The Font Cover and Canopy
Researched and written by Sylvia Ord
My interest in the design of the Baptistery grew after seeing a copy of the Edward Willins sketch and the result of my ‘search’ is related in these comments.
In 1236, an act of Parliament was passed stating that the fitting of a font cover was compulsory in order to prevent the theft of Holy Water, often used, for instance, in the practice of black magic. Each parish was expected to provide both font and cover. Both were listed by the Archbishop of Winchester in his expenses for 1305. From the fourteenth century onwards, especially in East Anglia, the functional cover developed into tall structures of open-work tracery. These are examples of the beautiful carving of this era and the creative skills of woodworkers. Even the puritan William Dowsing, a destroyer of images, is said to have expressed his admiration for such work.
The original case and canopy at St Peter Mancroft is considered to date from 1460 (about seventeen years before Caxton's first printed book in England). There are only three other of similar design in this country. These can be seen at St Mary's Luton, dated 1350; St Botolph's Trunch, 1500; Durham Cathedral 1662. In this design four pillars support a platform on which stands a 'drum'. The font, standing under this platform is raised giving it, perhaps, greater dignity, because it is level with the altar. The drum houses the font cover which can be lowered or raised by means of a pulley, and which passes through an opening in the platform into the drum.
The present baptistery is a restoration of the original, in honour of Queen Victoria's Golden Jubilee in 1897. The architect was Frank Baggallay and, as reported in The Builders of 4th January 1890, the work was carried out with 'exceptional care and skill' by J. E. Knox of Kennington. The eight sided font no doubt influenced the choice of an octagonal design. The whole structure is in oak. It has two sections: the lower 15th century and the upper 19th century.
The fifteenth century Baptistery
Each of the four supporting pillars seem to have been cut from one large trunk giving four sides for decoration and four corner shafts. The decorative design on each pillar is similar to the ornamentation in, for instance, the North Porch. Here a stone figure is placed in a niche, and it is possible that this idea was used on the wooden pillars. Here a panel is placed over the niche (measuring 12x3.5 inches), and above the niche is a 'canopy' of intricate carving which includes, a quatrefoil (like a clover leaf); tracery 9decoration of a blank arch); crocket (a decorative spur); crenellation (like a battlement). There is a second niche on the lower half of the pillar, with the decorative carving also. The work, using a chisel and mallet would have taken a great deal of time. The panels are considered to have been painted with figures of saints, now hardly discernable and first noted in the Church Guide written by the Revd. Delany Sabberton (Vicar of All Saints, Warwick) in 1930.
The edge of the platform is crested with a leaf motif. Ribbed vaulting with rosette bosses is used underneath, as in the example in the Cathedral. Four pendants, structured like the pillars, are attached to the platform and decorated with fern carvings.
There are many examples of the decanter (pepper pot) used as a 'formal' ornament (a finial).
We noticed that there are slight differences in the carving on the pillars, which suggests that at least two people were working.
The nineteenth century section
In spite of various enquiries we have not yet been able to find the original plans which would no doubt have given more information. However, we do have a print published in The builders in 1890 showing the architect’s final objective.
The octagonal drum was placed on the original platform and is enveloped by carving. Four 'human' figures, with traditional angel wings and flowing robes, are standing on the pendants, holding scrolls, and four on the pillars proudly sounding trumpets. There are slight differences, for example, in the fall of the robes and the arms of the trumpeters. Maybe the notion of individual differences is suggested. Angels are described as both messengers of God and guardians of human beings. Thus the imagery seems entirely appropriate for the sacrament.
Encircling the top of the column is a decorative 'girdle', then a shallow dome on which the symbolic pelican is carved, sitting on her nest, and feeding her fledglings by pecking her breast for blood.
The two sections are linked by the use of certain common features, such as the decanter. We know something of seventieth attitudes.
Matthew Reynolds (2005) comments that St Peter Mancroft's rich furnishings were not commended by the city. The church was referred to in a list of complaints to the Long Parliament of 1647. He quotes:
'…at the font there are also diverse Images upon the top, an angell gloriously apparelled standing upon a gilt globe and holding a sceptre in his hand, then upon 4 pillars stand the 4 Evangelists. There is also hanging over the water a gilded dove sustyned by a wire with about forty images besides'
The sketch of 1884 shows how the canopy looked when the architect first saw it. The article, from a report in The Builder of 4th January 1890 states that the canopy was 'thickly covered in black paint and the figures in the niches had been hacked out'. No drawing of the original top could be found but a 'slight structure' had been roughly propped on the platform, over the octagonal opening through which the original cover must have slid up and down. He therefore based his reconstruction on the canopy at Trunch. It was also stated that, when cleaned, the wood had been roughly coloured in red, green and white with gilt crockets and filials, as was usual in late medieval woodwork. Mr Baggallay must have removed the panels over the niches to come to his conclusion. We found one ‘securing’ nail and this was identified as Victorian.
The wood in the panels looked as if it might be 'original', so we sent a photograph of one, chosen at random, for dendrochronological dating. This process relies on the spacing of grain for results. No evidence of graining was found and it was reported that the cutting of the panel was unusual. However the general conclusion was that it was likely to be fifteenth century. We also sent a photograph of paint found on another panel for comment, that too was considered to be original.
We were able to look into one niche and saw a vertical cut that was a little rough. Another theory was, very tentatively, put forward. Possibly the surface at the back of the niches was to be prepared for an alternative decoration, maybe painting. Then there was a change of plan and the panels were put in place, and painted instead. (again a slow process – paint was likely to be made of egg white and natural pigment). Here we will leave the search. Restoration has continued. Work on the font canopy was recently carried out in memory of Ronald Langford by his family.
The nineteenth century cover is now suspended over the font. We have no specific knowledge about the woodworkers who made the early baptistery. But
Because of the possibility of transporting timber by boat, the Master carpenter, and his apprentices, may have lived and worked in premises by the Wensum. There was certainly a crane at Fye Bridge and there is still a wood yard there.
Finally we must think of the Carter and the Carpenter transporting the beautiful new canopy to the Church. It conjures up many 'pictures'. Which way did they come?
In the Mancroft Review of June 1888 there is an entry referring to the restored canopy. The writer tells us that it looked very beautiful, and that ' a small brass to the memory of the late Mr W. E. Bell, at whose expense the restoration was carried out' would be placed nearby.
Acknowledgements
There are so many people, including our visitors, who have been helpful. I am extremely grateful to Charles Cairns; Pauline Plummer; Philip Howard; Nigel Bumphrey; Peter Nokes; David Sharp; Janet Wyer; David Wyer; Martin Foster; Clive Jenkins Jones; Norfolk Heritage Library; Ian Tyres, Dendochronological dating at the University of Sheffield; David Park, Courtauld Institute of Art; Adrian Marsden, Norfolk Museums' Archaeological Service.
Bibliography
Bond, F. Fonts and Font Covers (Henry Frowde, 1908)
Fleming, J. Dictionary of Architecture (Penguin, 1991)
Meeres, F. A history of Norwich (Phillimore & Co. ltd, 1998)
Rawcliffe, C & Wilson, R. Medieval Norwich (Hambeldon & London, 2004)
Willins, E.P. Quaint Old Norwich (Published by the author, 1884)
Reynolds, M. Godly Reformers and their opponents in early modern England (Boydell & Brewer, 2005)
