Crossing tower

     Willis[1] dated the cathedral on architectural style and concluded the crossing tower was concurrent with the Early English western end of the choir (three bays). He dated the choir to the Early English period mostly by pier bases, but could not have known the nature of the bases of the large columns supporting the central tower. Since building the crossing tower must precede altering the choir substantially, it is inductive they must be concurrent.

Plan of the crossing, Willis (1861), with varied shading changed to colour. The four crossing columns are a mixture of four phases of construction, 1200, 1220, 1240 and 1250, and are shown consisting of work from the four phases. The greater part of the eastern side of the columns is Early English, the piers on their north and south sides are shown as late Early English and the nave side is labelled early Decorated. The dates given can only be approximations.

Willis could not have examined the crossing tower columns and his representation of the columns with different phases is about dating and not kind of stonework. The mixture is hidden by large banded shafts down the columns. It is possible the columns contain within them the remnants of the columns from the second cathedral.

Dufty^[2] thought the date of the central crossing was called into question by the survival on it of a roof crease of a nave he assigned to the 12th century. This crease appears on the outside of the west wall of the central crossing, in the north-west angle between tower and nave clearstory. He concluded there was a pre-13th century nave and together with the cathedral archive having mid-12th-century carved stones, meant building was very early. Indeed, could this be from the second cathedral? 

The author cannot find this crease, but there is a roll moulding on the wall at the height mentioned which can be seen from inside the north transept on the corner of the crossing tower and nave. It is absent on the corresponding wall in the south transept.

Clifton[3] described a housing roll on the west face of the crossing tower within the nave roof vault which covered the join of a nave roof to the tower to prevent water ingress. He thought this showed a nave roof for a Norman second cathedral. Clearly, there are complexities to the west wall of the crossing tower.

South-west crossing tower column.

     Rodwell[4] in 1987 and subsequent articles reasoned the Early English choir was built in the last quarter of the 11th-century[5] and later a great alteration to the choir and presbytery were the starting points for the current, third cathedral. He dated the reconstruction of the choir as being, c. 1170–1200, and undertaken in three stages.[6]  He then thought the crossing was built c. 1200–1220 followed by the chapel(s) on the south side of the choir. There was no interval in this order. With this sequence the crossing tower is not concurrent with the choir alteration. It is unclear why the eastern wing of the cathedral should be substantially altered before the crossing tower was built.

            Maddison,[7] 1993, began with his assertion the remodelling of the east end was designed by the same master as the building of the crossing tower because of a similarity of detail, though little detail was mentioned. He accepted the choir and crossing tower at Lichfield were contemporaneous. He also found a correspondence of the tower with the spire of Ashbourne church[8]  based on shapes of plinth, arcade and jamb mouldings. This church probably dates around two decades later. Maddison assumed the spire was part of the main tower build and connected much of the work to Bishop Walter De Langton’s episcopate. He envisaged much building around 1315 including the north-west front tower, completion of the crossing tower, final remodelling of the choir and the beginning of the Lady Chapel. The three ‘high steeples’ were on by 1323 as noted in the diary of pilgrims Simon Simeon and Hugh the Illuminator,[9] which means the construction was both extensive and relatively rapid, 1315–1323.

            Rodwell in 1990[10] conducted a close examination of the stone in the tower, from above the roof ridges to below the parapets, and concluded the upper part of the tower and the spire belong to the same phase of construction. He was surprised how much of the original medieval belfry stage of the tower remained intact. The east face was best preserved, with about 90% survival, the north face was the next best, at about 70%, whereas the south and west faces were poorly preserved, with only 25-30% survival. There was much rebuild in the 17th-century after the Civil War. The amount of visible Civil War damage (grapeshot and cannon balls) seems to have been similar on the north, south and east faces, but there was virtually none on the west.[11] In the 19th-century the south-west turret and pinnacle were completely rebuilt, large parts of the south and west sides were refaced and the parapets were renewed. There were at least two Victorian restorations of the tower.

Drawing of the central tower by S. Shaw (1798) and by Britton (1820). The spire is 77 m (252 feet) high.

 

            It is clear dating the crossing tower is imprecise. Its start of construction was either late 12th-century or more likely early 13th-century and was contiguous with the squaring of the choir and presbytery. Published dates for rebuilding the eastern arm vary between c. 1195 and 1210.[12] The four supporting pillars and vaulted roof must have been in place before the transepts were completed, 1220 for the south side. A small square room above the vaulted roof of the crossing was added at the time of the nave being constructed and the choir roof was being finished in order to attach all roofs to the crossing. Holes in the wall suggest there were corbels to hold a wooden roof above this room. Early in the 14th-century (1315?) two more storeys were added to the tower and then an octagonal spire built. There are indications some changes had to be made soon afterwards. Perhaps, the central tower was a belfry before the south-west tower was completed internally.

    There are similarities between the central tower and the equivalent at Hereford Cathedral. This includes buttresses and parapets. Both upper parts could have been built around 1320.

   See the post, ‘Third cathedral dates’, for the background history to the building of the cathedral. See the post ‘Third cathedral, dates and conjecture’ for a summary of the problems with dating.

    It is said the cathedral is in the shape of a cross and this was a recollection of crucifixion. This is untrue; the side arms or transepts buttress the massive central tower. The Greek cross shape is necessary for supporting the crossing tower. Generally, churches without a central tower have small side chapels and are not cruciform in shape. At Lichfield the four arms of the cathedral buttress the crossing tower and this was insufficient. The tower is built with two shells, an outer wall which has needed much restoration and an inner wall. This gives strength without needing extra large stone which would have been difficult to raise in height.

    What is the purpose of the central tower?

There are several hypothetical answers; here is one. Early churches in the Middle East were built as domes above a square base. The worshipper would look upwards when at the central, sacred part of the church. The Greeks also built domed churches, but added side chambers. The Italians and then the French had a mix of domed churches with some later having a central tower area with extensions to the western door and eastern apse. The English built few domed churches but instead had massive central towers, usually with steeples. Towers were also moved to the western end. The central tower has become a place of sanctuary, storage and belfry. It has also been a lookout.    

---

[1] R. Willis, R. On foundations of early buildings recently discovered in Lichfield Cathedral. The Archaeological Journal, XVIII, (1861), 1--24.

[2] A. R. Dufty, ' Lichfield Cathedral.' The Archaeological Journal, 120 (Report of the Summer Meeting of the Royal Archaeological Institute at Keele in 1963), (1963),  293--295.

[3] A. B. Clifton, The Cathedral church of Lichfield. (London: 1900), 36.

[4] W. Rodwell, The Norman Quire of Lichfield Cathedral. Its plan and liturgical arrangement. Lichfield: 50th Annual Report of Friends of Lichfield Cathedral. (1987)

[5] Ibid, from the scanty historical records Rodwell placed the building date of the choir as soon after 1085.

[6] W. Rodwell, ' The development of the choir of Lichfield Cathedral: Romanesque and Early English'. In: J. Maddison, ed. XIII Medieval archaeology and architecture at Lichfield. Leeds: The British Archaeological Association, (1993), 22–29.

[7] J. Maddison, ‘Building at Lichfield Cathedral during the episcopate of Walter Langton, 1296–1321.’ In Medieval archaeology and architecture at Lichfield, XIII, The British Archaeological Association, (1993), 76.

[8] St Oswald’s church, Ashbourne, began to be constructed in the 1220s and the tower and spire were completed by c. 1330. That makes it around 20 years later than the dates given by Willis. The Bishop of Coventry and Lichfield dedicated the church in 1241 which suggests a link with the cathedral.

[9] M. Esposito, ‘The Pilgrimage of Symon Semeonis: A Contribution to the History of Medieval Travel’ The Geographical Journal (1917), 51, 77–96.

[10] W. Rodwell, ‘Central Tower Recording: A Progress Note,’ letter to the Dean and Chapter held in the Cathedral Library, (1990).

[11] Could this mean the Parliamentarian bombardment from the west concentrated on the west front?

[12] See Willis 1861, 10; Anon. Illustrations: Lichfield Cathedral, in (ed.) H. H. Statham, The Builder, February 7, (1891), 60, 108‑9 and W. Rodwell, (1993) 17, see note 4.  The author prefers a later date of c. 1208, to fit in better with the history of bishops and the machinations of King John.