Amesbury Church. Reasons for thinking, 8fc. 9 



5th year of Edward IY. (1465-6) " concerning the liberties of the 

 Abbess (formerly of Fontevraud) in the Manor of Leight on Buzzard," 

 looks like it, but the heads of the Amesbury Convent seem never 

 to have called themselves anything but " Prioress," and continued 

 that style to the last. 



My object to-night is not so much to read a critical paper on 

 Amesbury Church considered architecturally, for which it would 

 have been necessary for me to re-examine the Church, as to carry 

 out an intention that I formed, several years ago, of calling attention 

 to the fact that the identification of the present Parish Church with 

 the Church of Amesbury Priory, which appeared to be becoming a 

 matter of pretty general acceptance, was not proved, and that it 

 seemed to be contrary to the evidence. 



I was present, in the Church, when the late Mr. John Henry 

 Parker, in August, 1876, pronounced it to be undoubtedly the 

 Church of the Monastery, because there was evidence of there having 

 been formerly a cloister along the north side of the nave. That 

 was, I think, his principal, though it may perhaps not have been 

 his only reason for forming that opinion. It was contrary to my 

 view at the time, though I did not dispute it on the spot, and, on 

 examination, it did not appear to be at all conclusive. This led 

 me to study Canon Jackson's paper on Ambresbury Monastery, 

 which had been published in the Society's Magazine, 1 in 1867, and 

 also a pamphlet by the late Mr. W. C. Kemm, of Amesbury, 

 printed in 1876, on the occasion of the combined meeting of the 

 Archaeological Institute and our Society, at Salisbury, when 

 Amesbury was visited. * 



The conclusion, I came to, was that the evidence was against the 

 theory that the present Church was the Church of the Priory, but 

 still Mr. Parker's dictum that the Church bore evidence of monastic 

 arrangement, naturally carried considerable weight, and I think 

 that, until I heard his remarks, the significance of the cloister had 

 escaped me. It is a matter for consideration therefore, whether the 

 plan of the Church and cloister necessarily implies a monastic 



1 Wilts Arch. Mag., vol. x., p. 61. 



