Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T08:48:13.454Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Church Alignment and Patronal Saint's Days

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2008

Ian Hinton
Ian Hinton
Affiliation:
The Old Rectory, Barnby, Beccles, Suffolk NR34 7QN, UK. E-mail: .
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The results of this survey of almost 1,500 rural churches do not support the oft-repeated idea that churches are aligned with their patronal saint's sunrise. In fact, they provide evidence that the churches specifically do not face different sunrises and that churches dedicated to saints with summer feast-days are aligned in the same direction as those dedicated to saints with winter feast-days. However, the results of the survey raise significant questions about other aspects of church alignment. A significant variation in alignment has been uncovered east to west across the country, with a difference of 10° in the mean alignment of churches between the west and east of England. Possible reasons for this are explored. In addition, churches built on sloping sites are found to have downhill-facing chancels. If the choice of site were random, churches would face uphill as well as down. The possible implications of this for church and village location are also explored.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Antiquaries Journal , Volume 86 , September 2006 , pp. 206 - 226
Copyright
Copyright © The Society of Antiquaries of London 2006

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Abrahamsen, N 1992. ‘Evidence for church orientation by magnetic compass in twelfthcentury Denmark’, Archaeometry, 34/2, 293–303CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ali, J and Cunich, P 2001. ‘The orientation of churches: some new evidence’, Antiq J, 81, 155–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arnold-Forster, F E 1899. Studies in Church Dedications, 3 vols, LondonGoogle Scholar
Barnes, G 1997. ‘Church location in the Norfolk landscape’, The Annual, 6, Norfolk Archaeol Hist Res Group, 23–36Google Scholar
Benson, H 1956. ‘Church orientations and patronal festivals’, Antiq J, 36, 205–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bond, F 1914. Dedications and Patron Saints of English Churches, OxfordGoogle Scholar
Canadian Geological Service 2004, ‘Geomagnetism, magnetic declination calculator’, Canadian Geological Service, <http://gsc.nrcan.gc.ca/geomag/field/mdcalc_e.php> (n 04 2006)+(n+042006)>Google Scholar
Cave, C 1950. ‘The orientation of churches’, Antiq J, 30, 47–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chauncey, H 1700. The Historical Antiquities of Hertfordshire, LondonGoogle Scholar
Cheney, C 2000. Handbook of Dates for Students of English History, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
Clark, A, Tarling, D and Noel, M 1988. ‘Developments in archaeomagnetic dating in Britain’, J Archaeol Sci, 15, 645–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, R 1992. ‘The dedications of medieval churches in Derbyshire: their survival and change from the Reformation to the present day’, Derbyshire Archaeol J, 112, 49–61Google Scholar
Davies, R 1984. ‘Church orientation in Rutland’, Rutland Rec, 4, 142–3Google Scholar
Duncan, D 1999. The Calendar: The 5000-year Struggle to Align the Clock and the Heavens, LondonGoogle Scholar
Eeles, F 1913–1914. ‘The orientation of Scottish churches, illustrated by an analysis of some examples in Aberdeenshire and Banffshire’, Proc Soc Antiq Scotl, 48, 169–83Google Scholar
Farmer, D 1991. The Oxford Dictionary of Saints, OxfordGoogle Scholar
Hinton, I 2004. ‘Do chancels weep: does the often noticed difference between the alignments of nave and chancel actually mean anything?’, Church Archaeol, 5–6, 42–54Google Scholar
Hoare, P and Sweet, C 2000. ‘The orientation of early medieval churches in England’, J Hist Geog, 26/2, 162–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoskin, M 2000. Tombs, Temples and their Orientations: A New Perspective on Mediterranean Pre-history, LondonGoogle Scholar
Jay, E 1993. The Literary Associations of Rydal Church, Armitt TrustGoogle Scholar
Johnson, W 1912. Byways in British Archaeology, LondonGoogle Scholar
Jones, G R 2004. ‘TASC datasets and how to use them’, University of Leicester, <http://www.le.ac.uk/elh/grj1/database/data.html> (12 04 2006)+(12+04+2006)>Google Scholar
Lawrie, W 1859. History of Freemasonry, EdinburghGoogle Scholar
Lucy, S 2000. The Anglo-Saxon Way of Death: Burial Rites in Early England, StroudGoogle Scholar
Morris, R 1989. Churches in the Landscape, LondonGoogle Scholar
Parker Pearson, M and Richards, C 1994. Architecture and Order: Approaches to Social Space, LondonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pevsner, N 1951. The Buildings of England. Cornwall, LondonGoogle Scholar
Pevsner, N 1958a. The Buildings of England. North Somerset and Bristol, LondonGoogle Scholar
Pevsner, N 1958b. The Buildings of England. Shropshire, LondonGoogle Scholar
Pevsner, N 1970a. The Buildings of England. North-West and South Norfolk, LondonGoogle Scholar
Pevsner, N 1970b. The Buildings of England. Cambridgeshire, LondonGoogle Scholar
Pevsner, N 1970c. The Buildings of England. North-East Norfolk and Norwich, LondonGoogle Scholar
Pevsner, N 1988. The Buildings of England. Bedfordshire, Huntingdon and Peterborough, LondonGoogle Scholar
Pevsner, N 1991. The Buildings of England. Suffolk, LondonGoogle Scholar
Pevsner, N and Nairn, I 1999. The Buildings of England. Sussex, LondonGoogle Scholar
Pevsner, N and Neave, D 1999. The Buildings of England. Yorkshire: York and the East Riding, LondonGoogle Scholar
Pevsner, N and Sherwood, S 1974. The Buildings of England. Oxfordshire, LondonGoogle Scholar
Salzman, L 1992. Building in England down to 1540. A Documentary History, OxfordGoogle Scholar
Shore, T 1886. ‘Orientation of churches in Hampshire’, Antiquarian, 10, 95Google Scholar