5. Windmill Edge (Sheet 28 S.E.) in Preshute, N. of Barrow Cottages and the Manton Barrow (name from Smith's map).

6. Windmill Knowl (Sheet 34 N. W.) on Roundway Hill, the name of that part of the hill lying in Bishop's Cannings parish, E. of Roundway Hill Farm (name from old MS. 2in. O.S. map of 1811).

7. Waden Hill, in Avebury parish, south of the village, was formerly called Windmill Boll, and is frequently so described by Stukeley. I suspect that the name "boll" or "ball" had reference to one of the round barrows on the northern end of the hill, on the brow of the hill above the village.

THE DESTRUCTION OF THE ANCIENT SCREEN AT HULLAVINGTON.

By CANON F. H. MANLEY.

It is melancholy to have to report the loss of a valuable heritage of the past which made one of the Churches in N. Wilts notable.

The oak screen which stood across the north or Bradfield Aisle of Hullavington Church, at about two-thirds of its length from the west end, was a precious relic of antiquity. The circumstances under which it was taken down show how possible it is even now for irreparable mischief to be done, despite the fact that all legal requirements have been carried out, when the subject matter is a portion of a parish Church.

There can be no question that the ancient screen was urgently in need of repair, and the late Vicar, the Rev. J. C. Ramsay, was afraid that at any time in its worm-eaten and tottering condition it might collapse, possibly doing some considerable damage in its fall. Visitors to the Church, who had come especially to see the screen, had spoken to him of its value and of the possibility of its repair, recommending him to consult certain architects of repute before taking any action. The Vicar, however, seems to have made up his mind that the screen was beyond repair, and apparently he was supported in this view by his churchwardens. A proposal that the ancient screen should be replaced by a new one, erected in the Church as a memorial of the Hullavington men who had fallen in the war met with general approval and the necessary steps for carrying out this unfortunate idea were quickly taken.

The well-known firm of Messrs. Jones & Willis were consulted and asked to furnish designs for a new screen. Their advice was not to take down the ancient screen, but, finding that this advice was not acceptable, they supplied the design for a low screen to be substituted for the ancient screen.

A meeting of the parishioners was held 15th Sept., 1917, when a resolution was passed approving the removal of the ancient screen and the erection in its place of a new oak screen, according to the design of Messrs. Jones & Willis. The Vicar and churchwardens' petition for a faculty to carry out this work was duly presented to A. B. Ellicott, Vicar General of the Consistory Court of Bristol, a citation was issued by him, 26th Sept., 1917, and on the 30th Sept. affixed to the principal outer door of the said Parish Church of Hullavington. There for fifteen days it remained and no protest against this act of destruction was raised. Then on 16th November, 1917, the authority "duly weighing and considering the premises" sanctioned the removal of the old screen and erection of a dwarf new screen in its place, the faculty being signed, F. J. Press, Deputy-Registrar.

All this legal procedure did nothing to protect this precious fabric of our forefathers and its doom was sealed!

How far the Rural Dean at the time, the late Canon Mac Millan, had been consulted we do not know, but certainly no representative of the Wilts

Archæological Society was asked for advice. Those interested in the preservation of our ancient monuments had no inkling of what was going Thus it was left to those on the spot, who had no idea of the value of what they had in charge, to destroy what was the special glory of their Church.

on.

Messrs. Jones & Willis removed the old screen with the greatest care, and the portions of it which they were able to preserve, viz., sixteen carved panels, 18in. by 9in., are now in the care of the present Vicar, Rev. E. G. Mortimer, who is anxious to utilise them so as best to show something of the beauty of what has been lost. He would be glad to receive suggestions upon this point, and, as the question of funds is a serious one, any donations towards the cost from those interested in the matter.

We have to thank the Rev. F. R. P. Sumner (Hucknall, Notts) for the following full description of the ancient screen and also for the excellent photos, from which the two illustrations have been made, one viewing the screen from the east and the other from the west.

The screen was one of remarkable interest, retaining, as it did, the old balcony-front to the rood-loft. Only two other examples of the balcony-front remain in the county, viz., those at Avebury and Edington, with which Hullavington should be compared.

The Hullavington screen is mentioned by Cox (Church Furniture, p. 141) and Keyser (Mural and Painted Decorations, p. xxviii., 139). The work bore every appearance of composite date. The lower part with doorway and ball-flower enrichments was of late thirteenth century or early fourteenth century date, while the upper portion with balcony-front was of the fifteenth century.

The screen was in a most dilapidated condition, but not beyond repair. All tracery of the lights and lower panels were gone and the two uprights of the central door alone upheld the tottering structure. Evident signs remained, however, of the enrichments of cornice and loft-front which once were there.

The special features of the screen were the early date of the lower portion and the old balcony-front remaining still in situ. The former should have provided much interest to the archæologist on account of its remarkably early date for wooden screen-work. The latter was one of the few original balcony-fronts remaining out of those which were once the glory of our land. It consisted of eighteen open panels with tracery heads, divided into three compartments by four tabernacled niches. The carved tracery of the panels and niches had gone but the marks where they once stood remained, as the illustration shows. The pierced panels would have been enriched by applied ogee canopies, the heads of which extended to the handrail of the balcony-front (ef. Dennington, Suffolk). For that purpose the moulding at the head of the pierced panels was cut through.

A curious feature of the screen was the pulpit line projection above the door on the western face of the screen. Similar projections westward are found on the screens at Sleaford and Cotes-by-Stow, Lincs. Projections eastward are seen at Montgomery, Newark, Sutton-on-Trent (Notts), and Dunster (Som.).

VOL. XLII.NO. CXXXVII.

F