Page:Notes and Queries - Series 9 - Volume 2.djvu/230

 222

NOTES AND QUERIES. [ s. n. to. 1

HEYSHAM ANTIQUITIES. THE late summer rambles of the Royal Archaeological Institute in the royal Duchy of Lancaster have been noteworthy alike for the pleasure they have afforded to the mem- bers and for the invaluable stock of knowledge they have imparted to archaeology in general. Thus, during a visit made to the interest- ing hamlet of Heysham, near Morecambe, Sir Henry Howortn descanted learnedly on the antiquarian notabilia of the locality, and propounded views which were startlingly at variance with historical accuracy. The accomplished knight is apparently more at home in matters Mongolian than in Lan- castrian chronology. Ihus the Manchester Courier, in an otherwise appreciative leader on Sir Henry's inaugural address on historic Lancaster, courteously found fault with his " too Macaulay-like distinction between the Lancashire of to-day and that of 150 years ago "; while I beg modestly to dissent from his views anent the antiquities of Heysham. These latter are three in number the old church, containing many objects of interest, the ruined remains of St. Patrick's Chapel, and the eight curious rock-hewn coffins on the bold promontory overlooking the sea. A quite recent inspection of these relics of the past has sharpened my appreciation of Sir Henry's remarks upon them, delivered on the spot, though I am forced to oppose them strongly. "Sir Henry Howorth, said the Manchester Courier,

"lectured on the ruins of the old chapel of St. Patrick, and the coffins hewn in the solid rock, combating the notion of an Irish influence. Sir Henry contended that St. Patrick set out from Heysham to the Isle of Man, and thence to Ireland, and that, consequently, if there was any similarity between this old chapel of St. Patrick at Heysham and chapels in Ireland, the latter were the copies, and not originals."

The meagreness of the report contrasts markedly with the fulness of the lecturer's confidence. The glamour of the "Irish in- fluence" seems to have blurred his vision, and so warped his judgment. If facts do not exist militating against the awful theory, then facts must be invented to disprove it. For invented assuredly those facts are. Of course, it is intensely interesting to have the exact spot determined once and for ever whence the youth Succat left the Britannias and sped him on his work to evangelize the heathen Scoti in far-off lerne. But can it be decided so offhandedly ? Certainly not, in the absence of irrefragable proof, on Sir Henry's bare ipse dixit. The two Britannias (Prima anc Secunda) were regions large enough to have

afforded a hundred points for embarkation; out who shall say at this distance of time where lay the favoured one ? This, like the tuture saint's birthplace, must for ever remain shrouded in mystery. As a sug- 5estion I reverently accept Sir Henry's sur- mise, but I distinctly reject its assumed finality. But were it even established beyond suspicion, it still remains to be demonstrated, first that the embryo Apostle of Erin sailed thence to Man, and secondly that the Heys- ham chapel was the prototype, and not the copy, of the Irish chapels. These arguments, like their predecessor, rest upon a mere hypothesis, which in my judgment has not the dignity of a presumptio stat; whereas the counter-supposition reaches it easily, because naturally and in accordance with probability. Thus, e.g., the Manx tradition that St. Patrick floated the banner of Christianity on Peel Hill decidedly refers to a late or, at least, middle epoch of his apostolate ; besides, had he announced the Evangel of Peace first to the Manninghe, there would have been some mention of it either in his ' Confessions ' or in his epistle to Coroticus. Again, it is far more likely that the Heysham chapel was a replica of its sisters across the Mare Hibernicum, seeing that it must have been posterior to the saint's ministry. Whichever way we look at Sir Henry's objection, this contention must hold good. For St. Patrick's visit to the spot (afterwards known as Kessam in Domes- day times) was either before or after his voyage to Ireland : if the former, then no chapel could have been built there by him ; if the latter, then it must have been a copy of the Irish ones. But it is contended that the Heys- ham chapel is of Saxon origin, and that it Erobably suggested to the future apostle the >rm of similar edifices in Ireland. Certainly the archway still remaining in good pre- servation is undoubtedly Saxon in style, but no Saxon chapel could have existed in the saint's youth ; and why and when was the building dedicated to St. Patrick? Evidently after his decease, and probably built after it too, and equally probably in imitation of the chapels raised by him in the land of his adoption. To me, therefore, the very con- verse of Sir Henry's reasoning is the more correct view.

As to the stone coffins chiselled out of the hard rock, the "Irish influence" is not so clear. Curious they certainly are, and almost unique. Irish in the sense of monastic they may have been ; my theory is that they belong far more likely to the Viking age, when the royal Scandinavian pirates infested the coast. What more natural than that those