David A. H. Cleggett investigates the short-lived tower erected by Lewis Nockall Cottingham in 1825 and replaced by the present 1904 tower and spire. Featured in The Friends of Rochester Cathedral Annual Report for 1995-1996.

It used to be said the central tower of the cathedral was built during the episcopate of bishop Hamo de Hethe (1319-53), but this was a casual reading of both the visual and documentary evidence. Since it was built, the tower and spire have been the subject of several structural surveys, alterations in outline, frequent repairs and even replacement.

When Charles Hodgson Fowler,' the cathedral architect, surveyed the fabric. following his appointment in 1898, he said 'it is generally stated ithe tower was) all built by Cottingham in 1827 and its exterior is certainly all his work but the main body of walls and inner facing up to the height of 33' above the ringing chamber floor are medieval work, i venture to think, of the same date as the Elast] arch of the crossing underneath'?.

Cottingham's tower 1825-1904

Work on the arches to support the tower dates from the period of the completion of the choir and ante-dates Hamo de Hethe. Hodgson Fowler considered a tower was taken up above the supporting arches to the level of the ridge of the high-pitched roofs. This would have given an exceedingly squat tower, one not dissimilar from that at St. Canice's cathedral, Kilkenny.

In 1343, bishop Hamo de Hethe 'caused the new steeple of the church of Rochester to be carried up higher with stones and timbers, and to be covered with lead. He also placed in the same four new bells whose names are Dunstan, Paulinus, Ithamar, and Lanfranc?' According to Thorpe's Custumale Roffense the central tower was, in 1545, called 'six bell steeple', indicating two bells had been added to the original four.

By 1670 the tower and spire were in a poor state of repair. Mr. Guy, of Strood, and Mr Fry, a carpenter of Westminster, surveyed the spire and reported the need for urgent repair.* Whatever was done was not enough to arrest decay. On December 8, 1679 the chapter minutes record:

'Mr Guy appeared this day in the Chapter house & gives this account

Concerning the Steple vizt. That he finds the same in a very ruinous Condicon - ready to sinke downe into the Churche & to Carry all before it, by reason of the rottennesse of the plates, & that the great Girders are rotted quite through so that a stick may be easily thrust through the same: & that all the lead is so thinn that there is no mending of it & that it is thought that the spire hath not beene new leaded since it was first set up. And that three Corners of the Stone worke of the tower wch is all rent and Cracked, must be taken downe, And that he supposes that the making good of the stone Tower, the taking downe of the Old Spire & putting upp of new one & sufficiently to Cover the same with lead may amount unto the sum of £1600 over & besides the old lead & timber's.

Mr Fry did not agree with Mr Guy, stating: 'That the mending of the lead upon the Spire and the mending of one end of a Beame att the tower end of the east side of the Spire wilbe sufficient to keepe the same from falling'" Rightly or wrongly, Mr. Fry's opinion prevailed and the minutes for 23 June 1680 record The Repaires of the Steeple . . . to be done forthwith".

But all was not well. Following Mr Dudley Ransome's survey of the fabric in 1747 the spire was found to be dangerous and the tower much decayed. John Sloane, an unrecorded architect, designed a new spire, the model for which. survived in the crypt of the cathedral until the end of the nineteenth century. An attractive drawing by Jacob Schnebbelie (1760-92), shows the new spire to good effect. The ornamental arcade of tall trefoiled arches is clear in this drawing which was later engraved by Charles Warren (1767-1828), and reproduced in Hughson's Environs of London in 1806. Thomas Hearne FSA (1744-1817), produced a fine drawing of the cathedral from the north west in 1805, a drawing showing both the tower and Sloane's spire to good effect. This drawing was engraved by William Byrne (1743-1805), and is now much sought for. It was necessary to relay the lead on Sloane's spire in 1788." An interesting engraving of The North Prospect of the Cathedral Church of Rochester by John Harris (c. 1680-1740), shows the spire as it was before Sloane's rebuilding. It rose from the belfry stage without any ornamental parapet.

Surveys continued to be made of the fabric, with repairs carried out as monies permitted, until December 1824 when Lewis N. Cottingham [see review of the monograph of this architect in this report] was invited to survey the building for necessary repairs. His findings were to have a profound and lasting effect on the building.

Although Cottingham's survey has not survived, that made by Sir Robert Smirke (1781-1867), which is supplementary to it, has. Of the 'Great Tower' he wrote;

"Upon examining the state of the Spire raised about 40 or 50 years lagol upon the Walls of this Tower, it appears that the Lead which covers it is in so defective a condition as to admit the wet in many places; the Woodwork at the base of the spire is already in a decaying state and will soon be unequal to its support. At the time of my examination the greater part of these timbers next the Angles of the Tower and of the floor below it exhibited every appearance of having been wet for a considerable time.

The Lead appears also to have been originally fixed in an imperfect manner, as I am informed that parts of it are frequently loosened by the action of the wind.

Drawing by Thomas Hearne FSA 1805, engraved by Wm. Byrne

I am of opinion there can be no doubt of the necessity of taking down the spire unless it is substantially repaired & wholly covered with new Lead.

Upon examining the state of the Walls of the Tower with reference to the Question whether it will admit of being raised a few feet higher with safety if the spire should be taken down, it is to be observed that there is an irregularity in the construction & form of the Piers which support this Tower on the side next the Nave; as the effect of this irregularity is obviously to give additional strength to the Piers and there are some peculiarities in its construction which afford strong grounds for believing it to have been build since the erection of the Tower the' at a remote period, I am induced to believe there were indications of weakness which it was intended to counteract, and I would not therefore advise the charging of much additional weight upon these Piers.

The walls for a considerable height above the Piers & Arches appear to be in a good condition; there are no fractures seen in them except one next the North East Angle and that is neither considerable nor recent; the Walls are well relieved, by a strong framing of Oak timber, from all partial effects that might be occasioned at the ringing of the Bells, and it would be extremely advisable to repair in an effectual manner this framing, the upper part of which has been suffered to decay.

The walls at the upper part of the Tower (above the level of the Belfry floor) are in a less secure state than those below it; they have been repaired at the Angles with Brickwork & are upon each side rather bulged forward in the centre; I would therefore recommend that these walls should be taken down to the level of the Belfry floor and rebuilt with compact well cemented Masonry, first laying a connected chain of strong Yorkshire stone landings in large sizes upon the surface of the walls below. If worked in a solid manner, these may be reduced to a thickness of two feet & a half, and secured by strong diagonal inside Ties at the Angles, at the level of its present height and also at that of the new Roof; this diminution of weight (upwards of 50 tons) occasioned by the rendering the thickness of the wall, added to the weight of the present spire with its covering, which can also be computed with accuracy, will give the weight of the Masonry that may be added to increase the height of the Tower above its present level, without any addition to the weight now charged upon the Arches & Piers supporting it, and therefore without risking the stability of the Fabric'.

It was accepted that the spire should be removed but it was obvious that without one the tower would take on rather a mean appearance. Cottingham proposed to take down the upper storey of the tower, rebuild it and take it up, facing the whole with Bath stone, What he proposed did not contradict Sir Robert's sentiments. Unfortunately local people were apprehensive that the raising of the tower would overload the crossing piers. James Savage' was requested by the dean and chapter to give an opinion on Mr Cottingham's proposal. Savage found the crossing Piers to be perfectly sound and capable of bearing the weight it was proposed to put on them. But local opinion prevailed and what was eventually built, illustrated here and on the front cover was never an admired work. Cottingham's perspective drawings for the tower are most attractive!,

Following Hodgson Fowler's discovery that Mr Cottinsham had retained the inner mediaeval core in his tower, sentiment grew for a replacement of the tower with one resembling the 'original'. Thomas Hellyar Foord, a local worthy, offered to pay for a reconstruction of the tower, to be surmounted with a spite His offer was accepted.

Engraved by A. Warren from a drawing by Jacob Schnebbelie. 1806

The North Prospect by John Harris (c. 1680-1740)

When designing the new tower, Hodgson Fowler re-introduced the early.

English arcading below the belfry stage and generally rendered both tower and spire in a way so as to resemble its appearance in prints. Mr. Foord was a deeply disappointed man when he saw the drawings for the spire. He had wanted a tall spire, but the crossing piers had not been built to support one and so the squat tower we see today was built. Hodgson Fowler's designs, drawn by S. F.

Halliday, cut away to illustrate the spire's framing, were submitted in October 1903". Building was completed by November, 1904. Some of the Bath stone used to face Cottingham's tower lay at Acorn Wharf, a property of Mr Foord. who gave it to the cathedral in 1906 to be used in the construction of a stone oriel in the chapter room.

Since 1904 the tower and spire have remained much as Hodgson Fowler left them.

My thanks to the dean and chapter for their kind permission to reproduce documents from their archive.

David A. H. Cleggett

St. Thomas of Canterbury, 1996

Notes

1. Hodgson Fowler, Charles, architect, was appointed clerk of works at Durham cathedral in 1864 and became architect to the dean and chapter there in 1885. He rebuilt the chapter house, which had been wantonly destroyed, in 1892. During his long working life, Hodgson Fowler developed an extensive practice in Co. Durham, designing the church at Easington colliery between 1925-28, more than sixty years after his first appointment at Durham.

2. Chapter Minutes, Ac 18.

3. Cotton Mss., Faustina B5, folio 89b.

4. Chapter Minutes Ac2, f.8a.

5. Chapter Minutes, Ac3, f.14b.

6. Chapter Minutes, Ac4, f.8a.

7. Chapter Minutes, Ac4, f.016a.

8. Chapter Bills and Vouchers, FTv bundle 177.

9. DRc/Emf 52/1.

10. Savage, James, (1779-1852), born at Hackney, much of his architectural practice was connected with churches in London. Savage was frequently an adviser, as at Rochester, In enquiries on architecture. His St. Luke's Chelsea, where he is buried, is seen as an early attempt
    to revise medieval forms of construction.

11. DRC/Emf 17/3.

12. DRC/Emf 14/3.