1

The Church of St Theobald and St Mary

Great Hautbois

Fig. 1. Tower and porch from south

Hundred of Taverham NHER: 7677 Deanery Taverham Stephen Heywood FSA Historic Buildings Officer Norfolk Historic Environment Service Union House Gressenhall Norfolk

11th March 2013

IntroduThe situHautboand the pilgrimPeter Dwith lanthe Bainsurvive16 of Nnearby.

The churound w3). The chancelchancelconglomwest waplenty ocentury Soon afinvolve

1 R J W 2 Jekyll’s

uction uation of thiis Castle is pre-Reformage destinat

De Alto Boscnds. The othnards. In 13s and parts

Norfolk Arch It also show

urch itself cwest tower,

building stal.2 The northl which has merate quoiall there waof Roman b

y.

fter the consed the block

Purdy, ‘Haut

s plan recons

is church cla very sign

mation activtion. It had co who hadher half of t312 Sir Robof it still haheaology1 (Fws the villa

consists of aa chancel anarted as a sih and west wa blocked s

ins at the weas a large sprick re-used

struction of king of the w

tbois Magna

structs an ap

lose to the riificant site a

vity around tan attendanhalf the ma

he manor bbert Bainardave masonryFig. 2) show

age to the we

F

a nave with nd a south pimple aislelwalls of thesplayed winestern and nlayed windod as voussoi

f the nave a west window

’, Norfolk Arc

pse. See Inco

2

river Bure anand the ruinthe image o

nt hospital fanor of Gre

belonged to d built Hauty revetmentws the castleest of the ch

Fig. 2. 1671 m

a two-bay aporch. All, eless nave wie nave survindow. The mnorth easternow (fig. 5). irs. The bui

round towew and the fo

chaeology, X

orporated Ch

nd beside thned tower pof St Theobafor pilgrimsat Hautboisthe Abbots tbois Castlet. A map of e still standhurch.

ap

arcade dividexcept for tith a small ave as well amasonry is n corners ofThe fabric

ilding dates

er was addedormation of

XVI, 1907, pp

hurch Buildin

he moated rresides overald which wfounded in . He endowof St Benet. The moat 1671 reproding and also

ding it from he chancel, apsidal or sqas most of thcharacterisef the nave (Fis of courseto the secon

d to the wesa narrow to

p147-152

ng Society ap

remains of r the former

was a populan about 1235wed the hospt’s and was of the castlduced in voo the church

a south ais is roofless quare-endedhe north waed by ferrugFig. 4). Alsed flints witnd half of th

st wall. Thisower arch w

pplication

r village ar 5 by Sir pital held by e

olume h

le, a (Fig. d all of the ginous o in the th he 11th

s which

has sincwas cledistinct to Hadd

Fig. 3. P

Fig 4. So

ce been reduarly an addbatter whic

discoe churc

Plan after B

outh east nave

uced in sizeition with itch is fairly uch in this re

Batcock

quoins

e to contain ts walls buttunusual for espect. The t

3

a doorway ting up agairound towetower has fo

(fig. 5). Altinst the wesers but has tfour simple a

Fig.

though closst wall. The the distinctioarched bell

5. West wall

se in date th tower has aon of beingopenings w

of nave

e tower a

g similar with flint

4

rubble dressings (fig.1) and two loops to the lower floors at the west. One of these has a fine arched lintel in conglomerate (Fig. 6).3 The first major alteration to the Norman church was the lengthening of the chancel and the addition of a transept. The archway between the chancel and the transept arm has been blocked (Fig. 7). The alteration took place probably during the early 13th century and may be associated with the miraculous image of St Theobald. A fragment of sophisticated early 13th century dogtooth ornament has been built into the west wall masonry and may have been part of the St Theobald shrine (Fig. 8).

Fig. 7. Blocked transept arch and east bay of arcade

Fig. 8. Fragment of dogtooth

3 The interior of the tower is inaccessible at present

Fig. 6. Loop to west side of tower.

5

During the 14th century an aisle was added to the south side on the alignment of the transept. A two bay arcade was constructed connecting with the nave. It has an octagonal central pier with similar responds, all with moulded bell capitals. The arches are of two plain-chamfered orders with the inner order of brick. The aisle has two simple lancet windows rather than large traceried ones which might be expected. These have medieval brick internal dressings similar to the inner order of the arcade (fig. 9). In contrast, the remains of the holy water stoop beside the south door uses a lot of Roman brick (fig.10).

Fig. 10. South door with holy water stoop

Fig. 9. Aisle south window interior

The aisle is almost as wide as the nave and its relatively tall walls show that it had a very shallow roof. Ladbrooke’s lithograph shows the church before its ruination and the shallow aisle roof is very much in evidence (fig.11). The image also shows the nave had a lead roof and that there was a small thatched building in the churchyard. The print also shows that the chancel had a slate roof covering and had a small buttress which has been rebuilt in larger form since.

The porch was probably added in the 15th century and the chancel roof has king posts with raking struts typical of 19th century techniques and probably dates just before Ladbrooke’s lithograph of the 1820s. It has soulaces to collars rather than tie beams and the sarking boards tend to confirm a former roof covering of slate (fig. 12).

6

Fig.11. Ladbrooke’s lithograph of 1820s

Fig. 12. Chancel roof

Thomas Jekyll was the architect engaged to rebuild the church on its present site in 1862. The Incorporated Church Building Society received two applications from him – the first was for the enlargement and re-seating of St Theobald’s and the second for rebuilding. It is clear that the church was still needed in a reduced role because the church yard was still in use. For this reason the chancel was kept roofed and sealed by removing the chancel arch and building a complete gable-end. Considerable quantities of limestone ashlar are used to line the blocking

7

and also to block a window on the north side of the chancel in its easternmost bay. Part of the work to the chancel may also have included the part rebuilding of the east wall where a brick relieving arch has been built into the masonry over the panel-traceried window along with rebuilding the gable with several blocks of limestone ashlar.

Fig.13. East wall of chancel

The revealed wall tops were protected with little slate roofs (fig.1) and the site and buildings have been maintained more or less since the move to the new church and remain one of the most evocative and attractive ruined churches in the region.

Present Condition In recent years the church has suffered from vandalism and theft and maintenance has declined. Several faults need to be rectified soon if major failures are to be avoided. In particular some small sections of masonry have fallen which could be repaired quite easily. These are:

• The south east side of the tower at mid height • The south wall of the aisle exterior at ground level • Wall around the tower arch • Any other areas of loose masonry • Some selected areas urgently needing repointing

8

Other things which need to be addressed include: • Stopping ivy growth (killing before trying to remove) • Repairing the little slate roofs over the wall tops • Opening the tower arch and removing the guano for a proper inspection to be made • Selective pointing • The iron gates to be repaired and repainted with micaceous iron oxide

The memorial chapel needs • Gutters and down pipes with soakaways • The stolen floor tiles need to be replaced • Repairs to the roof structure • Although the tiles are well laid at present the sarking boards are in need of repair or

removal. Desirable works:

• The glazing of the windows in the memorial chapel with adequate protection. • The decoration of the chapel • The re-roofing of the tower and keeping out the pigeons • The re-siting outside the church of the polished granite tomb in the south aisle • Provide information leaflets and discreetly placed information panels • Access for vehicles, parking etc.

Finally it is important to in institute a programme of maintenance which includes a quinquennial inspection by the church’s architect. Stephen Heywood, March 2013