The Sun.
London, England, 1851-10-29 00:00:00

BOW CHURCH.

The history of this church is a strange one. As the
writer has elsewhere remarked—if not originally a
Roman temple, as was generally believed, it was one of
the earliest churches built by our Norman conquerors:
it has been destroyed by storm and fire; was at one time
garrisoned and besieged; and was afterwards the scene
of an assassination. We first find mention of it as u
Christian church, in the reign of William the Conqueror.
Stow says, it was the first in the City built on arches of
stone, and that it was therefore called St. Mary de Arculms,
or the Bow; although he elsewhere says, that it took its
name from certain stone arches, supporting a lantern on
the top of the tower. In the twelfth century, a tumult
of a serious nature occurred in the City, which led to an
assault upon the church. The ringleader was William
Fitz-Osbert, surnamed Long•board, an individual of
loose morals, who apparently possessed great talents, and
was almost worshipped by the lower orders, on account
of his exertions as a professed advocate for the poor,
against the oppressions of the rich. An attempt being
made to seise him, he took refuge in Bow steeple,
together with various followers, and being well provided
with ammunition and provisions, was able, for a long
time, to defy the authorities. In, corder to drive him out

and
dd
aftertie o desired
hasty
treffect;al v r Lehi ee
which had leeraweeta
281;1filer pepdrairsto nToefhr sits,h e
steeple,
thehri
aout egs rt essde.wp
pro-
bably been much injured during the attack on Fitz-Os-
bert, fell down, and caused the death of several persons.
It seems, however, to have been repaired soon afterwards;
for in 1284 we find that one Thicket, a goldsmith, who
had seriously wounded a person named Ralph Crepin
(under what circumstances is not mentioned), took refuge
in this church, and slept in the steeple. While there,
certain friends of Crepin entered during the night, and
violating the sanctuary, first slew him, and then so
placed the body as to induce the belief that he had com-
mitted suicide. A verdict to this effect was accordingly
returned at the inquisition, and the body was interred
with customary indignities. The real circumstances,
however, being afterwards discovered through the evi-
dence of a boy, who it appears was with bucket in his
voluntary confinement, the murderers, amongst whom
was a woman, were apprehended and executed. On
this occurrence the church was interdicted for a time,
and the doors and windows were stopped up with
brambles. After the fire the present edifice was com-
menced by Wren. The whole of the works appear to
have been completed in the year 1680.
The crypt of Bow Church, which belongs apparently
to the end of the eleventh century, is now filled with
upon
their share
which have doubtless contributed in silence coffins of all ages and sizes piled one the other,
ofpart of this
1849 we gave
.a view
of disease and premature death to the
.1 ilntents of the
neighbourhood. In
crypt with its fearful furniture, which havewe. reason to
know had its effect in rousing the public to a sen3e of
permitting intramural interments.
How much
hty
longer in
ersuoh madness is to be permitted we
know not. We repeat our:denunciation of the system, and
would urge, with respect to Bow Church, that the bodies
should bo immediately removed to consecrated ground,
and any fresh deposits there be strictly prohibited. The
crypt is ventilated, the coffins are put in fair order, and
we would carefully avoid attaching blame to any indi-
viduals di-
viduals connected with this charnel-house, which is
from being as bad as many others. It is against the
system which we protest—a, syttm foul and murderous