The work of E. W. Pugin
- This topic has 159 replies, 25 voices, and was last updated 14 years, 4 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
-
As is well known, E. W. Pugin did much work in the north-west of England, mainly in Cumbria and Lancashire.
Apart from All Saints in Barton, another interesting church is Our Lady and St Hubert’s in Great Harwood, built in 1858-59 through the munificence of James Lomax to cater for the rapidly increasing population of Irish Catholic workers in the area.
For info on the church, follow the link
http://www.sthuberts.org.uk/about.php?PHPSESSID=23827ccdf0ed87ac3cc8aedd006fa57cBelow is a picture
-
In Manchester stands the famous Gorton Monastery, one of E.W. Pugins’s most famous constructions, known locally as Manchester’s Taj Mahal. Sadly, it fell into serious disrepair following the departure of the Franciscans in 1989. Now, thankfully, it is being restored. A major campaign for funding is still going on and the Monastery Trust raised
-
A little curiosity is what is said to be E.W. Pugin’s only surviving Anglican church, St Catherine’s in Kingsdown.
See link:
http://www.lynsted-society.co.uk/html/kingsdown_church.htmlHere is a photo:
-
-
-
-
Apart from Monkstown, which P. Clerkin mentions above, the Pugin and Ashlin partnership built a number of very beautiful churches in the Cork area (easily explicable, because Ashlin was a local man, from Little Island). Cobh Cathedral is in many ways the apogee of their church-building in the region. Earlier churches like St Peter and Paul’s, Cork, use techniques that are brought to perfection in St Colman’s Cathedral.
Here are some pictures of the magnificent Church of the Immaculate Conception, Clonakilty, easily the finest church in the diocese of Ross, which bears a remarkable resemblance to Cobh. Built to Ashlin’s design, it was opened in 1880. I gleaned some information from a local publication which I quote:“As far as we can gather the building of the present Clonakilty Church was undertaken by the Rev. Matthew O’Donovan, then Parish Priest of Clonakilty. In passing I would like to mention that the said Fr. O’Donovan, was an uncle of the late Senator T.J. O’Donovan of Inchydoney. The foundation stone was laid in 1870 by the Most Rev. Dr. O’Hea, the Bishop of Ross. Though he had commenced this noble work, Fr. O’Donovan did not live to see it completed, for he died in 1875 and was succeeded by the Rev. P. Madden. Throwing himself wholeheartedly into the work, and showing unbounded energy which never flagged, he overcame many difficulties to finish the work so well begun by his predecessor. He was no doubt encouraged and ably assisted by the Most Rev. Dr. Fitzgerald who had succeeded Dr. O’Hea. But well we know that the encouragement and endeavour would have been in vain, were it not for the zeal and self-sacrifice of a generous people, who had, even though suffering from want, contributed generously to the appeal of the Parish Priest. Thus on the 25th day of July, 1880, the faithful of Clonakilty who had knelt on the earthen floor of the old chapel, changed over to honour and worship in what the daily press described as “a temple of gorgeous proportions, a proud and beautiful building, in its turn a type of our religious progress, in the altered condition of our country”.
“The Church was built by Mr. S. C. Ashlin of Dublin, according – as we are told – to a plan suggested to him by Fr. O’Donovan. It is said to be one of the most successful examples of Mr. Ashlin’s skill as a Church architect. It is of pure Gothic of the early French style, and consists of a nave, aisles, transepts, two chapels and a baptistery. The nave is 158 feet long by 32½ feet wide, the transpets 33½ feet by 32 feet, the aisles 72 feet by 16 feet. The total length of the nave is over 162 feet, the breadth across the transepts is 109 feet. The height to the ridge of the roof is about eighty feet and the thickness of the walls is five feet. I wonder in how many cases of Churches built at the present time would you find walls of that thickness. In the gables of the nave and transepts are three large wheel windows, while the apse-shaped sanctuary has stained glass lighting which represents the Nativity, the Visitation and the Assumption of Our Lady. The nave is separated from the aisles by an arcade, which is carried across the transept, by which means the large piers that would be necessary at the angles of the transept are avoided, and thus a clear view of the High Altar is open from the aisles and the transepts. The tympanum of the east arch which on either side divides the chancel from the side chapels, is filled with stone tracing, resting on Sicilian marble columns. The columns of the nave arcade have capitals and sub-bases of granite, bases of limestone, and shafts of Aberdeen polished granite. The roofs of both the naves and the aisles have arched principals, the spaces between them filled with wood grouting, having carved bosses at the intersection of the ribs. The whole section of the ceiling between the ribs is boarded in yellow pine, three inches in width, the dressings of the windows, doors, etc., are Ballyknockane granite. The altar of the Sacred Heart, the gift of a lady and gentleman in Clonakilty was erected by Mr. Pearse of Dublin at a cost of £350. The altar of the Blessed Virgin was the gift of Mrs. O’Brien, Main Street, Clonakilty, and erected by Mr. P. J. Scannell, Cork at a cost of £250. Over this was a window presented by Mr. McCarthy, Main Street, Clonakilty, and the Stations of the Cross, the gift of a Clonakilty lady cost £245. The High Altar, the product of cultured taste, is executed in a style of most refined art. It is largely composed of pure white marble, relieved with some coloured marbles. At the time of its erection, it stood almost unrivalled in its beauty by any altar in the South. Messrs. Eardley & Powell, Camden Street, Dublin, were contractors for this work, and it cost then over £675. A touching thought is that the cost of this Altar was defrayed by the collection of the children of the parish, through the medium of subscription cards. The altar rail is 110 feet long of wrought iron, and was made by Mr. Cullinane, a local blacksmith, whose family still carry on the family tradition and trade in the town. It was presented to the Church by Mr. Canty of Clonakilty. The approximate cost at the time for the erection of the Church was £36,000.”
-
St Peter and Paul’s, much loved of Corkonians, is built on a very restricted site in the centre of Cork, just off St Patrick Street, the main thoroughfare.
More info by Gianlorenzo on this church – see posting #530 on the reordering and destruction of Irish cathedrals thread. -
A little reminder of Pugin and Ashlin’s greatest achievement, St Colman’s Cathedral Cobh.
Info on this is on another archiseek thread, and the best site for general information is that of the Friends of St Colman’s Cathedral (http://www.foscc.com), a local heritage group fighting to maintain the Cathedral in its pristine glory. -
Here is Cobh Cathedral’s glorious interior: a feast of Neo-Gothic splendour!!
-
In relation to E. W. Pugin and G. C. Ashlin, it would be useful were someone to undertake research on the conceptual influence of Didron and Lassus on both of these architects. Didron’s programme for building the ideal Cathedral, town church or village church is outlined in his Annales Archeologique published between 1844 and 1871. That there should be similarities between Clonakilty and St. Peter and Paul’s in Cork, and Cobh Cathedral is not in the least surprising since all projects are variants on Didron’s ideal church. Too bad that nobody, as far as I am aware, has had the chance to conduct such an important and detailed research project before the vandals got to work.
-
RE the previous posting.
The learned Praxiteles has drawn attention to the Didron and Lassus influence in relation to Cobh, and it is certainly plausible. Didron was friendly with A.W.N. Pugin, father of E.W., and was present at the consecration of Pugin’s English masterpiece, St Giles’ Church in Cheadle. A.W.N. would have subscribed to the Annales, in which Didron and Lassus presented a project for church building based on an idealised early 13th c. church in French Gothic style, which could be expanded or contracted depending on whether you wanted a parish church or a cathedral.
I imagine E.W. would have inherited his father’s collection of the Annales, and so would have been perfectly familiar with the Didron-Lassus project. Their ideal church (posted by Praxiteles on the reordering and destruction of Irish cathedrals thread, at #472) does bear a strong resemblance to churches built by Pugin and Ashlin, such as Cobh Cathedral, and Pugin’s All Saints in Barton upon Irwell (cf. posting #518 on the reordering thread).
Certainly, this is a research theme that would be well worth undertaking.Here, to facilitate matters, is the Annales version of the ideal church and Lassus’ drawing (north elevation) for work on the cathedral in Moulins.
-
An interesting E.W. Pugin church in NW England is St Mary’s in Cleator, opened in 1872. In 1978 it underwent radical renovation …. to bring it into the space age, I imagine!!
-
Yet another E.W. Pugin church in the Cork area is St Brigid’s in Crosshaven. The foundation stone was laid in 1869 (the year after that of St Colman’s Cathedral, Cobh) and the church is constructed in Little Island limestone.
Also to be seen in Crosshaven is Burges’ Holy Trinity Church (Anglican), which contains a fine rose window. -
Near Crosshaven, in Monkstown, is E.W. Pugin’s Sacred Heart Church (1871). See P. Clerkin’s posting above (#4) for the plan. Here is a link to a photo:
http://www.corkandross.org/jsp/parishes/churchimages/mkstown/mkstown_ch.html.
-
-
Those churches are beautiful. The setting of St Peter and Paul’s off Patrick streat is fantastic: it’s like something out of a mediterranean hill town, with a narrow street hiding such a large and intricate structure. One of the misfortunes of being brought up a protestant (Anglican) is that you just don’t get to experience such sumptuous interiors. And that’s even with Anglican churches being the least dreary of the various prod denominations. I’ve been in one or two Free P churches and they’d make a bus shelter look like an architectural masterpiece. Sangallo, do you know of any E.W. Pugin churches in Northern Ireland? Did he do any work outside of Ireland/Britain?
-
Dear MT
I’m open to correction on this, but as far as I know, E.W. Pugin was not involved in the construction of any Northern Ireland church. Most of his work was in the Dublin and Cork areas.
That said, his partner and brother-in-law George Ashlin, a Corkman, who again concentrated on the Cork and Dublin regions, did have some involvement in the decorative scheme for St Patrick’s in Armagh, although he was not the principal architect. I gather that he did some work in Newry, on the cathedral (built to the design of the Newry architect Thomas Duff in the 1820s) and the Dominican church, St Catherine’s.
I will put up more info as it comes to hand.
Regarding church interiors, we are fortunate that E.W. Pugin’s for the most part have survived intact. However, those of his Irish counterpart, J.J. McCarthy, have suffered at the hands of the liturgists in the name of the latest fad (usually masquerading as “liturgical requirements of Vatican II”). Archiseek’s “reordering and destruction of Irish cathedrals and churches” thread goes into this in some detail. -
On the outskirts of Waterford City, but in the diocese of Ossory, is another Pugin and Ashlin church, Sacred Heart in Ferrybank.
The parish website contains a potted history of the construction of the church. Here is a link:
http://www.ferrybankparish.com/history/index.htmHere is a picture
-
Pugin and Ashlin were also responsible for Kilanerin church, near Gorey, in North Wexford (diocese of Ferns).
-
Arles Church in Co. Laois, Diocese of Kildare and Leighlin, is a Pugin and Ashlin Church of 1865. Note the similarity with Kilanerin.
-
Pugin built 5 or 6 churches in Wexford – follow this link http://www.wexfordweb.com/pugin.htm
My old school St Peters (you may have read about it in the Ferns Report!) has a really charming Pugin Chapel – the altar is especially lovely although I believe the church layout was significantly reordered in the ’60s..
-
RE # 22
The Wexford churches mentioned are all outstandingly beautiful. They are, however, due to E.W. Pugin’s more famous father, A.W.N. Pugin. E.W., as far as I know, was responsible for two churches in Wexford: Kilanerin and Our Lady’s Island, as well as the chapel in Edermine.
The wife of A.W.N. Pugin’s English patron, the 16th Earl of Shrewsbury, was a native of Wexford. Her uncle, John Hyacinth Talbot, was the first Catholic MP for the area after emencipation. Shrewsbury’s Wexford connections, the Talbots, explains why Pugin received so many commissions in the area. E.W. inherited the accumulated goodwill!
Here are pictures of the church on Our Lady’s Island, due to E.W. Pugin and G.C. Ashlin, built in 1863-64, and consecrated in 1881. See the link http://www.ourladysisland.com for more information. -
Re #17
I want to come back to the second question MT put to me, as to whether E.W. Pugin designed any churches outside Britain and Ireland.
The answer is yes. His best-known work is the basilica in Dadizele, a place of pilgrimage east of Courtrai in Belgium. The present church is a reconstruction of Pugin’s basilica, which was sadly destroyed during the First World War. Pugin’s basilica had a higher spire and fine iron cresting on the roof, somwhat similar to Cobh’s.Chris Brooks describes it as follows: “stone vaulted and late thirteenth-century, it is nevertheless polychromatically red, black and buff, with an amazing crossing tower that finishes in a zigzag patterned spire containing giant statues”. See his The Gothic Revival, London, Phaidon, 1999, p. 367.
As to its significance, Brooks places Dadizele along with Cobh, Barton-on-Irwell and Gorton, as among E.W. Pugin’s finest achievements: “Not only astonishing, the Dadizele design is instructive too – certainly high Victorian, but with a decorative intricacy and fidelity to medieval detail characteristic of the younger Pugin, as in C
-
E.W. Pugin also worked in Belgium with the country’s most well-known revivalist, Jean-Baptiste B
-
Béthune carried out his work in Maredsous beginning in 1872. It is very much influenced by the Gothic style prevalent in High Victorian England.
Below are pictures of Maredsous and of Abbot Marmion. -
E. W. Pugin is responsible for three cathedrals: one in Ireland (Cobh) and two in England (Shrewsbury and Northampton).
Regarding Northampton, the cathedral website there (http://www.northamptoncathedral.org) has this to say:
“There is evidence of Christianity in Northampton area as far back as mid-Saxon times and possibly earlier.
Subsequent to the Norman invasion it became a favoured residence of the Kings of England.
After the reformation it was not until the early part of the nineteenth century that there became a renewed interest in the Catholic faith.
In 1829 the Catholic Emancipation Act was passed, and in 1850 the Catholic hierarchy was restored with the country being divided into dioceses, each with a Bishop.
In 1821 a priest was installed in a house in Northampton town centre, and two years later Father William Foley was installed by Bishop Milner to establish a regular mission in the town.
His first base was a small house using one room as a chapel, but it wasn’t long before he had the finance to purchase a piece of land on which the current Cathedral stands.
Originally part of St Andrew’s Priory a century earlier, it was the place where Thomas Becket escaped.
The Chapel, dedicated to St Andrew, was opened on 25th October 1825, the feast of St Crispin.
By 1840 the congregation was outgrowing the chapel, and the newly resident Bishop Waring commissioned Pugin to design a collegiate chapel. Within no time this to was outgrown by the numbers wishing to worship. Bishop Amhurst asked Pugin’s son to extend the building to become a Cathedral. The extension, the current nave, was opened in 1864 and dedicated to Our Lady Immaculate and St Thomas of Canterbury.
The building remained pretty much unchanged until 1955 when Bishop Leo decided to pull down St Andrew’s Chapel and extended the west end of the Church. The last changes were in 1988 when the land adjoining the Barrack Road was converted to a car park.” -
Shrewsbury Cathedral was commissioned by the 17th Earl of Shrewsbury and completed in 1856. It is dedicated to Our Lady Help of Christians and St Peter of Alcantara.
Here are some pictures: -
After our brief foray into Belgium and England, let us return for a moment to Pugin’s work in Ireland. Pugin, with his partner Ashlin, was involved in improving Fermoy Parish Church. Saint Patrick’s Church in Fermoy was built in the early 1800s. The original church was quite small and was extended in 1843 when Father Timothy Murphy was parish priest. The architects Pugin and Ashlin designed further extensions in 1867 which gave the church its modern appearance. The external appearance is largely due to Pugin and Ashlin who were called in to add the asymmetrical tower and spire, and supplied buttresses to stress the verticality of the facade. The interior is by the Pain brothers.
Fr Timothy Murphy was Bishop of Cloyne from 1849 to 1856, and was the man most responsible for Fermoy’s stunning ecclesiastical skyline on the south side of the Blackwater, with Presentation Convent, Loreto Convent, St Colman’s College and St Patrick’s Church.The Irish Builder, the indispensable source for historical information on 19th c. churches in Ireland, has the following to say about Fermoy church:
ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH,
FERMOY, CO. CORK.
OUR illustration of this church shows the improvement and additions effected under the superintendence and from the designs of Messrs. Pugin and Ashlin. The church stands on one of the Fermoy hills, and can be seen from every portion of the town. The chief difficulty presented to the architects was the great width of the nave and the flat lines of the roof (the roof remains untouched), and this has been overcome by breaking up the west front with buttresses, &c., as will be seen by reference to the lithograph. The architects deemed it better to place the tower and spire at the transept, as a roadway opens immediately opposite, thereby giving a full view of it from the town. A handsome railing, with gates, &c., surrounds the entire site.
This church is the cathedral of the diocese, and these alterations have been carried out with the
sanction and assistance of the Bishop, the Right Rev. Dr. Keane, by Mr. Newstead, builder, Fermoy.
When all the works are completed the total expenditure will be about -
-
Regarded as Dublin’s finest Victorian church, SS Augustine and John (John’s Lane Church) in the Liberties area was designed by E.W. Pugin and executed by his partner George Ashlin for the Augustinian fathers. It was built between 1862 and 1895. It has the tallest spire in Dublin (231 ft), and occupies a prominent position on high ground overlooking the Liffey valley. It has a striking polychromatic appearance, being built in granite with red sandstone dressings.
The eminent Gothic revivalist Ruskin is said to have praised it, describing it as a “poem in stone”.
Statues of the apostles in the niches of the spire are by James Pearse, father of Padraig and Willie, who were executed after the 1916 Easter rising.
There is some good stained glass from the Harry Clarke studios. -
Richard Morrison in the Times has drawn attention to some very disturbing news concerning Stanbrook Abbey in the Malverns, Worcestershire (Stanbrook is another outstanding E.W. Pugin achievement).
It appears that the Abbess, believing the cost of restoration prohibitive, has decided to put the Abbey on the market with an asking price of £6 million. There seems to be resistance in the community, however.
There is also a dispute going on with English Heritage as to whether Stanbrook should be a Grade II or a Grade II* building (II* would guarantee greater protection).
Read the story at this link:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,1069-1988371,00.html -
Another fine Dublin church by the firm of E.W. Pugin and G.C. Ashlin is St Kevin’s in Harrington Street.
For a picture, here is a link:
-
I have already posted some information about All Saints Church, Barton-upon-Irwell, on the “reordering and destruction” thread. Here is some more information from English heritage on this great E.W. Pugin church, which is on the Grade I heritage list.
Roman Catholic church. 1867-8. By E. W. Pugin. Rock-faced stone with slate roof. Nave, aisles, west bell turret, apsidal chancel with north chapel. Gothic Revival. 8-bay nave and aisles with weathered plinth, weathered buttresses and gabled porch. Each bay has a 2-light plate tracery aisle window with hoodmoulds and sill band and 2-light Geometrical tracery clerestory windows with continuous hoodmould. Steep roof with coped gables and pierced ridge tiles. West rose window above arcade of pointed lights and arched doorway all flanked by bold weathered and gableted buttresses. 4-bay polygonal chancel with 2-light plate tracery windows in each bay below a series of coped gables. Grotesque gargoyles. The 3 x 1 bay side chapel has a steep hipped roof and similar gables above each bay which interrupt a parapet with pierced quatrefoils. Interior: arcade arches, piers and chancel arches all in banded pink and yellow stone. Well carved foliage capitals. Lofty scissor-braced roof structure springing from angel corbels. Rib-vaulted chancel lavishly gilded. Elaborately carved stone altar and reredos. Good wall paintings, one showing E. W. Pugin with a plan of the church. Timber pews. Stained glass. A notably complete and unspoiled example of E. W. Pugin’s work, said to be his best.
I don’t know if All Saints’ is E. W. Pugin’s best work – I am inclined to think it is St Colman’s Cathedral, Cobh – but it certainly ranks well up there with Dadizele Basilica and Gorton Monastery. But readers of this posting may have different opinions on this.
Unfortunately, I have not yet been able to find a photo of the interior, but here is another photograph of the exterior:
-
Incidentally, E.W. Pugin was also responsible for the very fine adjoining presbytery. Here is an English Heritage description:
URMSTON REDCLYFFE ROAD SJ 79 NE (SJ 7697 SE) (west side) 2/34 All Saints’ Presbytery (formerly lists as Church of All Saints) – GV II Presbytery. c.1867-8. By. E.W. Pugin. Rock-faced stone with slate roof. 3-bay 2-storey plan with gabled wing to left and porch in bay 2. Gothic Revival. Projecting plinth. Continuous first floor band and sill band. Moulded arch to recessed porch with inscribed plaque above. Canted bay window to left and 3-light mullion and transom window to right. 2-light mullioned first floor windows and a gabled oriel sash window in bay 3. Coped gable to right. Prominent ridge chimney stacks. Similar bay, oriel and mullion windows to sides and rear. A C20 addition which is not of special interest links the presbytery to the church at the rear. Included for group value.
All credit is due to English Heritage for their interest in and contribution to the restoration of All Saints’ Church and Presbytery, and for their appreciation of one of the great works of one of the finest architects of the Gothic Revival.
-
-
A little notice from the Irish Builder re: St. Brigid’s, crosshaven, Co. Cork, E.W. Pugin’s last Irish commission:
NEW R. C. CHURCH, CROSSHAVEN,
COUNTY CORK.
THE foundation stone of a new church was laid on the 22nd ult. at Crosshaven, Co. Cork, by the Bishop, the Most Rev. William Delany, D.D.
The new church, which is being built from designs by Mr. E. Welby Pugin, will stand due east and west, occupying a commanding site on the brow of the hill, directly facing the entrance to the Carrigaline river. In plan the building will consist of a nave and aisles, terminated at the east end by the chancel and side chapels. Over the side arches of the nave, which will be supported by columns of polished Cork reel marble, will run a clerestory of simple but effective design. The sacristy will be on the south side of the church, near to the chancel, and at the southwest angle of the building a baptistry will be provided. The roofs will be of exposed timber work, having the ceiling spaces pannelled. The church, as laid out, is 92 feet long, by 45 feet wide in the clear, and the height, from floor to ridge pole, will be 55 feet. Ex-ternally the building will be finished with limestone facing and Bath stone dressing to the doors and windows. An outside porch is provided at the western or principal entrance, and a lofty tower or spire (the lower storey of which serves as a second entrance porch) stands about mid-way in the length of the north elevation. In the centre of the lower part of the east or chancel gable, just above where the foundation has been laid, will be a niche containing a statue of Saint Brigid, the patron saint of the parish, and to whom the new church is to be dedicated. Above this niche, in the upper portion of the same gable, and filling up the space over the high altar, when viewed from the interior, there will be a large and very handsome rose window. Other rose windows of smaller size and varied in design, will also be introduced in the gable of the aisles. The style of the architecture is Victorian Gothic, and the work is being carried out under the personal superintendence of Mr. Collingridge Barnett, the Irish representative of Mr. Welby Pugin.
Mr. Rd. Evans, of Cork: is the contractor.
[Taken from Irish Builder, Vol. XI, 1869, p.205] -
I came across a nice drawing of Sts Peter and Paul in Cork, published in the Illustrated London News before the altar and sanctuary were installed.
-
On the Mallow-Fermoy road in Co. Cork is another Pugin & Ashlin gem, the Church of the Nativity of the Blessed Virgin Mary in Ballyhooly. I gather that the interior has fallen victim to an “enlightened” member of the clergy who introduced it to what he took to be the spirit of Vatican II.
Ballyhooly Catholic Church
The Right Rev. William Keane, Bishop of Cloyne, laid the foundation stone of the Catholic church in Ballyhooly on 29 August 1867. George C. Ashlin and E. W. Pugin designed the church which is in the pointed style of architecture. It is built mainly from limestone with courses of sandstone. It was dedicated in 1870 and named the Church of the Nativity of the Blessed Virgin Mary. The first parish priest in the new church was the Very Rev. Canon Philip Burton.
The Irish Builder has this to say:NEW ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH AT
BALLYHOOLEY, CO. CORK.
This church, of which we give an illustration, is to be erected on a suitable site near Mallow, Co. Cork, for the Rev. Mr. Burton. The architects have been obliged to adopt a simple and severe, and we think effective, treatment of their design, as the funds at their disposal have been so limited-only £1,500 being allowed for the expenditure, exclusive of fittings, &c. The church is 84 feet long internally, and is divided into bays of 12 feet. The roof is constructed of framed, curved principals, and is boarded on back of rafters with diagonally laid sheeting.. The church is boarded under benches with tiled passages, &c. The sanctuary is to be tiled with encaustic tiling. An organ gallery terminates the western end of the nave, beneath which a convenient porch is arranged. The architects are Messrs. Pugin and Ashlin, of Dublin. The contractor has not yet been declared. [Taken from Irish Builder, Vol. IX, 1867, p.120]The drawing attached is taken from the Irish Builder, Vol.9, 15 May 1867, p.121.
-
Still in the Cork area: the convent of Mercy in Skibbereen, also due to Pugin and Ashlin.
Catherine McCauley founded the Sisters of Mercy in 1831 in Dublin to care for the poor and the sick and to educate poor children. By 1837 the sisters established a house in Cork. Nuns from the order first came to Skibbereen in 1860 when four sisters from Kinsale opened a school in the town. They remained in Skibbereen until July 2003 when the convent and school were closed and the remaining sisters joined other houses of the order in Cork. Skibbereen Town Council gave the sisters a civic reception in 2003 to mark their contribution to education in Skibbereen for 143 years. The well-known architects Ashlin and Pugin designed the Convent of Mercy.. In January 2004 the property was sold for €1.5 million
From the Irish Builder:
CONVENT CHAPEL, SKIBBEREEN
THIS chapel, just erected by Mr. W. Murphy, Bantry, has been dedicated. It is in connection with the existing convent, which is situated on an elevation at eastern entrance to the town of Skibbereen, and presents a striking object to the traveller entering by that direction. The style adopted is the Early Decorated. The building contains a lower floor, the nun’s choir, and the sacristy; while on upper floor is the infirmary for the members of the community. On the north side is a small cloister, terminating in a turret, which contains a stairs by which the nuns can reach the organ floor without passing through the chapel. The building is lighted by a circular window in the west gable (illustrated in IRISH BUILDER, No. 184), and eight windows with traceried heads in side walls. The wall over the altar is pierced by a five-light window filled with stained glass, by Messrs. Earley and Powells, representing SS. Patrick, Peter and Paul, and the Divine Redeemer. The roof has arched principals, and is sheeted with timber, stained and varnished. In the side wall next convent are three arches supported on marble columns, the spaces between which are filled with wrought-iron work. Externally the church is faced with Bath stone. The cost of the entire was -
Another exquisite little gem from Pugin and Ashlin is the parish church at Ballyhooly, near Fermoy, Co. Cork
Ballyhooly Catholic Church
The Right Rev. William Keane, Bishop of Cloyne, laid the foundation stone of the Catholic church in Ballyhooly on 29 August 1867. George C. Ashlin and E. W. Pugin designed the church which is in the pointed style of architecture. It is built mainly from limestone with courses of sandstone. It was dedicated in 1870 and named the Church of the Nativity of the Blessed Virgin Mary. The first parish priest in the new church was the Very Rev. Canon Philip Burton (Image from: Irish Builder, Vol.9, 15 May 1867, p.121)Cork City Libraries
-
BTW all those images are available at
http://www.irish-architecture.com/buildings_ireland/cork/ -
Re posting # 38 showing an idealized interior view of Sts. Peter and Paul’s in Cork from the London Illustrated News:
The thought struck me that were Cathal O’Neill to see this he might adopt the same attitude he has to a similar drawing for the interior of Cobh Cathedral and canonize it as the definitive version of the architect’s intended interior. In the case of Sts. Peter and Paul’s it would provide him with just the right thing to “justify” evacuating the interior of everything in it and furnish a “rationale” to the unsuspecting for the brutal implanting of another television quizz show setting, probably not too different from what he is planning for Cobh Cathedral. We are told that Ludwig Mies is his inspiration and muse for all this entreprise. However, anybody familiar with the outskirts of Cracow, Breslau (aka Wroclaw) and worst of all, Prague, will realize the utter dehumanizing effects of the bauhaus and its complete negation of anything personal or creative in man. The social disasters to which all this has contributed in the former commie bloc underlines just whay anything as fascist as Mies must be approached with the utmost caution. Importing all this into a religious context is doubly absurd since the religious is built on and nourishes the exact opposite of the herd.
-
-
Regarding Edermine, the chapel was indeed built by E.W. Pugin for the Power family around 1858. It is pretty simple in design.
Edermine served as a refuge for the Maredsous Benedictine novices under the leadership of Abbot Columba Marmion for a time during the First World War. Dom Mark Tierney OSB tells the story in his book Dom Columba Marmion published by Columba Press, Dublin.
The Maredsous community eventually established a permanent Irish foundation in 1927 at Glenstal (four years after Abbot Marmion’s death). -
-
Barton-upon-Irwell, Manchester
Attached is a detail from the wall paintings of the Chancel depicting the adoration of the Lamb. On the left, E.W. Pugin is depicted holding a plan of the church.
Fortunately, this interior has survived almost perfectly intact. We should be grateful to English Heritage for that. They could teach our mick mouse heritage protection outfit in Ireland a lesson or two – especially as far as the heritage officer on Co. Cork is concerned.
-
Following a financial disaster, E.W. Pugin went to America in 1873 to establish an office in New York. He stayed less than a year but while there produced drawings for at least one important commission; the Basilica of Our Lady of Perpetual Succour at Roxbury, Boston. It is believed that many of E.W. Pugin’s projects in North America were executed by his brother Peter Paul Pugin – about whose work much research still awats and undertaker.
The Basilica at Roxbury before completion (1910) of the spires:
The basilica was consecrated on 7 April 1878.
The interior:
-
@Praxiteles wrote:
Barton-upon-Irwell, Manchester
Attached is a detail from the wall paintings of the Chancel depicting the adoration of the Lamb. On the left, E.W. Pugin is depicted holding a plan of the church.
Fortunately, this interior has survived almost perfectly intact. We should be grateful to English Heritage for that. They could teach our mick mouse heritage protection outfit in Ireland a lesson or two – especially as far as the heritage officer on Co. Cork is concerned.
A clearer image of the wall painting showing E.W. in medieval dress holding a plan of the church. The painting is by J. Alphege of Hardman and Co., Birmingham, c. 1868.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Hi,
I’m currently working on the restoration of St Francis of Assisi in Gorton and also doing some research into EW Pugin for a permanent exhibition when we re-open in May 2007. I was delighted to find the Archiseek site and this thread. Thanks to Sangallo for the information on Belgium links. One of the puzzles for us is what was the connection between the Belgian Franciscans and Pugin. I had suspected there had been a Belgian link prior to the Franciscans arrival in Cornwall in 1858. One of their first acts was to engage EW Pugin to enlarge their premises at Sclerder. Their next two collaborations were Killarney Friary and Gorton Monastery.I also believe we have a photo of EW taken at Gorton Monastery in about 1867. I’ve attached the photo and we think Pugin is at the back on the left.
I hope to contribute more and will update on the restoration if people would like?
Best wishes
-
Dear Gorton,
Glad to know you like the E.W. Pugin thread, and that it is proving helpful for the Gorton restoration project. I don’t know anything definite about the connection between Pugin and the Belgian Franciscans, but one must bear in mind that E.W.’s father, A.W. N. Pugin travelled a lot in Northern France, and had contacts with Gothic revivalists like Didron. Certainly, E.W. was friendly with the Belgian revivalist, Béthune . just maybe the connection comes from there.
Please keep us all informed of the Gorton restoration – perhaps some photos?
Also, do you know much about E.W.’s All Saints Church in Barton-upon-Irwell? It would be interesting to get some good photos of exterior and interior on the thread, as the ones presently on it do not do justice to this jewel.
Regarding Cobh Cathedral, which was planned by E.W., though he died only seven years after it was begun, you will find plenty of information on the website of the Friends of St Colman’s Cathedral, http://www.foscc.com -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
St. Mary’s, Burrow on Furness
E.W: Pugin 1852
St. Mary’s Catholic Church is built on a plot of ground facing Duke Street, generously presented by the Duke of Devonshire through Sir James Ramsden, to whom the Catholics of Barrow owe a deep debt of gratitude. The designs were furnished by the late Mr. Pugin, to whose father this country is indebted for the revival of Gothic architecture-a style which seems intimately connected with the sublimity of christian worship. The church was built in 1866-7, at a cost of £6,000. The finished design includes a tower and spire which, when added, will render the building not only a conspicous object in the street in which it is situated, but an ornament to the town. The interior is spacious, accommodating about 800 persons, and consists of an apsidal chancel, nave, and side aisles. The latter are separated from the nave by rows of arches resting on pillars with alternately moulded and floriated capitals. The pupit is a creditable piece of carving, bearing on its four sides, cut in high relief, representations of the four evangelists in the act of committing to writing the inspirations of the, Holy Ghost. The chancel is embellished by a magnificent altar and reredos, designed and carved by Messrs. Neill and Pearson, the eminent sculptors of Dublin. The whole design is beautifully characteristic in its conception, and harmonizes well with the Gothic style which has been preserved throughout the edifice. The prominent portions, consisting of the antependium (front part of the altar), the tabernacle, and the candle benches, are all composed of statuary marble, except the plinth, which is of dark coloured marble. Behind is the reredos of Caen stone, containing six arches, three on each side of the tabernacle, resting on beautifully polished columns of Galway green marble. Within these niches are the following effigies : on the right the Immaculate Heart of Mary, St. James, and St. Paul; and on the left a statue of the Sacred Heart, St. Peter, and St. John. The reredos is surmounted by embattled work, richly moulded and carved. On the front of the altar are two very significant groups representing the Last Supper, after Leonardo da Vinci, and the Adoration of the Lamb. These groups stand out in high relief, and are both admirable specimens of the truthfulness and delicacy of the sculptor’s chisel. Above the tabernacle rises a massive canopy, supported on red marble columns. It is octagonal, resting on a square, which has gablets on each of its four sides, in which are arches. Each of these gables is finished by a finial. The upper part of the canopy is richly crocketed, and terminates in a large floriated finial. The tabernacle and candle benches are heavily moulded and inlaid with red, green, and white marbles. The tabernacle is also enriched by an elaborate brass door, on which are engraved a cross, and a border of beautiful flowing foliage. The work is all executed in the highest style of art, and is a credit to the sculptors. Last year, 1881, a large and powerful organ was added to the church, which necessitated a very considerable enlargement of the gallery. The instrument was originally built by Messrs. Hill and Son, of London, for the Theatre of the Liverpool Philharmonic Society, and contains nearly 3,000 pipes. It is blown by hydraulic power, but is also so arranged as to be independent of water force. We are glad to note that the cheap coloured prints of the Stations of the Cross hitherto used in the church, are now (June, 1882) being replaced by a set more worthy the edifice. The new series are well executed oleographic copies of the Italian masters. Each picture is encased in a massive oak frame of two shades, richly carved in the Renaissance style. A bell and bugle moulding and corner pattresses give a lightness and artistic finish to the frame. The upper and lower shafts carry tablets, bearing the number of the station and the names of the donors. The frames are the design and work of Mr. Matthew Russell, and bear testimony to his manipulative skill. The mission is under the care of the Rev. E. Caffrey, assisted by two resident curates, and numbers about 5,000. Attached to the church is a handsome presbytery from the designs of Mr. J. O’Byrne, of Liverpool. The Schools, near the church, form a good block of buildings, of the Gothic style to agree with that edifice, and enlivened by the introduction of bands of cream coloured bricks. The accommodation becoming too limited, the schools were enlarged in 1881, by the addition of a spacious two storied building, increasing the capacity to about 1,000. The new wing is a substantial brick building with a capacity for 500 children, and was erected at a cost of about £3 per child of the accommodation. The boys’ school is under the care of Mr. Bulmer, and the girls’ and infants’ under Miss Fairbairn and Miss Shaw.
from Mannex’s directory of Furness and Cartmel, 1882. -
Praxiteles,
In a deep recess of my mind I have an image of St. Josephs Glasthule with a sort of stand-alone spire/belfry. I always thought it (the plan) looked very incongruous. Never built, do you know if that was part of the Pugin + Ashlin design or a later proposal?
Thanks
KB2 -
-
Hi Folks,
I’ve been ringing All Saints Barton for 2 weeks without success to gain access. I’ll just have to try on spec. In the meantime for those of you who can get BBC2 there is an half hour documentary about Gorton Monastery and our trials and tribulations in getting through the funding and red tape. We had a private screening this week and the photography is absolutely stunning. So watch out for” A Passion for Churches” BBC 2, 7.30 p.m 8th March 2006
Best wishes
-
-
Hi Luzarches
Attached are two views of altar and sanctuary, both showing altar rails. The rails were present at the time of deconsecration and are probably post 1914. (or 1910) Immediately prior to 1914 there was a Rood Screen which lasts for less than a year. I’ll check the details when i get to work on Monday. I cant tell if there are rails to the side altars at the top of the aisles, so will check pictures on Monday.
-
-
-
Very interesting pictures of Gorton monastery in the previous post – thanks Gorton! The altar rails run the width of the church, embracing sanctuary and side chapels in a unity, a feature very noticeable in Pugin and Ashlin’s Cobh Cathedral, also St Peter and Paul’s, Cork, and All Saints, Barton. Could it be said that this was a feature of Pugin churches?
The reredos is most spectacular and unusual. How well does it survive? -
My memory was playing tricks, the altar rails were in place by 1914 as you can see on the attached. If i had to hazard a guess i would place them at the latest 1885, the date the high altar was consecrated. The rood screen didnt last very long and appears to be part of minor re-ordering of the Church, possibly as part of the 1911 golden anniversary celebrations when the whole of the Church was re-decorated. The reredos is in appalling state, about only 1/3 rd survives. More on altar and reredos later. Incidentally the altar is by Peter Paul Pugin
-
-
It’s a beautiful day here in Manchester so i thought i’d go to Mass, if thats the only way to get a look at Pugin’s All Saint’s Barton interior. Wrong:( Whats the world coming to when you can’t get into Church on Sundays? However took some exterior shots. Bit difficult as all gates padlocked and views obscured from south by friary and from north by trees, however here they are. first 4 of 14
-
-
-
-
-
@Praxiteles wrote:
E. W. Pugin
The Basilica of Our Lady in Dadizele, Flanders
This looks to eb the interior before the WWI bombing.
Praxiteles,
Did this church survive WWII to be faithfully rebuilt in the manner of St Martin, Ypres, or was it done on a budget? Any contemporary pictures?
-
Dear Praxiteles,
Thanks, i’ve got a phone number and web address for All Saints but no answers. It was’nt possible to even knock on friary door cos gates were padlocked. Concerned that no activity on a Sunday, although at least one set of tyre tracks in the snow. If you look closely at picture 4 you can see door appears to be nailed shut and picture 14 shows damage to roof. Are we facing another “Gorton Monastery”. will keep you posted. -
-
Hi Sangallo,
Reredos at Gorton MonasteryIn 1883 an outdoor workshop on the north side of the Friary garden was constructed to serve as brother Patrick Dalton’s workshop for the creation of the high altar. P.P. Pugin designed this altar, which was one of the largest exemplars in the country at the time of its consecration in 1885. An article in Manchester Faces and Places written in 1900 describes in detail the altar and reredos as it existed at that time.
“The altar and reredos are very elaborate in decoration. At the back of the altar is the marble and alabaster reredos, forming a buttress to the great central canopy, which rises to the height of over 40 feet. The bottom of the reredos is composed of two large piers, that on the Epistle side containg the piscine, and that on the Gospel side the aumbry. On the top of these piers are canopied niches, in which are figures of St Anthony, St Clare, St Elizabeth of Hungary, and St Bonaventure. Arches with traceried and crocketed gables connect the piers with the walls of the chancel. On either side of the central canopy, which is supported by marble columns, are flying buttresses formed of open tracery work, and at the bottom of these buttresses are piers terminating in niches. In the niches on the gospel side is a figure of St Francis, and in that on the Epistle side is a statue of St Dominic. The throne, supported by two angels, is placed immediately under the central canopy, and is approached by steps following the line of the apsidal chancel, at the back of the reredos. The altar and tabernacle stand away from the reredos, and are approached by three stone steps. The altar top is of pure white marble supported by eight Californian marble shafts, and beneath the altar are panels on which are varied subjects emblematic of the eucharist. The tabernacle is of alabaster, richly moulded and carved, and has a door of beaten brass”
Sadly the altar has been heavily vandalised and presently all that remains are the stone steps and the brick base. The reredos has also been vandalised, mostly at the sides and upper edges. On the attached sketch, taken from an old photograph i’ve marked up in red the existing remains of the reredos. Anything out side of the red line has been lost and even those parts inside the red line have been subject to damage as you’ll see from some sample photos i’ve attached.
Some times it makes me sad:( and other times it makes me mad:mad: but one day we will have the money to restore it – latest estimate
-
-
-
St. Chad’s Cathedral
One of the finest neo-gothic church buildings in England, built to the design of Augustus Welby Pugin and opened in 1841. Much of the work is by Hardman & Co. The mother church of the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Birmingham, it contains some splendid 19th century stained glass made by Hardmans, a 16th century Flemish pulpit, and a late medieval statue of the Virgin Mary, as well as one of the largest new manual organs in the UK, built by Walkers & Co in 1993. -
The link below shows a picture of the great Rood Screen build in St. Chad’s by A.W. Pugin. Unfortunately, in the late 1960s it was dismantled and atomized. Recently, I believe, the Cross was reinstated but the other parts of the screen remain scattered in various places. Let me quote Nicholas Psevner on thi particular piece of vandalism: “Without the screen, we totally lose Pugin’s intended drama of the nave space revealing the chancel as a giant reliquary, that is, for the relics of the 7 century Bishop of Mercia, St. Chad….housed in the gilt feretory above the High Altar reredos”. Most of the bits and pieces of the screen are to be found in Anglican church of the Holy Trinity in Reading.
-
-
Just take a look at the 39 Articles published at the beginning of the Book of Common Prayer and you will see why there are doctrinal problems about that particular entreprise:
Articles 28 and 31 , I think, sould be sufficient to see that there still remains a good deal of ground to be made up before even an “agreed” doctrine of the Eucharist, for what that is worth, can be arrived at:
http://www.reform.org.uk/restore.php?page=http%3A//www.reform.org.uk/covenant/39.html
-
There are certainly differences between the faiths which present very deep spiritual contradictions; however in todays World both faiths have a lot more in common than most other religions and the recent increases in secularism and inter-faith partnerships have led to regular situations where members of both faiths find themselves in the others places of worship. I think that finding ways to solve these issues are a lot more important than altering a cathedral which doesn’t need updating.
BTW
The story of St Chads is an interesting one and should be a salutory lesson to all those who wish to embrace the latest fads at the expense of important architectural fabric which I am sure was only created by the great sacrifices of a previous generation.
-
If anyone is interested in viewing two wonderful example of neo-Gothic Rood Screens, I have just posted two examples built by A. Tepe, one in Utrecht the other in Amsterdam, which are still in place and largely intact. They can be found on postings # 830 and # 833 on the thread dealing with the reorganizationa and destruction of Irish cathedrals and churches.
-
Architect Francis Roberts has done a beautiful restoration job at E. W. Pugin’s church of St Mary in Barrow on Furness:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/frarchitects/sets/72057594099490552/
-
Yes, indeed. This is a far cry from the O’Neill hack-approach. The paint work looks very well but I am not convinced by that shaggy red carpet spilling around all over the place. The altar mensa would also look better where it was and should never have been moved. Where, however, are the altar rails?
-
@Thomond Park wrote:
It is ironic that the church will not permit anglicans to receive communion in their churches but does not object to important architectural fittings being transferred from important cathedrals to anglican churches
There is no irony if one allows that churches are used as places of worship rather than architectural museums. Worship should be conducted in accordance with the current liturgy of the religious denomination rather than a liturgy which may have obtained at the time the church was designed. Is the preservation of architectural fittings more important than freedom of worship?
-
@sangallo wrote:
Architect Francis Roberts has done a beautiful restoration job at E. W. Pugin’s church of St Mary in Barrow on Furness:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/frarchitects/sets/72057594099490552/
E.W. Pugin and Ashlin’s lovely church in Monkstown Co. Cork is currently undergoing restoration. It is a community project with many of the experts giving their time and expertise free. Thankfully to date there is no mention of any re-ordering, but there is one worrying aspect in that Alex White is involved. He was involved in the disastrous Cork Cathedral project and was also involved as a committee member in the Cobh debacle.
-
@Gianlorenzo wrote:
E.W. Pugin and Ashlin’s lovely church in Monkstown Co. Cork is currently undergoing restoration. It is a community project with many of the experts giving their time and expertise free. Thankfully to date there is no mention of any re-ordering, but there is one worrying aspect in that Alex White is involved. He was involved in the disastrous Cork Cathedral project and was also involved as a committee member in the Cobh debacle.
Paul Clerkin put up some drawings of Monkstown Church at #4 on this thread and there is a picture at #15.
Gianlorenzo, do you have any pictures of the interior? -
@Gianlorenzo wrote:
E.W. Pugin and Ashlin’s lovely church in Monkstown Co. Cork is currently undergoing restoration. It is a community project with many of the experts giving their time and expertise free. Thankfully to date there is no mention of any re-ordering, but there is one worrying aspect in that Alex White is involved. He was involved in the disastrous Cork Cathedral project and was also involved as a committee member in the Cobh debacle.
http://www.irish-architecture.com/buildings_ireland/cork/monkstown/index.html
-
@Praxiteles wrote:
Yes, indeed. This is a far cry from the O’Neill hack-approach. The paint work looks very well but I am not convinced by that shaggy red carpet spilling around all over the place. The altar mensa would also look better where it was and should never have been moved. Where, however, are the altar rails?
The rails are there. If you go through the pictures and in the one of the nave facing west to the rose window you can see them in the foreground. There is no gate however, but maybe that will be put back as it doesn’t look quite finished yet.
-
-
@Praxiteles wrote:
No! We are talking about Monkstown. Can you get someone to rust over and take a few shots – especially of the inside. Does anyone know what is goning on there’. Was there a planning application?
Permission was granted by Cork County Council two years ago to restore and reorder the church. If you wish to check it out, the file reference is 04/1991. There was no fuss and no appeal to An Bord Pleanala. Monkstown people are gentle folk who respect their clergy. They also hold Alexander White in high regard and are not impressed by Praxiteles pathetic attempt to smear someone who is a great architect and a perfect gentleman.
-
-
@Praxiteles wrote:
Sirius:
Post °111 was not posted by Praxiteles. Indeed, no mention of Alex White appears in anything posted by Praxiteles on this thread.
Cool the steam!
Please accept my apologies, Praxiteles, as I now realise that it was Gianlorenzo who posted the statement that “there is one worrying aspect in that Alex White is involved”. Can I take it that Praxiteles does not support Gianlorenzo’s smear tactics?
-
@Sirius wrote:
Permission was granted by Cork County Council two years ago to restore and reorder the church. If you wish to check it out, the file reference is 04/1991. There was no fuss and no appeal to An Bord Pleanala. Monkstown people are gentle folk who respect their clergy. They also hold Alexander White in high regard and are not impressed by Praxiteles pathetic attempt to smear someone who is a great architect and a perfect gentleman.
I congratulate you on being elected to speak for the whole of Monkstown. What I said about Alex White is based on his involvement with the disaster which is the North Cathedral – re-ordered and what was proposed for Cobh Cathedral. I have met Alex White and found him a perfect gentleman. What I said was not a personal ‘smear’, but a comment on his involvement in ecclesiastical architecture and liturgy. It was he after all who proposed the adoption by the Cloyne HCAC of the discredited document “Liturgical Requirements for St. Colman’s Cathedral. Context and Text” written by the pseudo liturgist Fr. Danny Murphy.
Can we then presume from what you say that the Sanctuary in Monkstown Church will be torn apart and altar rails removed etc. If so St. Colman’s in Cobh will become even more unique in that it will be conserved in its original form. There are not many Pugin/Ashlin churches left, unfortunately. Future generations in Ireland will have no idea what a true Gothic church should look like.
You mention planning permission – what did it grant persmission for?
PS You should not malign poor Praxiteles, I happen to know the lady personally and she is a dear.
-
-
-
Here’s another E.W. Pugin building. ‘The Towers’ or as now ‘Meanwood Towers’ in Meanwood, Leeds, West Yorks. I’d be interested to hear if any one has any more information on the site, especially if anjyone has any plans or drawings.
Regards
L.A.
[ATTACH]2439[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH]2440[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH]2441[/ATTACH]
-
Meanwood Towers is situated off Parkland Gardens near Stonegate Road, Leeds. This house was built in 1867 by Edward W. Pugin for Thomas Stuart Kennedy, in gothic style. In May 1869 an organ house was completed to house a Schultze organ commissioned for Kennedy’s wife. The organ house was centrally heated and could seat up to 800 people. The organ was built in 1869 by J.F. Schulze & Sons of Paulinzelle, Germany. A special wood-framed organ house, large enough for some 800 people, was built to accommodate it. In 1877 the organ was loaned to St Peter’s Church Harrogate, and in 1879 it was installed by Brindley & Foster in the north transept of St Bartholomew’s Church, with two additional Pedal stops (1 and 3) supplied by Schulze. The case of American walnut was made at this time.
http://www.armley-schulze.freeserve.co.uk/OrgHist.htm
The original tall ornamental chimneys of Meanwood Towers were shortened in 1969 as they were unsafe. The house has now been converted into flats.“The Sixties, after all, had no taste for Victorian architecture.
Some, like Meanwood Towers in Leeds, have been subdivided into flats. “It has suffered a number of assaults on its fabric… and its gardens are built over with modern houses,” writes Sheeran. “Yet it is still a striking sight, and one comes across it like a great, beached wreck.” George Sheeran recalls that story in the new edition of Brass Castles: West Yorkshire New Rich and Their Houses 1800-1914 -
-
-
@Gianlorenzo wrote:
Does anyone know exactly what is planned for Monkstown parish church. Sirius mentioned permission to re-order the church, but failed to answer my question as to what exactly was permitted.
For the education of Gianlorenzo:
The following works for the reordering of the Church of St. Mary and the Sacred Heart in Monkstown were approved by the Conservation Officer:
The placement of the pulpit into the chancel area,
The erection of a platform to bring the altar table out into the crossing
The rearrangement and/or permanent removal of some pews
The removal of two confessional boxes
The relocation of the baptismal font
The relocation of part of the original reredos back from the existing altar table
The erection of tapestries
The blocking up of an existing door opeThe following works were not approved and were excluded by planning condition:
The removal of the existing altar and statue in the Lady ChapelThere was no submission from An Taisce
There were no submissions from the general public
There was no request for further information
The decision to permit was made within 8 weeks of the submission of the applicationHere endeth the lesson
-
@Sirius wrote:
There was no submission from An Taisce
There were no submissions from the general public
There was no request for further informationThis entirely proves just how off the beam the proposal for Cobh was; An Taisce do not object to proposals in places of worship lightly. In fact in my experience An Taisce spend much of their time protecting the setting of many Cathedrals and Churches around Ireland by making submissions on large developments on neighbouring sites that could if completed compromise these buildings place in the architectural hierarchy.
-
I have not jet seen Monkston, but the description provided for Ganlorenzo is sufficient to allows us to form the opinion that another disaster has been brought about by a group of people who know nothing about the liturgy and consiedrably less about the Irish neo-gothic movement. Clearly, the oeuvre of Pugin is currentlly in the hands of hay-barn builders whose mentors rise to nothing more than chip-shops. Just how and why has Ireland become so culturally (and religiously) detached? The likes of those involved in Monkstown show all the sympthoms of the post-colonial trauma that we usually associate with the farthest reaches of the Limpopo. 50 years ago, D Guinness started to try to do something to conserve the remnant of a certain aspect of 18th century Ireland. To-day, the Monsktown paddies are busily dismantling precisely what gave (and gives) them the only form of social identity available to such a reprehensible class. Keep A. White at the other side of the Lee, please.
-
@Sirius wrote:
For the education of Gianlorenzo:
The following works for the reordering of the Church of St. Mary and the Sacred Heart in Monkstown were approved by the Conservation Officer:
The placement of the pulpit into the chancel area,
The erection of a platform to bring the altar table out into the crossing
The rearrangement and/or permanent removal of some pews
The removal of two confessional boxes
The relocation of the baptismal font
The relocation of part of the original reredos back from the existing altar table
The erection of tapestries
The blocking up of an existing door opeThe following works were not approved and were excluded by planning condition:
The removal of the existing altar and statue in the Lady ChapelThere was no submission from An Taisce
There were no submissions from the general public
There was no request for further information
The decision to permit was made within 8 weeks of the submission of the applicationHere endeth the lesson
1. Who ever heard of a pulpit in a chancel? Their purpose is for preaching and of necessity must be located where people can hear what is said. In the great French churches you will encounter a tribune opposite the pulpit to seat the clergy who come in procession FROM the chancel to hear what is preached. But I suppose that no one in Monkstown will ever have heard of Bossuet, Bourdalou, Fenelon, Nicholas McCarthy, or for that matter Abraham a Santa Clara.
2. Another crossing fiasco! This has nothing to do with liturgy and nothing to do with architecture.
3. The permanent removal of pews. Here we are back to the same old pea banking off the same old pot. In Cobh the pews were moved into the Lady Chapel where they are breaking Oppenheimer’s mosaic floor. Has the Conservation officer seen that, and if so, what is being done about it?
4. Am I to take it that the removal of two confessionals in Monkstown means that it is now a zone free of the effects of Original Sin or are the clergy just too lazy to hear confessions?
5. The only reasonable place for a relocated baptismal font is in a baptistery outside of the church. Otherwise, are we to take it that there has been an outbreak of dipping in MOnkstown?
6. I do not understand the idea of relocation part of the reredos back from the mensa. Did we not just move the mensa away from the reredos earlier on; It sounds like total destruction. Please Mr. White, do Mr White go back to building chip shops and holiday chalets.
7. The erection of tapesteries: the usual unimaginative solution to atempt covering over the visual holes created by the destruction of the central feature of a neo gothic church: the altar. Just look at them in Longford, The Pro-Cathedral etc, etc, sine fine dicentes.
The entire project sounds like having arrived at a level of imagination and artistic creativity that EVEN manages to surpass the great Professor O’Neill’s efforts in CObh. It just goes to show you what the country boys can come up with when they take a japenese type inspiration from their cosmopolitan betters.
-
@Sirius wrote:
For the education of Gianlorenzo:
The following works for the reordering of the Church of St. Mary and the Sacred Heart in Monkstown were approved by the Conservation Officer:
The placement of the pulpit into the chancel area,
The erection of a platform to bring the altar table out into the crossing
The rearrangement and/or permanent removal of some pews
The removal of two confessional boxes
The relocation of the baptismal font
The relocation of part of the original reredos back from the existing altar table
The erection of tapestries
The blocking up of an existing door opeThe following works were not approved and were excluded by planning condition:
The removal of the existing altar and statue in the Lady ChapelThere was no submission from An Taisce
There were no submissions from the general public
There was no request for further information
The decision to permit was made within 8 weeks of the submission of the applicationHere endeth the lesson
Thank you so much for the ‘lesson’.
Would I be safe in assuming that the above re-ordering of the Sanctuary and Nave in Monkstown was presented to the parishioners and planning authorities as “liturgically required”?
If so, then I am not surprised that the people did not object as, in the main, this particular lie has been convincing congregations all over the English speaking world for some time. And make no mistake, it is a lie. I would have much greater respect for the wreckers if they just once spoke the truth,and admitted that these changes are something they desire and that they are not ‘required’, as such by the Universay Catholic Church.What is very interesting is what was not approved. I wonder how the removal of the altar and statue in the Lady Chapel could be justified liturgically and why would anyone want to do it? Would they then perhaps have changed the name from St. Mary and the Sacred Heart to simply Sacred Heart?
The answer, of course, is Iconoclasm.
An Iconoclast is:
1. One who attacks and seeks to overthrow traditional or popular ideas or institutions.
2. One who destroys sacred religious images.The above perfectly describes those involved in much of the destruction to Irish churches in the last 20-30 years.
Their ideas are hopelessly out-dated, but unfortunately those who hold to them are currently in positions of power within the church and they are still able to destroy our heritage and convince people like Alex White et al. that what they are doing is necessary for Catholic liturgy. -
Sirius, you have failed repeatedly to explain to us the liturgical requirements for the re-ordering of churches that you appear to support and you have also failed to correct my assumptions regarding Monkstown I can therefore take it that Pugin and Ashlin’s little gem is Monkstown is due for complete interior destruction albeit that the exterior will be restored.
-
@Gianlorenzo wrote:
Sirius, you have failed repeatedly to explain to us the liturgical requirements for the re-ordering of churches that you appear to support and you have also failed to correct my assumptions regarding Monkstown I can therefore take it that Pugin and Ashlin’s little gem is Monkstown is due for complete interior destruction albeit that the exterior will be restored.
I support the right of all religious denominations to reorder their places of worship in accordance with their own beliefs. I believe it is a matter for each denomination to decide when to revise their liturgy and, once they do so in accordance with the rules of their community, they should be entitled to practice that revised liturgy within their places of worship. If the interior of a place of worship is “protected†it is reasonable that the wider community should ask the religious denomination to respect the architectural heritage in so far as this can be reconciled with the practice of the liturgy. However I do not consider it reasonable that a religious community should be compelled to subordinate their liturgical requirements to the architectural preferences of people who do not share their faith.
In the case of Cobh Cathedral, An Bord Pleanála accepted that the proposed reordering was based on liturgical requirements. However the Board decided that the proposed design was not the only way of meeting those liturgical requirements and that, as there appeared to be other options, the design submitted by the Trustees was probably not the best way of meeting those requirements. By framing the decision in this way the Board was effectively inviting the Trustees to submit a further application incorporating appropriate revisions to the design. I believe that anyone with experience of the planning process would support this interpretation of the “reasons and considerations†attached to the Board’s decision.
As I am not a member of that community I do not see why Gianlorenzo should expect me to justify the liturgical requirements of the Catholic parish of Monkstown. Would he expect me to explain the liturgical requirements of the mosque in Clonskeagh?
I am satisfied that Fr. Cotter has permission in accordance with the Planning Acts and Regulations. His architect set out in detail the extent of the reordering and the reasons therefore. These documents were available to the public. At a time when 24,000 were supposedly outraged about the reordering of Cobh Cathedral, not a single voice was raised against what appears to me to be a similar proposal for Monkstown parish church. I find that puzzling and the only explanation I can offer is that, while they are only a couple of miles apart, these two places of worship are located in different dioceses.
-
@Sirius wrote:
I support the right of all religious denominations to reorder their places of worship in accordance with their own beliefs. I believe it is a matter for each denomination to decide when to revise their liturgy and, once they do so in accordance with the rules of their community, they should be entitled to practice that revised liturgy within their places of worship.
I couldn’t agree more, but the salient point is that for the Roman Catholic Church it is not in the remit of any individual to decide what is ‘liturgically required’ without recourse to the Holy See and/or the Congregation for Divine Worship and Discipline of the Sacraments. Individual bishops are guardians of the liturgy not the authors of liturgy.
-
@Sirius wrote:
If the interior of a place of worship is “protected†it is reasonable that the wider community should ask the religious denomination to respect the architectural heritage in so far as this can be reconciled with the practice of the liturgy. However I do not consider it reasonable that a religious community should be compelled to subordinate their liturgical requirements to the architectural preferences of people who do not share their faith.
I have not posted to this thread before and have not read all the previous posts so apologies if I am repeating previous points – but I am intrigued by the above quote.
Might the same logic not be extended to encompass the more usual type of Protected Structure’?
For example is it reasonable to expect, say Dermot Desmond, to merely observe the law as far as can be reconciled with his particular needs?
He might believe in installing a dumb waiter in a PS for example – I would not share his ‘belief ‘but is his belief not akin to the ‘liturgical preference’ above?
(and what would happen to the (protected) decorative features of Catholic churches if the liturgical preferences chose to dispense with graven images/stained glass etc. and revert to a more fundamental style?)
-
-
@publicrealm wrote:
I have not posted to this thread before and have not read all the previous posts so apologies if I am repeating previous points – but I am intrigued by the above quote.
Might the same logic not be extended to encompass the more usual type of Protected Structure’?
For example is it reasonable to expect, say Dermot Desmond, to merely observe the law as far as can be reconciled with his particular needs?
He might believe in installing a dumb waiter in a PS for example – I would not share his ‘belief ‘but is his belief not akin to the ‘liturgical preference’ above?
(and what would happen to the (protected) decorative features of Catholic churches if the liturgical preferences chose to dispense with graven images/stained glass etc. and revert to a more fundamental style?)
This is the point that was made by FOSCC and An Taisce at the Oral Hearing in Midleton.
If you take the stance that Church authorities can arbitrarily decide what is liturgically require. without reference to the norms of their own denomination, and that this must be ‘respected’ irregardless of any other criteria, then the Act itself becomes redundant in the area of the protection of significant ecclesiatical structures. -
@publicrealm wrote:
I have not posted to this thread before and have not read all the previous posts so apologies if I am repeating previous points – but I am intrigued by the above quote.
Might the same logic not be extended to encompass the more usual type of Protected Structure’?
For example is it reasonable to expect, say Dermot Desmond, to merely observe the law as far as can be reconciled with his particular needs?
He might believe in installing a dumb waiter in a PS for example – I would not share his ‘belief ‘but is his belief not akin to the ‘liturgical preference’ above?
(and what would happen to the (protected) decorative features of Catholic churches if the liturgical preferences chose to dispense with graven images/stained glass etc. and revert to a more fundamental style?)
The difference is that freedom of worship is enshrined in the Constitution as is the right of religious denominations to manage their own affairs.
-
@Sirius wrote:
I support the right of all religious denominations to reorder their places of worship in accordance with their own beliefs. I believe it is a matter for each denomination to decide when to revise their liturgy and, once they do so in accordance with the rules of their community, they should be entitled to practice that revised liturgy within their places of worship. If the interior of a place of worship is “protected†it is reasonable that the wider community should ask the religious denomination to respect the architectural heritage in so far as this can be reconciled with the practice of the liturgy. However I do not consider it reasonable that a religious community should be compelled to subordinate their liturgical requirements to the architectural preferences of people who do not share their faith.
There you said it – once they do so in accordance with the rules of their community. That says it all. What was proposed in Cobh was not in accordance with the rules of the community, ie the Universal Catholic Church.
What constitutes a ‘religious community’. Can it be possible that you think that a bishop – any bishop – along with a few of his clerical friends constitutes a religious community? Where does that leave the other 90% of people in Cobh in your reckoning? -
@Sirius wrote:
The difference is that freedom of worship is enshrined in the Constitution as is the right of religious denominations to manage their own affairs.
Sirius:
How can there be a transgression of the right to freedom of worship and freedom for religious denominations to organise their own affairs when the Cobh Cathedral project is NOT required by the liturgical law of the Catholic Church?
Introducing the question of religious freedom into the Cobh debate is a piece of eye-wash concocted by McCutcheon and Mulcahy in their report of last November to ABP when they simply could not come up with a convincing reply to the position advanced by the FOSCC. Clearly, McCutcheon and Mulcahy did not have the best Canonical advice available to them when they were baking in the pastery kitchen – if indeed they bothered to consult any canonist. That little oversight left them groping in the ark for they did not quite know what they were at.
Also, Sirius, keep in mind taht in the irish constitution the right to religious freedom and the right of religious denominations to organise their own affairs are not ABSOLUTE rights but CONDITIONAL rights subject to the demands of public order. It might not be such a good idea in the present climate to want to tease out the implications of that.
-
@Praxiteles wrote:
Sirius:
Keep in mind taht in the irish constitution the right to religious freedom and the right of religious denominations to organise their own affairs are not ABSOLUTE rights but CONDITIONAL rights subject to the demands of public order. It might not be such a good idea in the present climate to want to tease out the implications of that.
So far the only public order issue would appear to be the threat to assassinate the bishop which was reported by THE_Chris in post #847. Is there more?
-
@publicrealm wrote:
I have not posted to this thread before and have not read all the previous posts so apologies if I am repeating previous points – but I am intrigued by the above quote.
Might the same logic not be extended to encompass the more usual type of Protected Structure’?
For example is it reasonable to expect, say Dermot Desmond, to merely observe the law as far as can be reconciled with his particular needs?
He might believe in installing a dumb waiter in a PS for example – I would not share his ‘belief ‘but is his belief not akin to the ‘liturgical preference’ above?
(and what would happen to the (protected) decorative features of Catholic churches if the liturgical preferences chose to dispense with graven images/stained glass etc. and revert to a more fundamental style?)
The Illium Properties case is more interesting than Cobh Cathedral as the conservation issues are not overlain by obscure and largely irrelevant liturgical arguments.
The Inspector’s Report on PL 29S.131528 took the view that while the works were more charaeristic of a Palladian style villa rather than a Georgian period townhouse “they constitute an expression of individual aesthetic taste which, given the ‘private dwelling’ nature of this protected structure and the reversibility inherent in their application as decorative features, can reasonably be described as acceptable interventions”
This seems to imply that if the protected structure is your private dwelling you are entitled to modify the interior in accordance with your personal taste provided the works are reversible.
-
-
@Praxiteles wrote:
The only one who mentioned this case in relation to Cobh Cathedral was McCutcheon and Mulcahy. Are we there again?
Semper argumentum ad hominem!
-
@Gianlorenzo wrote:
There you said it – once they do so in accordance with the rules of their community. That says it all. What was proposed in Cobh was not in accordance with the rules of the community, ie the Universal Catholic Church.
What constitutes a ‘religious community’. Can it be possible that you think that a bishop – any bishop – along with a few of his clerical friends constitutes a religious community? Where does that leave the other 90% of people in Cobh in your reckoning?I agree that the crux is the right of each religious denomination to manage its own affairs and decide on its liturgical policy. But how should that decision be made in relation to Cobh Cathedral? Should matters of faith and morals be decided by plebiscite? If so, should the electorate be confined to the Catholic parishioners of Cobh or should it be a decision of the laity of the entire diocese? Would you include in the poll the a la carte Catholics who might only attend the Cathedral for family weddings, baptisms and funerals? I think it would be simpler to leave it to the Bishop who, I expect, will make the right decision in consultation with the Roman curia.
-
@Sirius wrote:
I agree that the crux is the right of each religious denomination to manage its own affairs and decide on its liturgical policy. But how should that decision be made in relation to Cobh Cathedral? Should matters of faith and morals be decided by plebiscite? If so, should the electorate be confined to the Catholic parishioners of Cobh or should it be a decision of the laity of the entire diocese? Would you include in the poll the a la carte Catholics who might only attend the Cathedral for family weddings, baptisms and funerals? I think it would be simpler to leave it to the Bishop who, I expect, will make the right decision in consultation with the Roman curia.
In the first place this is not a question of Faith or Morals. If it were those who make up FOSCC and the vast majority of the parishioners in Cobh wouldn’t have opposed their Bishop.
A short history of what happened in Cobh.1992 Restoration project set up – Cobh Parish has to date contributed €1.3 million to this project – on third of the total – this was the percentage Cobh Parish contriuted to the building of the Cathedral. The population of Cobh is c. 1/13 of the population of the Diocese, therefore the people of Cobh have per head contributed vastly more that those in the other parishes of the Diocese, naturally as this is their parish church. c.18,000 people in the Diocese outside Cobh signed the petition against the changes to the Cathedral.
1998 re-rodering was first announced to the people, even though some tried to say that this had been included in the original Restoration Project as presented to the people – it was not. The basic plan of extending the sanctuary, removing the altar rails (less radical than the eventual plan) and intrucing new cathedra, chair, altar and ambo. The people objected. Everyone agreed that a new altar should be put in place of the present temporary altar, but the rest was unnecessary as people saw it. This is still the situation.
Numerous promises were made to come back to the people with the eventual final plan, this did not happen. On 18th July 2005 plans were submitted to Cobh Town Council for planning permission. That same evening saw the first of the “consultations” with the people, in other words the people were faced with a fait accompli.
At no time since 1992 have any of those behind the project attempted to explain to people “WHY”.
If you go into Cobh today and talk to people about their Cathedral, that is the one question that will come up again and again – Why? No effort was made in Midleton to answer this question.Finally and most importantly this is not a case of ‘disobedience’ to the lawful authority of the Church. At no time have people been instructed to stop opposing the changes. And there has been no consultation with the Roman Curia on this matter, other than by the people themselves. Had the document ‘Liturgical Requirement’ which accompanied the planning application, been submitted and approved by Rome then FOSCC and the people of Cobh would have found it very difficult to oppose further.
-
It must have been very embarrassing for poor bishop McGhee sitting thre at the the Oral Hearing in Midleton and having to listen to the evidence being produced that made it more than clear that there were discrepencies in what he had been telling various people:
– in making a solemn promise that he would come back to the people fo Cobh BEFORE submitting any plans for the Cathedral which has never been honoured.
– stating in a letter to the FOSCC in April 2004 that NO plans EXISTED for the Cathedral when in another letter to Rome in October 2003 he announced that plans had been FINALISED. As it turned out, the plans had been completed on 23 June 2003.
– trying to suggest that a public consultation had taken place on the mad-hatter scheme of Professor Cathal O’Neill when in fact the public were not shown the plans until AFTER they had been submitted and at a point when no suggestions could have been taken on board.
What are we to call all of this in ordianry terms: mendaciousness.
It is peraps just as well that he has made no further statements on the Cobh Cathedral debacle since the publication of the ABP ruling. Had he done so, could have been believed?
-
@Bruges wrote:
This seems to imply that if the protected structure is your private dwelling you are entitled to modify the interior in accordance with your personal taste provided the works are reversible.
Certainly the extract you quoted would imply this Bruges.
I can only hope that what the Inspector meant was that a slight eparture from the strict Georgian townhouse pattern is acceptable – i.e. that certain very limited expressions of ‘personal taste’ may be permissible (provided they are reversible).
Any general deference to personal taste would open up an appalling vista – might as well scrap the record of PS’s and be done with it.
(I hope the Minister for the Environment and destruction of Heritage hasn’t yet heard of Archeire (or the interweb) 🙂
-
@publicrealm wrote:
Certainly the extract you quoted would imply this Bruges.
I can only hope that what the Inspector meant was that a slight eparture from the strict Georgian townhouse pattern is acceptable – i.e. that certain very limited expressions of ‘personal taste’ may be permissible (provided they are reversible).
Any general deference to personal taste would open up an appalling vista – might as well scrap the record of PS’s and be done with it.
(I hope the Minister for the Environment and destruction of Heritage hasn’t yet heard of Archeire (or the interweb) 🙂
The principle behind the Illium decision would appear to be that the designation of the INTERIOR of a private dwelling as a protected structure should not unduly restrict the right of the family to arrange the layout of the interior to suit their domestic requirements. It would be unreasonable to insist that just because a family lives in a protected structure they must consult with Ian Lumley and Dr. Freddie O Dwyer when they want to rearrange the furniture.
It is important however not to read too much into the Illium decision. Mr Desmond was in an unusually strong position as he already had planning permission by default as a result of a spectacular own goal by the Dublin City Council planners and conservation officers. In deciding to grant permission under PL 29S.131528 the Board was not comparing the proposal with a do nothing scenario but rather with the scheme which was already been deemed to be permitted by the High Court judgement of O’Leary J. in October 2004.
-
@publicrealm wrote:
Certainly the extract you quoted would imply this Bruges.
I can only hope that what the Inspector meant was that a slight eparture from the strict Georgian townhouse pattern is acceptable – i.e. that certain very limited expressions of ‘personal taste’ may be permissible (provided they are reversible).
Any general deference to personal taste would open up an appalling vista – might as well scrap the record of PS’s and be done with it.
(I hope the Minister for the Environment and destruction of Heritage hasn’t yet heard of Archeire (or the interweb) 🙂
Scrapping the list of PSs is exactly what would have ensued in the wake of the CObh Case had the personal preferences of the Trustees been acccpted by ABP.
-
@Sirius wrote:
For the education of Gianlorenzo:
The following works for the reordering of the Church of St. Mary and the Sacred Heart in Monkstown were approved by the Conservation Officer:
The placement of the pulpit into the chancel area,
The erection of a platform to bring the altar table out into the crossing
The rearrangement and/or permanent removal of some pews
The removal of two confessional boxes
The relocation of the baptismal font
The relocation of part of the original reredos back from the existing altar table
The erection of tapestries
The blocking up of an existing door opeThe following works were not approved and were excluded by planning condition:
The removal of the existing altar and statue in the Lady ChapelThere was no submission from An Taisce
There were no submissions from the general public
There was no request for further information
The decision to permit was made within 8 weeks of the submission of the applicationHere endeth the lesson
Been away for awhile.
Sirius – do you imagine that these are original proposals? They are now in the domain of the mundane.
Do not be surprised that the parishioners in Monkstown are not objecting. They have been lied to, and have in their innocence accepted the word of their priest and the so-called architectural and liturgical experts.
What is happening in Monkstown is a scandal and in years to come people ( including architects) will ask ” How was this allowed to happen”? -
-
The Church was designed by Edward Welby Pugin, son of Augustus Welby Northmore Pugin famous for his work on the Houses of Parliament. Pugin senior died at an early age and his work was continued by Pugin Junior who completed his fathers commissions and went on to become internationally famous in his own right.
Is there any way to confirm that the church in Great Harwood was actually designed by AWNP?
@gh78 wrote:
I would like to know if you have any information/photos/records about EWP’s work on Our Lady and St Hubert’s church in Great Harwood, Lancashire.
I have recently been in touch with a descendant of James Lomax who provided the funds to build the church.
Thanks!
-
Some news regarding Gorton monastery & the high altar:
-
Hello, I am wondering if you or anyone subscribing could possibly help me? I am desperately looking for any information/drawings/plans, etc, regarding a small Private Chapel in Euxton Lancs that has been confirmed as being designed by E W Pugin. The chapel concerned is within the grounds of Euxton Hall and was commissioned by the Andertons who owned the estate at the time. It is a miniture (sisiter church) to the nearby St Mary’s Church and was re-built at the same time (1865-1866). The Chapel has many typical Pugin architectural features, Maw and co floor tiles similar to those in Westminster, and also a beautiful Hardman stained glass window. Any information would be much appreciated.
-
The Pugin Society may be able to help here:
-
@sangallo wrote:
I have already posted some information about All Saints Church, Barton-upon-Irwell, on the “reordering and destruction” thread. Here is some more information from English heritage on this great E.W. Pugin church, which is on the Grade I heritage list.
Roman Catholic church. 1867-8. By E. W. Pugin. Rock-faced stone with slate roof. Nave, aisles, west bell turret, apsidal chancel with north chapel. Gothic Revival. 8-bay nave and aisles with weathered plinth, weathered buttresses and gabled porch. Each bay has a 2-light plate tracery aisle window with hoodmoulds and sill band and 2-light Geometrical tracery clerestory windows with continuous hoodmould. Steep roof with coped gables and pierced ridge tiles. West rose window above arcade of pointed lights and arched doorway all flanked by bold weathered and gableted buttresses. 4-bay polygonal chancel with 2-light plate tracery windows in each bay below a series of coped gables. Grotesque gargoyles. The 3 x 1 bay side chapel has a steep hipped roof and similar gables above each bay which interrupt a parapet with pierced quatrefoils. Interior: arcade arches, piers and chancel arches all in banded pink and yellow stone. Well carved foliage capitals. Lofty scissor-braced roof structure springing from angel corbels. Rib-vaulted chancel lavishly gilded. Elaborately carved stone altar and reredos. Good wall paintings, one showing E. W. Pugin with a plan of the church. Timber pews. Stained glass. A notably complete and unspoiled example of E. W. Pugin’s work, said to be his best.
I don’t know if All Saints’ is E. W. Pugin’s best work – I am inclined to think it is St Colman’s Cathedral, Cobh – but it certainly ranks well up there with Dadizele Basilica and Gorton Monastery. But readers of this posting may have different opinions on this.
Unfortunately, I have not yet been able to find a photo of the interior, but here is another photograph of the exterior:
You may be interested in this old postcard of the interior of the Irwell church
-
-
-
From The Economist
God’s Architect: Pugin and the Building of Romantic Britain
By Rosemary Hill Allen Lane; 416 pages; £30
Gothic’s moral superiority
Aug 9th 2007A marvellous biography of the architect who built glorious cathedrals—and filled Britain with buildings that vaguely resembled medieval monasteries
ONE of Augustus Pugin’s many jobs in his teenage years was to scurry around the rafters at Covent Garden, pulling on ropes to produce the extravagant illusions that the theatre-goers below were so fond of. It was dangerous work, high up in the dark and with heavy flats moving at high speed. There were dangers after the show was over too. In early 19th-century London, prostitutes used the empty boxes for business and the air of licence that came with the theatre appears to have got to anyone who hung around it.
This was not the place for the pampered son of a French artist, whose hazy origins hinted at aristocracy and the guillotine and a well-born mother whose income never quite matched her status. Pugin was headstrong, though, and his parents were too delighted with their son to ban him from the opera house. The attic of their Bloomsbury house was converted into a model theatre, complete with special effects, where Pugin could play at producing dramas in light and shade.
The first three decades of his life were lived at a pace that makes other prodigies look like slouches. He drew his first commission for King George IV, a design for a gothic sideboard for Windsor castle, at the age of 15. While still a teenager, he painted architectural theatre sets and assisted his father in the production of architectural illustrations. With the money he got, he decided to buy a house. His father vetoed this idea, so Pugin bought a boat which he sailed up and down the Thames. By 20 he was married and a father.
Then came the deaths. Anne, Pugin’s wife, died shortly after childbirth. A year later his doting parents, whose support had freed him, were dead too. His inheritances were enough money to build his own house on a plot of land near Salisbury and, more to the point, a gothic imagination that peopled his dreams with ghosts and sleepwalkers, and his waking with strainer arches and coloured glass.
Despite Pugin’s brilliance, this was not an obvious recipe for success. Happily, though, his adulthood coincided with changes in 19th-century Britain that made his peculiar talents fashionable. The flouncy Regency era, symbolised by John Nash’s Brighton pavilion (where, Rosemary Hill writes, “the Prince and his guests sat down, in a building that looked like a giant pudding, to enjoy puddings that looked like little buildings”), was passing away, to be replaced by a more purposeful early Victorian age. The landscape was changing fast too, as people moved from the land to the squalor of the cities. There were many critics who objected to the pace and results of industrialisation and thus were receptive to the feelings of romance, piety and nostalgia that the gothic style produced in its admirers.
Pugin built and built: cathedrals, churches, schools, stations, there was no limit to it. He backed his style with a polemical assault on his architectural foes. To those who thought his gothicism backward, he pointed out that classical architecture was not only older but more foreign than his beloved gothic. Gothic also had a moral claim to superiority. This was not just because it was in vogue before the Reformation, which Pugin, who converted to Catholicism, identified as the beginning of the end. Gothic also invoked the spirit of the medieval monastery where a softer charity had prevailed, unlike the kind in those ghastly new workhouses.
Some of the arguments Pugin made in favour of purity of style and against frippery would be turned on him later by the pioneers of modern architecture, who thought the gothic revival looked ridiculous. His ideas were also taken up by John Ruskin, and used against him. But the decline of Pugin’s reputation was well under way during his own lifetime. Being “architect to one grate or one fireplace is worse than keeping a fish stall,” he complained when commissions for buildings dried up, to be replaced by bits of interior design.
Pugin’s career ended at the age of 40, when he lost his mind. He was admitted to Bethlem hospital in Southwark, opposite one of his greatest buildings, St George’s cathedral, taken home and died within the year. In this excellent book, the author suggests that Pugin had caught syphilis when he was a teenager working in the theatre where he first fell for the light, shade and drama of architecture. -
Gorton Monastery wins top property honour
By Chris Barry – Editor
THE restoration of Gorton Monastery, the stunning 19th Century former friary in east Manchester, has been named the top North West building project at the property sector’s annual awards.
The Monastery – one of the finest examples of High Victorian Gothic architecture in the world – which has been saved from ruin by a £6.5m restoration, was crowned Project of The Year by judges at the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors’ 2009 awards.Seven other projects were awarded prizes at the awards evening held at the City of Manchester Stadium, where the North West’s most impressive buildings and property schemes were commended.
Widely regarded as the region’s property ‘Oscars’, the awards recognise and celebrate inspirational initiatives and developments in land, property, construction and the environment.
The categories included; building conservation, commercial, community benefit, design and innovation, regeneration, residential, sustainability and tourism and leisure.
Gorton Monastery won the overall Project of the Year accolade – the top-rated award presented to a nominee that excelled across all eight categories and above all other submissions.
The Monastery, once listed as one of the top 100 endangered sites in the world, was awarded the honour for its outstanding entry which scooped the building conservation award. The £6.5m restoration project is now a tourist attraction and also hosts corporate events and weddings.
Other winners on the night were the Liverpool One shopping centre, which won in two categories, and Edge Hill University in Lancashire claimed the award for sustainability. All the winners will be entered into the national RICS awards later this year, where they will compete against building projects from across the UK.
RICS chairman of the judging panel, Andrew Kellaway said: “We have seen some truly inspirational projects this evening, which proves that property professionals across the North West are still showing their innovation, creativity and commitment to sustaining and improving the property landscape.â€
Mr Kellaway concluded: “The awards symbolise excellence in the North West property and construction sector and provide an invaluable opportunity for the region to celebrate and showcase its exceptional projects. There is some fantastic work being done which deserves to be championed and celebrated.â€
-
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
