St Stephen's Church, Hackington and its possible connection with Archbishop with Archbishop Baldwin, with an appendix on the Rood

{ 253 ST. STEPHEN'S CHURCH, HACKINGTON, AND ITS POSSIBLE CONNECTION WITH ARCHBISHOP BALDWIN. BY SURGEON-CAPTAIN KENNETH H. JONES, M.B., R.N. THE first church we know of at Hackington was in part built by Archbishop Anselm about llOO or a little later, and of this considerable portions still remain at the west end and in the nave of the present building. The present church consists of a nave, with a tower at its western end, a chancel, north and south transepts and a south porch. The tower was raised, probably, by Archdeacon Simon Langton, about 1230, upon the walls of Anselm's Norman nave. In order that the Norman nave should be able to carry the weight of the tower, two large buttresses were placed at its north-west and south-west angles, while a very thick wall, some twelve feet high and pierced by a pointed arch, was built from side to side of the nave, inside, to support its eastern wall. All this is clearly shown on Canon Livett's excellent plan facing page 268. The great buttresses form straight joints below the level of the Norman eaves, and above are slightly bonded into the tower walls. The windows of the tower, probably of thirteenth century date, were altered in the fifteenth century, when trefoil hoods were added. The whole is surmounted by an octagonal wooden spire dating from the late seventeenth or early eighteenth century. An examination of the south side of the church from west to east shows :first a Norman window in what is now the ground floor of the tower, next a fifteenth century porch, built slightly askew on to the Norman nave wall, with a twolight window in its east and west walls. The nave is entered from this porch by a Norman door, which is surmounted by a tympanum with star ornament and a wooden lintel, 254 ST. STEPHEN'S, HACKINGTON. beautifully illustrated in Canon Livett's drawing. Immediately above the eastern half of the roof of the porch is a Norman window, the sill of which was cut down in the thirteenth century. Further east are two E.E. lancets, rather close together, and next comes an E.E. south transept, largely re-built in Elizabethan times and having a fine four-light window of that period in its south wall, a blockedup E.E. lancet in its west, and a two-light Dec. window in its east wall. Lastly there comes a long, well buttressed, thirteenth century chancel, with three fourteenth century two-light windows on each side, and in its east wall a large five-light :fifteenth century window, flanked high up on either side by a small trefoil ogee-headed window of Dec. date. The two-light fourteenth century windows in the chancel replaced thirteenth century lancets in a manner to be explained when dealing with the interior. Examining next the north side of the church from east to west, commencing at the junction of the north transept and chancel : the east wall of the transept, which is of the thirteenth century but was largely re-built in the fourteenth and sixteenth, contains a three-light Tudor window. The north wall shows a three-light Dec. window, and the rebuilt wall has angle buttresses east and west, while the west wall contains a two-light window, possibly modern. As the examination proceeds westwards on the north side of the nave, first there occur two E.E. lancets, rather close together and corresponding with the pair in the south wall. Further west is a third E.E. lancet, replacing an original Norman window, and still further west is a Norman window which has been removed from its original position and reinserted lower down and further west in order to give light to a vestry in what is now the ground floor of the tower. This is clearly shown in Canon Livett's plan. In an examination of the west end of the church, the most striking features are the great E.E: buttresses of the tower. (See Plate I(a).) It is at once evident that these buttresses are built up largely of flint rub ble with some pieces of Roman brick and mediooval tile, but also to a very . -- . .J,• . .,.􀀬·•· ....-t,,t... .. ... 􀀊 • - '"""''..... . 􀀄--- ;;.' ... ,_ . -, • . !\L ••, -•-•'" ,......t, ff. ,... ... "•' -.....,V- \lf. - '- .. ""· l􀀂􀀃 ,. .,, . ST. STEPHEN'S CHURCH, HACKINGTON, From the South. 256 ST. STEPHEN'S, H.ACKINGTON. large extent of cut and moulded Caen stones, most of them apparently of late Norman date and some displaying very characteristic tooling of that period. These many pieces of Caen stone are used exactly as if they were rubble and of no value. They comprise many portions of moulding and arcading, shafts of smaD pillars laid horizontally and on end, capitals of engaged shafts, and perhaps most abundantly of all plain voussoirs, of which at least forty can be counted. Many of these re-used stones can be picked out in the photograph, Plate I (a), and one of them is shown in detail in Plate I (b ). The quoin stones of the buttresses are almost all of Caen stone and many of them show signs of E.E. tooling. Most of them, it is clear, were never intended for their present purpose. Some of the quoin stones have entirely disappeared from weathering and have been replaced by bricks. Above the line of the eaves of the Norman church, the faces of the thirteenth century tower display various pieces of cut and moulded Caen stone, especially voussoirs, but below that line they are conspicuously absent. This is clearly shown in the photograph, the dividing line coming just above the Norman window in what is now the south wall of the tower. Altogether more than five hundred pieces of cut and moulded Caen stone, not including quoin stones, were counted on the faces of the tower and buttresses. The other quoins of the tower are of Kentish ragstone. It may be as well to point out here that the walls of the chancel and transepts (except where, in the south transept, Elizabethan rebuilding has taken place), and some parts of the eastern ends of the nave walls, are full of worked Caen stone of late Norman date. A specimen is illustrated in Plate I (c). The west door next claims attention (see Plate, II). At first sight it has the appearance of a Transitional doorcase; and such, in a sense, it is. A close examination of its component parts, however, presents some unusual features. The doorcase is pointed in form and consists of four orders, the outer three being of Norman materials, Pt,ATF. r. (a) \\'C'􀂃t and South walls of towC'r Rhowinir f'f'·ll􀂄<'d C'RC"li 􀂅t(H1f'. (b) Bifurcation of arcading and a fragment of tooled Caen-atone re-used in E. fa<'e of 􀀹\V. buttr""s of tower. (c) Fragment of billet mouldin􀀺 rt•-11Rrrl in E. wall of ::-; . tran􀂆l•pt. ST. STEPHEX'R, H,\CKlX(:'l'O􀂇. PLAT,: TT. (a) West Door. ST S'J'EPHE􀁀'S, HACKTNC:TON. (b) Sir Roger l\Ianwoorl's Font. (See page 262.) ST. STEPHEN'S, HACKINGTON. 257 and the inner of E.E. The outermost order is of plain Norman voussoirs, lying flush with the surrounding wall, which have been manipulated into place, so as to give the arch its pointed form. The next two orders are of Norman moulded voussoirs of the well-known "zig-zag" pattern.The order next to the outside one has become almost a round arch, and as it does not fit into the outer order a gap occurs and has been filled in with mortar. The third order from the outside, also of moulded voussoirs, is almost round but not quite, whilst the innermost of the four is pointed in shape, of Kentish rag, shows characteristic E.E. tooling, and the individual voussoirs are much larger than those of the three outer orders. The two inner orders of Norman cut voussoirs spring from Norman caps, which are supported by Norman shafts and ba.ses, set in square recesses composed of E.E. chiselled stones. Some of these shafts and square recesses have been replaced by new stones in modern repairs. The outer and inner orders are without impost mouldings. An examination of the engaged shafts, bases and capitals of the imposts of the second and third orders shows these all to be of different patterns. It is evident from the situation of the jambs on either side that they never really fitted into their places, and so badly do they approximate to one another, and to the church wall, that great gaps had to be filled in with mortar and cement. Turning now to the inside of the church, the arches which separate the north and south transepts from the nave present points of considerable interest, and display certain peculiarities of construction (see Plate III, which shows the southern arch, and also the parclose screen and rood screen). The span of these arches is just over nineteen feet, which is unusually wide, especially for a church of moderate size. They are made up of plain Norman cut voussoirs, which it appears were intended for arches of a smaller width, and mortar has been wedged in between them to make the greater span possible. It is remarkable that the arches held up. A semi-diagrammatic drawing by EngineerCaptain J. B. Hewitt, R.N., from materials supplied by 21 258 ST. STEPHEN'S, HAOKINGTON. Canon Livett, shows the condition very well. Slight exaggeration has been permitted for the sake of clarity. a b ... ······· ,,•··· ·• .. ·• . ... a Semi •Circular arch, showing voussolrs properly shaped and fitted. b The same voussolrs used to make a. semi-circular arch of double the span of above, showing how the joints would " gaJ)e " on the under side, and would need to be well packed with morta.r, for the arch to austa.fn itself and ca.rry a. load. Measurement of the responds of these arches shows that the width is seven inches greater on the south side than on the north, and the latter is about that of the Norman nave wall on that side; the west respond on this side has a modern shaft with base and cap. The other responds have Norman bases, caps and impost mouldings. The east respond has a late Norman cap, highly ornamented, which is well shown in Canon Livett's beautiful drawing. The greater thickness of the responds on the south side accounts for the presence of the peculiar little pilasters to be seen both inside and outside of the church. Before leaving the inside of the church it may be as well to explain here how the two-light Dec. windows replaced the E.E. lancets in the chancel. The engaged shafts and rear arches of thirteenth century date were left in position and the splays of the lancets cut back in the north and south walls. In the case of the five-light east window, it is probable that there were originally two E.E. lancets in this position, surmounted by a round window, and that these were removed, and the splays cut back at each side, leaving the thirteenth century engaged shafts in position. ST. STEPHEN'S, HACKINGTON. 259 These changes are well shown on Canon Livett's plan. On each side of the great east window is a small ogee trefoilheaded window rather high up and of Dec. date. The function of these two small windows is doubtful. It now remains to consider the unusual features of the church and to see if it is possible to explain them. In the first place an immense number of cut and moulded Caen stones,1 chiefly of late Norman date, is used in the tower buttresses, the tower, chancel, and transept walls and elsewhere. This great mass of cut Caen stone is used as rubble, or " build up " material, as if it were of little or no value. It seems reasonable to suppose that there must have been a large store of such stone to be had for nothing, or for very little, not far away. The way in which the west door, evidently an insertion into the Norman wall, is made up of odd pieces, chiefly of late Norman date, which do not fit accurately together, renders it probable that they too are derived from the same source as the cut Caen stones in the tower and buttresses. Lastly the presence of two unusually wide transeptal arches, made up of Norman voussoirs, cut for others of smaller span, together with their adaptation in a situation for which they were not intended, requires explanation. It is hoped that it will be possible to show a probable connection between these unusual constructional features and Archbishop Baldwin. No attempt can be made to follow through its intricacies Archbishop Baldwin's classic quarrel with the monks of Christ Church. Excellent accounts of this dispute are to be found in Memorials of Canterbury Cathedral, by Messrs. Woodruff and Danks, and in The Story of Lambeth Palace, by Mrs. Dorothy Gardiner, and elsewhere. Briefly, the Archbishop proposed to build a church and a college for seventy Canons in the churchyard at Hackington, a proceeding viewed with alarm by the monks of Christ Church, who appealed to the Pope to restrain Baldwin's proceedings. The Archbishop is then said to have shifted 1 See Plate I (a). 260 ST. STEPHEN'S, HACKINGTON. the scene of his activities to a spot near St. Dunstan's Church, about a thousand yards away as the crow flies. Here apparently, first a wooden church was erected and later pulled down, after which the Archbishop gathered together stone for a fresh building both of a church and of houses for his Canons, and he also entrenched the site. Eventually after several years Baldwin gave up the struggle, patched up a peace with the monks and departed to the Holy Land as a pilgrim and there he died, at Acre, in 1190. With Baldwin's successor, Archbishop Hubert Walter, the struggle went on, but eventually by order of the Pope the church wa.s definitely and finally demolished. The chief authority for all the various phases of this quarrel is Gervase, a monk of Christ Church, and naturally not altogether unbiassed. It is recorded that the Archbishop transported his material to Lambeth, there to build a church and college. It is hardly likely that he actually did so, the journey being a long one. It has also been suggested that the little late Norman church at Barfreston was built out of material intended for Baldwin's church at Hackington, or St. Dunstan's. But an examination of the church at Barfreston does not favour the view that it is built up of oddments of Caen stone. Stephen Langton followed Hubert Walter as archbishop and in 1227 he made his brother, Simon Langton, archdeacon of Canterbury and it is on record that the latter built for himself a church, or was then about to build one, and also a residence, at Hackington, and that he took up his abode there ; from that time also the revenues of Hack:ington and Tenham were attached to it.1 Simon Langton also gave an undertaking to the monks of Christ Church that nothing in any way prejudicial to their interests should be done by him, or by his successors, in the church at Hackington. The archdeacons of Canterbury did, as a matter of fact. reside at Hackington from this time until the Reformation, 1 Batteley's Somner: Antiq. of Gant., p. 156. ST. STEPHEN'S, HACKINGTON. 261 and a large irregular building, shown in a map of 1769 (published by Joseph Andrews, Andrew Dury and Wm. Herbert, London), situated in the field between the church and the present rectory, but demolished before 1800, was probably their residence. From the architectural evidence it appears that the Norman church of Anselm at Hackington, was greatly extended in E.E. times. On the west end of the nave the thirteenth century tower was built and supported by great E.E. buttresses. The ea.stern ends of the nave walls were pierced for E.E. lancets and the sites where this took place can easily be made out, especially on the north side where much refacing of the wall with pieces of Norman cut Caen stone is to be seen. Lastly, round the Norman chancel were built the thirteenth century transepts and chancel and the Norman chancel was then demolished. All this is best appreciated by reference to the plan made by Canon Livett where the destroyed Norman work is shown in pale tint. It is submitted that all this new E.E. building was the work of Simon Langton and that the huge quantity of late Norman Caen stone, used by him, is material collected by Archbishop Baldwin for his proposed collegiate church. The tooling and form of the Norman materials fits the date of Baldwin and the style of the later architecture that of Simon Langton, viz., about 1230. Whether Baldwin built, or did not build, and whether at Hackington, or near St. Dunstan's, does not appear to matter much, provided the strong probability of the use of his material in the present church be admitted. It has been suggested that the stones discarded after the great fire at the Cathedral in 1174 were those used in the extension of the church of St. Stephen, against which is the fact that very few of them show any signs of burning. It may be as well here to mention that some of the older antiquaries appear to have thought that part of the church of St. Stephen at Hackington, as we see it, was actually built by Archbishop Baldwin. 262 ST. STEPHEN'S, HACKINGTON. William Lambarde, in his Perarnbul,ation of Kent (1570), says that Archbishop Baldwin pulled down an old timber chapel and began to raise in its place a fine church of hewed stone. Kilburne, in the Survey of Kent (1659), says much the same. Both writers, however, state that Baldwin was not allowed to finish his building. Other features, both ancient and modern, of this interesting church, call for a passing notice. The font, of late fourteenth century date (see Plate II (b)), was presented to the church by Sir Roger Manwood, as mentioned in his will. Where he obtained it is not known. Lambarde mentions the absence of a font. Manwood's font is octagonal and made in two pieces, the dividing line coming in the middle of the stem. The bowl, unlined, has a central drain, whilst two pairs of holes on opposite sides of the flattened lip were for the hinges and staples of the pre-Reformation font cover. Round the top of the font, above the arcading, Sir Roger Manwood had cut and inlaid with red paint the following inscription, which fits in the eight sides : ROGERUS I MANWOOD I MILES I CAPITALIS I BA.RO l SCACCARII I 15911 D. IX. 00. The almsbox bears the date 1634 and is in the form of a Doric pillar of wood surmounted by a square top of the same material on which rests a little iron chest with a trunk lid and three locks, the efficiency of which has been proved by various vain attempts by thieves to break into the box. The words " Remember the poor " are painted on two sides of the square wooden top. The early seventeenth century pulpit rests on a modern base ; it is nicely carved in the style of the period, and is surmounted by a cornice ornamented with lions' heads, perhaps of the eighteenth century. A carved screen dated 1626 shuts off the E.E. arch dividing the nave from the tower space, and of this the central mullion can be removed in order that at a funeral the coffin may be carried from the west door directly into the nave. The two doors of this screen, one on either side of the central mullion, have rather the appearance of having been removed ST. STEPHEN'S, H.ACKINGTON. 263 from the screen at the end of the dining hall in some large dwelling house. The rood-screen which replaced an earlier one in the first quarter of the sixteenth century is described by Mr. Aymer Vallance, F.S.A., in an appendix to this paper. A rather plain oak communion table of Jacobean date is now used as a side table inside the communion rails. Outside the west door of the church there is a wrought iron ornamental scraper, and a bracket and lamp case of the same make and material is placed on the wall of the buttress just north of it. These beautiful specimens of handicraftsmanship were made by Mr. A. Chambers, a member of the choir, who presented them to the church. The four lights of the Elizabethan window in the south transept are filled with very beautiful modern painted glass by an artist, Muriel Minter Cooper, who did the whole of the work from her own designs. The subject, the Annunciation of the Blessed Virgin, was chosen by the Advisory Committee. The Manwood monument in the south transept is a fine example of the monumental art of the late sixteenth century and I am informed by Mrs. Arundell Esdaile, that it is attributable to Maximilian Colt, or Coulte, alias Poutrain or Powtran, and is an early specimen of his work. The bust of Sir Roger Manwood is undoubtedly a portrait and he is shown as wearing the S.S. collar which he was the first Chief Baron of the Exchequer to be allowed to use. In a vault made.by Sir Roger under the floor of this transept are buried members of the Man wood family. In conclusion it only remains for the writer to express his great indebtedness to Mr. V. J. B. Torr and to Canon G. M. Livett for assistance in preparing this paper and especially to the last named who prepared the admirable plan which accompanies this article and renders clear much that without it would be very obscure. 264 ST. STEPHEN'S, HACKINGTON. APPENDIX. THE Roon-SCREEN AT ST. STEPHEN'S, HACKINGTON. BY AYMER VALLANCE. THE contract for supplying a rood-loft at Hackington is of peculiar interest ; such documents being none too common. In the first place it should be noted, as Rev. C. E. Woodruff points out, that it would be more usual for the churchwardens to be parties to the contract. Why, in this instance, the Vicar took the responsibility instead, does not appear. It is clear that the rood-loft in question was not the first loft to be erected in the church, but that it was designed to supersede an already existing loft. The stipulation that the new loft was to be fa.c:;hioned like a given example (in this case the loft at Holy Cross church, by the Westgate, a church due to the generosity of Archbishop Sudbury) is a familiar one in similar contracts. The rood-loft and screen of Holy Cross church have been torn down, but a portion, which survives, of the panelling of the wainscot, now made up into a seat for the organist in front of the organ,shows, if the two be compared, that the direction to copy for Hackington the work at Holy Cross church was duly observed. The parapet of the new loft was to be adorned, as was not unusual, with "howses," i.e. niches of tabernacle work to contain images. A water-colour drawing of the interior of the church by Aaron Penley, in 1857, shows the rood-screen as it then was. Standing in the chancel arch, it comprised, as now, three arched openings or bays between one half-bay at each extremity, the whole being surmounted by a frieze of pierced quatrefoils. The doors do not appear. It is evident, therefore, that they had been taken down, though happily, as it transpired, they were not destroyed. The head-tracery of the other parts of the screen remained practically complete. As the aforesaid drawing shows, a slight and perfectly plain parclose divided the south transept from the body of the church. This parclose, however, was abolished by Rev. John White some time between 1857 and 1878, to make way for a new organ; and also the summit of the rood-screen (including the upper ends of all the structural standards) was cut away, reducing it to an invected outline along the top. A photograph, taken of the interior about 1887, is preserved in the PLATE III. (a) Showing the rood-screen and the parclose. From a drawing by Aaron Penley, 1857. {b) Showing the rood-screen mutilated and the parcloso gone, subsequently to 1857. From a photograph in the Ve;itry. ST. STEPHEN'S CHURCH, HACKINGTON. ST. STEPHEN'S, HACKINGTON. 265 vestry, and shows what the rood-screen then looked like. In this condition it remained until 1896, when it was altered once more, and given its present shape. The most commendable item of this last restoration is that the screen doors, which had been stored away, were brought back, and re-hung in their proper place. The existence of the old boutels and caps, both in the east and west faces of the screen, show that it originally overhung with vaulting toward the chancel as well as toward the nave. The new vaulting is correct inasmuch as it projects both toward the chancel and the nave, but incorrect ina.gmuch as unfortunately its overhang is too meagre and shallow. The boutel-shafts are -0ylindrical, with crested polygonal caps, and polygonal bases. The latter are of very effective design, and have a somewhat unusual height of l' l}". The rood-screen, standing under the western outer order of the chancel arch, measures 15' 6" long. The bay on each side of the entrance centres at 3' 8", while the middle bay centres at 4', with a clear opening of 3' 8½". The fenestration is 4' 7" high from the middle rail to the crown of the arch. Along the face of the middle-rail runs a traceryband of quatrefoils. The wainscot comprises four panels to the bay, corresponding to the divisions of the fenestration. The panelling of the wainscot is enriched with skirting traceries and head-traceries. The latter are not quite uniform in design from end to end of the screen. They resemble some of the German motifs which occur in the screenwork of, among other churches, Holy Cross in Canterbury, Graveney and Newington-next- Sittingbourne for example. The springers of the chancel-arch have been mutilated, notably on the south side, for the insertion of timberwork of a tympanum, or to form part of the rood-loft. There is no trace of a rood-stair. Two iron hooks or loops in the nave's east wall, one to right the other to left of the chancel-arch, and slightly above the level of the capitals of the said arch, may have been provided for the cord o􀂫 the rood-veil or of the light before the Rood. (March, 1929.) Surgeon-Captain K. H. Jones writes, early in August, 1932, to say that the presence of the death watch beetle having been discovered in the woodwork of the screen, the latter consequently had to be placed under repab:. It had been thickly coated with varnish, all of which had to be removed. In the process it was found that several parts had been mended with deal, including 266 ST. STEPHEN'S, RACKINGTON. one entire mullion. There was also discovered evidence that the original screen had been coloured, traces of blue and red, and perhaps green, and even, on the capitals of the boutels, gilding, being discernible. This showed how literally the contractor carried out his undertaking to model the screen at Hackington upon that of Holy Cross church, even including its polychrome decoration ; for though no distinctive colour can be made out in the remains of screenwork at Holy Cross church, unmistakeable evidence of ancient paint remains in parts. There is another feature common to the screenwork at Holy Cross and St. Stephen's churches. The .flat groundwork to the traceries at the top of the wainscot is pierced in each panel with six little round holes arranged in a triangle, two and one. The purpose of these holes is unknown. They are so small, only about ¼ inch each in diameter, that they can scarcely have been intended for elevation squints. Perhaps, as their distribution is quite symmetrical, they were designed merely for ornament. It would be interesting to learn whether similar perforations have been noted in any other screen. P.S.-Since the above was printed Surgeon-Captain K. H. ,Jones writes to say that he has discovered an entry in the old church books, recording that, in 1695, the Ten Commandments and Lord's Prayer were " curiously painted and fixed up in three severall frames upon the screen between the chancell and the nave." He also tells me of an important find by Mr. W. Halward, Hub-librarian of the Cathedral Chapter Library. The latter, having picked up in Canterbury market au early drawing of the interior of St. Stephen's, presented it to the Rector, Rev. Wilfred E. Watkins, who is depositing it in the vestry. The drawing is in pencil, and, though unsigned and undated, is proved by internal evidence to have been made about 1845. At that period, as the drawing shows, the uppermost portion of the screen (the Ten Commandments, etc., already taken down) extended across the entire width of the nave, from lateral wall to lateral wall. There shortly followed, in 1846-7, a " restoration " of the building ; and, by 1857, as Aaron Penley's drawing proves, the long beam on the top of the screen, above the quatrefoiled frieze, had been removed, and no part of the screen exceeded the width of the chancel-arch opening. It should be remarked further that the low parclose, depicted by Penley as dividing the south t,ransept from the nave, is only just discernible in the 1845 drawing. PLATE TY. ST. STEPHEN'S CHURCH, HACKINQTON, SHOWING THE ROOD-SCREEN, from a pencil drawing of about 1846. ST. STEPHEN'S, HAOKINGTON. 267 TRANSCRIPT OF THE INDENTURE [Oct. 6, 1519.] ADD. MS. 38139, folio 236. THE RoODE .A.TT WESTGAT. This Indenture made the vj. daie of October in􀃈 eleaventh1 yea.re of the reigne of King Henry the eight after the Conquest of England Betweene Iohn Rooe,2 Olerke vickare of the pishe Churche of St Stephen the Martir of Hakinton besids Canterburye of ye one partie and Michaell Boneversall of the towne of Heth Carver of the other partie Witnesseth that the saide Michaell hath Covenanted and graunted and by this Indenture Coven nnteth and graunteth to make for ye saide Iohn Roo a newe Roodeloft of seasonable, cleane and substanciall Tymber and boords for the parishe Chu.robe of St Stephen beforesaide wt11 howses & Images in the same And the same Roodlofte in good proporcon sui·ely woorkmanly and substancia.lly wrought to bee sett and builded in the saide pishe Church of Hackenton in the place where the ould loft nowe is there sett, & of the same lenght the same newe Roodeloft to bee made Carven & wrought in every forme of woorkemanship or better as nowe is wrought & made after the newe Roodeloft nowe sett and being in the parishe Churche of the holie Crosse of Westgate of the Citie of Canterburie And the saide newe Roodelofte and other the premisses well curiouslie and arteficially to bee made and wrought wtll all things thervnto ptayning by the saide Micha.ell in mannr and forme aforesaide to bee sett vpp & full garnished wth in the saide parishe Church of Hackington at the proper Costs and chardges of the 􀃉aid Michaell a thisside the Fen.at of Easter the well shalbee in the yeare of or lorde God 1522. And furthermore yt is Covenanted and agreed betweene the saide pties and the same Michaell Covennnteth and graunteth by theis prsenta that the same Micha.ell at his proper Costs an