Finally a few days in London and a respite from the Infernal City, and a trip north to Peterborough and Stamford. An opportunity to complete by series of posts on the cathedral at Peterborough with a look at the interior. It was, as you can see, a bit of a drab day. Hardly June weather at all.
The interior is vast, cavernous, without the usual subdivision one would expect in a large Medieval church. Of the two medieval screens in the nave, the pulpitum has altogether disappeared but the wooden rood screen survives however, ex situ in the north transept. The architecture is pretty much heterogeneous, being Anglo-Norman with little addition. The most important of these additions are the dramatic, vertiginous west transepts (E.E.), the crossing tower (Dec), and the New Building (Perp). Very sophisticated, the latter. The work most likely of John Wastell. The painted wooden nave ceiling (early 12th century) is a very rare survival indeed. The painted wooden ceiling of the chancel is late Medieval. Both ceilings have been extensively restored, by Blore and Gilbert Scott respectively. They give some welcome colour to an otherwise grey, austere interior, which I think is partly at least due to the aesthetic preferences of John Loughborough Pearson in the 19th century. As I said in my post about the exterior of the building the cathedral suffered greatly during the Civil War, and as a result is pretty low on furnishings. The choir stalls are, I believe, by Pearson. He also repaved the chancel with cosmati work and designed the imposing ciborium over the High Altar. His was the second major restoration of the 19th century. the first was by Edward Blore. George Pace worked here during the second half of the 20th, but thankfully did little damage - the seating in St Sprite's Chapel is actually rather good.
The cathedral does, however, contain to interesting pieces of early sculpture. Firstly is the enigmatic Hedda Stone - Anglo-Saxon of disputed date. There is a stone relief in the south transept long thought to be Anglo-Saxon in origin but is more likely to be Roman. It depicts two deities, rather than, as previously thought, two abbots. Dancing.
No comments:
Post a Comment