EXCAVATIONS AT BOXLEY ABBEY
By P. J. TESTER, F.S.A.
THE remams of the Cistercian Abbey of Boxley, founded in 1146, He
at the foot of the North Downs less than two mUes from Maidstone
(N.G.R. TQ 761587). Apart from the extensive late-thirteenth-century
barn, plaHfly visible from the motorway (M20), what survives of the
medieval buUdings is not impressive and, for the most part, architecturaUy
featureless. Covering the site of the south end of the west range
is a house of eighteenth-century appearance which on close inspection
is revealed to contain traces of medieval and post-Dissolution Tudor
construction, while gardens to the north and east are enclosed by stone
rubble walls standing—in more or less rebuUt condition—on the hnes
of the medieval nave and south claustral buUdings. The eastern Hmb
of the church with its transepts, the chapter house and eastern range,
together with the greater part of the west range, are represented only
by footings buried weU below the lawns and flower beds.
In previous times attempts have been made to interpret these
scanty remains and to supply additional information by excavation.
George Payne traced the general hnes of the presbytery and transepts
in 1897-8 but unfortunately he seems to have left no plan or other
adequate record of what he found.1 Working on what could be deduced
about Payne's digging, and relating this to the standing remains, a
tentative reconstruction was produced by A. W. Clapham and F. C.
EUiston-Erwood in 1926. This, with subsequent modifications, was
pubhshed by EUiston-Erwood in Arch. Cant., lxvi (1953), where an
admission was made that the plan was mtended to serve only untU
'a new generation of archaeologists, according to ancient custom,
proceed to indicate how and where theH predecessors erred'. It is very
gratifying, However, to admirers of this eminent late member of our
Society to record that our recent investigations have proved his
reconstruction substantiaUy correct except for detaUs which could not
possibly have been deduced from the evidence then avaUable.
In 1971-2 the Kent Archseological Society undertook a programme
of selective excavation with the Hmited object of estabhshing the
general plan of the church and claustral buildings. In this we were
actively encouraged by the present owner of Boxley Abbey, our member
SH John Best-Shaw, who aUowed us the Hberty of opening trenches
in the lawns and other parts of the gardens to locate buried footings.
1 Payne describedthe results ofhis work to members of the Kent Archseological
Society on 31st July, 1901. Arch. Cant., xxv (1902), liii-liv.
129
P. J. TESTER
The cultivated nature of the site has, of course, imposed obvious
restrictions on such activities and the location of our trenches has
been conditioned to a large extent by horticultural as weU as archseological
considerations. In spite of this, the results of three short periods
of digging have been most rewarding, and it is now possible to draw a
revised plan based on sound evidence.
The Society is appreciative of the kindness of SH John and Lady
Best-Shaw for permitting the excavation in theH grounds. Mr. J. E. L.
Caiger has given freely of his time in making plans and conducting a
resistivity survey. Our Honorary General Secretary, Mr. A. C. Harrison,
B.A., F.S.A., ably managed the labour force and has supphed the
translation of the fourteenth-century document in Appendix II.
Mr. A. P. Detsicas, M.A., F.S.A., assisted throughout with the excavations
and undertook the photographic recording. Mr. L. R. A. Grove,
B.A., F.S.A., F.M.A., provided the drawings of the chalk capital and
the grave coverstone and has written the description of the latter Hi
Appendix I. The tUes have been drawn by Mr. A. C. Hart, and Dr.
R. P. S. Jefferies, B.A., Ph.D., F.G.S., reported on the chalk samples.
In the digging considerable help was given by members of the
Archseological Society of SH Joseph Williamson's Mathematical
School, the Lower Medway Archseological Research Group, and the
Maidstone Area Archseological Group. Thanks are also recorded to the
foUowing individuals for then sustained support: Mesdames P. Day
and R. M. Tester, B.A.; Misses H. Balsdon, B.A., H. Bright, E. Butler,
G. Taylor and J. TrebUcock; Messrs. R. Chapman, B.A., B. C. Cooker,
P. Cooker, N. Cuff, S. J. DockriU, R. A. W. Earl, T. German, 0. K.
Hales, A. Hargreaves, S. Hart, T. ItheU, B.Eng., D. T. Jones, D. B.
KeUy, B.A., A.M.A., J. Keon, R. Lowson, B.A., P. E. Oldham, B.A.,
P. H. Pearce, D. J. Robertson, A. Sears, P. Sadler, S. Skinner, R. Stibbs,
A. Thomas and P. Thomas.
DESCRIPTION OE THE REMAINS
THE NAVE
The outhne of the nave of the mid-twelfth-century church is
represented by standing waUs, largely rebuUt or re-faced, on the north,
west and south sides, now enclosing the remams of a derehct watergarden.
The western part of the south waU is original and contains
a round-headed doorway. This and the rectangular opening just west
of it were unblocked by Payne, and subsequently a smaU area was
enclosed to the north and roofed over to form a modern chapel. In the
west waU the splayed jambs of a blocked medieval window are apparent.
The rectangular opening iu the south waU shows httle evidence of
medieval origin and has jambs of much-weathered Tudor bricks.
Payne is said to have found it blocked by numerous fragments of a
130
m:®::.
*._£>._..<£>.
SLUIC.
CHAP EK
DORMITORY
UNDERCROFT
HOUSE
V .!
DRAIN OU1LLI IO POND
97 0
WAKMINC HOUSE
( IOSI R
• 97-3
rs r KANC. .
S.rh
EXISTING
HOUSE
OVIK ONI
LEGEND.
CHURCH AND MONASTIC BUILDINGS.
'////mta EXCAVATED.
~ " ~ ~ . CONJECTURAL.
^ = 1 STANDING WALLS.
© YEW TREE.
+ »< ire SPOT HEIGHTS, A.O.D.
10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
L U I 1 I 1 I I I
90 100 110 120 130 1*0 150 160 170 180 190 200
Feet.
POND.
TTTT
30
I t Metres.
BOXLEY ABBEY
LAYOUT TRACED BY
EXCAVATION, 1971-2.
SURVEYED & DRAWN :-J.E.L. CAIGER, 1973.
Fio. 1. [fact p. 130
EXCAVATIONS AT BOXLEY ABBEY
late-medieval canopied tomb, now preserved in the modern chapel.
Here can be seen the angle of the western respond of the south arcade,
buUt of chalk ashlar. The plain round-headed doorway referred to
above is undoubtedly twelfth-century and formed the south-west
entrance to the church. Further east, there is another round-arched
opening, turned Hi brick, forming the entrance to a tunnel passing
under the terrace covering the site of the south aisle and possessing
no signs of marking a medieval entrance. Just east of it is a further
brick arch, almost at ground level, possibly related to the drainage of
the water-garden. The mam entrance to the church from the cloister
would have been Hi this south waU near its junction with the transept,
but aU trace of it has disappeared with modern re-facing.
After the Dissolution the whole of the south aisle was fiUed with
rubble and soU to form a terrace, the south arcade being replaced by a
stone retaining-wah. The north arcade has disappeared completely but
an excavation at the west end of the nave revealed the sleeper waU
on which it stood, as shown Hi the plan. There is no clue as to the
number of piers once separating the nave from its aisles but EUiston-
Erwood's estimate of eight bays seems reasonable and has been
foUowed in our reconstruction. Probably the piers were cylindrical for
in our recent digging a large block of chalk was discovered with a
curved face suggesting that it formed part of such a feature.2 The
radius indicates that the pillars would have been no less than 3 ft. 6 in.
Hi diameter. On the evidence of what obtained elsewhere in Cistercian
churches of the mid-twelfth century, we may safely conjecture that the
arches of the arcades were pointed and that above them was a clerestory
of round-headed windows, with no triforium as this was out of keeping
with the austere conventions of the Order. Vaulting over the main
span of the nave is unhkely, though possibly the aisles were covered
in the characteristic Cistercian maimer with pointed barrel vaults set
across each bay, as can stUl be seen at Fountains Abbey.
In the west waU sUght mdications were detected below ground
level of the sides of the mam doorway but robbing and reconstruction
had removed aU architectural detaUs.
The western piers of the crossing He under a modern garden waU
and the terrace, and could not be examined. They may have supported
a low central tower of only sufficient height to receive the abutment of
the pitched roofs of the nave, presbytery and transepts, for anything
more pretentious would have been Ha violation of the Cisterian ordinances
of that time.3
* I t is interesting to observe that the thirteenth-century pillars of Boxley
parish churoh are of chalk, as noted in the guidebook.
* The General Chapter of the Order in 1157 decreed: Turres lapidem ad
campanas non fiant. Marcel Aubert, L'Architecture cistercienne en France, i,
Paris, 1947,141.
131
P. J. TESTER
A smaU excavation against the foot of the north waU showed that
the medieval foundations project shghtly from the inner face of the
existmg waU which stands upon them.
Another excavation against the terrace waU on the Hne of the south
arcade revealed a patch of medieval tUed floor, 2 ft. deep (Plate IIB).
Adjoining, a north-south Hne of triangular tUes set on edge marked the
riser of a destroyed step against which the tUes had been verticaUy
set.4 This change of level may weU have been related to the position of
the central altar before the rood screen, and on this evidence it is
tentatively concluded that this screen crossed the nave between the
next paH of piers to the east—midway down the length of the nave.
This would form the eastern limit of the lay brothers' quHe occupying
the western bays of the nave in accordance with Cistercian custom.
The next one or two bays eastward would form the retro-quHe, bounded
on the east by the pulpitum from which the staUs of the monks
extended into the crossing.
THE PRESBYTERY
Bordering three sides of the raised lawn now covering the area east
of the nave are nine chpped yew-trees planted in times past to mark the
foundations traced by Payne (Plate IA). They form the outhne of a
typical short square-ended eastern limb of the church, such as the Cistercians
frequently constructed before the relaxation of t h en customs in the
late-twelfth and thirteenth centuries. To verify the traditional significance
of these trees, we excavated between two in the eastern ahgnment
and found, at a depth of 3 ft. 9 in., a massive rubble foundation
marking the eastern Hmit of the church. The presence of flower beds
prevented us from confirming the north and south waUs in simUar
manner.
The very rough sketch-plan made by Hubert Bensted and referred
to by EUiston-Erwood5 shows this presbytery and notes the presence
of a tUed floor and remains of sedUia along the south waU. Nothing
can be known about these features without more extensive excavation
than the cHcumstances of our recent investigation would aUow.
SimUarly, whether or not the presbytery was vaulted cannot be gauged
without fuUer examination of the deeply-buried remams.
THE SOUTH TRASSEPT
The outer waUs were traced by trenching and the transept was
found to extend further south than EUiston-Erwood conjectured.
1 A similar arrangement was observed in the north transept, as described
below.
5 Now in the National Buildings Record. I am grateful to Mrs. Nesta Caiger
for drawing my attention to this.
132
EXCAVATIONS AT BOXLEY ABBEY
This indicates that there was space for three chapels opening from the
east side rather than two. Payne evidently found traces of these for in
a letter to him from Bensted (16th November, 1897) the writer compared
Boxley to KHkstaU and observed: 'The transepts were divided
as I understand you to say Boxley is for three altars each.'6
On the west side, some excavations conducted by SH John Best-
Shaw and Mr. B. J. WUson Hi 1959 and 1966 uncovered two thin waUs,
and these can now be interpreted as remains of the night staH by which
the monks descended from the dormitory to the church for the night
office.7 We re-excavated the southern end., and other detaUs are taken
from notes of the earher excavations by Mr. L. R. A. Grove, who has
kindly made his record avaUable to us. The narrow space between the
east-west waU and the end of the transept was observed by the earher
excavators to have been entered by a door at its east end. Apparently
the staH was a secondary feature as the north-south waU did not bond
into the transept and was constructed with Hghter-coloured mortar
than that of the main structure. SH John informed us that a floor of
plain tUes was encountered during the digging Hi this area. We also
found many smaU glazed tUes from destroyed tUe-mosaic floors.
Two of the yew-trees planted to mark this transept are shghtly
misplaced on the east side. One further west stands significantly over
the conjectural hne of the waU separating two of the transept chapels.
THE NORTH TRANSEPT
Much of its area Hes Hi a field outside the garden, and by the
courtesy of the farmer, Mr. J. HamUton, we were able to engage in
more extensive excavation here than elsewhere. As weU as intercepting
the three outer waUs, two long cuttings were made north-south in the
area of the northern chapel. On the mside of the north waU there
remained part of the chamfered phnth of a respond forming one side
of the opening into the adjoining chapel. Further south was the base
of the pier between the entrances to the north and central chapels.
Against the west side of this pier there remained in situ a row of smaU
rectangular floor-tUes, each 4 | by 1 | Hi. (cf. Fig. 5, nos. 5 and 6), laid
alternately yeUow and dark green with the longer side against the
waU, theH depth from the present surface being 3 ft. 9 Hi. In addition,
two lozenge-shaped and three triangular tUes were set vertically
against the base of the pier, evidently as part of a band continued
originaUy across the riser of the step from the floor of the transept
s Mr. M. I . Moad, Curator of the Eastgate Museum, Rochester, has kindly
brought this evidence to my notice. There are several volumes of Payne's correspondence
in the Museum.
7 Remains of the night stair are not to be confused on the plan (Eig. 1) with
the adjoining modern steps leading up to the terrace.
133
P. J. TESTER
to the raised pavement of the chapels (Fig. 5, no. 1). Many other
scattered floor-tUes of various shapes and sizes indicated the former
existence of tUe-mosaic pavements, as Hi the south transept. Fragments
of mouldings and part of a chamfered hood-mould were recovered
from the destruction d6bris (Fig. 4, nos. 1, 4 and 6).
The base of the altar in the north chapel was uncovered, and it
appeared that this had been reconstructed at one time, and the floor
raised about 6 in. The first altar was 5 ft. 6 in. long and backed against
the east waU. Later it seems to have been rebuUt to stand 1 ft. 6 in.
from the waU, its width (east-west) being 3 ft. OriginaUy the floor was
laid on rammed chalk and had been raised by a layer of clay and chalk
capped by a thin spread of mortar intended as a bedding for tUes.
Both lateral waUs of this chapel retained traces of plaster.
Apparently the east waU of the chapels was not of one buUd as
there was a distinct straight-joint through the footings Hi continuation
of the south face of the waU separating the north and central chapels,
and the colour of the mortar was noticeably Hghter in the southern
section. Moreover, the floor-level in the north-east corner of the central
chapel could not be observed due to an intrusive excavation of unknown
age or purpose. Whatever the explanation of these anomalous features,
there is good reason for assuming that the three chapels would have
been conceived as part of a unitary plan despite a possible hiatus Hi
theH construction.
In each transept the chapels would most Hkely have been covered
by separate pointed barrel vaults with pointed arches forming the
entrances. This arrangement can stUl be seen at Fountains Abbey
where the east end of each chapel was Hghted by a paH of round-headed
windows with a cHcular opening above. The piece of chamfered, hoodmould
found Hi excavation may have come from a doorway in the
north end of the transept, as mdicated Hi the reconstructed plan,
Fig. 7.
THE WEST TOWER OR PORCH
An unexpected result of excavating outside the west end of the
church was the discovery of foundations of an attached structure with
diagonal buttresses at its south-west and north-west corners. This
was clearly a late addition, probably buUt in the fourteenth or fifteenth
centuries, and forming either a porch or a tower. It is more probable
that it was the latter although it is impossible to estabhsh this with
certainty. The footings seemed more substantial than requHed for a
porch—even one with an upper storey. On plan it may appear disproportionately
smaU for a tower, although its actual dimensions are
no less than many of those attached to parish churches. I t is known
that a tower existed somewhere at Boxley Abbey for after the Dis-
134
PLATE I
A. Site of Presbytery from North-west. Yew Trees mark Foundations traced
Geo. Payne in 1897-8.
B. Arched Recess in West Wall of Refectory.
[ face p. 134
PLATE II
%t
#%x *•
jr*«». ^ ' • *:.••.
*HI
• , " >
• J ;
1
: i.
a
§
§K
£•»•
"*•" «.-. r
f " m^
l
if
•
*
• '-•• X"'.f\ *
s • *$- • ' •' " C- • *
} f ^ { x
te4*«.' s i
J • '" i
1* ^^— ^ ' ' ; ;;"
. * .'•' '
A. Entrance to Refectory with Traces of Abutment of East Wall of West Range.
B. Floor-tiles in Xave.
PLATE III
i
V,-Y
j§ * L I P .(» . . ..
i «•**' * , 1
• T ' • £K • i • -'
A. Diagonal Buttress at South-west Corner of West Tower or Porch.
B. The House from the North-east.
PLATE IV
20**
Tudor Chimney on South Side of House.
EXCAVATIONS AT BOXLEY ABBEY
solution the grant of the property to SH Thomas Wyatt specificaUy
mentions a 'steeple'.8 As previously stated, the early Cistercians were
forbidden towers and the crossings of theH churches were not designed
for this purpose. However, at the end of the Middle Ages towers were
sometimes added in other positions, for example, on the west end at
Purness and adjoining the north transept at Fountains.
Whatever the height of the western feature at Boxley, it is most
likely that it had an entrance Hi its west wall so that its ground storey
provided a functional porch. No trace ofthis entrance was found as the
waUs had been destroyed to below cUl level.9
In the later medieval period Boxley Abbey became a muchfrequented
place of pUgrimage on account of the famous Rood of
Grace, and it is reasonable to suppose that the west end of the church
received this addition in order to enhance the dignity of the entrance
by which pUgrims approached the object of devotion.
THE CLOISTER
Excavation has shown that the north and west alleys were wider
than those on the south and east and that the arcades rested on narrower
footings. There is documentary evidence that rebuUding was put m
hand Hi 1373 when the abbey employed a mason named Stephen
Lomherst to demohsh the old cloister and rebuUd it, one aUey at a
time, but from the excavated remains it seems hkely that only the
north and west aUeys were in fact reconstructed (Appendix II).
The enclosure is unusuaUy narrow east-west and it is strange that
advantage was not taken of the fuU length of the nave to site the
western range in Hne with the end of the church, so providing a cloister
area of more normal proportions.10
THE CHAPTER HOUSE
This was found to conform to the shape and proportions of a
common type of Cistercian chapter house, vaulted in nine bays (3 by 3)
and kept low to aUow the dormitory to pass over. Only the four waUs
were located by trenching and the inner face of the west waU was
searched for traces of the doorway. This was found to have been
blocked by post-Dissolution masonry and revealed no original architectural
features. At the base of the blocking, a chamfered cUl occurred
bearing indications of having related to an opening only 3 ft 3 Hi. wide
* J. Cave-Browne, The History of Boxley Parish, 1892, 33, footnote. He
gives his authority as Aug. Office Eeoords, Box A, 66.
• A slight internal bulge in the footings of the south wall is insufficient to
indioate the position of a stair, or vice, and is probably fortuitous.
10 The plan of La Forte (Sa6ne-et-Loire) exhibits the same peculiarity.
M. Aubert, op. cit., i, 113.
135
P. J. TESTER
with a roU moulding on the internal edge of each jamb. As this openmg
was too narrow to have formed the original chapter house entrance, it
is assumed to have been a late—possibly post-Dissolution—insertion.
In the north-west corner were mdications of footings interpreted as
traces of a stone bench which would be expected to continue round the
inside of the buUding, although evidence of it was lacking Hi our
excavation at the east end. A few floor tiles were found in situ and
several pieces of chalk mouldings occurred in the destruction debris.
Some of these are sections of vaulting ribs of twelfth-century character
(Fig. 4, no. 2).
THE SACRISTY
The narrow space between the chapter house and the transept
would normaUy have formed the sacristy. Frequently, it was divided so
that the western half provided a Hbrary entered from the cloister, whUe
the eastern part was used as a sacristy entered through a doorway in
the end of the transept. Whether these arrangements obtained at
Boxley cannot at present be determined.
THE PARLOUR
Remains of the lower part of the parlour entrance were found to
be weU preserved, the unmoulded jambs being of chalk, with a stone
cUl set Hi the floor immediately inside the opening. Probably there
was also a doorway in the east end. A short length of the return waU
on the south side was observed, sufficient to indicate the width of the
apartment.
PASSAGE OR DAY STAIR
Next to the parlour was what appears to have been a narrow
passage with indications of a door at its west end. A through passage
in this position was a feature of many Cistercian plans, giving access
from the cloister to the infirmary and other buUdings to the east.
Alternatively, it may originaUy have contained the day staH by which
the monks ascended from the cloister to the dormitory.
THE DORMITORY UNDERCROFT
Trenches across the line of the east and west waUs estabhshed the
internal width of this part of the range as 26 ft. 3 Hi. No attempt was
made to explore the interior apart from a smaU excavation towards the
south end which located a square pier—probably one of a line on the
central axis of the undercroft and serving to support the floor of the
dormitory above. The entrance may have been in the north end or on
the site of the modern steps in the south-east corner of the cloister. In
136
EXCAVATIONS AT BOXLEY ABBEY
Cistercian monasteries this area under the dormitory was put to various
uses: sometimes it provided accommodation for the novices and in
other instances it appears to have been utilized as a workshop.11
On the upper floor, the dormitory itself would have extended over the
fuU length of the range, passmg above the chapter house up to the
south transept.
THE REREDORTER AND DRAIN
The sanitary arrangements at Boxley seem to have been simUar
to those at KHkstaU and VaUe Crucis where instead of the latrines
being housed as usual in a buUding projecting at right-angles to the
end of the dormitory, they were situated in the end of the east range
itself with a drain passing beneath.12 At Boxley the drain is weU
preserved, its course continuing some distance to the east where it is
covered by a pointed barrel vault. Water was conducted from a source
to the north, where rivulets stiU run in the fields, and made to flow
westward through the vaulted drain. Immediately on the line of the
east face of the dormitory range there is a constriction Hi the drain
with vertical grooves on each side where a wooden sluice-gate held
back the water before it passed beneath the latrines (Fig. 2). When the
gate was raised from above, the water flowed with sudden force to
scour the area under the privies, apparently escaping into a ditch
running southward for about sixty yards into an existmg pond. Surface
indications of this ditch remain Hi the field between the pond and the
Abbey. In the waU forming the south side of the dram are openings to
provide access for the purpose of removing accumulated sUt.
THE REFECTORY
Most Cistercian plans indicate a refectory lying at right-angles to
the south side of the cloister, though until the middle cf the tweUth
century this buUding occupied the Benedictine position opposite the
church and paraUel to it. Where the older plan had been adopted it
was almost invariably altered in the late-twelfth or thirteenth centuries
and Boxley appears to have been a notable exception in this respect.
Neither a resistivity survey nor trenching in positions where a northsouth
refectory would have stood produced any positive mdications.
The north waU is original, except for external re-facing, and retains
two ancient doorways. The one to the west has a weathered chalk
internal jamb on the west side with evidence of modern rebuUding
opposite. Its two-centred doorcase (Plate IIA) is an msertion, probably
11 Ibid., ii, 74.
12 Aubert (op. cit., ii, frontispiece) shows the Boxley arrangement as typical
in his Tlan Type des Batiments rfiguliers d'une Abbaye cistercienne'.
137
P. J. TESTER
Windlass. (Conjectural.)
Sluice -gate guide blocks.
SECTION ACROSS DRAIN & WALL.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
I I I I I I I I I I H FEET.
LtW^^3
kl - L L L ^ — M
-Wall.
Drain. Sluice-gate position.
SECTION ON £ QF DRAIN.
Eia. 2.
J.E.I. CAIGER, 1972.
138
EXCAVATIONS AT BOXLEY ABBEY
fourteenth-century or later, and may even be the actual doorway made
by Stephen Lomherst soon after 1373,18 replacing an older and larger
entrance. To the east is a taU, featureless, round-headed opening,
seemmgly twelfth-century despite modern patching. Its position
towards the 'high' end of the refectory is most unusual and its purpose
is problematical. Two heraldic corbels set in its jambs appear to be
fourteenth-century and have apparently been inserted in modern
times, having been found elsewhere in the ruins.14
Inside the west waU there occurs a wide but shaUow round-arched
recess, 8 ft. high and 9 ft 6 in. wide, its cUl being 2 ft. above ground
level or about 1 ft. more from the refectory floor (Plate IB). If it were
situated Hi the cloister, it would be unhesitatingly accepted as the site
of the lavatorium where the monks washed theH hands before and
after meals.15 In the position it occupies, however, it would be unwise
to assert that this was its function without strong supporting evidence.
A smaU excavation below this recess disclosed a stone dram running
north-south against the foot of the waU. Just to the south, a blocked
doorway can be observed Hi this waU and most Hkely it communicated
with the monastic kitchen.
The course of a rubble waU lying north-south was encountered in
two smaU excavations Hi the enclosed garden south of the refectory.
It was too shght Hi construction to have formed the side of a refectory
and neither its age nor purpose could be ascertained. Digging was very
restricted in this area on account of the closely placed rose beds.
THE WARMING HOUSE
This identification of the area between the refectory and the east
range has been confirmed by excavation resulting Hi the discovery of
remams of a medieval fireplace against the east waU. Less than half
the area of the original room is now accessible, the northern part being
shut off by a modern stone waU. An entrance of uncertain age gives
access to the southern section which is covered by a modern brick
barrel vault. From the interior, the south waU is seen to have possessed
two round-headed openings of tweHth-century character and Hi the
west waU is a round-headed recess, Hke an aumbry, 3 ft. high, 3 ft. wide
and 1 ft. 6 in. deep, of simUar age. Digging on the east side disclosed
the half-round stone kerb of the fireplace bordering a hearth of thin
bricks set on edge. The fuU width of the fireplace could not be determined
due to the waU sealing off the northern area. No doubt the fireplace
possessed a hood supported by shafts on either side, and it is
13 Appendix II.
14 Arch. Cant., xv (1883), xii.
16 Interesting notes by Professor R. Willis on the form and function of the
monastic lavatorium occur in Arch. Cant., vii (1868), 166-7.
139
u
P. J. TESTER
significant that part of a Purbeck marble base of late-twelfth- or
early-thHteenth- century form was found Hi the digging close by
(Fig. 4, no. 3).
To the right of the fireplace an openmg occurs suggesting a doorway
into the east range. It is blocked by post-Dissolution chalk rubble on
the east and across the west side the base of a thin waU was excavated,
proving that this was not Hi fact a doorway but a deep recess once
accessible from the dormitory undercroft. The floor of the recess was
paved with square green and yeUow tUes.
THE WEST RANGE
Two trenches excavated in the lawn confirmed the correctness of
EUiston-Erwood's siting of this range. Along the west side was a guUy
bordered by rough unmortared blocks of stone, intended to catch
water dripping from the eaves. Beyond this, Httle can be added to our
knowledge of the lay brothers' quarters apart from what may be
inferred from better preserved remains elsewhere. TheH dormitory was
on the first floor with theH refectory beneath, part of the lower storey
also containing an outer parlour communicating between the cloister
and the court to the west. Possibly at Boxley the doorway at the
north end, still to be traced by one jamb remaining against the south
wall of the church, formed the entrance to the parlour. Entrance to the
lay brothers' quHe in the western part of the nave was gained through
the existing round-headed doorway in the south aisle. The kitchen,
serving both the monks' refectory and that of the lay brothers, could
have been conveniently sited in the south end of this range.
Whether the range continued southward beyond the extent shown
in our plan is uncertain. There was undoubtedly a cross-waU in the
position indicated, as signs of an arched opening set in an east-west
alignment appear inside the east wall. A plan of 1801 (Appendix III)
indicates an extension to the south but this may have been a post-
Dissolution addition as are many of the waUs comprising the complex
of outbuUdings remaining Hi this area.
Within the present house there is a substantial section of medieval
waU containing a two-centred arched doorway and formerly there were
indications of three blocked lancet windows.16
Between the house and the church the footings of a thin rubble
waU were traced approximately at right-angles to the west range. It
did not join that buUding and its age and purpose remam uncertain.
Across it was a length of lead pipe17 most hkely related to the former
water supply of the post-Dissolution house.
18 Arch. Cant., xv (1883), xii.
17 The internal diameter is 2 in., the lead being 0.2 in,, thick. A keel-shaped
join rims along one side.
140
EXCAVATIONS AT BOXLEY ABBEY
BUILDING MATERIALS AND CONSTRUCTIONAL DETAILS
Stone
The rubble foundations uncovered by excavation consisted of the
same material visible in the standing medieval waUs, namely, ragstone
and other varieties of stone derived from the local Lower Greensand.
Much of it is very cherty and varies Hi colour from grey to dark ferruginous
brown.
Chalk
Abundant evidence exists that internal work in the church and
monastic buUdings was mainly of chalk. Jambs of doorways and other
openings in the church, refectory, parlour and warming-house were
found to be of this material, as were the nave arcades, the vaulting
ribs of the chapter house and a hood-mould in the north transept.
Samples of aU these have been examined by Dr. R. P. S. Jefferies,
F.G.S., and identified as coming from the Labiatus Zone in the lower part
of the Middle Chalk. Great quantities of chalk occurred in the destruction
d6bris aU over the site. ChaUc was extensively used for internal
work in medieval buUdings, especially in areas where it was readily
obtainable from a local source.
Roman Tiles
In the foundations of the north transept and the presbytery
many fragments of Roman roofing-tiles were incorporated. There were
also clearly recognizable large pieces of box-tUes and fragments of
opus signinum. This discovery substantiates the note on Bensted's
sketch-plan where he wrote 'Roman debris found aU over this area'
on the crossing, and imphes the presence of a Roman buUding near
the site of the Abbey.
Mortar
A striking feature was the pronounced orange-brown colour of the
mortar in the rubble footings, due to admixture of coarse sand with a
high ferruginous content. In some post-primary constructions, such
as the waUs of the night staH, the mortar was a more normal grey.
Brown mortar can be seen in the exposed core of the north waU of the
refectory.
Bricks
Examples set on edge in the hearth of the warming house were
approximately 9 in. long and 2 J in. thick, and were eroded and blackened
by burning on the exposed side. They must represent a late pre-
Dissolution repak, and Hi aU probabihty the earher hearth within
141
P. J. TESTER
the stone kerb was composed of roof-tUes on edge, as at Higham Priory
and elsewhere.18
Arch Construction
In the church, refectory and warming house are round-headed
openings, as previously noted, the arches being turned in rough material
without accurately shaped voussoHs. The recess Hi the west waU of the
warming house has, however, well cut voussoHs of chalk. These surviving
mdications of the architectural character of the primary buildings
suggest the use of a simple Romanesque style devoid of elaboration,
which would be appropriate to the austere ideals of the Cistercian Order
in the middle of the tweUth century.
^v
J
5S
/2»- ic*.tt*ry ot^CU>*t(
» 6*1*1 Why, 'J3SJ
I NCHES. I*. ^MvuUfLx. MuJa. tUAOK
Mv~i. U JLU~. lt*.q.
FIG. 3.
Capital, Base and Mouldings
Fig. 3
Part of a chalk scaUoped capital recovered in 1959 during excavation
in the area of the south transept. It is now in Maidstone Museum,
and Mr. L. R. A. Grove, B.A., F.S.A., F.M.A., has kindly supplied the
drawing. The design is typical of the twelfth century.
Fig. 4
1. Part of a chalk hood-mould, internal radius about 2 ft. 6 Hi.,
found in rubble overlying the floor of the north transept. A representation
of a shield is deeply scratched upon it, suggesting that the moulding
was accessible from floor level and so may have come from a doorway
rather than a window. Probably twelfth-century. The elongated form
of the shield indicates an early date but the diagonal lines across its
face are not regarded as having any heraldic significance.10
» Arch. Cant., Ixxxii (1067), 147. Also, Ixxii (1968), 21, and Ixxiii (1959),
211-2.
10 Mr. A. C. Cole, B.C.L., M.A., E.S.A., Windsor Herald, has kindly ndvisod
me on this point.
142
EXCAVATIONS AT BOXLEY ABBEY
/ 7
Era. 4. Mouldings (£).
143
P. J. TESTER
2. Chalk voussoH of vaulting rib found with several other identical
pieces in rubble inside the west end of the chapter house. Remains of
a thick coating of lime-wash cover parts of the surface. TweUth century.
3. Purbeck marble base, from scatter of debris overlying floor of
warming house. I t may have been the base of one of a paH of shafts
supporting the fireplace hood. The mouldmg is matched by latetwelfth-
century bases in Chichester Cathedral.
4. Fragment of moulding composed of chamfer with roll and frontal
fillet. Found in north transept. Remains of lime-wash on surface.
Fine-grained freestone—probably Greensand. Most hkely thirteenth
century.
5. Section of chalk moulding with broad fillet. West end of chapter
house. Thkteenth century or later.
6. Fragment of keeled roU from north transept. Material simUar to
no. 4. Probably thirteenth century.
7. Fragment of moulding from north aUey of cloister. Fine-grained
freestone. Late-medieval Perpendicular.
8. Large section of ragstone moulding with glazing groove indicating
that it formed one side of a window. Lying on ground surface outside
west end of nave. I t has the wide hollow or 'great casement' characteristic
of the late-medieval Perpendicular style and may have come from
the west tower or porch.
FLOOR-TILES
Tile Mosaic (Fig. 5)
As previously mentioned, numerous scattered smaU glazed titles
were found, particularly in the areas of both transepts, and sporadicaUy
in other parts of the abbey. They constitute clear evidence that floors
of plain, two-colour the mosaic formerly existed at Boxley, very
simUar to those at other Cistercian houses such as Byland, Fountains,
Meaux, Melrose, Newbattle, Newminster, Rievaulx and Sawley. In
fact, this was a distinctive Cistercian feature, and it is considered that
the tUes were in aU cases almost certainly made close to where they
were used.20 Boxley is known to have been a centre of tile-making in
the Middle Ages,21 and there can be Httle doubt that the tile mosaic as
well as some other types of decorated floor-tiles described below were
local products.
TUe mosaic occurs also Hi Continental Cistercian houses and the
technique may have come to Britain through the medium of the
Order. It was derived from Italian cosmati work done Hi coloured
20 E. S. Eames, Medieval Tiles, London, 1968, 5. The only example of a kiln
at present known to have produced tile mosaio was at Meaux, near Beverley.
Med. Arch., v(1961). 21 L. R. A. Grove, Arch. Cant., Ixxii (1958), 216-8.
144
•ram?
wmmmMmm
**:•*
Era. 5. Tile Mosaic (J).
(Drawn by A.C. Hart)
145
P. J. TESTER
marbles for which the Hght and dark tUes were a cheap substitute. At
Boxley, the tUes are smaU squares, rectangles, triangles and lozenges
with one cHcular specimen. Byland Abbey preserves the best example
of floors formed of almost identical tiles, the geometrical patterns
being laid in panels, as Ulustrated in Mrs. Elizabeth Eames' handbook
Medieval Tiles (1968), PL xiii. There lozenge and triangular tUes are
shown set against the riser of a step into the Byland transept chapels,
almost exactly Hke those found in situ at Boxley in the same relative
position.
The Boxley tUes are of red clay, usuaUy a Uttle under 1 Hi. thick,
with beveUed sides. TheH surface colour is either yeUow, due to lead
glaze appHed over a white shp, or dark green grading into manganesebrown
or black. The smaUer tUes were made by breaking larger ones
along hnes deeply cut into the clay whfle it was still soft. Many examples
of tUes scored Hi this way before firing were found in the excavations,
as iUustrated in Fig. 5, nos. 14-16 and 19-22, from which it appears
that they were frequently used as complete units ff the smaUer divisions
were not requHed.22 A fragment of a cHcular tile, found in the north
transept, had aU traces of glaze worn away and is estimated to have
been 6 Hi. Hi diameter and 1 -4 in. thick.23 Two smaU square specimens
(Fig. 5, nos. 2 and 3) have a worn grey surface with white shp decoration
in the form of an octofoU and a star, respectively.
TUe mosaic is at present only known from three other Kentish
locahties: Canterbury Cathedral, Rochester Cathedral, and Leeds
Priory.24 The Canterbury fragment has been dated c. 1220.25 At
Rochester it occurs in the north-east transept and the presbytery which
were completed c. 1215.26 Mrs. Eames is of the opinion that tile mosaic
in general belongs to the thHteenth century, the pavement laid at
Meaux between 1249 and 1269 being probably one of the latest.27
In view of the close association of the Cistercian Order with the
use and manufacture of this type of floor-tile, it is suggested that
Boxley Abbey—the only Cistercian house Hi Kent—was the source of
the tUe mosaic at Canterbury, Rochester and Leeds.
Belief Tiles
Several fragments of glazed floor-tiles bearing moulded designs in
raised reHef were found in the general area of the east range, that
22 At Strood, Mr. A. C. Harrison has noted the occurrence of floor-tiles scored
diagonally to facilitate breaking. Arch. Cant., Ixxxiv (1969), 161.
23 There are two complete tiles of this form from Boxley Abbey in Maidstone
Museum.
21 J.B.A.A., ii (1847), 95.
25 E. S. Eames, op. cit., 4.
2» Arch. Cant., xxiii (1898), 317 and PI. IV.
" E. S. Eames, op. cit., 6.
146
EXCAVATIONS AT BOXLEY ABBEY
'M
PPH1
mwi.^Smfr
f;-*--.-
Previous
Previous
The Ancient Buildings of New Romney
Next
Next