1

FAITH, FOLK AND FABRIC

The Story of a remarkable Church and Parish

Urswick, Low Furness, Cumbria

By Reverend Colin R Honour, M.Ed.

2

(C) 2011 Colin R Honour

The right of Colin Honour to be identified as the author of this work has been asserted by

him in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988

All rights reserved.

No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form, or by any means,

without the written permission of the copyright holder.

3

to all the ‘saints and sinners’

and ‘collared doves’

who have made this church

and parish what it is.

4

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The roots of this book lie in eight years of parochial ministry in this beautiful corner of

North-West England where the remoteness and isolation of the Low Furness Peninsula has

left so much of its early history undisturbed. George McCloud described some places

spiritually as being ‘thin places’ where earth and heaven seem to meet.

Urswick is one such place.

I would like to thank our special friends at Urswick for introducing us to its remarkable past

and sharing with us a vision for its future, and to the original Hidden Light Project Group for

all we shared together.

To Steve Dickinson, local archaeologist, for firing my imagination in the early days, and for

permission to reproduce his line drawings of the inscribed stones in the church’s north wall

from ‘Beacon on the Bay’, and photographs of the ‘threshold stone’ between tower and

nave exposed in 2003.

To Sir Roy Strong for introducing us to the ‘wider picture’ in a way we can all understand,

and for allowing me to quote from his little gem, ‘A Little History Of The English Country

Church’.

Thanks go to the patient Archivist and Staff at the Barrow Central Library Local Resources

Section, and also at Kendal Library, for their willingness to go the extra mile for me. Thanks,

too, to John Imlach and Graham Perry at the church for unearthing additional information

and providing local contacts, to Ray Wilson, for his love of Urswick and care in nurturing its

historical heritage, and to Gareth Lester at the United Reformed Church in the village.

To John Imlach again for his revised guide to the church, for his devotion to the church and

congregation in his several capacities as church warden, treasurer, ‘shepherd’ and friend,

and for proof-reading my script and making helpful suggestions and corrections.

To Chris, my long-suffering wife and soul-mate, for her painstaking reading of the initial

script and her helpful suggestions, too, as well as her patience with me during this initial

period of adjustment to retirement!

To Reverend Alex Armstrong, Priest-in-Charge of Aldingham, Dendron, Rampside and

Urswick, my successor, for graciously allowing me to visit the church on several occasions to

check information, to take photographs, and to continue to share some aspects of its life,

and to Norman for his practical assistance.

And to all those people, known and unknown, who over the many generations have kept,

and are keeping, this beautiful church at the heart of their community, shared it, shaped it,

securing its fabric and its story for future generations to enjoy.

5

Contents

Acknowledgements

Preface

Chapter One: Urswick Church- the First Thousand Years 9

Chapter Two: Casting Around The Bay 36

Chapter Three: The Norman Revolution 62

Chapter Four: Dissolution And Dis-location 85

Chapter Five: The Stuart Era 99

Chapter Six: The ‘Long’ Eighteenth Century 119

Chapter Seven: Muddy Waters 136

Chapter Eight: A New Chapter 156

Chapter Nine: The Next Chapter – But Not The Last 192

Appendix: Urswick And Its Christian Origins Explored 201

Research Materials Specific To Urswick 225

Bibliography 228

6

Where is Urswick?

7

PREFACE

Heversham, 2011.

“A jolly sight too much of the parson in all this you might say, but it cannot be helped. He

really figured largely in the restoration- uncomplaining he took the blame, but let him have

some post-humous honour”.

( Reverend.T.N. Postlethwaite, Vicar of Urswick, 1903- 26)

Thomas Norton Postlethwaite was captivated by the antiquity of Urswick Church and its

restoration, for him, became a passion- nay, an obsession. He was, of course, always aware

that he was building on the efforts of his predecessors for good or ill- and also to secure its

future as a place of refuge and of worship to the glory of God.

The fact that today the church is still so wonderfully maintained is a huge credit to those

parishioners who over many generations have worked tirelessly to ensure that it is still open

today for all to experience its unique atmosphere and to sample something of the history of

the wider church through its fabric and its story.

And what a story!

Here we explore the very roots of Christianity in Britain.

Here we discover the struggles and the joys of the infant Church as it sought to carve out its

identity.

Here we meet some of the great ‘saints’ of the Celtic world – St. Kentigern, St. Cuthbert,

perhaps St. Chad and even St. Patrick.

Here we can trace the development of the northern Church against a background of

migration, of disputed lands, of the growth and dislocation of community, of power and

politics and of heroic journeying.

Here we also find a very human story of a growing and changing community emerging from

its geographical isolation into a whole new world of change and challenge - not without its

struggles or its humour!

8

Here, in the stone, wood and glass of the present building and its surroundings we can see

almost two thousand years of history written in the fabric and sense it in the amazing

atmosphere of the church of St. Mary and St. Michael, Urswick.

This book is an attempt to bring together the many strands from many directions which

illustrate the journey so far. My hope is that it will help today’s pilgrim to understand how

we have journeyed thus far and perhaps to pause to consider the journey ahead.

My own dedication would be to T.N.Postlethwaite and all of my other predecessors who

shared a unique privilege as co - stewards of God’s ‘little gem’ at Urswick, and particularly to

those who have shared the faith journey with me in more recent times.

It really is a special place.

Reverend Colin R Honour M.Ed.

(Rector of the Benefice of Aldingham, Dendron, Rampside and Urswick, 2001-9)

9

Chapter One: The First Thousand Years

Bulmer’s Directory of 1910 described Urswick Parish as being ‘of considerable extent,

covering an area of 4,100 statute acres, inclusive of wood, common and water. It has a

length of three miles, a breadth of two, and is bounded on the south and west by the

parishes of Aldingham and Dalton, on the east by Morecambe Bay, and on the north by the

parishes of Ulverston and Pennington’.

The Parish is divided into four townships of Much Urswick (Great Urswick), Little Urswick,

Bardsey (Bardsea) and Stainton and Adgarley (sometimes called Bolton with Adgarley or

Adgarley with Stainton). ‘Ecclesiastically, the parish is divided into two districts, St. Mary’s

Urswick, and Holy Trinity, Bardsea, the inhabitants of the latter parish under the deed of

consecration retaining all their rights as parishioners of Urswick’, wrote Bulmer.

In the more distant past Bolton had been granted a separate chantry from the mother

church at Urswick; Sir Richard Coupland gave annually four pounds of wax to Urswick church

probably in compensation for any loss the mother church might sustain by the new

foundation. That was in the time of Henry III. The manor was given to Furness Abbey. Baines

writing in 1870 says that it now belongs to the earl of Derby, upon whose family it was

conferred by the forfeiture of Sir Thomas Broughton, (through his participation in Lambert

Simnel’s attempt to obtain the Crown). It is now a single messuage forming part of the farm

buildings at Hawkfield, in which the arches, doors, and windows of the ancient chapel or

chantry may yet be traced’, but Bolton still gives its name to the manor, styled Bolton-with-

Adgarley.

10

Bulmer listed the principal landowners as having been:

H.R.H.Gale, Esq. J.P. Bardsea Hall

John Croudon Ashburner, Blawith Vicarage

Petty Trustees

T.E.Hockin, Esq, Wellwood, Bardsea

Dr. John Cranke

All of these names and the echo of their individual histories resonate around the wider

Parish and together with many others, both high and low born, make up an amazing journey

through time.

Before the boundary revisions of 1974 the Furness Peninsula was part of ‘Lancashire north

of the Sands’, in other words on the northern edge of the extensive and expansive

Morecambe Bay. In fact, its most accessible route from the south (if not the safest) in

earliest days, was across the shifting tidal route ‘over Sands’. In more recent years the area

has been dominated by the growth of Barrow-in-Furness and its ship-building industry, and

the number of smaller ‘villages’ on the Peninsula like Great Urswick and Little Urswick have

increasingly become ‘commuter villages’ for those working away from the area or working

in BAE Systems at Barrow or up the west coast at the nuclear energy plant at Sellafield.

Whilst farming continues at some level many of the houses have become retirement homes

for the growing numbers of older persons seeking the ‘peace and quiet’ of the countryside.

There is, however, a strong local identity and fierce pride in its heritage by many whose

families can be traced back for a number of generations, a feature and in some ways a

benefit of having being somewhat insulated from the rest of the country for most of its

history. It is because of this isolation that much of its historic past has been overlooked and

ignored and it is only in recent years, particularly with the new interest in ‘Celtic spirituality’,

that the area has begun to attract closer attention and its historical ‘treasures’ unearthed

and placed in context.

Amazingly, much of this historic footprint can still be seen in the fabric and the landscape of

the church of St. Mary and St. Michael, Great Urswick, and no doubt there is much yet to be

discovered and added to this fascinating journey.

Steve Dickinson, a local archaeologist of whom more later, wrote: ‘Examination of the

landscape around the church, and the church itself, allows a presentation of new and

emerging archaeological evidence for a major late and/or sub-Romano-British church and

monastic foundation; subsequently influenced by Irish and Anglo-Saxon activity.’ (The

Beacon on the Bay, 2002)

11

Not all of his conclusions and ‘inferences’ have found universal acceptance, not least by

other archaeologists, and there is a lack of follow-up ‘evidence’ to date to support some of

his most far-reaching claims. However, he has opened up for us an extremely helpful and

lively debate which will continue. Sadly, some important discoveries made by Mr. Dickinson

in his initial survey have gone unacknowledged and have become lost in later disputes and

difficulties, and it is with this particular piece of ‘evidence’ that the ‘story in stone’ at

Urswick begins.

I refer to three fragments of ‘early Christian inscribed stones’ built into the outer north wall

of the nave which are possibly part of a late or sub-Roman church dedication slab. The

lettering on one of the stones has an I and the left side of an M or a P from which he

completes the first line as I/M/P (eratori) CA (esari); he suggests that not only is this the

start of an inscription recording a dedication under a late Roman Emperor’s reign, but from

another of the stones suggests possible evidence for the tenth year of that reign (ANN) O

X.The period suggested is c398-450 AD.

Dickinson states that further fragments of early Christian inscribed stones can be seen

elsewhere in the same wall. His footnote is worth repeating here as an indication of the use

of these particular pieces. He states that the ‘choice of these particular elements of the

broken inscriptions by builders of the nave north wall seems particularly significant. Great

Urswick 3 and 5 have X prominent on them, (with the damaged M/P on Great Urswick 4

acting arguably as half an X. It is suggested that these stones incorporating cross symbols

were deliberately chosen as a suitably Christian deterrent on the north side of the church.’

12

Line drawings reproduced with permission from ‘The Beacon on the Bay’ (c) Steve Dickinson 2002

13

Readers might be interested to note that during Anglo-Saxon and Norman times, and

probably even later than that, burials tended to be made to the south of the church because

there was a tradition that the devil haunted the north side in order to take wandering souls

off to hell!

In a later publication about the church at Great Urswick and its landscape called ‘By water,

by stone’ produced for the Hidden Light Community Project in 2004, Dickinson refers to

three other ‘inscribed and/or sculpted stones in the church’.

The first of these is a slab of pale gritstone that forms the threshold between the nave and

the belfry. This was revealed in 2003 when re-wiring and work to the heating system was

being undertaken. He claims that the ‘letter forms revealed through flash photography on

its underside.... is considered to display part of a rare 5th-8th century AD memorial

dedication’ (page 11). Unfortunately this stone is currently inaccessible (see Appendix).

The second stone is fastened to the sill of the tall nave window closest to the church porch

door. It was actually discovered in 1911 being used as a lintel in another south nave

window, hence its peculiar shape, having been cut and re-used. It is part of an Anglo-Saxon

sandstone cross, originally some 3 metres high. This is the most significant, and most

disputed, relic and requires detailed exploration.

The third sculpted Christian stone fragment relates to the Viking/ Norse-Irish immigration

of the 10th century and underlines the continuity of the Christian faith on the Furness

Peninsula. This, too, was discovered during renovations made to the chancel in 1911.

It is probably best to provide a wider context for Great Urswick at this point before we

return to examine those two visible ‘stone witnesses’ in detail because its geographical

location and strategic position is significant to our story. We also have to explore a broad

historical ‘footprint’ because our journey embraces more than one period of ‘immigration’

over a huge expanse of time. I hesitate to refer to ‘conquest’ favouring instead the term

‘settlement’ in relation to the area because it is the nature of the Furness Peninsula that

whilst it was occupied and settled by various groups and parties its folk remain as free and

independent as ever!

We are reminded that from earliest times up to the 18th century Furness was largely an

island. ‘To the north and north-east’, says Dickinson, ‘Windermere and the River Leven,

Coniston Water, the River Crake and the sinuous crag-bound course of the Duddon valley

running south-west from Wrynose Pass effectively restricted easy landward access. The

tides of Morecambe Bay and the Duddon Estuary acted as huge natural barriers to the east

and west respectively.’ (page 2).

14

When the tides were out, leaving huge plains of shallow water and open sands, they

provided the well-used, if dangerous ‘cross-sands’ routes into Furness. These routes have

great significance in terms of trade and travel over the centuries from Roman times to the

coming of the railways in the early 19th century.

Fred Barnes, former Librarian for Barrow Borough and a popular local historian in his book

‘Barrow and District’ Second Edition published in 1968 sketches the developments in

Furness from Prehistory to the coming of the Angles in one helpful chapter and his

particular themes of migration, refuge and settlement are extremely important to the

development of the Church in Furness. He begins by stating that ‘man and human culture

reached Britain from the Continent in a series of waves beginning with Old Stone Age man

about 30,000 years ago. In most cases the invasion began from south-east England or

Cornwall and always the newcomers pushed back the races they found there to the

highlands of the north and west.’ (page 7). He suggests that being an isolated and remote

area made Furness ‘peculiarly ideal for the sheltering of superseded civilisations’. New

Stone Age man pushed out Old Stone Age man from about 2500 BC only to be evicted in

turn by Bronze Age man after about 1900 BC. The men of the Iron Age began to expel the

Bronze Age peoples about 500 BC. ‘So’, states Barnes, ‘’since to this secluded promontory

would come in turn as refugees Neolithic and Bronze Age men and later Early Iron Age men

(Celts) one is not surprised to find a considerable mixing of cultures’ so there would be

groups still living a hunting, food-gathering life while other groups had taken up farming and

reached a relatively high standard of civilisation. He points to significant ‘field evidence’ in

the area. Bronze Age burials- round barrows, cists and urn-fields- are common and some of

their contents have survived.

The ‘concentric’ stone circle on Birkrigg Common, about 2 kilometres from Urswick, known

locally as the ‘Druids Temple’ was dated to the Late Bronze Age. Other burial sites around

Urswick, eg. Heaning Wood, and the ‘Burial Chamber’ recorded on the Ordnance Survey

map are further evidence of Bronze Age activity.

Barnes states that the habitation sites of the earliest inhabitants of Furness have been

totally obliterated, but the more substantial stone-built settlements of the period around

the Roman Conquest- those of the ‘Ancient Britons’- have survived. He cites Urswick Stone

Walls, Appleby Slack and Foulna near Holme Bank together with the hill-fort at Skelmore

Heads, Urswick, as the best examples. These settlements suggest small tribal or family units

of perhaps fifty individuals engaged in crude cultivation and possessing livestock.

Adding to the sense of antiquity with the Urswicks at the centre, Nikolaus Pevsner in his

inventory of the buildings of England (1969) refers to a further enclosure on the north-east

slope of Birkrigg Common, pear-shaped in plan and delimited by a rubble bank ten feet

wide; a single entrance occurred on the east side but there were no surface traces of

15

internal structures. The other one, marked as ‘Homestead’ on the current Ordnance Survey

map, was a further enclosure one mile east south-east of Little Urswick. He described the

site as being ‘polygonal in plan and defined by a massive rubble bank revetted with large

stone slabs’. The foundations of two circular huts were visible in the interior and although at

the time the settlement remained unexcavated it was probably Iron Age or native Romano-

British.

Urswick Stone Walls has attracted particular attention because of its size; consisting of the

foundations of a 70 x 100 metre sub-oval settlement incorporating the remains of at least

five roundhouses. Dickinson suggests that this development demonstrates that the local

environment would have been an increasing patchwork of fields and pastures with

woodland pock-marked by clearance for timber and fuel as the local community increased

in size. It also shows signs of further, later development. Whilst the oval camp is dated at

approximately 200 BC, the second, four-sided enclosure is a later addition, its shape

showing the influence of the normal Roman camp plan (Barnes) and thought to date from

the period of Roman occupation (Dickinson). Gaythorpe writing in 1882 decided that the

oval enclosure seemed ‘without doubt’ to have been an ancient British fortress, probably

constructed of increased strength during the early Iron period ‘with a view to securing

command of the veins of haematite ore known to exist in the fissures of the limestone in

the immediate neighbourhood’. He concluded that there were no indications of the

enclosures having been occupied by either Anglian or Norse settlers.

Dickinson suggested ‘good evidence’ for later prehistoric and Roman period iron smelting.

He goes one huge step further in that he sees in the developments at Skelmore Heads a

rampart which together with the size of the site, as being ‘typical of a post-Roman or early

historic period royal site’ and states that ‘in the field walls in the surrounding landscape,

evidence from worked sandstone is accumulating for a long-lost major Roman military site.’

What can be stated with confidence is that Urswick and its Tarn seem to have been a

significant focus over hundreds, probably thousands of years; this is supported by Barnes’

reference to the ancient road across Furness ‘used from time immemorial’. It links up with

the oversands route from Cartmel at Conishead (Barnes says this was the only practical

route up from the sands until the mosses were drained). From Conishead the track winds

round the shoulders of the hills across Furness to Ireleth, always crossing the valleys at the

narrowest point; it goes by way of Urswick to Dalton across the Goldmire Valley to Ireleth,

where it links with the oversands route across the Duddon estuary to Millom.

James Stockdale in his ‘Annals of Cartmel’ re-printed and published in 1978 describes how

in 79 AD in the reign of Emperor Vespatian, Agricola, the Roman General, in his second

campaign ‘contended with the bravest and most powerful of the British tribes- the

Brigantes- drove them through their thick woods and morasses, till at length he reached the

16

southern shores of the great Bay of Morecambe; and, having with difficulty passed over the

then low-lying sand-banks and quicksands of the estuary, for the first time led the Roman

legions into Cartmel.’

Barnes could find no evidence for Roman occupation or settlement in Furness and supposed

that the chain of forts along the roads, combined with the operation of the Roman fleet,

completely isolated the Britons around Millom, Furness and Lonsdale. He would expect a

small naval station to be sited on Piel Island or the South End of Walney Island for use by the

fleet in emergencies but suggested that any Roman ‘finds’ would be associated with passing

trade and that ‘probably the natives traded with the Romans, perhaps Roman tax collectors

or punitive expeditions penetrated Furness’. We know from history that in 138 AD the

Romans suppressed a revolt in the Lake District and that after 220 AD there were continual

raids into the area by pirates from Ireland and Scotland until Roman authority was fully

restored towards the end of the third century. These raids were repeated during the later

years of the fourth century and of course the Romans withdrew altogether in about 410 AD.

The Romans were known to have used the ‘over sands’ routes regularly when travelling

north from Lancaster. A large hoard of Roman coins has very recently been found at

Arnside.

John Dobson, Master of the Grammar School in Little Urswick from 1876 until 1920, wrote

that ‘although it is much disputed whether the Romans during their four centuries

occupation of Southern Britain had much connection with Furness, yet Urswick can put us in

touch even with that conquering, civilizing, Christianity-spreading race. Mr. Close figures a

silver coin of the emperor Otho found at Little Urswick in 1798, and only a few years ago a

copper coin of Constantine the Great was unearthed in the vicarage garden at Little Urswick

and is now in the possession of the Rev. T. N. Postlethwaite.’

He referred to the supposed ‘Roman road which passed along the northern boundary of the

parish’ (which was proven not to be such) and stated that ‘it would not cause any very great

surprise if a Roman milestone or even a Roman Altar were to be discovered within our

boundaries’.

Dickinson holds out greater hope for a significant Roman presence in Furness but that is not

our concern just now. He claims with confidence that ‘we can begin to see a local post-

Roman power centre here in the landscape around the Urswick villages’. He goes on to state

that his ‘landscape survey, besides revealing tantalising glimpses of Roman Urswick

settlement origins, has also demonstrated evidence for both the inner and outer boundaries

of a massive, previously unidentified, early Christian monastery; the buildings of which, with

the exception of the church, have disappeared’.

Continuing the sequence of habitation and migration Barnes tells us that in the

readjustment following the withdrawal of the Romans from Britain the Celtic inhabitants of

17

Furness were absorbed by the Kingdom of Strathclyde which then covered the west side of

Britain from the Mersey to the rock of Dumbarton on the Clyde. He states with absolute

confidence that ‘Christianity had already been brought to Cumbria by St. Ninian about 397

AD, but soon the Christian Celts had to face the inroads of heathen teutonic invaders.’

Stockdale, again in flowery tones tells us that on the departure of the last Roman legion

from the north-west part of Britain-‘particularly Cumberland, Westmorland, and the

adjacent districts of Cartmel and Furness, containing several Romano-British colonial towns

and posts-were at once invaded and overrun by hordes of barbarians, Scots, Picts, and

Saxon Pirates, who ravaged the whole country with fire and sword, destroying all traces of

Roman civilisation.’

Angles conquered and occupied the territory to the east of Cumbria about the middle of the

sixth century and founded the powerful kingdom of Northumbria; again, Barnes states that

‘Furness would receive its share of Celtic refugees’. He also tells us that Lancashire south of

the Ribble was wrested from Strathclyde by the English in 613 AD and then for 70 years

there was a series of struggles between the English of Northumbria and the Britons of

Strathclyde.

Barnes makes the point once more that West Cumberland, Westmorland and Furness were

never conquered, yet the multiplicity of Anglian place names in Low Furness proves that

there must have been considerable colonisation. He also shows that names like Roose and

Walton tell us that the Britons remained among the Angles. He suggests that Furness was

penetrated by small groups of Angles who settled on empty land; they possessed heavier

ploughs than the Celts which could turn the heavier rich soils, whereas the Celts had been

forced to settle on easier worked uplands or gravel patches on river banks. In time there

would be intermarriage and only those Britons deep in the remote fells could remain racially

pure. The Celtic population, hemmed in by 7th century invaders, seems to have gradually

dwindled in numbers and the early isolated Anglian settlements showed little tendency to

expand- and ‘thus matters stood for 200 years’ says Barnes... until the coming of the next

wave of immigrants, this time of Scandinavian origin during the 9th and 10th centuries.

Readers will recall that Dickinson claims to have identified the outline of an early ‘estate’

and the inner precincts of an early Christian monastery with the current church building of

St. Mary and St. Michael near the centre. He states that the layout is similar to that on Iona

and at Lindisfarne (Holy Island) and this element of the site suggests an ‘Irish template’ of

the 6th-7th century AD.

If we can accept that there is a sub-Roman dedication slab built into the fabric of the nave

and the possibility of the area being evangelised by St. Ninian and his monks around the end

of the 4th century, then perhaps the most we dare suggest is that the later inhabitants of the

7th century may have built more permanently on the early monastic site and extended its

18

boundaries along the lines of the ‘Iona template’ most familiar to them. The period ‘in

between’ has to remain subject to much speculation as to who might have evangelised Low

Furness or even re-introduced Christianity to the area because history tells us that the battle

between Christianity and paganism was not a one-off battle! Interestingly, M. A. Gordon,

(1963) an author from Kentmere, seems to believe that Ninian and his monks were active as

far south as Ninezergh at Levens (he also claims that the great St.Columba himself landed at

Heysham and then ‘passed on his way up into Scotland, working and teaching as he went’

(page 19) He says that ‘it is thought that much of what St. Ninian taught and many of the

churches he built had been destroyed in the general depredations made by successive

invasions of Scots and Northumbrians’.

King Ecgfrith of Northumbria gave Cartmel ‘and all the Britons in it’, no doubt including

Furness, to Cuthbert on his becoming Bishop in 685 AD.

Let us look briefly towards Ireland and the Isle of Man and their possible links with Urswick

and Furness before returning to our ‘stone witnesses’. Furness would have been a prime site

for a very early Christian foundation at the northern end of the critically important western

seaways with their links to early foundations in Ireland, Wales, Cornwall, Gaul, Spain and the

Mediterranean. We know from archaeological evidence that strong trading links were

established between Europe, Ireland and Britain. We should include the Isle of Man in the

picture, again because of its strategic position between Britain and Ireland and we know it

provided a ‘safe haven’ for Christian monks. However, we also know it as a scene of conflict

between the Irish Scots and the Irish and that it was actually abandoned by the Irish in the

late 6th or early 7th century.

We also know of significant Christian missionary work in Lancashire by monks associated

with St. Patrick, in particular from an established settlement at Heysham where St. Patrick’s

Chapel can still be seen. It is now known that a number of Irish Culdee monks evangelised

south of Heysham as far as the River Ribble and north of Lancaster as well and into Lonsdale

and Furness.

It was of course from Ireland that St. Columba established his monastic dynasty based on

Iona, and this became the spiritual power house for the evangelisation of Northumbria by

St. Aiden and his monks in the early 7th century. Bede records that when Aidan began his

mission many other Irish monks followed and evangelised the whole of Northumbria. It is

presumed that they all came from Iona but of course some could just as easily have come

directly from Irish monasteries to the west coast of Lancashire and the Furness Peninsula.

Witnesses in Stone

The question, then, is this: does our main ‘witness in stone’ provide evidence for who

established the Christian church at Urswick? That depends, of course, on how one is able to

19

interpret what is there but the most likely ‘witness’ to that is probably still hidden from us; it

is most likely, from what has already been stated, that the ‘Tunwine Cross’ would have been

set up in the context of an earlier established Christian presence in the area.

The cross fragment was discovered in the church in 1911 and was found ‘in stripping the

plaster from the walls’. Collingwood reported that ‘we saw the stone in its place as lintel to

the easternmost window in the south wall of the nave, high over the Gale pew, and as it

carried no weight and was of no importance to the structure we had it taken down in the

presence of the vicar, his churchwarden, clerk, and others, and tried to clean and read it.’

He noted that it was made of red Furness Abbey sandstone (Permian) and would originally

have been a cross ‘somewhat over six feet high- quite a large enough stone to be won at

that period and carried four or five miles from the nearest outcrop of Permian.’ In the

carvings he saw several ‘late Anglian’ features similar to other carved crosses. Of the rear of

the cross he states that ‘the irregular scroll is more distorted than any such work I know in

the North of England, but it is obviously derived from such late Anglian work as the cross-

base at Rastrick.’ He is absolutely sure that ‘there is no Scandinavian ornament on this cross

and it must be pre-Viking’.

20

He is somewhat dismissive (and mystified) by the carved figures; of the two main characters

on the front section he suggests that ‘perhaps the runes on the figures are intended to

explain them’.

On the reverse side- let’s use Collingwood’s own words to describe it: ‘there are two

persons in the boughs of a tree, one sitting; above them are two birds, the tail of a third

suggests the restoration; below them are beasts, indeterminable as to species but not

dragons, and the paw of a third again suggests the restoration. Adam and Eve in the Garden

are sometimes found on early Christian monuments, but usually with the serpent; and if

these are intended (as some indications suggest) for semi-nude figures, the drawing is

unbelievably infantile. At the same time the design is effective, well proportioned, and

adapted to the space; the tradition of decorative art in decadent schools outlasts the power

of naturalistic drawing.’

21

He then turns his attention to the inscription which he interprets as:

‘This cross Tunwini erected in memory of Torhtred, a monument to his lord. Pray for the

(his) soul’

He suggests that that the name ‘Tunwini’ was recently found (as ‘Tundwini’) on a cross at

Hexham and that ‘Torhtred’ (meaning ‘bright counsel’) is a possible Anglian name. The last

line, written on the figures of the two men, could be read as ‘Lyl this waes’ meaning ‘This

was ‘Lyl’ or ‘Lul’. He says that Lull (us), the Anglian bishop of Mainz, and Lilla, the ‘minister’

of King Eadwine, may suggest parallels for the name; but the subject of the picture is still

obscure’.

Collingwood concludes that the cross is distinctly Anglian, though very late, and he sees a

Celtic influence in the figures and possible links with Ireland. However, he comes down on a

link with Yorkshire:

‘But the ornament and formula of this cross connect it very strongly with the West Riding,

and suggest that Furness and Craven were one county, part of the decaying kingdom of

Deira under Osberht and Aella; for the date of this monument to Torhtred, lord of Urswick,

must be about 850-870 AD or shortly before the Viking invasion which stamped upon

Furness the Scandinavian character it bore until the time of Gamel’s tympanum at

Pennington, three hundred years later’

22

Richard Bailey and Rosemary Cramp undertook a detailed study of the Tunwine Cross and

reported for the British Academy in 1988. Of the runic inscriptions they state that whilst

they were intended to fill the framed panel on the face ‘the rune-master miscalculated. The

five lines of runes, the last smaller and more cramped than the other four, fail to complete

the text, which over-runs three of the quadrants of the relief cross in the panel beneath’.

The figures and the decoration on both front and back are described in great technical detail

but it is in their conclusions that the real interest lies for our purposes. They state that for

dating of the cross ‘there are three significant features which, however, do not point in the

same direction’ but they conclude that ‘on the whole the Urswick inscriptions look happiest

in the eighth or ninth centuries, though it must be stressed that we know little of the precise

development of north-western Old English’.

They continue by saying that the cross poses problems both iconographically and

stylistically. The phonology of the inscription has suggested a date late in the eighth or ninth

centuries ‘but the ornament suggests a date in the later section of that bracket’; they found

it difficult to decide how many of the idiosyncrasies of the piece were to be explained by

lack of comparable material and how much by the incompetence of the artist! The name of

the carver and the language and script attest that he was English, but save to note that this

is the only inscription which defines the relationship of the donor and subject.

Of the ‘Adam and Eve’ scene Bailey had suggested that the representation could represent

the ascent of the great cosmic tree which is both cross and ladder to heaven. The birds

‘would then represent the souls of the blessed, and perhaps their rather strange appearance

could be explained in the light of their heavenly role’. The creatures were similar to the

types of Northumbrian beasts on the corner of the Franks casket.

23

They turned their attention to the other figural scene and found this ‘less unusual’ since

there were other examples from Lancaster, Burton in Kendal, and at Kirkby Wharfe in

Yorkshire. They struggled, however, to interpret the scene and state that ‘it seems possible

that we have here some narrative of a saint’s life or a conversion scene.’ In terms of the

rather unusual dress of the figures they note that ‘from the mid ninth century onwards

Northumbrian carvers eschew Classical dress even on biblical figures. It is therefore only if

one considers that this cross is before that date that the significance of the dress must be

explained.’ They felt that ‘most of the idiosyncratic features of the piece could best be

explained as deriving from the traditions of Hiberno-Saxon manuscripts’.

There would seem to be considerable agreement between these findings and Collingwood’s

earlier conclusions, particularly in terms of the suggested dating to the latter half of the

ninth century and ‘definitely pre-Viking’. So basically we have a hint of Irish Northumbrian

influence and an agreed dedication by Tunwini to Torhtred. The only real difference- and to

me a vital one- is that Bailey and Cramp interpret the second inscription over the figures as

‘Lyl made this’ whereas Collingwood perhaps favours an alternative which says ‘This was

Lyl’, referring to the figure on the left and not necessarily the craftsman who carved the

stone. By 1927 Collingwood has reverted to reading the inscription as ‘Lyl this w(rought)’

although there was still some uncertainty about this.

As we shall shortly see, Steve Dickinson offered a completely different interpretation in

2002, but a large part of his claim for an earlier dating of the cross relies on trying to identify

the two men depicted in this panel. If we apply the same approach to the above

conclusions, is it possible to identify these persons from other sources and to suggest a

possible late ninth century explanation?

A trawl of historical sources soon identifies Torhtred as being martyred by Danish Vikings in

about 870AD at Thorney about 5 miles from Medeshamstede abbey (modern day

Peterborough). The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle records the event as taking place in 869 AD. We

also discover from the Journal of Medieval Archaeology in 2006 that the abbey was set up

by Charter in about 664 AD and that King Oswiu of Northumbria had been a major patron

together with King Peada of the Middle Angles.

The occupation and colonisation of East Anglia, the eastern half of Mercia and southern

Northumbria by armies of heathen Danes had a catastrophic effect on the life of local

churches and the wider administration and pastoral oversight was severely disrupted. We

are told that in the region beyond the Tees, the sees of Hexham and Whithorn ceased to

exist altogether and to the south York was reduced to an impoverished ruinous state.

We now turn towards Lindisfarne in Northumbria in about 875 AD when the monks fled the

monastery in the face of this new wave of Viking raids, taking with them the body of St.

Cuthbert and other relics together with the Lindisfarne Gospels. Their journeys over several

24

years have been well documented elsewhere, including their passage through the Furness

area, setting up crosses and in some places dedicating churches as they went, possibly

including St. Cuthbert’s church at Kirkby Ireleth. The party was led by Bishop Ecgred of

Lindisfarne; also in the party was Eadred Lulise, abbot of the monastery at Carlisle (Caer-

Luel). It is not suggested that he was with the party when it set out from Lindisfarne but

joined it when they reached Cumbria. Whilst one cannot identify a definite link between

Torhtred and Lulise (Luel) it was not uncommon for monks to serve in one monastery before

being invited to take charge of a different one elsewhere.

Could the two figures then be the abbot of Caer-Luel on the left and the martyred

Torhtred on the right? That might then suggest that Torhtred was the local Urswick person

being acknowledged by Tunwine who arranged to have the cross set up in his memory.

Could the inscription after all really be: Tunwine put up this cross in memory of his son

Torhtred. Pray for the soul. ’That could also account for its somewhat ‘rustic’ nature!

Let us return to Steve Dickinson and his detailed re-analysis of the cross and his very

different conclusions. His basic argument is that the runes had been ‘over cut’, meaning that

there were demonstrably late additions to an original text and that attempts had been

made to alter the earlier text. Instead of the Tunwine interpretation above, which he terms

a ‘phase ii reading’, his phase i interpretation reads:

Luibe put up (this cross) in memory of Torotheo. Luigne...

His re-construction of the text of the figure runes reads: ‘L*u*l this wa(s)’ and he states

clearly that we could regard L*u*l as being the person on the left ‘engaged in discussion

with a bishop or archbishop on the right’. In his view this is a ‘portrait of a real ecclesiastical

event; created to be seen and read as an intimate part of the text above it’ and states that

‘this is not a stylised picture drawn from the gospel books available to some cack-handed

provincial Anglo-Saxon sculptor’. We should, he suggests, be able to find these individuals,

and identify that event (or propose it as a new element), in the early historic period and

proceeds to interpret the landscape around Great Urswick and Little Urswick to find an

appropriate setting for the cross.

Dickinson concludes that ‘there are many indications in the limestone-outcrop and drumlin-

dominated landscape around Great and Little Urswick of the outer boundaries and core

enclosure (inner precinct), of a large monastic complex.’ The area enclosed by these outer

boundaries is ‘inferred’ as approximately 180-200 hectares. The core enclosure (inner

precinct) is roughly rectangular, is some 8 hectares in extent and ‘appears as a distinctive

feature on the 1850 Ordnance Survey map’. He suggests that whilst it would be unwise to

attempt to unravel the complexities of what is patently a large, multi-phased site, ‘there is

sufficient archaeological evidence present to permit comparisons of aspects of the core of

the site to other key Northern British monastic foundations’ (he provides diagrams of the

25

inferred boundaries of Iona and of Lindisfarne alongside that of Great Urswick). He then

states, importantly in the interests of dating the origins of the site that ‘the position of the

early church, near the centre of each enclosure should be noted, (that at Great Urswick,

east of centre, implies an earlier foundation, which, with topographical restrictions, affected

what we might describe as an Iona-inspired inner precinct layout)’ (page 26).

Returning to the dedication on the cross and the figures depicted together with the ‘names’

Dickinson identifies Tunwini with ‘Trumwin/i(e)’, bishop of Abercorn and the Picts from

681-5 AD who died in 704 AD. He was consecrated by the then Archbishop of Canterbury,

Theodore of Tarsus (602-690 AD) who had been sent to Britain to try to unify the Roman

and Celtic Churches. Dickinson suggests that this is in fact our ‘Torotheo’ and a prime

candidate for the figure on the right of the panel. For the other figure, ‘Luibe’ he can find no

trace but suggests that both ‘Luighbe’ and ‘Luigne’ appear in Adomnan’s Life of St.

Columba, he states, ‘more correctly, they seemingly appear as two pairs of kinsmen’. Luigne

was the prior of a monastery in his old age ‘in the island of Elen. It is suggested that Luigne

and L*u*l are one and the same person!

He therefore concludes (or suggests strongly the scenario) that the original cross and its

memorial inscription were commissioned by Luigne in anticipation of his and Theodore’s

deaths. It was presumably only part-finished when Luigne died, and Trumwini, evicted by

the Picts from Abercorn, arrived and arranged for its completion in 690 AD, or shortly

thereafter’ (page 40).

It is suggested by Mr. Dickinson that as part of his mission to unify the Church after the

disaster of the Synod of Whitby in 664 AD, Theodore ‘visited every part of the island where

the English people lived’ (Bede), that he met with Luigne, then probably around 75-80 years

old. He states that ‘we can guess that the two men had much to talk about. Their meeting

and discussion is arguably the event commemorated on the Great Urswick cross,

commissioned by Luigne in memory of Theodore; and the artist has given them both Irish

tonsures. This graphic statement underscores the fact that feelings were still running high

some six or seven years after the meeting.’ (page 42)

Before we turn to our second ‘witness in stone’ it might be worth drawing out the

conclusions made by J. Michael Green in 1993 in his book ‘The Forgotten Celtic Saints’. He

suggests that Chad, Bishop of York from 664 AD and later of Lichfield from 669 AD, spent

those years between in the main re-tracing the missionary steps of St. Aiden and St. Oswald,

starting from Whalley abbey in Lancashire where Bishop Tuda of Lindisfarne, his Iona

contemporary, was buried having succumbed to the plague. Green describes Chad’s journey

with companion monks from Lancaster northwards in about 668 and across to Furness. He

states that ‘on the peninsula of Furness, churches were established at Broughton-in-Furness

(Borch), Bolton chapel at Bolton Heads (Bodettun) located to the south of Great Urswick and

26

the areas of Marton (Meretun) near Ireleth, and Newton (near the site of the Furness Abbey

of the future)’. He goes on to suggest that ‘it is possible that other churches on Furness

were established at this time, the most likely being Ulverston, Great Urswick, Aldingham

and Kirkby Ireleth, the last two being dedicated to St. Cuthbert when he was given the area

of Cartmel (Chercebi) together with ‘all the Britons in it’ by King Egfrid of Northumbria in

675’. It is perhaps a little surprising that this important event was not recorded in stone at

the time!

One other concept worthy of mention here in relation to actual church buildings, is that of

the church’s dedication as St. Mary in the Field. One of Archbishop Theodore’s boldest

concessions was to give permission for clergy to celebrate the sacraments ‘in the field’, that

is in places where there was a growing local community but as yet no church building,

perhaps a standing cross as the focus and gathering point for the worshippers in the

meantime. Could that have been the case at Urswick?

Whilst there was clearly a Christian presence at Urswick and across Low Furness in the late

7th and early 8th century it is still possible that the church building, especially the permanent

stone building, came later. We shall need to look at the fabric of the church with Mr.

Dickinson and others to look for Anglo-Saxon features (we are unlikely to find Celtic features

because they weren’t the slightest bit interested in permanent buildings or artefacts which

could be considered idolatrous). All writers, including Bulmer writing in about 1910, agree

that the church ‘is of very ancient origin, and was in existence in 1127’; he continues that

‘local tradition asserts that the body of the church was built about the year 900.’ (page 414).

When Collingwood reported on the discovery of ‘a pre-Norman Cross-shaft from Urswick’ in

1909 he stated that until quite recently no distinctive relics of the Viking age had been

found in Furness. In 1902 attention had been drawn to the Pennington tympanum with its

12th century runes and then early in 1902 the ‘Rampside Sword’ had been discovered in the

church yard. This cross-shaft fragment with ‘ornament of Anglo-Scandinavian type’ was the

first of its kind found in Lancashire North-of-the-Sands. It had been discovered in the north

chancel wall when a space was being made for a recess for the organ; it had been used as a

‘through’ and unfortunately split to fit.

However, the piece was made of rather soft, red St. Bees sandstone and was part of the

upper part of the shaft and neck of a wheel-headed cross; it provided sufficient size and

shape to allow Collingwood to work out the approximate shape and size of the head. He

suggested that the ornamentation of the upper member of the front panel was a well-

known Scandinavian ring-knot ‘characteristic of tenth century crosses’ a style of execution

often seen in crosses of the Danish or Norse period. He continued by stating that the

thickness and height of the shaft were suggested by the fragment of pattern still seen on

one edge and this gave a “Stafford knot” in its simplest arrangement. His conclusion was

27

that ‘a cross of this type, with a wheel-head and interlacing partly composed of rings, and

executed with the pick as well as the chisel, belongs to a series well known throughout the

north of England, and dated in Yorkshire to about the middle part of the tenth century’, but,

he suggested, since the Stafford knot pattern connects this example with West Cumberland,

and especially with the Beckermet St. John’s crosses, ‘we may perhaps place the Urswick

stone in the later half of the tenth century’.

He said that it was obvious that there was ‘already at that time a church at Urswick (the

Tunwini cross fragment hadn’t been discovered by this time), and we may be tempted to

make a further inference’. He felt that since small points were found in the cross in which

the Urswick stone is akin rather to the West Cumberland than to the Lancashire crosses.

This suggested that the christianised Viking colony in Furness in the second half of the tenth

century was a little closer in touch with Cumberland than with the people across the Sands.

He also reported that other carved stones were found in the course of the work at the

church, including large fragments of one or more grave slabs; ‘but none of these bear pre-

Norman ornament’.

28

Collingwood produced a full-sized illustration of the cross which still hangs at the back of the

church next to the font. Bailey and Cramp in 1988 dated this cross fragment as being ‘tenth

to eleventh century’.

Dickinson comments helpfully that this was a period of settlement rather than raiding, and

that most of these settlers would have come from Ireland, the Isle of Man and Western

Scotland and were generally called Norse-Irish, second or third generation Scandinavians.

Revd. T.N. Postlethwaite, Vicar of Urswick, in an address to a group of local Antiquarians in

1923, told them that traditionally it was believed that the church was already two or three

hundred years old when the monks moved to begin work on Furness Abbey in 1127 AD and

that ‘the fragments of the pre-Norman crosses show that in this case it is not misleading’.

He said that in all probability Urswick and Dalton church (which had been rebuilt) were the

only places of worship in the neighbourhood at the time. It was quite possible that there

was no other church nearer than Kirkby. That is to rush ahead a little too far into the

Norman era.

David Hill in his ‘Atlas of Anglo-Saxon England’ (reprinted in 1992) shows only Kirkby Ireleth

as serving the whole of Low Furness as a ‘minster church’, that is with a group of clergy (or

29

possibly monks) being dispatched across the area; Urswick is identified as a place with a

stone cross and sculpture but not necessarily with its own church (although all else seems to

suggest at least a small ‘local’ church there). It says something about the rise and fall of

churches as a result of invasion and migrations over the years and we know for a fact that

the Danish invasions across the country caused massive dislocation of the ecclesiastical and

administrative system for a long time. Postlethwaite writes that the ‘Northmen’ came to this

particular district in considerable numbers, ‘and there is little trace of Christianity before the

Norman Conquest in 1066’. Yet at Urswick, as we know there was clear evidence of a

continued Christian focus.

Stockdale informs us that Halfden, a Danish chief, having conquered the kingdom of

Northumberland, which then extended over Cumberland, Westmorland, Lancashire,

Yorkshire, Northumberland and Durham, bestowed the lands on his followers, ‘and very

probably granted Cartmel, which Egfrid had given to St. Cuthbert, to one of them’ That the

Danes held Cartmel district in 876, he says, was pretty clear from the number of Danish

coins found at Castlehead; one of these with the inscription HAFDE REX on the front and

MONNE on the reverse was in his possession at the time of writing. This suggests

occupation from the east and settlement from the west over a period of time.

In 1033 AD the second Jarl (Earl) Ulfr, a commander, chief governor and land owner in North

Lonsdale, had letters patent granted to him by King Canute. His jurisdiction extended in the

north over the original honor of Egremont and the ancient lordships of Cartmel and Furness.

Stockdale says there could be little doubt that Ulverstone took its name from the first Jarl

(Earl) Ulfr- Ulf or Ulfr being a Scandinavian proper name meaning the Wolf. Ulverston is

therefore Ulf’s Town- Ulfr’s Town- or ‘as pillars or stones anciently were set up to show

boundaries and to mark possessions, it may be Ulf’s-stone or Ulfr-stone.’ Urswick’s Norse

Cross could well date from this period.

Continuing the clues given by names Bulmer says of ‘Urswick’ that it probably came from

‘Urse-wick’ (the village of Urse), a Saxon or Norse proper name. Canon Ayre in his ‘History of

Urswick and its Church’ published in 1897 refers to Dr. Barber’s ‘Furness and Cartmel Notes’

in which it was suggested that Urswick could have derived from the Norse Hgjostr, meaning

a barren place, or from the Frisian Hoerst, a wild rough place near a bush or a swamp, with

the addition of vic, a village or town. Without wishing to rush ahead it’s better to continue

this thought a little longer because in the Domesday Book the name Chiluestrevic is thought

to represent it and again Dr. Barber suggests that this is a contraction of Mikill-hrjostr-vik

and that then becomes the modern designation of Mickle, or Much, Urswick.

Having established as far as one is able that the Christian presence was retained during

many years, probably at least from the time of the Celtic evangelism of Aiden and Cuthbert,

and that a focus for worship existed at Urswick from early days, possibly out of doors

30

around a standing cross, it might be helpful to some of our readers at least if we pause to

consider firstly what the Columban monastic Church was like in its beliefs and practices and

then to look briefly at how that changed after the Synod of Whitby in 664 AD bearing in

mind that the change from one to the other didn’t happen over night! It was more than 100

years before Iona finally adopted the ‘Roman’ Easter and practices.

What was the Columban church and community like?

Columba’s ‘rule’ (in both senses of the word) continued for well over 100 years after his

death, in fact considerably longer than that because it was not really overtaken fully until

the Benedictines took ascendancy in the 12th century. We must remember also that King

Oswald of Northumbria had been educated and converted at Iona and brought Iona’s

influence to Lindisfarne/ Northumbria via St. Aidan when he regained his kingdom. Egfrith,

King of Northumbria, at the time of St.Cuthbert also had earlier links with Iona.

Imagine if you will a community of considerable numbers who lived, worked, prayed and

slept in a collection of wooden huts and wattle and daub shelters. The church would

probably be of wood also, although at Urswick there is a possibility that it ‘bucked the trend’

and had a stone church from earlier times; that would be unusual and very significant. The

community would be surrounded by a rectangular vallum for protection (also indicating a

spiritual boundary). Some monks would live alone whilst others would live communally in

dormitories or similar. Around the central church would be the guest house, kitchen/

refectory, library/ scriptorium, barns for storing grain, and the smithy and workshops.

Beyond the vallum would be large areas of fields where the community farmed, kept cattle

and sheep, grew crops and hewed wood.

The community would have been divided into three main groups: seniores who would be

largely responsible for the services in church; working brothers who would do most of the

manual labour in the workshops and fields, and the juniores who were novices under

instruction. In addition to the resident community there would be students, pilgrims and a

steady flow of visitors, including other monks on pilgrimage and penitents seeking

atonement.

Bradley states that it would be that the ‘resident community of monks who constituted the

heart and soul of the monastery, their lives of self-mortification and daily offering of the

sacrifice of praise, provided its raison d’etre’. (Page 71) He also states that in common with

the inmates of most Irish monasteries the monks would have followed a lifestyle that was a

good deal more strict and austere than that pursued by those founded by St.Benedict and

his followers- by no means the whimsical and romantic picture of the Celtic Church often

depicted today!

31

It would be quite usual to have a combination of eremitical and cenobitic practices within

the same community, with solitary anchorites and married monks living alongside one

another, a feature of the balanced rhythm of life within the community as a whole. There

would be an emphasis upon study. A further significant feature would be the prominence of

the abbot as ‘ruler’ even over any bishops who were living in community.

Columba’s ‘rule’ prescribed three daily labours; reading, work and prayer. The rule divides

work into three parts also : ‘thine own work, and the work of thy place as regards its real

wants; secondly, thy share of the brethren’s work; and lastly, to help thy neighbours, viz. by

instruction, or writing, or sewing garments or whatever they may be in want of’ (Bradley

page 73). The third daily work, of prayer and devotion, occupied the largest part of the

‘rule’.

Prayer, both individual and corporate, was at the heart of the community’s life; the monks

would spend long spells in solitary prayer in their cells; at set times during the day and night

the bell would summon them to church to recite Divine Office (largely the Psalms).The

Psalms played a large part in the devotional life of the Columban Church- chanted, recited,

copied, studied and used heavily in prayer and poetry- and in its missionary work and

evangelism.

There were five canonical hours during the day- prime, terce, sext, nones and vespers and

at night there were three separate services- Ad initium noctis (at nightfall), Ad medium

noctis (at midnight) and Ad matutinam (very early in the morning towards daybreak). Mass

was celebrated on Sundays and Feast Days at sext, the midday service.

The main weekly celebration of the Eucharist would have happened in the church and

other services probably around the high crosses dotted around the community.

Bradley tells us that the Columban Church exemplified the principle of lex orandi, lex

credendi- a worshipping community which believed that God was to be found through

prayer and contemplation rather than through debating societies and arguments. Their

church was clearly centred on worship and the felt presence of God among them.

There was an emphasis upon pastoral care and practising the presence of God by their

availability to others, in a ministry of healing and reconciliation, of hospitality and welcome.

This pastoral care would have extended to the local community, another distinctive feature

of Columba’s monasteries and general to Irish monasticism. As recorded earlier there was a

strong and apparently harsh penitential discipline because penitence was linked to a

substantial healing and wholeness ministry. Bradley states that ‘sensitive pastors that they

were, Columba and his contemporaries combined prescription, instruction, advice and

empathy in seeking to cure sick souls’ (Page 83).

32

A final point to be made (and very important to understand) is that although they would

have practised the real presence of God they were not a fixed or static community, rather a

Church ‘on the move’ in outreach, in journeying, in peregrinate and pilgrimage to find that

‘place of resurrection’. The Columban Church had no interest in buildings as monuments or

in leaving their mark behind them; they were content to worship God wherever and

whenever!

I came across an extremely helpful and timely little book called ‘A Little History Of The

English Country Church’ by Roy Strong, first published in 2007. In it he reminds us that early

Christian worship centred on a shared communal meal, the agape, which would be followed

by the Eucharist (from the Greek for thanksgiving), the symbolic re-enactment of the Last

Supper. He shows how during the first centuries various forms of worship developed that

centred on the consecration of bread and wine followed by their distribution to the

congregation. By the fourth century two main rites for the Mass had emerged, the Roman

and the Gallican, both of course conducted in Latin. Strong states that ‘the Roman rite was

originally relatively simple and austere, while the Gallican rite was more sensuous, symbolic

and dramatic, celebrated with splendid ceremonial and an abundance of incense and

prayers’. What little we know of the rite of the Celtic church stemmed from the Gallican rite,

albeit with local variations, but in the aftermath of the Synod of Whitby it was the Roman

rite which prevailed in England.

Part of Archbishop Theodore’s brief when he arrived in 668 AD was to reconcile the Celtic

and Roman groups following the Synod of Whitby. In the case of the liturgy he made

concessions to the Celtic followers by accepting some of their liturgical practices and

integrating them into the Roman rite. Strong tells us that from the Celtic tradition came

many of the dramatic and symbolic ceremonies that punctuated the liturgical year. The

result was a mixed rite to which was added during the eleventh century the recitation of the

Creed and the offertory, or the bidding prayers, which were said in the vernacular. He

concluded by saying that ‘what eventually prevailed in the English country church became

known as the ‘Sarum rite’ which ‘brought together all these different elements and became

the standard throughout most of England. Its sense of drama and splendour differed greatly

from the simpler Roman rite and was to penetrate even the humblest of parish churches.’

The concept of the ‘local’ church was very much the focus of the beginning of the second

millennium and heralded what was termed the ‘Great Rebuilding’ when during the period

between 1050 and 1150 considerable numbers of churches were built and the concept of

church as a fixed building was clearly established. The earlier Anglo-Saxon ‘minster model’ in

which kings founded churches (or monasteries) that accommodated communities of monks,

nuns or priests who served an extensive outlying area, interestingly survived both the Viking

and the Norman invasions, but then as Strong puts it ‘went into eclipse as local churches

multiplied in response to the emergence of both self-contained manors presided over by

33

thegns and by the village as a new rural social unit’ (page 20). We shall come back to that

shortly.

So let us return to our ‘local church’ and take a closer look at the fabric of the building

before the coming of the Normans and the Conquest in 1066.

One of the strongest pieces of evidence for the existence of the church building before the

coming of the Normans is that there is no evidence of any Norman architecture in the

building! Reverend Postlethwaite suggested, however, that the Porch could be of ‘very early

Norman work’.

Local history owes a great date to ‘Parson’ T.N. Postlethwaite not only for the reordering

and refurbishments of the church building during his term of office at Urswick in the early

part of the twentieth century but also for the written material he left behind. In his address

to the Cumberland and Westmorland Antiquities and Archaeological Society on September

5th 1923 he stated:

‘I think - I will not say the original- but a very early church covered the area that now forms

the nave. Outside can be seen in both the N. And S. Walls a series of arch-holes at about two

thirds the height of the present walls. I am inclined to think that they supported light

timbers which carried a steep-possibly reed- roof. Later the walls were heightened at

presumably two different periods and windows inserted. The masonry below the arch-holes

is of a very rude character. The walls of the chancel and porch are not bonded into the nave,

thus postulating additions’.

Dickinson was rather dismissive of Postlethwaite’s description of the ‘arch-holes’ and their

assumed function and stated instead that ‘the regularity of these holes, both in terms of

their height above the ground, and the distance between them, led to a suspicion that

Postlethwaite’s use of the term arch-holes had more to it than a mere description of timber

supports. Careful examination in conditions of sharply angled evening and early morning

sunlight revealed that the majority of the putlog holes were inserted into the blocking

masonry of preceding, small round-headed windows.

He suggested that preliminary sketches of the fabric revealed clear sequences of built-lines

below, up to, and including, the in-filled round-headed windows. ‘These sketches’, he

continued, ‘also indicate the potential positions of access points to an earlier structure or

structures.’ The nave has a north door ‘sited in a singularly unusual location around the mid-

point’, with traces of an in-filled door head above it. He declared that ‘we could state that

the nave’s in-filled small, round-headed windows are similar to complete examples from

Anglo-Saxon churches elsewhere. But, at this stage, this doesn’t actually help us in our

understanding of the complex evolution of the nave and chancel arch wall fabric’.

34

Further close examination by Dickinson of the wall above the present chancel arch revealed

a ‘fascinating study in the evolution of what we may suggest are the earliest churches at

Urswick.’ There are two previous chancel arches and indications that the nave north wall

had been shifted northwards. ‘Perhaps most interesting of all is the extremely steep roof

pitch indicated between the masonry of phases 1a and 2a’.

Turning to examine the fabric of the wall separating the nave from the tower indicated that

there had been substantial alterations in that area. In relation to the western tower itself

Dickinson agreed with Postlethwaite’s statement in 1923 that it was an addition and

originally low and ‘saddle-backed’. In his booklet ‘Some Notes On Urswick Church and

Parish’ published in 1906 Postlethwaite stated that there was ‘little reason to doubt that its

four main walls and the lower portion of the tower are part of the original building’; by 1923

he had had conversations with Collingwood and others having discovered the cross

fragments and undertaken other work within the church and had obviously modified his

view on the sequence of building development.

35

His final comment in relation to ‘indications that the chancel arch was pierced in an existing

wall or heightened from an existing apse’ provides a further clue to the suspicion that the

‘first’ church building was rectangular and simply made (it is more than likely that an even

earlier wooden, single-cell church could be under the floor of the nave if the early

foundation has any truth in it).

Roy Strong tells us that Northumbrian churches built in the Celtic tradition had standing

crosses outside and inside the building itself a narrow nave and small square chancel with a

single arch. If there is evidence, as both Postlethwaite and Dickinson suggest, of the chancel

arch being pierced in an existing wall or heightened from an existing apse then perhaps we

should consider either the basilica-type of church introduced by Augustine and widely

adopted in early stone church buildings (the basilica consisted of a rectangular nave, which

accommodated the congregation, and a semi-circular apse, or chancel, for the altar) or the

later ninth or early tenth century Romanesque style of building in which the apse

disappeared in favour of a rectangular chancel with a large east window; chances are we are

seeing the development from one style to the other at Urswick. During the period of ‘Great

Rebuilding’ many of the churches were built in the Romanesque style but by then towers

became widespread, too.

Readers will recall Dickinson’s observation that the nave had been extended to the north;

Pevsner commented that the ‘nave and chancel is one and the tower as broad as both’

which suggests that the tower at the west end was not part of the original build (Pevsner

suggested that it ‘gives the impression of belonging to the 13th century, except for the Perp

upper stage’). Mr Pollitt, the church’s PCC Secretary, in his guide to ‘The Parish Church Of

St. Mary and St. Michael’ produced in 1977 said of the Tower that it was ‘probably an

addition to the original church; the lower part is probably pre-Norman and initially it would

be low and squat and it may have been saddle-backed. The tower walls are very thick and it

has been suggested that it may have been a form of Pele tower used to protect the local

settlers and their animals from marauders.’Could the Anglo-Saxon windows have been filled

in at the same time?

Dickinson writes that ‘around 1000 AD the land we now know as Cumbria was populated by

folk from Gaelic Scotland and Ireland, Scandinavia, Anglo-Saxons from the south and east,

and, last but not least, Cumbrian and Scottish (Strathclyde) Britons’ and it would appear that

largely they managed to co-exist. Things were soon to change again...........

36

Chapter Two: Casting Around The Bay

Whilst it has not been possible to date to discover the original founders of the Christian

community at Urswick, obviously such a significant development would not have been an

isolated settlement for long; a wider exploration is called for, which again because of the

remoteness of Urswick overland, suggests a journey ‘oversands’ or across the relatively

short distance of about 12 miles across Morecambe Bay by shallow boat to Heysham.

Why Heysham?

Because it is widely acknowledged that an early Celtic Christian community was established

on the headland at Heysham, a foundation associated with St. Patrick and with striking

similarities to the Celtic Church in Ireland at the time. The site has been subject to

archaeological examination on more than one occasion, so there is ‘hard evidence’ to work

with.

The journey will then follow the coastline northwards for about 15 miles to Heversham

where according to Bede a significant Anglian monastic community was established by

about 730AD. There is speculation that an earlier Celtic Irish foundation existed at

Heversham. Roger Bingham, a local author writing in 1983 says that ‘although some of the

Roman soldiers tramping along the military road that ran through Hincaster to Watercrook

would have been Christian, Heversham was evangelised by missionaries from the Celtic

Church of Ireland. They like the Angle immigrants made their way in and out of the estuaries

and bays of the northwest coast during the fifth and sixth centuries. Indeed, if the legend

concerning St.Patrick’s foundation of Heysham Church, fifteen miles down the Bay, has a

factual basis then local Christianity might have been a continuous history from the late

Roman period.’

37

Again, whilst there is ‘evidence in stone’ of the Anglian community at Heversham, its

foundation and earlier existence has not been investigated in any serious way. This provides

a wonderful opportunity to ‘test’ the Celtic Irish model which existed on Iona and was

transferred first to Lindisfarne and then more widely, perhaps to Urswick. Could we find

similar material in the landscape at Heversham?

The research at Heversham might possibly expand our search to the north along the west

Cumbrian coast and south towards the River Ribble to examine wider evidence. The whole

project has to be set against the general background of the rise of the kingdom of

Northumbria and the evangelism and Christian conversion of much of the kingdom in the 7th

and 8th century, a time of huge change for the wider Church; it also has to include the

picture of wider immigration first by the Angles and later on by the Irish Norse in the tenth

century.

It is perhaps helpful to state that the recognised southern boundaries of Northumbria were

marked by the Humber and the Ribble rivers. The modern historian Marjorie Chibnall has

described Northumbria as historically ‘resolutely separatist’ and as a ‘sturdily independent

region’; this was in part perhaps because of the intermediary geographic position it

occupied between England and Scotland and the resulting devastation the Northumbrians

had encountered by both English and Scottish invasions.

St. Cuthbert was seen as a unifying symbol of the region, more so because a great deal of

land and territory was given to the community of monks who had Cuthbert as their patron

saint by King Aethelstan and others, and these land holdings came to be known as the

Patrimony of St.Cuthbert. By the early twelfth century those who lived on ‘St.Cuthbert’s

land’ were identified as Haliwerfolc, or ‘people of the saint’. The Haliwerfolc were rather

disparate peoples, ‘not necessarily bonded by ethnicity or politics, but by the unifying factor

of their lives which was the shrine and land of St. Cuthbert. This provided them with a

tremendous sense of cohesion and identity’.

The coming of the Normans and the redistribution of the lands is an appropriate place to

conclude the wider study because it was about then that the Celtic monastic Church as we

understand it was absorbed and/or marginalised further by the revival and rapid growth of

the Benedictine monasteries and a period of ‘grand’ church building begun.

Heysham, Lancashire

Farrer and Brownbill writing in 1914 describe Heysham as containing ‘but a single township,

which has from ancient times contained the two hamlets or manors of Higher and Lower

Heysham. These hamlets are situated on the rocky hill which was probably in former times

the only habitable part of the parish, being mostly over 50ft. above sea level and rising at

several points to 100ft. The place must have been almost isolated. To north, east and south

38

the surface falls away to the low-lying lands of Poulton, Heaton and Middleton, much of this

tract being moss, described as a ‘spongy flat’ in 1820. On the west the hill-side, here well

covered with trees, falls sharply from one of its highest points down to the Irish Sea. On the

edge of the cliff, some 40 or 50ft. above sea level, at a point where the coast makes a sharp

turn to the east for a little space, stand the ruins of St. Patrick’s Chapel.’

They continue in relation to the building itself by stating that ‘the building is unlike the usual

Saxon type of church both in plan and detail, and suggests a Celtic influence in keeping with

its traditional dedication, but no suggestion as to the exact date of its erection can be

offered.’

Jane Sterling (1974) states that enough of the ruined chapel remains to show that it was

built in the Saxon style, and that ‘it is unique in England (except in Cornwall) as a single-

celled chapel but it is very similar, both in structure and position, to many of the tiny Irish

churches which are now in a similarly ruinous condition.’ (page 6)

Fishwick (1894) is of interest because although he ‘dates’ the hogback stone found in the

graveyard as ‘of great antiquity, and probably belongs to the sixth or seventh century’ (since

proven to be late 10th century) he describes the chapel: ‘the original church which was only

twenty-four feet long and seven and a half feet wide was dedicated to St. Patrick and has,

on that account, been thought to have been established by a colony of Irish monks who,

about that period, are said to have visited this district’.

St .Patrick’s Chapel was excavated in 1977-78 and it was found that there had been a

smaller and earlier building on the site, with walls covered in plaster inside and probably

with texts and paintings on them. Dr. White (2003) says that ‘it seems that the smaller

chapel may date from the eighth century’. He also comments that five out of six of the

stone-cut graves have separate sockets cut out above the head end, ‘almost certainly for a

marker such as a cross. In addition part of a large socket is visible partly under the east wall

of the chapel.’

Kenyon (1991) says that it is possible that Heysham was, in fact a ‘much earlier foundation

than Lancaster, established on an early Christian site. The ‘Birds Head’ stone (found during

the 1977-78 excavations) appears to be the arm of a throne, perhaps the cathedra used by

an eighth or ninth century bishop’ (page 103). White suggests that the carved head is in a

style reminiscent of the Lindisfarne Gospels.

In his attempted interpretation White dismisses any connection between the stone building

and the historic St.Patrick who lived during the 4th century; he also suggests that paired

ancient churches are sometimes monastic. The rock-cut graves cannot be directly dated but

‘could well be the earliest feature on the site’. The socket under the chapel east wall could

be for a large cross, or even a memoria representing the burial place of the saint. He

39

suggests that ‘this might explain why the graves are cut into the rock nearby, since sharing a

saint’s burial place could help ease the passage into heaven’

The coming of the Celto-Norse from the Isle of Man and from Ireland in about 950 is noted

by the discovery of the beautifully carved hogback stone placed over a grave in an area

beneath St.Patrick’s Oratory/ Chapel and that at about the same time ‘there was an

increasing demand for important people to be buried near the Oratory, and to be

remembered in it. This led to an extension of the Oratory (Phase 2)’. The land alongside was

divided into successive small graveyards with enclosing walls, for leading families, ‘Angle

and Celto-Norse’.

Fortunately there is more archaeological evidence provided by Newman (1996) from the

University of Lancaster Archaeological Unit. Her observations are very helpful: ‘This site is

unique in that it is also the only such of the period in the county to be subject to modern

archeological excavation. The fabric of both church and chapel has been dated to the late

eighth century; this apparent contemporaneity can be paralleled elsewhere, particularly at

monastic sites, such as Jarrow’ (page 99). She refers to the ‘bird’s head carved stone’ which

was discovered in 1994 which has also been ascribed an eighth century date; she states that

‘it bears marked similarities to pieces that have been interpreted as the arms of massive

ceremonial chairs, such as bishops’ cathedras and abbots’ seats’.‘The evidence’, she

suggests, is therefore amassing for a monastic site at Heysham, subsequently substantially

refurbished and extended, the eastern extension covering the base of a cross, before the

cemetery fell out of use, which on the basis of radiocarbon dates from the burials appears

to have been by the twelfth century’ (page 100). In conclusion she says that the relationship

between St. Patrick’s and St. Peter’s is a matter of debate, ‘but it seems highly likely that a

site existed here, St. Peter’s perhaps forming the monastic church with St. Patrick’s acting as

a cemetery chapel’.

If this can be accepted, and also a monastic function for the religious site at Lancaster, as

well perhaps at Halton, then there is clearly something very unusual happening in the lower

reaches of the Lune Valley.

It was also noted that ‘Heysham, Halton and Lancaster have produced fine examples of both

Anglo-Saxon and Scandinavian styles (of stone sculptures) which suggest the foundation of

all three sites by the eighth century and their continuous use at least into the tenth century.

Lancaster’s stone sculptures were considered unusual in that several of the surviving

fragments had evidence of inscriptions on them; this is generally taken to indicate a

monastic presence.

The discovery of a hoard of stycas, ninth century Northumbrian coins, in Vicarage Field in

Lancaster suggested activity around the church at this time, ‘which would be expected

40

given the relatively large number of crosses here’ (page 103) and the likely source of its

foundation as a monastery

Undoubtedly the Heysham headland continued to be a very important site over many

centuries but perhaps there are two important issues to be clarified here before one begins

to look further afield for the expansion of the early mission and the significance of particular

places. One is the nature of Irish monasticism and mission and the mixed motives of the

Celtic monks in setting out, and the other is the whole concept of continuity of place. It

would also be helpful to look more closely at the importance and the continuous use of

graveyards (as has already been seen in relation to Heysham).

Many of the early Irish Celtic monks made incredible journeys, trusting God to lead them

and to keep them safe as they wandered; they sought out wild and remote places, coastal

places, islands and islets, and by their distinctive spirituality, their very presence and

personal holiness they impacted those places deeply. Some drew others to them and

around them, and spiritual centres grew up. Some chose the solitary life. The monks

understood the basic rhythm of the Christian life and the need to balance activity in the

world with withdrawal from it. The ideal of peregrination involved a certain degree of exile,

renunciation and searching for one’s own desert place of resurrection but there was also for

many the passion for the gospel which drove them to evangelise and to build other spiritual

communities.

Heysham certainly fits the requirements for a remote place and of course would be

accessible by sea; its location suggests its use perhaps as an ancient pagan religious site long

before the arrival of the Irish monks whether at the time of St. Patrick or later and this ties

in with ‘continuity of place’.

Sheldrake (1995) states that Celtic Christians were as concerned as their ancestors about

the issue of the sacred landscape and about good and evil places; they accepted that two

worlds came together at certain familiar places in the landscape, ‘boundary places’ where

heaven appeared to meet earth. Sometimes they were associated with traditional sacred

places such as woodlands or wells or tribal burial centres- obvious boundary places,

doorways into the spiritual world. He says that ‘in search for holiness and spiritual

experience there was a creative tension between desire for seclusion and the wish to be

accessible and open. This was apparent not least in ‘the extraordinary continuities of

ancient holy places in people’s consciousness and religious behaviour’. He goes on to show

that the spirituality of Celtic Christianity, inherited from its pre-Christian origins, included an

extraordinary sense that the ‘other world’ of saints, the dead, angels, demons, and God, was

close at hand and that the boundaries between this material world and that other world

were all around people. This resonated with pagan ‘ancestor worship’ and the Celtic belief

41

that the souls of the departed inhabited the living which Sheldrake suggests was absorbed

into early Christian belief.

To return briefly to Sheldrake’s ‘extraordinary continuities’ above it is clear from a wealth of

archaeological evidence that many ancient churches are built on the same site of former

religious sites or ancient burial sites; this is also apparent in Ireland. Again it is Sheldrake

who explains that the 13th century Benedictine Abbey on Iona was built precisely over the

ruins and foundations of St. Columba’s original abbey, thus taking the power and spiritual

authority of that saint for itself. That continuity was not uncommon.

Nearer to home, the church at Urswick on the Furness Peninsula is aligned strictly east-west

even to the point of some cosmetic ‘straightening out’ inside ( the tower internally is out of

line by 8 degrees but the outside building line is straight)!

Particular locations were considered to have a special quality (like Iona) or to be especially

sacred because of their associations. It was common for the Celts to mark these special

boundaries in a tangible way, often with standing crosses. The site at Heysham would not

have been chosen at random by the Celtic monks.

Concluding her comments in relation to Heysham and its links to the Patrician church,

Sterling reminds us of ‘another legend of a very early chapel, built like St. Patrick’s very close

to the sea, is that of Kilgromal. An oratory of Kilgromal (local spelling also includes

‘Kelgrymole’ and ‘Kilgrtmol’) is mentioned in a deed connected with the Norman foundation

of Lytham Priory. According to the story the chapel, which lay between the present day

holiday towns of Blackpool and St. Annes, was washed away by high tides during a violent

storm.’ (page 7).

Was this, then, further evidence that the Irish monks who came to these shores came first

to establish a monastery and then to set out to convert the region? Or could it be that the

developments of the Northumbrian Kingdom and the conversion of King Edwin gave a fresh

impetus to those who had begun the work in the time of King Aethelfrith?

Hyslop-Smith (1999) introduces his description of ‘Christianity in England from the Late Sixth

Century to 664’ like this: ‘It is easy to lose sight of the wood for the trees in recounting the

history of Christianity in the hundred years or so after the arrival of St. Augustine in 597. The

rush of exuberating events is of crucial importance, and these included not only the

activities of St. Augustine and his companions, St. Aidan and his fellow Irish missionaries,

and a host of other outstanding Christians whom we will meet in this chapter, but the tangle

of political affairs in the various kingdoms of the land.’

Sterling refers the reader to the books of Bede for more definite evidence of the conversion

of Lancashire; Bede records how after King Aethelfrith of Northumbria had been killed in

42

battle his sons were sent for refuge to the community of Irish Christian monks on Iona

where St. Columba had founded a monastery in about 563. It was Aethelfrith who between

613 and 616 attacked and defeated the Britons at Chester.

Stenton (1946) writes that ‘it is usually regarded as the event which brought the English to

the shore of the Irish Sea, and separated the Britons of Wales from their compatriots in the

north’ (page 78). He continues: ‘There is no direct evidence as to the date at which the

Bernicians reached the Cumbrian coast. But there are enough ancient place-names in

Cumberland and Lancashire to suggest that Athelfrith could have ridden from the Solway to

the Mersey through territory in the occupation of his own people,’

Rollinson writing in 1996 states that the colonisation movement accelerated dramatically,

and by the end of the seventh century it seems that most of Cumbria was in Anglian hands.

He observes that ‘it is interesting to reflect that whereas the name Cumberland has its

origins in the Celtic word Cymry, Westmorland is derived from the Anglian

Westmaringaland, ‘the land of the Western border’, appropriate enough if one considers

the Northumbrian point of view’ (page 34)

Bede records, importantly, that following the appointment of Aidan to the See of Lindisfarne

in 635 ‘henceforth many Irishmen arrived day by day in Britain and proclaimed the word of

God with great devotion in all the provinces under Oswald’s rule’ (page 147). He also notes

that ‘most of those who came to preach were monks’. The southern Picts had been

converted by St. Ninian who had a monastic community at Whithorn which was then in the

kingdom of Bernicia. Oswald ‘through diplomacy’ (Bede) brought Deira and Bernicia and

Elmet together peacefully and they ‘became one people’. J. Michael Green (1993) reminds

us helpfully that in 636 the southern boundary of Northumbria stretched from the River

Mersey south of Manchester across the country through Huddersfield, Dewsbury, Castleford

and Pontefract to Ferrybridge. Here it took the line of the River Aire and included all the

land north of the River Humber.

Without wishing to repeat earlier material, Green shows how extensively Oswald and Aidan

evangelised Northumbria, including the setting up of a monastery at Whalley, not far from

Roman Ribchester. He describes it as an ‘Anglian Celtic Christian monastery’ with a stone

church. It is likely that the area was already Christian and had a small wooden church. Green

suggests that it could have been evangelised by St. Kentigern or ‘could have come under the

influence of St. Patrick’ (page 49), making an important link with Heysham. It was at Whalley

that Bishop Tuda was buried in 664 having succumbed to the plague; that, too, has

significance for this particular study because it introduces St. Chad, bishop to the West

Saxons, to the ‘mix’ in what is now Lancashire and South Cumbria, (then Amounderness and

Furtherness).

43

Green states that’ whilst Chad and his companions were to establish many new churches in

Amounderness there were many Christian churches already in existence, most bearing the

prefix ‘kil’. Since Bronze Age times trade links with Ireland had existed in the area; indeed,

the ancient trade route has been identified from the estuary of the River Ribble on the west

coast to the River Humber on the east. It is likely that some of these churches were founded

by evangelical Culdee monks from Ireland, inspired by St. Patrick (Heysham), St. Ninian and

St. Kentigern all known to have been in the area’ (page 127).

It could be of significance here to note that King Oswy of Northumbria was a witness to the

Charter in 656 which established the monastery and its lands at Medeshamstede (modern

Peterborough) along with Bishop Tuda of Lindisfarne and Bishop Wilfred of Ripon and some

Earldormen and other noblemen. Oswy was described as ‘friend of this minster and of

Abbot Sexwulf’, which suggests that he, too, gave land to the monastery. This Charter was

upheld and further gifts of land made in 675 by King Aethelred of Mercia.This could have

significance for the original interpretation of the Anglian runes at Urswick in which Torhtred,

martyred near to Medeshamstede in the 9th century, was commemorated by Trumwini;

perhaps these were lands also belonging to Medeshamstede and a monastic ‘outpost’ there

at Urswick.

On the death of Aidan in 651 Finan, one of the Irish monks who had accompanied Aiden

from Iona, succeeded him as bishop of Lindisfarne and he continued the missionary

activities of Aidan and extended them into other English kingdoms during his 10 years in

office. Finan was succeeded in 661 by Colman, another abbot/bishop from Iona under

whom ‘an even more serious controversy arose about Easter and also about other rules of

Church discipline’ and this dispute led to the Synod of Whitby in 664.

It is of interest to this particular study to note Bede’s comments about Colman, that ‘so

frugal and austere were Colman and his predecessors that when they left the seat of their

authority there were very few buildings except the church (which was constructed of ‘hewn

oak and thatched with reeds after the Irish manner’); indeed, no more than met the bare

requirements of a seemly way of life... for in those days the sole concern of these teachers

was to serve God, not the world; to satisfy the soul, not the belly’ (page 194)

Rollinson, in searching for archaeological evidence, notes that the absence of pagan Anglian

burial grounds in Cumberland and Westmorland points to the fact that by the time they

made their treck across the Pennines they had become Christian converts. He points to

several fine examples of early Anglian sculptured stone crosses which still survive; with the

exception of these, he says, very few Anglian artefacts have been unearthed in Cumberland

or Westmorland, and that so far no Anglian houses or halls have been positively identified.

The year 664 is highly significant to the development of the English Church for several

reasons. As we have seen, the Synod of Whitby led to the ascendancy of the ‘Roman’ church

44

practices at the expense of the ‘Celtic’ church; evangelism was stalled somewhat because a

number of Irish bishops, monks and their English supporters removed themselves back to

Iona or to Ireland rather than accept the Roman practices.

Another significant factor, perhaps less commonly recognised, was that a sudden plague

which according to Bede, ‘decimated the southern parts of Britain and later spread into the

provinces of the Northumbrians, raged for a long time and brought widespread death to

many people.’(page 194) It was equally destructive in Ireland. As indicated above, Bishop

Tuda succumbed to the plague and was buried at the monastery at Whalley. Bede records

that as a result of Tuda’s passing Wilfred was sent abroad to be consecrated bishop to serve

in Northumbria, and also that King Oswy, ‘following his son’s example, sent to Canterbury to

be consecrated Bishop of York, a holy man, modest in his ways, learned in the Scriptures,

and careful to practise all that he found in them. This was a priest named Chad, a brother of

the above-mentioned most reverend Bishop Cedd, and at the time Abbot of Lastingham’

(page 197).

Bede also notes that ‘after the example of the Apostles, he travelled on foot and not on

horseback when he went to preach the Gospel, whether in towns or country, in cottages,

villages or strongholds; for he was one of Aidan’s disciples and always sought to instruct his

people by the same methods as Aidan and his own brother Cedd.’ (page 197).

J. Michael Green (1993) makes a case for Chad having spent a great deal of this ‘waiting

time’ to be admitted as Bishop of York, 664-667, moving around the Northumbrian

ecclesiastical areas of York and Durham. He then states, importantly, that ‘we also know

that he was in the north Lancashire part of King Oswy’s Northumbrian Kingdom, a large area

of which was later to be known as “Amounderness”.(page 117). Green also suggests that he

made several church dedications whilst travelling around “Furtherness” (Furness) during this

same period. The following extensive quote is made in order to clarify something of the

extent of Christian church activity along Morecambe Bay north of the River Lune and the

inferred mission of St. Chad to the area in about 667:

‘Travelling north on the Roman road they came to Lancaster, then a hamlet containing the

ruins of a Roman fort, in the manor of Halton. Fording the River Lune, Chad established the

church of Skerton and at a later date, it was dedicated to him. Whilst he was in the area he

would likely visit St. Patrick’s Church at Heysham. A Northumbrian Cross was later erected

to mark the event. Middleton Church (Middlettun) to the south of Heysham had recently

been hallowed. Meanwhile the evangelical party of monks had established churches at

Bolton-le-Sands (Bodeltone), this church was also re-dedicated to St.Wilfred in 712, and,

across the ford over the River Keer at Chrenforde (Carnforth) at Warton. Another at Priest

Hutton (Hotune) was hallowed and after visiting the Celtic Christian Monastery of

Heversham (Euresham) they travelled over the ancient track from Levens through

45

Witherslack to High Newton. Here a church was founded along with that of Field Broughton;

there is no supporting church in High Newton today. On the peninsula of Furness, churches

were established at Broughton-in-Furness (Borch), Bolton chapel at Bolton Heads

(Bodettun) located to the south of Great Urswick and the areas of Marton (Meretun) near

Ireleth and Newton (near the site of the Furness Abbey of the future). There are no

churches at either Marton or Newton today. It is possible that other churches on Furness

were established at the time, the most likely being Ulverston, Great Urswick, Aldingham and

Kirkby Ireleth, the last two being dedicated to St. Cuthbert when he was given the area of

Cartmel (Chercebi) by King Egfrid of Northumbria in 675. Cartmel (Kirkham) itself could have

been founded at this time. When he had finished his visit to St. Patrick’s chapel, he travelled

north on the Roman road to Warton. Here, in the Ancient-British area, with the bronze-age

fort on the crags behind overlooking it, Chad dedicated the church to St. Oswald.’ (Pages

142-143)

The above could cause some conflict with other ‘evidence’ gathered from other sources, but

it serves to further illustrate the range and extent of early Christian activity around

Morecambe Bay and the role of successive missionary groups of monks and bishops.

It is important to take note, though, that stone churches were beginning to replace the

simple, wooden structures.

It is perhaps worth recording that St. Cuthbert, bishop from 685 until 688, was very much of

the Celtic persuasion although he tried to uphold the Roman practices; his elevation to high

office has significance for us because it is recorded that in 685 King Ecgfrith of Northumbria

made grants of land to Cuthbert which included territory in Carlisle and Cartmel ‘together

with all its British inhabitants’. It would appear, said Rollinson, that ‘in some instances it

seems that the native people were regarded as chattels to be transferred with land at the

will of their Anglian master’. He also concluded that the majority of the British continued

their pastoral way of life. ‘Unhindered by their new overlords and unaware of the

impending invasion of a new group of people from the west who would further change the

settlement pattern of this north-west part of England, the Celts tended their sheep and

goats for another 200 years.’ (page 36)

O’Sullivan (1985) states that there are also references to Cuthbert’s land holdings at

Yealand Conyers or Yealand Redmayne. This area has a number of significant

archaeological features including an ancient barrow, a hermitage, and other indications of a

spiritual nature which would certainly meet Sheldrake’s criteria for ‘extraordinary

continuity’.

To the south of the ‘Yealands’ lies Warton Crag and its village and church dedicated to St.

Oswald, again an area which has a long history of habitation. Lofthouse’s rather flowery

depiction written in 1967 is helpful and could encourage more serious investigation in the

46

future:

‘Warton Crag, a great upthrust of limestone, where you watch your step lest you stumble on

a cave of prehistory or wandering among primroses, violets and cowslips you discover the

tumbled limestone walls of some Iron Age fort. Wild roses and honeysuckle gad over Celtic

sheep folds and hut circles. On the tops, the natives of Roman times signalled their opposite

numbers across the bay called Moricambe, much as men of North Lancashire in the twelfth

to fourteenth centuries gave warning by beacon from Furness Abbey’s signal hill, Birkrigg,

and Warton to the rest of the county when the Scots were approaching. Dreaming shores

encompass the Crag now. The Keer inlet in the tenth century floated Viking ships on the

high tide, and Thoredus son of Gunner wintered his longships herein; not so dreamy then,

nor when tides of exceptional strength lifted acres of shore, common land, at Keer mouth,

burying Cote Stones, the medieval quarry from which the parish church was built, and

destroyed the grazing of many a farmer’ (Page 159).

During the latter years of the seventh century several significant Anglian monasteries were

established to serve as ‘minster’ churches in their particular areas; these were established at

Dacre (near Penrith), Heversham on the Kent estuary, and at Lancaster. Green, of course,

suggests that they already existed as Celtic monastic communities before this time, as do

others. We know from Bede that Dacre was still being completed in the 690’s and that

Swidbert was abbot- he was consecrated bishop of Fresia in Germany in 692.

Newman (2005) noted that excavations showed that Dacre was an important monastery

because ‘many of the artefacts, which included fragments of window glass from the 6th or

7th century, an 8th or 9th century gold ring and a copper escutcheon suggest that Dacre was a

high status site.’

A 9th century cross fragment was also discovered in the churchyard; another carved stone

discovered in 1875 has been dated to the 10th or 11th century. It is believed locally that

stones from the former monastery were incorporated into the present Norman church.

Clearly from what has gone before there were a significant number of monasteries across the region established by different personages and significant land owners over the years. It is perhaps particularly important as the journey moves from Heysham towards Heversham that on a map of Anglo-Saxon England which appears in the book ‘Anglo-Saxon England’ by Stenton in 1946 only ‘Hefresham’, ‘aet Eamotum’ (near Penrith) and ‘Luel’ (Carlisle) are listed in the whole of what today we would call Cumberland and Lancashire north of the river Ribble (‘R.Rippel’). The river Eamont was considered to be the boundary between Northumbria and Strathclyde after the Danes had ‘conquered’ Northumbria. It was at Eamont Bridge in 925 that King Athelstan chose to meet with the king of Scots and his ally, the king of Strathclyde. Perhaps this strategic location begins to explain the importance of the monastery at Dacre.

‘Hwitern’ (Whithorn) is also marked.

47

It is worth ‘taking a breather’ at this point to revisit the situation at the end of the seventh

century in Northumbria because this period and the first half of the eighth century were the

‘golden years’ of the Northumbrian church and of significance to this particular study. Bede

almost hints at a revival!

On the death of King Egfrid in battle in 685, who had gone first against the Irish, then against

the Picts, contrary to the advice of Cuthbert and Egbert, Bede records that ‘the Picts

recovered their own lands that had been occupied by the English, while the Irish living in

Britain and a proportion of the Britons regained their freedom’ and Bishop Trumwine ‘who

had been appointed their bishop, withdrew with his people from the monastery of

Abercurnig, which was situated in English territory but stood close to the firth that divides

the lands of the English from those of the Picts’ (page 255)

Egfrid was succeeded by his brother Aldfrid who was ‘a man well-read in the Scriptures’ and

who ‘ably restored the shattered fortunes of the kingdom, though within smaller

boundaries’ during his 19 year reign. First Eadbert and then Ethelwald succeeded Cuthbert

as Bishop of Lindisfarne and John ‘a holy man’ succeeded Eata at Hexham, all very much in

the Irish monastic tradition.

Adamnan, abbot of Iona was sent by his ‘nation’ on a mission to Aldfrid in Northumbria and

remained there for some time. On his return he tried to convince his own monks on Iona to

accept the Catholic Easter but failed to do so; however, he did convince many in Ireland,

those not subject to the jurisdiction of Iona. It is during this time that St. Egbert comes into

prominence. In true Celtic ‘perigrinate’ style he resolved to take the gospel to Germany

from Ireland where he was ‘living a life of exile’. Bede records that ‘he had already chosen

the boldest of his companions, whose distinguished lives and learning rendered them well

fitted to preach the Gospel, and all preparations for the voyage were complete’ (page 278).

In a vision one of his companions saw the late ‘beloved priest’ Boisil, former Prior of

Melrose, who declared that God wanted Egbert to go to Iona to ‘instruct the monks of

Columba’. A second vision convinced Egbert but ‘he none the less attempted to carry out his

projected voyage with the brethren’ A violent storm ensued but ‘everything that belonged

to Egbert and his companions was salvaged’.

Meanwhile, Bishop Wilfred died in 709 at Ripon, succeeded at Hexham by his priest Acca, ‘a

man of great energy and noble in the sight of God and man’. Of equal significance perhaps

was the decision in 710 by Nechtan, King of the Picts, living in the northern part of Britain, to

adopt the Catholic Easter and asked for help from the English people to implement it.

In 716 Egbert went across from Ireland to Iona and persuaded the monks to adopt the

canonical Easter. Bede comments that ‘this seemed to happen by a wonderful dispensation

of God’s grace, in order that the nation which had willingly and ungrudgingly laboured to

48

communicate its own knowledge of God to the English nation might later, through the same

English nation, arrive at a perfect way of life which they had not hitherto possessed.’ (page

321). Egbert stayed on Iona for 13years and died there in 729.

The only obstacle to complete unity in the north seems to be ‘the Britons, who had refused

to share their own knowledge of the Christian faith with the English, continue to be

obdurate and crippled by their errors, going about with their heads improperly tonsured,

and keeping Christ’s solemnity without fellowship with the Christian Church’ (page 322).

This was clearly by now a small, marginalised sector, because Bede states that in the

province of Northumbria now ruled by Ceolwulf, four bishops hold office: Wilfred in the

church of York, Ethelwald at Lindisfarne, Acca at Hexham, and Pecthelm in the See known as

The White House, where the number of believers has so increased that it has recently

become an Episcopal see with Pecthelm as its first bishop’ (page 324). This is, of course,

Whithorn.

Bede’s summary is worthy of reproducing here:

‘At the present time, the Picts have a treaty of peace with the English, and are glad to be

united in Catholic peace and truth to the universal Church. The Irish who are living in Britain

are content with their own territories, and do not contemplate any raids or strategems

against the English. The Britons for the most part have a national hatred for the English, and

uphold their own bad customs against the true Easter of the Catholic Church; however, they

are opposed by the power of God and man alike, and are powerless to obtain what they

want. For, although in part they are independent, they have been brought in part under

subjection to the English. As such peace and prosperity prevail in these days, many of the

Northumbrians, both noble and simple, together with their children, have laid aside their

weapons, preferring to receive the tonsure and take monastic vows rather than study the

art of war. What the result of this will be the future will show.’ (pages 324-5)

One of Wilfred’s ambitions during his ‘career’ had been to achieve ecclesiastical

independence for Northumbria, presumably with himself as primate; the idea of a northern

archbishopric was never forgotten, and on the death of Archbishop Berhtwald in 731 (who

was the last high ranking ‘officer’ who had experienced the confusion before the coming of

Archbishop Theodore in 680) seemed to provide the opportunity.

In 735 Egbert, bishop of York and of royal blood, received an archbishop’s pallium from

Pope Gregory III, destroying the constitutional unity of the English church. However, to the

Northumbrians and to Bede this was a step towards an increase in the number of

Northumbrian bishops (Bede refers to a plan for 12 such bishops in the province of York). In

the end, according to Stenton, the policy failed, Northumbria fell into political disorder, and

endowments could not be found for the proposed new sees.

49

In his letter to Archbishop Egbert, Bede refers to the growth in monasteries since the turn of

the century, ie from 700-730, and related charters obtained by their ‘owners’ in a very

negative way. Could this have particular significance for the foundation of the Anglian

monastery at Heversham during this period, especially since it the only one detailed on a

map covering Westmorland and Lancashire? Obviously ‘Hefre’( or ‘Hever’, ‘Heavre’,

‘Hafre’)must have been a major Anglo-Saxon land owner but to date it has not been found

possible to identify him or his connections with the Northumbrian kingdom.

However, a Scandinavian website offers an alternative interpretation of Heversham as being

‘Hafreoarheimer’ (homestead of a man called HEAHFRITH) History records a famous letter

from Adhelm, abbot of Malmesbury, later Bishop of Selborne, to Heahfrith who had

returned from six years of study in Ireland. It was suggested that Heahfrith had been a

former student of Adhelm. Bede provides the Northumbrian link here where he writes that

‘whilst Adhelm was still a priest, an abbot of the monastery known as Maelduib’s Town

(Malmesbury, Wiltshire) he was directed by a synod of his own people to write a notable

treatise against the errors of the Britons in observing Easter at the wrong time and doing

other things contrary to the orthodoxy and unity of the Church’ (page 298)

This was thought to be after the Synod of Hatfield in 672, the clear implication being that

perhaps Heahfrith was one of the significant number of ‘English, both nobles and

commoners, who in the age of Finan and Coleman left their own country and returned to

Ireland. It is not inconceivable that he would give lands and endowments for establishing a

monastery/ mynster near to Heversham.

On his elevation to York, Egbert replaced the bishops at Hexham (with Frithubert) and

Whithorn (with Frithuwold) who then provided considerable stability until their deaths in

766 even though politically Northumbria continued to be unsettled and fought over.

Archbishop Egbert was the most eminent English ecclesiastic of his generation but ‘his fame

rests on his work for the instruction of the Northumbrian clergy, and in particular on the

great school which he founded at York’ (Stenton page 146).

After 737 ‘the diocesan organisation of the English church was unchanged for many years’

but it was only by slow degrees that the religious life of the English village community

became centred upon a church served by a resident priest. The gradual establishment of a

parochial system was impossible until ‘kings and their companions had been persuaded to

build and endow churches on their estates, and the impulse to this work spread very

gradually from the higher to the lower ranks of nobility’ (page 148)

In the context of this limited regional study he also states, importantly, that ‘there is no

doubt that many ancient parish churches actually represent early monasteries which have

disappeared without other trace’ and that the ‘missionary impulse was strong in early

English monasticism and the foundation of a monastery was a natural means of spreading

50

Christianity among a backward people.’ On the other hand, he warns that where a

community is described as a monasterium it does not mean that its members were

necessarily monks because in the eighth century and even later the word was often applied

to a church served by a group of clergy sharing a communal life, and it is through this usage

that the greater parish church came to be described as a minster’. He also suggested that

the earliest English parishes were large districts served by clergy from a bishop’s familia,

grouped round a central church. Whereas in the early middle- ages most parish churches

were ‘lesser churches’ founded, not by kings or bishops, but by lay noblemen. ‘The general

evolution of the Old English parish,’ he states, ‘is represented in outline by the classification

of churches recognised by late Old English law-the ‘head minster’, or cathedral, the

‘ordinary minster’, the lesser church with a graveyard, and the ‘field church’. (page 148).

In most cases the lesser church arose within the original parish of the matrix ecclesia, and

the memory of its origins were often preserved by a pension from its priest to the rector of

the parish from which its territory had been withdrawn.

The ‘field church’ arose for the benefit of a community established on lands newly brought

under cultivation.

Green states that whilst the Anglian Celtic Church of the seventh century was a simple

church, ‘as indeed were the Celtic monasteries’, it was much later, when Roman Christianity

prevailed over the whole country, that churches were categorised into:

Mynster: Mother Church previously Mynster: “Monastery or Nunnery” (Mynsterstede =

Monastic Buildings)

Ciriclicstow = Church with burial place

Feldcirice = Field Church or Chapel

Stenton also reminds us that even at the end of the eighth century many Christian

communities of long standing were still not provided with any form of church; it was seen to

be an English custom that on the estates of many lords there was no church, but only a

cross raised on high for the daily service of prayer. Many carved stone crosses were erected

in Northumbria in particular, probably for this purpose (and to mark the site of former

churches) and undoubtedly some of these crosses were erected as memorials to the dead,

for example, at Great Urswick.

The history of the Northumbrian kingdom in the remaining years of the eighth century was

violent and turbulent generally and of course it changed even more dramatically in 793 with

the first Viking raids on Holy Island, which as Hylson-Smith stated, was not to be a

temporary affair because after a short period of respite the frequency of the incursions

51

increased and led on to settlement, the ‘age of the Vikings’ was about to begin and it would

not end until the Normans came to conquer and to settle.

The coming of the Vikings, or rather the results of their incursions on the monasteries,

provides further clues to our search because in 875 Bishop Eardwulf decided to remove the

relics of St.Cuthbert and others together with other treasures from Lindisfarne to avoid

them falling into Viking hands (new raids had begun) and with monks and others in their

party went on a pilgrimage which lasted for seven years before they were allowed to settle

down first at Crayke to the north of York and then at Chester-le-Street.

According to David Adam (1993) the group headed west hoping to reach Ireland. He

highlights several places where the party rested, including Melrose where Cuthbert trained

as a monk, then ‘they also came to the Derwent and near the place where Herbert

(Cuthbert’s hermit friend) was buried’ (page 130). He states that ‘even Cumbria was not as

safe as they had hoped’ but even accepting that some church dedications to St.Cuthbert

were made later, the progress of the ‘pilgrimage’ can be tracked from the wilds of

Kentmere, along the Eastern Fells to Penrith, Carlisle, then westwards towards the coast

where they hoped to escape to Ireland.

Legend has it that a terrible storm arose, the ship they were in was swamped and the

Lindisfarne Gospels were swept overboard and lost. That night Hunred, one of the coffin

bearers had a dream in which Cuthbert told him the Gospels would be found unharmed

near Whithorn in Galloway, so the group (now called ‘Cuthbert’s Folk) went to St. Ninian’s

monastery at Whithorn.

Other dedications to St. Cuthbert then appear on the ‘over sands’ routes in Furness going

south, at Kirkby in Furness and at Aldingham.

Adam states that ‘they managed to travel the length and breadth of Northumbria without

being captured; this was often due to the devotion and help of others’. We know that in

several places where the monks rested or stayed, crosses were set up (Kirkby in Furness and

Aldingham?) to commemorate this event.

After a few years ‘on the road’ the Vikings seemed to look to colonise rather than invade so

the party ‘took courage and entered the Viking heartland of Yorkshire. They settled at

Crayke only a few miles from York itself’ (page 132).

Stenton provides a useful summary of this period where he states that ‘before 915 pirates

were visiting the country between the Pennines and the Irish Sea in sufficient numbers to

dislodge the local nobles and churchmen (as happened at Heversham). Nothing definite can

be said about the date at which the raiders turned from plunder to settlement, but on every

ground it is probable that the change began in the first quarter of the tenth century. The

52

ease with which communication was maintained between York and Ireland in the next

decades suggests very strongly that the north-west coast of England was in Norse

occupation. And a long time is needed for the evolution of the art-forms cut on the pre-

conquest sculptured stones of Cumberland, Westmorland, and Lancashire’ (page 327).

Heversham and its Mynster

Stenton notes that at the end of the 9th century ‘an English minster still existed at

Heversham at the head of the Kent estuary’ (although presumably the ‘ownership’ of the

lands and endowments could have changed hands) and comments further that ‘it seems

clear that the settled life of this country had not yet been disturbed by the invasions from

Ireland and Strathclyde which were to revolutionize the culture and social organisation of

Cumberland, Westmorland and Lancashire’ (page 316). We also know that it was ‘truly’

monastic since when it was abandoned at the beginning of the 10th century it was led by an

Abbot who withdrew with his monks. There is no reference to another church there.

As noted earlier, Bingham writes that ‘although some of the Roman soldiers tramping along

the military road that ran through Hincaster to Water Crook would have been Christian.

Heversham was evangelised by missionaries from the Celtic Church of Ireland. They like the

Angles immigrants made their way in and out of the estuaries and bays of the north west

coast during the fifth and sixth centuries.’ (page 10). ‘Moreover’, he continues, ‘it was the

Angles or their Celtic pastors who established at Heversham the only Anglian monastery

known to have existed in Westmorland.’ In his Website History of Heversham

(www.heversham.org) he places the setting up of the ‘Celtic Church monastery’ at about

650AD and the date of the Anglian carved stone cross fragment found in the churchyard as

being 750AD. In the text he suggests that ‘it seems that Heversham may have received a

transfusion of the faith by missionaries from the Celtic Church of Ireland who also founded

St. Patrick’s Church at Heysham fifteen miles down the Bay’, and then states that ‘more

certainly a monastery existed at Heversham from the sixth century until it was probably

destroyed during the raids of the Norse Vikings 300 years later’ (page 8). He speculates that

Celtic monasteries were ‘more like that of a twentieth century commune than the highly

disciplined and celibate Abbeys and Convents of the Middle Ages. ‘Possibly a group of huts

close to a well and grouped round a stone cross formed the nucleus of the community on

the site of the present Church.’

J C Dickinson (1980) offers a further observation regarding King Ecgfrith’s gift of Cartmel and

surrounding area to St. Cuthbert in 685. He states that he gave Cartmel with all its Britons in

it ‘and also a place called Suthgedluit, which was then put in charge of an abbot (as we know

53

from other evidence that there was an Anglian abbey at Heversham, it seems likely that this

is what this latter name denotes)’(page 5). This would tie in with the possible endowment of

Heversham monastery by Heahfrith noted earlier in response to the correspondence with

Adhelm of Malmesbury in about 673.

Bingham again (1983) suggests that ‘in applying the term ‘monastery’ to the Anglian

religious community the lofty and extensive edifices and sophisticated orders of the middle

ages should not be imagined. Instead there would be a community of monks and nuns

inhabiting a huddle of low huts made of timber, turf and field stone. Around all would be a

wall or stockade designed to deter human enemies and also to keep out wild animals.’ (page

11). ‘Of the crude monastic structures’, he writes, ‘nothing verifiable remains though some

foundation stones found in 1852 whilst digging a grave 20 yards North East of the church

were believed by the vicar of the day, Canon Gilbert, to be Anglian’.

Dunn (2003) gives a well-researched description of what the layout of early Irish

monasteries looked like and since this would be the basic ‘template’ for the Columban

community on Iona and Aidan’s monastery at Lindisfarne we can assume that any early Irish

Celtic monastic community on the west coast of Britain would follow a similar pattern. She

states that comparatively few Irish monastic sites have been excavated but the surviving

physical remains together with the surviving literature reveal a life led within a vallum,

usually curvilinear in form, sometimes an actual wall, elsewhere created by a ditch. She

continues to show that ‘monks often slept one or two to individually constructed cells

(though there is also evidence of dormitories in the literature), while the abbot had his own

house. The monks sometimes slept in and generally ate and wrote or copied manuscripts in

the major building of the monastery; the tech mor-great house- otherwise known as the

praindtech or simply the monasterium. (page 151)

However, the most striking feature of the evolution of Irish monasteries was the ‘way in

which their internal space became divided into more sacred and less sacred zones. The

focus of communal monasteries was, naturally, the church which might contain the relics of

the saint. The church was surrounded by the most sacred space or sanctuary, the termonn,

which might well have been surrounded by its own wall. She uses the monastery at Nendrun

(referred to earlier) as an example because it was divided into three concentric spheres of

activity- ‘the holiest near the church, then the next holiest, corresponding to the plateau

mentioned in many texts, and a third outer region where smiths and other artisans set up

their workshops and where pilgrims and visitors might be accommodated’ (page 152).

The lack of any significant finds over the years could perhaps suggest that the Anglian

monastery at Heversham although strategically important, was not built on a grand scale

like, for example, Dacre, although it was considered to be a ‘key’ development and likely to

be substantial. Even if the current church was built over the original monastery and if it was

54

‘sacked’ by the Vikings then a piece of glass or other artefact of that period would surely

have come to light (as occurred at Dacre). That is, of course, if the current church site is in

fact the same as that of the monastery.

It might be important to note the extent of the churchyard around the existing church and

the fact that in 1770 when the church was undergoing repairs a large quantity of human

bones was found in an old cemetery a few yards east of the porch. This could be helpful in

finding the approximate outline of the earlier pre-Norman church. Bingham also reports

that in 1777 Nicolson and Burn recorded finding a pile of bones under an arch beneath the

south wall, suggesting the presence of a crypt. He also noted that an 18th century plan ‘even

shows graves in the main pathway leading to the South porch, some of which were

disturbed in 1823 when the Turnpike road encroached on the yard’ (Page 77).

One further observation is very helpful where he speculates that when the church was built

burials would probably take place to the south, but that ‘evidence that Heversham yard

might have extended three hundred yards to the south-east was produced in 1948 when

skeletons were dug up during the building of the Bay View Council Houses’ (Page 76). He

suggests that these remains could ‘simply have been those of suicides buried outside

consecrated ground or, possibly have come from the cemetery of the Anglian villagers

situated away from the monks’ graves near the church’.

The ‘official’ church yard was extended in 1871 and again in 1900.

Postlethwaite records in relation to Urswick church that ‘there was originally no wall round

the church yard. People of wealth or importance were buried under the floor of the church.

Those who could not afford the privilege would find their graves as near to the church as

possible, and at the present time the ground under the eaves of the church is crowded with

bones where interment after interment has taken place’.

This was not an unusual practice and can again provide evidence for an earlier Saxon church

at Beetham as noted by Nicolson and Burn in 1777 recorded in the History and Antiquities of

the Counties of Westmorland and Cumberland. They state that ‘about 40 yards distant from

the place where the school house now stands there was anciently a chapel which is said to

have been dedicated to St. John, and near it many human bones have been dug up in a place

which is now converted into a garden’ (page 223). The school house was about 60 yards

from the present church. They also noted the discovery of a large amber bead inset with a

silver ‘medallion’ with clear Christian inscriptions and engraving on it.

Lofthouse writing in 1965 provides a further link here in that she refers to the existence of a

cross ‘where folk met to pray for safe crossing of a dangerous ford’- from Sandside to

Foulshaw Moss; it was known locally as St. John’s Cross. Sandside is a short distance from

Beetham. She also makes reference to the Hall in Dallam Park which according to the 1829

55

directory was erected in 1720 on the site of the old hall which had been built out of the

ruins of an ancient tower.

The only known relic of the Anglian period at Heversham is the sculptured stone cross

fragment discovered in the churchyard believed by Collingwood to be from the 8th century

and a ‘fine example of the Classic Anglian School’ (Bingham, 1983). Its design was thought to

parallel other Anglian sculptures at Lancaster, Heysham, Waberthwaite, Lowther and

Hoddon, possibly produced by a school of sculptors at Lancaster or Heysham ‘where there

was a Celtic church and also suitable stone.’

Side view Front view

Anglian cross fragment St.Peter’s Church, Heversham

Two further discoveries recorded by Calverley in his 1899 survey are also important. He

writes that ‘an examination of the outside walls of the church was rewarded by the

discovery of a fragment of an arm of the cross showing that the head of the cross itself was

adorned with the leaves and tendrils of the all-pervading Christ vine’ and that ‘it is a very

gentle and refined art; one does not feel the want of more undulation such as gives interest

to the half barbarous reliefs of the Viking and Norman age.’

Perhaps it would be helpful to look back at the function of the ‘church’ in the time before

Archbishop Theodore and to consider briefly the location and purpose of the earlier

examples of standing stone crosses.

Hylson-Smith writes that ‘in the valiant efforts of the church to provide pastoral care in an

age before the parish system had come into being, much had to be done with sparse

56

resources. Theodore allowed priests to say mass ‘in the field’ in the closing years of the 7th

century. There were scattered standing crosses to mark the spots where services of prayer

were held, and where, perhaps, even a ‘field church’ had not yet arisen.’(page 208). He

concludes that believers must have gathered in the open-air in many areas where there was

not access to some form of church building. He also states, importantly, that ‘whatever may

have been the initial intention of the founder, in the pioneering conditions of the seventh

and eighth centuries, the luxury of a totally withdrawn religious house without some

responsibilities to the neighbouring villages and monastic estates would have been

unthinkable. Preaching and baptizing may not have been listed as required duties in a

monastery’s foundation charter; but such functions would have been taken for granted.’

(page 212)

Standing crosses were often used also to mark sacred burial places and Christian meeting

places. Churches were built on or in close proximity to the same location in a number of

places and dedicated to a particular saint. One wonders whether several churches

dedicated, for example, to St. Mary in the Field have that sort of beginning and their roots in

the vision of Theodore.

It is also important to remember when looking for evidence that even at the end of the 9th

century, in addition to a lot of substantial minsters, there were a considerable number of

local churches, made both of stone and timber.

A further factor identified by Dunn (2003) was that ‘any involvement by monasteries-as

opposed to clerical ‘minsters’- in pastoral care must have begun rapidly to diminish in

importance, when Theodore of Tarsus arrived in England as archbishop of Canterbury in

669.’ She goes on to state that Theodore’s work had begun to undermine any possible

claims by monasteries to the right to perform pastoral work. She suggests that while Bede

was still able to count burial as a pastoral duty performed by monks, he does not mention

either baptism or the administration of the Eucharist. She surmises that ‘perhaps, by Bede’s

time, monasteries had ceased even occasionally to administer or control the administration

of the latter, while still burying the dead.’

Hylson-Smith cites the preaching and teaching ministry of Cuthbert and Boisil who covered

vast areas extending even to the remotest farmsteads, and Bede who is quoted as saying

that ‘it was the custom amongst the English people at that time, when a clerk or a priest

came to a village, for all to gather at his command to hear the Word, gladly listening to what

was said’.

It is ‘presumed’ that the monastery ceased to exist after Tilred, abbot of Heversham,

allegedly abandoned the monastery at Heversham for a safer location in the north east. The

same Tilred was bishop of Lindisfarne from 915-925.

57

Rollinson presented a rather more measured approach to the coming of the Vikings. He

stated that ‘there can be little doubt that the early visits of the Scandinavians to

Cumberland and Westmorland conformed to the stereotyped pattern, and no doubt these

early raiders were roundly condemned by Christian scribes’…..but ‘it must be remembered

that, like the Anglians, the Scandinavians formed part of a folk movement of new settlers,

but whereas the Anglian farmers sought and colonized the good quality soils, the

Scandinavians were pastoralists and on the whole established themselves in the fells and

along the creeks and inlets of the coast.’ (page 36). He suggested that in fact, the ‘Vikings’

who colonized Cumberland and Westmorland were second or third generation

Scandinavians who came from Ireland and the Isle of Man, and as such they should be called

Norse-Irish.’ He also suggested that by the time they arrived they had already been largely

converted to Christianity (whilst not easily abandoning the ‘old religion’ as can be seen in a

number of carved stone crosses of the time).

The church guide for St. Peter’s church, Heversham comments that ‘Tilred was probably anxious to quit Heversham on account of his fear of the Norse Vikings who were in his day settling in the surrounding district. It is not improbable that this early monastery of Heversham fell prey to their ravages’. However, Tilred’s withdrawal was a planned retreat because in an extract from the anonymous ‘History of St. Cuthbert ’taken from English Historical Documents Volume 1 (Whitelock, 1955) it records that ‘in the time of the same King Edward (the Elder), Tilred, abbot of Heversham bought the estate which is called South Eden; half of it he gave to St. Cuthbert, that he might become a brother in his monastery; the other half to Norham, that he might be abbot there’ (S21)

The lack of any Norse relics could suggest that once the monastery was abandoned by

Tildred and his monks and it fell out of use, perhaps even the graveyard was undisturbed.

Having said that, the local names ‘Kirkgate’, ‘Kirkgate Lane’ and ‘Kirkhead’ could indicate

ancient connections to the ‘kyrke’ at Heversham and suggests the presence of a church

there apart from the monastic church.

Bailey (1988) comments on the lack of Viking-Age carvings. He states that whilst both

Kendal and Heversham have produced Anglian sculptures ‘there are no later crosses

surviving from the whole of the valley’ (Page 27). He suggests that it is therefore possible

that Tilred’s ‘move from Heversham, when allied to the evidence of exceptionally dense

Gaelic-Norse place names in the area, reflects a more serious social upheaval in this district

than occurred elsewhere’.

Bingham’s observation that ‘the tenth and eleventh centuries were probably the most

tempestuous in the history of Heversham’ is an understatement! He says that for much of

that period the parish remained in the borderlands between England and the Scottish

kingdom of Strathclyde and there must have been sporadic conflict between Scot, Anglian

and Viking.’ A hoard of 10th century coins found at Beetham contained both English and

58

Scottish coins, the latter engraved with the St.Andrew’s cross. Bingham (1987) suggests that

they had probably been collected for Dane geld. Collingwood (1908) also comments that

Cumberland and Westmorland were ‘little colonised’ by the Danes who at first do not seem

to have ventured from their town centres, ‘and the wilder scenery and rougher Celtic

population of the west had no attraction to them’. (page 122).

Although Aethelstan had come to an agreement with Constantine king of Scots, Owain king

of Cumbria and Ealdred of Bamborough at Dacre in 926 they could not keep their pledge;

Thord Gunnersson led an English expedition into Cumbrian and Viking Westmorland in 966.

Collingwood, again, comments that ‘it might be said, as a rough summing-up, of the earlier

Viking period, that the Danes showed the way westward to the Norse, but the Norse set the

example of conquest and colonization to the Danes’ (page 72). Hylson-Smith shows that

after the death of Athelstan in 939 there ensued a period of chaos, and with the death by

assassination of Edmund in 946 there was even more confusion. He also states that Edgar’s

reign (959-975) contrasted sharply with the previous confusion and the disasters which

followed when the Danish invasion began again in earnest; by 1014 England was prepared

to accept the Danish Sweyn as its own king and his son Cnut was universally recognized as

king of the English in late 1016.

By 1060 Heversham had been attached to the Kingdom of England and it was in the

possession of Tostig, Earl of Northumberland, the brother of King Harold.

What is clear is that there was some form of parochial church presence at Heversham well

before 1090 (Domesday Book 1086) and from at least 1130 it had its own priest and

subsequent incumbents, variously entitled ‘rector’ or ‘parson’ or ‘clerk’, presented by the

abbot of St. Mary’s, York. All that has gone before would suggest that the area was largely

neglected by its distant ‘masters’ whether Scottish or English or even Norse and abandoned

to its own fate whilst the land continued to be worked by a very mixed and changing

population after Tilred and his monks had abandoned the monastery in about 902, and until

the estate was gifted to St. Mary’s, York in 1094. This would largely explain the lack of any

tangible evidence for this period.

It could also suggest that perhaps a rather crude ‘rustic’ church could have been included in

the gift of 1094, later to be rebuilt more substantially in stone by the Normans as part of

their huge church building programme . Burgess (1989) would support this view. He states

that in Cumbria generally there seem to have been a lack of Saxon parish churches - ‘either

the Normans destroyed most of them, or there were never very many stone ones anyway -

they may even have been structures of wood’ (page 41). He also made the point that the

Normans were a deeply religious people who disapproved of many former Anglian practices,

and as a result ‘in the parish churches rebuilt on an unparalleled scale- and in stone, not

wood’ (page 7)

59

A cursory study of the Ordnance Survey Map for the area will show that Norse remains were

found (above) within a few miles to the east and south of Heversham, and Norse place

names together with much evidence of settlement exist largely within the ‘loop’ of the River

Bela. This is hardly surprising when one considers the lie of the land in the 9th and 10th

centuries before extensive drainage was undertaken and marsh land reclaimed. Heversham

would have been on the edge of a much wider Kent estuary (there is evidence of a raised

beach at Moss Side Farm) as would Levens and Brigsteer. Perhaps the Bela also marked the

boundary of the Beetham estates which seem to have had particular significance apart from

the Heversham estates. Any Norse-Irish settlement would have been up the river to

Milnthorpe and then settling in surrounding areas where farming became more viable; it is

important to note again Rollinson’s observations that it would be gradual settlement and

relatively small numbers, not a sudden huge influx.

Lancaster continued with its Priory, but Heysham was granted to the abbey of St. Martin

Sees in France in 1094 but was never appropriated, the Rector paying 8d a year to the Prior

of Lancaster. With the other possessions of the priory the church went to Syon Abbey

(British History Online)

Cartmel

Fishwick (1894) referred to the establishment of an Augustinian Priory at Cartmel in about

1188 by the Earl of Pembroke. He stated that it was dedicated to St. Mary and ‘displaced the

ancient parish church which, if not of Saxon origin, was certainly a very early foundation’

(page 198). With its links to St.Cuthbert, the Celtic Church and the Kings of Northumbria it

would seem appropriate to look more closely at Cartmel and its surrounding area, eg.

Kirkhead, especially since it is on the ancient ‘oversands’ route across Morecambe Bay and

could have relatively easy links by boat with both Heysham and Heversham.

As noted earlier, King Ecgfrith made a grant of land to St.Cuthbert which included territory

in Carlisle together with Cartmel and all its British inhabitants (et omnes Britannos cum eo);

we are not told how much land around Cartmel was given but it denotes a significant area

rather than one particular village, which may well have come later, growing up around the

church. It is believed that the lands extended well up into Low Furness. He also had land

around the Yealands south of Milnthorpe.

The purpose (apart from attempting to persuade Cuthbert to accept the bishopric of

Hexham) would have been to establish a further monastic community or communities,

presumably using the Celtic Irish monks from Lindisfarne and others already at work in the

North who had by then adopted the ‘Roman’ rule.

The old Celtic name for Cartmel ( ‘carrs’- rocky place and ‘meol’- lumpy headland) is

illustrative of the access point from the Bay by boat between Humphrey Head and Kirkhead

60

which would have been deeper inland in those times, a ‘safe haven’, and close to the over

sands walking route from Hest Bank to Kents Bank. If one accepts the name Cartmel to be

Old Scandinavian rather than Celtic then it becomes ‘katr’ and ‘melr’- a sandbank by much

stony ground.) which supports its Bay-side location and access by sea just as much as the

Celtic name. The headland site would satisfy Sheldrake’s criteria for ‘continuity’ since there

are other ancient features around, including a ‘Holy Well’.

There is, of course, no recorded physical or material evidence in stone to date to support

the theory that Kirkhead might have been the original site for the monastic community’s

activities, but it would seem to be supported by the ‘pattern’ established so far at Heysham,

Heversham, and possibly at Urswick.

J.C.Dickinson (1980) writes ‘there is no doubt that this early church was erected below

Alithwaite near the Cliff which because of this came to be known as Kirkhead (‘The Church

Headland) and had near it a now vanished pool which a post-Conquest charter terms

‘Church Pool’ (page 5)’ He states that although nothing remains of the building whatsoever,

graves had been discovered there ‘which urged J Briggs to write a far from fascinating

‘Elergy’. Dickinson envisaged a ‘small place of worship, perhaps served from the rather

short-lived Anglian monastery of Heversham’, and then goes on to say that ‘if, as is possible,

the church itself had become ruinous in Viking times, it may well have been restored in part

in post-Conquest times’ (page 11). A similar situation could also be applied to Heversham.

A short distance inland south of where the village of Cartmel now stands with its priory is a

significant cross roads with the name (and remains) ‘Headless Cross’. There was certainly a

larger cross in the centre of Cartmel, considered likely to have been a ‘preaching cross’ in

the early days before a church was established. This would ‘fit’ Fishwick’s understanding of

the Priory displacing the ancient parish church ‘which, if not of Saxon origin, was certainly a

very early foundation’. The ‘UK and Ireland Geneology’ website (GenUKI) also states that the

church was ‘founded in Saxon’ times.

It is romantic to mention the legend that St.Cuthbert appeared in a vision to the monks from

Bradenstoke Priory in Wiltshire and directed them to establish the Priory at Cartmel

‘between two streams, one flowing north and one south’ or the alternative version that

Cuthbert in fact directed the architect, who had originally planned to build on Mount

Bernard close by, to locate the Priory between two springs of water. The next morning,

according to the legend, water flowed from the two foundation stones where the Priory

Church now stands’. The reality is more likely that it was erected on the site of the former

ancient grave yard which had been marked out with a sculptured standing cross.

It is clear from what has gone before that there were significant numbers of small churches

and chapels established ‘around the Bay’ during the Anglo-Saxon period. Some almost

certainly would have been damaged or destroyed, and in some cases abandoned during the

61

early years of the Viking migration. Some of those churches would have been restored or

rebuilt during the pre-Norman period, as the pattern of parochial ministry continued to

develop in England and the Norse Vikings became ‘christianised’. From what we know of the

coming of the Normans a number of larger, grander stone churches were built over the

smaller churches, and little earlier material is left to be seen; others were established on a

selected site nearby, as for example Cartmel Priory with a church included, or Dacre which

included in its construction some material from the Anglian monastery which had existed on

the same site.

It was also a period of significant monastic developments since the Normans were a deeply

religious group who wished to ensure their place in eternity through generous endowments.

We have found ‘evidence’ of earlier churches at Urswick, at Beetham and at Cartmel, and

we are aware of the parallel developments at Heysham, but so far nothing more to help us

to discover the sequence of developments at Heversham apart from the fact that the estate

and its church were granted to the Abbey of St. Mary’s, York.

We have seen that by the middle of the twelfth century all of the land and estates in the

area of this study was in the hands of several religious houses, and that where churches

were established or re-established in stone, provision was made for a priestly ministry to be

available locally, not least for baptisms and burials, so in that sense yes, the Celtic journey is

at an end, the parochial system established and the authority of the orthodox church

upheld. This would continue up to the Dissolution of the monasteries and the re-distribution

of their assets more widely. There were still land disputes, invasion from Scotland to face,

and the ever-present threat of disease and plague.

The Normans built well and we have many examples in stone of their aspirations and

achievements for an established church similar to that in Europe, but the Celtic spirit?

One senses that it will always be free………….

62

Chapter Three: The Norman Revolution

Whilst the monastic reform movement of the tenth century was highly significant in the

development of the Church and state, and to some extent in the inclination of the pagan

Vikings to embrace the Christian faith, it was confined largely to the southern half of

England. By 1017 it had not penetrated further north than Burton in Staffordshire and

Crowland in south Lincolnshire. ‘Yet’, states Kenneth Hylson-Smith, ’those who wish to

champion the persistent good effects of the reform movement up to the times of the

Norman Conquest can point to the flowering of vernacular literature and art; the

outstanding characters and achievements of the statesmanlike Archbishop Wulfstan and the

saintly bishop Wulfstan of Worcester; and the invigorating example of the monasteries of

the Severn valley in sending helpers to the north, soon after the Conquest, who revived

Northumbrian monasticism and eventually re-founded Durham, with immense and

beneficial consequences for the future’ (page 263).

Our area of Lonsdale and Furness, together with much of Cumberland and Westmorland,

had other concerns!

Even in 1066 the area north was debatable land, ‘shuttlecocked between England and

Scotland’ (Rollinson), complicated further not only by the Norse-Irish colonisation but also

by the resurgence of the British Kingdom of Strathclyde. In 1032 King Cnut exchanged

Lothian for Cumbria, but by 1068 all the lands north of the Derwent and the Eamont had

been seized by the Scots under Malcolm III, and the boundary of Scotland lay across the

dome of the Lake District (hence the whole of Cumberland and most of Westmorland does

not appear in the Domesday survey of 1086). Bagley shows how the areas later known as

63

Lonsdale, Kendal, Cartmel and Furness were included in ‘the king’s land in Eurvicscire

(Yorkshire)’ and prior to 1066 had belonged to Earl Tostig, the rebellious brother of King

Harold whom Harold defeated at the Battle of Stamford Bridge that year. ’Within five years’,

states Bagley, ‘this northern area had suffered two ruthless invasions, the one in 1065-6 by

Tostig’s English enemies, and the other in 1069 when the Normans “harried the north” as a

punishment for revolt’ (page 15) leaving Lonsdale a ‘stricken and impoverished land’.

Richard Newman saw this as in part explaining the de-population of Lancashire north of the

Ribble before 1086 ‘perhaps as a result of Malcolm III’s invasion of 1061 or because of the

deliberate wasting of the region by the Normans either to quell resistance or to discourage

invasion from the sea’.

Barnes noted forcibly that ‘it is known that anarchy prevailed in Northern England from

1066 to 1087’; large tracts of land were depopulated and much of the country lay waste and

uncultivated. Many ‘vills’ disappeared not by the inroads of the sea as presumed, but

abandoned and never repopulated. Coastal communities were abandoned and the

population concentrated on Dalton which could be defended from hit and run pirate raids,

etc. ‘Thus we find at the beginning of the 12th century Dalton was the most important place

in Furness challenged only by Urswick and Ulverston’.

If not already done, this would have been a prime time for constructing (or strengthening)

the tower at Urswick church as a place of refuge for the local population. Baines in his 1870

History of Lancashire tells us that in 1138 ‘a terrible irruption from the north laid the whole

peninsula desolate’ and it was as a refuge from such incursions that the Pile of Foudrey was

built, commonly believed to be in 1328 but from the evidence of a deed in Beck’s Annals it

must have been during the time of Stephen, around 1135-1154.

We know that William the Conquerer gave the lands between the Ribble and the Mersey,

Lonsdale, Cartmel and Furness to Roger of Poitou as reward for his support. Roger chose

Lancaster as the site for the castle from which he could administer and defend his estates.

This was the beginning of the county of Lancaster, and, in conjunction with the routes over

the Sands, explains why Furness and Cartmel, which geographically form a unit with

Cumberland and Westmorland, were included within the borders of Lancashire right up to

1974. This was also a wise strategic decision since the main invasion route from Scotland

came round the west coast of Cumberland and across the sands of Morecambe Bay. By

1092 Roger’s forces controlled the border country around the Solway Firth and had begun

to build Carlisle castle. After a failed rebellion against Henry 1 in 1102 all of Roger’s English

estates were confiscated and the Honour of Lancaster given to Stephen of Blois, grandson of

the Conquerer.

Just to complete the ‘scene setting’ for further local exploration, in 1139 David of Scotland

wrung from Stephen, now King, the promise to invest his son, Henry, with the earldom of

64

Northumbria. Henry conveniently interpreted this to mean the old Saxon kingdom of

Northumbria and promptly brought his Scottish troops as far south as the Ribble! In 1157

the Scots were forced to surrender ‘Northumbria’. In 1168 under Henry II the county was

given administrative unity and the area we now know as Lancashire was officially described

as the county of Lancaster, and that which is called Lonsdale north of the Sands was

referred to as Furness wapentake or elsewhere the Dalton wapentake.

Let’s turn our attention back to ‘Hougon Manor’ (or Low Furness Manor) which included

Borch (Birkrigg) and which almost embraced Great Urswick and Berret-Seige (Bardsea) at

the time when the lands were granted to Michael le Fleming somewhere between 1107 and

1111. He was granted the lands lying eastwards of Abbey Beck and southwards of the moors

of Birkrigg and Swarthmoor, and this became the new manor of Aldingham, later called

Michael’s land or Muchland. The rest of the ‘forest of Furness and Walney’ was granted by

Henry to his nephew Stephen, Count of Bolougne and Mortain, afterwards king of England.

Michael le Fleming built his motte and bailey castle on Mote Hill, Aldingham, overlooking

the Bay and according to William Urswick ‘made grants of land to his neighbours on such

terms as enabled them speedily to rise to a position of affluence’. He built the present

church dedicated to St. Cuthbert at Aldingham, probably building on or over the existing

earlier church there. It is likely that further attention would have been given to the church

at Urswick at the same time.

There is an important point of clarification here in relation to the endowment of the church

at Urswick and its development.

Canon Ayre writing in 1897, made reference to a document contained within the Coucher

Book of Furness Abbey about the inferred foundation of the church building, which shows

that in a statement made by William, Earl of Boulogne, the second son of Stephen the

founder of the abbey, he declared that his predecessors built it. The endowment, it was

generally thought, was largely provided by Michael le Fleming or some member of that

family. This ties in to some extent with the suggestion by William Urswick that the building

was not in good repair at the time or could suggest that Michael le Fleming build over

and/or around the former church building, although we have already discovered that no

Norman features exist in the building; so the picture remains obscure.

What is clear from the records is that although the Abbot retained possession of the

advowson of Urswick, Michael arranged with Abbot Ewan to retain the next presentation in

his own hands; this was a contested issue between Michael le Fleming and the later Abbot

John de Cauncefield. The issue was resolved by Michael doing fealty to the Abbot and

monks for certain lands which he held of the Church, and acknowledging their right to the

advowson; they on their part promised to present ‘Daniel Fitz Michael’ to the Rectory of

Urswick.

65

The right of presentation to a benefice pertained to the lord, bishops or monastery, who

would take the major part of the church’s endowment, including the tithe, a tenth of the

congregation’s crops and livestock. This left the priest with only a small part of the church’s

income together with what was given at the offertory on great feast days like Easter and

Christmas. He also had the glebe land to work for his sustenance. Daniel clearly had special

provision for a period of time.

The most significant development in the area (over and above the construction of churches

at Dalton, Ulverston and Pennington and the restoration of St. Cuthbert’s church at Kirkby

Ireleth) was clearly the founding of Furness Abbey by the Charter awarded to it by Stephen,

Earl of Bolougne, in July 1127. He bestowed all his possessions in Furness on the Abbey with

the exception of those lands owned by Michael le Fleming. Again, it’s Baines who clarifies

the position for us in that Stephen first gave the estates to the Order of Savigny but another

grant of the same date gives it to ‘God, St. Mary of Furness, and the abbot of this new

foundation’ (Page 630). It was established by a group of thirteen monks with Ewan de

Albrincis, the first abbot, as their leader. He states that ‘the holy brotherhood were the

fourth offshoot from the Benedictine order of Savigny, so named from their monastery of

Savigny, in Normandy, founded in 1112. On their arrival in England in 1124, they seated

themselves for a time in the centre of the county of Lancaster, in a monastic erection,

already established, at Tulketh, near Preston. The abbot, however, with the sagacious eye of

a monk, fixed upon a site for the erection of his new house where all the materials were at

hand, and in a situation where the monastic authorities could reign monarchs of the district.

Here in Furness, stone, timber, iron and lead all presented themselves in abundance; and

the patronage of Stephen, earl of Boulougne, afterwards king of England, furnished the

means of erecting such a sanctuary as might almost defy the corroding hand of time itself.’

(Page 630).

We are also told that this charter of Stephen, by which the abbot claimed almost regal

power, was confirmed successively by Henry I and II, Richard I, John, and Henry III. As we

shall see, this power was exercised frequently. It is worth ‘spelling out’ something of the

extent of the abbot’s power here because it also illustrates the powerful position and huge

accumulated wealth of the Abbey in the north.

Again, I quote Baines:

‘The abbot, by virtue of the foundation-charter, claimed to have and exercise, among other

privileges, sheriff’s tourn, assize of bread and beer, wreck of the sea, weyf, infangene

thereof, and free chase in Dalton, Kyrkby, Irelygh, Penyngton, Ulverston, Aldingham, Legh

(Leece?) and Ursewyk in Furneys; to be free from fines and amercements, and from service

to the county and wapentake, for himself and men in these vills: and to have a market, fair,

and gallows in Dalton in Furneys, and to make summons and attachments, by his bailiff, in

Furneys’ ( page 630).

66

By these charters the Abbot became possessed of the entire lordship of Furness, including

Dalton, Ulverston and Walney, besides property in other places. The rest of Furness was

held by Michael le Fleming.

Most of the abbot’s disputes were about land and the abbey’s rights and nothing to do with

the religious agenda.

We are told that within a few years the course of aggrandisement began by the gifts of the

various proprietors within the influence of Furness which ‘gradually rendered this abbey one

of the richest ecclesiastical corporations in the country’.

For his part le Fleming gave to the abbot two coastal villages, Ros (or Roos) and Criveltron,

in exchange for the manors of Bardsea and Urswick. The church at Urswick was not included

in this transaction as we said, because the Abbot of Furness (John de Caunusfield) had

already bestowed it upon Michael’s own son, Daniel, ‘clerk in alins, with a caracute and half

of land for the term of six years’. Daniel is listed as the first incumbent at Urswick in 1160

but Baines has Daniel as being ‘the clerk, parsona de Urswick’ from 1181-5.

Michael le Fleming made a further gift by a second charter in 1153, this time when

‘Fordeboc with all its appurtenances’ were assigned to the Abbey.

It wasn’t all ‘plain-sailing’. In 1134 the Abbey established a satellite house, Calder Abbey,

with twelve monks led by Abbot Gerold; one of their number was Allan de Urswick. Sadly

for the Calder Abbey folk, four years later it was laid waste by David and his marauding

Scots, and the monks abandoned it and returned to Furness Abbey. According to a later

account the monks were reproached by the Abbot of Furness for their cowardice and he

refused to receive them back. They took refuge with the archbishop of York who ultimately

procured for them a settlement at Bellaland, which became Byland Abbey.

In 1148, the year when the Abbey founded another daughter house at Swinshead near

Boston in Lincolnshire, the fourth abbot of Savigne surrendered his house with all its

dependencies into the hands of Bernard, Abbot of Clairvaux, for the purpose of becoming

Cistercians. Peter of York, the fourth abbot of Furness, with his monks, appealed to Pope

Eugenius III against the surrender and obtained a confirmation from the Pope that Furness

Abbey should remain in its original designation. However, on his return from Rome he was

seized by the monks of Savigne, forced to resign his abbey, and become a monk there.

We have acknowledged Allen de Urswick, monk, ‘in passing’ and have yet to discover his

heritage and the basis for the ‘de Urswick’ title which took greater prominence in later

generations. It is recorded elsewhere that ‘two vassels of Michael le Fleming- Bernulf and

his son, Gilbert, lived in Urswick in the “House by the Tarn” (Melville, 1959). For services

rendered to the Baron of Kendal- Gilbert was granted the Manor of Coniston but his son

67

Adam remained at Urswick where he held 56 acres for which he paid 2s 8d a year and he

took the surname ‘Urswick’. The Urswicks lived for many generations in this valley, their

home being Urswick Hall the site of which is (or was) shown on the Ordnance Survey map,

close to the edge of the tarn (GR: SD271746).

Of the first incumbent of Urswick church in the Norman era, Daniel le Fleming, we know

almost nothing other than his incumbency covered the years 1181-5. He is also listed as

incumbent at Aldingham from 1180. Perhaps because both families have strong links with

the Urswick ‘story’ we should follow them in a little more detail at this point.

Thomas West in his ‘Antiquities’ of 1774 in making reference to Michael le Fleming’s second

grant to Furness abbey, says that ‘this probably is the Michael le Fleming whom Baldwin his

kinsman, knowing to be a valiant man, sent with some forces to assist the Conquerer in his

enterprise against England. After the conquest was completed, and William seated on the

throne of England, this valiant knight, with other Norman chiefs, was dispatched into the

north to oppose the Scots, and awe the partisans of Edwin and Morcar, two powerful

Saxons, who opposed themselves to the Norman yoke, and whose power William dreaded

the most. Michael, for his fidelity in several good services, received from his master many

noble estates in Furness, Gleaston and the manor of Aldingham, with other lands in

Furness.’

Michael le Fleming lived to ‘a great age’ and was interred at the Abbey. In 1199 King John

granted to William le Fleming, his son and heir, a court leet and court baron, with all other

liberties and privileges commonly granted therewith, except wreck of sea, reserving a rent

of ten pounds per annum for his manor of Aldingham. West then indicates that the manor

did not remain long in the Le Fleming name because in 1269 Michael le Fleming (son and

heir of William) died without issue, his brother William having drowned in Leven water. It

descended to his only sister Alice, wife of Richard de Caunsefield in which name it continued

until 1293, when William de Caunsfield, dying without issue, it descended to John de

Harrington, and in that name it continued until 1457. The de Harringtons figure largely in

the life of Urswick church a little later on.

One final little anecdote on the Le Fleming family: We know that the first Sir Michael le

Fleming ‘and his posterity’ were lords of Aldingham, and according to West ‘resided in

Gleaston Castle after the sea had swallowed up their seat at Aldingham, with the village,

leaving only the church and the east end of the town, and the mote at the west end, that

serve to shew what the extent of Aldingham has been. About the same time, the villages of

Crimleton and Ros, which the first Sir Michael exchanged with the monks for Bardsey and

Urswick, were also swallowed up, as is supposed.’ He goes on to state that although the

time of that accident could not be ascertained ‘it may be conjectured, from the nature of

the building, that the castle of Gleaston was built on the occasion, and in such haste as

68

obliged them to substitute mud mortar instead of lime, in a site that abounds with lime

stone, and by a family so powerful.’ (Page 218) Gleaston castle is considered to have been

built in the mid fourteenth century.

When Michael le Fleming exchanged Ros and Crimelton for Bardsey and Urswick he also

gave to ‘Adam, son of Bernulf (de Urswick) two bovates in the same vill by charter for 32d

per annum (see above). Adam’s son and heir was Gilbert de Urswick whose son in turn

‘another Adam’, had two sons, Adam and John, and a daughter called Elizabeth, ‘eventually

heiress to her brothers on their death, who married, in the reign of Henry III, Sir Richard le

Fleming. By deed, undated, John de Urswick, brother of ELIZABETH, granted to her and her

husband, all the land which had belonged to Adam de Urswick in exchange for other lands’.

Baines notes that the Urswick family ‘long retained a considerable rank in the country’.

Michael le Fleming also gave three carucates of land in Adgarelich (Adgarley) in marriage

with his daughter Goditha, and half a carucate in ‘Hursewic’ in marriage with William, son of

Eward or Edward, probably the husband of Goditha.

We should perhaps mention one other family which has some prominence in the future of

Urswick church and the area, and that is the Couplands who had possession of the manor of

Bolton. During the latter end of the reign of Henry III Robert de Denton, Abbot of Furness

Abbey, granted to Sir Richard, son of Sir Alan de Coupland, a chantry in his chapel of Bolton

in Urswick. As Baines states, ‘the said Sir Richard gave annually four pounds of wax to the

mother church of Urswick, on the feast of St. Michael, probably as compensation for any

loss the mother church might sustain by the new foundation’.

Canon Ayre notes that in 1260 William de Melberby was presented to the vicarage at

Urswick by the Abbot following the death of William de Boyvill. He also comments that

these are the only incumbents of Urswick previous to the dissolution whose names survive.

Several others are referred to by Pollit who quotes the list provided by Reverend

Postlethwaite. These are as follows:

Following William de Melbery becoming incumbent in 1260 he lists Richard de Barnard

Castle without dates, followed by William in 1297, John in 1351, John Fisher in 1361, William

Normande in 1380 followed by William Walton, In 1445 John Woodhouse and then in 1535

Thomas Harrison, the last vicar presented by the Abbot of Furness Abbey.

It could well be that for at least some of this period the church ministrations were carried

out by monks from the Abbey anyway.

Canon Ayre also gives us more information in relation to a document believed to be dated

between 1198 and 1205 in which Honorius, archdeacon of Richmond, ‘after stating that the

churches of Dalton and Urswick from ancient times were known to have belonged to the

69

monastery of Furness, and that Pope Celestine had authorised the brethren dwelling there

to convert its endowments to their own use, goes on to say: “We considering the necessity

of the aforesaid brethren, which arises chiefly from a lack of grain, grant all the tithes of

every kind of grain belonging to the above-mentioned churches to the aforesaid brethren,

to be converted to their own uses”, reserving however a small allowance to the vicars

incumbent of the said churches.’ Pope Celestine had also stipulated that the abbot had the

liberty to present to the bishop ‘priests qualified to minister in these churches in your name,

who shall be responsible to him for the cure of souls, and respect his Episcopal rights

according to the custom of the province; but they must both faithfully pay the revenues to

you and give security’.

Bardsley writing in 1885 in his commentary on the Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, states

that in 1230 Walter Gray, Archbishop of York, confirmed the chapels of Dalton and Urswick

to the monks of Furness, and declared the advowments of Ulverston and Pennington to

belong to the canons of Conishead’. So, in 1230 the church at Urswick and its lands were in

the care of the Abbey of St. Mary of Furness under the ministrations of William de Boyvill.

This does not seem to be the end of the matter because Baines shows that ‘the advowson,

though claimed by Henry Fitz Henry, as regardant of the manor, belonged to the monks of

Furness, to whose use W., archdeacon of Richmond in 1288, confirmed, together with

Dalton, the church of Urswick, saving the vicarage of twelve marks, after the decease of

William de Boyvill’. This led to further dispute because in the deed the expression ‘ecclesias

de Dalton et Urswick cum capellis’ is seen as proof that Urswick had a chapel or chapels

even then. In fact the monks of Furness at the time claimed (unsuccessfully) a right to

Ulverston and Pennington as chapels depending on the church of Urswick.

We have identified the ‘main movers’ in the early development of Urswick and its parish but

there is still somewhat of a mystery surrounding the thirteenth century ‘Le Franceys’ grave

slab which currently stands intact next to the ‘priest’s door’ in the chancel of Urswick

church. The slab is flat and tapered from head to foot with ‘floriated cross elaborately

carved in relief, and inscribed along the chamfered edge, in Longobardic characters + HIC :

JACET : AMICIA : FILIA : JOHANNIS : FRANCESSI . It also has a pair of sheep shears engraved

into the slab which indicates that Amicia died young.

70

From an engraving by H.Gaythorpe, 1882 (original now too worn to photograph clearly)

We know from records that John le Franceys witnessed the charter of Roger de Lancaster,

baron of Kendal, granted to Ulverston by Edward I in 1284, so can date the slab accurately.

Gaythorpe writing for the Barrow Field and Naturalist Club in 1882 had discovered a lease in

the Duchy of Lancaster Calendar of Ancient Charters or Grants, a lease dated 1328 for a

term of years by John, son of Roger the smith of Bolton, to John Fraunseys of Bolton, of all

his lands in the vill of Bolton. He suggests that this John Fraunseys was probably an ancestor

of Amicia.

Several references have already been made to the Coucher Book of Furness Abbey written

or copied up in the early part of the fifteenth century. It was reproduced for the Chetham

Society in 1886, edited by Rev. J. C. Atkinson and J.Brownbill who added helpful notation

and several ‘correctives’. They describe it as being ‘a large folio, sixteen inches in height by

ten inches and a half in width, and consisting originally of two hundred and ninety-three

folios of ordinary vellum, but many have been torn out.’ They add that ‘it is to be lamented

that at some remote period, many of these illustrations, and in consequence parts of pages

have been cut out, the work probably of an antiquarian collector of the time of Queen

Elizabeth, as several of the escutcheons which have been recovered and pasted in their

proper places are labelled at the back in the writing of that date’. In relation in particular to

some of the earliest deeds or other documents written in old French they sense that the

copyist did not himself understand the writing he was transcribing.

71

The Coucher Book consists mainly of a descriptive index of ‘Charters, Fines, Pleadings, Papal

Bulls, Etc. connected with The Abbey and its lands and other properties’. It also has copies

of miscellaneous charters and documents inserted at the beginning of the Coucher Book

together with a metrical account of the foundation of the Abbey. It is an extremely

important resource but sadly it has not been translated into English! It is concerned

primarily with the Abbey’s assets and can tell us very little about what actually happened

inside the particular churches. Some of this can be inferred from study of general practices

in the church or key national events during the period up to the Dissolution in the sixteenth

century, and this is helpful because it can in part explain additional physical changes made

to the church during this period. This we shall attempt to do.

The year 1215 would seem to be a significant ‘marker’ because that was the date of the

Lateran Council and that was when the priest obtained the right of freehold of his benefice;

if he was one of the monks from the monastery that had the right of presentation and

appropriated all the revenues, the priest was called rector. Of greater significance in relation

to the building itself and the congregation was that the Council enunciated the doctrine of

transubstantiation, ie., that the ‘substance’ of the bread and wine at the Mass actually

became the body and blood of Christ. It was stipulated that everyone should receive the

Sacrament once a year.

The reservation of the Host in a pyx suspended over the altar became mandatory. The

chancel became the focal point of the church and a large stone altar was to be placed there.

Close to the altar stood a piscina for the ablutions (Urswick’s is still visible in its original

position). On the north wall in the chancel would be the aumbrey, a cupboard that housed

the sacred vessels, the paten for the Host and the chalice for the wine.

The chancel was now physically divided from the nave by a wooden pierced screen. At

Urswick in the east wall of the nave on the south side of the chancel is a hagioscope. In

some places it is called a ‘squint’ because such holes, with one corner shut off were

constructed in the early part of the thirteenth century in order to permit worshippers, who

were not permitted into the chancel area, to view the altar and the celebration of the Mass

from behind the chancel arch. It would appear that the north side of this opening had been

filled in by stone until it was removed in 1907, thus revealing the hagioscope.

There was another significant division in that responsibility for the upkeep of the chancel

was given to whoever had the right of presentation. The nave, with all the ornaments,

vestments and the upkeep of the church-yard became the responsibility of the laity. This led

to the emergence of vestries, gatherings of the laity to raise funds, and church wardens

whose task it was to administer them.

72

Strong tells us that although a long list of ornaments and vestments was also required,

records of Episcopal visitations revealed that many churches lacked even the most basic

liturgical vessels and few had any vestments at all.

It’s time to consider once more our local ‘evidence in stone’, this time to look more closely

at the porch. We have ascertained that it was built separately from the main body of the

church because it was not bonded to the south nave wall. In 1920 a ‘Mass Hour Dial’ (or

Scratch Dial) was discovered on the outside of the left hand entrance to the porch. Pollit

described it as being ‘well-worn and incomplete but was used, in days gone by, to show, by

means of a shadow pointer, the times for Mass and Daily Services’. Dickinson described it as

an ‘early Christian sundial with a small ‘gnomon’ or central hole for a pin, the shadow of

which marked the time on nearby sectors subdivided to indicate service times’. The

inference is that it is Anglo-Saxon. The porch is difficult to date accurately but when one

considers the function of a porch in relation to rites of passage during medieval times then it

has to be at least as old as the ‘original’ Norman font which stands at the west end of the

nave.

Roy Strong writes that although nowadays the church porch is little more than a repository

for notices of times of services or the flower rota, in medieval times it was the setting for

major rites of passage, particularly baptism and the ‘churching of women’.

Let’s look briefly at each one of these:

Baptism took place within days of birth (bear in mind the infant mortality rate and the fear

of death without baptism); the baby would be brought to the church by the midwife and the

godparents where the priest would meet them in the porch. The baptismal party would

bring some salt for the first exorcism; some of it was placed in the baby’s mouth and prayers

said, after which the infant’s forehead was signed twice with the sign of the cross. Strong

goes on to tell us that then after spitting into his left hand the priest would moisten the

child’s ears and nostrils in emulation of similar actions by Jesus when healing the deaf and

blind man. He then made the sign of the cross on the child’s right hand, declaring ‘May you

remain in the Catholic faith and have eternal life forever and ever. Amen.’ Now invited by

the priest to ‘Go into the temple of God’ the party would enter the church and gather round

the font which was at the west end of the nave.

Churching of Women: The priest would greet the baby’s mother in the porch- forty days

after the birth of a boy and eighty days after the birth of a girl- and after prayers and a

sprinkling of holy water, he led her and a party of women friends into the church where a

monetary offering in thanksgiving was made.

73

Strong also suggests that the porch was the place where ‘a large part of the medieval

marriage ceremony took place’ and makes reference to Chaucer’s Wife of Bath who had had

five husbands “all at the church door”. He also pointed out that since at that time fees for

marriage were required from both landlord and church, then until the thirteenth century

most peasant couples set up home without the benefit of matrimony!

From the later Middle Ages the porch was also the place where oaths were sworn, bargains

struck, disputes settled and business transacted. Parson Postlethwaite pointed out that in

more recent times it was usual to spend ‘a night or two’ in the porch after a funeral to

frustrate the evil designs of “body snatchers”.

Two other features of the Urswick church porch should be noted (although not necessarily

from this early period); again it is Mr Postlethwaite who provides the information. He tells

us that the parson used to pasture his cow in the churchyard, ‘as was his right’, but the

wardens strongly objected to her using the porch as a “boose” so they slung a chain across

the entrance where its remains can still be seen. On the right side of the porch are some

vertical grooves and these were allegedly formed by Tudor archers sharpening their arrows

prior to target practice. Mr Pollit suggests that they were made by soldiers whilst waiting for

morning service.

The Font

Baptism was originally by total immersion. If this was performed inside the church as was

the usual practice in the 11th century it would have taken place in large tub in the body of

the church. In Norman times this developed into a circular or polygonal container made of

stone in which the sanctified water was kept securely locked down! The font in Urswick

church is hexagonal in shape, made of local sandstone and standing on a pedestal. For some

reason it was actually discarded from the church in 1826 (perhaps we shall discover why

later on) but it was re-instated in the 1920’s with a heavily carved oak cover, the original

having been lost. The securing rings for the lid are clearly visible in the carved stone work.

During the Norman period under discussion the floor of the nave was earthen and there

would be no seats or benches, ‘so the faithful stood or knelt on the ground’. There would be

no heating or lighting- candles on the altar appeared towards the end of the twelfth

century. As Strong said, ‘churchgoing remained a rigorous experience for several

generations’.

The dominant feature in the church would have been the Rood above the chancel arch,

depicting Christ on the cross flanked by the Virgin Mary and ‘The Beloved Disciple’ John and

usually made of wood. The Rood in Urswick church is of course modern, having been carved

by Alec Miller in the early 1900’s, but it gives a good visual impression of what the earlier

Rood would have been like in the chancel arch. Pope Gregory the Great who sent Augustine

74

to England in 597 laid down the principle reasons for their use: ‘For a picture is introduced

into a church so that those who are ignorant of letters may at least read by looking at the

walls what they cannot read in books’.

Although not a feature of a simple ‘rustic’ Celtic church, certainly during the later Anglo-

Saxon and early Norman period of developments in stone, etc. the internal decoration of

the church became significant. Stories and images from the Bible would have been painted

on the walls. It was reported that when renovations were being undertaken at Urswick in

about 1910 they found ‘some suggestion of coloured mural or design work on part of the

nave walls which had been covered up by the plaster’. These were described as being of

elaborate character in combinations of green, yellow and black. It was said that these traces

of early murals were too fragmentary to be retained. We can have no idea about the actual

dating of these murals, whether others had been painted there before them, etc. or even

when the stone walls were first plastered over, but they would seem to fit the template for

the church of the 13th and 14th century or earlier. The plastering referred to above, which

was removed in 1910, was done during the time when a ceiling was constructed in the nave

for insulation purposes in 1751 but that is to rush ahead!

This would seem an appropriate place to consider the windows, or more particularly, the

glass in the windows, of the chancel which attract the eye with the colours of the many

heraldic arms and which deserve closer attention. The Lancet Window on the south west

side of the chancel contains glass partly made up of fragments taken from the old East

window. For some as yet undiscovered reason this window, almost certainly thirteenth

century, was removed in 1850 and for many years afterwards the old tracery stood in the

garden at Hawkfield. A new east window was given by a Mrs. Ashburner of Holmbank and

the glass, the gift of the Revd. Gwillym, incumbent of Ulverston and Rural Dean, was put in

in 1855. The Coat of Arms of Furness Abbey are to be seen above those of Citeaux Abbey

which was the mother house of the Cistercians. Mr Pollitt, the Secretary of the Parochial

Church Council and author of the guide to the church published in 1977, states that this

glass, which was reset in 1976, is worthy of study, ‘not only for its content, but for the

careful way in which the ancient fragments have been put together with the assistance of

some modern glass.’ Below the Furness Abbey arms are two fragments of yellow stained

glass, on one of which is a bird, probably a wheatear or a bunting, and on the other a lion’s

face, one of the crests of the Harrington family. Below the Citeaux shield within a circle is a

greyhound ‘courant’.

In the modern Flamboyant style window in the south east of the sanctuary some of the glass

is described as ‘ancient’. The Eastern light shows the arms of the old Furness families,

Coupland and de Kirkby above Curwen, and in the western light can be seen the arms of

Pennington and Broughton above le Fleming. This mediaeval glass, according to Pollitt, ‘is

described by experts as being very good’. The ancient glass composes most of the tinctured

75

glass and those portions of plain or silver glass which show a ‘diapered’ effect; this is

thought to have come from Furness Abbey, but parts of it may have been from Urswick’s

own building. We are told that in 1855 when the new East Window was glazed Revd.

Richard Gwillym ‘put the painted glass out of the old East window into the window next to it

on the south side of the church, filling it up with other glass.’ As well as the coats of arms,

the head of a saint in a brown habit (not a Cistercian monk as has often been supposed says

Mr. Pollitt) can be seen in the upper part of this window.

The original tracery of the East Window was restored in 1907. This window shows the

heraldic shields of ten old families. In the middle of the central light are depicted the Royal

Arms of Queen Mary (1554) who was Lady of the Manor of Muchland. Below the Royal arms

are the arms of Marshall, William Marshall being the founder of Urswick’s Grammar School

in the reign of Elizabeth I. The coat of arms of the de Urswick family is on the right of the

Marshall arms. The other eight families whose arms are displayed are Newton, Cancefield,

Huddleston, Preston, de Boyville, Stanley, Harrington and Bardsey. Some of these families

have been referred to in the above text; others will emerge as we continue with the story.

The windows in the Nave for which Pollitt claims ‘little historical significance’ are all

different shapes and sizes and their positions do not conform to any set pattern. Most of

the work on opening them up to their present form is mid-nineteenth century so we shall

return to them at the appropriate time; however, Gaythorpe tells us that the earliest

specimens of window tracery are in the nave and date from about the middle of the

fourteenth century. Possibly these windows were inserted by Sir John de Haryngton, who

was lord of Aldingham from 1347-1363/4. He suggests that ‘the ancient windows in the

chancel and upper stages of the Tower are nearly a century later, and most probably are the

work of William de Haryngton, the donor of the bell, who was born in 1392 and died 3rd

March 1458.’

He also stated that the ‘probable date of the ancient glass is about the middle of the

fourteenth century, and it would most likely be inserted when the Decorated window and

the piscine with the hexagonal-shaped fluted basin, about seven and a half inches in

diameter, were put into the church’. (page 107).

In relation to the tower at the west end and which Baines described as being ‘large and

massive’ (Gawthorpe describes it as a ‘massive embattled western tower’), we have already

noted that the lower section was probably either pre-Norman or built during the period of

Scottish incursions in the middle of the twelfth century. Baines relates that in 1316 the Scots

under Robert the Bruce ’wasted the northern counties, and Furness ‘and only six years later,

in 1322, the Scots made another incursion, once again laying the area waste, and causing

the monks to either build or restore the Pele or Peel, a strong castle on the neighbouring

island of Fouldrey. It is more than likely that this was the period when the church tower at

Urswick was enlarged and increased in height. At some point the monks also inserted a

76

sculpture of the Mater Delorosa or Pieta (depicting The Virgin Mary nursing the dead body

of Jesus in her arms) high up in the west facing wall of the tower. This is made of local red

sandstone, probably quarried from Furness Abbey itself. There are in fact two other niches

but they remained empty; close investigation proved unfruitful. The buttresses also suggest

their origins in the Abbey quarries.

The full impact of the Scottish incursions can be seen through the respective values of the

rectories of Aldingham and Urswick. In 1291 Aldingham rectory was valued at £53 6s 8d and

after the 1322 raids £10 only. Urswick rectory was valued at £5 6s 8d in 1291 and was

reduced to 40s after 1322. Perhaps it is not surprising that it was stated that ‘though various

ancient remains have been observed, the history of the parish (of Urswick) has been without

any very noteworthy incident.’ It is abundantly clear that the peninsular was ‘ruled over’ by

the Abbey of Furness in just about every aspect of its life.

Let’s while away the years by revisiting the ‘Legend of the Tarn’ without which any story of

Urswick would be incomplete. It has appeared in many versions over the years, even in

verse written and delivered, I understand, by Parson Postlethwaite. I thought I would use

the version as recorded in Bulmer’s History and Directory of Furness and Cartmel as told by

old Willie Waane (the village oracle) and written by John Bolton, a local geologist of note:

“Urswick was once a market town, called ‘Lile Ooston’, and was older than either Kendal or

Lancaster. The inhabitants had everything in plenty with the exception of a beck for their

cows to drink from, which obliged them to provide limestone troughs supplied with water

from the draw-wells for the cows and sheep. The old women began to grumble sadly at this,

as they were an idle, gossiping, worthless set, and at length, declaring they would stand it

no longer, they all went to the priest and informed him that if he did not send them a beck

of good water for their cows, they would neither come to church nor confession as long as

they lived, giving him forty days to perform the task otherwise they would stone him to

death, for they knew he could do it if he would. The priest was a man of great sanctity and

learning, who had made a pilgrimage to the Holy Sepulchre at Jerusalem, and to appease

them he ordered every woman in Lile Ooston to attend church next day, and meet him in

the grave-yard, when he would accede to their demands; but they must agree to do his

bidding, or he would not only refuse their request, but take away their wells also. The old

women attended according to his request, when the priest ordered them to form a single

line, and march in procession three times round the church, while he prayed; but in

consequence of each woman in the place wanting to be first, none of them would submit,

and they immediately began to wrangle about precedence, the noise and confusion of all

talking violently together being so great as to be heard on the top of Birkrigg- indeed, a

serious riot occurred amongst them, and it was some time before the priest obtained

silence, though not without severe threats. When quiet was at last restored, the priest

formed the assembly into a circle, walking blindfold round the ring first one way and then

77

the other, and after turning himself three times, he broke through them, deciding by this

trial that the woman on his right should go first, and the one on his left last. Accordingly,

they opened out into line, and proceeded as the priest directed, every woman being

discontented with the arrangement, except the one who headed the procession, the rest

murmuring about the unfairness of the thing, and even insinuating that she who was thus

honoured before them all was a favourite of the priest. This bare-footed company started

from the north-west corner of the church tower, just under the figure of the virgin and child,

walking at a very slow pace the way of the sun, the priest praying all the while with his

hands above his head. After the first walk round, there came on a fall of snow, and the old

women paused one minute before commencing the second, which was brought to a halt on

its completion by a tremendous storm of hailstones, as large as seamew’s eggs. The ancient

dames now rested while the holy father walked once round the churchyard alone, and then

they all commenced their third journey, which was interrupted, after a few yards, by a

dreadful clap of thunder bursting directly over their heads, followed by other peals in rapid

succession, until the perambulation was accomplished, when the earth trembled, and a

rushing noise was heard in the west. Immediately afterwards they saw a herd of cows

fleeing before a flood of water, which, rushing down the hollow, now formed the boundary

between the townships of Much Urswick and Little Urswick, swept everything before it, and

eventually became what is now known as “The Clerk’s Beck”, or “The Priest’s Beck”. The

earth had been shaken by a great convulsion of nature, which raised up a hill near Lindale

Cote, and changed the direction of a stream of water near that place, this has continued to

flow ever since towards Much Urswick, and is in fact the present existing “Clerk’s Beck”. The

gossips had now abundance of water for their cattle, and were contented for a short while,

until one day, after a storm of rain, the water in the new beck became red with iron ore, and

although the priest assured them the cows would prefer it before any other, and proved it

by trying them with well water unsuccessfully, the female portion of the community

disputed the fact, and grumbled more than ever at the priest, before whom they presented

themselves, vowing, that unless he gave them clear water in their beck, and plenty of it too,

they would never enter the church again. He informed them he could supply their demands

but it was a dangerous venture inasmuch as he could not control the quantity, and they

might receive more than they liked; but if they persisted, he would give them such an

inundation as would satisfy them for a long time, so that they had their choice whether they

would be content with Clerk’s Beck, although it was sometimes rather reddened in wet

weather, or risk the hazardous provision of clear water he had mentioned. Wonderful to

relate, the old women were for once all of one mind, and when the priest hesitated from

reluctance to agree to their desire, they taunted him with want of power, and called him a

poor helpless, impotent, old pretender, and not a true priest, and they danced and raved,

and swore at him, and defied him to his face, one old hag going so far as to say she could

make a better priest out of a bit of clay. Being now convinced of their worthlessness and

depravity, he made them retire, every one of them to her own house and, after opening all

78

the doors and windows, remain perfectly silent for one hour by the sun-dial in the

churchyard, he would them try if he could not satisfy them with water for ever. It was

understood between them, that a signal should be displayed on the top of the principal

house, so that in case they repented, they should signify the same by striking their colour,

but if it remained flying after the hour expired, they must take all he had promised. They all

left in great joy, saying they had frightened the priest, and when they had secured the clear

water they would have something else. Following their instructions, they displayed the

appointed signal, which being perceived by the priest he walked slowly round the church

once, and raised his hands on high, when a snow shower came on, but the flag was still

floating on the breeze showing the determination of the applicants for more water. The

priest rested to give the discontented women an opportunity for changing their minds, but

no intimation being given, he lifted up his hands again, and there came on a fearful storm of

hail as before. This second warning was unheeded, although the priest rested twice as long,

and turned himself twice round to give them time to regret the fatal step they were taking,

indeed, so far from retreating, the most turbulent of the women was observed on the

house-top beside the flag, defying the power of the priest to his face. At length, turning his

back on the town, for he could not bear to look on what would follow, he gently elevated his

hands- when an earthquake sank the town in a moment- but even in the midst of this dire

calamity the stern old harridan before mentioned was seen standing upon the roof of her

house, snapping her fingers at the holy father, and crying aloud for more water. Very soon

all was over, and when the priest gazed in the direction of the town, Lile Ooston had

disappeared for ever, and its place was supplied by the tarn of Much Urswick.”

It might be an opportune moment to consider more closely the quality and role of the local

priest. Roy Strong describes the medieval clergy as being an ‘uneven bunch’- which might

equally be said of clergy at any time- and fell into two distinct groups: prosperous rectors

and poor vicars. The parish priest typically lived in an isolated community, largely cut off

from other priests or people with similar education and interests. ‘Without any means of

transport except a horse, with no post, no newspapers and very few books’, says Hylson-

Smith, ‘the country clergyman was left almost entirely on his own to cope with his daily

round, and with the struggle against loneliness, heightened by celibacy, secularism, and

probably a small but disheartening amount of indifference and indolence among the local

people for whom he was responsible.’ (page 236).

We are reminded that the lot of the so-called ‘inferior clergy’ was pretty desperate around

the twelfth century with the appropriation of parochial endowments by the religious

houses, as happened of course at Urswick when Furness Abbey held sway. Rectories

disappeared and very poorly paid vicars were substituted, as we have seen; their condition

was improved and their living somewhat more secure after the Lateran Council of 1215

although still extremely poor.

79

We are told that there was also an improvement in the educational level of the clergy as the

thirteenth century progressed. Hylson-Smith quoted Shinners and Dohar who stated that

the village parson was not, as so frequently portrayed, ‘a barely literate, barely celibate,

barely sober bumpkin, more at home in a tavern or in flagrante delicto than at an altar or a

prie-dieu.’

Every priest was expected or required to know the ten commandments, the seven deadly

sins, the seven sacraments and the creed as the basic matters of belief. And then in Bishop

Grosseteste’s ‘Constitutions’ they were reminded of their duties and what conduct was

expected of them. It makes sobering reading:

No woman should be allowed in his house whose presence might cause suspicion of evil; he

should not frequent taverns, engage in merchandise, or act as a bailiff. He should not profit

from the goods entrusted to him, attend plays, game with dice, or carry arms. He should

ensure that the cemetery was enclosed, that no markets, games or lawsuits were permitted

in holy places, clandestine marriages should be forbidden, and no layman, with the possible

exception of the patron, should be in the chancel with the clerks during divine service. Of

the pastoral aids, the tract by Archbishop Pecham called Ignorantia sacerdotum (or ‘The

Ignorance of Priests) was most widely circulated and used. It was issued in 1281 and

outlined the fundamental theology with which every priest was expected to be familiar.

Hylson-Smith states that it conformed to the well-established, and much favoured

mediaeval practice of assembling all the sevens: the seven sacraments, the seven deadly

sins, the seven virtues, the seven works of mercy. It concisely rehearsed the Ten

Commandments, and it succinctly summarized the articles of faith.

By now everyone over the age of fourteen was bound by law to take Communion once a

year, at Easter; they had to prepare for the sacrament by an act of penance or confession.

Whilst this could be a brusque affair with the priest reeling off to the kneeling penitent the

‘Seven Deadly Sins, the Five Senses and the Seven Works of Mercy’, as Strong points out,

’through confession the priest was often able to settle disputes within the village

community and enforce morality on his flock.’

As we have seen, the climax of the Liturgical Year was Easter, but throughout the year all

the great feasts were marked by processions in which everyone took part. Rogationtide, the

solemn beating of the parish bounds on 25th April, could last for several days depending on

the size of the parish. This was a ceremony designed to drive out evil spirits, invoke God’s

blessing on the coming harvest and, at the same time, define the village community. As

Strong pointed out ‘all these ceremonies of the Christian year brought constant animation

to the church building and reflected a faith with a strong sense of theatre. Through them

both individual piety and collective identity found their expression and permeated everyday

80

life’. In fact, the many rituals and ‘rites of passage’ that took place in the parish church

impinged on every single person ‘from cradle to grave’.

Before we move on this might be the most appropriate place to highlight the ‘rush-bearing

ceremony’, an ancient custom and procession, revived at Urswick by Revd. Postlethwaite in

1905. On the Sunday nearest to St. Michael’s Day in September the men from the village

would take horses and carts and cut down rushes from around the Tarn and bring them in

to spread on the church’s bare earthen floor, the old ones having been removed and the

floor swept first. Again, the villagers would come in procession to the church and together

celebrate the foundation of the church. Today the congregation, school children and

villagers process with the vicar, church officers and choir together with the ‘Rush Queen’

and her retinue of attendants and ‘sword-bearers’ around the village led by a local brass

band, and hymns are sung at various points and money collected in a large sheet; then the

procession enters the church where a service is held, the Rush Queen presented with a

white-bound bible and children’s posies blessed at the altar. At the end of the service the

children place their posies on untended graves and then the members of the congregation

are invited to share in refreshments, including traditional home-made gingerbread!

Specially written ‘Rush Bearing’ Hymns were traditionally learned in school and sung in the

church; today they have been somewhat ‘diluted’ and modern hymns added; Reverend.

Postlethwaite composed his own hymn for the day. One or two verses taken from the

‘processional hymn’ will give the reader a ‘flavour’ of the occasion:

Come ye because your fathers brought in laden wains of yore,

The winter-warmth of scented rush to ease a trodden floor,

From marsh and rill, from flat and hill, from space of seave and sedge,

The tribute of a manor’s wealth, a people’s grateful pledge?

Green rushes in our trophies, and flowers of colour gay

For God, for man, these homely gifts, our heartfelt love display.

A double service then you yield with thought of old-time need,

From man you gain the earthly due, from God the heavenly meed.

Then with your gift your voices life in strains of love and praise,

Inspiring emblems held aloft, triumphant paeans raise.

Green rushes in our trophies, gay flowers of brightest hue

We bring to make our yearly gift, today this gift is due.

There is an alternative ‘legend’ which to be true to the full story of Urswick should at least

be noted; the biographer of Nicholas Marshall, (Vicar of Urswick 1620-60) and the Marshall

family tells us of the drowning of the original village and church at some early stage of its

history. It’s best to report verbatim so that all the ‘credit’ goes to him:

81

‘It happened that each day the village was totally deserted- with the men perhaps cutting

timber in the woods, or tilling their master’s land; whilst the women were busy in the

bottom pastures, perhaps tending sheep and chickens, or planting seed. One day, as usual,

as two of the foresters, having brought back a dozen trimmed quarter trunks of timber,

were laboriously heaving them nearer to the council fire in readiness to heap them into a

fuel pile, they heard what sounded like an echoing drum-roll rising from beneath their feet,

every time they threw one of the heavy logs to the ground. Intrigued by the phenomenon,

they paused in their task, and deliberately lifted another log, to let it drop. Again there was

the same rumbling sound, but this time it was followed by an enormous cracking sound.

Feeling the ground tremble beneath their feet, they watched with alarm as a narrow line of

soil slowly sank down a visible crack which had appeared only a few feet in front of them!

Believing the devils were coming out of hell to take them, the two labourers ran as fast as

their legs would allow, back towards the woods to pass the news. But before they could

reach it, a thunderous rumbling, grinding, and snapping was heard for miles around, as

cracks appeared all over their settlement, and houses collapsed. From that distance, the

men could clearly see the spire of the church toppling, and they watched in amazement as

the church itself slowly sank lower, then seemed to steady itself, only to start sinking once

more. Then with a roar it was swallowed, and a gigantic pall of grey dust billowed up from

the spot, soaring higher and higher towards the clouds. Then, as these clouds of dust were

slowly swept away by the breeze, the sound of running water could be heard. As everything

finally settled down and the onlookers began to emerge from their dazed shock, they

scrambled across to the site where their village had stood only a few hours before- but it

had completely disappeared, apparently drowned in the waters of a tarn that was rapidly

rising, to occupy the spot where the settlement had been when they had set out for work

that morning!’

One suspects that even Henry Barber MD would have approved of this tradition. It seems

that he approved of little else! Writing in 1894,of Urswick church, he wrote, ‘There is little

else (other than the grave slab in memory of ‘Amicia Filia Johanis Francissi’ referred to

earlier) interesting in this church besides an old font, an alms box, and a piscina in the south

wall of the chancel; but there is much that is uninteresting- such as the high pen-like pews,

and a remarkable private-box-sort-of-thing, somewhere between the floor and the roof-

relics of the churchwardenic period- and an ugly pulpit and prayer-desk. It is a good thing

that the bell in the tower is hidden or it would crack its sides at the sight of them; for none

of these abominations existed in churches in their early days’ (Page 332).

Marshall’s biographer also reports as ‘legend’ that ‘about a millennium ago when the

present Parish Church of St. Mary was first opened, the Abbot of Furness commented that

the “labouring of the Ossick coots had raised the church again from the ground” for he

acknowledged that “where had stood the old church now was the tarn”. In thanksgiving he

82

instituted an annual ceremony in which the boys of the parish collected rushes from beside

the tarn waters, and carried them to the new church in solemn procession behind the

Blessed Sacrament.’

‘Each year since’, he reported,’ round about Michaelmas, the whole parish gets together for

a rush-bearing ceremony. The lads of the parish hack rushes from the tarn verges, and make

them up into individual crosses, or their own original religious emblems. Then these tokens

are blessed, and borne in solemn procession to the high altar of SS Mary & Michael, whilst

‘village maidens’ gather flowers to lay on the graves of their own forebears in the

churchyard.’

Barber’s reference above to ‘the bell’ is probably a slip of the pen because there was more

than one bell in the belfry at the time of writing; there were in fact three, two hung in the

eighteenth century, the peal to become four in 1953. We shall come to consider the later

bells but the oldest bell, known as the Harrington Bell is worthy of mention here and its

casting date fits the period before the Dissolution. This bell is the largest and according to

Gaythorpe ‘in outline it is more graceful and symmetrical’ than the others and is ‘finely

modelled and well proportioned’. The inscription which encircles the bell reads:

maria S + S WILHELMUS DE HARYNGTON DOMINUS DE ALDYNGHAM ET DOMINA

MARGARETA UXOR EIUS +

The ‘Haryngton’ shield of arms is cast on the lower part of the bell below the waist. No

founder’s mark is visible, but there is a ‘cross patonce with the angles diapered immediately

under the word ‘Maria’ and after the word ‘Eius’ and on either side of the former cross is an

elongated S-shaped figure’. He states that the perfect form of the letters in this 15th century

inscription and the beautiful diapered backgrounds are in striking contrast with the old face

Roman letters and incorrect spelling in the inscriptions on the 18th century bells.’

Gaythorpe suggests that ‘it is not improbable that the ‘Haryngton’ bell may originally have

been given to Conishead Priory by Sir William Haryngton seeing that he had a chapel and

was buried there.’ There is nothing to suggest that he was particularly interested in Urswick;

one would have expected to find the bell perhaps at Aldingham. The bell was most likely

purchased by the churchwardens of Urswick after the Dissolution of Conishead Priory in

1536. In the Inventory of church goods at Urswick in 1552 in which the name of a Wylim

Harrington occurs as one of the churchwardens there are (among other things to which we

shall return) ‘two bells.... one hande belle..... and two other bells, being in the steple not

meneyonid in the first Inventorie (1547). The churche wardens doo depose that the said

pyssheners doo owe for two of the said bells Xii.’ Clearly, then, suggests Gaythorpe, if the

‘Haryngton Bell’ is one of these, the other one (the fourth) is not now in the ‘steple’, and

both the second and third bells, dated 1711 and 1724, may have been re-cast from two

older bells’. (Page 101).

83

Pollit makes reference to the ‘story’ that the missing bell was moved to Dalton or Kendal in

the eighteenth century and speculates that ‘perhaps it was a damaged bell with the metal

intended for recasting’, although this story, ‘conjectural or true, does not explain the

absence of two bells from the original bells (1552) replaced presumably by the bells

acquired in 1711 and 1724.’

This is another example of our being at a considerable loss in our research because a lot of

records and documents relating specifically to the church are no longer available to us.

Gaythorpe, writing in 1900, comments that ‘it is a matter of regret that there are now no

Parish Registers at Urswick earlier than 1608. According to a statement by the vicar before

the Assistant Commissioner, Arthur Cardew, Barrister-at-Law, at the public enquiry made at

Urswick on 13th September 1898, ‘there were no deeds whatever when he came to the

parish about twenty years ago. There was a mass of parchment at the bottom of the chest

which, with the damp, had gone to jelly, and it had to be dug out with a spade. Some of the

Parish Registers were mutilated horribly, entries having been bodily cut out here and there’

(page 107).

Our only other major source for the medieval history of Furness is the Coucher Book of

Furness Abbey referred to earlier. This was compiled in 1412 at the instruction of Abbot

William Dalton. Richard Esk seemingly composed the introduction and the table of contents,

while John Stell acted as scribe.

Fred Barnes tells us that the Scottish wars of 1316 and 1322 caused a spate of castle

building and fortification in the district but, for example, the fact that the building or more

likely, rebuilding of Gleaston castle, was never completed suggested that there followed a

more settled period after 1322. Dalton Castle seems to have been a Court House and prison

rather than a military structure, while Piel Castle must have been of much more use as a

strong warehouse for the harbour, rather than a defence against Scottish raids by land.

Barnes also provides an extremely helpful general picture of Furness life at the time of

Edward III, Furness’ period of maximum prosperity, and suggests that ‘under the monks the

economy shows that nice balance of rights and duties which characterise the feudal system.

The tenants paid rent and also a “fine” (admission fee) of one penny on admittance as

tenants; they had to render service such as the carting of 160 loads of peat required by the

Abbey every year from Angerton Moss and the provision of a specified number of men duly

armed and horsed to serve the King when called upon, against the Scots, or to defend the

harbour of Piel. In return for these rents and services the tenants received fixity of tenure in

their holdings; a share of 60 barrels of single ale or beer and 30 dozen loaves of coarse

wheat bread distributed weekly; free education for their children in the Monastery school;

iron for their ploughs; hamlets with access to the sea had “tangle-dales” or liberty to collect

sea-weed for use as manure; each tenant had a turbary dale in Angerton Moss for peat, and

84

wood for repairing their houses and implements could be collected from Sowerby Woods.’

(page 34)

Although the Abbots possessed almost regal power, they were far from being absolute

monarchs; they may have had power to oppress their tenants but they took good care that

no one else should presume to do so. The Abbot appointed his own officers and the Sheriff

or Sheriff’s officers were prohibited from entering the Abbot’s territory under any pretext of

office whatever; no man was to presume to disturb the Abbot or any of his tenants on pain

of forfeiting £10 to the King!

Perhaps the only other accessible event worthy of note before we come to the Dissolution

and the Reformation under Henry VIII is the story of Lambert Simnel, pretender to the

English throne, who crossed over from Ireland in 1487, landed at Piel with 2,000 men,

mainly Flemish troops, under Colonel Martin Swartz, and a further number of Irishmen

under Captain Geraldine, a total force of about 8,000 men. The Abbot and all the local

gentry excepting Sir Thomas Broughton of Broughton Towers held aloof from the rising. The

rebel force was destroyed at Stoke-on-Trent.

85

Chapter Four: Dissolution And Dis-Location

A comment, this time by Farrer and Brownbill in their History of Lancashire Part 27d (Part of

Lonsdale Hundred) published in 1920, provides a natural ‘break’ in the sequence. Having

traced the history of Furness during the Middle Ages, and the descent of the two great

lordships which were appropriated by the Crown during 1537-54, they suggest that ‘with

such a population inhabiting a district remote and difficult to access, there are naturally few

events of special interest to narrate thereafter’. (Page 302) I think Barnes would disagree

with them and certainly his account of local events in the period leading up to the

Dissolution of Furness Abbey are well worth reporting here in some detail, and it sets the

scene for the dramatic changes which took place in the church almost overnight.

He states that ‘the backcloth for the play is an England where the old nobility had been

squandered by the War of the Roses with resultant decay of the power and influence of

feudalism and the rise of a new “middle class”, and concentration of power in the Crown;

and England enjoying the revival of learning and growth of mercantile activity and an

England undergoing agricultural depression’ (Page 38).

Locally, he says, by 1530 Gleaston Castle lay in ruins, the Lord of Aldingham had not been

resident in the area for nearly 80 years, the Pile of Fouldrey had long been a ruin, and the

Abbot’s other castle at Dalton was much decayed. Broughton Tower, slowly decaying for 50

years, now belonged with all its lands to the Earl of Derby, ‘one of the upstart new nobility’.

86

The Penningtons now resided at Muncaster in Cumberland, and Ulverston never had a

resident lord, being divided usually between Crown and Abbot. Hugh Fleming of Coniston

and his brother-in-law, Richard Kirkby of Kirkby Ireleth, represented the old manorial

families but they were simply squires, ‘not even of knightly rank’. William Bardsey of

Bardsea and his cousin Henry Ambrose of Lowick remained also as owners of minor manors.

New men coming into the district, ‘particularly in the Fells, showed themselves unimpressed

by the Abbot’s feudal rights and did not hesitate to sue him in the Chancery Court of the

Duchy when occasion offered; and this litigious infection spread to the remaining manorial

lords.’ According to Baines the old edifice’, anciently called Urswick Hall, and at a later

period Redmayne Hall, had since been enjoyed by nineteen generations of the family of Fell.

We are told that the incomers were mostly capitalists who had bought up estates under

various tenures and were busily improving them, ie., converting them to grazing farms,

introducing superior breeds of sheep and cattle, trading in wool and leather, and generally

conforming to the changing times when arable farming was depressed and grazing the only

paying branch. Low Furness had been mainly a corn producing area and the Abbot’s tenants

had been unwilling or unable because they lacked the capital, to launch out into new

ventures; many failed and saw their farms pass into strange hands. The Abbots showed

hostility to the newcomers while they neglected to help or advise their old tenants, ‘thus

they alienated both’.

As an example Barnes cites the Abbot’s attempts to restrict the sale of farm produce except

at prices fixed at Dalton market and says that these and other demands if enforced would

have reduced the tenants to the level of serfdom. Resistance was fierce and ‘after sixteen

years’ strife and contention’ a new Bill of customs was agreed by both parties in 1526. There

were also disputes within the Abbey between the monks and the Abbot, and it got to the

point where the monks threatened to intercede with the King, and in great alarm the Abbot

implored Thomas Cromwell to prevent them, for “if such disobedient persons may escape

punishment our religion will be utterly undone.” That was in 1533.

It is tempting to continue with the account of the events and the covert activities during the

next four years which led up to the dissolution of Furness Abbey in 1537, but the key event

was the arrival of the Receiver, Robert Southwell, on 23rd June 1537, who came to dismiss

the monks and to realise the effects of the Abbey. First the monks and then the lay brethren

and servants were dealt with, about 140 in all, and as Barnes points out, importantly, ‘as it

was a time of scarcity and agricultural depression, they must have found the coming winter

very trying’ (Page 51). 120 poor boys in the cloister school were given a holiday and told not

to return and 13 poor almsmen lodged in the monastery were given one mark each and sent

out to beg for their living. All of the effects of the monastery were sold off and the charters

and documents sent to London on three pack-horses!

87

When Southwell left, most of the Abbey was reduced to roofless ruined walls and the only

buildings spared were those a farmer would need. The gardens and orchards were likewise

spared for the farmer’s use. In 1540 the possessions of the late monastery of Furness were

by Act of Parliament annexed to the Duchy of Lancaster.

We are told that ‘though the monks were so shabbily treated, the Steward, the Bailiff of

Dalton and the other bailiffs and officers of the Liberty received appointments under the

Crown for life. For example, Roger Pele was granted, in lieu of 100 marks, the rectory of

Dalton consisting of the corn tithes of Lindal and Marton, and the small tithes and Easter

dues of the Parish, yet in less than two months he was being harried by a King’s servant who

had a lease on the parsonage! He appealed to Thomas Cromwell ‘not forgetting to enclose

a gift of 20/- in gold and a promise of £4 more from the Easter offerings’ and was allowed to

enjoy his living in peace until he died at Dalton in the spring of 1541.

But what about Urswick?

We know that it would have come under the Duchy of Lancaster in 1540. We also know that

Thomas Harteley was presented to the vicarage of Urswick by the Abbot of Furness Abbey

in 1535 and that on his death in 1544 William Sawrey was presented by Hugh and Walter

Askue ‘for this time only, on grant of Roger, late abbot of Furness.’ If the destruction of

Furness Abbey had only marginal impact on the life of the local church, then the

Reformation which began to speed up in the latter years of the reign of Henry VIII and took

root in the reign of Edward, who acceded to the throne at the age of nine years old in 1547,

was to have almost immediate and far-reaching impact on the local church.

Suddenly in 1536 all feasts between 1st July and 29th September were abolished ‘apparently

for interfering with the gathering of the harvest’. So were all those feasts which fell in the

Westminster law terms ‘for they hindered government administration’. The exceptions were

the feast of the Apostles, the Virgin, Ascension Day, the nativity of John the Baptist, All

Saints and Candlemas. Strong states that ‘the abolition of the holy days triggered off some

unrest but, for the most part, it appears that the directive was simply ignored; most parishes

went on celebrating their local saints as they always had,’ (Page 67).

In the same year the first doctrinal statement of the new Church of England was issued. The

‘Ten Articles’ were an indication of what was to follow. Only three of the seven sacraments

were upheld- baptism, penitence and the Eucharist. The intercession of the saints could still

be sought but clergy were instructed to warn their congregations of the danger of

worshipping images, ‘censing them, and kneeling and offering unto them.’

A series of injunctions issued in August of 1536 by Thomas Cromwell were far more severe.

Clerics were told to encourage parishioners to read the Bible in Latin and English and to

preach on the Ten Articles. Fathers and landlords were to catechise their families and

88

households on the Lord’s Prayer, the Creed and the Ten Commandments. In 1538 saints

were largely excised from the liturgy, the use of the rosary condemned and the ringing of

the angelus bell forbidden. The faithful were exhorted not to ‘offer money, candles or

tapers to images or relics, or kissing or licking the same’, and then any ‘feigned images’

which evoked such a response were ordered to be taken down; this went hand in hand with

the abolition of ‘candles, tapers or images of wax.... before any image or picture’. As Roy

Strong states, this single injunction set in train the destruction of church interiors, which

were gradually dismantled over the next thirty years. Perhaps it was then that the two

trefoil-headed ‘niches’ either side of the chancel arch at Urswick were vacated!

One positive injunction from those declared in 1536 was that ‘the curate of every parish

church shall keep one book or register, which book shall, every Sunday take forth and in the

presence of the churchwardens or one of them, write and record in the same all the

weddings, christenings and burials made the whole week before.’ The register was to be

kept in a locked chest within the church. This is a huge asset in identifying particular families

and moreso as there are little ‘additions’ here and there which give us a glimpse of life at

the time. As we shall see, though, it was not well kept and there are considerable gaps.

The records of the Manorial Court are also fascinating reading and tell us much about life in

general at the time. For example, in 1545 ‘the jurors put a penalty that none within the

lordship (of Muchland) shall keep no cards in his house under a penalty of 6s 8d nor suffer a

man servant to play at cards but in crysmis within their house under a penalty of 20 Shillings

and he that playeth to loose 13s 4d.’ In 1561 the Court ordered that ‘no man shall keep no

carding in his house nor codying nor peny prike nor nottrakes playing for bread nor nayles

under a penalty of 20s. Those that play and he that kepys the cards and hosts 40s.’

One would expect the local vicar to set a good example but sad to say that in 1574 William

Sawrey, vicar of Urswick, was in court ‘for gaming and playing at cards and dice in his own

house upon the Sabbath day in the time of divine service and that he had there

accompanied him as well Leonard Corker, Edward Jackson and divers others’. The case was

adjourned for a time for consideration.

We also note that in 1596 William Lindow, vicar of Urswick, was ‘presented for saying that

Edward Cooke is a forger of men’s wills to be in fine unless he can prove him so to be at the

next court’. It would seem that this arose because one of the parson’s perquisites was to

draw up wills for the parishioners.

In terms of keeping law and order it has transpired that Urswick village once had its own

stocks and market cross. In a letter written by a Richard Stables to John Dobson in 1918,

then school master at Urswick Grammar School, he says that ‘sometime between 1820 and

1840 Richard Smith of Bankfield caused Urswick cross and stocks to be removed from waste

land in front of the ‘Derby Arms’ because they interfered with the direct straight carriage

89

drive out of his front gates. They were built into a retaining wall about 10 or 12 yards from

Bankfield front gates on the Little Urswick side of the gates’ (James Melville, 1959).

Returning to the national scene:

The death of Henry VIII in 1547 and the earlier fall from grace of Thomas Cromwell in 1539

did not stop the process of reformation. In 1547, within weeks of Edward’s accession, a new

set of injunctions were issued to alter every church in the kingdom and what happened

inside them. All images were to be destroyed, all processions were to cease, instead the

cleric was bidden to kneel and read the litany, an English version of which had been

introduced by Archbishop Thomas Cramner in 1544. There was to be no holy water or holy

bread, and the use of votive candles forbidden. Money which had been raised for these by

various chantries, guilds and fraternities was to go into the poor box. (Strong, Page 69).

In December 1547, before the above institutions could offer significant resistance, they too

were suppressed, with the Crown confiscating their goods, lands and income. This had a

significant effect on some parishes because they had taken on major responsibilities for

running the church, raising money for expansions or repairs. This ceased.

Suppression continued and in the following year a licence to preach was introduced,

intended to give state control over what was said in the pulpit. Should the incumbent not

have a licence he was to read instead one of the approved homilies to his congregation. By

the Autumn of 1548 sermons were banned altogether!

The Prayer Book of 1549 swept away any variant celebrations of the Mass, replacing it with

a ceremony in English that was stripped of all the traditional externals such as holy bread

and water, ‘bidding the beads’ and the elevation of the Host. The service was still non-

participatory except that the Communion was now to be taken in both bread and wine. The

Prayer Book also reduced the traditional liturgical year to Christmas, Easter, Whitsun and a

handful of saint’s days.

The year 1552 has particular significance and brings us back to the situation at Urswick. In

that year the second Prayer Book made a complete break with the past. It introduced a

communion service in which both cleric and congregation participated together. Vestments

were forbidden. The Holy Table, which replaced the altar, was to be moved into the body of

the chancel and placed in the north-south position for communion. Any notion that the

Eucharist represented the sacrifice of Christ on the cross disappeared and the communion

service was purely commemorative. Consecrated bread and wine left over was to be taken

home and consumed by the cleric.

Roy Strong says that ‘when Edward VI had come to the throne in 1547 churches had been

filled with devotional objects and items essential for the performance of the liturgy. The

church had been a compartmented space filled with nooks and corners partitioned off for a

90

variety of altars or fraternities. The eye was held and guided by the presence of flickering

lights illuminating numerous images. By the close of 1552 the church had become one large,

empty, whitewashed enclosure. Colour, which had been everywhere, on the walls, the

polychrome statues, the vestments and the altar dressings, had vanished; so had the smell

of incense. All that the church was left with was a surplice, two tablecloths for the Holy

Table, a communion cup and a bell to ring before the sermon.’(Pages 74-75)

When traces of murals were uncovered on the walls of the nave at Urswick it was apparent

that the whitewashing which finally obliterated the murals had been carried out in stages,

the first of which included decorations in Indian red of elementary Tudor roses.

As part of the general visitation of 1552 planned by the Priory Council and carried out by the

Commissioners, the names of the church wardens at Urswick church are given together with

an inventory of its goods. The church wardens were: John Marshall, Robert Garner, John

Wylkinson (Wilkinson), Ric(hard) Byrdesey (Bardsey), Rycherde (Richard) Johnson, and

William Harrington. The inventory included, apart from the two bells referred to earlier,

‘one chasuble of.... two old vestments of yelowe and grene sylke, one albe, one cope of

blacke chamlett, one hande belle, one altar clothe of rede, two other bells being in the

steple not mencyonid in the first Inventorie’ ( Canon Ayre, 1897)).

At the time of the visitation the vicarage was held by William Sawrey who had been

appointed on the death of Thomas Hartley in 1544. It is not known whether Sawrey resigned

his living on the re-introduction (briefly) of the Roman ritual on the accession of Queen

Mary in 1553. Henry Woodbury was presented to the living in 1554 by Queen Mary as was

her entitlement under the Duchy of Lancaster and he died in 1558, to be followed by

Thomas Dobson presented by Philip and Mary in that year.

According to the list of vicars produced by Postlethwaite and Pollit, Thomas Dobson was

succeeded in 1562 by William Sawrey, the son of the gentleman who had resigned his office

in 1554. He was to be succeeded in 1580 by James Saier (Sayer) presented by Queen

Elizabeth. Of these worthy gentlemen we know virtually nothing, but we have some insight

into the ‘state of the nation’ especially during the Marian period and the accession of

Elizabeth in 1558. Having been forced to destroy or dispose of much from their churches

and their practices, suddenly they were issued new Injunctions in 1556 which began by

‘bidding parishioners to go once more to church, there to hear Divine service, not in jangling

or talking or walking commonly up and down, especially at mass time, but occupying

themselves, according to the time and place, in godly meditation and prayer, either with

beads or books of prayer allowed and appointed.‘ (Strong, page 78).

The clergy were required to reinstate ‘all godly ceremonies of the Church, as holy bread,

holy water, bearing of palms, creeping to the cross, standing at the gospel, and going on

procession. Strong comments that because of the previous destruction a great deal had to

91

be improvised ‘on the cheap’. Of course, it all changed again in November 1558 when

Elizabeth came to the throne and in 1559 the ‘Act of Uniformity’ was passed followed by a

series of royal injunctions. The Act was aimed at standardising the service, but this did not

happen uniformly across the country, certainly in the early years of her reign; however, the

early visitations to the parishes in 1559 and throughout the early 1560’s were thorough and

quite brutal. The Commissioners were ‘hell bent’ on destroying any artefact used in Catholic

ritual, including seeking out and destroying any items held in private hands, but as Strong

suggests, importantly, as the vast majority of priests remained in post, many external

Catholic rituals would have continued within the framework of the Prayer Book service.

A further practical point to be made was that during the reign of Edward VI bequests to

churches plummeted from 65 to 15 per cent of what they had been before the reforms; all

the changes demanded were expensive whilst income from bequests fell further

dramatically with the dissolution of the chantries.

It’s interesting to note that neither Baines (1870) nor Canon Ayre (1897) have a second

William Sawrey holding office at Urswick but we know from the records of the Duchy Court

in 1548 that, whilst vicar of Urswick, William senior was then lodging in Hawkshead and was

under attack from the local mob. The following extract taken from Postlethwaite’s ‘Some

Notes on Urswick Church and Parish’ published in 1906 makes interesting reading:

“William Sawry Vicar of Urswick, in the County of Lancaster, complained that when he and

Henry Bromthwate Chaplain, & servant to plaintiff were in God’s peace & the King’s, one

Anthony Rigge & Cuthbert Rigge & six other persons to plaintiff unknown, on St .Stephen’s

day last (1548), about nine o’clock at night, assembled at Hawkesyde in the county of

Lancaster with force & arms, to wit, with swords, bucklers, staves, bills, clubs, daggers &

other weapons defensive, & assaulted the said Henry Bromthwate in the house of Miles

Rigg, where the said Henry is tabled, & would have murdered him if he had not fled into a

chamber but the inhabitants of the town came and with greyt payn and busyness Interupted

the said evill disposed persons of theyr devellysshe purpose. Not content with this, the said

Cuthbert & Anthony Rigg, Robert Sandes, and other riotous & light persons to the number

of twenty assembled in manner of a tumult or insurreccion at Hawkesed the 15 of January

last about twelve o’clock at night, and assaulted the house of Gyles Kendall in Hawksed

wherein plaintiff then lodged, broke open the outer gate of the house & would have forced

the inner gate but that it & the walls were too strong. When defendants saw they could not

get into the house they called upon plaintiff to come out of it for they would have -----------

one of his arms or legs before going away. They stayed there threatening him until the next

day, when the country round about heard of the said riot and met together to rescue

plaintiff from defendants who then withdrew. Moreover, before the said 15th day of January

& since, defendants have often assembled to try to murder plaintiff who in consequence has

often been in danger of his life.

92

Plaintiff prays that the King’s dred letter of Privy Seal may be directed to the said Cuthbert

Rigg & others to appear to answer the present.”

We do not know the cause of the riot and the threat to the life of William Sawrey in 1548

and whether it was about religious differences, but we do know that he had several landed

interests in the Hawkshead area. In 1559 he also purchased part of the Urswick estate. The

Robert Sandes (Sandys) referred to above was probably cousin to William Sandys who was

killed in an affray at Conishead in 1558 and to Edwin Sandys, Archbishop of York.

The ‘murder’ of William Sandys has a link to Urswick via Nicholas Bardsey who was strongly

implicated. It seems that whilst ‘patrons’ of Urswick church they were a pretty

argumentative and unruly bunch! Christopher’s grandfather, Christopher had abused his

relationship with the Abbot of Furness. The citation goes that ‘The Abbot, trusting to the

honour of a ‘gentleman born’ had given him the Tithe Barn of Bardsea with the tithes

deriving from it, for his lifetime at the low sum of £4. And “that he would be beneficial to

the said monastery and always ready to give advice” he should retain 13/4d out of this £4

for his advice. He had also lent Christopher, when in need, the sum of money amounting to

£20 (this could have been £200- the manuscript is unclear) for the payment of which the

latter was bound in a “Statute marchaunt”. According to the Abbot’s letter of complaint

Christopher took the tithes, used the barn, but returned neither the £4 nor any sound

advice, and, when the Abbot was in difficulty the gentleman “embezzled the statute”.

Alexander, in an attempt to recover his property sent his monks to take possession of the

tithe barn and gather the grain from the fields. Christopher with a company of 30 armed

men arrested Edmund Curwen, the plaintiff’s assistant, and having beaten him, imprisoned

him in his house. The monks, unaccustomed to such scenes of violence, fled in panic to their

monastery for sanctuary, leaving behind them horse, cart and tithes.’ It was said that there

was no point in the Abbot bringing action against Christopher Bardsey because he was the

under steward of “myche lands” in Furness, to the Earl of Derby. In fact the Abbot and his

monks were charged at Lancaster before Sir Hymphrey Conyngsby and found guilty of

riotous behaviour!

Christopher Bardsey was also involved as part of a large mob in a brawl at Kirkby Ireleth

church during the mass. It was so bad that the priest ‘fearing a murder would there take

place, did “unrevesse himself” and would not say Mass. When he died he instructed that his

body be buried ‘within the Priory of our Blessed lady of Coyished (Conishead) with all my

mortuaries due to my parish of Urswick’. Christopher was succeeded by William his second

son because his eldest son John had been ‘murdered with great barbarity’ on 18th July 1533,

allegedly at the instigation of Thomas Lord, the last Prior of Conishead.

William Bardsey was the owner of Bardsey Hall at the time of the murder of William Sandys

in 1558. The dissolution of the monasteries in 1536 had roused the worst passions;

93

whatever the religious background of the Reformation, the change in the ownership of

Church lands inspired fierce hatreds. As we have seen, William Bardsey and his family had

for generations received tithes from Furness Abbey and ‘it caused him no small resentment

to lose this advantage and see William Sandys of Esthwaite, who was Receiver General of

the Lordship of Furness, after the Dissolution, growing rich at his expense.’ When William

Sandys, Edwin Sandys’ brother purchased Conishead from the Crown in 1548, and held

tithes on Gleaston Flat which was part of the estate in Bardsey, resentment went even

deeper.

At the enquiry in 1559 following the murder of William Sandys, “John Rawlinson of Furness

Fells said that William Sandys was murdered on account of certain tithes, which were in his

possession and which the sons and servants of William Bardsey, Esq. attempted to carry

away. The sons were Nicholas and Robert and the name of the servant was Trog(b)eton but

it was unknown who struck the mortal blow.” Another witness said that 50 men and women

took part in the murder, and that William Bardsey harboured a grudge against William

Sandys, because the latter had delivered to him a privy seal for concealing a piece of land

from the Queen. In revenge his son Nicholas committed a “certain heinous crime” and then

fled to Scotland, and remained there in his hideout until he was certain of the Queen’s

pardon.

Nicholas Bardsey inherited on the death of his father. We are told that he was an adherent

of the ‘old faith’ and kept secret contact with Rome which brought him into conflict with the

Government. In his will Nicholas left £2 a year to his kinsman, Richard Bardsey, for life. This

Richard Bardsey was a church warden at Urswick in 1552 at the time of the visitation. It’s

interesting to note that four years after Nicholas’ death in 1586 the ministers of Elizabeth I

learned that “there is a Richard Bardsey, an old man, who is kept about Furness. He came

lately from the Pope and is seminary priest very thought, he was brother to one ould

Bardsey of Furness, who was a great papist”. Nicholas Bardsey was one of the governors of

Urswick Grammar School when it was established in 1585 (see below). Nicholas declared in

his will that he should be “buryed in my parishe Churche of Urswick, nihe to the place where

the body of Anne Bardsey, my wife was laid”. He was in fact buried at Aldingham on 11th

July 1586.

There is something of a lingering mystery surrounding the origins of the silver chalice and

cover which is still in use at Urswick today. Postlethwaite described it as ‘the traditional gift

of Archbishop Sandys’.

94

Edwin Sandys was Archbishop of York from 1576-1588, the year he died; he was previously

Bishop of Worcester in 1559 and then Bishop of London in 1570. We know that he was born

at Hawkshead in 1519 and his father was called William Sandys of Esthwaite. Edwin, we are

told, was an ‘early confessor of the protestant faith’ and he opposed vestments and making

the sign of the cross. We also know that it was he who ordered the destruction of the

standing stone cross at Kirkby Ireleth. It is therefore not unlikely that he would also order

the breaking up of the Tunwinni Cross and perhaps the Norse Cross at Urswick during the

same visitation!

It was during this period that Protestant militia detachments applied lime-wash to church

interiors to obliterate images and ‘every trace of colour and Catholic identity. The

biographer of the Marshall family suggests, however, that these militias didn’t come this far

north and that ‘fortunately, in this area, the inexorable destruction of the fine woods of the

church furnishings was avoided, as was the lime that disintegrated the delicate pigments of

the sacred paintings’.

To return to the mystery of the silver chalice and cover, we have an inscription of its maker

on the base of the vessel, A.K (linked). The initials W.S. and the date 1571 are inscribed on

the knob of the cover. Edwin’s father, William, died in 1548 and Edwin’s brother, William

Sandys of Estwaite and Conishead Priory, died in 1558 ‘in an affray’ at Conishead as we have

95

seen. The lettering could suggest that the chalice was made in London and given in memory

of WS, probably his brother.

Edwin Sandys took an active interest in the affairs in Carlisle diocese because in 1559 when

the Bishop of Carlisle, Bishop Oglethorpe, was deprived of his ‘see’, Sandys recommended

Bernard Gilpin, a kinsman, to succeed him but Gilpin declined, it is believed because the

family were too well known in the county! Edwin had earlier supported the cause of Lady

Jane Grey in 1553 against Mary, had been jailed as a result, but reinstated by Queen

Elizabeth.

William Sawrey died in 1580, to be replaced by James Saier (Sayer) who was in office until

he died in 1585. It’s with William Lindowe that we pick up the Urswick story more fully but

before we look at this perhaps a few comments on the state of the church more generally.

Strong tells us that the Elizabethan Church was haunted by its lack of a preaching ministry

for most of the reign. The 1559 injunctions laid down that every parish should listen to at

least one sermon per month, yet a year later it had become a quarterly occurrence. Almost

thirty years into her long reign only a fifth of clergy had a licence to preach and in 1584 it

was calculated that only 600 of the country’s 9,000 parishes yielded enough income to

support a cleric educated enough to preach!

Locally one or two ‘snippits’ give us some idea of what else was going on in Furness; for

example, in about 1568 Walney Chapel was founded when, to assist the spread of the

Reformation, Elizabeth pressured the Bishop of Chester to enforce church attendance.

Walney was too great a distance from Dalton Parish Church and gave the inhabitants a good

excuse for not attending. Barnes tells us that the period between the Pilgrimage of Grace in

1536 and the outbreak of the Civil War was a period of peace in Furness, hinting that there

was a sort of sentimental attachment for the monarchy even though Furness had become

distinctly protestant, puritans were numerous in the area and the High Anglican party that

existed among the gentry was looked upon as crypto-romanist. Since the Duchy of Lancaster

owned most of the estates, the rents on the manors were low, the customs not

burdensome and relations between lord and tenant amicable, there was little cause for

discontent to arise.

Barnes suggests, however, that any unrest and apprehension that there was in Furness had

a religious rather than a political origin. There was somewhat of a ‘stir’ around the time of

the Spanish Armada in 1558 in terms of a suspected plot, or rather a rumour, to invade the

area through Piel, involving Cardinal Allen, leader of the Jesuit missions to England who had

been a native of Fleetwood. Their fears proved groundless; ‘in fact’, says Barnes, ‘there is no

evidence that either the inhabitants of Furness in general or Preston (Thomas Preston) in

particular ever had any rebellious or traitorous intentions whatever at this time.’ (page 55).

Thomas Preston was deputy steward of Piel Castle and was labelled as ‘a Papist atheist’.

96

The religious changes which followed the dissolution of the monasteries in 1536-9 and the

dissolution of the chantries in 1546 had also curtailed a lot of activity in the realms of

education but within a few years of the accession of Elizabeth it was becoming clear that the

new Church of England was firmly established and, says Bagley in his ‘A History of

Lancashire’ published in 1956, ‘this prospect of stability, coupled with the steadily increasing

prosperity of the middle classes, encouraged gentlemen to endow more schools’.

Urswick Grammar School, founded by William Marshall, was established by charter in 1585.

Canon Ayre tells us that William Marshall of Lambeth, who in 1580, having the intention of

founding such a school, is said to have left the decision to Grindal, archbishop of

Canterbury, as to whether it should be established at Much Hadham in the county of

Hereford, or at Urswick. Grindal opted for Urswick, having been a native of St. Bees and

‘consequently entertaining an affection for the north’. The School was established in 1585

on a secure basis; Queen Elizabeth, at the petition of the inhabitants of Urswick and ‘other

persons in the neighbourhood’, gave permission, by her letters patent, bearing date the 12th

March in that year, for a School to be established for the education of both sexes, and to be

called the Free Grammar School of Queen Elizabeth. It was placed under the control of

twelve governors who were to appoint the master and make statutes respecting the

revenues of the School.

They were called grammar schools because the curriculum was based upon the study of

Latin grammar; more importantly for us in relation to the church is that all pupils received

weekly tuition in the doctrines of the prayer book; every school master had to be licensed

by the bishop. The local vicar would keep a close watch on the school’s teaching and the

scholars would attend church services regularly as a group. It soon became customary for

the vicar of Urswick to be also Master of the Grammar School.

As for the church itself the ‘Elizabethan Book of Homilies’ included one ‘for repairing and

keeping clean, and comely adorning of churches.’ As Strong illustrate, this states that ‘To it

(the church) the parish should resort to hear God’s words and know his will, to receive the

sacraments, and here, together, the whole multitude of God’s people in the Parish should

pray, give thanks to God and bestow alms.’ Like any dwelling house it should maintain ‘all

things in good order, and all corners clean and sweet’. There should be ‘places convenient

to sit on’, a pulpit and the Lord’s Table for ‘his holy supper’ and a font for baptism. And of

course seating continued to be fixed according to social status and habitation, with the

lower classes and the young consigned to benches at the west end.

On the death of Nicholas Bardsey in 1586 the estate was divided between his two

daughters, Dorothy, who married James Anderton and Elizabeth who married Lancelot

Salkeld of Whitehall in Cumberland. Dorothy and James Anderton inherited Bardsea. In 1591

James obtained a grant of the important Stewardship of the Royal Manor of Muchland, with

97

the keepership of Seawood Park and the custody of Gleaston castle for life. We are led to

believe that in the light of his lordship of Bardsey, in right of his wife, and his offices of

Muchland and Receiver of Furness Abbey lands, must have rendered him one of the leading

men in Furness. In maintaining his wife’s rights as landowner, Anderton found himself in

constant conflict with the times; his history is mostly taken up with accounts of law-suits

with those who challenged the old order of things. He is charged, as Steward of Muchland,

with unfair dealing by the tenants and later as Justice of the Peace with bullying the Clerk. It

was said that he inspired the ready loyalty of his friends, and something akin to hatred

among his enemies. His position was rendered difficult and ambiguous by a clash of

interests: on the one hand he was a faithful adherent of the Roman Church, on the other he

sought the favour of the Protestant monarchy so that he might satisfy his ambition for high

office under the Crown.

Presentation to the living at Urswick was made by William Chaderton, the Bishop of Chester,

in 1585, when William Lindow(e) was made vicar but James Anderton was the most

important man in the Parish.

In 1598 the church was re-roofed probably replacing a thatched roof. An oak beam across

the easternmost part of the nave, exposed during alterations made during the time of

T.E.Postelthwaite, bears a series of carved initials of all those who were interested in re-

roofing the church in that year with the date also carved prominently among them.

The date is followed by the initials W.L.V (William Lindow, Vicar). Postlethwaite suggests

that the two other initials following, W.H. probably indicate an assistant priest. On the next

line come the initials of the leading men of the parish, starting with ‘J.A.Esquire’ (James

Anderton) husband of Dorothy of Bardsey Hall. Alongside James Anderton’s initials can be

clearly seen J.S, J.G, C.G, and T.F. Their positioning would suggest that these are probably

98

the initials of some of those listed as ‘freeholders’ in 1600, namely John Sawrey, John

Garner, Christopher Garner and Thomas Fell, probably also churchwardens. Walter Curwen

was also a freeholder at the time- perhaps his name is there also. The vicar, William Lindow,

was described in 1610 as ‘a preacher’ which suggests his protestant persuasion; his name

was also misspelt as ‘Lindall’ but I could find no further references under this spelling. He

was buried at Urswick on 24th January 1620 having served as vicar for 35 years.

The religious and social upheavals of the seventeenth century and their impact on Furness

are worthy of a Chapter of their own, but let us conclude this one by considering the local

struggles with plague or epidemic as the century closed. The most documented and the

most graphic account is that of the Dalton Plague of 1631 (Barnes) but this was the last of a

series of plague years. There is evidence that 1597 was a ‘plague year’ in Dalton, and again

in 1623 when the record shows 154 burials in Dalton church yard and 54 in 1624. It is

interesting to note that in the Urswick Register for 1608-1695 whereas the average annual

number of burials is in the low teens, in 1623 there were 54 and in 1624, 29. The highest

instance of burials was the period between December 1623 and March 1624. Cause of

death is not recorded but at Urswick there is not one outstanding group of deaths, there

being 26 men, 28 women and 27 sons and daughters during that period.

The plague of 1631 in Dalton raged for seven months and killed 360 inhabitants in all out of

a total population of 612. We know it spread as far as Walney where 120 people died, again,

half the population. Sadly there are no entries for this period in the Urswick Register but it

must have had an impact there, not least in restrictions on travel and stock movement, etc.

At Dalton the vicar, Reverend A Tomlinson, ‘’also fled in fear and left the holy thresholds of

the church’.

99

Chapter Five: The Stuart Era

Roy Strong tells us that by 1600 ‘we sense a recognition of the Church’s pre-Reformation

inheritance’ and that the chances of the Church of England returning to Rome could be

ruled out but, ‘at least for the Elizabethan and Jacobean periods, those who emphasised its

Catholic roots and traditions could be accommodated within its theological spectrum.’ That

was not to last. Perhaps the largest ‘pressure group for change’ at the opening of the new

century was that of the Puritans. They regarded many of the conventions that the Church of

England retained as the dregs of popery, such as the sign of the cross at baptism, the

wearing of a surplice and the churching of women, but although many Puritan views and

beliefs found their way into the ‘main stream’ of the Church, the majority of parishes abided

by the Book of Common Prayer which provided the framework for corporate worship in the

parish church.

This was enshrined in canon law by the Convocations of Canterbury in 1604 and York in

1606 in the early years of the reign of King James. The Canons decreed that no minister

should depart from what was laid down in the Book of Common Prayer, churchgoers should

receive communion kneeling, they should also kneel for prayers and the litany and stand for

the Creed and ‘everyone should make ‘lowly reverence’ at the name of Jesus. Communion

was obligatory for everyone over the age of sixteen at Easter, and ‘every minister shall wear

a decent and comely surplice with sleeves, to be provided at the charge of the parish.’

100

The Authorised Version of the Bible (King James’) was published in 1611. Strong descibes

the text as being ‘of such powerful felicity that, along with the Book of Common Prayer, it

has remained the bedrock of the Anglican tradition.’ (page 128) Within a single generation it

was to become the most familiar, and often the only known text of the Bible.

The uneasy ‘peace’ began to suffer when the young Church of England began to develop its

own theological foundations; the Church was seen, rather than having made a break with

the past, as ‘returning to the purity and traditions of the Early Church, before the arrival of

the popish St. Augustine.’ They re-discovered a Christianity that stressed the importance of

the sacramental life and venerated tradition, in other words the centrality of the

sacraments, especially the Eucharist, which they ‘didn’t view as a merely commemorative

act like the Puritans but one in which Christ was really present.’ As Strong states, ‘all of this

was to have a dramatic effect on the country church when, with the accession of Charles I in

1625, those who shared (this) concept of the Church gained the ear of the king. With the

appointment of William Laud as archbishop of Canterbury in 1633 all that had begun to find

legal expression in the 1604 Canons was now to be enforced under the aegis of government.

The result was yet another transformation of the church building as radical as that which

had occurred in the 1550’s.

This was compounded when the ‘spiritual status’ of bishops and clergy were re-evaluated

and there was a new emphasis on their ability to be a vehicle of supernatural, God-

ordained, powers, which in the Eucharist could consecrate the bread and wine so that Christ

really was present; the priest’s ability to bestow blessings, to sign a child with the cross and

to give absolution were all viewed in a different light as the Church began to see itself as

belonging to an ancient apostolic tradition rediscovered. Thus the altar/table became a

point of contention between the two groups. After his appointment as archbishop of

Canterbury William Laud became the driving force behind ‘the general mending, beautifying

and adorning of all English churches.’ It was only after 1630 when the physical reordering of

churches became mandatory, that trouble erupted and the Puritans were faced with what

they regarded as the reintroduction of popery!

According to Roy Strong ‘all over the country there was a frenzy of activity as communion

tables were adapted and moved; rails erected; surplices purchased along with pulpit cloths,

covers for the altar, service books, pewter flagons for the communion wine, chests for

books, alms boxes and cushions. To that we can add structural repairs to walls, roofs and

porches, not to mention glazing broken windows, paving earthen floors and putting the bells

in order.’ (page 138). However, when civil war erupted in 1642 the forces of destruction

were to exceed any of the devastation to parish churches in the previous century.

Furness was not to escape the conflict between the Royalists and the Roundheads, but in

1641 they had much else to focus the mind! In November of that year the news reached

101

England of an Irish rebellion accompanied by the massacre of English and Scottish colonists;

as Barnes tells us, rumour magnified the horrors and hundreds of refugees who fled to

Lancashire spread the tales. A report was circulated that the butchery had been ordered by

the kIng at the instigation of his Catholic Queen. News came to Furness that a large army of

wild Irish had assembled at Carrickfergus destined to invade England through Piel, ‘and thus

protestants would be the first to experience the papist fury.’ There was this background of

apprehension and religious exacerbation in Furness when the civil War broke out in 1642.

Barnes gives a superb account of the Civil War in Furness; sufficient here to quote Thomas

Park, High Constable at the time: ‘Sorely as Furness was plundered the inhabitants were

surprised that no protestant throats had been cut nor any personal violence offered by the

Royalists.’

By Ordinance of the Lords and Commons assembled in Parliament on August 23rd 1645, the

use of the “Directory for the Public Worship of God” was made compulsory and the use of

the Book of Common Prayer made illegal. As Barnes states, throughout Furness in all

churches and chapels, the Directory was at once brought into use and the Prayer Books sent

away to the Committee of Parliament as directed. All the ministers had sided against the

King, and one or two at least seem to have been zealous Parliamentarians. This change is

public worship was part of the price paid to Presbyterian prejudice for the support of the

Scottish army against the King. In 1646 the title of Bishop was abolished and church

government in Furness became chaotic for a while until Lancashire was divided into nine

classical presbyteries of which the ninth comprised the parishes north of the Sands. Its

members were five ministers and eleven laymen, the majority being from Furness Fells and

headed by Thomas Fell of Swarthmoor Hall, M.P. for Lancashire since 1645.

It is of particular interest to the Urswick story that Nicholas Marshall who was inducted as

Vicar of Urswick in 1620 managed to survive all of these changes and much, much more

before his departure in 1660 and it is with him that our story continues. All of the ‘usual’

local resources refer to Nicholas Marshall being ‘scandalous in his life and negligent in both

his callings’ (as vicar of Urswick and as Master of the Grammar School) but this needs

putting into the context of the times. As Reverend Postlethwaite comments, ‘I am inclined

to think that Mr. Marshall’s real fault in the eyes of the Parliamentarians was that he

refused to comply with their narrow creed.’ We see from the Registers that children from

many of the neighbouring parishes were brought to him for Baptism.

The Parish Register for 1608-1695 notes:

‘Nicholaus Marshall inducitur in Vicaria de Vrswick 2nd die Februarij 1620

p Gulielmum Collier de Dalton’

He was presented by Robert Curwen, Christopher Gardner, Thomas Fell and Thomas

Marshall, all described as ‘(Gents)’.

102

On 4th December 1646 the Committee for Plundered Ministers made report on Mr. Marshall

as follows:

“Vpon complaint made that Nicholas Marshall, from whome the Rectorie of Urswick in the

Countie of Lancaster is sequestered by the Committee of the said Countie, contynueth in

the possession of the said vicarage and officiateth there, it is ordered that the Committee of

parliament for the said Countie doe, and they are hereby desired to, remove the said Mr.

Marshall out of the said vicarage and Church and the possession there-of. And it is further

ordered that vpon the petitioners producing a Certificate, vnder the hands of the godlie

Ministers of the Neighbourhood, of Mr. Millington this Committee will then referre him to

the Assemblie of divines to examine his fitnesse to officiate the said Cure to the end he may

be settled in the said Church and Viccarage there of.”

Clearly Mr. Marshall survived the enquiry because in a survey held in 1650 it is reported:

“There is belonging to the said Viccaridge A house in decay and about 2 acres of Gleab Land

And that there belongeth to the Viccaridge Wool lamb pig goose hay hemp flax & small

Tithes through the whole parish & that the value of the profits issued out of the Viccaridge

and belonging to the Vicar Amounts to £20 per ann. And further, that the vicar officiating

the Cure of the Church is Mr. Nicholas Marshall, both Vicar of the Church and maister of a

free Scoole, but that he is scandalous in his life and negligent in both his callings.”

Postlethwaite also comments that Nicholas Marshall was shrewd enough to get his own

Clerk appointed Register in accordance with the Act of November 8th 1653.’ The entry in the

Register reads: ‘Edward Fleminge Elected & Aproued Register for the Parishe of Vswicke

Toucheinge Marriages Birthths (sic) & Burials of all Sorts of people by a late Acte Novembr

the 8th 1653’

No records were kept between 1631 and 1652 apart from 1634. Since this is such a critical

period in the history of the church it is to be regretted that further records were either

incomplete, non-existent or ‘lost’ later on. However, all is not lost because with the wonder

of the internet to hand the author was able to ‘Google’ Nicholas Marshall and discovered his

family website which makes fascinating reading! The reader must appreciate, however, that

there is a clear pro-Catholic, anti-Protestant bias to the writing as we begin with William

Marshall, founder of Urswick Grammar School; the biographer states that ‘this then was the

background against which the traumatic destruction of existing English culture detached Sir

William Marshall’s descendants from the culture and beliefs of their forefathers for eight

generations; and culminated in the Marshall family’s reconciliation to the age-old Faith by

the marriage of a bastard daughter of an abused Catholic inmate of the workhouse’.

Sir William Marshall had three ambitions, namely:

i to gain the living of St. Mary & St. Michael, Urswick for one of his sons

103

ii to obtain the grant of a Coat of Arms for his family

iii to acquire a Royal Charter to build a grammar school on which could be publicly displayed

those family Arms.

William never did achieve his first objective but without realising it at the time he had

unconsciously ensured his grandson’s succession a few years after his own death. It is a little

surprising that whilst Sir William was still conspiring to put his son John into the vicarage,

there were no protests from him when Thomas Dobson was succeeded by the young

William Sawrey, the old vicar’s son, who had by then graduated in Divinity- the Marshalls

and the Sawreys had intermarried anyway. However, the biographer states that this

decision was a tragedy for the locals, ‘because the first act of the new Vicar was to

reintroduce a protestantized Order of Mass’ and suggests further that ‘in the traditionally

Catholic climate of the times at Urswick, it was the most that the younger Sawrey could

have accomplished, for he would not have dared to attempt to replace the Mass in its

entirety.’

As we have seen, James Sayer followed on from William Sawrey the younger, and he by

William Lindow(e). In 1620 ‘the powerful residual influence of the deceased William

Marshall finally achieved the object he had schemed for during his lifetime’. The family, by

now having ‘succumbed to the prevailing High Anglicanism of that part of Lancashire’, were

successful in acquiring the Urswick living for William’s grandson, Nicholas. It’s interesting to

note that much is written about Nicholas’ incumbency, not a word is said about his

becoming also Master of the Grammar School!

Nicholas was described as being ‘a typical Englishman of his classe, being of kindly and

mildly pious disposure; subtly ironical, but decorous with scholarship and culture, and slow

to exert himself’. He is said to have regarded his living like a seat in a college fellowship, ‘as

a mere piece of patronage, awarded as a favour, and enjoyed as a privilege.’

It is said that his sermons, carefully composed, were delivered from the pulpit ‘as literary

exercises’, meant to flatter and appeal to the taste of the elegant young people who

customarily sat in the high pew around the slumbering Squire, but too abstract and

impersonal to move the emotions of the patient rustic audience in the body of the church.

He was, however, a popular local figure. His kindly disposition was often shown by his visits

to the stocks in the village when an offender was being pelted with dung, rotten eggs or bad

fruit. It is said that because of his exalted position the local peasantry would desist and

stand reverentially to one side at his approach, and would good-humouredly disperse at his

command, thus offering some temporary respite to the suffering man. Usually he would be

104

accompanied by his verger carrying a water-skin, and, after giving the victim a drink from a

cup, he would douse him to remove the stinking mess that clung to him! Although it didn’t

prevent his tormentors returning when the Vicar had left, it was much appreciated.

He was rather less well liked by the agents of Parliament and their Roundhead escorts! His

biographer claims that whilst visiting friends in ‘Preston Town’ he was identified as a High

Anglican Minister by a group of Roundhead soldiers who threatened him with personal

violence; it appears that he was an accomplished swordsman, ‘sticking two of them before

managing to escape’. Thereafter, allegedly, he always went about armed with two pistols.

His ‘greatest problem’, however, were ‘the interfering and sanctimonious fundamentalist

preachers who descended on them with official warrants and state authorizations that

appeared to give them carte-blanche. Let me quote verbatim:

‘In their determination to reorganise the administration of the Parish, and reduce his high

Anglican liturgy to a Presbyterian and anti-clerical model, the fundamentalist often arrived

under the armed protection of a truculent Roundhead officer, perhaps with a small platoon

of nervous musketmen in tow. Then, in the market square, or at Sunday service, he would

attempt to elbow out the appointed Vicar, and take over the normal proceedings in order to

engage in a long and tedious tirade against the alleged satanically inspired tendencies

allowed there. Despite resentment at his gross methods, it was difficult to silence the man,

who felt secure and safe in his belief that the populace would not dare take revenge for fear

of a retaliatory strike later by a detachment of puritan soldiers.’ (page 43)

‘Unfortunately,’ he continues, ‘for most of these Brownist preachers, unfamiliar with that

part of England since their origins tended to be in more southerly counties, the tolerance

level of the Furness congregation was often very much lower than they had previously

experienced. Consequently, with their bodyguard rendered impotent in the face of

overwhelming universal anger, it was not unusual for his sermonizing to be abruptly

terminated as he gasped for breath in the village pond’.

It is only right for the sake of a true record that the official accusations made against

Nicholas Marshall should be made clear. William Gardner of Urswick made two official

complaints to the Bishops about him as follows:

‘William Gardner c Nicholas Marshall clerk, schoolmaster for neglect of school, drinking in

Hawkshead, Dalton and Urswick; for beating Samuel Harrison preacher of God’s word, also

for adultery and fornication’. (ED C5 12)

‘Wm.Gardner c Nicholas Marshall vicar and schoolmaster for neglect of school, keeping a

youth to act as master, being only fit to teach petties, not training scholars for the University

according to founder’s endowment of £10, playing at cards, also dice and losing heavily,

being beastly drunk in Urswick, Hawkshead, Dalton and Harburroide and fighting’ (ED C5 16)

105

Let us now return to the publication of the ‘Directory of Public Worship’ in 1645 and to Sir

Roy Strong’s account of this extremely disruptive period where we can perhaps find a more

objective view of the situation described so colourfully by the Marshall family biographer.

The Directory was published in April 1645, three months after the Prayer Book was officially

banned by Parliament; all copies were to be confiscated and those who continued to use it

were to be imprisoned. Roy Strong describes the Directory as being ‘a guide to what in

effect were a series of virtually improvised services devoid of formal structure’. It advised on

appropriate topics for prayers but provided no wordings; even the basic formularies, such as

the Creeds, were not included.

Along with the publication of the Directory of Public Worship came the imposition of the

Puritan Sabbath. Sunday was to be a day spent quietly in self-examination, meditation and

prayer, ‘all worldly business or our ordinary callings laid aside, as they may be impediments

to the due sanctifying of the day when it comes’ (Strong, page 153). This was to be a ‘holy

cessation..... not only from all sports and pastimes, but also from all worldly words and

thoughts’.

Bouch (1948) gives us some examples from the ‘Visitation and Correction Books of the

Bishops of Carlisle and York in relation to ‘Sabbath Breaking: ‘spreading manure’ (1663);

entertaining drinkers’ (1668); for leading corne on ye Sunday after Sunsett’ (1633); Walter

Preston of Dalton ‘for loitering in ye church yard in service time and being admonished by ye

churchwardens wold neither go in nor out’ (1633); ‘scolding the wife of James Grame’

(1668).

Games playing on the Sabbath was of course also forbidden; here are a few examples of

those in trouble: ‘shooting at the Butts’ (1664); for playing at nine pins’ (1672); ‘for suffering

cards to be plaid in his house’ (1663); for fishing in time of Divine Service’ (1672); ‘for

prophaining the Lord’s day by playing att football’ (1686); ‘for playing at shovel board’; ‘for

bowling upon ye Sabaoth day in ye afternone’; for plating at pigles’ (pitch and toss); ‘for

gardinge in time of Divine service in ye afternoone’; for drinking and takeing tobacco in ye

house of Jo.Warin, Clarke, in evening prair time’.

It was of course almost impossible to enforce the disposal of the Prayer Book and the

celebration of major Feasts in every single parish and the Prayer Book took on an almost

mystical status, services using it were often conducted in secret behind closed doors.

However, these proposed reforms created a significant break with the past and ended what

one might call the ‘single congregation’. Until the 1640’s the only members of the

community not embraced by the ministrations of the local parish priest had been the

recusant Catholics, but now with the dissolution of the old ecclesiastical structures

numerous ‘sectarian’ groups emerged. The Separists had no place for the parish church and

moved away to form congregations of like-minded believers from other parishes. As Roy

Strong states, importantly, ‘this marked the end of a single Christian community

106

congregating in a single corporate building; in a sense the great age of the country parish

church ended here in the middle years of the seventeenth century’ (page 157)

Additionally, further social disruption occurred when baptisms, marriages, the churching of

women and burial, all significant milestones in the life of the ordinary villager, were either

banned or altered beyond recognition (hence the blank years in the Register at Urswick

between 1634 and 1653). In 1644 fonts were ordered to be demolished and in the 1645

Directory baptism was no longer given any set ceremony and the minister was advised to

‘use his own liberty and godly wisdom’; it only stipulated that water should be sprinkled on

the child’s face from a basin. The radical departure led to a steady rise in private baptisms

where the old form could be used in secret. The Directory abolished the ‘churching’ of

women altogether. It also gave short shrift to funerals and burials and prayers for the dead

and for that matter, any belief that the living could do anything to aid the departed were

wiped out at the Reformation. This was clearly hardest on the bereaved themselves and as

Strong puts it, ‘most of the reassuring ritual was abrogated and replaced by what amounted

to a brutal burial’.

Marriage was the most important rite of passage in any parishioner’s life and although

marriage was no longer recognised or celebrated as a sacrament, it was in some ways

enhanced by the Reformation. Readers will recall from earlier times that the medieval rite

was governed by a strong sense of hierarchy, gentry being married below the chancel whilst

for lesser mortals it was conducted at the church porch. The ceremony progressed as

follows:

The service took place amidst a gathering of family, friends and neighbours. After the banns

had been read three times, the bride was ‘given away’ by her father to the groom or by an

adult friend. The couple held hands; each took a pledge with the priest acting as mediator.

The groom then laid a ring along with a money offering on a dish or on the Bible. After the

priest had sprinkled ‘holy water’ on the ring and blessed it, the groom placed the ring on

successive fingers of the bride’s left hand- on the thumb in the name of the Father, on the

first finger in the name of the Son, and on the second finger in the name of the Holy Spirit,

and finally on the third finger where it came to rest with the word ‘Amen’. The couple then

entered the church for the nuptial mass and blessing.

At the Reformation the core of the ceremony was retained but now it was conducted for

everyone inside the church in the presence of the congregation. In the 1653 Marriage and

Registration Act, there being no scriptural authority for a minister to marry people, this

statute denied the Church the right to celebrate marriages and substituted instead civil

ceremonies conducted by a Justice of the Peace. The Act also stipulated that clerics had no

authority to keep records, parish registers, or, indeed even to bury the dead, hence the

comments that Nicholas Marshall at Urswick appointed his own ‘Clerke’ who also

maintained the Register for our perusal! Bouch reports several instances of clandestime

107

marriages taking place; for example in 1663 Thos. Askam of Kirkby Ireleth was accused of

‘marryinge of a couple without licence about eight of clock in ye night in an unlawful place’.

There were records of several illegal burials in open fields!

Holy Communion didn’t escape the attention of the Puritans either; the Directory turned the

communion service into a purely commemorative event to which only the elect could be

admitted. Those who wanted to receive communion were first examined by the minister

and two church elders and only if thought ‘fit’ were admitted to The Lord’s Supper, so that it

became divisive and the cause of great hurt within the small rural communities. After the

death of Oliver Cromwell in 1658 the continued uncertainty and instability in the country

created a longing for the return of the old order pre-Civil War and the beloved, apparently

indestructible Prayer Book. Strong comments that with the restoration of the monarchy in

1660 the Prayer Book with its mid-sixteenth century English language, was already archaic

but it had become untouchable. All was not to be plain sailing however!

Back in rural Furness the colourful George Fox, founder of the Quakers, was meeting both

opposition and success, as we shall see; there were other non-conformists in the area as

well as the Quakers, the Anabaptists and the Fifth Monarchy men. The handful of Roman

Catholics was left largely undisturbed until the time of the ‘Popish Plot’ in 1678; ministry to

them was maintained by priests sheltered in the houses of some of the local gentry. Bardsea

Hall, for example, had a Catholic family living there until 1732.

The dominant Puritan faith was household-based: it saw the home as the seat of devotion,

prayer and fasting. They had no time for the parish church or its structures other than as a

‘meeting place’ to hear the Word of God. They acknowledged only Sunday in terms of

structure, rejecting any other festival or celebration, symbolism, dress or ritual. The Sabbath

was a day for rest and prayer and listening to the Word.

What were the differences between the Separatists groups and the wide range of Church of

England parishioners?

The Baptists refused to utter a prayer in the company of any regarded by them as

‘unregenerate’. The Quakers took things further, rejecting a faith based wholly on the Word

of God for a belief in the manifestation of the Holy Spirit within the individual. The Fifth

Monarchists were looking for the Second Coming of Christ to rule, the Ranters denied the

authority of Scripture, Creed and ministry, and the Muggletonians rejected the doctrine of

the Trinity!

George Fox arrived in Furness from Cartmel in 1652. According to the Marshall family

biographer he made two visits in the same year. He notes that Fox ‘felt it expedient to avoid

Urswick, where some of the more fiery justices of the peace had warned Nicholas (Marshall)

of the dire consequences to the man, if he (Fox) had the temerity to show his face there.’ He

did, however, speak at Aldingham and at Rampside and at Dendron ‘which was built but

108

never Priest had preached in it’. He was opposed by William Lampitt, the priest at Ulverston,

and by Justice Sawrey but ‘speedily convicted Margaret Fell at Swarthmoor Hall in the

absence of Judge Fell on circuit’. On his return Judge Fell received a lurid account of Fox’s

‘indocrination’ of Margaret Fell and the family; Judge Fell was first incensed but after

meeting with George Fox became sympathetic and allowed the ‘Friends’ to meet at

Swarthmoor Hall thereafter.

On his second visit Fox went to Walney where he was beaten up by an angry mob at the

instigation of the wife of James Lancaster ‘for the people had persuaded James Lancaster’s

wife that I had bewitched her husband’ (Fox’s Journal). He was thrown out of the village and

had to walk the three miles to Rampside where he was cared for until Margaret Fell sent a

horse for him to return to Swarthmoor Hall. On his arrival he found that once again Justice

Sawrey, this time with the support of Justice Thompson, had intended to serve a warrant

against him but Justice Fell would not support it; instead he sent out warrants to Walney ‘to

apprehend all those riotous persons’ who had waylaid George Fox. Many of them fled the

country. Whilst there clearly was some sympathy for George Fox and his ‘Friends’ his

somewhat intemperate language and attitude didn’t help his cause. For instance, he began

a letter to Parson Lampitt at Ulverston like this:

“The Word of the Lord to thee, O Lampitt! who art a Deceiver, surfeited and drunk with the

Earthly Spirit, rambling up and down in the Scriptures, and blending the Spirit amongst the

Saints Conditions, who hadst a Prophesy, as they Father Balaam had, but art erred from it”.

He concludes by saying “And when thou art in Torment (though now thou swellest in thy

Vanity, and livest in wickedness) remember thou wast warned in thy Life-time, when the

Eternal Condemnation is stretched over thee, thou shalt witness this to be the Word of the

Lord unto thee.” (Barnes)

I noted that William Marshall was one of those who laid charges against George Fox in 1652

before the Justices for Lonsdale; they begin “wee thought good to signifie to your worpps.

yt one George Fox hath beene lately in these parts and hath uttered severall

blasphemies....” Henry Birkett in his ‘The Story of Ulverston, (1949), tells us that these

allegations were thought to be insufficient and the Justices asked for further particulars.

Michael Altham from Over Kellet swore against George Fox that:

“He did affirme that he had the divinitie essentially in him.

That both Baptisme and the lords supper were unlawful.

He did dissuade men from reading the Scripture telling them that it was carnall.”Two

warrants were made against him as a result.

109

William Smyth and Nathanael Atkinson swore that Fox claimed:

“that he was equall with god.

That god taught deceit.

That Scriptures were Antichrist.

That he was the Judge of the world.

That he was as upright as Christ.”

The Justices agreed to ‘make 2 warrants against him.’

It is also recorded in ‘Footsteps in Furness’ that ‘on the 24th January 1660 at Swarthmoor,

forty-three persons were taken, some out of their houses, others from the market and some

from their labours, by a party of horsemen and without any warrant or examination before

a magistrate, committed to Lancaster Castle’. The forty-three were ‘guilty’ of being Quakers.

They held meetings which were then against the law, and refused to pay tithes to the

church. Margaret Fell was herself imprisoned in 1663, eventually being released four and a

half years later through the intervention of friends of the King.

A foretaste of things to come!

Margaret Fell was widowed in 1658 and married George Fox in 1669.

Nicholas Marshall was followed as Vicar of Urswick in 1660 by George Inman on the

presentation of Thomas Fell and Thomas Marshall according to Baines. Postlethwaite says

that he was presented by Sir Jordan Crosland Knt. This gentleman had a colourful history

during the Civil War, having held Helmsley Castle for the Royalists in 1644 before

succumbing to Fairfax’s assault. He was also Constable of Scarborough Castle when George

Fox was incarcerated there during the period 1661-6. However, in 1651 a John Winter of

Penrith had petitioned the commissioners to the effect that Rydal Manor, sequestered from

the late William Fleming, was let privately to Walter Cowper in May of that year for £100

although the petitioner had offered £200. Cowper had arranged to lease the estate to Roger

Barwicke, a recusant delinquent, for his master, Sir Jordan Crosland, a dangerous

delinquent, who kept possession, to the terror of the well-affected, it being a strong place

and noted rendezvous for malignants’. It transpires elsewhere that on the death of William

Fleming in 1649 this land was ‘probably’ included in a parcel when a sister of William

(unnamed) later married Sir Jordan Crosland and therefore the right of presentation to

Urswick church went with it.

Marshall’s biographer states that competition for the perquisites and status of the more

desirable incumbencies like Urswick was established and that ‘moral stature as the basis for

110

appointment soon gave way to one’s social connections as the principal criterion, and social

standing became the determining factor in appointments to the more choice parishes. That

was, of course why Sir William Marshall had wanted the living for his son John, and Nicholas

fitted the bill.

The biographer is somewhat condescending towards George Inman where he writes that

‘without specific checks to halt the decline, it was inevitable that the standards of conduct

amongst the clergy throughout the country should consequently fall. Even well intentioned

parsons like George Inman, who personally farmed his glebe land in Urswick rather than hire

a manager, still devoted much of their lives to fox-hunting, drinking, and general worldly

pleasures.’ It was only to be expected, he suggested, when one considers that even the

most devoted Ministers were usually the younger sons of the nobility, or, in the case of less

wealthy benefices, the children of gentry. ‘Like Vicar Inman, they were ‘trained’ at

universities such as Cambridge; founded by the Catholic Church for the formation of priests.’

Final comment: ‘Although often well versed in the classics before they arrived at these ‘Halls

of Learning’, these potential pastors gained little knowledge of theology, and even less

understanding of the needs of ordinary parishioners; and because of their privileged

backgrounds they never bothered to learn.’

A more detailed ‘search’ on the website Google tells us that this was the George Inman who

entered St. John’s College Cambridge in 1647 and who was master of Urswick Grammar

School in 1655. He remained Vicar of Urswick until his death in 1681.

Whilst there is little to relate about Urswick and its church during George Inman’s

incumbency, it was a traumatic time in the national Church generally and clearly would have

had some impact locally. In 1660 a weary nation, tired of political upheaval and social

dislocation was looking for stability. Strong tells us that the initial desire to accommodate

both Presbyterians and Independents in a new settlement was strongly resisted by the

returning Anglican clergy who wanted to ensure that Puritanism and its influence could not

return.

The Act of Uniformity of 1662 imposed on all parishes a ‘slightly revised’ Book of Common

Prayer and every incumbent was required to take an oath of loyalty both to the Prayer Book

and to the monarchy. We are told that two thousand refused to swear the oaths and were

ejected from their livings. This was followed in 1665 by the Five Mile Act which forbade

ejected clergy to come within five miles of their former living. As we have already seen,

these years were a time of persecution for Nonconformists and Dissenters, but it was the

lingering fear of a Catholic revival which hung heavily over the nation. This had its roots in

Elizabethan England with the defeat of the Spanish Armada and the Gunpowder Plot which

became part of a Protestant national mythology, and now of course both Charles II who

reigned from 1660-85 and his successor James II who reigned from 1685-88 were known to

be sympathetic to the Catholic faith if not actually active within it.

111

The only way that Charles and James could obtain toleration for the Catholics was to also

guarantee toleration for Dissenters of all persuasions. Charles issued a Declaration of

Indulgence in 1672 ‘by which Presbyterians, Congregationalists and Baptists would be able

to apply for licenses to practise their faiths publicly at specified locations, and Catholics

were allowed to worship in private.’ Parliament was outraged and Charles was forced to

withdraw his Declaration in 1673. James went further in 1687 when he issued a Declaration

of Indulgence suspending all penal laws against Noncomformists. He set out to repeal the

Test Act of 1673 and began to appoint both Dissenters and Catholics to official positions,

leading to a revolution in 1688 which brought William III and Mary, James’ daughter, to the

throne. James went into exile and in fact converted to Rome. Finally, the Toleration Act of

1689 officially recognised Dissenters who were allowed their own meeting houses, but the

discriminatory conditions of the Test Act returned and Catholics continued to be excluded.

In Furness Catholic priests were ministering in private, residing for example at the Abbey.

Father Clement Smith was residing at Bardsea Hall until 1688 when it was beset by a mob of

300 local people and he was forced to take refuge elsewhere in Furness for the next eleven

years until he died in 1695. Rampside Hall was also a refuge for missionary priests.

Farrer and Brownbill in their ‘A History of Lancashire’,( 1920) made reference to a letter

dated 24th June 1664 that shows the discontentment of the Nonconformists; their churches

had had a meeting in Furness and were resolved to meet again ‘otherwise (they) would

have no means of coming together without suspicion.’ They were in touch with the Fifth

Monarchy men, the Anabaptists and the Quakers. There is a footnote about a note written

to Roger Kenyon by William KIrkby of Kirkby Ireleth in 1684 in which he described his efforts

to repress the Dissenters by using the laws against absentees from church and ‘frequenters

of conventicles’. He was pleased that ‘several, both Quakers and other Dissenters are (upon

our putting the law into execution) become conformists to the Church; and those who are

most obstinate and disaffected to the government is by these methods plainly pointed out.

But’, he continues, ‘while we thus struggle amongst our neighbours, with loyalty and all

integrity to serve our gracious king and our country, here is some of our neighbouring

justices, who you well know, Mr. Rawlinson, and Mr. Knipe, who refuse to join with us in

this good service’.

George Inman died in 1681 to be replaced as Vicar of Urswick by Thomas Inman, his half

brother, who was presented on 16th October 1681 by Anthony Turner, Vicar of Dalton,

together with Thomas Marshall, John Cockenskell, Christopher Gardner, Thomas Fell of

Redmayne Hall and William Postlethwiate (Yeoman). There is a note in Politt’s 1977 history

of Urswick Church that ‘apparently in 1661 certain property was sold to George Inman,

senior, a yeoman of Urswick, the previous 1660 having seen his son, of the same name,

presented as Vicar by the vendor of this property. In 1729 the heiress daughters of George

Inman, Vicar, conveyed the property to Thomas Briggs and in the conveyance is stated the

112

following: ‘And also that Advowson Patronage Free Nomination and Free Disposition of the

Vicaridge of the Parish Church of Urswick....’.

The only other information one can glean about Thomas Inman was his marriage at Urswick

on 19th June 1689 to Mrs. Anne Hunter of Roosecote as recorded in the Parish Register. He

resigned his office in 1696 and was replaced on 21st September 1696 by Richard Swainson,

presented by Rectors and Parishioners of Urswick. Thomas Inman became curate at

Aldingham. Swainson held office until he, too, resigned in 1713 to become Vicar of

Hawkshead.

There are two brass memorials in the chancel for the latter years of the seventeenth

century, the chancel being the most significant place for burials of ‘important’ people from

the parish. The first is inscribed: ‘Here lyeth the Body of Dorothy daughter of Alexander and

Dorothy Butler of Toderstaff, who died at Bardsea Hall in the sixth yeare of her age.

September 26th, 1687’.The second tablet in brass in memory of James Barwick who died at

Bardsea Hall in 1695 is set into the floor bearing the following description:

Fool man, why art thou such a sot

To dote on that which soon is not?

Leave thy sinful lusts and pleasure,

Which thou delight’st in above measure,

Repent in time before too late,

And think upon approaching fate,

Thou must ere long be brought down low

And rest in dust as I do now

Hopeing to rise again and be

JACOBUS BARWICK obit

Decimo die Novembris

1695 Anno aetatis Trigessimo Secundo.

Virtus post funera Vivit.

There is almost nothing recorded about the general life of the village during the Stuart

period. Birkett comments, rightly, that there is little doubt that the century following the

Dissolution and the dispersal of the monks was a hard one in Furness. Their industry, their

business acumen as well as their philanthropy were greatly missed. Of the ordinary villager

he wrote that ‘their lives were undistinguished, they did their work, attended church, drank

at the inns and enjoyed an occasional national celebration.’

113

During medieval times local life had had three main ingredients, namely: war, agriculture

and industry, and that during the Stuart period 1603-1747 there was a gradual elimination

of war, constancy of agriculture and the development, slowly at first but more quickly as the

years pass by of industry. He noted that in the 17th century Cumberland and Westmorland

were the two poorest counties in England ‘probably the cause of the apparent poverty was

the smallness of the population as compared with the acreage of the counties’. He also

commented that in agriculture new ideas which had been introduced into other parts of

England in the 17th century did not affect these counties (including Furness) till the next

one! ‘The same crops were sown and the same kind of stock kept as in the past’. As an

example he shows that turnips first introduced to England in 1645 were introduced to

Furness in 1755, similarly clover (1752) and wheat. Winter feed for cattle meant that it was

no longer necessary to slaughter most of the stock each year. By the end of the 18th century

potatoes were grown by almost every farmer both for home use and to sell at the Market.

Oats, barley, the most important cereals, provided bread for the inhabitants.

Marshall, writing in 1958, suggests that ‘agriculture seems to have been generally backward’

so much so that Thomas Pennant, visiting the district in 1772 remarked that the inhabitants

had “but recently applied themselves to husbandry”, going on to say that “till within these

twenty years even the use of dung was scarcely known to them.” W.B. Kendall wrote that in

the first half of the eighteenth century “the land was neither drained, cleared, or manured”,

the breeds of sheep, horses, and longhorn cattle were alike poor, and oats was the main

cereal cultivated. Marshall goes on to show that farming in Low Furness was still

comparatively backward during the second half of the eighteenth century, but there had

been a revival of the cultivation of wheat.

By this time farmers were beginning to live above a merely subsistence level; they had

something over to sell at the Market, from which they obtained money needed to buy the

furniture they owned. Most villages now had their own brewery, flour mill, saw mill and

bobbin mill, a local lime kiln, or access to same. In the early years of the 18th century almost

every cottage had its hand looms with all the family participating in the work. An analysis of

Urswick’s Parish Register from 1695- 1837 shows clearly how the countryside was changing

and the closer links with the Market Town of Ulverston developed through changes in

variety of employment. The following analysis is taken from the Marriages where the status

of the man is recorded:

1723- 1747

Husbandman = 43 Mariner = 20 Blacksmith/Smith = 9 Yeoman = 6 Weaver = 5

Taylor = 3 Shoemaker = 3 Ships Carpenter = 2 Carpenter = 2 House Carpenter = 2

Waller = 2 followed by 1 of Tanner, Gardener, Block Maker, Bailiff, Currier.

1748-1773

114

Husbandman = 52 Mariner = 23 Gentleman = 4 Cordwainer = 4 Black Smith/Smith = 4

Yeoman = 3 Merchant = 2 Taylor = 2 followed by 1 of Ship’s Carpenter, House Carpenter,

Vicar, Mantua Maker, Cabinet Maker, Weaver, Cooper, Labourer, School Master

1774-1800

Husbandman = 49 Mariner = 15 House Carpenter = 7 Labourer = 7 Yeoman = 6

Cordwainer = 3 Gentleman = 2 Miller = 2 Weaver = 2 followed by 1 of Shoe Maker,

Mercer, Taylor, Sail Maker, Slate Merchant, Grocer, Waller, Gardener, Merchant’s Clerk,

White Smith, Wine Merchant, Black Smith

1801-1826

Husbandman = 41 Cordwainer = 5 Weaver = 4 Labourer = 4 Miller = 3 Servant = 3

Mariner = 2 Carrier = 2 Shoe Maker = 2 School Master = 2 Solicitor = 2 Flax Dresser = 2

followed by 1 of Chair Maker, Shop Keeper, Manufacturer, Maltster, Butcher, Carpenter,

House Carpenter, Confectioner, Merchant, Huntsman, Gentleman, Clogger, Vicar,

Accountant, Stone Mason, Joiner.

1827-37

Husbandman = 21 Miner = 2 Tailor = 2 School Master = 2 Farmer = 2 Labourer = 2

House Carpenter = 2 followed by 1 of Shoe Maker, Currier, Maltster, Wine Merchant,

Joiner, Hooper, Coachman, Butcher, Clerk/Curate, Carpenter

By now the entries for Burials begin to provide more details as well, and for the first time we

can note ‘pauper’ burials and later on still, the age of the deceased. Some years stand out

because of the high number of burials, eg. 1751 (20) and 1772 (20), a few slightly higher

than average, eg 1728-1730 (about 16 a year) where the average is generally in single

figures or up to about 11 during the latter part of the eighteenth century.

Perhaps this is the appropriate place to consider briefly the issue of ‘poor provision’ in the

Parish because this was clearly one of the many duties of the ‘Vestry’ and the

Churchwardens and ‘fund raising’ would have had a profound effect on the on-going

condition of the church itself. From early days the Churchwardens were in charge of the

poor relief, a task devolved to them after the Dissolution of the smaller monasteries who

had given significant help and support to the poor, etc. The ‘Vestry’ generally was made up

of ‘twenty-four sidesmen, oligarthic and self-electing’. Marshall quotes the words of Sidney

and Beatrice Webb who said that they “had no organic connection with the inhabitants at

large, but- together with the Incumbent and the usual parish officers- acted in all respects in

their name and on their behalf”. Membership seems to have been based on the ownership

or occupation of the land.

115

Let me quote Marshall’s description:

‘Although the duties of the “Four and Twenties” were in the first instance church-centred

being concerned with the appointment and wages of clerks and sextons and the rotation of

churchwardenships- they were, like the church itself, intimately bound up in many aspects

of town and rural life. The Four and Twenties from the sixteenth to the eighteenth centuries

became responsible for the administration of public endowments; through their

appointment of curate-school- masters and supervision of schools, public education came

under their purview; and they were responsible for the care of the poor. They took action

against certain public abuses, and by the imposition of church rates and cesses of all kinds,

they reached into the pockets as well as the consciences of parishioners. ’ (page 127)

Clearly, changes in eighteenth century Furness brought a widening of the range of

employments available to local people and probably led to an increase in the population;

what is clear is that there was an increase in pauperism as well. It’s only as they are

recorded in Burial Records that we can gauge their numbers, and of course sums of money

spent on their relief by individual parishes. Urswick does not seem to have any records in

existence in relation to provision for the poor, etc. until the middle of the eighteenth

century- poor law pensioners 1755-1774 and a list of apprentices 1769-1781 some or all of

whom could be from ‘poor families’. They also retained details of travel accounts for officers

of the parish for 1769 and 1792. The following extracts for this period will give the reader

some idea of how poor families were dealt with by the ‘Vestry’:

20 Augt. 1769

Then agreed at a Meeting of the Sidesmen, Churchwardens and Overseers not to grant any

Parish Allowance to any poor Persons who have Children proper to put out Parish

Apprentices but they shall be put out as they shall arrive at a proper Age

23 Aug. 1769

Margaret Waller Daughter of Fras. Waller of Bardsea plac’d Apprentice to Thos.Fell of Little

Urswick Apprentice aged 11 Years or thereabouts.

23 Augt. 1769

Richard Waller Son of the sd. F. Waller, aged 8 Years or thereabouts, to Chr. Wilson of

Bardsea Esqr.

23 Augt. 1769

William Waller Son of the sd. F. Waller, aged 13 Years or thereabouts to Wm. Ashburner of

G. Urswick.

23 Augt. 1769

Jane Blackburne Daughter of Chr. Blackburne aged 7 Years or thereabouts to Mr. Tho: Petty

for Wellhouse

116

20 Feb: 1771

Ruth Blackburne Daughter of Chr. Blackburne aged eight Yrs. To G. Ashburner of Holmbank

who paid £10 Fine.

21 Feb: 1771

The said Ruth Blackburne to Wm. Thompson of Bardsea

27 Apl. 1772

Peggy Blackburne Dr. of ye sd. Chr Blackburne aged 7 Years to Chr: Ashburner of Aldgarley,

who paid £10 Fine

28 Apl. 1772

The said Peggy Blackburne to Jas. Cranke of L. Urswick

From the same records Postlethwaite indicates that ‘Vagrant poor were discouraged’; we

come across the following weighty resolution:-

‘We whose names are hereunto subscrib’d being ye Minister, Sidesmen & other Inhabitants

of ye Parish of Urswick do hereby unanimously agree, not to give any Thing for ye future to

any Vagrant Poor, as we do not apprehend that such Kind of Relief can properly be deem’d

an Act of Charity, but rather an Encouragement to Laziness & Vice: And we further agree to

prevent, as far as is in our Power, the Poor of our own Parish to ask Relief in any other

Parish. In Witness whereof, we have hereunto set our Hands this 11th Day of March 1753.’

(signed by John Addison Vicr. Of Urswick and all of the Sidesmen and Inhabitants.

Care was taken too that no paupers should obtain a settlement in the parish:

‘Parish of Urswick 5th Novr. 1782

Whereas an Inclosed Field called Turncar consisting of about an Acre, together with a little

mean old House; thereunto adjoining was, about eighty Years ago, given to the Church of

Urswick- the House thatched- the Length about 9 Yards- Breadth about six Yards- and Depth

of Side Wall little above seven Feet- an Earthen Floor- three small Ground Rooms- 4 little

Windows- No Stair Case nor upper Room- No Sort of Outhouse, Garden nor Orchard

belonging to it. The Value of it by Estimation less than Five Pounds- never inhabited by any

but the very poorest Persons. And whereas the Field is separated from the Common all

round by a Hedge, which being generally plundered by the poor Tenants for Firing, the

Repairs thereof & the Damage the Inclosures suffers by the Trespass of Cattle appears to be

three Times more than the clear Rent of the House. For the above Reasons We the Vicar &

Principal Inhabitants of the Parish, being convinced that it will be not only for the Benefit of

the Church, but also of the Parish do hereby consent that the said House be taken down,

and that the Stones thereof be apply’d to the Repairs of the Fence round the Field, and to

enlarge it by inclosing a Piece of Ground on the Front of the House by raising a Wall running

in a straight Line from the End of the House to make it square with the Fence next to the

117

Hollow Lane. And whatever Money may remain, after the Expence of the Repairs of the

Fence and erecting of the said Wall, it shall be lodged in the Sidesmen’s Hands, and the

Interest thereof apply’d to the use of the Vicar.’

John Addison, Vicar.

Geo: Ashburner. Tho. Postlethwaite. William Thompson. Thos. Ashburner. Wm. Ashburner

Junr. William Gardner. Wm.Ashburner Sen. Eward Ashburner. Tho. Petty. William Wane.

Malachi Cranke. Thos.Danson. James Hall. John Thompson. Robert Settle. John Kendall. John

Wilkinson. James Deason. Churchwarden.’

Let us conclude this little section by quoting some ‘bad news-good news’ from Fred Barnes.

He reminds us that each community was responsible for the poor relief of its own people,

even when they had moved and become destitute elsewhere. Hence the following letter

addressed to “The Overseer of the Poor of Urswick near Ulverstone, “ from James York, who

had moved from Urswick to the village of Hornby Castle near Catterick in Yorkshire, and had

since become unemployed:

“Sir, I ham sory to have to wright so often to you concerning my Rent and think it very

strange that nither me nor the overseer of our township as not recd. any answer to his

letter before this time. I have six children and 4 out of the six laying ill in the Hooping Cough,

we have not had ither the fire or candle out for this last six weeks and our Rent not payed

yet, and I can insure you Gentlemen that it is impossible for me to get them that support

that they stand in need of at present and as to paying my rent it is impossible. But I will

thank you to have the goodness to give me an answer one way or the other. I am Sir your

humble servant Jas. York. P.S. I don’t think the youngest child can live more than a day or

two.”

A further letter says that if the overseers of Urswick do not help he would have to apply to

the overseers of Hornby Castle and they had already warned him that they would then

immediately remove him from Hornby. The overseers were responsible for destitute

families, orphans, illegitimate children, and the insane, and funds at their disposal were

limited, hence the apparent reluctance to hand out money.

Travelling beggars got short shrift, as the following copy of a document dated 1750 shows:

Warrant to whip Vagrant out of the County County of Lancr to wit

To the Constables of the Division of

Broughton in the Psh of Kirkby Ireleth

in the sd. County and to every or any of them.

Whereas J:M a vagrant & R.Y. ; whom he calls his wife and A:J & H their Children were

brought before me Jas Machel Esqr one of his Majesties Justices of the Peace and Quorum

118

in and for the sd. County by you the sd Constables they having been found in your said

Division wandering and begging as vagrants. These are therefore to require you the sd

Constables or some of you to strip the sd J:M naked from the middle and openly to whip

him until his body be bloody & you are afterwards to see that he & the sd R Y & their

Children do pass out of the sd County in the next road leading towards N Britain where the

sd JM says he has long dwell and belongs to

Given &c

Now for the good news!

‘But one must not get too grim a picture; life offered pleasures which were enjoyed all the

more for being homespun and seasonal; pace-egging, harvest, rush-bearing, hunts such as

the Dalton Rout with their associated balls, and fairs, all provided conversation for weeks

before and after the events; weddings and funerals, itinerant salesmen and entertainers,

provided breaks in the daily routine, and of course churches were places where you met

your friends and exchanged the current news as well as places for spiritual solace’ (page 85)

Thomas West, who served as Catholic priest to Furness from 1767-1779 and whose ‘Furness

Antiquities’ was published in 1805 wrote that ‘the people of Furness in general, and of

Ulverston in particular, are civil and well-behaved to strangers, hospitable and humane. This

universal civility and good manners is the characteristic of furness, and distinguishes it from

those parts of the kingdom where as importunate curiosity degenerates into rudeness and

barbarism, so flagrant and offensive amongst those of the lowest stations. At church and

market their appearance is decent, and sobriety is a general virtue. Quarrels and affrays are

seldom heard of at fairs and public meetings. The modesty of the female sex and sobriety of

the men prevent irregularities before marriage, and secure conjugal love and affection

through life. The women are handsome, the men in general robust. As the air of Furness is

salubrious, so the inhabitants of Furness are very healthy; but medical advice is more

necessary than formerly.’ (page 17).

119

Chapter Six: The ‘Long’ Eighteenth Century

Richard Swainson attended Oxford University and graduated in 1695 with a B.A. Degree, at

the age of 20 and was appointed Vicar of Urswick in 1696. He married Esther Petty (nee

Dennison), the widow of Edmond Petty of Wellhouse, Bardsea, in 1704. They had five

children, four of whom were born whilst at Urswick. He moved to become Vicar of

Hawkshead in 1714 and died in 1719.

There is an interesting ‘aside’ here in a ‘deed of surrender’ of property to the church by

Edmund Petty and his family in 1702. Thanks to Reverend Postlethwaite we can report it in

full:

“March the 4th Anno Doni 1702

The same day came Edmund Petty of Wellhouse in ffurness in the County of Lancaster,

Yeoman, and Esther Petty his Wife (the said Esther being solely and secretly examined) and

Jane Petty of Wellhouse aforesaid Widow, before me William Simpson gen Steward there

and in open Court surrendered into the Hands of the Lord of the said Mannor All that their

Messuage and Dwelling house at Hagg-end in Great Urswicke in ffurness aforesaid with all

the Appurtences and alsoe All that Close there called Turncarre or Rygarth containeing one

120

acre of arrable Land or pasture ground, and the Hempland adjoining thereunto, with all

their and every of their Rights members and appurtences, on the North-East Side of the

Highway, being of the Annual and Yearly Rent of Two Shillings or thereabouts. To the use of

the mInister of Urswicke for thr time being and his successors To have and to hold unto the

present minister of Urswicke Mr. Richard Swainson and to his successors Ministers of

Urswicke successively and after another for ever, To the use of such Minister there, and, his

successor for ever Provided always that it shall and may be Lawfull for every such successive

Minister there and his Successors for ever to enjoy the same and to Receive the Rents and

profits thereof for ever, for the maintainance of a Preaching Minister there and not

otherwise, he and they Yearly paying all Rents ffines and services due and accustomed.

Salco &

Capt. Die et Anno Supradicto coram

W. M. Simpson

Deu Stew ibidem”

This was almost certainly the ‘old House’ pulled down in 1782!

In 1702 the church was reported to be properly furnished. The Lord’s Supper was

administered ‘thrice a year at least’.

This is probably the right moment to refer back to the bells in the belfry. The reader will

recall the earlier discussion in relation to the ‘Haryngton Bell’ and the ‘missing bell’.

Gaythorpe supposes that the two ‘other bells’ in the belfry dated 1711 and 1724

respectively may have been re-cast from two older bells. The inscription encircling the

second or central bell reads I : FLEMING. R : BRIGGS. W : TOMSON. CH. WARDENS. 1711.

The first bell which hangs near the north side of the tower has the inscription encircling the

bell which reads . Henry. Houlme. Vicar. James. Shaw . John . Conskell . Church .

Wardens . 1724 This bell was cast by Luke Ashton of Wigan.

On the departure of Richard Swainson there were two nominations made by parishioners.

23 nominated Alexander Bagot and 42 parishioners nominated Henry Holme. Postlethwaite

notes that ‘each party consisted of true & real patrons, but the 23 yielded to the greater

number, who had likewise much the greater share in the Tyths and Patronage appendant.’

Henry Holme was presented to be Vicar of Urswick on 30th July 1714. He died in office in

1747.

We may know little about the incumbency of Henry Holme but we are fortunate in being

able to observe the condition and relative wealth of the Parish in 1716 from a ‘Terrier’

drawn up by the Vicar and Wardens in that year. It is worth reporting in full:

‘A Copy of a true and perfect Terrier & Note of such Yearly Pensions & Profits as belong to

the Parish Church of Urswick.

121

Our Vicarage House is down to ye Ground. We have no Outhouses nor Stables,

Orchards nor Gardens.

The Demesne belonging to Bardsea Hall, except wt. Is lately purchas’d to ye same

pays a Modus of five shillings p. Ann, in Lieu of Easter Dues, & all Tyths belonging to

ye Church. The Estate of Wellhouse by like Prescription 5 shillings, except a place

call’d Boonwoods wch. Pay’d when Pastur’d, Tyth of Wool & Lamb. Stainton pays 3s

4d in lIeu of Tyth Hay. Aldgarley pays Tyth Hay of all their meadows in Kind, & Hemp

& Line. Every Estate in Little Urswick & Great Urswick pays a small Prescription for ye

Meadows thereunto belonging, & Hemp & Line in Kind, now chang’d into a Modus as

appears by ye Easter Books; only Wm. Addisons Estate at Little Urswick pays Tyth in

Kind, for ye Meadows, thereunto belonging, one Lying on the Back side of the House,

the other about 2 Acres lying in a Place call’d Kirk Flat, adjoining to a Place call’d

Crook Lands. The Town of Bardsea pays neither Modus nor Prescription for Hay

Hemp or Line nor pays in Kind. Bolton pays 4 shillings in Lieu of Tyth Hay & one

Penny in lieu of Hemp & Line. Some little Meadows lying near Beckside pay Tyth in

Kind and also two at Harbarrow, The two Estates at Holmbank pay either 5 Shillings

for Tyth Hay, & Hemp & Line in Kind. Also a Place call’d Brigmeadow pays Tyth in

Kind.

The Custom of Mortuaries in our Parish is 10 shillings for every Householder that

dyes possessed of Goods to ye Value of 40£ & 6s 8d for 30£ and 3s 4d for 20£. The

whole Parish pays Tyth of Wool & Lamb in Kind.

The Tyth Corn belongs to ye Improprieters, none due to Church.

We have half an Acre of arable Ground, adjoining to the Church Yard, & an Acre &

half of meadow adjoining to that.

A purchase of an old House & an Acre of Land call’d Turn Car has been made by ye

Parishioners & given to ye Church. Purchase £30 Lord Molineux of bardsea Hall, has

made an Agreement with ye present Vicar of Urswick to pay him Yearly £2 10s for ye

Easter Dues & Tyths of ye Parcels of Lands that he has lately purchas’d, the one call’d

Bardsea Moor the other Woo Brick. The Vicr. Of Urswick has Privilege to put any

Goods he keeps on any Comon in ye Parish.

Henry Holmes Vicr. Chr.Gardner

4 June 1716 Wm. Ashburner Church Wardens

Tho. Greaves

Chr. Fell

Added to the above is Henry Holme’s responses to Francis Gastrell, Bishop of Chester’s

Articles of Enquiry in 1722; again, his responses to each question can be reproduced here in

full:

122

“

Q: Have you any Free School, or other Schools within your Parish or Chapelry?

A: One free grammar Schoole in Little Urswick and no more.

Q: By whom was it erected or founded?

A: Founded by Wm. Marshall of Lambeth in the County of Surrey.

Q: Who hath the nomination of the Master?

A: Twelve Govers. most of which live in the parish and as one Gover. Dies the Survivrs. Have

power by the Last Will of the Said Wm. Marshall an a patten from the Crown to elect

another in his place.

Q: What Lands, Rents, Stipends, Money, or other Income belongeth to it, and by whom

given?

A: Fifteen pounds in Money p. Annum Given by the aforesaid Wm. Marshall to be paid out

of the Issues and profits of the Mannour of Brantingthorp in the County of Leicester.

Q: In whose Custody are the Deeds, Wills, or other Writings, by which such Lands, Rents,

etc. were given?

A: In the Custody of Thos. Brig of Great Urswick one of the Govers.

Q: Is there any other Gift, or Legacy to any other charitable Use within the Parish or

Chapelry? If there be give particular Account of it.

A: A Gift of Twenty Pounds given by Thos. Fell of great Urswick to be lent out att Interest by

the twelve or side-men of the Parish of Urswick who are to pay the Interest of the said 20£

each year to ye Vicar as is express’d in the last will and Testmt. of the said Thos. Fell.

Q: Into how many Townships, Hamlets, Villages, Quarters, &c. Is your Parish or Chapelry

divided?

A: Only one Townshipp besides one Town call’d Stainton which belongs to the township of

Leese in the Parish of Aldingham.

Q: Is there any other Part, District, or Division of your Parish or Chapelry that goes by any

other particular Name?

A: No.

Q: Have you any Ancient Seats, Halls, Granges, and how called?

A: One Ancient Seat call’d Bardsea hall

Q: How many Church-wardens, or Chapel-wardens have you within your Parish?

A: Four Churchwardens.

123

Q: If not chose as the 89th Canon directs, give an Account of the Custom and manner of

chusing them.

A: Chose as the 89th Cannon Directs.

Q: For what Township, Quarter, &c. Does each Warden Serve?

A: One for Stainton cum Adgarley one for Little Urswick Bolton Boltonheads and Beckside

one for great Urswick and one for Bardsea.

Q: Is your Parish Clerk chose as the 91st Canon directs, or by whom is he chosen?

A: Our Parish Clerk Chose as the 91st Canon Directs.

Q: What Salery or Income belongs to him?

A: The Clerks Salery arises thus Every Married Couple in the Parish pay to him yearly four

pence and every Widdowr. and Widdow 2 pence.

Q: Have you any particular Custom of making Lays, or Assessments?

A: The Assesmt. for the Church is laid by the Quindecim commonly, valled Quidam.

Q: Have you any particular Custom of Collecting such Assessments?

A: The Churchwardens collect it.

Q: Have you any particular, or unusual Custom of Tything?

A: No.

Q: Have you any remarkable Custom of any kind within your Parish or Chapelry?

A: One, every householder in the parish pays two pence to the Vicar once every 3 years as a

due for Cera Panis.*

Test. Hen. Holme.”

*Cera Panis should be read as Cera et Panis, ie. Wax for the use of the Altar and Holy Bread

( Panis Benedictus). Postlethwaite tells us that in post-reformation times at Urswick the cera

panis continued to be collected for the benefit of the vicar, ‘who doubtless strove to justify

his action in demanding it by providing out of his own pocket the bread and the wine used

for the Sacrament on Good Friday and Easter Day, the parish providing at other times.’

It was Bishop Gastrell who suggested that church at Urswick which bore the name of St.

Mary in the Fields was also associated with St. Michael. St. Michael’s Day is closely

connected with the various Charities of the Parish, and it seems possible that in post-

reformation times St. Michael’s name may have been brought into prominence through the

desire to avoid any suspicion of papacy that the dedication to St. Mary might convey.

124

Roy Strong gives a helpful summary of the state of the country parishes as we enter the so-

called ‘long eighteenth century’. It was marked by the manifest alliance between the

returning royalist gentry classes and the Established Church. The gentry supported the

parish church and in return the clergy helped maintain the existing social and political order.

He says that the village as a living community ‘was an essay in reciprocity’. At the top came

the gentry, substantial landowners who exercised authority within the locality, and who as

JPs and MPs represented its interests. As impropriators and patrons of advowsons, the

gentry ‘owned’ the parish church more than at any other period in its history. The officiating

cleric would have owed his position to the ‘owner’ and everyone else, tenant farmers and

estate workers owed their livelihood to him.

The gentry also dominated the space within the church, its walls increasingly adorned with

plaques commemorating members of the leading families, and their family pews taking

precedence over any other seating, as we shall observe so clearly when the ‘Gale Pew’ is

considered in more detail a little later on. It was those who came immediately below the

gentry in rank, the major tenant farmers and smaller land owners who held office as

churchwardens; they saw that the church was kept in good repair, managed the finances

and were responsible for making presentations at visitations. Office was usually held for a

period of two to three years, so that in the longer term most influential families in the local

community took a part in running the church. Postlethwaite in his ‘Some Notes on Urswick

Church and Parish’, published in 1906, gives details of churchwardens in an unbroken

sequence from 1711 until 1818.

As we move into the eighteenth century the clergy start to emerge as a distinct social and

professional group. Incomes varied enormously and in 1704 a fund named the ‘Queen

Anne’s Bounty’ was created with the purpose of augmenting the livings of the poorer

Anglican clergy; pluralism, the holding of several livings by the same cleric, was another

solution to the problem of poorly endowed parishes, but this led to the employment of

curates and in the growing non-residence of the incumbent. Throughout the eighteenth

century, even during the latter quarter when the industrial revolution was causing ‘massive

urbanisation’, the distribution of both clergy and churches remained hugely uneven and

essentially medieval. The tithe was regarded as essential to supplement the clergy’s income

and was often the source of disputes and poor relations between cleric and some

parishioners, especially Dissenters!

Most clergy lived at the level of the yeoman farmer but many were more wealthy and began

to sit on the bench or act as JPs and this naturally increased the distance between them and

the congregations they served. Let Roy Strong’s words illustrate the situation:

‘The eighteenth century ushered in the era of the ‘squarson’, an incumbent who was less a

cleric than a country gentleman, living a life of cultural leisure and country sports, whose

flock were treated rather like dependants on a great estate. Although in theory a clerical

125

career was open to all, increasingly the richer benefices became so desirable that the

aristocracy and gentry, who held many of the rights of presentation to livings, began to

colonise them for their younger sons.’ (page 179)

To be ordained, clerics required a degree from one of the two universities; few clerics

specialised in divinity, sermons were often read out from a book written by some well-

known divine. As Strong states, ‘in short, Georgian clerics were untrained in theology and in

the elements of the spiritual life. The result was the virtual absence of what we know as

pastoral ministry’.

What the average parishioner experienced on Sunday seems hardly inspiring. Challenged

first by Dissident and then by Methodism, the clergy became increasingly defensive,

determined to maintain a hold over the liturgy and regarding the services of the Prayer Book

as sacrosanct. After the years of the Civil War and Interregnum they were deeply resistant

to any kind of lay participation and suspicious of any spirituality expressing itself outside the

walls of the parish church, hence the conflict with the Wesleys in the 1730s onwards which

finally led to Methodism becoming a separate denomination in 1784 when John Wesley

began ordaining his own ministers.

Readers will have taken note that Bardsea Hall was still the only Ancient Seat in the Parish in

1722 and it is with the changed circumstances there that we have to continue because this

was to impact significantly on the church at Urswick during the rest of the eighteenth

century. On February 2nd 1705 Mary Anderton sold her customary lands to Lord Molyneaux

and on May 25th, granted a lease for a year for the consideration of five shillings of her

Manor and freehold to Thomas Molyneaux, son of Lord William, a nominal purchase(r) and

the next day, May 26th, a release to the said Thomas for the sum of £2,500. Other additions

were purchased by Lord Molyneaux but by order of the Chancery Court the estate was sold

to the highest bidder in 1723 to pay for the debts outstanding from the death of Lord

Molyneaux in 1717. It was purchased on behalf of a Sam Kilner for £4,500 but before the

purchase of the Manor could be completed Sam Kilner died intestate and insolvent.

There is an entry in the Urswick Parish Register which reads: Mr. Kilner of Bardsey Hall

buried June 11th 1730 and his son, Samuel, who was baptised at Urswick on July 4th 1730.

Once again an Order of the Court required the re-sale of the Manor; bids were placed on

behalf of John Kilner, Senior, of Sunbrick, Sam’s father, but before the purchase could be

completed Mr.Kilner came to an arrangement with Christopher Wilson Esquire.

Having made his fortune as a Captain in the East India Company’s service, Christopher

Wilson returned to England and purchased Bardsey Manor on March 25th 1732. He had

married Margaret, daughter of John Bradyll of Conishead Priory in 1727. Local patronage

reflects the fact that Christopher Wilson became a significant benefactor and patron at

Urswick. It could have been so different because although patronage of Urswick ‘came with

126

the territory’ initially Christopher Wilson attended Aldingham church until he fell out with

the Rector! Christopher Wilson gave to Urswick Church a silver Communion Plate in 1741.

At the bottom is a circular elevation on which is engraved the donor’s Coat of Arms, and

underneath ‘Christopher Wilson, 1741 is inscribed. In the 1778 Terrier it is described as a

‘patten for bread given by the late Chr. Wilson of Bardsea Hall Esq. Weight is marked on the

same (viz 15 oz 12 dwt.)’.

In 1747 John Addison was presented by ‘Christopher Wilson and other inhabitants’ to the

Vicarage of Urswick, on the death of Henry Holme. A Graduate of St. John’s College, Oxford

University in 1732, Addison had been Master of Urswick Grammar School for several years

prior to becoming Vicar. Christopher Wilson Esquire was by now beginning to make his

patronage ‘felt’ and it was to him that a faculty was granted in 1759 to erect a gallery pew

(since referred to as the ‘Gale Pew’) at Urswick and additional works were undertaken at the

time, not without some local opposition.

A Vestry Meeting was held on 7th August 1751 to discuss the placing of a ceiling in the Nave;

there was obviously some disagreement and a vote taken. Votes FOR were 12, including

Christopher Wilson, and AGAINST were 29. The ceiling was erected in due course and in the

next few years the walls were heightened and a new roof laid. Christopher Wilson’s ‘gallery

pew’ was erected in 1759 in the south east corner of the nave. Gaythorpe gives a wonderful

description of this so-called ‘Gale Pew’ in his notes of 1882:

‘Perhaps the most noticeable feature within the sacred edifice is an object resembling a

large water tank, elevated above the south-east corner of the nave and supported at the

north-west corner by a pillar, but on inquiry it turned out to be a gallery appriopriated to

the Gale family, and erected in 1759. It is approached by a wooden stair-case from the

priest’s door in the chancel, and is divided into two compartments; the larger has seats on

the north, west, and south sides for about twelve or fourteen persons, and the smaller (for

127

the servants), adjoining the chancel arch, has seats for four or five persons on the east and

north sides; but is is (sic) almost impossible for any one seated in either of the pews to see

the clergyman during service on account of the height of the oak panelling. Perhaps it may

have been pews of this kind that gave rise to the prohibition of talking in church during

service for fear of disturbing the rest of the congregation.’

The Gale Pew was considered unsafe in 1907 and was brought down to ground level.

Reference is also made to the three decker pulpit which may also date from this time, ie.

1759; this ‘now almost obsolete type of pulpit’ according to Gaythorpe still ‘adorns’ the

church, then standing well out into the chancel arch. According to Pollitt in 1973 this pulpit

originally stood centrally against the South wall of the Nave.

Christopher Wilson died in 1773 and befitting his ‘status’ he was buried in a vault beneath

the chancel of Urswick church; his widow Margaret (formerly Braddyll) was interred there in

1781. There is a tablet affixed to the chancel wall which is inscribed with their names and

also that of their daughter, Sarah and her husband, John Gale. There is an entry in the

Urswick Register’s Marriages Section for 1752 which reads ‘John Gale, Whitehaven,

gentleman, and Sarah Wilson Bardsea Hall. Sarah died less than a year after her father and

was also buried at Urswick. John and Sarah Wilson Gale’s eldest son was named Wilson Gale

and he adopted the name and arms of Braddyll by Royal Sign Manual and became the

owner of Conishead Priory, having inherited the estate from his cousin, Thomas Braddyll,

who died without issue in 1776.

It might be as well to report the full inscription on the tablet because it seems to go to some

128

length to establish the ‘pedigree’ of the family members and of course could prove helpful

for anyone undertaking family research in the future:

‘To the Memory of CHRISTOPHER WILSON, Esq. who departed this life the 15th Nov 1773.

Aged 84 years.

Also of SARAH his Daughter Wife of JOHN GALE of Whitehaven Esq. who died the 10th Oct.

1774. Aged 46 years.

Also Margaret Wife of the above named CHRISTOPHER WILSON daughter of JOHN

BRADDYLL, of Braddyll, Breck Hall, Pertfield, Salmesbury Hall and Conishead Priory in this

County, Esquire, who died April 1781, Aged 85 years.

Also JOHN GALE of Highhead Castle and Cleater Hall,County of Cumberland, Burnyside Hall,

County of Westmorland and Hallswell, County of Durham, Esquire. (Husband of the above

mentioned SARAH) who died 19th October 1814. Aged 87 years.’

A further Terrier was produced and delivered to the Bishop’s Register at the Visitation of

1778; it gives an accurate description of the parish at the time, in particular the complexity

of the tithes to be collected.

One or two items of particular interest should help us here: Fees for Marriage by License

5s 0d, by Publication 2s 6d.

Fees for Burial For a Sermon wh. Text chosen 1£ 1s For DO. No Text chosen 10s

For Burying in ye Church In any Part but ye Chancel 10s but more if insisted on.

For burying without a Sermon 1s 0d.

For keeping ye Registers is allow’d p. Ann 2s 6d.

The Terrier also introduces us to one of Urswick’s more colourful and famous families, the

Cranke family. According to Postlethwaite Malachi Cranke was a Churchwarden at Urswick

in 1778. The Terrier of 1778 was signed by John Addison, Vicar, and the four Churchwardens

William Fleming, Thomas Petty, Anthony Fox and William Butler ; one can only presume that

Malaki Cranke and Christopher Gardner replaced William Fleming and Anthony Fox after the

Visitation.

Canon Ayre writes that a tombstone in the churchyard bears an inscription commemorating

James Cranke, ‘an eminent artist’ who was born in the parish in 1709. According to Ayre ‘he

early evinced a taste for painting, and when he was a young man, he went to London for the

purpose of improving himself in that art. Here his talents were appreciated and he acquired

both fame and wealth as a portrait painter. But owing to his health suffering through the

129

incessant application which he gave to his profession, he returned to his native place and

built a house at Little Urswick; and here for thirty years he successfully pursued his

occupation among the inhabitants of the surrounding district. The inscription on his

tombstone is in Latin, and may be translated as follows:

“Here near his parents lies James Cranke, painter, a very excellent artist, and a very

excellent man who being, under God, the author of his own fortune happily raised himself

from a humble position to fame and celebrity, by his skill in the art which he diligently

cultivated, and by the eminent uprightness of his morals. The age of 72 years having been

completed with the highest praise, overcome by old age but by religion strong, he departed

from this to a more blessed life, on the 28th day of October A.D. 1781”.

There are two original oil paintings in the church, a painting of the ‘Last Supper’ which was

mounted on the reredos during the Chancel renovations in the early years of the twentieth

century; this painting is attributed to James Cranke, 1709-1781. The second painting, on the

East Nave wall (covering the infill where the entrance to the Gale Pew had been) is said to

be the work of James Cranke the Younger, 1746-1826.

‘Adoration of the Shepherds’ (copy of a Corregio) painted by James Cranke (Younger)

130

There is a further record of a John Cranke son of James Cranke whose dates, 1746-1816

suggest that he was twin to James the Younger. John was admitted to Trinity College,

Cambridge in 1767, obtained his BA in 1771, his MA in 1774 and later obtained a Bachelor in

Divinity degree in 1792. . He was for some of the time a tutor at Trinity College, and

thereafter served as a clergyman in Cambridgeshire parishes. Pollitt notes that ‘different

members of the family at different times became guardians of important items of church

property at a time when they might well have been irretrievably lost.’ These items include

the old font and the tracery from the East Window removed in the nineteenth century and

discussed later. The lists of Churchwardens give the names of several generations of the

Cranke family, including Nick in 1734, Malachi in 1778, William in 1818 and another William

in 1834-46 and M.J. from 1879-1906.

William Cranke, grandson of James Cranke the Elder, is credited with introducing the

Shorthorn cattle into Furness and recognised for ‘his adoption of modern improvements in

the management of tilled land’ writes John Dobson. Dobson’s observations on the

landscape around Urswick, written in about 1920, are interesting. He writes that ‘the

reversed S curve of the hedges in many of our modern fields tells us of the enclosure of the

old communal plough lands this reversed S curve being caused by the man leading the

foremost pair of an eight ox team very naturally pulling off to the right some distance before

he reached the end of the furrow in order to make the turning with his unwieldy team and

plough.’ He continued to demonstrate that ‘the ploughlands of the different owners lay side

by side in acre or half acre strips separated by a narrow strip of grass which in the course of

generations took the reversed S curve of the furrows and when the time came that the

various owners settled among themselves to enclose their shares of the communal fields

what more natural than that they should plant their fencing shrubs along these re curved

grassy strips’.

His later comments help in interpreting the landscape further where he writes that ‘here

and there you still find a field with a grassy hillside laid in long strips or terraces. That you

may safely say has not been ploughed for over 200 years for with our modern team and iron

implement we plough up and down hill whereas in old times with oxen and a rude wooden

plough they turned up the soil in strips one above another along the hill side’.

There is an almost complete silence on happenings in Urswick during this period but

changes in the area and the rapid developments within the iron ore and the shipbuilding

industries will have had their effects, drawing some into alternative employment and others

into capital investment. Some of the changes can be inferred from the entries noted earlier

in the Marriage Register of the time. It is important to remind ourselves, however, how

131

relatively small each settlement was with an equally small and largely settled rustic

population focused on the ‘manor’ or ‘big house’.

Birkett states that although Ulverston had never been officially recognised as a port, in 1737

there were 231 ships anchored within the Liberty of Furness. He cites William White who

showed that in the middle of the eighteenth century exports from Greenodd alone were’

minerals and merchandise worth from £150,000 to £200,000 annually’. By 1774 Ulverston

had won recognition as a port and seventy ships were registered as belonging to it. The

Ulverston Canal was completed in 1796.

He writes that ‘it is significant of the time that a familiar sight was the long procession of

carts loaded with red hemaetite ore to the canal, a development of an age-long business in

Furness and destined to play a great part in the district in later years. Mining, weaving,

spinning and tanning employed more and more people, and agriculture drew many young

people from the town. Then, and for many a year, the parents of large families of the

working-class almost invariably sent their children to farm service,’ (page 81).

It is worth taking note here that the ‘war years’ of 1793-1815 were a time of rapidly rising

population and of urbanisation, which according to Marshall meant an increased demand

for farm produce; when that could not be easily imported from abroad it also meant high

prices. It was a rise in prices consequent on the American War which brought about a

renewal in wheat cultivation, including in parts of Low Furness. The process of the

Enclosures Acts caused some cottagers to quit the countryside ‘and the uncommon progress

of manufactories which induced multitudes to engage their children therein’. The ‘boom’

was followed by ‘bust’ with the agricultural depression following Waterloo and the marked

fall in prices after 1820. It was noted that at this time ‘in Furness and Cartmel, outside of the

town of Ulverston, paupers formed about 10.8% of the population’. (Page 290)

There was also a change in farm ownership with many farms being tenanted or leased.

Marshall stated that these tenanted farms employed the majority of farm servants ‘for

many of the yeomen, it is believed, managed their holdings with little or no labour except

that provided by their own families.’ The farm servants and labourers consisted partly of

married men living in cottages near the farm and partly of single men and women living

under the farmer’s roof. At this time, that is, about 1830, farm servants with their families

constituted two-thirds or three quarters of the rural population; the other portion not

directly engaged in agriculture contained many who were indirectly concerned, such as

blacksmith, carpenter, wheelwright, miller and millwright, saddler, grocer and other shop

keepers, the clogger, shoemaker and country tailor.

There seems to have been a greater interest in providing education on a wider basis

although even by 1820 according to Marshall ‘only a small proportion of the juvenile

population attended them’. He suggested that it was more to the point to enquire what

132

means of tuition were available to the sons of the yeomen or tradesmen in some villages at

a distance from the main schools. Urswick was more fortunate in having its own Grammar

School. Of the vicar at Urswick at the time, William Ponsonby, it is said that ‘he takes all

children, boys or girls, in the parish or neighbourhood without any demand; but they

generally pay him a trifling gratuity at Shrovetide, called a Cockpenny. He has now about 40

scholars, whom he instructs in reading, writing and arithmetic. Ten of them are also learning

Latin, and one is advanced in Greek.’

It may be that Urswick was more fortunate than many other places in its educational

provision. A memorial tablet commemorating John Russell on the north wall of the nave

indicates that there was an ‘Academy’ in addition to the Grammar School in the village.

Bouch and Jones (1961) described several ‘Dissenters’ Academies’ which were ‘the only

institutions which offered something like a university curriculum designed primarily to

provide Dissenters, then barred from Oxford and Cambridge, with an education to fit them

for the nonconformist ministry or for the professions of law and medicine,’ (page 206) .

The memorial reads:

“Near this place are interred the remains of JOHN RUSSELL For many years Master of an

Academy in this Parish. He died June 1st. AD 1831.His disposition was social and benevolent

and his conduct governed by scrupulous SINCERITY FIDELITY and HONESTY. As a Teacher of

Youth He early acquired the Confidence of his Neighbours, by dispensing with Diligence

Ability and Zeal as well the store of POLITE LEARNING As of humbler KNOWLEDGE. And his

Perseverence eventually conferred on his Name a Widely extended CELEBRITY. The greatest

part of his numerous PUPILS Desirous of his holding in Perpetual honour a MERITORIOUS

EXAMPLE have united in erecting this imperfect memorial of their RESPECT and their

OBLIGATIONS. AD MDCCCXXX11.”

There is no mention of the Grammar School or ‘Free School’ in this context and we know

from his institution as Vicar of Urswick in 1805 that Reverend William Ponsonby was

appointed also Master of the Grammar School and was still the Master in 1820. He was

considered fortunate because he had a ‘school room with apartments above, which latter

he let for 3 guineas a year’.

The School became a public elementary school in 1848 but retained its original name of

‘Grammar School’. It was considerably enlarged in 1884 at a cost of £600 raised by voluntary

subscription (in 1898 the average attendance was 178).

Urswick was perhaps fortunate in a further way in that in 1812 ‘Richard Smith, Liverpool,

gentleman, aged 23 years and miss Anne Fleming, sp. Aged 24 years’ were married at

Urswick Church and set up home at Bankfield in Great Urswick village. Readers will recall

133

that it was Richard Smith who sometime between 1820 and 1840 removed the cross and

stocks which prevented his coach and horses sweeping into the drive of Bankfield. The

Smith family took an active interest in the church, the men becoming churchwardens at

some point, and by 1861 Henry Smith played a leading part in the dispute surrounding the

election and the right of presentation of the new vicar. The family made significant

donations to the church.

More of this later on.

To return to the period of ‘silence’, it seems that even the Vicar Addison was finding things a

bit quiet! There are a few random comments scattered around the Registers at this time.

For example:

‘The Summer 1762 the driest ever known. The Waters in the Winter 1762 the lowest ever

remembered. Little Urswick Tarn almost dry at Candlemas 1768. At its greatest Height seven

yards below the Cart Way.’

’28 Jan: 1763 A Bull was roasted upon Urswick Tarn, several Races run Country Dances

performed upon the Ice.’

’14 Augt. 1765. The Trench from the Tarn towards Clark Beck was cut to serve both as a

Fence, and for bringing up the Boat. It being a most remarkably dry Summer.’

‘July 1766. The School of Little Urswick new Slated, End Wall taken down to the Floor, & a

new Wall raised twenty Inches narrower, whereby the Fire Room &c. Was enlarged. New

Window put out in the Fire Room & in the End Room. Half of Fire Room & End Room new

joisted & lathed & plaister’d and three new doors made.’

‘1770 Excessive wet Sumer. Grain out of doors 20 Novr.’

21 April 1773 My Mare foled.’

We know nothing of how the Vicar spent his time but there is in existence a Diary of Edward

Jackson, Curate at Colton, later Vicar of Ulverston, covering the year 1775. In it he ‘goes

hunting, dines out frequently, rides with the justices, cuts his hay field, makes sermons,

plays cards, observes the weather and generally has a surprisingly full life.’ As Birkett

comments, ‘it not only tells us of an active parson’s interests, but those of the gentry with

whom he associated. Apart from buryings and christenings little is written about the humble

folk whom, no doubt, he served well.’

There are several brass memorial plaques in the outside south wall of the church at Urswick,

one of which records the interment of the Reverend John Addison who died 19th August

1788. He was 41 years Vicar of Urswick and 50 years Master of the Free Grammar School in

Little Urswick. Thirty years after his death a marble tablet was placed inside the church on

134

the north wall of the nave.

It has a Latin inscription which translated into English reads:

‘To the memory of an honest man, faithful pastor, and diligent teacher, very learned in the

Greek and Latin languages, some of his many surviving pupils desire this sepulchral marble

to be sacred. A.D. 1818.’

William Ashburner was presented as the new Vicar of Urswick by the ‘Inhabitants and

Landowners of the Parish’ on September 17th 1788. In his turn he became a popular figure

in the community. There is little information readily available about him other than that,

born in 1760, he came from local yeomanry stock and was married in 1782 to Mary Briggs in

Aspatria. Both the Briggs’ and the Ashburners’ had roots in Urswick and had been influential

within the community and the church over several generations. The Parish Registers for

1786-87 show that William Ashburner was serving as ‘Curate’ at Urswick during those years,

presumably as incumbent in waiting!

John Bolton, another ‘famous son’ of Urswick, the eminent geologist, wrote in tribute to

William Ashburner as follows:

“The Ancient Free School where Rev. William Ashburner, vicar of Urswick presided. Our

parson was a kind & good master, & at the annual ‘barring out’ quietly submitted to have a

little dirty water thrown over him when he attempted to storm our barricade, and as he

never could succeed, being always forced to retreat, it was not with frowns and threatening

for another time, but with a good-natured smile at his defeat. We were then free to choose

our Captains and clerks for the annual foot-ball match, who were also our commanders for

the cock-fights on Shrove-Tuesday, at the ancient cock-pit ring, on the upper side of the

green in the centre of the village. In the holy & humane pastime carried on at this ring, on

Shrove-Tuesday, of the years 1796-98, the vicar presided in gown and bands, and might be

seen running round the ring, being then a strong and active man, but instead of preaching a

sermon, or reciting passages of Scripture to his unruly parishioners to keep them quiet, he

used a more persuasive and irresistible argument, - a nice little two handed cudgel.

We are not to presume from the above sketch, that the Rev. Vicar was a bad Man, on the

contrary, from our own Knowledge he was a Kind-hearted Christian minister, a scholar and a

gentleman, beloved by his pupils and generally by his parishioners. But times are altered, 70

years have made many changes, and although cock-fighting is now abolished by Act of

Parliament, a portion of the cock-pit ring still remains on Urswick Green.”

William Ashburner also published a Bowdlerised version of the Bible for the benefit of his

Scholars.

He resigned his living in 1800 at the age of 40 and was succeeded by John Bailes, also

presented by the Inhabitants and Landowners of the Parish. Bailes served only a matter of

135

five years, resigned his office, and was followed by William Ponsonby who remained Vicar

until 1841.

136

Chapter Seven: Muddy Waters

If the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries were considered to be ‘quiet’ for the

villagers of Urswick and surrounding area, the period 1805- 1841 was far from quiet for the

church during the incumbency of Reverend William Ponsonby! This was a critical and hugely

important time which is somewhat ‘muddied’ by the apparent loss of a vital Parish Book for

that period, reported missing by Reverend Mathias Forrest in 1842 when he took up office

as Vicar of Urswick on the ‘demise of my Predecessor’. He was far from happy and stated

that it was “worse than nonsense to say it is lost”. We shall come to look at the structural

and material changes to the building during this period shortly.

It is also important to track the progress of the Wilson-Gale family of Bardsea Hall since they

were still the major benefactors of the church and had particular influence as ‘Lords of the

Manor’ even if presentation was now firmly in the hands of the ‘Inhabitants and

Landowners in the Parish’.

Readers will recall that Sarah Wilson daughter of Christopher Wilson, Esquire of Bardsea

Hall married John Gale of Whitehaven in 1752 and they occupied Bardsea Hall on the death

of her father. We have to follow the line carefully because on the death of Thomas Braddyll

their son Wilson Gale adopted the name and coat of arms of Braddyll thus becoming Wilson

Gale Braddyll residing at Conishead. The youngest son of Sarah and John Gale married

Sarah, daughter of the Reverend Roger Baldwin , Rector of Aldingham, his cousin. He was

called Henry Richmond Gale.

137

We now move to the next generation to find that Thomas Richmond Gale Braddyll born in

1777, son of Wilson Gale Braddyll, married Frances Bagot of Levens in 1803. Thomas

became a Lieutenant-Colonel in the Coldstream Regiment of Foot Guards. He was aged 42

when he succeeded to Conishead. He became also High Sheriff of Lancashire in 1821. We

are told that like his parents he had extravagant tastes and consorted with the Prince

Regent and his fellows. He mortgaged Bardsea Hall and Edge Farm to settle his parents’

debts.

In 1821 he set out to rebuild Conishead, engaging a leading London architect to design and

oversee the restoration, but again found that his funds couldn’t stretch as far as he had

hoped! Generous to a fault, Colonel Braddyll was a major benefactor to Ulverston Parish

church; he also gave land for the building of a church in Bardsea. His son laid the foundation

stone for the church in 1843 but the imcomplete building, like Conishead and other

property, all fell into the hands of his creditors. In 1849 the Court of Chancery made an

order for the sale of these properties and Colonel Braddyll was virtually bankrupted. The

Reverend Thomas Edmund Petty of Well House, Bardsea, saw to it that the church at

Bardsea was completed in 1848. In fact he became its first Curate-in-Charge in 1853; the

delay in consecration was in part due to his own ill-health.

The ‘Sentence of Consecration’ of Holy Trinity, Bardsea, was ‘openly and publicly read and

promulget upon Monday, September 5th 1853, signed by Richard Gwyllam, Rural Dean,

Matthias Forrest, Vicar of Urswick, G.S. Petty, and Charles W Petty, Secretary to the lists t of

Chester. The reason given for requiring the additional church was that ‘there was not

enough room at Urswick Church’.

This is probably an opportune moment to insert some details recorded in the Westmorland

Directory of 1851 which gives a helpful breakdown of population (presumably adults only)

of Urswick Parish from 1801 up to 1841:

1801 = 633

1811 = 590

1821 = 787*

1831 = 752

1841 = 760 (372 male, 388 female)

One would assume that the significant growth during this decade would be the increased

mining activities particularly at Stainton.

138

It also lists the Principle Landowners as being:

Mrs. Ashburner

W. Gale. Esq.

T.R.G. Braddyll. Esq.

The Earl of Derby

Thos. Petty. Esq.

Additional notes show that the ‘vicariel tithes’ were commuted in 1849, for £200 a year, and

the living is now possessed by the Rev.Mathias Forrest’.

We shall return to the Petty family connection with Urswick, but one notes from the

Register that a William Petty of Well House had been buried at Urswick as far back as 1695

so connections existed over a long period of time. A Thomas Petty first appears in the list of

Churchwardens in 1778, then 1781, 1789-92 and then seems to fall out of the picture again.

We now turn to the other side of the Gale family, namely Henry Richmond Gale the

youngest son of Sarah and John Wilson Gale who married his cousin Sarah Baldwin. Henry

became a General and fought in the American War of Independence. The family lived at

Bardsea Hall whilst the Gale Braddylls lived at Conishead and later lived at Aldingham Hall.

General Gale’s son, William Gale, born in 1788, married in 1820, was able to buy back

Bardsea Hall later on; he made alterations and built a new wing to the Hall. William’s

brother, John, was killed by falling off his horse in 1799 and was buried at Urswick. William’s

son, Henry Richmond Hoghton Gale served in the Crimea and retired with the rank of

Captain in 1861. He married Emma daughter of Thomas Sneyd of Sidbury Manor in Devon in

1862 and they lived at Bardsea Hall. It was the four daughters of Captain Gale who gave the

carved oak font cover to Urswick church in memory of their father once the ‘original’ font

was restored in about 1907; it is said that the four heads carved on this huge cover are

likenesses of the four daughters. ‘The Gale Pew’ has an inscription in memory of William

Gale their grandfather. James Gale was admitted as Vicar of Urswick in 1861 but that is to

rush ahead too far for now.

The Reverend William Ponsonly took up office as Vicar of Urswick in 1805 following the

resignation of John Baile. In some ways it was a ‘home coming’ since the Ponsonby family

had roots in Great Urswick from at least the beginning of the eighteenth century. The Parish

Register shows that in 1734 Jane, daughter of Wm. Punsunby’ of Much Urswick, was

baptised; in 1736 another child, John, was baptised and in 1738 Mary, a further daughter of

‘Wm. Punsonby’, was baptised. Ann Ponsonby, presumably William’s sister or aunt, died a

spinster in 1731.

139

As noted above Reverend Ponsonby was also appointed Master of the Grammar School. A

busy life was helped by the presence of curates at least for a period. The Diocesan Parish

Papers for the time indicate that Robert Warriner was curate at Urswick in 1811 and

William Sandwith in 1812 with a stipend of £45 per annum. There is a note from Reverend

Ponsonby to the effect that he could not increase the stipend of his curate because ‘the

vicarage is only worth £45 per annum’!

The Parish Registers for April 13th 1819 shows that ‘Wm.Ponsonby, Vicar, ba & Agnes

Ashburner, sp.’ were ‘married at St. Mary’s, Carlisle, lic, by the Rev.R.I. Hartley, M.A.’

witnessed by Eliza Ashburner of Midtown, Urswick and Richard Fleming, late of the same

parish. Sadly and tragically, it was a short marriage.

The Burial Register entry for March 24th 1820 records ‘Agnes Ponsonby, Huntide, aged 28’,

and for May 14th 1820, ‘William Ponsonby, Huntide, infant.’

The Baptism Register for March 12th 1820 reads:

‘Isabella d. William & Agnes Ponsonby, Huntide.

William s. William & Agnes Ponsonby, Huntide.

The above are twins’.

Clearly Agnes died shortly after giving birth to twins, followed a few weeks later by baby

William. Reverend Ponsonby was left with a baby daughter to care for probably with the

support of his wife’s family.

We have Reverend Matthias Forrest to thank for further information where he writes:

“For the information of my successors.

The Vicarage House was purchased about 1843 for 500£ of which sum £200 was got from

Queen Ann’s Bounty (a Benefaction); 276£ raised by voluntary contributions: and the

remaining sum, conveyance and other expenses, were paid out of Queen Ann’s Bounty

money belonging to the Church.

The Paddock adjoining was brought at the same time from the same owner (Miss Ponsonby,

daughter of the late Vicar) for £100 paid entirely from Q. Ann’s Bounty money belonging to

the Church. M.Forrest.”

Tragedy seems to have continued because according to a local source Isabella Ponsonby

married James Malachi Cranke, but ‘sadly she died young and before having children thus

denying the village of the continuity of a family line which has been such an asset to the

community over several generations’.

140

In 1826 William Ponsonby applied for a Faculty to ‘erect a Gallery & make several other

alterations and Improvements in the church.’ This was contested by John Cranke on behalf

of himself and others and the Consistory Court was convened at Richmond to examine the

objections. Details have proved hard to come by but Postlethewaite noted that the old

Norman font was removed from the church in about 1826. Fortunately it was ‘piously

preserved at Hawkfield by the late Mr. Wm. Cranke’ and restored to the church in 1904. It

was recorded elsewhere that it had been used as a ‘flower bed’! The Norman font was

replaced by a ‘modern Gothic font dating from 1827’; it still stands at the back of the

church under the gallery!

The above would seem to vary ‘in detail’ from the original proposals put to the Meeting of

the ‘Inhabitants of the Parish’ in January, 1826. This is reported at length by Reverend

Ponsonby as Chairman of the Vestry Committee in the back of the Vestry Minute Book for

1825-1945 (again, there are some gaps). It is worth reproducing much of the entry here

because it provides what information there is and could suggest perhaps why John Cranke

later objected (William Cranke, Churchwarden in 1818, was part of the Committee who

made the initial recommendations with Thomas Postlethwaite, Robert Geldart and Richard

Smith of Bankfield); one presumes that these were the Churchwardens at the time although

of course this is the period when names are missing (1819-1841).

Canon Ayre wrote that ‘in the year 1826 a faculty was obtained for re-pewing the church

and making some other alterations, the cost of the whole amounting to £137. The pulpit,

which stood at the centre of the south wall, was removed to the east end of the north side

of the nave, and a gallery was built across the west end, blocking up the obtusely-pointed

arch which divides the nave from the tower.’ (page 159-60) The old irregular oak seats were

replaced by uniform pews of painted deal which according to Pollitt lasted for well over one

hundred years before they were replaced.

The Vestry Committee’s original proposals read as follows (written by Reverend Ponsonby

as Chairman and Vicar):

‘The Committee have examined the state of the Church and lay before you a plan of its

interior which contains thirty-three pews all of which are free and capable of containing 240

Persons, a greater number than usually attend divine Services there. A great proportion of

these pews require repairing, but the committee are of opinion that the old Materials used

be found very generally available. The Committee is recommending that their repair be

substantially made, are enabled to submit to you a Plan for altering the arrangements of the

Pews and increasing their numbers, without resorting to any rate upon the Inhabitants.

With this view they have rec’d offers of subscriptions for 14 Individuals, Proprieters of

dwelling houses within the Parish, to the amount of £140 which somewhat exceeds the

Estimates now laid before you for the expense of accomplishing the work. This sum is

141

proposed to be laid out, in erecting a Gallery at the West End of the Church to contain nine

Pews and in making five other Pews in the body of the Church, amounting together to 14

Pews, which are to be appropriated for the private use of the Individuals above mentioned

and also in completing the other improvements as delineated in the Plan and which are as

follows, viz in making one Pew for the Churchwardens Overseers of the Poor and Elders of

the Parish to contain 14 Persons, another Pew for the Choristers or Singers to contain 20

Persons and thirty three free Pews to contain 210 Persons, altogether affording

recommendation to 344 Persons.

In effecting that arrangement it will be necessary to remove the Reading Desk and Pulpit to

the East End of the Church an alteration which the Committee do not doubt will meet your

approbation, as the minister will then front the Congregation’

No mention here about removing the Norman font, etc. but perhaps therein lies the source

of the later objections.

Reverend Postlethwaite provides one of the ‘lighter moments’ during the incumbency of

William Ponsonby. He tells the story of Old Tom Turner, one of the Turner family, to be

Parish Clerk. Old Tom had two sons, Tom and William, commonly known as Billy who in turn

became Parish Clerk. Billy was a blacksmith and had a smithy opposite the (present) Derby

Arms where the old village cross once stood. Old Tom Turner was very poor when appointed

clerk. He had his fees and a payment of 4d per house if kept by a married couple, or 2d if by

a widow or widower. To keep him off the parish £5 a year was given to him from the Rates.

He was very keen over his fees; he used to say he “did not keer who wha deed, or whar they

deed, so as they came to Ossik to be buried.” He allegedly shocked people with his

roughness and irreverence over funerals.

It would seem that his ‘irreverence’ went further. Postlethwaite tells us that Tom Turner

was once in difficulty in setting the key on the pitch-pipe (for congregational singing) for the

psalm before the sermon. Mr. Ponsonby was preaching. ‘After a third ineffectual attempt on

the choristers’ part, the vicar interrupted with a deep voiced “Let us pray”. But Turner was

not so easily obliterated; in audible tones he exclaimed “----------- thy praying, t’ psalm cums

afore t’ Sarmon.” (Page 42)

The author of the church’s ‘millenium publication’ of 1977, states that ‘from 1828 to 1840

further drastic renovation was done. The chancel was at that time in a very bad state, and

after long correspondence with the Lord of the Manor, was repaired by public subscription’.

He goes on to note that ‘at the same time the original East Window was removed. Windows

were opened up in the nave and the roof slated. A reredos of tiles was made against the

east wall, and the Vestry added.’ (Page 12).

142

The Vestry Minute Book for 1825-1945 simply records a Meeting convened on 21st July 1847

‘for the purpose of considering what steps should be taken for putting the Chancel of this

Church into proper repair.’

‘It was proposed by Mr. Wm Cranke that the matter should stand over till next Spring and

that proportions should be made in the meantime.’ It was also proposed that Mr. E. Petty,

Mr. Wm. Cranke and Mr. W. Fell be requested to make a Plan & Estimate of the proposed

Alterations as soon as possible.’ (Signed by Matthias Forrest, Vicar)

There are no further entries in this Minute Book until 1877.

Matthias Forrest made a note elsewhere that ‘Mrs. Petty of Wellhouse gave us an oak Chair

for the Altar, also an Altar Cloth’ and that ‘About the same time Mrs. Ashburner of

Holmbank gave a new East Window, which cost about 100£.’

This might be the opportune moment to remind frustrated readers that according to the

statement by the Vicar before the Assistant-Commissioner, Arthur Cardew, Barrister-at-Law,

at the public enquiry made at Urswick on 13th September 1898, “there were no deeds

whatever when he came to the parish about twenty years ago. There was a mass of

parchment at the bottom of the chest which, with the damp, had gone to jelly, and it had to

be dug out with a spade.’ (Gaythorpe)

Gaythorpe, as we noted earlier, bemoaned the removal of the East Window and its

replacement ‘with execrable taste’ by modern windows; however, all was not lost because

the tracery of the original windows was preserved in the garden at Hawkfield. The work in

the chancel also included rebuilding the top portion of the walls and ‘cheap deal timber

put in the roof.’ The chancel floor was re-laid using Hutton Roof flags.

In about 1850 the vestry, which was probably added on to the chancel in the early

seventeenth century, was rebuilt. An entry in one of the Church Books notes that “About

the year 1850, the Chancel & Vestry of Urswick Church were rebuilt, at a cost of £173-7-3.

This sum was raised by Voluntary Contributions. List of Contributors lost.”

A number of observations have been made about the unusual windows in the church in

that no two were alike! Pollitt wrote that ‘It is interesting to see that all are different in

shape and size and that their positions do not conform to a set plan.’ (Page 8) He also states

that most of the work on ‘opening them up’ to their present form is mid-nineteenth century

and some of the glass is quite modern. Gaythorpe writing in 1882 describes the windows as

follows: ‘the arrangement of the windows is, to say the least, eccentric. On the north side

(of the nave) is a lofty, square-headed window, with remains of broken tracery; another

of two obtusely-pointed lights, and a third of modern date differing from both the others.

On the south side of the nave is a narrow-pointed single light, an Early English window,

and a square one of two lights without any pretensions to architecture; whilst the fourth,

143

a circular window, concludes the series.’ (page 89). It is interesting to note that when

Canon Ayre wrote about the same windows 15 years later there were now five windows in

the south side of the nave! The addition is described as a ‘modern pointed window, with

two lights’. The middle window on the north side was, according to Ayre, ‘erected to the

memory of Isabella Ashburner in 1822’.

Gaythorpe adds that ‘the earliest specimens of window tracery are in the nave, and date

from about the middle of the 14th century. Possibly these windows were inserted by Sir John

de Haryngton, who was lord of Aldingham from 1347 to 1363-4. The ancient windows in the

chancel and upper stages of the tower are nearly a century later, and most probably are the

work of William de Haryngton, the donor of the bell, who was born 1392 and died 3rd March

1458.’ (page 91)

A Memorial Tablet in memory of Reverend William Ponsonby is sited on the north wall of

the Nave. Its dedication and warm tribute reads as follows:

‘Sacred to the memory of the Rev. William Ponsonby late vicar of this church who died on

the 8th day of July 1841 in the 64th year of his age and 37th of his incumbency.

His meek and Christian disposition, benevolence of heart, and integrity of conduct, as well

as the plain but earnest manner in which he inculcated the fundamental doctrines of the

gospel endeared him to his parishioners and friends who have caused this tablet to be

erected as a tribute of their affection, and to perpetuate his name whose ministry was one

of peace and goodwill to all mankind.’

Before we get involved in the ‘local politics’ of the 1860’s let us resume our observations

about developments in the wider Church during the first half of the nineteenth century

which left no part of the Church of England untouched. Towards the end of the eighteenth

century many of the former membership had turned to Methodism or had become Baptists

or Congregationalists; Methodism had a strong appeal because it was concerned with

personal salvation and stressed the equality of sinners irrespective of their social status.

Further to this, an evangelical revival took place in the Church of England itself led by the

likes of William Wilberforce and the Clapham Sect, which drew a section of the upper

classes back to a life of personal piety and dedication to social and moral causes; its

inspiration came from outside of the Church and was regarded by many Anglican clergy as

‘smacking of the enthusiasm of Dissenters and Methodists’ (Strong, page 202).

BY the 1820s the national Church was in crisis. The Dissenters objected strongly to having to

pay the church rate to maintain a church they no longer belonged to. In 1828 the Test and

Corporation Act abolished legal penalties for Dissenters. 1829 saw the Catholic

Emancipation Act which marked the end of the Church of England’s monopoly of public

office and the universities. There was conflict within the Church itself between those who

supported the Oxford Movement, whose members wanted to reinstate the emphasis on the

144

sacramental life of the Church and to reassert its catholicity, and the strong evangelical wing

of the Church with its focus on Scripture and personal salvation. This was the signal for more

changes to many church interiors and the conduct of liturgy, and perhaps the changes

Reverend Ponsonby and his supporters wanted to make at Urswick should be set against

this development.

We have already seen how the rural community was changing and the emergence of distinct

classes of landowner, tenant farmer and landless labourers. Strong suggests that the

divisions sharpened as both landowners and farmers, in response to an increased sense of

social hierarchy and class status, withdrew from the communal life of the village. However,

it was still usually the landowner who held the advowson and therefore could control the

choice of incumbent and influence what went on inside the church itself. Again, this would

seem to be a significant factor to consider when we look at the furore surrounding the

appointment of a successor to Matthias Forrest in 1861.

There was a sustained drive to eradicate non-resident clergy who only rode out to their

parishes on Sunday. The Pluralities Act of 1838 laid down that no cleric could hold more

than two benefices and that they should not be more than ten miles apart. In 1850 the

distance was narrowed down to three miles. Parsonages had to be built or acquired for the

incumbent to be resident, as we saw with the purchase of the parsonage at Urswick in

about 1843. Most were grand residences with room for indoor servants and often

accommodation for gardeners and the like. Strong stated that ‘in the Victorian age, some

clergy finally achieved their dream of becoming gentlemen, riding out to the hounds, playing

cards and cricket, and gardening’, but that wasn’t perhaps so obvious in the smaller rural

benefices. Clergy income improved considerably, making their income in the top 10 to 15

percent of the national average; some income came by way of fees as well as what could be

earned from teaching. Tithes were finally abolished nationally in 1868 in favour of a

voluntary contribution. Glebe land could be farmed, of course, but the agricultural

depression of the 1870’s reduced some clergy income significantly.

Special training for the ordained ministry was being given to some, for example, by the

founding of training colleges at Chichester and Wells in 1840 and Cuddesdon in 1854. It was

not the norm until about 1880. One of the most significant outcomes of the reform of

clerical ‘conditions of service’ was the recovery of pastoral ministry now that the cleric lived

among his flock.

Interestingly, although the Victorian era is still viewed as the great age of churchgoing, the

reverse is true; the 1851 census showed that the vast majority of the population never

attended church and those who did came from the upper and middle classes. And yet, this

period between 1840 and 1880 saw the restoration of some 7,000 churches across England

and the building of many new ones. Strong points out that ‘this was not a grass-roots

expression of rural spirituality, it could be described as an aspect of estate management

145

during the agricultural golden age between 1850 and 1875’ (page 209). He writes that: ‘The

transformation that often followed- depending on the commitment and views of the local

landowner and the cleric-must have come as an enormous shock to many congregations,

where previously there had been a whitewashed shell filled with family pews and a three-

decker pulpit obscuring the chancel, there now arrived pews in serried ranks facing an altar

adorned with a cross, candlesticks and brass vases filled with flowers. One by one the

windows would be filled with newly commissioned stained glass and the altar would be

vested with the changing colours of the liturgical seasons.’ (Page 213).

Urswick was no exception!

Pollitt refers almost incidentally to there being an ‘oak Communion rail dated about 1850’

and to the harmonium ‘which had been given to the church in 1864 from public

subscription’. In 1855 Mrs Smith from Bankfield in Urswick, and her daughter presented the

church with cushions for the pulpit and Reading Desk, ‘also new books for same’. We do not

know whether Urswick had a formal choir at this stage, robed or otherwise, but clearly

congregational singing was now an important part of the services. William Ponsonby had

proposed the provision of a Pew for Choristers or Singers in 1826 as part of his re-ordering

plan. Was this now perhaps the end for the Parish Clerk and his Pitch Pipe?

In 1872 the Act of Uniformity Amendment Act allowed clergy for the first time to adapt

services and to separate Morning Prayer, Litany and Holy Communion. This was a further

move towards making Holy Communion the main Sunday service. By 1900, according to

Strong, a pattern of Sunday worship had developed with Communion at 8am followed by

Morning Prayer as the principal service. ‘Hymns Ancient and Modern’ was first introduced in

1860-1.

Canon Ayre listed amongst Urswick’s other treasures ‘a silver flagon, jewelled, presented by

Mrs. Remington, of Aynsome,( formerly Mary Ashburner) and inscribed ‘Presented to the

parish church of St. Mary Urswick ad 1877’. A silver gilt paten, presented by George

Remington, tends to be bracketed with the flagon, but this was probably presented to the

church somewhat earlier.

Other incidental entries in the Parish Registers record that ‘George Remington of Ulverston

gave us new Books for Altar. Also a silver Paten for the Bread. Also napkins for use at

Sacrament.’ This entry is included in details about the new window on the south side of the

nave given by George Petty Esq. of Ulverston; that would be towards the end of Matthias

Forrest’s incumbency. Henry Remington, Solicitor from Ulverston, was married to Mary

Ashburner formerly of Urswick; their son, George, would probably have been too young to

make a personal gift to the church at that time; perhaps it was a gift from his grandfather,

Reverend George Remington, formerly Vicar of Cartmel.

146

On the death of William Ponsonby in 1841 the Reverend Matthias Forrest, Bachelor of Arts,

was appointed Vicar at Urswick; clearly his was but the latest of ‘local’ appointments since

we know from the records that his mother was interred at Colton church in August 1850

aged 75 years and the family came from Bouth. One of his forebears was the vicar at Blawith

from 1764-1786, the patron of that living being the Braddyll family from Conishead.

There is no record that Matthias Forrest was married. He died, aged 48 years, on 7th January

1861. In 1851 the School was being run by Mr. William Hodgson so perhaps by then it was

not the ‘usual practice’ for the Vicar to be also Headmaster. We have noted that Matthias

Forrest kept accurate records and provided helpful information for his successors, but both

the way in which his appointment and that of his successor were made suggests that all was

not well within the Parish or at least among the major land owners!

Early in March 1861 the Churchwardens were asked to convene a Vestry Meeting to discuss

the successor to the Reverend Matthias Forrest, but there was obviously some issue

regarding voting protocol and rights of presentation. A declaration was made by Matthew

Sharp of Stainton, Sarah Hunter of Huntide, and others that following the death of Matthias

Forrest they agreed ‘to appoint Henry Smith of Bankfield to act on their behalf to vote in the

election of the Reverend John Park of Rampside to fill the vacancy’. This document was

dated 27th March, 1861. However, in a detailed document dated March 18th 1861 lodged at

the Records Office entitled ‘Dispute over Patronage- Opinion by H. J. Holland’ the issues

become clearer and perhaps explain the cynical reason for the ‘lost book’ referred to by

Matthias Forrest. I quote from the document:

‘The evidence of the Persons present at a meeting in 1841 must be very carefully taken and

their affidavit made to the facts they can speak to. They should be asked whether they had

notice of the meeting, from whom and why they attended and where- whether they

attended at the first as well as at the adjourned meeting. Was Mr. Forrest elected at the

meeting- and when was the presentation paper signed. In short all particulars that can be

obtained from them of the meeting should be obtained. Application should be made by the

parishioners who are approving the steps that have been taken to inspect the Vestry books

to see if there are any entries of the meeting in 1841 or at the prior presentation. Or to

avoid any question as to the parishioners’ rights to see the books, the two churchwardens

who take the said view as Mr. Smith can inspect the books without any application. All

entries as to the prior presentation should be examined’

He then goes on to state ‘I think that a distinct refusal to convene a meeting should be

obtained from the two churchwardens unless it has been obtained already as a distinct

refusal is necessary before applying for a mandan.....’.

The churchwardens, who seemed to be split over the issue, were William Battersby, John

Bentham, Adam Woodburn and William Butler.

Of course, the missing book which would have been in the possession of the churchwardens

147

during the vacancy also contains the names of the four churchwardens at the time Mr.

Forrest was appointed! Perhaps a scrap of paper among the 1975 ‘Notes on 1,000 years of

Urswick Church’ held in the Records Office could deepen the mystery or raise a further one!

Two brief entries in relation to ‘the Society’ from a ‘Minute Book’ for 1822-41:

‘Mr Jackson purposes to treat here if Mrs. W Cranke does not bear a Child in the course of

twelve months’, and, secondly, that

‘Mr. Geldart purposes with Mr Jackson that if John Coward is married the first of any of the

members of this Society he will treat with a Bottle of Spirits, if not Mr Jackson will do so.’

Both entries were made in December 1841 as ‘the final entries in the Book’. There is no

formal record of such a Minute Book among the official archives. John Coward, Yeoman, of

Windhill and William Cranke, Yeoman, of Hawkfield are both listed in the Directory for 1825.

Was this one of the two Societies from which the clergy were ‘excluded’ for some

mysterious reason? Reverend George Humphriss made a ‘pained’ reference to local hostility

and being excluded over 100 years later.

In a note written by R.F.Yarker dated 28th March 1861 Malachi Cranke was informed that

Mr. Yarker had received a memo signed by Mrs. Petty and Mrs.Thackeray; he wrote:

‘I hear today that the other side don’t now contend that there was a Vestry Meeting strictly

so called when Mr. Forrest was elected. They say that the Voters were convened in vestry to

receive nominations, and that the votes were collected at the Voters Houses, and the Deed

of Presentation was signed afterwards and they propose to be going to work now, exactly as

then....’

Clearly there had been an expectation that Reverend Park would be elected because the

Presentation Document which had been produced for Matthias Forrest had been pencilled

over showing Mr. Park’s name! However the dispute was resolved, the fact remains that

Reverend Park was not elected and the Reverend James Gale was elected as Vicar of

Urswick. He served from 1861 until 1877. It is interesting to discover that the Reverend John

Park was a non-graduate who had trained for the ordained ministry at St. Bees Theological

College in 1828, the early date suggesting that this must have been one of the first Training

Colleges in the country.

Born in 1834 at Lavenham in Suffolk, James Gale was the youngest son of William Gale (of

Bardsea Hall), brother of Henry Richmond Hoghton Gale, Esquire, who became Captain in

the Light Infantry, referred to earlier. He studied at Trinity College, Cambridge, matriculating

in 1853 and obtaining his BA in 1857. He resigned his office in 1877 and history records that

he died at Norwood in Surrey 12th May 1911.

There is a memorial tablet on the north wall of the chancel to commemorate James Gale. It

reads:

148

‘In Honoured Memory of James Gale BA Trin College Cambridge

Son of William Gale of Bardsea Hall

And Vicar of The Parish 1861-1877.

Born March 19th 1834 Died May 12th 1911.

Also Of Emma His Wife And True Helpmeet

Daughter Of The Rev. Richard Johnson

Rector of Lavenham Suffolk

Born August 24th 1838 Died October 15th 1909’

A Vestry Meeting was convened on 6th July 1877 ‘to advise and consult on steps to be taken

to provide a successor to the vacant vicarage and living’. Notes indicate that all applications

received since the resignation of the late vicar were read and laid before the Meeting, viz:

Rev. Henry Ashe

J. Ashburner

R.B. Billinge

Thos. Douglas Walter Hall

M.J. Torvers

It was moved by Henry Smith, seconded by H.R.H. Gale, that Revd. R.B. Billinge be elected to

succeed Rev James Gale resigned.

It was (also) moved by Henry Smith, seconded by James Ashburner, that the Rev. Henry

Ashe be elected.

The Meeting was adjourned until 20th July to decide.

Robert Burland Billinge was presented by the ‘Freeholders’ as Vicar of Urswick on 2nd April

1878. We have scant information about the ministry of Robert Billinge or his background,

but we do have an important ‘snap shot’ of church and parish life at Urswick during the year

1889 because during that year Reverend Billinge produced and distributed the first monthly

editions of ‘Urswick Parish Magazine’ for which subscribers paid the sum of one penny per

month. As Mr Billinge explained, it was not a magazine published totally by the parish but ‘a

certain magazine is what is called ‘localised’. i.e., local matter of interest is printed in

addition to the ‘central sheets’. He chose to ‘localise’ a magazine entitled ‘The Church

Monthly’ which he described as ‘an excellent one, contains good articles on various topics,

has a serial story, puzzles, acrostics, &c., and in addition we shall have our parish

information.’ The local information he proposed to publish was ‘information as to Church

Services, Magic Lantern Entertainments, Concerts, Temperance and other Meetings. The

149

Baptisms, Marriages and Burials, the Parish Accounts, the Report of the School Examinations

and other matters of interest will find their place from time to time.’

He hoped that ‘in order that the magazine should do its proper work it is necessary that it

should be taken in every house and taken regularly.’

The first print run was of 75 copies, which were ‘sold immediately’ and there were 110

subscribers for the February edition. In the February edition the vicar declared himself ‘glad

to receive communications of matter of interest to the Parish’ for publication, but warned

that ‘nothing of a controversial character will be printed’!

He reported that he had been received with kindness and courtesy ‘wherever I go in the

parish’. He had been out collecting money to pay the salary of the caretaker of the

Churchyard and whilst stressing the responsibility of parishioners for the upkeep of ‘God’s

Acre’, ‘I have the hope that interest in the Churchyard may lead to greater interest in the

Church and the Services held there.’

He also reported on a very successful Sixth Annual Temperance Tea Party enjoyed by

between 80 and 90 people. The ‘after entertainment’ included ‘an admirable address by the

Rev. J.Haythornthwaite’ and ‘songs, duetts, and readings furnished an enjoyable evening’s

amusement’. Mrs. Billinge had been one of those who provided a ‘tray’ of refreshments for

the event.

In March he reported back on a successful ‘annual entertainment to Church Workers’ in the

Day School. He wrote that ‘upwards of forty partook of a substantial tea, and afterwards

spent what seemed to be a pleasant evening in singing, playing at various games, &c.’ Whilst

he was thankful for all of the help in Church work already given, ‘I am like Oliver Twist, and

must “ask for more”.’ He desperately needed teachers in the Sunday School, ‘especially in

the morning’. He felt that there were many in the parish who had the ability and the time to

devote to this work and implored them to come forward!

Subscriptions were now up to 120 per month.

Reference has been made earlier to the gradual introduction of regular services of Holy

Communion. The Easter Services illustrate this development well. ‘On Good Friday there will

be Morning Service and an Administration of the Holy Communion at 10.30; Evening Service

at 7. The Vicar will preach at both Services. On Easter Day the Holy Communion will be

celebrated at 8 a.m., and again after the 10.30 Service; Evening Service at 6.30. Midweek

Services with visiting preachers had been held during the Lenten period.

Mr.Billinge was Honorary. Secretary of the Association of Church Choirs for the

Archdeaconry of Furness; he made an appeal for more members of the choir at Urswick,

‘particularly basses and tenors’ and asked ‘Are there not some men in the parish who can

sing, and will sing?’

150

An important social commentary comes out from the May magazine where Mr. Billinge

reports on the parish’s ‘Easter Egg’ contribution; the children, aided by their grown up

friends, had given ‘no less than 355 fresh eggs’. Of this number 284 had been sent to

Liverpool, with some flowers, to the Children’s Infirmary, with the remainder going to the

Cottage Hospital in Ulverston. The Vicar reported that during the year 1888 12,159 people

had died in Liverpool, ‘and of this number no less than 5,515 were Children under 10 years;

of these, 2981 died under one year and 2,089 between one and three years of age.’ He

stated that this was a very serious fact, ‘and the Children’s Infirmary does what it can to

check this great mortality among the little ones.’ ‘Last year’, he continued, ‘there were

1,168 indoor patients of which 626 were quite cured, 369 were relieved and only 70 died,

while there were 11,469 out-patients who received medical assistance and relief. I do not

think I need say more to prove that any help given to such an Institution is well bestowed.’

Just to remind us that much of the civil administration of the Parish was still the

responsibility of the Church, Mr. BIllinge reported that at the Vestry Meeting held on March

25th Overseers of the Poor were appointed as follows: for Much Urswick Mr. J.P. Brockbank,

Little Urswick, Mr. W. Butler, Aldgarley and Stainton, Mr.W.Cranke, Bardsea, Mr.J.R.Dunn.

Mr.R.Neale and Mr.I.Taylor, were re-elected Surveyors of the Highways. On April 20th, a

Vestry Meeting was held, when a rate of 8d. in the £ for the relief of the Poor and other

purposes was laid, and Mr. John Bowerbank, was re-appointed Assistant Overseer.

The Easter Vestry Meeting had been held on April 26th for the election of Churchwardens

and Messrs. M.J. Cranke and G. Butler were nominated as Vicar’s Wardens and Messrs. R.

Neale and F. Rawlinson were elected Parishioners’ Wardens. Messrs. H. Gordon-Smith and

R.Neale were elected Lay Representatives to attend the Ruri-decanal Conference.

The Accounts showed that £58 14s 6d had been collected during the year for Church

Expenses, compared with £44 19s 0d the previous year. The major expenditure had been

£12. 18.0 for repairs to the wall round the churchyard. Of the Vicar’s Offertory Accounts,

from an income of £20 8s 11d, £10 16s 6d had been distributed in the Parish.

A sobering entry in the Parish Register:

BAPTISM

May 19- Barbara Eleanor, daughter of Charles and Eleanor Nixon, Much Urswick.

BURIAL

May 15- Eleanor Nixon, Much Urswick, aged 29 years.

July and August being ‘quiet months’ were given over to a summary about the origins of the

Grammar School in Urswick.

151

In the September Magazine Mr. Billinge reported on separate Sunday School treats for

Stainton and Urswick. About 40 Stainton children had had ‘a good afternoon’s romp in a

field near the Mission Room’ followed by a substantial tea ‘which went the way it was

intended to go, evidently giving satisfaction in its journey.’ The Urswick Sunday School

children had a Service in the Parish Church at 2 o’clock ‘ and afterwards a dripping

procession of some 140 children hurried to the Day School’ where ‘with the cheerful help of

the teachers and some friends (names too numerous to mention) a thoroughly enjoyable

afternoon and evening was spent. Our old friend, Robert Maudsley, rigged up some swings,

skipping rope contests were indulged in, step-dancing practised, and a variety of other

amusements caused time to fly so rapidly that all were quite surprised when darkness put

an end to the day’s pleasure.’ He concluded that ‘More cake and buns and tea went the way

of all cake than in any previous year, and I had almost forgotten to say that each child

received a present (both here and at Stainton) of some toy- battledors and shuttlecocks,

skipping ropes, balls, marbles, tops, &c., being distributed.’

The forthcoming Harvest Thanksgiving Service was to be held on Sunday 22nd September

and the Collection would, as usual, be in aid of the Sunday Schools, for which the usual

amount of £10 is required. Mr.Billinge invited parishioners to provide gifts of fruit, flowers,

corn, &c, as usual, for the purpose of decorating the Church, and to help in its decoration.

Reporting back on the Urswick Harvest Thanksgiving, Mr.Billinge writes that the ‘I am glad to

say that the Thanksgiving Services held on Sunday were successful from every point. True

the rain and storm of Friday and Saturday rather spoilt the brightness of the flowers, but

there were plenty; liberal offerings of wheat, oats, barley, fruit and vegetables were sent,

and there was ample ready and skilful help forthcoming to make our old Church look very

bright and beautiful with God’s gifts.’ The Church was ‘well filled’ in the morning. During the

afternoon the Church was full to hear the children attending the Sunday Schools sing a

‘Service of Song’ entitled ‘Harvest Home’. At night the Church was ‘crammed’ and ‘the

singing not only of the choir (who, let me say, chanted the Psalms excellently), but of the

congregation was hearty and good.’

The programme for the coming winter months was to include monthly Temperance

Meetings ‘with an address’, and others with ‘Services of Song’, etc.; an appeal was made for

‘singers, readers, or reciters, who are willing to help in the entertainment’. The Magic

Lantern was to be employed to ‘try to make a few of the dark evenings pass pleasantly’, the

first to be a Service of Song, illustrated by Lantern pictures called “Eva, or Uncle Tom’s

Cabin”.

There were now 126 subscriptions to the Parish Magazine.

152

In relation to changes in the range of church services and the wider use of music, one notes

that ‘A Service of Song’ seemed to feature regularly at this time; one presumes this to be an

early version of ‘Songs of Praise’.

Pollitt writes that ‘the harmonium, which had been given to the church in 1864 from public

subscription (reported above), was replaced by the present Organ, a two manual electric

pipe organ by Wilkinson’s of Kendal’ (page 11) but he doesn’t give a date. In the 1973

millennium publication the author includes the provision of the organ ‘with its very fine

organ case’ in the gift of Miss Petty. There is a little confusion here in terms of dating and

perhaps the development of the organ itself because in the Churchwardens Accounts, for

example in 1882, a sum of £3 is paid to the organ blower for a period of 2 years; from 1883

an annual salary is being paid to the Deputy Organist and in 1886 the sum of £4 7s 6d was

paid for Tuning the Organ.

It is clear that Miss Petty provided the organ casing because this is totally in keeping with all

of the wonderful wood work in oak in the chancel which dates from the early years of the

twentieth century (the casing is dated and ‘signed’ by Alec Miller ‘1910) but what evidence

there is suggests a significant upgrade to the existing organ at the time. Having said that,

there is nothing to confirm who might have donated the original organ so perhaps Miss

Petty did provide it on an earlier occasion! The ‘electrification’ of the organ would have

occurred in more recent times since Geoffrey Elleray recalls operating the blower in the

1940’s.

Two more pieces of helpful information for us to ponder: in the November edition the Vicar

reported that ‘everyone knows of the complaints made of the Church being so cold in

winter’ and now thankfully Mr. Gordon-Smith had ‘with his customary liberality’ provided

£25 towards the cost of a new ‘handsome slow-combustion stove, which the

Churchwardens purpose placing in the Church.’ He also indicated that ‘We, the

Churchwardens and I, would like to place another stove at the Tower end of the Church, in

fact we purpose doing so’ and concluded that whilst he could not say how much it would

cost, he hoped that ‘this notice will prepare you for the duty of putting your hands in your

pockets and bringing something out of them. I am sure all will be ready to help in making

the Church more dry and warm.’

In the December edition Mr. Billinge reported that the Diocesan Inspectors had examined

the scholars at the Day School in Religious Knowledge ‘and I’m glad to say that the report

received, which is countersigned by the Bishop of Carlisle, is a very satisfactory one’. Their

General Comment read as follows:

‘The Managers and Teachers are to be congratulated on the very satisfactory state of

Religious Knowledge in the School. The work has been steady and conscientious, and the

children answered brightly and with interest. The hymns were sung sweetly, especially in

153

the higher class, and great attention had been given to the Prayer Book among the elder

children.’

Urswick School- On the Books, 220 children; Average Attendance, 173; Present, 184.

Having gleaned a little of the life of the church, perhaps we can pick up something of the

development of the villages through the freehold occupants listed in the 1882 Directory of

Furness and Cartmel published by P, Mannex & Company.

For example in LIttle Urswick:

Post Office

Grocer

Victualer (Swan)

Shoemaker

Shopkeeper

Branch of Co-operative Society

Butcher

Mine Manager

For Much Urswick:

Blacksmith

Shopkeeper

Tailor

Beer House (Derby Arms)

Victualer (General Burgoyne)

Joiner/Millwright

Shoemaker

Dressmaker

Mason

Mine Manager

Shopkeeper

At least 12 farmers were listed in an around the villages. There was even a Gunpowder

Manufacturer at Holm Bank!

Evening classes in various subjects were now being offered as well. For example the local

paper in October, 1900, reported that the Technical Instruction Classes at Urswick ‘opened

on Monday with a fair attendance’. It went on to state that ‘a preliminary meeting was held

in the Workingmen’s Club room at Stainton for the forming of an ambulance class’ and that

‘the wood carving class, under Mr. Russell, of Barrow, begins on Thursday night’.

The nature of rural society was changing, and so was the administration of the parish.’ In

1800 the parish was still the principal agency of local government; the vestry, chaired by the

154

vicar, and consisting of the major landowners and rate payers, was responsible for poor

relief, apprenticeship schemes, schools, roads, and public health. The vestry also maintained

the church and was entitled to raise money for its upkeep from the parishioners. By 1900 all

these responsibilities except caring for the church building had been taken away by the

Local Government Act of 1894. As central legislation was imposed, suggests Strong, the

village ceased to be isolated and that ‘national newspapers and other cheap printed matter

now penetrated even the remotest hamlet, breaking down traditional, inward-looking

communities.’

We have noted how Bardsea became a separate ecclesiastical parish in 1853, but under its

deed of consecration the inhabitants retained all their rights as parishioners of Urswick .

Bulmer in 1910 reviewed its more recent history. He reminds us that the incomplete church

building was purchased at auction in London by Reverend T. E.Petty, who became its first

curate-in-charge. He completed the building and endowed it with a farm on Walney Island

which was sold in 1899 to Vickers, Maxim & Co as a site for their model workmen’s cottages.

The living was a vicarage worth £258 in the gift of T.E. Hockin, Esq. of Wellwood. The other

principal landowner was R. H. Gale, Esq. JP. Near to the church was a school, erected in

1852, and endowed by Mrs. Petty; at the time it had 42 children in attendance. Baines

noted in 1870 that Bardsea had a ‘good school and master’s house adjoining’. He also

commented that ‘regular steam communication at one time took place between Bardsea

and Fleetwood, but was not supported, and now the last remains of the jetty have

disappeared.’ (Page 646)

The other Township in Urswick Parish was of course Stainton and Adgarley into which

Baines included the Manor of Bolton-with-Adgarley. We noted at the outset that Bolton was

awarded its own chantry during the reign of Henry III and Urswick church was awarded

‘compensation’ by an annual payment of four pounds of wax. Bulmer included it in the

Township of Little Urswick.

Stainton and Adgarley consists of ‘two scattered villages’. Baines wrote in 1870 that the

principal mineral production of this parish was iron ore. In 1835 it had been recorded that

‘the mines of Stainton and Adgarley were esteemed the richest in the lordship of Furness’

but he stated that ‘there never was much iron-ore at either of these places’. Canon Ayre

said that the marble yielded by the Stainton Quarries was known as Ulverston marble; ‘it

admits of a fine polish, and is used for mantle-pieces, table-tops, and other ornamental

purposes.’ He also said that since the opening of a branch of the Furness line of railway from

Dalton to Stainton, ‘vast quantities of limestone rock have been carried away to the

smelting furnaces at Barrow, to be used as a flux.’ Bulmer in 1910 reported that ‘a band of

limestone passed through the township, cropping above the surface in several places, and

forming the entire substance of the hills.’ Two large limestone quarries were being worked

by the Barrow Hematite Iron and Steel Company at Stainton and between 500 and 600 tons

155

turned out daily at each. The Crown Quarry, as its name implies, was the property of the

Crown and the other one belonged to the Duke of Devonshire.

In the millennium publication of 1973 the author writes that ‘like Little Urswick, this too was

a tight knit community of farmers and farm workers, with quarry workers, both of whom

had their own inn, The Farmers Arms and The Miners Arms’. He also wrote that ‘standing at

the lower part of Adgarley is the former Infants School, now a Mission Church to St. Mary

and St. Michael. Up the road is the former Congregational Church built in 1902, a fine

dressed limestone building faced on the frontage with sandstone’. This was a replacement

for the old chapel dating from 1873. The cost of the new church was between £400 and

£500. The stone was the gift of the Barrow Hematite Iron and Steel Company, and much of

the labour, such as carting, was done gratuitously. We observed earlier from Reverend

Billinge’s Magazine entries that the mother church at Urswick had a substantial work in

Stainton through its School and Sunday School. It wasn’t just the public houses which

divided the villagers!

In March 1889 Mr.Billinge reported that a new harmonium had been provided for ‘Stainton

Church Mission Room’ at a cost, including carriage, of £7 10s, paid for by subscription. It

was noted earlier that Stainton and Urswick had their own separate Sunday School Treats

and separate celebrations of the Harvest Festival. The Stainton Harvest had been successful

and ‘an ample supply of corn, fruit, and flowers was sent as a thanks offering for the

plenteous harvest, and a ready, energetic band of workers decorated the Mission Room

very tastefully indeed’. Mr. Dobson preached in the morning, the Vicar in the afternoon, and

in the evening a Service of Song, “Harvest Home”, was sung by the Children attending the

Sunday School held in the Mission Room. The number of scholars was steadily increasing

and Mr. Billinge appealed yet again for more helpers. Stainton obviously had its own Choir

because in the December Magazine the Vicar was able to report that the ‘Service of song

“Christie’s old Organ” was very nicely sung by members’.

An interesting social mobility factor again appears in this Magazine where Mr. Billinge

advertised a forthcoming Magic Lantern Exhibition of South Africa and commented that ‘So

many have gone from this district to South Africa that I hope we shall have a “full house”

again, as the subject should be interesting.’

156

Chapter Eight: A New Chapter

Changes were afoot at Urswick and a Vestry Meeting was called for 1st October 1902 to

make arrangements to find a successor to Reverend Robert Burland Billinge who had

vacated the living.

Here we are indebted to John Dobson, Headmaster at Urswick Grammar School from 1876

to 1920 and churchwarden during the early years of the twentieth century (and his

descendents who retained his collection) because not only did he write his own paper on

the ‘History of Urswick’ but he also kept diaries and notes together with a collection of

newspaper cuttings from which much of the key detail in this Chapter is gleaned.

The Vestry Meeting dated 1st October 1902 was attended by 18 landowners and 10 patrons

who met to consider applications for the vacancy. The Minutes of the Meeting of the

Resident Landowners shows that the committee chosen to select the new incumbent had

‘reduced the number of candidates to be considered from over 190 to seven’. It was then

noted that the ‘patrons proceeded by ballot to further reduce the number to four with the

157

result that Revd. Thomas Norton Postlethwaite, John Swalwell, Walter Sturdy Gardner and

Thomas Clark Gawith were left for a final selection’. The meeting decided to ask the last

three ‘to take each a Sunday duty in the Parish Church of Urswick and adjourned until the

6th or 13th December’. The Reverend Postlethwaite had already taken the duty in the parish

‘on several Sundays’. The three other applicants subsequently withdrew, thus leaving the

way clear for them to vote by 17 votes to 4 in favour of Thomas Norton Postlethwaite, BA

(Trinity College, Cambridge) who was elected on 21st January 1903 and was to remain Vicar

of Urswick until 1926.

Thomas Norton Postlethwaite was born at Hitchin, Hertfordshire; his father, Thomas, came

from London and his mother, Mary Jane, from Derby. In 1871 the family were living at Hazel

Mount, Thwaites, near Millom, Cumberland where Thomas senior was occupied as a ‘Slate

Merchant’. Thomas junior was one of six children, the eldest son but his sister Emily was

older by two years. The family were obviously wealthy, employing a Governess to teach the

children and employing resident cook, nurse and housemaid.

We know that Thomas Norton Postlethwaite attended Trinity College, Cambridge where he

gained his BA Degree. The Census of 1881 places him, now aged 24, living at Heatherly

House, Sandhurst in Berkshire with Reverend and Mrs Sprusling and employed as an

Assistant School Master. In 1891 he could be found in St. John’s Park, Greenwich, London, in

a house providing accommodation and care for several young boarders; it would appear

that they were children of British colonials serving overseas (one was born in Japan, one in

Ireland, another in India, another in the USA, and three from the UK, all British citizens).

Both he and the co-leasee were listed as ‘School Master’.

There is no detail of ‘what happened next’ to bring him back to the north of England, but on

June 12th 1895 Thomas Norton Postlethwaite, BA., now Curate of St. John’s Barrow, was

ordained priest by the Bishop of Carlisle at Carlisle Cathedral, and in 1901, aged 43 years, he

is found to be living alone at 17, Canal Foot, Ulverston as a ‘clerk in holy orders’, clergyman,

which presumably means as a curate at St. Mary’s, Ulverston from where one assumes he

was despatched from time to time to ‘cover’ services at Urswick during the interregnum.

His Institution and Induction to the living at Urswick were reported in the local paper on 5th

March 1903 and it makes interesting reading:

‘At the conclusion of this part of the service the Bishop of Carlisle’s Mandate having been

read, the new vicar was conducted out into the churchyard to the “Priests Door” at which

upon his knocking the Archdeacon proceeded to admit him by means of the huge and heavy

ancient key which has been used on so many similar occasions to admit his predecessors.

The new vicar was next conducted to the belfry and bidden to toll the bell. This was done

and in due course the mellow sound of the ancient “Harrington” bell rolled out along the

quiet valley.

158

The Archdeacon explained the difference between the institution of their new vicar by the

Lord Bishop which was a spiritual proceeding, and his induction by the Archdeacon, which

was a temporal ceremony placing the vicar in possession of the rights and privileges of the

benefice. He pointed out the distinction between the spiritual and temporal side of a

clergyman’s life, and how apart from his great spiritual duty of ministering the word of God

and prayer, he was called upon to do a hundred things of a worldly character in connection

with that parochial organisation, the repairs of the church, the training of the choir, trips

and treats, and so forth.

He must be careful, however, to see that these temporal distractions did not draw him away

too much from his strictly spiritual duties. Many clergymen liked to take everything on their

shoulders, thus robbing the laity of their share of the work they might do for God.’ The

Archdeacon ‘asked them not only to pray for God’s blessing on him, but to help him to

“mind his own business”.

The same newspaper edition reported on the great storm ‘which passed over the district

during the early hours of Friday morning last,(which) though one of the most severe within

living memory did comparatively little damage. The slates were blown off from a large patch

on the south side of the roof of the Parish Church (in Urswick), trees were uprooted and

part of the churchyard wall blown down’.

At the Annual Vestry Meeting on 3rd April 1904 the Churchwardens’ accounts for the year

were read out by John Dobson. They showed that ‘whilst £25 6s 2d had been subscribed

during the year for church expenses the wardens had been called upon to spend £35 11s

1d, leaving an adverse balance of £10 4s 11d. This, it was explained, was mainly due to the

comparatively large amount spent for the repair of damage done to the windows, roof and

churchyard wall by the storm of the 27th February 1903, and to the fact that the interior of

the church had been coloured and specially cleaned during the year, and many needful

repairs, long delayed, had been attended to’. The meeting was of opinion that a special

appeal to landowners and residents should be made to clear off the debt.

Two ‘snap shots’ of parish life in 1905 are recorded, the first being a very successful Friday

night dance organised by the young men of the parish, held in the day school in Little

Urswick. The report stated that ‘the dancing was kept up until far on in Saturday morning’

and noted that ‘it is understood that any surplus proceeds will be handed over to the choir

and organ fund.’ The M.C.’s were ‘R.E.A.Uren and Jno. Wood.’

This dance coincided with the Harvest Festival held on the Sunday; note that ‘in the

afternoon the children’s service took the form of a rushbearing, being a revival in a symbolic

form of the ancient custom of the parish, discontinued 80 years ago’; this, the first of a new

era, has continued up to the present day.

159

It was a very popular reintroduction and parish event. The reporter wrote that ‘following

the procession into the church, a crowd of parishioners and visitors filled the building to its

utmost capacity, and many were turned away unable to find even standing room. The Rev.

T. N. Postlethwaite, vicar of Urswick, addressed a brief discourse to the assembled

congregation dwelling on the utility of the ancient custom of rushbearing, the symbolism of

its modern form, and the lessons to be drawn from both.’ It was also reported that ‘a

service in continuation of the festival was held on Wednesday evening when a good

congregation assembled.’ By 1907, just two years later, rush bearing was once again

regarded as an annual tradition and Revd. Postlethwaite had written additional material for

the service.

Reverend Postlethwaite writing in 1906 commented that ‘it is a somewhat curious fact that

most of the land in the parish of Urswick is farmed from homesteads within the village- a

remnant of earlier and unsettled times when men were wont to congregate for the sake of

company and protection. These village farms create much of the life and picturesqueness of

the place. There is the string of cows on their twice-a-day journey to the milking byre, there

are the horses returning from plough or other labour in the fields, the sheep pattering on

the road as they are brought to the farm-buildings for salving or dipping. The varied

occupations of the farm, in byegone days - the churning, the cheese-pressing, the thud of

the flail, the sorting of roots, killed the monotony of the constant rattle of the looms, the

tap-tap of the cordwainer’s shop or the heavier clang from the smithy. For in those bye-

gone days village industries were fostered. Home-spun flax and wool were home-woven in

the village. Boots and shoes and clogs were constructed at the village workshop. They cost

rather more than the present town-bought foot gear, and lasted ten times as long. House-

wives made their own preserves, instead of selling their garden produce for a few pence,

and buying ready-made jam, the skilfully concealed concoction of turnips and carrots for the

winter’s need. Now-a-days, failing the mines there is nothing left but Emigration or the

Workhouse. Most of the village industries are dead, slain because people refuse to spend

their money in their own community.’ (page 54)

John Marsh and John Garbutt, who produced a photographic journal in 1994 entitled ‘The

Lake Counties of one hundred years ago’provide for us a clear summary of the ‘rural scene’

at the turn of the century in a period of economic depression. They wrote that ‘the lot of the

farm labourer, poor and exploited in the main, changed when the towns of the district

offered an alternative in the new factories, shipyards, steelworks and mines. The poverty

and exploitation varied only slightly, but the working-class communities of Furness and the

Cumberland West Coast and Carlisle possibly offered a safer haven than the weather and

landowner. During the depressed years of the turn of the century the Christian Church in its

divided form offered succour to most communities in many differing ways......’

160

They went on to say that ‘the church (or more often the chapel) was the centre of social as

well as spiritual life for many families, with groups such as church youth groups occupying

the young in a way to be followed by the Scouts early in the twentieth century. The

Temperance Movement, born out of the wretched alcohol abuse in the early nineteenth

century, was strong in all parts of the Counties.’ The Quaker movement which in the

eighteenth century had provided a source of support in difficult times, had changed

substantially by the late nineteenth century with many owners of original Quaker

enterprises no longer supporting them but adopting Methodism or the ‘new’ Church of

England. The workers who worked for the industries owned by these Christian industrialists

were fortunate in that the communal care associated with them led to greatly different

conditions from the exploitation offered by many of the others.

It is worth noting here once again that many of these rural communities were somewhat

isolated from the rest of the area even at the time of the First World War when motor cars

were still relatively unknown. Stanley Finch from Barrow, writing in 1972 about this period

in his little book entitled ‘Rememberable Things: A Farm Youth of Yester-Year’, suggests

that for most people the quickest form of transport, apart from the railway, was the horse.

Having said that, he describes the isolated nature of the local farming community and the

conditions under which the ‘hired labour’ lived and worked. Of his stay at Middle Foulshaw

on the Kent Estuary he wrote that it ‘seemed to be a world of its own, isolated and remote

from the great world. There was, of course, no radio in those days, and I have no

recollection of daily newspapers, so there was little contact with the world outside, and only

meagre scraps of news came through, or so it seemed to me.’

Of his next employer he wrote that ‘I was contracted to work whatever hours John

Shuttleworth chose. The hours were long, starting in the early morning, and seldom

finishing before six o’clock in evening, except on Sunday when I just managed to get to

Egton-cum-Newland church for evensong. Needless to say, there was no half day off.’

(page 12).

Many of those working on the farms around Urswick and Low Furness would have fared no

better. Perhaps the nearest in description to Urswick was Quernmore near Lancaster in

1924 of which he wrote ‘in those days motor cars were seldom seen.... and although

Lancaster was only three miles away, so remote seemed the valley, and so deep its solitude,

that it might have been twenty. It seemed a little world of its own, far removed from the

noise and hurry and bustle of the town.’ The other factor was the centrality of the

church/chapel in the life of the people: ‘here, from farms and cottages on the hill-side and in

the valley, they came Sunday by Sunday to thank God for the mercies of the past week, and

to seek His strength for the week ahead.’ Sunday morning and Sunday evening and for

Stanley Finch and many like him, leading groups of youngsters in the Sunday School during

the afternoon.

161

In July 1906 a Vestry Meeting was held at Urswick to discuss the ‘Enlargement of the

Church’- that was the headline in the paper on 21st July but the Meeting was intended

primarily to consider a scheme for the enlargement of the churchyard. ‘The vicar having

announced that an opportunity had occurred of purchasing for a very reasonable sum a

piece of land extending from the west end of the churchyard through the highway towards

Little Urswick, and that the owner of a right-of-way had kindly consented to its diversion. It

was unanimously agreed.....that the scheme as outlined by the vicar be approved by the

vestry, and that the vicar and churchwardens be appointed an executive committee to

collect funds and forward the work’.

It was also reported that ‘they also hoped at the same time to be able to raise sufficient

funds to enable the churchwardens to remove the crumbling reredos and replace it with

one of panelled oak of native growth, to restore and replace the old east window with its

beautiful and unique flamboyant tracery, preserved so long by the Messrs. Cranke, at

Hawkfield, and recently given back to the Church by the Earl of Derby, who had purchased

the Hawkfield estate, and to effect other repairs and restorations without destroying the

characteristic appearance of the ancient building. These matters, however, will come before

the vestry at a later meeting should it be found possible to carry them forward.’

This was the beginning a hugely significant programme of repairs and restorations which

would draw considerable attention to the church in unexpected ways; reading through the

various details one senses a determined effort to focus on restorations rather than the

‘improvements’ suggested and introduced by Reverend Ponsonby some one hundred years

earlier and the ‘repairs’ of the 1840’s.

Roy Strong suggests that the twentieth century was the ‘century of preservation’ and that

the roots of the appreciation of old buildings lie in eighteenth-century antiquarianism and in

the emerging tourism during the Naploeonic Wars when, cut off from the continent, the

English embarked on exploring their own country, and churches began to appear in guide-

books as objects of aesthetic, antiquarian and anecdotal interest. He indicated that the rise

of the preservation movement at the close of the Victorian period also affected the country

church. The process began in 1877 with the foundation of the Society for the Protection of

Ancient Buildings- ‘directly precipitated by the ruthless ‘restoration’ of medieval churches’-

and the passing of the Ancient Monuments Protection Act in 1882. Later came the Georgian

Society and then the Victorian Society followed in more recent times by the Historic

Buildings Council and its successors, English Heritage and the Council for the Care of

Churches.

By mid-September of that year (1906) the newspaper was able to report that the work of

extending the churchyard was making rapid progress ‘thanks to the voluntary work put in by

large numbers of the workingmen of the parish, backed up by the farmers with horses and

162

carts’. A week later it was reported that the work had been ‘taken in hand by working men

of the parish, many of whom have very sensibly decided to give part at least of their

subscription in labour, clearing out old fences, taking up old and making new roads, and

quarrying stone for walling, while the farmers promise to do the necessary carting.’

By mid-October it was making ‘fairly satisfactory progress’, that there was ‘no lack of

gratuitous labour but the rains have hindered the wallers.’ The Stainton quarrymen who

lived in Little Urswick were ‘engaged getting stone for the work from the quarry at the

entrance to Little Urswick’. Mr. Myles Sleigh, the owner of the quarry, had given the stone

‘and the workmen are getting it free of cost for labour,’

At the end of December, whilst reporting on the efficiency of the ‘newly-installed heating

apparatus’ in the church, used for the first time the previous Sunday, it was also ‘hoped to

have everything in order by Sunday the 30th when the Bishop of Carlisle is expected to

consecrate the enlargement of the churchyard.’

In February 1907 the newspaper was able to report that ‘the newly-acquired portion of the

Churchyard has now assumed a neat and orderly appearance, the boundary walls being

bordered with shrubs of various kinds, while choice ivies and cotoneaster are planted

against the walls themselves. Memorial yews have been placed in fitting positions by some

of the leading inhabitants, and the surface has been neatly levelled and bulbs planted in the

turf’.

The same edition also reported that a ‘special meeting was held in the vestry of the Parish

Church on Friday morning to empower the vicar and wardens to apply for a faculty to

enable them to carry out a number of improvements and additions to the ancient

structure. The necessary authority was readily granted.’

A long report on the ‘DEDICATION SERVICE BY THE ARCHDEACON OF FURNESS’ printed on

23rd November 1907 adds considerable important detail to many of the items and

developments already mentioned earlier. It is worthy of extensive reproduction here:

‘The afternoon service was specially held for the purpose of dedicating the various gifts and

restorations which have been made during the last twelve months. The ceremony of

dedication was most impressively performed by the Archdeacon of Furness in the presence

of a crowded congregation. The reredos, the gift of Miss Petty, of Stockbridge, Ulverston, is

a beautiful work of art from a design by Mr. J.D. Brundrit of the firm of Settle and Brundrit,

architects, Ulverston. It is constructed of panelled oak put together without nails or screws,

wooden pegs supplying their place as in the best ancient work. The oak used was grown in

the parish, and the panelling and moulding and all the work of construction was carried out

in the village workshop of Mr. R. Dobson and his able assistant, Mr. R. Jackson.

In the centre, and just behind the holy table, is fitted in a painting of the Last Supper, by

one of the Crankes, probably James, the elder, great-grandfather of Mr. M.J. Cranke, of

163

Midtown, Great Urswick, who for many years has filled, and still fills, the office of church-

warden in his native parish.

On the left of this altar piece is a beautifully carved figure of the Virgin Mary with the Infant

Saviour in her arms, while on the right appears the figure of the archangel, St. Michael, with

his foot on the neck of the slain dragon.

On the heavy oak moulding above the picture are carved cherubs heads, and relieving the

plainness of the panelling to left and right are carved strings of fruit and flowers, after the

style of Grindling Gibbons. This carved work which very powerfully done, was executed by

the Guild of Handicraft of Chipping Campden, Gloucester. On the side wings above the

panelling is cut the following inscription:-

“To the glory of God and in pious memory of the ancient family of Petty, of Urswick, Sarah

Jane Petty, of Stockbridge, makes this offering.”

After solemnly dedicating this reredos at the request of Mr. J. D. Brundrit (acting on behalf

of Miss Petty), the Archdeacon proceeded to the belfry to dedicate, at the request of the

ringers, the work performed in connection with the bells, one of which has been recast and

the whole peal rehung at the expense of Mrs. A. B. Pickthall, widow of Capt. John William

Pickthall, formerly of Holmebank, Urswick, in memory of the said John William Pickthall, her

late husband. Here also was unveiled the mural brass placed on the north wall of the

church, and inscribed:-

“That they might sound forth God’s praise and bid folk to His house Alice Bateson Pickthall

caused the bells to be hung and restored in memory of her husband, John William Pickthall.”

Among other work of restoration recently completed the east window deserves more than

passing mention. Some fifty years ago, when certain alterations were made in the chancel,

an ancient window with flamboyant tracery, almost unique in England, was replaced by a

window of more modern design. Owing partly to faulty construction this new window was

found to be in danger of falling to pieces, and the tracery of the old window having been

preserved by the care and piety of the late William Cranke, of Hawkfield, and his sons now

living, it was determined to replace the old stonework which had been given back to the

vicar and churchwardens by the present Lord Derby, who had meanwhile bought Hawkfield.

Under the watchful eyes of Mr. J.D. Brundrit and the Rev. T. N. Postlethwaite, vicar of

Urswick, the work was most successfully carried out by Messrs. T. F.Tyson, builders,

Ulverston. The stonework of the newer window, redressed, was used as much as possible;

where fresh material was needed and where the ancient work was crumbling it was very

cleverly restored and repaired by Messrs. Tyson’s workmen.

Much of the ancient glass had been lost, although some is was still preserved in the narrow

lancet window west of the priest’s door, it was decided to fill the restored window with

clear glass in oblong and square, panes, and enrich it by adding the arms of various ancient

164

families closely connected with the parish, thus supplementing the heraldic memorials

preserved in the two windows on the south side of the chancel.

Accordingly there appear in two of the small lights in the head of the window, blazoned in

proper heraldic colours by Messrs. Seward of Lancaster, the shields of Westby and

Chancefield, while in the three principal lights reading from left to right and from above

downwards are those of Le Fleming, Stanley, Earls of Derby, Harryngton; Preston, Queen

Mary (at the suggestion of his present Majesty); De Boiville, Marshall, Urswick.’

In April 1909 the Archdeacon once again attended a special service of dedication at Urswick,

this time to dedicate ‘certain gifts and offerings recently made for the adornment of the

interesting old Parish Church of Urswick, and for use in its services.’ The gifts included a

‘very beautiful embroidered altar cloth’ given by Miss Bowskill of Bardsea; it was designed

and embroidered by the sisters of St. Peter’s Home in Kilburn. A further gift of embroidered

collection bags designed and made by the sisters was also dedicated. Miss Postlethwaite,

the vicar’s sister, had donated a ‘fair linen cloth’ embroidered by the Bedfordshire straw

plaiting girls. Perhaps of greater significance was the gift of ‘a massive silver cross, given by

Mrs. A. Satterthwaite and Miss E. Neale, with silver flower vases from the girls of the

parish.’ The cross and vases were designed by Mr. D.J. Brundrit(t) and the work carried out

by the Guild of Handicraftsmen ‘who did the beautiful carving of the oak reredos given by

Miss Petty and dedicated over a year ago.’ The reported stated that ‘other work, either in

progress or completion, will add greatly to the beauty and dignity of this fine, old church.’ A

further brief note published a week later flagged up ‘an addition to the alterations and

improvements in the chancel of this ancient Parish Church, now being carried out at the

expense of Miss Petty, Stockbridge House, Ulverston, it is pleasing to chronicle the offer by

Myles Atkinson Sleigh of Eversley, Darley Dale, of a pair of substantial oak doors to replace

those of painted pinewood, by which at present admission is gained from the south porch to

the body of the church.’

The organ was replaced (the vicar acknowledged a gift of £300 towards the cost) by the

present organ, a two manual electric pipe organ by Wilkinson’s of Kendal. It has always been

assumed that Miss Petty also paid for this not least because the organ case, described by

Pollitt as carrying ‘some very fine carvings (cherub faces and musicians) of David’s pipes and

Cecilia’s organ.’ The Petty coat of arms is also carved on the organ case and higher up are

the arms of the Abbot of Furness. In his leaflet about Urswick church Reverend Humphriss

wrote that ‘In 1910 Miss Petty completed the restoration of the Chancel with Altar Rails,

New Organ and Case, Choir Stalls and the stone work of the floor and walls’.

The extent and the quality of the wood carvings, the work of Alec Miller of the Guild of

Handicrafts, continues to amaze with carvings depicting musical instruments on the ends of

the choir stalls; there is ‘something of the humour of the misericord about the Barrel Organ

165

and Monkey depicted. ‘Folklore, or fact, has it’, says Pollitt, ‘that the vicar jokingly suggested

to the carver who had exhausted his own ideas for musical instruments,’

Miller’s carvings include the Magnificat (the Song of Mary) depicted on the vestry door and

St. Mary and St. Michael on the main doors.

Across the Chancel arch is a Rood Beam in oak, with the rood, a cross bearing a dove

supported by angels, again beautifully carved by Alec Miller. On the north side of the arch is

a carved figure of a Pilgrim, assumed to be that of St. James of Compostela and on the south

side, a figure of John the Baptist. Pollitt states that ‘it is not clear why these particular

persons are portrayed but the carving is very fine and the designs have been made with care

to make them true to type and period.’ The Scallop shell motif appears on much of the

carving; it also appears on the back of the more modern pews in the Nave. St. James is

depicted wearing a scallop shell and is portrayed wearing a pilgrim’s gown, staff, bottle and

scrip or bag. The ‘sounding board’ above the pulpit is also carved in the shape of a large

scallop shell held by two carved figures of children. Dated 1912 it is inscribed ‘Wm.

Frederick Nelson’.

It was said of Alec Miller that ‘he has always remained in the position of the student and the

disciple’ and clearly his craftsmanship exudes a ‘labour of love’ as well as a high degree of

professionalism. Alec Miller was born in Glasgow in 1879. His father was a cabinet maker

and as a ‘dissenter’ held strictly to the Sabbath Day observances.

Alec left school aged 12 and was apprenticed for seven years to a Miss Anstruther (later

Mrs. Mackay) who had a studio for teaching woodcarving. He was a good student and by the

age of 14 he was ‘becoming useful at very elementary bench work’ (Wilgress, 1987).

Around this time he and his brother Will joined an evening Drawing Class, followed by wood

carving classes conducted by the Kyrle Society. In 1896 he became a student in evening Art

classes in Glasgow High School under a Mr. William Paddock and ‘it was here that the young

apprentice became the young artist’.

In 1898 Alec was promoted to journeyman status and was taken on a visit to London for the

first time and was introduced to the writings of John Ruskin and William Morris and both he

and Mrs. Mackay shared an interest in the writing of C.R. Ashbee, and his Guild of

Handicrafts. In 1902 he was introduced to Mr. Ashbee and this led to an offer of work which

he took up shortly after the Guild left London and set up in Chipping Campden. This was to

be his home for 37 years, although the Guild ceased to exist after 1909. The combination of

Ashbee as designer in wood and Miller as carver proved very successful and much sought

after.

His daughter, Jane Wilgress, in her book on Alec’s life entitled ‘Alec Miller: Guildsman and

Sculptor in Chipping Campden’ published in 1987, states that ‘In the years of the First World

War Alec did a lot of work for the church and Town Hall at Ulverston’, but this is inaccurate

166

because as we know most of his work was undertaken on behalf of Miss Petty for Urswick

Church.

During the 1920’s Alec made several successful visits to America. In 1930 he was once more

in America, carving, writing and lecturing on the West Coast of America, and many offers of

work and commissions followed and he moved to California with his wife. He published

books on ‘Stone and Marble Carving’ (1948) and ‘Tradition in Sculpture’ (1949) and was still

working out of his Santa Barbara studio in his 80’s. Alec Miller died in 1961 having returned

home to visit Janet Ashbee, but she died before he could see her. He is buried at St.

Nicholas’ Church, Wade.

We have examined earlier in some depth the discoveries made when the restoration work

was undertaken, ie. the removal of the ceiling and exposure of the old cross beam, the

faded murals on the nave and chancel arch, the now famous cross fragments, and so on. An

additional discovery, so far not satisfactorily explained, was the doorway on the north side

of the nave; this is an unusual feature in a small church. Pollitt writes that ‘presumably the

present nearly square opening with a raised step to this door had been filled in before

plastering. There is no obvious change in the form of the external arch as seen from the

North side of the churchyard but this must have been filled in as well’.

Writing in 1924, Reverend Postlethwaite stated in his paper to the Cumberland and

Westmorland Antiquarian and Archaeological Society that ‘a certain amount of absolutely

necessary restoration has been undertaken. Some of the work, personally, I sometimes

regret.’ He then reported that ‘a gallery pew fixed against the S.W. wall of the chancel has

been removed. It had been erected by Christopher Wilson Esq. of Bardsea Hall about 1753.

It was considered an eyesore, but at the same time it was curious and very typical of the

period. However, it became more or less unsafe owing to a fire, and it seemed best to

remove it.’ Of the chancel flooring he stated that ‘as in the case of some old churches there

was no chancel step, but a gradual slope towards the west. After some hesitation the floor

has been recently levelled and a step constructed. Although this step, ritually, is a great

convenience, I sometimes regret its presence,’ He also noted that ‘quite recently General

Gale has caused the font to be reinstated, and, with his family, has provided it with a carved

oak cover.’

Whilst Urswick church was subject to a ‘boom’ in its re-ordering and its being favoured by

local subscriptions, the wider picture was less than rosy. Birkett cites the end of the Boar

Wars in South Africa as being the beginning of a slump. The iron trade ‘soon had its

inevitable slump, and Furness in 1908, knew a severe depression.’ The stability of the local

agricultural interests cushioned Urswick and its surrounding area from its effects. Birkett

states that ‘ the farmer was not prospering anywhere, but the local farmer, who depended

167

chiefly on stock-raising, did not feel the depression as did his fellows in other parts, whose

main interest was in grain.’ (page 150).

The First World War saw many people drawn to Barrow for the building of the

Dreadnoughts and armaments, and the area remained relatively safe- and increasingly

prosperous. As Birkett said, ‘the war, then, meant for most local people more money, higher

prices, a few restrictions, and a growing shortage of food’. Inevitably, after a brief post-war

boom, as many of those who had come into the district then left again, there was a general

slump first in the iron trade, followed by farming, and then in general business, too.

Villagers mourned their casualties of war, but were otherwise largely unaffected. We have

no direct evidence from Urswick but the following comment is perhaps not untypical of the

area:

‘The war seems to have had little effect on the village – life went on in the parish much as it

had done until world war one. In fact just reading the Parish Council records it seemed as

though it had almost never happened’ ( Witherslack, Meathop and Ulpha).

Reverend Postlethwaite was a prolific writer during his time at Urswick, of which more later;

however, in a handwritten exercise book with the grand title ‘Confessions of a Country

Parson and notes on Urswick Church and Parish written to my successor-but-one. For his

use and benefit’, he begins by making reference to the First World War. He writes, in 1917,

‘We are in the thick of a great war. Some of the village lads have already given their lives for

their country. Arthur Leviston-one of the first-the son and only son of the Blacksmith. James

Pitt Pladdy in a Canadian contingent. Willie Hall was ‘missing’- a happy dare-devil lad, from a

family of some position, note, landowners and weavers, who let their resources dwindle

little by little till they were content with a labourer’s lot and a prospective old age provision.

Jack Hird- a village scamp; Joe Remmington, who left a young wife....’

In October 1921 a service was held at the church to celebrate the ‘Unveiling & Dedication

of the War Memorial’ by the Rt.Hon. The Lord Richard Cavendish, C.B., C.M.G. and

Dedicated by the Rt. Rev.The Lord Bishop of Barrow-in-Furness. The ceremony included the

firing of several volleys by a party of the 4th K.O.B.R. The names of the fallen were listed as

follows:

G.Armer G.Hastings J.Pittpladdy

G.Barrow R.Helm W.Poole

J.Baycliff J.Hird J.Procter

J.Churchman C.S.Jackson J.Remmington

R.Edmondson J.P.Jones J.P.Slater

168

J.J.Fisher A.Leviston T.Smith

A.B.Frost S.Line W.Trenouth

W.J.Hall W.D.Mossop R.Walker

E.I.Harrison S.Oliver J.M.Wilkinson

For the Church in general, 1921 was a significant year because this saw the passing of the

Parochial Church Councils (Powers) Measure 1921 Act in succession to the vestries and

Vestry Meetings, which required the setting up of elected Church Councils.

For the diocese of Carlisle, 1921 brought a new Bishop, Dr. Williams, considered by many to

be a ‘High Churchman’ unlike his predecessor, Dr. Diggle, who had by all accounts ‘made

himself unpopular by his attacks upon the Anglo-Catholics.’

Dr. Williams wrote in the Diocesan Gazette that ‘one hundred years ago men in England had

a great vision vouchsafed to them of the Holy, Catholic Church..... That movement (the

Oxford Movement) begun a hundred years ago, has transformed the outward appearance of

our churches; it has added a new dignity to our worship, and generally enriched our

corporate life. But you will still seek for the deepest and truest results of that great

movement, not so much in outward order as in a fuller realisation of the Church’s

sacramental teaching,’

Harper writing in 1966 in his ‘Story Of The Lakeland Diocese 1933-66’ comments that ‘if we

are to take one of the Oxford Movement’s effects what, the Bishop describes as “the

outward appearance of our churches”, then we may note that the record of faculties

granted up till the Second World War shows the frequent introduction of Altar crosses and

candlesticks’ (page 15).

It was said that when Dr. Williams came to the Diocese (1921) it was known as a Low Church

Diocese, possibly the most Low Church diocese in the country; clearly his elevated view of

the Oxford Movement was not universally popular, not least in Urswick!

Postlethwaite’s ‘Confessions of a Country Parson’, introduced above, was completed after

he ceased to be Vicar of Urswick, probably in 1927 or even early 1928, as his disparaging

comments about his successor (Lynch) show. In fact, he had difficulties with some of the

earlier leadership and had little time for his predecessor (Billinge) either. He wrote:

‘Most men are jealous of their predecessors. I am not. I pity mine, though he caused me

some inconveniences. I pity him because I have to experience some of the trials he had to

undergo....... he had an impossible wife and a still more impossible sister-in-law. The cult of

the parish was tea parties, with the school-master’s wife in bib and tucker fluttering about

169

with an inane giggle. He, my predecessor, was hopelessly Mid-Victorian; possibly by time

these notes are read, if they will be read, the Mid-Victorian years may be regarded as a

Golden Age. Really they were hopelessly prosaic, I mean hopelessly prosaic in church

matters than in anything else. The Harvest Festival- the feast of St. Pumpkin, the local

‘Times’ called it- was the great gathering day of the year.’

He then turned his attention to others in the church leadership:

‘I found the people here, the leaders, when I came, Athenians. They talked. They talked of

grandiose plans from Church Restoration to other matters. They talked very sagely. They

talked. But they never did. Meanwhile for all their talk the Church leaked at every seam....

There was one same man in the parish, who did not talk, also he did not, or rather, forcibly,

he did not let other people do. He was Malachi James Cranke, a man of an older school, of a

family... local fame. He had a mind stored with tradition of the past, and harked back to a

period far more austere than the Mid-Victorian. One might almost have called him

Jacobean. “Mr. Cranke will not allow it” was the wail of the Athenians when greeted with

the reproach that their talk lead to nothing.’

The following extract illustrates the loneliness and perhaps the mental tiredness of

Postlethwaite and is almost certainly written in the latter months of his life:

‘I live so much alone that nobody really knows much of my life. They think they do, that is

the Athenians. What they do not know they insert, and they have..... investigations. To the

Boeotians at times I partly reveal myself. But the revelation does not greatly interest them,

they are content to accept the obvious. If my ministry goes down to posterity- and there is

no reason why it should- I shall be dismissed with the adjective ‘excentric’ (sic). I am not

particularly ‘excentric’ not in the way the Athenians employ the term. There is no

excentricity in despising their ham sandwich tea parties, refusing to recognise their

superlative merits, or subsuming to their inflated pomposity. I may be excentric in other

ways. In fact I am, judging from the world’s standard, more or less mad. In any case, this

madness has been responsible for the restoration of the Church, as far as it has gone. My

immediate successor has, I know, hated my restrictions. He has been, I feel sure, an

Athenian of the Athenians. He may have spoilt some of them, though I have done the best I

could to protect them by ‘faculties’. My ‘ideas’ have been behind them all.

I wish to give due credit to the architect, Mr. Brundritt, to the meritorious carver, Alec

Miller, to the craftsman Robert Jackson, journey-man and head piece in the shop of the

immaculate and ale-wise village carpenter, whose belonging will undoubtedly claim for him

an increasing shine in the work. If he outlives me, and it seems more than probable that he

will, he will pose in the reign of my successor as the man who restored the Church, but

whose design and workmanship were tempered by the Bodleian tests of my humble self.

But in reality he did nothing further than receive the ‘brass’ and a plenteous supply of that.

But when all due credit is given to the actual workers, I beg most humbly to claim just credit

170

for the ideas, the form or fashion of each piece of work the inspiration. The love for the

Church has become with me a passion.’

Note: Athenians were known to be great debaters and philosophers but not known for

making decisions or taking action. Boeotians according to the Oxford Dictionary refers to

crass or dull persons, f. Boeotia in ancient Greece, proverbial for stupidity of inhabitants.

He then commented on each piece of the restoration work and ‘furniture’ in some detail

and again it is worthy of extensive reporting because it provides additional insights not least

into the man himself:

‘I am unconventional - I am responsible for the figure of the ‘Palmer’ (pilgrim returning

from the Holy Land with palm branch or leaf), the erstwhile who brought the Tarn in

vengeance - a conventional man would have demanded a Biblical saint. Here we should

reference back to the ‘Legend of the Tarn’. Postlethwaite’s ‘confession’ flies in the face of

our ‘preferred option’ of the figure being that of St. James of Compostella and perhaps

even questions the motivation for the figure of John the Baptist on the opposite side- did

Postlethwaite see himself as ‘someone crying in the wilderness’?

He goes on: ‘I am responsible for the twin patronal saints on the reredos; the architect

suggests “pelicans” as supporters! I am responsible for the cherubs’ hands in heir of

‘bosses’. For the little lassie’s head and the little lad’s head espying the drops- look at the

boy’s features, he knows nothing cares for nothing. Look at the girl’s head, look at her

expression. She has an ‘live’ knowledge of the wickedness of the world, immature but

developed significantly to share mother’s anxieties. To be horrored when father comes

home drunk on Saturday night with depleted wages, and there is the score at the village

grocer’s to be settled. David’s sandals on the organ were an infusion and his pan-pipes in

heir of the conventional harp. The youthful aged St. Mary on the Annunciation’s door.

I may be satisfied, but what matters it. I am dead, and a live dog is better than a dead lion.

In life, I was not even a lion, but a humble individual who showered love on people many of

whom were unreceptive of love; they wanted admiration, and this could not honestly be

bestowed.’

Postlethwaite continues: ‘The new Sanctuary Chair was wrought and provided by Robert

Jackson, “my man” of the immaculate and ale-wise village carpenter. Another has been in

the Church, the gift of Mrs. Petty of Well house as recorded in the Church books. The other I

bought at Malachi Cranke’s sale. It had belonged to a defunct churchwarden Cooper Penny,

a man apparently of unsavoury reputation, but possibly as good, or as bad, as the rest of us.

Miss Petty, the bountiful, gave the reredos, the organ and case- the pipes of the old organ

were incorporated in the new one. She gave the sand and lime lining for the walls of the

Chancel, the oak ceiling, the paving to the floor of Sanctuary and Chancel, the Choir stalls,

171

the Rood beam. Mr. and Lady Weywell gave the lamps. C.J. Chapman gave the wood for

the Litany Desk, we paid for its making.’

He made particular comment about the fact that ‘the children gave the Epiphany Credence

Table and the little silver water cruet’ and reflected ‘How your predecessor did hate those

water babies and water lilies on it. His Athenian soul revolted against the Neo-paganism of

it. My Mid- Victorian predecessor once came to inspect the Church. He sniffed, “Not very

ecclesiastical”. He had no power to do anything but sniff; your predecessor alas! May have

had the power, or may have taken it, and may have used it.’

Another little ‘aside’: ‘I had the candles burning one day when a parson a rabid Protestant of

the ultra- Peache-Trust School came down to take a funeral. Poor man!’

He explained that Miss Petty ‘is ancestrally of the parish. Her family burying place is in our

Churchyard, and her mother a Fell of Fellmount, Pennington, who of the class of the Fells of

Redmayne Hall, Lords of a tiny Manor. Her mother was my grandfather’s cousin- work out

the relationship. She was nearer a kin to Malachi Cranke. So she came as a benefactor who

was no interloper’.

‘By-the-by,’ he continues, ‘the oak of the reredos was grown in the parish, and the trees had

actually been transplanted by Malachi Cranke in his younger days.’

He then returns to his list of carvings: ‘In reference to the little figures on the Choir Stalls-

the musical cherubs we may call them; a village wise-ache when they were shown him

remarked:- “I call them nowt but lile Israelites.” Picture the stern disapproval of his

Protestant face. Of course the Athenians cheered his judgment to the echo. It was the

parson’s duty to please each and every! Small chance in such a case ever to restore the

Church. The man is dead now and well-nigh forgotten but his remarks would have been an

eagerly grasped excuse to the Athenians for their energies to end in ........talk.

We stripped the walls of their plaster within, and their rough cast without. The plaster was

beloved by the immaculate and ale-wise village joiner. Time and again he smeared it with a

coat of ‘colour wash’ at a cost to the parish of something like 10£. We took away the ceiling,

or false roof, and unveiled the fine old oak beams. Note the initials and the date on the

eastern-most beam, especially the ‘J.A. Esquire’, i.e. James Anderton of Bardsea Hall. So dry

were the beams when the ceiling was down that they sucked up 20 gallons of oil at 5/- a

gallon.

Mrs. Pickthall caused the bells to be re-hung and the treble one to be recast in memory of

her husband. Much of the old oak from the beams was utilised in the restoration. The Altar

Rails were entirely made from it. Miss Petty bore the cost of construction. The poor parson

172

gave some old brass candle-sticks for the vestry on All Hallows Eve the Day subsequent to

his humble birthday. They replaced two decaying Mid-Victorian, German-made ones.

Myles Sleigh gave the carved oak door, the parson devised the inscription and outline.

A jolly sight too much of the parson in all this you will say, but it cannot be helped. He really

figured largely in the restoration- uncomplaining he took the blame, but let him have some

post-humus honour.’

Final comments from Postlethwaite:

‘A local lawyer talks of a farmer client:

‘How’s your parson getting on?’

‘Nay, why the man’s clear daft!’

‘What’s he been doing now?’

‘Why, he’s made the Church like a girt Hoghouse.’

A saying: A local farmer when asked what he was going to make of his son, replied, “If he

grows up a nice bright lad I’ll make a farmer of him, but if he continues as dull as he is at

present he’ll have to be a parson!”

Postlethwaite’s papers which were held by Kendal & Fisher (Solicitors) of Ulverston were

described as having amongst them many in relation to his antiquarian interests rather than

his own estate hence their disparate nature. Many are badly damaged and almost illegible.

The list included a bundle of miscellaneous essays and notes, short stories like ‘How Dick

Dobbs made his fortune’ and ‘Love in a Trunk’ and ‘The Adventures of Mr. Lampwick.’ He

wrote a novel called ‘Betty’ which was published locally at his own expense; the publisher

required £40. Three other book drafts were found, ‘The Madness of the Mainingways’, ‘The

Quest of the Golden Bodkin’ and ‘The Shorecliffe Inquest’. He also left some notes on ‘Lay

activity in the Church of England’. A note amongst those in preparation for the ‘millenium

publication’ showed that he had also written two other novels entitled ‘Son of a Strange

Woman’ and ‘The Royalist Knight’.

A fitting memorial to Reverend Postlethwaite, a carved oak board bearing the names of

former Vicars of Urswick, was placed on the south wall in the Chancel. The inscription

reads:-

IN GRATEFUL MEMORY OF

THOMAS NORTON POSTLETHWAITE. BA.

VICAR OF URSWICK 1903-1926

THIS LIST OF VICARS OF URSWICK IS ERECTED

IN FULFILMENT OF HIS INTENTION

173

Examples of wood carving by Alec Miller

1.The Palmer 2. John the Baptist

3. Prayer Stool 4. Annunciation of Mary

174

1. Norman Font 2. Victorian Font Cover (Gale Family)

3 Piscina 4. Sounding Board (Alec Miller)

175

In 1914 a piece of land was purchased and funds found to erect a small wooden ‘chapel’ in

Great Urswick, largely run as a local ‘Church of Christ’ which has its roots in the Baptist

church; the ‘Breaking of Bread’ is central but without the ceremony of the Church of

England or the Roman Catholic Church. One of its latest family members, still trying to keep

the dwindling church alive in 2010 now under the umbrella of the United Reformed Church,

told the author how he and his sister were forbidden to go anywhere near to the parish

church under pain of severe punishment! It would appear that he was chosen at school to

be a swordbearer for the forthcoming Rushbearing Service and was told in no uncertain

terms that “we are not one of those!”

Prior to 1914 the early members of ‘Urswick Church of Christ’ would hold their services in

each others’ houses. When these were held in a morning there would be no musical

accompaniment as this was deemed to be ‘non-scriptural’.

The plot of land which bordered on the Tarn and known as ‘Tarnside’ was purchased from

Thomas Jackson (cost including ‘fines and fees’ was £13-19-4) and the chapel built under the

auspices of Thomas Ashburner of Much Urswick, whose occupation was described as ‘coach

builder’. When the church was built consideration had to be given to the tradition in the

Church of Christ for baptism by total immersion. Accordingly, a baptistery was built, and was

in regular use until about 45 years ago. It still exists to this day under the platform on which

the Communion Table stands but has been covered over by carpeting and has remained

unexposed since that time. It is not certain if it was filled by water from the Tarn or some

other source!

The first body of Trustees for the Urswick Church of Christ were as follows:-

Richard Wood, Much Urswick Butcher.

William Edward Wood, Much Urswick Butcher.

Samuel Wood, Sunbrick, Aldingham Farmer.

Edward Wood, Sunbrick, Aldingham Evangelist.

Joseph Oxley, Much Urswick Collector of Taxes.

Thomas Ashburner, Much Urswick Coachbuilder.

Richard Tyson, Soutergate Kirkby-in-Furness Butcher.

James Robinson, Sandside, Kirkby-in-Furness Retired Farmer.

Robert Oxley, Broughton Road, Dalton-in-Furness Butcher.

In August 1944 a Certificate of Registration as a Place of Religious Worship authorised for

the Solemnisation of Marriages was issued by the Superintendent Registrar.

176

Under a Resolution dated 14th July 1981, Urswick Church of Christ decided to become one of

the member churches of the Furness United Reformed Church.

At a Meeting of the Resident Landowners in December 1926 chaired by the Right. Revd.

Lord Bishop of Barrow-in-Furness, with 44 Landowners present, it was agreed ‘that a small

Committee be appointed to confer with the Lord Bishop of Barrow-in-Furness as to a

suitable clergyman to be Vicar of Urswick and then report to Landowners’. It was also noted

that ‘it was a recommendation from the Landowners that there ought to be a lady residing

at the Vicarage’.

At a further Committee Meeting on 20th December four names were submitted and it was

unanimously decided that Mr. Lynch, curate of St. Andrew’s, Ilford, be asked to visit the

Parish at a date to be fixed in the New Year. At a follow-up Meeting in June of 1927 it was

minuted that ‘after some discussion it was unanimously decided to recommend to the Land

Owners that the living of Urswick be offered to Mr. Lynch, Curate of St. Andrew’s Ilford.

Mr.Lynch thanked the Committee and stated his willingness to accept the offer.’

At a subsequent Meeting of the Land Owners with ‘about 40’ present Mr. G.Stables moved

and Mr. E. Garnett seconded ‘That the living of Urswick be offered to the Rev. A. Lynch of St.

Andrew’s Ilford.’ It was passed unanimously.

Reverend Alfred Lynch, as Vicar of Urswick, chaired his first Meeting of the Land Owners on

29th September 1927 when agreement was reached to accept a tender for £350 for the sale

of the old Vicarage.

Calls for a revision of the 1662 Book of Common Prayer had begun before 1914 but when a

revised version was presented in 1928 it was rejected by the House of Commons (but still

introduced in some churches). In September 1929 Urswick Parochial Church Council agreed

to purchase 50 copies of the Revised Prayer Book for use at Urswick and a further 18 copies

for the Stainton Mission, this after the Vicar, Reverend Alfred Lynch, had given a detailed

explanation.

During 1927 the Parochial Church Council had met ‘to consider the question of a new

Vicarage’ and agreed to sell the old one. They agreed in conjunction with the Bishop of

Barrow to attempt to raise £100 and to seek the required authority ‘to obtain if possible

authority to erect a Vicarage suitable for present needs.’ The new Vicarage was dedicated

by the Bishop of Barrow on 28th September, 1928.

In 1928 the Church Council deferred the question of electric light in the church. They also

agreed to the printing and purchase of 1,000 copies of a leaflet about the Church. The

previous year they had been persuaded by the ‘new’ vicar to adopt a Magazine for the

Parish and to purchase 160 copies of ‘Home Words’; the members of the Church Council

177

would distribute the magazine. They also ‘proposed that the whole of the Diocesan Quota

and Church Assembly Fund be paid this year.’

By 1930 the Church Council was also taking responsibility for the organisation of ‘fund-

raising’ events and proposed a Whist Drive and Dance to be held on Easter Monday.

A lot of the time spent by the Parochial Church Council at Meetings concerned discussion

about repairs and maintenance of the fabric of the building and the care and upkeep of the

churchyard, and increasingly, the finances of the parish, in particular the giving by the

regular congregation. Lighter moments are also recorded, for example, the problems the

Vicar was having in controlling his Organist!

The Minutes for the meeting of April 1930 recorded that: ‘The Parish Church Council deeply

deplores the indiscretion of the organist in convening a meeting of Church workers in

opposition to the Vicar’s wish expressed to him that such a meeting should not be called,

and hopes that no such similar action will be taken in future’. The organist obviously

survived the reprimand and in March 1932 obtained an increase in his annual salary from

£15 to £17-10-0.

In September 1932 the Church Council resolved that ‘a letter should be written to the

organist as from the whole Church Council, that observations had been made on his conduct

and to ask him to refrain from leaving the church and going into the vestry during the

sermon’.

In April 1931 the Vicar again ‘suggested that the Church Council might like to contemplate

the installation of electric lighting in the Church’ and in the following special meeting in

May ‘gave a full description of the two ways of lighting the Church (i) Floodlighting and (ii)

by pendants or hanging electric lamps’. The Secretary noted that ‘the floodlighting system

was agreed upon’ and it was proposed that ‘the Barrow Corporation Scheme of floodlighting

the Church for £79—0-0 be accepted on a deferred payment system if it could be arranged.’

The October 1934 Meeting of the Church Council confirmed the appointment of the

Reverend George Humphriss as Vicar. The following resolution was proposed:-

‘that this Council approves the appointment made by the Patrons of the Revd. G. J.

Humphriss to the Benefice of Urswick to be vacated by the Revd. A. Lynch.’

In November they were dealing with the resignation of the organist, Mr. Edmondson, who

clearly didn’t relish training yet another cleric!

Reverend Humphriss quickly made his priorities known. At his first Council Meeting in

December he ‘dealt with many topics and especially mentioned the need for loyal co-

operation under definite leadership in worship and work’.

In the Parish Magazine of the same month he introduced himself and Mrs. Humphriss,

178

informing parishioners that prior to this appointment ‘we have been engaged in very heavy

work for some time past in industrial parishes’ and then stated, ‘I do not know anything

about your attendance at Church and the services you are accustomed to have, but I feel

very strongly that these matters are of the utmost importance. If you already attend your

Parish Church for regular Public Worship, I ask you to continue; if you belong to that body of

people which puts in an occasional attendance, then I ask you to think about the matter

seriously.’

It was recorded by the Church Secretary that the Chairman (vicar) referred to the paucity of

Documents and appealed for help in his endeavour to recover any available documents

which should be in his care’. A note was added to the effect that ‘information had come to

hand from Mr. J. Dobson for the Vicar, that over 50 years ago a box of moulding documents

had been discovered but owing to the extreme condition of the same it had been necessary

to have them destroyed’.

By February 1935 the Vicar was encouraged by the slowly increasing church attendance “but

I am really disturbed by the poor attendance at Holy Communion.” After Easter he was able

to write that ‘I have looked back in the records and have failed to find an occasion when

there were 132 communicants on Easter Day previously’. Humphriss was not afraid to

express an opinion and in the July Magazine of that year ‘addressed a few words to the

young people of our parish’ and then stated that ‘I am greatly concerned by the use of ‘bad

language’ in this district by our young folk.’

At the Church Council Meeting in June he asked if the Church Council had ever considered

the question of taking the doors off the pews in the Church. It was recorded that ‘it was the

general opinion of the Council that such an action would spoil the appearance of the interior

of the church’!

His real interest was in what today one would call ‘outreach’ and he quickly introduced a

number of regular ‘social events’. There was to be an ‘American Tea’ followed by an Evening

Social for the whole family and there would be regular monthly Social Evenings from

October to February, these to be ‘open socials’ with Games, Songs, Dances, etc., for one

month and a Whist Drive for the other. Then there would be the Christmas Party and

Concert and the Shrove Tuesday Social. The Women’s Fellowship was to be re-started.

At the end of his first year he wrote that ‘most of the time has been spent in the study of

your ways and outlook. I have found you rather different from the types of people that I

have worked amongst hitherto. I expect you have found me different from other vicars who

have served in this parish’.

George Humphriss wrote a brief ‘visitor’s guide’ to Urswick Church in which he

acknowledged that ‘the church owes much of its beauty to the care and skill of the late

179

Vicar, Rev. T. N. Postlethwaite, and to those who, from a monetary point of view, made

renewal and restoration possible’. ‘It is pleasing to record’, he went on, ‘that all our useful

and beautiful gifts are not of the past alone. The Hymn and Psalm Boards and the Literature

Table by local craftsmen, which are so much of a piece in style and beauty with the other

oakwork, were given by parishioners in 1927, as were the pulpit Stair Carpet and the

antique Oak Book Box. A parishioner and the Grammar School Children added the old Bible

and the Literature Rack respectively in 1928.’

And then the appeal:

‘May we conclude by referring to a task that lies ahead of us- the re-seating of the church.

The seats in the majority of the pews are painfully uncomfortable. The flooring of them

consists of loose clattering planks. Kneeling is an impossibility. We see a vision of oak seats

in keeping. Perhaps some visitor may be sufficiently blessed with this world’s goods and

interested enough to help us to realise our vision.’

For the first time there seems to have been an initiative for Evangelism in the Diocese; that

was in 1936. In January’s Magazine Mr. Humphriss once again admonished his flock: ‘Many

of you who profess to be religious do not set a very good example in the matter of regularity

in worship’.

John Dobson, who had been the Headmaster at Urswick Grammar School from 1876 until

1920 and then continued to serve the parish as churchwarden, died in June 1936. An L-

shaped bench was placed in the Baptistry as a gift from his family, old scholars and friends in

his memory. Legend has it that requested that he be buried under the Church wall adjacent

to the road that leads from Great Urswick to the school ‘so that he could hear the children

walking to school’. His daughter was to become Headteacher in the late 1940’s; Geoffrey

Ellerey in his book ‘The Life and Times of an Ossick Lad’ published in 2010 described her as

having a ‘discoloured, piebald right eye which sometimes became a distraction, especially

when you came into face-to-face contact when she was doubting and questioning you.’

(Page 17).

In August 1937 it was recorded that ‘in connection with the Bishop’s Appeal the Vicar

reported that he intended organising a Study Circle particulars of which he gave and it was

agreed that they should be commenced as arranged.’ In September’s Magazine the Vicar

wrote that ‘A start has been made with the Study Circle. The attendance was good, but the

Officers of the Church were not very much in evidence.’ He then reminded the Church

Council that ‘The Bishop of Carlisle has asked what response the parish of Urswick is making

to the ‘Recall to Religion’. He said that the Study Circle and social events would be suggested

as part of its response.

On Saturday 18th March 1939 the local ‘News’ published an article by Revd. Humphriss

entitled ‘The Churches and Critics’. In it he wrote that ‘It is true that large sections of the

180

community have granted to God a “holiday without pay”. In fact, we have come near to

telling Him that His services can be dispensed with, except on occasions when the business

of anxiety demands that we shall recall Him to assist us.’

He continued, ‘It is inconceivable that man has really fallen out with God, but it is a fact that

many have fallen out with the expression and performance of the Will of God by His

representatives. Surely this is the first matter which needs immediate attention. The

Churches cannot lead the people into the land of promise, whilst they themselves are

content to dwell in the wilderness.’ Whilst it was popular to blame the parson it was also

the fault of the critics who were ‘ever ready to assign the blame’. He called them four-wheel

Christians- bassinette at Baptism- motor at marriage- and bier at burial. ‘If only they would

take the trouble to understand religion as they do to master their wireless sets, they would

very quickly discover that without religion in their lives one of their three valves was not

working.’

Urswick had its own Mission from Sunday 26th March until Monday 3rd April 1939 which

included special ‘Gospel Services’, ‘Men’s Services’ and a final ‘Mission Service’. Revd.

Humphriss wrote that ‘The Parish of Urswick is not apathetic to the Missionary call, neither

are we deeply interested as we should be’, but even this was over-shadowed by the events

on the world stage as war loomed once again.

The Church Council resolved not to meet during hostilities, or rather to meet ‘only when

necessary’, leaving the parish to be administered largely by the Vicar and churchwardens

In the October Magazine Mr. Humphriss wrote: ‘I must say a word about the Evacuees. First,

a word of welcome to all who have come to our parish. We know that your health will

benefit from your stay here. Already I know that you feel that people of the parish have

done their best to make you feel welcome. I need hardly say that we shall be pleased to see

you in some place of worship.’ Geoffrey Ellerey wrote that ‘The village also had an intake of

evacuees from the Salford area of Manchester who were allocated to certain houses and

hosts in the village although I only have a vague memory of them. They were accepted into

village life and they were involved in the spirit of the village, although there may have been

one or two villagers who would not accept them as part of us but they were in the minority.’

Among the papers associated with Urswick at the Barrow Records Office is a type-written

poem entitled ‘The Ossik Way’ written on Urswick Vicarage notepaper but undated. The

type itself would suggest the period around the 1940’s and one wonders if the opening lines

might indicate that it could have been written by an evacuee. It’s not particularly good as

literature but it is part of the character and story of Urswick and therefore perhaps should

be included:

181

The Ossik Way

All to Ossik we came a crowd,

We dropt to earth from a fleecy cloud,

Some from a-far and some from near,

And we’ve learnt all the tricks of the people here.

For now we’ve got into the Ossik way,

We know their work and we know their play,

We can tell folk’s doings and what they say,

For we’ve got into the Ossik way.

This our friend from Barrow town,

A footer captain of great renown,

Played in a scientific style,

With a gentle nod and a pleasing smile.

But now he’s got into the Ossik way,

He went off to Bardsea the other day,

And rough it wasn’t the word for his play.

He has adopted the Ossik way.

This little lass is a country maid,

She lives on a farm where eggs are laid.

She is famous at making pies,

And also for drooping her lovely eyes.

But now she’s got into the Ossik way,

This little lass with eyes of grey,

Only droops one at a time they say,

For she’s got into the Ossik way.

Our friend Dandy commenced to churn,

Gave to the barrel many a turn,

Through the air made the handle hum,

But never a whit would the butter come.

It was a joke in the Ossik way,

The morning before had been washing day,

Filled with suds was the churn they say,

Butter won’t come in that Ossik way.

182

Eleanor Jane a shopping went,

Too soon her last penny piece was spent,

Found that she had forgotten to buy,

Her flour, lard and eggs for the Sunday pie.

So she baked her pie in the Ossik way,

Beefsteak and potatoes et cateray,

But never a crust to over it lay,

It was a pie a la Ossik way.

In the December issue the Vicar wrote that ‘Even now, as we are told that our country is

fighting on a moral issue, the moral life of the Nation is being sapped away by the

desecration of the Lord’s Day, and by the permitting of much suggestive entertainment in

the illustrated papers, and the veiled jokes of some broadcasting comedians. I am not a

narrow-minded kill-joy. I recognise the need for healthy recreation and entertainment, but

if we are still to claim to be a Christian Nation then we must show to the world that our

Christianity is no mere cloak of respectability.’

In January 1940 he wrote that ‘I must refer to the lapse in Church attendance in our parish’

and conceded that ‘the revised hour of service may partly be the cause in some cases.’ The

February edition made reference to the harsh weather: ‘none of us will remember such

severe weather, and January 1940 will long be spoken of as the most winterly month for

many years’. For example, he wrote that ‘we at the vicarage have been perhaps more

isolated than those of you who live in the villages, for the road between Great and Little

Urswick has been almost impassable.’

All was not well in the parish, though, because in August he had to refer to the issue of who

sits where in church and reminded his flock that all pews were now ‘free’ and anyone could

sit wherever they wished:

‘I hope that our new friends will feel perfectly free and very much “at-home” in our midst.

Further, may I say that it will be my privilege to be of any assistance to those who, through

circumstances beyond their control, have come to reside in the parish. No doubt the

“Churchmanship” will differ from that which some are accustomed but I trust that in spite of

this it will be possible for our form of Service to be appreciated as a means of Grace’. There

were ‘a goodly number of “Visitors” in our midst’.

In 1941 he reported that ‘recent events have brought more visitors amongst us. Some may

feel strange to country life, but we offer them a hearty welcome in our midst’; in January

1942 there were still ‘a goodly number of the children who came amongst us for safety’.

Reviewing his ministry in the parish having now served for seven years, George Humphriss

wrote with feeling that ‘I am fully aware of the fact that to some people I am unacceptable;

183

in fact that attitude was adopted by some long before they had seen or spoken to me. It was

a queer expression of what they believed to be Christian charity and which I have never

been able to understand.’ He mused, ‘I am sure that many of our loyal members are totally

unaware that there are difficulties attached to the office of Vicar of Urswick.’ This seemed

to a continual drain on him. In April 1943 he wrote ‘I have made a start on cleaning much of

the rubbish away in the Churchyard extension, but it is a lonely job being on one’s own.’ He

seems to have been unable to engage with the wider community and working men in

particular.

In May he stated that ‘The Parson happens to be the one who has been appointed with

authority and responsibility to direct the welfare of the Church in any given parish. We may

not like him as a person, but if he is fulfilling his duties to the best of his abilities, then loyal

support should not be withheld. If differences of opinion should arise, then the right thing to

do is to talk matters over with the person; not with the gossipers of the parish. Perhaps with

the best intentions in the world a comment is made in the wrong quarter and before long it

has developed into actionable slander.’

Reviewing ten years as Vicar in the parish in December, 1944, once again he commented

that ‘I cannot say from the attendance in Church, that my work has been crowned with

success. It is true that much has been accomplished and much left undone; it is equally true

that from some quarters I have received help, and from others hindrance. But this is not for

me to judge. All that has been done has been intended for the Glory of God, and even if it

has been difficult at times to understand the sneers and inhospitality from some quarters,

none the less I shall continue to be faithful to my calling whilst I am with you.’ And then the

‘sting in the tail’:

‘Looking back at the records I find that I am in the good company of many of your past

Vicars in finding appreciation is not a strong part of the people of this district’!

George Humphriss was increasingly fighting another ‘battle’, this time with his own

deteriorating health. He had actively served throughout the First Great War and as he said,

had ministered in some tough urban parishes prior to coming to Urswick. We do not know

the details of his affliction but at a Church Council Meeting arranged for 23rd April, 1945 it

was recorded that ‘The Vicar reported that the Medical Adviser of the Pensions Board had

decided that in view of the medical Report received from the Doctors concerned he was

now permanently disabled. In view of this a resignation from the living of Urswick had been

tendered to the Bishop of Carlisle to take effect on July 30th, 1945.’

At a Meeting of the Landowners with the Diocesan Guidelines to hand it was moved that ‘in

view of the changed circumstances of parochial life, and with the fuller consideration of the

welfare of the Church in Urswick, it is the decision of the Resident Landowners, being the

undoubted Patrons of the living, that the Right of Presentation be transferred to the

184

Parochial Church Council for the time being. This decision to take effect after the present

appointment has been made.’ They then proposed the setting up of a Committee

comprising of 5 Patrons (elected by ballot) and 4 Churchwardens to begin the search for a

suitable candidate. They decided that candidates should be men with the following

qualifications:

Married

Not to exceed 45 years of age.

Previously to have held an appointment as Incumbent.

To hold views which were not representative of extreme churchmanship.

To give preference to ex-Chaplains to the Forces who had returned from Active

Service.

They requested 2 names to be submitted each from :

Bishop of Carlisle

Rural Dean of Ulverston

Vicar of Urswick.

On 12th November 1945 a Church Council Meeting was arranged to meet the new Vicar, the

Reverend Malcolm Douglas Grieve. MA.

Geoffrey Ellerey provides a few ‘snap shots’ of village and church life in the mid-1940’s. He

writes about the threshing day at the farm opposite the Derby Arms when the thresher,

owned and run by Edward Garnett which visited the farm as he did others around the area;

he pictured the noise and the dirt and the dust and the vermin scurrying about. His earlier

clear memories were of walking to school with a group of children from the village. ‘The

road meandered and passed sites of village life, farm entrances usually covered by cow

dung, grass and hay seeds, as well as gardens, orchards, a stately home, pubs, the village

shop, the church and the tarns. The main tarn is approximately a quarter mile long and an

eighth wide. There were two smaller tarns, one in the field opposite the vicarage, called

“Scriflates”, and the other in the field between the recreation hall and Hooks Lane. Over the

years both of these were filled in following accidental deaths but in periods of heavy rainfall

water still collects there.’

Elleray writes of Bankfield being converted into a convalescent home for boys from

Liverpool and Merseyside in the late 1940’s. He relates how Mr. Ratty, who was in charge of

the home, would arrange sporting events and football matches with the boys from the

village. The records show that after the 1939-45 war the Merseyside Hospitals Council

purchased Bankfield and the immediate surrounding grounds for £5,750 for use as a

convalescent home for boys, and it was thus used until 1956. ‘The isolated situation away

185

from Merseyside, evoked some criticism from the parents of the boys, as visiting was

difficult and when the re-assessment was made and the rateable value considerably

increased, the board decided to close the house, and put Bankfield up for sale’. It was

purchased by Messers Vickers-Armstrong on 1st December, 1956.

Whilst Elleray lived in a house with ‘all the current modern facilities’ he contrasted this with

some who lived in houses without electricity or running water and with earthen toilets at

the rear of the house. Water was collected from a communal pump.

In the village he refers to the ‘General Burgoyne’ as a popular meeting place, also the smithy

where Jimmy Newby the blacksmith used to shoe horses on a regular basis. Other

tradesmen were mentioned:- Mr. Ashburner, coachbuilder and wheelwright; Ernest Sawery,

joiner and undertaker; Harold Wood, butcher with his own slaughter house; John

Stephenson, butcher; the Miss Muggletons, two sisters who ran a small wooden shop and

Post Office; Len Garnett, joiner; Harry Stables and Mr. Stubbs, both builders.

He writes fondly of the arrival of the Reverend Grieve who initiated the setting up of cubs

and scouts in the village, and describes him as someone who was ‘also a big contributor to

the church school and a lot of associated activities involving the church, the school and

village life’. He indicated that Mr. Grieve came to the parish directly after the aftermath of

war and had a vision to help the youth. ‘Although classed as “high” church he had a sincere

interest in the parish and its inhabitants.’ He then went on to say that ‘The church and its

associated activities provided a core base and encompassed the theme of village life for me

and many other children. In my early years it was conventional to attend Sunday school...’

and then adds ‘I didn’t attend Sunday school out of choice but more because of parent and

peer pressure, but once there it was a good social get-together.’

The village was well suited to social and other activities, having the Sunday school building

next to the church, the Recreational Hall built in 1929 on land donated by a local farmer,

George Stables, which is between the church and the Grammar School in Little Urswick, and

also the ‘Reading Room’; this was, says Elleray, for much older people and was used by

them for playing cards, crib, and billiards- ‘and the playing of the odd gramophone and radio

was permitted too.’

Reverend Grieve, in consultation with the villagers, agreed to set up a troop of Sea Scouts

and had three patrols of 8 boys aged between 11 and 18, although most were about 14 or

15. One of the proficiency badges worked for was the ‘Astronomer’ badge, helped no end by

the fact that Mr. Grieve had a telescope set up on the Vicarage lawn!

There had to be a ‘down side’ and again Elleray is helpful where he admits that although he

enjoyed being involved in village life even after having gone to school in Ulverston, enjoyed

being a server at the church, and attended church on a regular basis, ‘I had difficulty in

186

comprehending the sermons and the preaching. The vicar was rather high church and I was

lost by his imaginative and rhetorical style. It seemed insincere at times, but to be a good

story. I enjoyed the congregation style of singing hymns as well as the organ music.’

Whilst Elleray’s comments are helpful regarding the local scene, there was a report

prepared by the Statistical Unit of the Church Assembly in about 1950 which indicated ‘what

has been happening to religion and the Church in England’ (Harper, 1966). Harper observed

that whilst a general survey cannot be wholly typical of the Carlisle Diocese ‘it is largely a

matter of degree’. He reported on a survey in York by Seeborn Rowntree which showed that

‘one man in four and one woman in five held no religious belief’. Of those claiming to be

Christians, six per cent went to a place of worship once a week; nine per cent did so less

frequently, but regularly; nine per cent attended irregularly. He also chose to ‘throw in for

good measure, because it sticks in the mind, that Mass Observation reported in 1947 that

forty-six per cent of those claiming the label C.of E. did not believe in life after death.’

Harper mused that ‘It is hard to believe that those with no vital connection with the Church

will for ever go on supporting it, especially as we move into “the third and fourth

generation” and its tags “humanist” and “secularist” become more and more acceptable.’

However, evangelism was still ‘to the fore’ in the Diocese and Harper reported that in 1955

missions of various kinds became a feature after something of a lull.’ The population of the

Diocese was fairly static as shown by Census figures:

1921..... 453,685

1931......430, 895

1951......458,503

1961.... 464,556

Harper commented on the work of the Diocesan Advisory Committee for the Care of

Churches which would investigate faculty applications prior to a decision by the Chancellor

of the Diocese. He noted that ‘It will be understood readily that during the War there was

little need of its services, but that afterwards it had much to do’, so much so that it had to

increase the frequency of its meetings.

A very helpful survey had been undertaken which enquired about changes made since

1933; questionnaires were sent to every parish in the Diocese and of 275 sent out 228 were

returned, ‘often with a helpful accompanying letter, parish history or notes’. The data

collected is extremely helpful in reviewing this period because it covers all major areas of

parish life. In terms of physical changes to the fabric ‘ornaments’ of the Church 17 Altar

crosses had been introduced, 21 Processional crosses, 41 sets of Candlesticks and

Vestments introduced into 44 parishes. On 71 restoration or rebuilding schemes at least

£222,500 had been spent; on 165 new or improved heating schemes at least £60,250 had

been spent, and for halls at least £83,850 had been spent on building, purchasing or

187

enlargements, etc. This does not include the the costs of building new churches or halls.

Harper notes also that ‘in a few instances, costs were met by private benefactors and are

not known.’

The Minutes of the Parochial Church Council at Urswick for the period 1947- 64 deal very

much with the ‘nitty-gritty’ of church life and governance; in relation to the building and its

contents the following ‘snippits’ help to complete the local picture:

April 1947:

‘Second challis (chalice): The Vicar reported that he had made several enquiries about the

existence of a second challis, but from information he had been able to get it would appear

that a second challis did not exist.’

June 1948:

Letter from Messers Brown of London as to the picture at the back of the Altar, ‘in which

they stated that the picture had been received by them in a damaged condition, and that

the cost of renovating it would be approximately £60.’

June 1951:

‘Mr Grieve addressed the Meeting, pointing out that the present seating accommodation is

far from being comfortable and contrasts unfavourably with the beautiful carving at the East

End of the Church, which greatly impresses any visitors’. He has ‘consulted with the

Churchwardens and they had agreed that the work of re-seating did need doing’.

1952:

Mr Grieve reported that it was ‘practically certain that this scheme (for re-seating) would be

completed this year’.

September 1953:

‘The Vicar said that the re-seating was going ahead’.

A Memorial Book was to set up in Church in which the names of the departed whose

relatives who had made donations to the Re-seating Fund in their memory were to be

recorded.

Reverend Grieve was ‘good with his hands’ and actually made the glazed cabinet for the

Memorial Book to be displayed himself.

The reseating was completed by March 1954 at a total cost of £1334 15s 2d.

Pollit, as Church Council Secretary, writing in 1977 in the guide to ‘The Parish Church Of St.

Mary and St.Michael Urswick’ states that ‘The dark oak Pews in the Nave, which seats 110

persons, were installed in 1954 through the subscriptions made by parishioners as a

memorial to their loved ones.’

188

In January 1955 it was recorded that ‘the oil painting had been cleaned with ‘Dettol’ and

hung in the Church’.

In April 1955 the Secretary noted that ‘the Vicar said that the fourth bell had been cast’. It

was donated by the late Mrs. Maudsley in memory of her husbsand Robert. The bell was

dedicated by the Bishop of Penrith on 11th September, 1955.

In 1957 an ‘Electrical Heating System’ was installed in the church at a cost of £231.

At some point during the early 1950’s names of the fallen in the Second World War were

added to the War Memorial. These were:

N Ashburner W Smith

F N Benson M Stables

N Jackson W K Thornborrow

W D Waterhouse

Much later on, after a great deal of discussion with the local Council and a long campaign by

a local resident, the names of A Garnett and E Smith were added to the list of the dead for

the 1914-18 War.

In January 1963 the Parochial Church Council offered ‘sincere congratulations to the Vicar

‘on his honour of an Honorary Canonry of Carlisle Cathedral’.

Returning to the Diocesan survey referred to by Harper, we can get some idea about other

changes in the life of the Church in Carlisle Diocese since 1933 and again it makes

interesting reading:

During that period of thirty years, 26 Sunday Schools had closed, 6 replaced with some

other form of Sunday Service, 3 replaced by weekly “Sunday” School and 6 new ones

started. There was a tendency to switch from afternoons to mornings. Some clergy regarded

Day School instruction as a viable alternative.

In Youth Work, 10 parishes had started Uniformed Organisations and 41 Church Fellowship

Groups/Clubs opened; 7 had replaced uniformed groups by Fellowship Groups/Clubs and 8

preferred to co-operate with the Local Education Authority in providing for youth.

Within the Church itself 35 parishes reported an increased use of Lay Readers and 50

parishes had set up Adult Study Groups of various kinds.

In terms of changes to Services, 79 had introduced Parish Communion, 46 had introduced

an Evening Communion Service and 49 parishes regularly held “Public” Baptisms which

largely meant during the main Morning Service.

189

37 parishes reported increased frequency of Sunday Communions and 72 parishes reported

the introduction of a regular Weekday Communion.

An analysis of the Service Registers at Urswick for the above period also show how the

Services pattern changed over time and Urswick became more ‘high church’ under the

leadership of Reverend Grieve. In terms of numbers, which seemed to be a preoccupation of

Reverend George Humphriss, only the number of communicants is recorded but even here

we can see particular trends.

On Easter Day 1930, in the time of Reverend Alfred Lynch the Services were as follows (with

number of communicants):

7.00 am Holy Communion 13

8.00am Holy Communion 25

10.30am Mattins

11.30am Holy Communion 22

2.00pm Childrens’ Service

3.00pm Stainton

6.30pm Evensong

Total Communicants = 60

The numbers of Communicants on Easter Day in subsequent years were as follows:

1932 83

1933 108

1934 61

George Humphriss

1935 132

1936 153

1937 122

1938 128*

1939 116

1940 99

1941 130

1942 75

1943 116

1944 83

1945 73

* from 1938 the Service Pattern included Communion at 7am, 8am and Mattins with

190

Communion at 10.30am. The highest numbers largely coincided with new Confirmees

making their first Communion.

In relation to the Service Pattern throughout the year, excepting Special Services, the

weekly pattern was as follows:

9am Holy Communion

10.30am Mattins

6.30pm Evensong (3pm in Winter)

A Family Service was held at 6.30pm once a month.

There was also a Mid-Week Service of Intercessions at 2.30pm

An interesting note made in the Services Register dated Sunday July 8th 1945 marked the

end of George Humphriss’ ministry at Urswick. It reads “this was the final service taken by

the Rev. G J Humphriss whilst occupying Vicarate. The remainder of the month being taken

as holiday due for last six years.”

The Induction and Institution of Reverend Malcolm Douglas Grieve was recorded for 22nd

November 1945.

Easter Communicants for the following years up to 1955 were based on a Service Pattern of

Communion at 7am, 8am and at 10.30am and were as follows:

1946 118

1947 83

1948 96 (+15 at Stainton)

1949 114

1950 87 (+12 at Stainton)

1951 93 (+10 at Stainton)

1952 108

1953 105

1954 137

1955 116

In 1948 Reverend Grieve’s new Monthly Service Pattern was established as being 8 am Holy

Communion each week, 10.30am Mattins and Holy Communion on alternate weeks, 6.30pm

Evensong each week. From 1953 he added a Monthly Communion at Stainton at 9.30am

He also introduced a Midweek Holy Communion at 10.30am on Wednesdays from 1948.

Other Services were introduced during the week from 1953 and the Pattern became as

follows:

191

Monday

9.30am Mattins

7.00 pm Guides

7.45pm Mission Service

Tuesday

9.30am Mattins

6.00pm Brownies

7.30pm Mission Service

Wednesday

8.00am Holy Communion

7.30pm Mission Service

Friday

9.30am Mattins

7.30pm Mission Service

‘Private Communions’ were also offered regularly.

Roy Strong suggested that whilst the Holy Communion had become the supreme expression

of corporate worship after the War, with Morning and Evening Prayer going into steep

decline, not all parishes, particularly the rural ones, welcomed yet more change either to

the language of the liturgy or to the further re-ordering of many churches which saw the

altar being ‘centred’ so that the celebrant could face the congregation; this meant either

bringing it forward at the east end or positioning it at the crossing. Society was also

changing significantly.......

Pollitt’s commented in his 1977 Guide to the Church of St. Mary and St. Michael, Urswick

that ‘the removal of the box pews during this reseating (1954) meant that from the middle

of the nineteenth to the middle of the twentieth centuries most of the furniture and

furnishing of the church had been renewed and beautified’. This, together with the general

picture described above of the Church in the Diocese in about 1966, would seem to be an

appropriate place to conclude the current Chapter.

192

Chapter Nine: The Next Chapter – But Not The Last

The publication of Geoffrey Elleray’s autobiography in 2010 is a clear reminder that we are

now within the realms of ‘living memory’ and at least some of the characters and

personalities he writes about are still very much alive! A second book by William (Bill) Alty

entitled ‘Fore and Aft’ also published in 2010 makes some reference to Urswick and its

church, and again some objectivity- and the benefit of distance in terms of time passing – is

perhaps called for before events can fit into a more ‘settled’ and wider context.

The Church, both the local one, and the wider church, has undergone further significant

changes in its organisation in the last 50 years and this too would benefit from a period of

reflection before judgments are made. For example, the ecclesiastical parish of Urswick

became ‘held in plurality’ with Bardsea in 1975 under the Diocesan re-organisation policy.

This was not the ‘mother/daughter’ church relationship of the early Victorian period

because there was now a high degree of autonomy enjoyed by both. There were, of course,

shared activities and services from time to time and the Vicar became “Vicar of the Parish of

193

St. Mary and St. Michael, Urswick and of the Parish of Holy Trinity, Bardsea” with the

Vicarage remaining at Urswick.

This was the first of several ‘reorganisations’ as a result of reductions in clergy numbers, and

other factors. The present Vicar has responsibility for the four parishes of Aldingham,

Dendron, Rampside and Urswick, with Bardsea being linked with Lindal and Pennington. As I

write further re-organisation is highly likely, hence the need for a longer-term perspective.

Roy Strong in his book ‘A Little History Of The English Country Church’ first published in

2007, whilst excellent in tracking the Church up to the beginning of the twentieth century in

particular, then begins to question the future direction of the Church in the light of the

growth of secularism which he describes as an “overwhelming tide” which has seen the

Church of England in steep decline from the 1920’s to the point where in 1979 only 11.5

percent of the population attended a church of some kind and by 2000 had declined further

to 7.5 per cent. He cites the widening gap between the majority of the population and the

Church over several decades and suggests that it was wildly at odds with society over

attitudes towards sexual morality and divorce, and further that after the 1960’s ‘its

influence over the young evaporated as it appeared narrow-minded, conservative and

hopelessly out of touch.’

The 1960’s were in many ways a ‘water shed’ for the Church because in the midst of the dis-

location of society in all sorts of ways, there was something of an evangelical revival which

slowly became rooted in many of our mainstream churches but this has also led to sharp

divisions within the Church in relation to biblical truth and biblical values in an increasingly

multicultural and liberal society, and that debate has still to run its course.......

All of the above has to be set against the changing nature of rural communities and villages

over the years since the 1960’s, and that too needs a much wider discussion. To do so here

would take the focus too far away from the ‘parish church’ which lies at the heart of this

book.

Parish life like most other aspects of life has its ‘cycles’, often driven by the particular

interests of the latest incumbent or by local circumstances. Whilst it seems appropriate to

leave the ‘nitty gritty’ of the parish’s development and its personalities and ‘politics’ in the

1960’s to be revisited at some future point, the cause of ‘history’ requires one to report on

several more recent attempts to rediscover the ‘roots’ of this unique place, not least

because it might encourage others to ‘take up the baton’ and to run with it!

In 2006, as the North West Evening News reported that ‘a solitary merchant’s weight –

thought to be Viking or a little earlier – was found in farm land between Barrow and Dalton’.

In June 2011 the same newspaper recorded that a ‘hoard’ of Viking silver coins’ was

unearthed in Furness. This ‘hoard’ consisted of 92 silver coins and artefacts including ingots

194

and a silver bracelet. Among the coins is a pair of Arabic dirhams. A local source described

the find as being ‘pretty nondescript, a fair bit of hack-silver (and silver bangles of known

weight that were used as currency rather than decoration) plus some coin. The coins include

some comparatively rare coins from minor saxon kings which made them valuable to

collectors, and of course Arab dirhams which were probably a universal currency at the

time, found all over the place’. Dated AD 850 – 950.The location of the ‘find’ was not

disclosed but it is known to be within a mile of Urswick Church, where of course there is the

fragment of a Viking cross. Other evidence of Norse movements across Furness is well

recorded, eg. at Rampside and at Pennington.

In 2010 Cameron Butland, Vicar of Rydal and Grasmere, a keen student of Celtic Spirituality,

introduced a day workshop in Furness with a map comparing the present landscape of Low

Furness with that of the eighth century, based on a survey and research undertaken by the

British Geological Society. The eighth century ‘projection’ shows an inlet of Morecambe Bay

stretching right up to Great Urswick and its tarn. This, if accurate, would clarify many issues

about access to Urswick by sea and could strengthen the case for an Irish Celtic monastic

community there and for Urswick as a trade ‘hub’ for a much wider area. The map is

reproduced below with his permission:

195

During the period 2007-2009 Paul Casson and his partner undertook a detailed digital

survey of the church of St. Mary and St. Michael, Urswick and produced some truly

spectacular results. Paul is an architect with a particular interest in ‘old’ buildings. His

colleague, a local archaeologist, was going to interpret the outcomes, but the project, being

of a voluntary nature, foundered and was not completed. Some examples of the ‘computer

models’ are shown below for perusal and individual interpretation; again, perhaps they will

encourage someone to ‘run with them’ at a future date:

Plan View showing the Tower and main body of the church

Of particular significance is the position of the Tower in relation to the rest of the building; it

was discovered to be at least 8 degrees out of line but the exterior walls had been ‘tidied

up’ to produce a definite east-west orientation overall. The thickness of the walls is clearly

seen. It was suggested that a strong case could be made for the north western wall of the

nave being the south wall of another building perhaps earlier that the current church. This

would suggest an earlier build under the present nave but only a further geo-physical

examination could clarify that.

196

The door in the north wall of the nave is clearly seen; this had been covered up for a long

time.

Digital picture of the Tower and rear of the Nave

197

The ‘threshold stone’ which has taken on huge significance as the debate surrounding the

church’s origins has continued can be clearly picked out from the above (between the inner

tower entrance and the rear of the nave).

Steve Dickinson produced a detailed report which he entitled ‘A Watching Brief on an

Archaeological Intervention within the Church of SS Mary and Michael, Great Urswick,

Cumbria: 10 March 2003.’ The Report is dated 1st June 2003. In the Report he describes the

circumstances of the Intervention and his ‘Finds’ of which a ‘Buff sandstone slab:

GU03/03/3: Urswick 6’ is the most significant. He recorded that through flash photography

the ‘photograph clearly reveals part of an inscription cut into the undulating lower surface

of the slab; covering an estimated (minimum) area of 0.6- 0.7m x 0.2-0.35m. He continues

to state that ‘elements of distinctive letter forms appear sprawling across the stone. It is not

possible at this stage to state unequivocally whether these letters are capitals or lower-case.

Nor is it possible to state at this stage what the inscription reveals; as it was not discovered

until after the floor was re-laid. However, it is possible from its letter forms to assign it to

the early Christian period; and to reasonably assert that it is a memorial dedication. Its date

is provisionally assessed as c.450-700 AD.’

198

Threshold Stone in situ looking into the Tower

Showing the Inscription

Photographs reproduced from ‘First Light Archeaological Report 1’ with permission (C) Steve Dickinson, 2003

199

Let the author of the latest ‘Tour Guide’ to this remarkable church have the last words:

‘As you complete the tour we hope you have enjoyed your visit to this ancient building and

also become aware that this is a living church. We would ask you to pause for a while and, if

it be your custom, to pray for this church and the people who have worshipped here in the

past and who do so today.

God be with you.’

200

201

Appendix

Urswick And Its Christian Origins Explored

Fred Barnes (1968) states that ‘man and human culture reached Britain from the Continent

in a series of waves beginning with Old Stone Age man about 30,000 years ago.’ and that

because of the isolated position of Furness ‘on the fringe of Cumberland and isolated by

arms of the sea, it was peculiarly ideal for the sheltering of superseded civilisations. As New

Stone Age man pushed out Old Stone Age man from about 2500BC only to be evicted in turn

by Bronze Age man after about 1900BC, so the men of the Iron Age began to expel the

Bronze Age peoples about 500BC. It was, he suggested, ‘ always a case of gradual pressure

by a more advanced civilisation on one less able to survive; the older civilisations gave

ground slowly’ and therefore once this slow progression is understood it ‘becomes easy to

see that in Furness the onset of new civilisations could be much later than in southern

England; and furthermore, since to this secluded promontory would come in turn as

refugees Neolithic and Bronze Age men and later Early Iron Age men (Celts), one is not

surprised to find a considerable mixing of cultures.’ In Furness there appear to have been

groups still living a hunting, food-gathering life while other groups had taken up farming and

reached a relatively high standard of civilisation.

Barnes states quite emphatically that the habitation sites of the earliest inhabitants of

Furness have been totally obliterated but the more substantial stone-built settlements of

the period around the Roman Conquest-those of the ‘Ancient Britons’- have survived at

Stone Walls (Urswick), at Appleby Slack, at Foulna (Holme Bank); another at Stone Close

(Stainton) has been totally destroyed by the Devonshire Quarries. A hill-fort at Skelmore

Heads, Urswick, was excavated in 1957-1960. These settlements suggest small tribal or

family units of perhaps fifty individuals engaged in crude cultivation and possessing

livestock.

Millward and Robinson (1976) too, found scant evidence for evidence of occupation of

Furness in Neolithic times but cite the remains of a burial chamber in Little Urswick. The say

that’ the archaeological evidence for the presence of Neolithic man in Furness is slight, but it

seems likely that several essential pieces of this prehistoric jigsaw have been lost down the

centuries’ but that ‘recently a different kind of proof has emerged to show that agricultural

communities were exploiting the landscape of Furness in Neolithic times. A boring 240 inches

(600 centimetres) in depth was made through the shell marls and peats that have

accumulated on the southern edge of Urswick Tarn in 1960. Professor Oldfield has suggested

202

that the pollen record hints at the widespread clearance of forest in Furness at this time, and

he believes that the Neolithic settlers of this district were mainly engaged in pastoral

farming. (page 193). They then go on to show that abundant evidence survives from the

Bronze and Iron Ages of the importance of settlement on the limestone hills around

Urswick. They state significantly that ‘the richness of the countryside around Great Urswick

does not end with the abundance of prehistoric sites on the hills that encircle the tarn’.

Whilst evidence is ‘thin’ they suggest that ‘down the centuries of prehistoric time, man

fought an uncertain and wavering battle against the wilderness. Pollen records throw up

several important hints about the evolution of the landscape; for instance, an extensive

phase of woodland clearance is indicated in the Middle Bronze Age, with a sharp reduction

of elm and lime in the pollen count, and an increased evidence of weeds and bracken. They

think it possible that this was the time of the creation of Birkrigg Common- a shared pasture

whose antiquity is confirmed by the presence of a tumulus to the north of the summit and

the stone circle of Middle Bronze Age date at Sunbrick.

The former open field system at Urswick is difficult to date but it is thought to be down to

the Anglian settlers of the seventh century although they state that it is ‘not impossible that

we are faced with a landscape feature that dates from the late Roman Iron Age (page 197),

with the possibility that the core of settlement at Great Urswick moved from an Iron Age

camp on a hill-top, down to an Anglian village on the shore of the tarn. They suggest a

similar development of the adjoining settlement of Little Urswick. Whilst the names ‘Great’

and ‘Little’ suggest a parent and daughter relationship of primary and secondary Anglian

settlements, it is also possible that Great Urswick and Little Urswick were founded by

Anglian colonists at the same period of time and that we should look towards Urswick Stone

Walls for an explanation of the development of this ‘daughter’ village. Urswick Stone Walls

and the adjacent terraced field represent the primary settlement of Iron Age and Roman

date. The rectangular enclosure at Urswick Stone Walls has tentatively been dated to the

Roman period. They conclude that both Little Urswick and Great Urswick might well

represent Anglian settlements on the edge of clearings that had been made between three

and four centuries earlier, at the close of the Roman period (page 199).

Final words hold out intriguing possibilities where they state that ‘apart from a few stray

coins, the Romans have left no trace on the region. The Iron Age communities here seem to

have been left undisturbed. The landscape of Low Furness exhibits a continuity that links

prehistoric times with the Middle Ages; Anglo-Saxons and Vikings were both absorbed by

this remote and isolated peninsula’ (page 200)

Barnes picks up on the remoteness of Low Furness and the difficulty of travelling in his

description of a very ancient road across Furness ‘used from time immemorial: it links up

with the oversands route from Cartmel at Conishead at the only place along the coast where

peat-mosses or steep cliffs could be avoided. From Conishead the track winds round the

203

shoulders of the hills across Furness to Ireleth, always crossing the valleys at the narrowest

point; it goes by way of Urswick to Dalton, across the Goldmire Valley to Ireleth, where it

links with the oversands route across the Duddon estuary to Millom. He states that ‘it was

mistakenly called a Roman road in the past, but excavation at Red Lane, Conishead, revealed

that the metalled surfaces were medieval, not Roman’ (page 11).

Barnes in fact dismisses any hint of occupation of Furness by Romans or of a military post

there. He states that they knew the inhabitants of Lonsdale and Furness as the Setantii, a

tribe subject to the Brigantes who ruled the north of England from Northumbria to

Lancashire. He says that Furness was in Highland England, was not required for colonisation,

did not contain any real threat to Roman communications, so it was by-passed. A chain of

forts along the roads combined with the operation of the Roman fleet, completely isolated

the Britons around Millom, Furness and Lonsdale. ‘Probably’, he continues, ‘ the natives

traded with the Romans, perhaps Roman tax collectors or punitive expeditions penetrated

Furness, it is none the less safe to say that no Roman occupation occurred’ (page 12).Barnes

concludes that ‘no other Roman relics have been found in Furness- no tiles, pottery, tools,

ornaments, inscriptions or masonry; the few Roman coins found, eg. in Sowerby Woods, at

Urswick, etc. may either be witnesses to trade between the natives and Romans, or may be

souvenirs dropped long after Roman times’.

He does point out an indirect connection however, in that in 138AD the Britons in the Lake

District revolted and were suppressed by the Romans and that after 220AD ‘there were

continual raids into the area by pirates from Ireland and Scotland, till Roman authority was

again fully restored towards the end of the third century; again during the latter part of the

fourth century the raids were repeated, and about 410AD the Romans withdrew altogether.

David Shotter, Professor of Archaeology at the University of Lancaster published several

papers in the ‘Transactions of the Cumberland and Westmorland Antiquarian and

Archaeological Society’ during 2000 to 2004 on the subject of Roman activity in the North

West of England. He wrote about the existence of a treaty between the Brigantian leaders

and Rome ‘which remained tolerably firm’ until the ‘betrayal’ of Caratacus in AD51 (Article

111.Vol.C, 2000) and raised the question of how and when the Roman armies became

involved in the politics and territory of the Brigantes. It would appear that ‘substantial areas

of territory were bypassed by Cerialis, including the Lake District and outlying areas like

Furness, and also by Agricola, governor from AD77-83. Cerialis was governor AD71-74.

Shotter suggests little if any Roman activity during the first century AD in the Furness area.

Colin Wells, in Transactions Volume 11,( 2003), writes that ‘it is conceivable that the Duddon

Estuary (along with the rest of the South Cumbrian fringe), being more isolated from the

main policing grid of Roman forts may have suffered from more political instability’ (page

75). He was writing about evidence from pollen cores, etc for a reduction in land clearance

204

and a consequent period of forest regeneration which in the post-Roman period suggested

‘a recession in activity at and just after the end of the Roman period’, meaning the 5th

century.

Whilst there are several ‘hints’ in relation to possible Roman activity in Low Furness there

appears to have been no substantive evidence of such activity or occupation until a local

archaeologist, Steve Dickinson, began his own investigations first at the church of St Mary

and St Michael in Great Urswick and then subsequently in the landscape of the surrounding

area from 2002 onwards, an amazing ‘fallow period’ of something like 30 years. In ‘The

Beacon on the Bay’ (2002) he reports on the discovery of several fragments of a Christian

dedication slab of a late- or sub-Roman period ( c.398-450AD) in the church fabric recording

a dedication under a late Roman emperor’s reign. He develops a strong argument for there

being an as yet undiscovered early Roman fort, Glannoventa/ Glannibanta/ Clanoventa/

Cantiventi located on the Furness Peninsula.

He concludes ‘To recap, we have demonstrable prehistoric and early historic-period evidence

for a major early estate at Great Urswick; connected with significant Roman and sub-Roman

place-names that match a Furness location. The inscribed stones built into the church fabric

strongly suggest a late or sub-Roman church foundation.’ (page 49).

In subsequent investigations he claimed to have identified via an air photograph a

significant Roman fort in fields south of the church and outside the boundaries of an

inferred seventh century monastic site (see illustration below).

During 2004 the ‘Furness Moles’ a local volunteer archaeology group, undertook a survey of

‘foreign stones’ in the field walls around Urswick and its immediate neighbourhood. The

group catalogued upwards of 150 fragments of dressed and worked St.Bees red sandstone

and additional gritstone masonery which according to Dickinson ‘allows the inference of

demolition, salvage and re-use of worked masonery from pre-Norman structures in the

investigation area’ (UODP Interim Report 1, 2004-5 Summary).

See also Hidden Light-Low Furness website www.explorelowfurness.co.uk .

205

Illustration above (Steve Dickinson) taken from ‘Life Before Barrow’ Part 1: Urswick Origins

Discovery Programme Interim Report 1-2004-5 Summary.

Dickinson failed to produce a report on the excavation in 2005 of an ‘early-period’ Roman

fort at Urswick in the area south of the church identified as ‘fort 1’ on the above illustration

so we are really none the wiser.

In a developing local project called ‘Celtic Christians: Spirituality and Sea Travel’, George

Henson and friends (2004) make it clear that ‘Great Urswick is near the centre of a network

of Celtic sea ways, which served and may have helped to shape Celtic Christianity’. They cite

Cunliffe (2001) who provides a masterful summary of developments from 8000BC to

1500AD of peoples and communities along the Atlantic seaboard of Europe; local trading by

206

sea and the exchange of gifts, good practices and ideas began early in this period. They

comment that ‘although the northern Celts, Bretons, Galicians and others developed

differently, there remains a clear kinship. Bowen (1969) shows how long distance travellers

used the Atlantic seaways during the Bronze Age and subsequently. Henson suggests that

Bowen requires updating because more recent discoveries of remains of major boats and

ships, along with growing use of computer simulation of sailing capacity and seaworthiness,

suggest that planked construction and curraghs about 60 feet overall with sails were both

capable of long voyages offshore without undue risk.

He goes on to say that ‘with the suggested role of seaways Urswick, the Cumbrian hills and

lowlands seem less isolated. Seen from the sea they are near the highway, with excellent

shelter within an archipelago off a major promentary available at all states of the tide’.

Barnes (1951) continues by stating that ‘in the readjustment following the withdrawal of the

Roman legions from Britain, the Celtic inhabitants of Furness were absorbed by the kingdom

of Strathclyde which then covered the west side of the island from the Mersey to the rock of

Dumbarton beyond the Clyde’ (page 17). Angles conquered and occupied the territory to

the east of Cumbria about the middle of the sixth century and founded the powerful

kingdom of Northumbria and Furness would have received an influx of Celtic refugees.

Again Barnes shows that Lancashire south of the Ribble was wrested from Strathclyde in

AD613 and then for 70 years there was a series of struggles between the English of

Northumbria and the Britons of Strathclyde.

In AD684 Carlisle was taken by the English and burnt, and all East Cumberland submitted to

King Ecgfrith of Northumbria; this split Strathclyde into two but in AD685 Ecgfrith was killed

by the Scots and the Northumbrian conquest halted.

Ecgfrith ‘gave Cartmel and all the Britons in it’ to St Cuthbert; if this was ‘our’ Cartmel and

Furness this could in part explain the significance and ownership of the church at Urswick

well before the time of Michael le Fleming and the Norman occupation (of which more

later).

West Cumberland, Westmorland and Furness were never conquered yet the multiplicity of

Anglian place-names in Low Furness proves that there must have been considerable Anglian

colonisation (eg Dalton, Ulverston and all the ‘tuns’. Aldingham, Bardsea, Leece, Dendron

are all Anglian names. Place-names like Roose (Celtic for moor) tell us that the Britons

remained among the Angles.

Barnes suggests that Furness was penetrated by small groups of Angles who settled on

empty land; they possessed heavier ploughs than the Celts which could turn the heavier rich

soils; whereas the Celts had been forced to settle on easier worked uplands or gravel

207

patches on river banks. In time some of the Britons would be absorbed, others pushed,

more or less peacefully, into the fells.

The only ‘hard’ evidence for this transition, according to Barnes, is the Tunwini Cross

fragment at Urswick (dated initially by Collingwood as about AD900 but more recently dated

by Dickinson from about late 7th Century) and the transition from Anglian to Northumbrian

and the arrival of the Viking settlers, many via Ireland and the Isle of Man, evidenced again

by a fragment of a typical wheel-headed Scandinavian cross dating from about AD950-

AD1000, also found at Urswick.

Barnes’ summary of the complex ‘ethnic mix’ of Furness is worth recording here:

‘In Furness they (the Norse refugees from Man) found one of the least populated and

wildest parts of England, the most outlying and least regarded part of Anglian Northumbria,

thinly colonised by Anglian settlers and still tenanted in places by Celts, part of the scattered

and dwindling Cumbrian race. The proximity of Deira (Chester), now held by the Danes,

made Furness a neglected borderland unlikely to be defended by the Northumbrians. Thus

Furness was an ideal refuge, it offered fair field for colonisation and the needs of the Vikings

did not clash with those of the Angles since the Viking was essentially a sheep farmer

concentrating on hill pastures in the Fells, requiring grazing land of little use to the Anglian

farmer.’ (page 20)

Place-names give strong clues to their movements and indicate how the Scandinavian

names cluster thickly in the fells whilst skirting the Anglian settlements such as Urswick and

Aldingham.

The origins and the antiquity of the church at Urswick has yet to be fully explored or

explained but that it was of considerable significance is beyond doubt as evidenced in the

cross fragments referred to above and the variety of dated materials used in its construction

and its links with the Northumbrian Church of Cuthbert and his predecessors. . The

migration of the Norse refugees from Ireland and Man might well have been but the latest

from those shores and the roots of the Christian church at Urswick found in the monastic

communities of Patrick’s Ireland.

In the Spring of 2003 whilst a new central heating system was being ‘piped’ in St.Mary and

St Michael’s Church, Great Urswick, part of an early Christian inscription was revealed. A

local archaeologist, Steve Dickinson, was on hand to take photographs of what was going

on; but unfortunately he did not discover the fact that the stone had elements of an

inscription on it until his photographs were developed - by which time the floor had been

re-laid and the stone left in situ!

So could this stone finally reveal the identity of the founder of the first church on this site

(or at least to whom it was dedicated)?

208

Dickinson says not: evidence from similar stones in other places suggests that it might

contain the name and status of the local dignitary who gave the land for the purpose of

building a church / monastery here. The dedication to Mary would most certainly have

come much later, either at the time when the Roman rite took ascendancy after the Synod

of Whitby in 664 or later when the church was extended/ rebuilt and the tower added by

the Normans in the early 1100’s, (more probably after 1107-11 when Michael le Fleming

took direct local control of the manor, and prior to 1127 and the foundation of the Abbey of

St Mary, when many masons would have been looking for work at the Abbey itself)

What do we know and upon what evidence do we base our claims?

We know from recent survey work and local exploration that the church walls contain

substantial evidence of weathered Roman masonry. In addition, in the north wall of the

nave some broken fragments suggest a post-Roman imperial dedication stone (see Steve

Dickinson’s The Beacon on the Bay report, v.01, Ulverston 2002, p40-42); although not

enough survives to allow us to reconstruct it from present evidence. There is also possibly a

part of a Roman pagan religious altar built into the south nave of the church, and other

evidence remains to be analysed in more detail from surrounding field walls.

With these finds adding to long-known evidence from Roman coins found in Furness, and

evidence from air photography, Dickinson has presented a persuasive argument for the

existence of a Roman Fort not far from the church site (we await geophysical survey to

confirm this). There is certainly worked Roman masonry in the walls and buildings of Low

Furness that allows us to infer a substantial military and civilian site in the area. The Furness

coins, which range from Republican to late Roman issues, suggest a trading community

growing up around the fort. We do know that Urswick was a trading centre for many years

even before the Romans came but it would be the lure of substantial amounts of iron ore

which made the area particularly attractive to the Romans, and of course, its access to the

sea made transportation much easier all round.

This evidence does not necessarily imply a church building there in Roman times; rather, the

re-use of masonry, etc. in building the church and/or repairing the church. (We don’t know

enough about the early construction phases that are clearly visible in the church fabric to

allow us to suggest dates – yet -for the building sequence).

Which came first – community or church?

Steve Dickinson has begun to build up a geographical picture of the past landscape in and

around Urswick and its Tarn, covering periods including the Bronze Age, Iron Age, Roman

and Norse. New evidence is emerging in relation to pre-Christian religious practices and the

use of sacred wells, standing stones and perhaps druidic groves, one on the lower slope of

Birkrigg Common in close proximity to the stone circle (locally called the ‘Druids Temple but

209

more likely to do with a burial site because cremated remains have been found within the

circle), and another well/ grove in Bower Wood under the Little Urswick Crags in close

proximity to the Stone Walls Iron Age settlement.

In his interpretations from local maps, aerial photography, and from evidence ‘on the

ground’ he has claimed to be able to identify the outline of an early ‘estate’ and the inner

precincts of an early Christian monastery with the current church building of St. Mary and

St. Michael’s near the centre. The layout is similar to that on Iona and at Lindisfarne (Holy

Island) and this element of the site suggests an ‘Irish’ template of the 6th - 7th century AD.

This discovery by itself does not prove clear links but it does suggest a style and a period

that is helpful to our further enquiries. We widely regard the earliest monastic communities

as occupying small circular or rectangular wooden structures in small compounds that

would be unlikely to leave much evidence behind. This picture may be correct for some

sites based on the eremitic (hermit-centred) movement that came out of the 4th century AD

Egyptian desert, but for the early Christian coenobitic (community-centred) movement

which would be more appropriate in the Urswick setting, reconstructions of sites and

founder/development sequences is a much more complex problem (for a mainly document-

centred discussion placing this in the context of early monastic rules; see Dunn, M., 2003;

The Emergence of Monasticism; From the Desert Fathers to the Early Middle Ages

(Blackwell).

Bowen, 1969: Saints, Seaways and Settlements in the Celtic Lands (University of Wales)

provides a detailed illustration of the Irish Celtic monastery at Nendrum, County Down,

established in the 5th century by Mochaoi, as a good representative picture of the lay-out of

a large Celtic monastery in the ‘Age of the Saints’. This, too, provides a helpful model for the

more likely origins of the Urswick site.

210

Later inhabitants built more permanently upon earlier foundations; so we could still

consider a monastic community being established at Urswick with a wooden church during

the late 4th century AD (see below) and the extended site developed more permanently with

a stone church later on.

So who are the main contenders for the founding of the monastic community and the

earliest dedication of the church?

Obviously, the first temptation is to link the more famous ‘saints’ with a particular

settlement. This is possible, but it is equally likely to be one of their followers or a group of

monks associated with them; with a dedication following. However, we should highlight

several features that suggest that Urswick was a very important - and early - foundation.

The sheer size of the site at Urswick, (the outer boundaries enclose an area of 180-200

hectares), is much larger than known early eastern Irish and western British monastic sites

(although comparisons may be invidious when the naturally bounded hinterlands of islands

such as Iona are taken into consideration). Urswick’s intimate later prehistoric, Roman and

post-Roman connections that landscape archaeology is beginning to reveal all give a

demonstrable longevity of community settlement in a sheltered and well-resourced

location. Furness itself, from prehistory until the 18th century, was ‘islanded’ by its position

between the Duddon Sands, the Irish Sea, Morecambe Bay and the fells, lakes mires and

rivers of Cumbria’s mountain core.

This would have been a prime site for a very early foundation at the northern end of the

critically important western seaways; with their vital links to early foundations in Ireland,

Wales, Cornwall, Gaul, Spain and the Mediterranean.

Let’s go back to the roots of Christianity in Cumbria to find possible contenders for the

foundation. We know that there were Christians in the Roman Army, although Christianity

initially was more tolerated than approved. For wealthy early Roman Christians services and

worship would take place in private, perhaps in the home of a villa or estate owner with a

‘house church’ of his or her own. Equally, Christianity could have come here independently

of the Romans since there was trade between the Mediterranean, Europe, Ireland and

Britain. Archaeological evidence for this is plentiful (in the form, for example, of amphorae

(Roman wine containers) from sites bordering the western seaways at the close of the

Roman occupation of Britain.

We can say with some confidence that there was considerable activity along Hadrian’s Wall

and in and around Carlisle in particular; there was a monastery there in the 3rd Century and

Carlisle had its own Bishop in 250AD, Bishop Nelior, (Rees, 2000) because he was martyred

with Bishop Nicholas of Penryhn near Glasgow during the time of Emperor Diocletian. He

would, of course, have had his ‘diocese’ in what is now southern Scotland and northern

England. A Bishop suggests a Christian community, an abbot and other monks called,

211

trained, educated and ‘sent’ to evangelise the area around Carlisle. They would travel

mostly by foot along established paths and routes; some would follow the course of a river

either by boat or along the banks. There is no evidence to date that anyone came this far

south and west over land.] (Steve Dickinson cites, for example, Prof. Charles Thomas, Prof.

Cramp, historian Charles Pythian-Adams and the ex-director of the Carlisle Archaeology Unit

as not supporting Rees with respect to this 3rd century Carlisle monastic site. He states that ‘

the earliest ecclesiastical site for which there is clear historical evidence in Carlisle is a 7th

century AD foundation – the one visited by Cuthbert as part of the Lindisfarne diocese’. ( See,

for example; Pythian-Adams, C.; 1996, Land of the Cumbrians; A study in British provincial

origins A.D. 400-1120 (Scolar).

St Ninian

There is much speculation as to where St.Ninian (also known as St.Nynia) was born and

educated. Thanks to Bede we know he was a Briton; perhaps from Cumbria. He certainly

received much of his education in Rome, (this recorded by Bede), was consecrated as Bishop

and evangelised amongst the Picts, (in Southern Scotland) where he was successful in

converting many. It is believed that he visited, or was a contemporary of, St.Martin of

Tours, (this is, however, disputed by some historians and is not mentioned by Bede). If we

accept this, he was impressed by the monasticism developing in Gaul at the time and

determined to bring it back with him. Tradition has it that he established a monastic

community at Whithorn based on the disciplines of St.Martin, and, following the death of

Martin in 397, dedicated his first church to him - a white, stone, mortared church, which

was unusual for its time and context. It is understood by some that he mounted missions to

the south, (probably into Cumbria) and ordained priests and consecrated bishops to manage

the area on Roman diocesan lines. Several churches are dedicated to St.Ninian in the north

of Cumbria, e.g. Penrith Ninekirks, and probably St.Martin’s at Brampton.

Ninian supposedly died in about 432 – but his dates are disputed by historians. Most of the

reliable information that we have about him was written by Bede, some three hundred

years after he lived.

This account, however, raises some interesting questions – particularly about the nature of

the ‘church’ at Whithorn and the status of the early monastic community there. To take the

latter first; excavations in the 1980’s near the site core failed to resolve critical questions of

post-Roman date and building sequences. Earlier excavations in the site core have never

been fully published, making it impossible to impartially assess observations and evidence

from them. Large quantities of lime for the mortar and limewash for a substantial stone

church would also have had to have been transported to Whithorn from the nearest sources

22 miles (35.4 km) to the east – a prodigious logistical nightmare for an early Christian

community. Historians have also queried such an early foundation to St Martin. Leading

212

historian of the early church in Scotland, Alan McQuarrie, points out problems with the

early dates for Ninian, and stresses (following Prof. A.A.M.Duncan) that Bede never made

Ninian builder of the first ecclesiastical site at Whithorn, and he never called him its first

bishop: indeed; ‘there is a measure of agreement that Nynia came to a church and see

already in existence.’ (McQuarrie, A., 1997; The Saints of Scotland; Essays in Scottish Church

History AD 450-1093 (John Donald); p55). Whithorn has all the appearance of an early

Christian mission station, and not a major 5th /6th century AD monastic base. We shall revisit

this shortly.

Such successes as the early clerics had in Galloway and SW Scotland were, apparently, short-

lived. The facts show that their ministry and successes were only temporary because, when

St.Kentigern was recalled from Wales to be Bishop of Strathclyde in what is now Glasgow in

about 573, he found that paganism had returned and struggled to convert the natives! No

wonder he took his time travelling back home.

However, much of what we know about Kentigern is based on twelfth-century AD

documents, such as the Life written by hagiographer (writer of a saint’s life) Jocelin of

Furness, and, as Alan McQuarrie shows (op.cit.; p117-144); we have to treat these and their

claims with suitably qualified respect (for example, the Welsh episode is regarded by Prof.

Jackson as being unhistorical; McQuarrie, ibid.; 133).

So what price St. Patrick?

There are many claims for where St Patrick might have been born. As with Ninian and

Kentigern, much of what has been written about Ireland’s patron saint dates to periods long

after he was alive. A lot of this late material was also written with particular political and

proselytising objectives in mind, (for example, to bolster Armagh’s early historic claims for

Irish church supremacy); so it must be examined very critically.

Fortunately, we have some writings considered by the majority of serious scholars to be

absolutely authentic–written by Patrick himself (Howlett, D.R., 1994; The Book of Letters of

Saint Patrick the Bishop (Four Courts Press). Patrick names his birthplace as Bannaventa

Berniae, which Howlett translates (from the Latin original) as referring to a town (op.cit., 52-

3). Other scholars see Patrick’s term for a town – uico, referring to a vicus, (a Roman

settlement) or an estate. Birdoswald Roman fort, (known to the Romans as Banna), has

long been a favourite location for Patrick’s birthplace, but the director of recent excavations

there, Tony Wilmott, doesn’t see the topography of the site relating to interpretations of

Patrick’s description. Prof. Charles Thomas suggests the Berniae element of the latter

relates to a mountain pass, (Wilmott, T., 1997; Birdoswald; Excavations of a Roman fort on

Hadrian’s Wall and its successor settlements 1987-92 (English Heritage); p231). No evidence

has been presented from Birdoswald for an early monastic settlement.

213

Patrick’s dates, as with Ninian, are a matter of dispute. We know from Patrick’s writings

that he came from an influential Romano-British family, his grandfather Potitus was a

Christian priest, as was his father; Calpornius. Patrick’s father is also considered to have

been a senior administrator, perhaps for the town council of Bannaventa, or for the Roman

Army; hence strong links with Roman places and centres of occupation. Some consider that

he undertook part of his education in a monastery where St.Ninian taught- again, perhaps,

significant for our explorations.

Patrick himself tells us that he was kidnapped by Irish slave traders at the age of 16

Tradition has it that on escaping and managing to get a boat back to England the boat was

wrecked in Morecambe Bay and Patrick came ashore at Heysham with other monks in his

party. Excavations at St.Patrick’s Heysham (Potter, T.W. and Andrews, R.D., 1994;

Excavation and Survey at St Patrick’s Chapel and St.Peter’s Church, Heysham, Lancashire,

1977-8, in; The Antiquaries Journal, 74, 55-134) have revealed no evidence for a 5th or even

a 6th century AD monastic foundation; although the chapel’s dedication is curious. We do

know, again from his writings, that Patrick received training in holy orders based on a British

church. With an evangelical zeal and a ‘call’ to return to the land of his captivity, he then

returned to Ireland.

If he had landed at Heysham on the other side of the Bay, his most likely land route would

have been ‘over sands’ from Heysham to Cartmel then to Conishead Bank, along the shores

of Low Furness, inland to cross over the Duddon and back to Carlisle area perhaps following

the coast line. Although it is most unlikely that he would stop long enough to establish a

community at Urswick because he was anxious to get back home, it is possible that some of

his monks could have stayed here, perhaps meeting up with others already here, and

evangelising Low Furness from here and building on the Irish monastic lines.

There is a tradition that many Irish monks and travellers knew about a significant monastery

in the north of Britain; known as a major teaching centre. The scale of the monastic ‘estate’

at Urswick compared with others would suggest a place of considerable importance,

although Whithorn is the ‘preferred’ location for this.

Patrick was consecrated Bishop in 431 by Pope Celestine and returned to Ireland in the

footsteps of Palladius who had had a short and unsuccessful mission in 430. Patrick died in

about 461. David Dumville, one of the pre-eminent Patrician scholars, estimates Patrick’s

death-date to be 493; Dumville, D.N.et.al., (1999); Saint Patrick (Boydell Studies in Celtic

History XIII).

We have to remember that this period in Ireland was one of great monastic developments,

of monks travelling all over the known world taking the Christian message far and wide; it

could be that this was a prime time for Urswick, as we shall see.

214

St. Kentigern (Mungo)

Let’s consider St. Kentigern again briefly. We know that several churches in the north of

Cumbria were dedicated to him, but he does not have further dedication in the south of the

county. Kentigern trained as a monk in Serf’s community at Culross on the Fife coast. He

established a base in Glasgow but fled south when an anti-Christian party came to power

(Rees 2000). We are told that on the death of Fergus, a ‘holy hermit’ who was buried at

Cathures (now Glasgow) Kentigern settled there and after some time the King and clergy of

region Cambrensis ‘besought him to be their bishop’ and ‘having summoned a bishop from

Ireland after the manner of the Britons and Scots of that period, they compelled him to be

consecrated’ (AD543). On hearing at Carlisle that many people living in the mountains were

pagans, he stayed in the area for some time, ministering as far down as Crosthwaite near

Keswick.

Rees suggests that it was possible that other Christians lived in that area and further south,

perhaps as a result of mission and ministry by Ninian and by Irish monks working there after

Patrick. It is thought that he then went northwest towards Aspatria and then south- could it

be via Urswick and then ‘over-sands’?

Rees (2000) notes another small church dedicated to St.Kentigern ‘on the mud flats where

the River Eden flows into the Solway Firth’ in Grinsdale and wonders if he in fact sailed to

North Wales from there.

Richard Ferguson, Chancellor of Carlisle Diocese (Diocesan Histories, 1889) referred to the

account of the Life of St.Kentigern by Joscelin of Furness written in the 12th Century in which

he states that on leaving Crosthwaite, ‘the saint directed his steps by the sea shore, and,

through all his journey scattered the seed of the Divine Word, gathered in a plentiful and

fertile harvest unto the Lord’.

As noted above Kentigern was successful in setting up a monastic community at Llanelwy in

North Wales but was summoned back north by Rydderch, nominal sovereign of Strathclyde.

His return was not rushed because he is not recorded as getting back until 574, a year later!

He was accompanied by St.Nidan, his cousin and St. Finan and a group of monks, 665 of

them in all, according to Joscelin of Furness Abbey. Can we find evidence of their activities in

our area? Well, a quick glance at the map suggests a possible link because within a day’s

walk of Urswick we have Finsthwaite and several settlements around Nibthwaite and of

course across the Bay we have Kents Bank, the River Kent, Kendal and Kentmere. Steve

Dickinson shows, however, that Finsthwaite = Old Norse personal name = Finnr’s clearing.

Nibthwaite = Old Norse – ‘the clearing by the new farmstead’. Kent- names originate in a

British name, considered by specialists to perhaps relate to hills; Cunetio/Cunetju. See Smith,

A.H.; 1967; The Place-Names of Westmorland, Pts. I and II (CUP); specifically Pt I, p9-9).

215

Further investigation of place names, etc. might help us but without clear evidence in the

form of a yet undiscovered stone cross or other ecclesiastical artefact we have to leave that

one lying around for the time being at least. Kentigern died in 612.

St. Columba

We must nor leave out the great St.Columba of Iona who was born in about 521 and died in

597. We make no claim to his ministry here, of course, but Steve Dickinson, in The Beacon

on the Bay (op.cit.) suggests a number of links with Columba and Iona, and this should be

explored a little.

In the church at Urswick there is a cross fragment containing runic inscriptions and images

of two persons (see illustration). When this was discovered in 1911 W G Collingwood dated

it as being from about 850-870AD, and considered it to be of no great quality or significance.

Steve Dickinson re-examined the inscription and concluded that runes in key locations

naming the original maker and original commissioner of the cross had been overcut. He

makes a case for this stone depicting a particular ecclesiastical event in the latter years of

the 7th Century, and suggests that two figures depicted on the cross’s ‘inscription face’ are in

fact Archbishop Theodore (7th Archbishop of Canterbury), and a prior named Luigne; named

in the runic inscription panel above them. This, if true, would place Urswick at the centre of

the massive political and ecclesiastic changes in the church during that period as the Roman

rite gained final ascendancy over the Irish rite - or did it?

Within the runic text, he claims, is also Trumwin/i, a significant northern bishop to the Picts

in 681 to whom we must return later.

216

The figures, one of whom appears to be a bishop, (he is holding a crosier) both have

Pictish/Irish tonsures – but why would an archbishop affirming the Roman model have an

Irish tonsure – unless of course we remember that it was done by a ‘local’ sculptor and is

representative of what he imagined?

It would be easier for us if the figure was Bishop Trumwini himself, but we don’t know that.

We are told that his predecessor had the cross erected to honour his ‘Lord’ Torotheo which

derives from Theodoros - Greek (‘God-given’) for Theodore. What is known from history is

that Archbishop Theodore consecrated Trumwini as Bishop to the Picts in 678, having

divided the large and troublesome Northumbria Diocese into two - and we know that

Theodore died in 690. If it is Theodore as seems probable, then who is the other person in

animated conversation with him and if it is ‘Luigne’, which is he and what did he do? When

did he arrive at Urswick and why?

Dickinson quotes widely from Adomnan’s Life of St.Columba (trans. Richard Sharpe, Penguin

1995) to make his case that this gentleman was in fact Columba’s steersman who had

become a prior in a large monastery ‘in the island of Elen’ in his old age.

There is reference to the ‘monks of Mag Luinge (Luigne?)’ on the island of Tiree not far from

Iona where penitents were often ‘banished’ to find their place of resurrection; the monks

were ‘attacked with a deadly plague, the effects of which were mitigated by prayer and

fasting’ ( Adomnan’s Life of St. Columba).

The fact of the matter is that in Adomnan’s ‘Life’ there are three separate Luignes and what

we have is a composite of the three! Dickinson argues that the linkage of three individuals

into one person is supported by Prof. Ó Riain, though Sharpe disputes this (Sharpe, op.cit.,

p288-289, fun 133)]. Luigne, incidentally, was the name of a tribe in Ireland and not

uncommon, so although we can perhaps trace their roots, we can’t identify exactly which

Luigne we are dealing with although the ‘evidence’ would seem compelling. There is nothing

in the ‘Life’ to suggest that Elen was anything more than a small island in the Outer

Hebrides.

We could perhaps place Bishop Trumwini as having visited Urswick in the 680s because we

have to remember that he was evicted or rather fled from Abercorn in 685 and went to

settle at a monastery commonly supposed to be Whitby [ Dickinson makes the case for

Bede’s terms - Streanæshealh/Sinus Fari - that have previously been linked with Whitby

applying in actuality to Urswick and this is detailed in Beacon on the Bay p47-8].

I do not propose to pursue that issue here.

We could equally well place Theodore on a pastoral tour during the same period since he

worked hard to unite the Church under the Roman rule. So, if the cross was set up by

217

Trumwini in commemoration of ‘his Lord Torotheo’, what was the event and was it linked to

the monastic community here?

Could it have been an earlier summit meeting between Theodore and the prior (Luigne)

from the Isle of Man (see below) which might have taken place during Theodore’s first

pastoral visits a little while after a critical mid-7th century AD Synod, in an attempt to

persuade the Isle of Man to ‘go Roman’? That would still make Luigne very old but it lends

some credibility to the event.

Of course, Urswick could be Luigne’s mystical ‘Isle of Elen’, God’s ‘trysting place’, and we

mustn’t dismiss that one yet!

Dickinson suggests the following scenario: that Luigne commissioned the cross with its

original inscription in anticipation of his and Theodore’s death. It was presumably only part-

finished when Luigne died, and Trumwini, evicted by the Picts from Abercorn, arrived and

arranged for its completion in 690 AD, or shortly thereafter.

At least that would seem to confirm the importance of the monastic community at Urswick

and its significance as a ‘staging post for ecclesiastical traffic’ between Britain and Ireland

and other places!

So far we have found no firm evidence for Urswick’s monastic community being established

overland from any direction; that one awaits further archeological evidence and

interpretation. We should, though, perhaps consider further the possibility that the settlers

came from the sea into the Bay because clearly this was one of the strengths of its location

and a regular feature of its early trading history. Successive ‘raiders’, eg the Romans and

later on, the Vikings, came from there. Whilst Ireland was no great distance from Southern

Scotland, the Cumbrian coast and North Wales, as we have seen, we must not discount the

Isle of Man’s significant position as a ‘staging post’ between Ireland and here and often

providing a ‘haven’ for fleeing Christian monks.

Our Luigne is alleged to have been prior of an important monastery ‘in the Isle of Elen’

during his later years, ie: mid 7th century AD. Could it, then, be that he went from Iona to

the Isle of Man via Tiree as prior and then as hinted above, he met with Theodore as its

representative? Again Dickinson is very helpful in that he refers to the Irish historian Dáibhí

Ó Crónin who presents the Isle of Man as a scene of conflict between the Irish Scots and the

Irish, citing its abandonment by the Irish in the later 6th /early 7th century; 1995; Early

Medieval Ireland; 400-1200 (Longman), p50. This would not suggest stable conditions for a

7th century early Christian Irish monastic community on the Isle of Man. Available evidence

currently indicates that the island housed no substantial 6th/7th century AD Christian

community on the ‘Ionan’ model – for example; there’s no historical, place-name or

archaeological evidence.

218

However, Rod Geddes writing in Rees (2000) about the influence of the Columban church on

the Isle of Man states that when King Aedan captured Mann in 583AD the island came

under the influence of the Columban church; by taking control of Mann, Aedan had secured

the southern sea routes in the same way that an expedition to the Orkneys in 580 had

secured his northern borders. The following 50 years brought political alliances which

helped the mission of the Church. Columba and Kentigern had forged a personal link with

each other which had brought Dalriada and Strathclyde together both politically by treaty

and ecclesiastically through their commitment to a common mission. They also drew in, by

association, Ulster, Mann, the British territories of Rheged around Carlisle and North Wales.

Urswick could have held a strategic position in this new spirit of co-operation and it would

be ‘safe’ to establish a community there perhaps; the time sequence fits well for an early

Iona familia development.

So we still have several intriguing possibilities, one, that a very early Christian community

existed at Urswick during the late Romano-British period and grew to be of sufficient

importance and stature to be a place to which ‘wandering saints’ would come, stay, study

and wander on; that the ‘template’ was transferred to Ireland as a basic monastic model (or

perhaps more likely that it was re-developed from the Irish model later on), that this really

was the place they knew as Rosnat and with the tantalising possibility of it being home to

St.Patrick!.

The second possibility was that it was established later on during the late 6th century

perhaps on the Irish model by Kentigern or his contemporaries and was of sufficient

strategic importance around AD670 for Archbishop Theodore to meet with an important

Irish/Ionan cleric in order to reinforce the decision implemented at the AD664 Synod of

Streanæshealh/Sinus Fari. This changed the nature of the established Church in the whole

of the north of Britain and Ireland, and Bishop Trumwini arguably wished to record this

highly significant meeting for posterity (and as a reminder perhaps to future wandering

saints!)

There is another possibility which presents itself, although there is no evidence for it yet,

and that is that Trumwini spent time here at the monastery at Urswick during the 660s

under the authority of Luigne (who established the monastery in the early part of the 7th

Century).

Perhaps he succeeded Luigne as prior, and Theodore ‘called’ him out to be a Bishop to the

Picts from here! Now that would be worth recording….

Ian Bradley in his book on the life of Columba suggests that it was quite usual to have high

standing crosses, initially of wood and later of stone, scattered among the monastery’s

various buildings, which commemorated ‘important events in the history of the monastery

219

or the life of the founder’ (Ian Bradley ‘Columba: Pilgrim and Penitent’ (1996) Wild Goose

Publications). Is this a further clue to the ‘Iona’ connection?

Links

It might be helpful to explore a little further some other ‘Irish connections’ because it is

clear that there was considerable ‘traffic’ between Ireland, Wales, Scotland and Britain over

this critical period, indeed since the emergence of monasticism after Martin of Tours. It is

astonishing to record the distances and the frequency of travel undertaken by bishops,

monks and their students alike; tracking them is in itself a fascinating journey which might

throw more light on the origins of Urswick itself. So let’s begin….

Nora Chadwick (The Age of the Saints in the early Celtic Church (1960), published by

Llanerch) refers to the ‘Catalogus Sanctorium Hiberniae’ to outline the different Orders

within Irish monasticism, the First Order, the ‘most holy’ bishops, those who received their

‘missia’ or order of service from Patrick himself. The Second Order, mainly presbyters and a

few bishops, who had received their missia from the Holy Men of Britain, ie David, Gildas

and Docus (or Cadoc according to D.S.Dugdale -Manx Church Origins (1998) published by

Llanerch- and others).

The Third Order were hermits and desert dwellers.

‘Gildas auctor’ was referred to by Columbanus in a letter to Pope Gregory the Great as one

whose advice was sought after in a matter of church discipline by a certain ‘Vennianus

auctor’ (Irish- perhaps Finnian of Clonard) who was traditionally considered to be the

founder of the great monastic movement in Ireland. Finnian, born in Leinster, spent some

years in South Wales at the School of Cadoc, returned to Ireland to teach, eventually

transforming an old church in Clonard into a monastery at a date somewhere between 520

and 530. He died of the plague in 548/549.

Gildas (510-570), dismissed by Bede as ‘their (Britons) own historian’, was the teacher of

Vennianus of Findbarr (Finnnian above) who in turn was a teacher of Columba.

A further link with St. Patrick which enhanced the position of Columba was a prophesy by a

‘stranger of British race, a holy man and a disciple of the Holy Bishop Patrick’, named

Mauchte, who said:

‘In the last years of the world there will be born a son whose name Columba will become

famous through all the provinces of the islands of the ocean, and he will shed a bright light

over the last years of the earth’ (Adamnan’s Life of St.Columba).

In the ‘Annals of the Four Masters’ Mochta/ Mauchte is listed in the ‘family of Patrick as

Patrick’s priest, next in importance to Sechnall, Patrick’s bishop. Mochta died in 534, bishop

220

of Lughmhagh.

Bede records that Columba (born in AD521) studied under St. Finbarr (Finnian), the bishop,

‘during his youth’.

We know that before about 550AD Columba had founded a ‘noble monastery’ in Ireland

known as Dearmach (Field of Oaks), and both from there and later from Iona his disciples

were sent out to establish further monasteries in Britain and Ireland. Columba left Ireland

with his twelve ‘disciples’ in about 557AD and landed on Iona to begin a major work which

would have an enormous impact for Christianity.

We also know that Cadoc was teacher of Gildas at his School at Llancarvan only a short

distance from Llanilltyd (Llantwit Major, Glamorgan) the monastery set up by the Breton

Illtyd in the latter years of the fifth century, so the early links with the Christian Celtic

movement on the Continent to Wales and with emerging monasticism in Ireland are clearly

made.

Cadoc later undertook missionary work in Brittany.

We have yet to include Enda who was a principal character in the monastic movement in

Ireland. He was persuaded to go to Rosnat to study under abbot Maucennus and then

returned to Ireland in about 500AD to set up his School on the island of Aran Mor in Galway

Bay; he died about AD530.

Despite the considerable influence of the Welsh Schools it seems that the ‘monastic

template’ was based on the Irish / Iona ‘template’. We have yet to establish the location of

Rosnat- could it be in South Wales where there clearly was significant activity during the

latter part of the fifth century ( the St.Partick’s Church website www.saintpatrickdc.org

suggests that this is so, probably St. David’s foundation at Pembroke) or was it, as we

considered briefly above, actually at Urswick? The Celtic Orthodoxy website

www.celticorthodoxy.org places Rosnat at Whithorn and that is supported by Watson

(History of Celtic Placenames of Scotland, 1926, reprinted by Birlinn (Edinburgh) in 1993),

who suggests that Rosnat (Little Cape) and Futerna are the same place, as are Teach Martain

(Martin’s House), Candida Casa, Magnum Monasterium, Hwiterne (Whithorn), Futerna

being the latinized Gaelic form of the old English Hwiterne.

He emphasises the strong links between Ireland and Scotland (Galloway and Dumfries).

Watson states that Candida Casa ‘remained long an important centre of religious life and

learning, widely known and much frequented’. He then re-states the importance of the links

between the kingdom of Northumbria and Iona and makes the point again that ‘long before

Hi (Iona) was founded by Columba, Candida Casa formed a very important link between

Ireland and Scotland’.

221

Dugdale (1998) refers to the ‘Liber Hymnorium’ which describes how Finnian of Moville and

his colleagues Talmach and Rioc studied under abbot Mugint at Futerna; since Finnian of

Moville died ‘at an advanced age in AD579’ the date of the above incident may have been

between 510 and 530AD with the clear implication that a monastic community existed at

Whithorn with definite Irish connections. Dugdale concludes that the period envisaged for

the British monastic phase at Whithorn/Futerna was approximately 530-630AD. That

corresponds well with other developments in the Irish church.

It is therefore quite likely that Urswick monastery/ community is neither Futerna nor

Rosnat but rather another significant monastic site developed or perhaps more likely re-

developed by colleagues/ disciples / contemporaries of Columba who brought the ‘Iona

Family template’ with them either directly from Iona o, more likely, from Lindisfarne.

Dickinson tells us that the ‘Ionan family’ monastic sites were: in Scotland (3), in Ireland (9),

and Northumbria (Lindisfarne), (we could perhaps now add ‘Man’),and that the landscape

and sculptural evidence from Urswick’s core makes for a British Ionan family member- with

Northumbrian designs upon it.

So can we begin to ‘pin down’ the sequence of events at Urswick within the historical

context and in relation to the one clear piece of sculptural evidence, the Trumwini Cross?

Having established that the political conditions were right for some degree of ‘mission

expansion’ into the north of England during the period approximately AD590- 660 and in the

knowledge that at the request of King Oswald, Aidan M’Libher and others set out for

England from Iona, in 635 ‘to convert his people to Christianity’. Bede records that once

Aidan, the first monk/bishop arrived and was accepted at Lindisfarne, then ‘many Irishmen

arrived day by day in Britain and proclaimed the word of God with great devotion in all the

provinces under Oswald’s rule’. He also notes that Churches were built in several places and

that the King ‘of his bounty gave lands and endowments to establish monasteries’. St. Aidan

was succeeded in 651 by Finnan as bishop (the Gaelic name for Lindisfarne was Eilean

naomh- Holy Island) who was bishop for ten years. We are told that Finnan built a wooden

church there which was later consecrated by Archbishop Theodore. This could mark the

gentle divisions between the role of bishop and abbot and provides the ‘possibility’ that

Lughe M’Cumin, listed among Columba’s disciples, described as a ‘monk of Hy’ (Iona)

became abbot of Eilean Naomh - is this our Luigne? Finnan was succeeded as bishop by the

former abbot of Iona, Colman, in 661. It was Colman, of course, a fiery Irish Celt, who got

caught up in the controversy which led to the fateful Synod of Whitby in 664. It would

appear that the roles of bishop and abbot had now been divided because we note that

Cuimine Ailbhe became abbot at this time.

So did Lughe (Luigne) then move across to establish or develop Urswick, his ‘trysting place’

on similar lines to Holy Island (Eilean Naomh)? That could place Luigne- not the one of myth

222

and legend but another Luigne because the list of Columba’s first 151 ‘disciples’ records at

least three others named Lughe!

Now, as far as Trumwini goes could it be that he came with Luigne as prior or in a similar

position as part of his own preparation for high office? There is a precedent for this sort of

progression in the life of Cuthbert who followed Eata to Ripon as ‘guest master’ and then

back to Lindisfarne as prior when Eata became abbot there in 664. The monastic ‘hierarchy’

very strongly supported insider appointments!

Moving on, we need to be reminded that after his ‘defeat at Whitby’ in 664 by the ‘Roman’

Bishop Wilfred, (the champion of Alchfrid, son of King Oswy), who incidentally had been

offered Ripon (In-hrypum) when Eata refused the Roman ways and returned to Melrose,

Bishop Colman, (who was championed by King Oswy who had himself been baptised and

instructed by the Irish and had a complete grasp of their language) returned to Iona as

abbot and three years later returned to Ireland. Tuda, a monk from the South of Ireland and

by implication, in favour of the Roman practices, became bishop of Lindisfarne with Eata, a

convicted Celtic monk as abbot.

It was Wilfred who held the bishopric of Northumbria after 664, that is, until King Egfrid fell

out with him and removed him from office in 678. He was replaced by two bishops both

former monks, Bosa, Bishop of Deira with his ‘see’ in York and Eata, Bishop of Bernicia with

his ‘see’ at Lindisfarne; Eata continued as abbot at Lindisfarne with Cuthbert as prior. In 681

Theodore took the opportunity to break the power of the huge Northumbria diocese by

appointing two more bishops, Tunbert to the see of Hexham and Trumwine to be bishop of

‘those Picts who were subject to English rule’ (Bede). It was Trumwini, of course, who is

believed to have persuaded Cuthbert to become a bishop in 685, the same year he was

removed from office as a result of a Pictish revolt and victory against King Egfrid.

So, to take Dickinson’s deductions, for whatever reason, and we can but speculate, Luigne,

Trumwini and Theodore could possibly have had a common event at Urswick from which a

significant sculptural memorial was produced. Did Theodore meet with Luigne in his

attempts to bring the Celtic Christians into line after the Synod of Whitby in 664 or to

persuade them to stay rather than follow Colman? Did he seek advice and support from an

old and wise Ionian monk/abbot? Or did he meet with him to persuade him to let Trumwini

go to be a bishop to the Picts? Did he perhaps travel to Urswick to dedicate its newly built

stone church-was that the event for which the cross-memorial was commissioned by

Trumwini?

Was Urswick, then, the last of the Columban Iona familia and the last bastion of the Celtic

Church in Britain?

223

In the coming years the archaeology will perhaps reveal more for us about the dates and

sequence of church/ monastic building and developments at Urswick and its links with other

major centres of Christianity. Can’t help thinking that the ‘early dedication stone’ lying under

the inside entrance into the Tower might provide the ‘key’ to so much more- however, we’ll

have to be patient.

Observations at Urswick have relied very heavily on conclusions reached by Steve Dickinson

drawn from ‘field archaeology’ which whilst giving general ‘clues’ cannot be as definite or as

scientific as more lasting artefacts. It may be that as this and other projects continue across

a wider spectrum of site that those observations can be challenged.

The same applies to the central ‘artefact’, the Tunwinni cross fragment and its ‘Pictish’

portraiture; Dickinson has produced impressive, detailed and well-argued conclusions in his

‘Beacon on the Bay’ (2002), and appears to have brought the ‘facts’ and the ‘field evidence’

closely together.

It has to be said that some of his conclusions seem like ‘a leap in the dark’ alongside that

given to date by other experts in the field.

There could be a different interpretation of this once it is subjected to more accurate

examination of the runes (are they overcut?) and dating of the work itself. It could be that it

is not influenced as heavily as suggested by the Northumbrian Church and the ‘Iona

template’ and that the early Celtic Irish site/monastery was further developed during the

Anglian expansion of the church and the changing monastic movement.

There is a further possible explanation which could be usefully explored, that the cross

fragment indeed is a memorial stone erected in the graveyard of a ‘field church’ in the 8th

century or even later (Collingwood originally suggested ninth century) and a church was

erected on the site at a later date dedicated to St. Mary in the Field.

Dickinson does, however, offer further ‘clues’ which help this particular study when he

describes the church ‘fabric’ at Urwick. Whilst rightly stating that dating church building and

building ‘phases’ is incredibly difficult, Urswick being no exception, he suggests that ‘We

could state that the nave’s infilled small, round-headed windows are similar to complete

examples from Anglo-Saxon churches elsewhere’ (page 31). He also suggests that there are

‘two previous chancel arches’ and that ‘infilled twin apertures are also visible high in the

wall’ and then concludes that perhaps ‘most interesting of all is the extremely steep roof

pitch’. This is added to by the discovery of the ‘eroded remnants of at least one historic

sundial, divided into six sectors (with a single part-subdivision of one sector)’. In his footnote

he makes comparisons with a church at Isel in North Cumbria and with the Saxon sundial at

Escomb.

224

Perhaps we can see much that is found in an Anglo-Saxon build.

The figures on the cross fragment could hold the key to possible events being depicted;

Dickinson has made his case at length and in impressive detail, Collingwood and others also

have made observations of a simpler, less flattering nature. Collingwood, for example,

deduced that the cross was Anglian, although he considered that the spiral carved on the

shoulder of the right-hand figure below the runic panel gave it a ‘touch of Celtic style’. He

dated it at c850-870AD. Dickinson argues for the period around 690AD.

Perhaps it is the ‘Pictish nature’ of the carvings that intrigues most. Dickinson states that

‘their simple profile heads have been compared with figures carved on Pictish stone

monuments in Scotland, but are regarded by Cramp as rare in Northumbrian stone carving.’

(page 16). He goes on: ‘Heads with scrolled ears and tip-tilted noses are found in insular

manuscripts such as the Book of Kells, and, indeed, a background of Hiberno-Saxon

manuscripts is seen as the source for much of the iconography of Great Urswick 1’ (the cross

fragment).

Dickinson also suggests that if the original translation is accurate then ‘Tunwini’ as maker or

setter of the cross’ could possibly be ‘Tundwini’ who is named on a grave marker from

Hexham in 672-6AD. The original translation reads:

‘Tunwini put up (this) cross in memory of his lord (son?) Torhtred. Pray for the/his soul’.

Dickinson’s reinterpretation should be placed alongside that of Collingwood because here

we have two very different ‘conclusions’ based on the one artifact.

Students of archaeology will know from their reading of the Journal of British Archaeology

that many of Dickinson’s broader claims were seriously contested by other local experts

during the period 2005-6 and despite Mr. Dickinson’s own defence of his conclusions, the

issues remain unresolved and await further research and perhaps revisiting of his work at

some time, especially in relation to the Tunwini cross, his suggestions that the runes were

‘overcut’, and particularly his claims for a Roman military and trading presence in Furness.

However, more recent discoveries have cast further light on the history of Low Furness and

could perhaps spur other work in the future.

225

Materials Specific To Research And Information In Relation To

Urswick And Its Church

W. Alty (2009) ‘Fore And Aft: A Life Interrupted by War’ Ulverston Self Published

Canon Ayre (1897) ‘The History of Urswick and its Church With Some Account Of Its Legends

And Antiquities’ in The North Lonsdale Magazine and Furness Miscellany Volume 11 No.8.

W.Collingwood (1909) ‘A Pre-Norman Cross-shalf from Urswick Church’ Article XV in

Transactions of the Cumberland and Westmorland Antiquarian and Archaeological Society

W.Collingwood (1911) ‘A Rune-inscribed Anglian Cross-shaft at Urswick Church’ Article XX1V

in Transactions of the Cumberland and Westmorland Antiquarian and Archaeological

Society.

S.Dickinson (2002) ‘Beacon on the Bay’ Ulverston First Light Heritage Agency.

S. Dickinson (2003) ‘First Light Urswick Origins Discovery Programme Archaeological Report

No.1’ Ulverston First Light Heritage Agency

S.Dickinson (2004) ‘By water, by stone’ Urswick Hidden Light Community Project.

J.Dobson (1920) ‘History Of Urswick’ Unpublished Notes

G. Elleray (2010) ‘The Life And Times Of An Ossick Lad’ Cumbria Long House Publishing

226

H.Gaythorpe (1882) ‘ Urswick Church’ in Transactions of Barrow Field & Naturalist Club

Volume 3 No.2.

Hall. R (1973) ‘St. Mary & St. Michael Urswick Church Millenium Publication 1000 Years of

History’ Church Archives

J.Imlach (2005) ‘St. Mary and St. Michael’s Church Great Urswick Cumbria’ Tour Guide

G.Lester (2011) ‘Notes On Urswick United Reformed Church, Formerly Urswick Church Of

Christ’ Church Archives

J. Melville (1959) ‘Bankfield’ Document held in Barrow Records Office

K.Miller (2003) ‘Correlated History Notes On The Village Of Bardsea And The Church Of The

Holy Trinity’ Church Archives

M. Pollit (1977) ‘The Parish Church of St. Mary & St. Michael’ Guide to Urswick Church.

Church Archives.

T.N. Postlethwaite (1906) ‘Some Notes on Urswick Church and Parish’ Ulverston James

Atkinson.

T.N. Postlethwaite (1924) ‘Urswick’ Reprinted from the Cumberland and Westmorland

Antiquarian and Archaeological Society’s Transactions Vol.XXIV- New Series

Kendal Titus Wilson.

W. Urswick (1893) ‘A History of the Urswicks’ Windsor Self-Published

227

Cumbria Records Office Documents at Barrow Central Library

BPR/14

Records For St. Mary & St. Michael’s Church deposited by PCC and Incumbent including PCC

Minutes and Parish Registers.

BPR/14/M/7 Notes on 1000 Years of Urswick Church History

BD/KF

BD/KF/111 and 112 Kendal &Fisher (solicitors) Ulverston: Bundle of Papers in relation to

T.N. Postlethwaite.

BD/So

BD So.4 Bundle of Papers relating to North Lonsdale Field Club, Ulverston 1772-1940.

Useful Websites

www.aboutulverston.co.uk

www.explorelowfurness.co.uk

www.fordham.edu

www.marshallfamily/net/familyhistory.pdf

228

Bibliography And References To Authors In Text

D. Adam (1993) ‘Fire of the North:The Life of St. Cuthbert’ London SPCK

W. Alty (2009) ‘Fore And Aft: A Life Interrupted by War’ Ulverston Self Published

W.Ashton (1909) ‘The Battle Of Land And Sea On The Lancashire, Cheshire And North Wales

Coasts’ Manchester Wm. Ashton & Sons

J. Atkinson & J.Brownbill (1886) ‘The Coucher Book Of Furness Abbey’ London Chetham

Society.

Canon Ayre (1897) ‘The History of Urswick and its Church With Some Account Of Its Legends

And Antiquities’ in The North Lonsdale Magazine and Furness Miscellany Volume 11 No.8.

E. Baines (1870) ‘History Of Lancashire Volume II: The History Of The County Palatine And

Duchy Of Lancaster’ London Geo. Routledge & Sons

J.Bagley (1970) ‘A History of Lancashire’ Fifth Edition Henly-on-Thames

Darwen-Finlayson.

R. Bailey & R. Cramp (1988) ‘Corpus of Anglo-Saxon Stone Sculptures Volume 2:

Cumberland, Westmorland and Lancashire North of the Sands’ Oxford University Press

H. Barber (1894) ‘Furness And Cartmel Notes’ Ulverston Jas. Atkinson publisher

229

F. Barnes (1968) ‘Barrow and District’ Barrow Barrow Borough Corporation.

R. Bingham (1983) ‘The Church at Heversham’ Milnthorpe self-published

H. Birkett (1949) ‘The Story Of Ulverston’ Kendal Titus Wilson

C. Bouch (1948) ‘Prelates And People Of The Lake Counties’ Kendal Titus Wilson

C. Bouch & G. Jones (1961) ‘The Lake Counties 1500-1830’ Manchester University Press

J. Bulmer (1910) ‘History Of Furness And Cartmel’ Preston T. Snape.

J.Burgess (1989) ‘The Normans in North-West England’ Carlisle unpublished

Burns & Nicholson (1847) ‘History of Westmorland’ Volume 1 Kendal Sayers

W. Calverley (1899) ‘Notes on the early sculptured crosses in the Diocese of Carlisle’

Kendal Titus Wilson

W.Collingwood (1909) ‘A Pre-Norman Cross-shalf from Urswick Church’ Article XV in

Transactions of the Cumberland and Westmorland Antiquarian and Archaeological Society

230

W.Collingwood (1911) ‘A Rune-inscribed Anglian Cross-shaft at Urswick Church’ Article XX1V

in Transactions of the Cumberland and Westmorland Antiquarian and Archaeological

Society.

J. Curwen (1930) ‘The Ancient Parish of Heversham with Milnthorpe’ Kendal Titus Wilson

J. Dickinson (1980) ‘The Land of Cartmel: A History’ Kendal Titus Wilson

S.Dickinson (2002) ‘Beacon on the Bay’ Ulverston First Light Heritage Agency.

S.Dickinson (2004) ‘By water, by stone’ Urswick Hidden Light Community Project.

J.Dobson (1920) ‘History Of Urswick’ Unpublished Notes

M. Dunn (2003) ‘The Emergence of Monasticism’ Oxford Blackwell

G. Elleray (2010) ‘The Life And Times Of An Ossick Lad’ Cumbria Long House Publishing

W. Farrer & J. Brownbill (1914) ‘A History of Lancashire’ Volume 8 London Constable &

Co.

S. Finch (1992) ‘Rememberable Things (A Farm Youth Of Yester-year) Arnside Arnprint

H. Fishwick (1894) ‘A History of Lancashire’ London Elliot Stock

231

Friends of Furness (1988) ‘Footsteps In Furness: Retracing The Travels Of George Fox 1652’

Barrow James MIlner

H.Gaythorpe (1882) ‘ Urswick Church’ in Transactions of Barrow Field & Naturalist Club

Volume 3 No.2.

H.Gaythorpe (1900) ‘Furness Lore’ Kendal Titus Wilson

M. Gordon (1963) ‘Early History Of North-West England’ Volume 1 Kentmere Henry

Marshall.

J. Michael Green (1993) ‘The Forgotten Celtic Saints’ Whalley Self-Published.

Hall. R (1973) ‘St. Mary & St. Michael Urswick Church Millenium Publication 1000 Years of

History’ Church Archives

J.Hancock (2005) ‘The History of Saint Peter’s Church Heversham’ Church Guide

K.Harper (1966) ‘The Story Of The Lakeland Diocese 1933-66’ Carlisle CDBF

D. Hill (1981) ‘An Atlas of Anglo-Saxon England’ reprinted in 1992 Oxford Blackwell.

K. Hylson-Smith (1999) ‘Christianity in England From Roman Times To The Reformation’

London SCM Press

J.Imlach (2005) ‘St. Mary and St. Michael’s Church Great Urswick Cumbria’ Tour Guide

232

Kenyon (1991) ‘The Origins Of Lancashire’ Manchester University Press

R.Latham (1990) ‘Bede: Ecclesiastical History Of The English People’ Revised Edition Tr. By

Sherley-Price London Penguin Books

G.Lester (2011) ‘Notes On Urswick United Reformed Church, Formerly Urswick Church Of

Christ’ Church Archives

J.Lofthouse (1965) ‘Countrygoers North’ London Robert Hale

J. Marsh & J.Garbutt (1994) ‘The Lake Counties Of One Hundred Years Ago’ Stroud Alan

Sutton Publishers

J. Marshall (1958) ‘Furness And The Industrial Revolution’ Barrow James Milner

J. Melville (1959) ‘Bankfield’ Document held in Barrow Records Office

K.Miller (2003) ‘Correlated History Notes On The Village Of Bardsea And The Church Of The

Holy Trinity’ Church Archives

R.Newman (1996) ‘The Archaeology Of Lancashire’ Lancaster University Archaeological

Unit

J.Nicholson & R.Burn (1777) ‘History and Antiquities of the Counties of Westmorland and

Cumberland’ Volume 1 Reprinted by E P Publishers in conjunction with Cumbria Libraries

233

N. Pevsner (1969) ‘The Buildings of England- North Lancashire’ .

M. Pollit (1977) ‘The Parish Church of St. Mary & St. Michael’ Guide to Urswick Church.

Church Archives.

T.N. Postlethwaite (1906) ‘Some Notes on Urswick Church and Parish’ Ulverston James

Atkinson.

T.N. Postlethwaite (1924) ‘Urswick’ Reprinted from the Cumberland and Westmorland

Antiquarian and Archaeological Society’s Transactions Vol.XXIV- New Series

Kendal Titus Wilson.

Proctor (1997) ‘The Ancient Ruins known as St. Patrick’s Chapel at Heysham Lancashire 400-

1100 CE’ Heysham Heritage Association

J.Richardson (1880) ‘Furness Past And Present’

W. Rollinson (1996) ‘A History of Cumberland and Westmorland’ 2nd Edition Chichester

Phillimore

R. Sheldrake (1995) ‘Living Between Worlds’ London Darton, Longman, Todd

F. Stenton (1946) ‘Anglo-Saxon England’ Oxford Clarendon Press

J. Sterling (1974) ‘Dark Age and Norman Lancashire’ Clapham Dalesman Books

234

J. Stockdale (1978) ‘Annals Of Cartmel’ Whitehaven Michael Moon Publishers.

R. Strong (2008) ‘A Little History Of The English Country Church’ London Vintage Books.

W. Urswick (1893) ‘A History of the Urswicks’ Windsor Self-Published

T. West (1805) ‘The Antiquities of Furness’ London T.Spilsbury

White (2003) ‘Heysham: Two Ancient Churches and a Burial Ground’ Leaflet Lancaster City

Museum

235

Helpful Websites Quoted In Text

www.aboutulverston.co.uk

www.explorelowfurness.co.uk

www.fordham.edu

www.marshallfamily/net/familyhistory.pdf

www.historyonline.co.uk

236