ESSEX-UK-L Archives

Archiver > ESSEX-UK > 2004-09 > 1096400440


From: "Lawrence Greenall" <>
Subject: RE: Wrabness, cage in graveyard
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 20:45:25 +0100
In-Reply-To: <0EE6092B.2F99F339.006A19F4@aol.com>


When Waltham Abbey was dissolved, the original great tower was left
standing, at the eastern end of the present nave. However, as three of its
four sides were left newly unsupported, it soon fell to the ground, and for
some years Waltham Abbey Church had no tower. While the parishioners raised
funds to replace it, the bells were rescued from the rubble and set up in a
temporary wooden frame in the churchyard. The new tower, the present one at
the western end (its top layers were rebuilt twice since, most recently in
1906), was built in stages as the funds came in, but finances dried up
before it was completed, so the decision was made to sell the bells to pay
for the final stage. Thomas Fuller in his History of Waltham Abbey made a
well-repeated quip about the town swapping steeple-less bells for a
bell-less steeple! The present tower is one of a very few in the county
built during Queen Mary's reign.

Bradwell church has an old gaol 'house' (not much bigger than an outside
loo) in the corner of its churchyard; it still has a padlocked door of iron
bars with wooden stocks running vertically up each side.

Lawrence

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [mailto:]
> Sent: 28 September 2004 12:21
> To:
> Subject: Re: Wrabness, cage in graveyard
>
>
> In an email dated 28/9/2004 8:18:22 am GMT Daylight time,
> "colleen morrison" <> writes:
>
> >Ah, yes, thanks Glynis! To ask another silly question, why did
> they put it
> >in the graveyard? Only place they could put it?
> >
>
> There is a full peel at East Burgholt (just the other side of the
> River Stour so more properly Suffolk) in a low building next to
> the church. The bells are hung with handles on top and swung by
> using these. I am not sure of the reason why they went for this
> option - there may not have been a tower or the tower may not
> have been strong enough at the time. And the bells would have had
> to be as near as possible to the church.
>
> DaveD
>
>


This thread: