisle nave flooring was replaced by
the red and black encaustic tiles that survive
today. The arcaded desk-fronts at the head of
each block, as well as the rear seat-backs of
both blocks, were mostly authentic, with their
panels interspersed with plain stiles and tracery
consistent with late 15th-century designs.
To the untutored eye this might seem to
be something of a hodge-podge, but the quality
of construction and design of these early 16th-century
benches was exceptionally good, and
markedly better than that found on most other
pews of this date in the same region. It was
often necessary to crawl around underneath
the benches to assess them, but the joinery
practices these efforts revealed were quite
sophisticated. They were also an advertisement
for the best and most sensitive kind of Victorian
restoration. After 500 years the pewed-out nave
was still virtually complete, with the central
portion of the coeval chancel screen surviving,
albeit removed to the west end. The decorative
carving on both benches and screen was
found to be still completely Gothic in form.
The other two case histories lie on either
side of the Pennines. St Andrew, Kildwick,
West Yorkshire, possessed a plethora of pew
and pew-associated timberwork, most of
it ex situ. Portions of the mid 19th-century
benching at the front of the nave, which the
parish wished to remove along with the 20th-century
benching behind it, incorporated
decorative panels from the now almost wholly
destroyed 17th-century box pews. The chancel
choir benches and stalls, which were again a
mixture of 17th and 19th-century components,
were also due for removal. They contained
on their fronts more of this important
collection of 17th-century West Yorkshire
decorative panelling from the same source.
Such incorporation is a good example of the
Victorians’ desire to conserve the art of the past.
It is not possible, in the space of this article,
to do justice to Kildwick’s rare and charming Eltoft family pew of 1633, but, in passing, a
quotation from Jonathan Swift’s withering
couplets on such structures, cannot be resisted:
A bedstead of the antique mode,
Compact of timber many a load,
Such as our ancestors did use,
Was metamorphosed into pews;
Which still their ancient nature keep
By lodging folks disposed to sleep.
With regard to the implications of the
reordering proposals at Kildwick, it was
important to weigh-up the value of this
collection of vernacular 17th-century decorative
panelling, incorporated in the assorted mainly
19th-century furniture forms. The latter, per
se, are of unexceptional artistic value, but,
perhaps, deserved to be retained mainly for
their utilitarian function as display frames. The
same can be said of the mid 19th-century nave
front benching, with its display of 17th-century
panels. The rest of the nave benching was well
made, functional, but of little intrinsic interest.
Assessing the significance of this eclectic assortment of pews and congregational
benching was challenging, but it was clear
that the dismantling of the later panel frames
would have put at risk the conservation of
this uniquely important collection of regional
vernacular carved panelling. It is only because
this material had been reused in this way, as part
of the church’s furnishings, that its art-historical
value had been overlooked. Such inspired
incarceration had saved it from destruction.
The catalogue of an exhibition of oak
furniture from Yorkshire churches held at
Temple Newsam in 1971 demonstrates the high
quality of much of the Kildwick material. The
framed three-panelled oak chest from St John,
Leeds, which was shown on that occasion,
although similar in design, is, in fact, of inferior
quality to the chest at Kildwick. The Leeds
chest has similar foliate crosses within a lozenge
with exterior lobes, but the latter are cross-hatched,
whereas Kildwick’s were spiralled.
Cross-hatching was not found at Kildwick,
although there was some inventive stippling,
which probably indicates an early 17th-century
date. The different dated inscriptions on the
Kildwick panelling, meanwhile, demonstrate
that the former box pews were supplemented
throughout the 17th, 18th and 19th centuries.
 |
|
 |
Above left: St Mary the Virgin, Deane, Lancashire; view of the north aisle benches from the west (Photo: Charles Tracy); above right: family pew-end at St Mary and All Saints, Whalley,
Lancashire displaying the coat of arms of the
Sherburnes of Stoneyhurst and dated 1638
(Photo: Clifford Ball) |
Kildwick Church, then, contains a superb
array of classically-derived, as well as plenty of
pseudo-naturalistic, ornament. It is a veritable
treasury of Yorkshire decorative vernacular
wood carving, mainly from throughout the 17th
century. As such, it is an important cultural
resource which deserves to be better known
and more widely studied. With the help of
the inscriptions and a comparative analysis,
it should be possible to create from this
remarkable collection an invaluable chronology
of the regional ornament style for the period.
And so, finally, to St Mary the Virgin,
Deane, near Bolton, Lancashire. For most of
its medieval life this ‘long, low and embattled’
church was a modest chapel of ease, subject
ultimately to Whalley Abbey. The church
was fully pewed-out with a mixture of oak
benches of the same design but of two different
dates, the later being early 19th-century.
The original bench-ends and seats could be recognised by the thicker scantling (or cross
section) of the timbers, and from the fact
that they were hand, as opposed to machine,
finished. The profile of all the bench-ends was
a characteristic pair of reversed scrolls, with
a three-quarter round moulding at the top
and simple round mouldings on each side.
The two campaigns could be recognised most
easily from an inspection of these bench tops.
The later benches must be the product of the
documented 1833 re-ordering, some of them
with brass plates engraved in a copper-plate
hand with the name of the lessor of a particular
family pew. They also have typically Victorian
decorated brass stays and metal troughs (now
painted) attached to the ends for the storage
of umbrellas. Of the 98 extant benches, 54 are
more or less ancient. Unlike the carved ends at
Haddenham, Deane’s bench-ends were plain.
The call for a significance analysis in this
case was prompted by the parish’s proposed
reordering of much of the furnishings. There
had been a discussion about the approximate
age of the older benches, with proposed datings
ranging from late medieval to 17th century. In
fact, research has turned up another church
in Lancashire with a set of benches executed
by the same workshop. It is at St Mary and All
Saints, Whalley, where the suite of furniture
includes the carved arms of the Sherburnes
of Stoneyhurst on a bench-end originally near
their family pew and now mounted on the
church wall. Conveniently, this is prominently
dated 1638. Whether the link with Deane is
coincidence, or in some way related to the
church’s medieval ties with Whalley Abbey,
we shall never know. The pew sets are not
quite identical. At Whalley the profile of the
bench-end tops has an extra roll moulding.
With the 1833 cloned 17th-century pews at
Deane, we find a nice example of the Victorian
historicising tendency, this time applied to a
set of early-17th-century benches. By dint of
careful observation and research, the argument
over dating is settled, and an attractive,
although not aesthetically outstanding, set of
furniture is found to contain an unexpected
historical significance. The decision that is
finally taken in Deane’s case should now, at
least, be better informed, if no easier to take.
~~~
Recommended Reading
- Margaret Aston, ‘Segregation in Church’, in WJ
Shiels and D Wood (eds), Women in the Church,
Studies in Church History, Vol 27, Ecclesiastical
History Society, Oxford, 1990
- J Charles Cox, Bench Ends in English Churches,
OUP, Oxford, 1916
- Fred Crossley and Frank Howard, English
Church Woodwork, Batsford, London, 1917
- Arthur Gardner, Minor English Wood Sculpture,
1400-1500, Tiranti, London, 1958
|
|
Historic Churches, 2009
Author
CHARLES TRACY PhD FSA is a specialist in historic
church furniture. He is the author of several books,
including a two-volume study of English gothic
choir stalls, and another on European church
furniture in England. He is often consulted by
parishes facing difficult re-ordering decisions which
hinge on the significance of their furnishings.
Further
information
RELATED
ARTICLES
Churches (general)
Restoration
Timber conservation
RELATED
PRODUCTS AND SERVICES
Historical researchers
Joinery
Wood carvers and turners

Site Map
© Cathedral
Communications Limited 2010
|