Communications. NOTES ON HALSALL CHURCH. Of the earliest church at Halsall the only visible fragment above ground is a few feet of foundation, at the north-west angle of the nave. This has, however, been traced in the interior of the church, crossing the opening of the tower arch, below the floor, and has plainly once formed the west end of the church. The exterior face has a plinth, with set-off of different section from any other in the structure, proving it to be part of an earlier building than the present edifice built over it, and most likely Norman. Reaching, as it does, not much over a foot northward beyond the junction of the western tower with the nave, nor occupying exactly the same line as the present west end, it may be assumed from this, and from the nature of subsequent alterations, that this wall represents the western face of a Norman church, without aisles, or western tower, consisting of nave, chancel, and porch, possibly of the same plan as the Norman remains at Aughton indicate, and most likely occupying little more than the space of the present nave without its aisles. No remnant of the "Early English" period has been found, and there was possibly no change in the church during the prevalence of that style. The first alteration of the simple Norman church appears to have taken place about 1290, when the north aisle, of four bays, was added to the nave; lofty columns and handsomely-moulded arches, with capitals, replacing the Norman north wall. At the same time the west end of the nave was either rebuilt or fitted with a new window. What may then have been done at the chancel, before the present beautiful one was erected at a later date, cannot be clearly ascertained. On the north side, in the interior, there is in the present chancel a kind of plinth, with a weathering projecting about nine inches into the church. This appears to be the line of an older wall, on which the existing one was partly built. The stone corresponds with that of the church of 1290, and possibly marks the line of its slightly narrower chancel. There are small indications that a tower was built about 1290 at the south side of the Norman church, towards the west end, situated like the spire at Ormskirk is, and of a similar character. It will be shown how this was displaced by succeeding alterations. The west end of the north aisle, and some small part of the east end of each of the north chapels, together with the north arcade, are the only remains in situ of this rebuilding. The north aisle roof is carried on corbels, supporting the main timbers, and above these, but below the present modern roof, is another series of corbels, now concealed under it. The late Mr. Paley, an eminent architect, thought that these were intended to support pinnacles for a clerestory, never completed; there is, however, no indication that they ever had, or were intended to have, any such superstructure. I would suggest that their purpose was to carry the overhanging eaves of the original nave roof; the drip of this would fall on the aisle roof, which would be only a very short space below the main nave roof, forming, at that period, almost a continuous slope, with only these eaves dividing them. When the later south aisle was built, the existing parapet was most likely added, and the wall on both sides raised over both arcades, to form the present blind story of the nave, thus superseding, with the parapet and gutters, the original north eaves. These corbels would then be rendered useless, but were permitted to remain. The fact that no corresponding corbels exist over the south aisle arcade, would thus be accounted for, none being required; and those on the north were superseded. The changes that followed this period seem to be the most interesting of all. It will be noticed that the tower and spire are of mixed detail, some corresponding pretty nearly with the date of about 1290, others showing early "Third Pointed" style. The square-headed west window has a sunk chamfer moulding in the jamb of thirteenth century date; the hood mould and tracery are of " Perpendicular " work. It is also evident that many of the stones have been rebuilt, having been numbered for removal and replaced, which is especially noticeable in the staircase door-way. The proportions and lines of the tower, too, are not adapted either to fit the high-pitched nave roof, nor is it sufficiently high to stand properly at the centre of the west end, though the proportions would be right for a side tower similar to Ormskirk. If we admit that this tower has been removed to its present site, the mixture of earlier and later details may be accounted for, as the latter would come into the structure at the date of its removal. The question then arises, why should the tower have been thus altered? And this may be explained by the desire to add a south aisle to the church. The site of the Norman porch, if it remained, would, according to local precedent, be near the centre of the nave; if the added tower, of circa 1290, also adjoined the south-west part of the original nave, it would become necessary to remove both porch and tower to obtain a south aisle the full length of the nave. Judging by the mouldings of the capitals and arches of the south arcade, which differ from those of the north aisle, and by their comparatively coarse finish show the decadence of the so-called "Decorated" style, we may fix the date of this aisle at about 1330 to 1345. The tower would then be only about 50 years old and still within the prevailing fashion of building, therefore its materials were probably taken down, numbered and stacked, the new aisle proceeded with and finished, and a new porch, near the previous site of the tower, added. The rebuilding of the tower at the west end appears to have been afterwards taken in hand, and by this time the "Third "Pointed" style had become current. If we look at the east end of the south aisle, we find another indirect evidence of the probable change of position of the tower. The east window of the south aisle is plainly one that has been reused, and it may have been the west window of the church of 1290, before the re-erection of the tower; the tracery is of that period, and the stone of the same quality as that of the north aisle: it is of earlier date than the south arcade erected to extend this aisle. It is set into the wall with a harder and lighter stone, and with a different outer jamb and arch moulding from its own, and under an arch not struck exactly from its original centres. The wall on the side next the nave is of the older material, and in the interior it stops short of the centre below the window, forming a kind of bench, the later wall not being exactly on the same line of foundation. This seems to indicate that this piece of wall was part of a former external buttress of the church of 1290, before the construction of the south aisle. There is another feature in the tower that seems to confirm these transmutations. On the gable of the buttress of the N.w. angle, facing westwards, towards the sea, has been cut a place for the insertion of a small figure (now lost), this being an addition to the original decorated buttress. It is evidently so made by an after-thought, and is supposed to have been a figure of S. Nicholas, the patron saint of sailors, for whom the spire of the church formed a sea-mark. It may be suggested that if such a figure stood in the west gable of the older church, which the rebuilding of the tower at the west end covered up, it was refixed upon this tower buttress facing west, which had, while the tower stood on the south side of the church, faced south; and the figure was, therefore, reset to face its original aspect in a buttress that originally had a different one. The wall at the west end of the south aisle was originally without any opening, and may have been so left by retaining the lower part of the blank wall of the tower. The best proof that the tower was not originally built at the west end is the foundation of the old west wall which crosses the tower arch below the present pavement. The last addition to the church was the splendid chancel, which is fully described by Mr. Taylor. It only remains to add that there seems to have been a design to rebuild or alter the entire nave in the same sumptuous fashion. At the junction of the chancel with the nave there is a slight raising of the wall of the north nave arcade, and corbels are inserted, as though the nave was to be rebuilt westwards on these new lines. The external fully moulded string courses on this portion indicate the same purpose. In the chancel the fully developed |