I haven’t posted much about the Anglia Square demolition recently as not much has happened. However, as I was walking by today there was finally some more action. And here are some photos of all the excitement.







HOME · LATEST 100 POSTS · BAR BILLIARDS · GOOD BEER GUIDE · NORWICH MARKET · FLIGHTS · RAILWAYS · INDIAN MEALS · CONTACT

I haven’t posted much about the Anglia Square demolition recently as not much has happened. However, as I was walking by today there was finally some more action. And here are some photos of all the excitement.








This notice appeared in the Norwich Mercury in September 1826 and relates to the manors of Bixley and Arminghall, immediately south of Norwich. It announced that game on the two estates was being strictly preserved and warned people against hunting or shooting there. In the language of the period, “sporting” meant pursuing animals such as hares, pheasants and partridges rather than participating in an especially vigorous game of bar billiards.
What makes the notice more interesting is the distinction it draws between “qualified” and “unqualified” people. Under the Game Laws then in force, the right to kill game was largely restricted to men with substantial property interests, certain long-term leaseholders and the eldest sons of esquires or men of higher social rank. Merely possessing a gun and finding a conveniently positioned pheasant was therefore insufficient in the eyes of the wealthy.
Those legally qualified to shoot were politely “requested” to stay away from the estates, while unqualified people were warned that they would be prosecuted without further notice. Being qualified did not give anyone the right to enter another person’s land, but the difference in tone is revealing. Wealthy sportsmen received a courteous announcement, while everyone else was informed that the authorities would be dealing with them and prosecution was likely.
The property qualification was abolished by the Game Act 1831, just five years after this notice appeared, although shooting still required the appropriate permission and certificate. It is a small snapshot of a different time, when hunting rights were determined by wealth, property and the apparently vital matter of whether someone’s father was sufficiently grand. You don’t get that in bar billiards.


Moving away from the Balkans for a few posts, I’ve been trying to find someone to take me to Mowgli for a while. After discovering the half-price curry offer running on Mondays this month, I was able to convince my friend James to come along for one of our executive lunches. It’s good practice in advance of the 2027 Norwich market expedition and also a precursor to my new monthly Indian meal which I’m pleased to see has a decent-sized group going this week.

It has a smart, contemporary interior and reminded me of the Dishoom chain, which frequently surprises and delights me.

It was clean and comfortable, but the tables are perhaps a little too close to each other which does take away from the ambience a little.

The lunchtime special menu.

The deal was that any of the curries in this section on the right, other than the biryani, were included in the half-price offer. Unfortunately, the half-price offer was not applied automatically, meaning that customers had to know about it and ask for the reduction. I’m never especially impressed when restaurants operate promotions in this way.

I ordered the mango lassi and it was a small serving for the price, although it looked attractive when presented. Its consistency was thinner than I had expected and neither the yoghurt nor the mango had enough presence to provide the usual richness and freshness.

The main curry I ordered was the Goan fish curry and I opted for that as the menu stated that it was “fiery, tangy, sweet and delicious” but this was devoid of any depth of flavour that I could identify. The fish was tender and served in a generous quantity of sauce, but this element didn’t have any fiery dimension to it. I tried a bit of James’s butter chicken, just visible at the rear of the photo, and the chicken was tender but again there was no discernible complexity to the flavours. Although the two curries were different dishes, neither established a particularly distinctive flavour of its own.
The Mowgli Black Dahl was served as a generous portion, but its consistency was loose and watery rather than rich and velvety. It also lacked the slick of cream promised on the menu, which might have provided some much-needed richness. The Tea Steeped Chickpeas perhaps fared better texturally, with the chickpeas retaining a pleasant firmness, but the flavours again needed greater seasoning. I’m not necessarily expecting a huge punch in terms of spice, but I do want some complexity.
I would say that the dishes were all competent, they were well presented, hot and the server named them carefully when placing them on the table. Nothing tasted bad and I enjoyed all the food, but perhaps they had oversold the experience that I was expecting.
The service was friendly and timely, although I’m not convinced by the need to add both a charity donation and service charge automatically to the bill. The price was reasonable given the half-price main courses, but the quality wasn’t there for me. Indian food needs greater depth and complexity. Overall, it was all too mild and I felt that the food sat closer to supermarket microwave quality than to anything authentic or richly flavoured. I have mentioned before that there is something perhaps a little wrong that JD Wetherspoon, who make no claim of authenticity relating to Indian street-food, are rolling out curries that have a greater depth of taste than a restaurant that is meant to be specialising in Indian cuisine.
Having noted all that, I was pleased to have visited and it’ll be interesting to see how the chain manages its rollout of restaurants across the UK. And James, my external food consultant, who has been before and apparently ordered nearly the entire menu, deserves some praise for taking me as we planned the third biennial tour of every food stall at Norwich Market.


This newspaper article was in the Norwich Mercury 200 years ago this week, reporting that Mr Snasdell had died from drowning. Not only do I like the word se’nnight, meaning a seven day period, but I particularly like the “the vital spark had fled” to describe his death.
The individual was Thomas Snasdell and he was buried in Mundesley on 7 August 1826, although he lived in Norwich. He had been born in 1782 and although not mentioned in the article, he married Ann Clarke on 6 September 1824. I will have to work out how to put the phrase “the vital spark had fled” into this blog somehow, it’s a phrase that I feel needs to return.


I’ve been thinking more about the west frontage of Norwich Cathedral, although I suppose there are worse things to overthink. Some people worry about careers, pensions and the long-term future of civilisation, but I have been thinking about where the spirelets of Norwich Cathedral have gone. The problem began when I found Daniel King’s seventeenth-century print of the west front, which shows a much more elegant and symmetrical arrangement than the one visible today.

I therefore asked AI to help create a modern photographic impression of what the cathedral might look like if the frontage had retained more of the arrangement shown in King’s engraving. This took a little persuasion. AI understood “Gothic cathedral” very confidently, but was rather less enthusiastic about counting statues correctly, which is a minor drawback when the entire point is having two figures on each side of the doorway. Several attempts produced one statue either side, extra figures in odd places or something that looked like a confident cathedral that most certainly wasn’t from Norwich. It still has the main portal wrong as the door has been shrunk right down, but there’s a limit to how much time I want to spend debating the matter.
I’ve decided I definitely like it more as it was. But I feel that I’ve exhausted this line of worry now and I’ll just have to accept what’s there.


This is a photo of the west frontage of Norwich Cathedral that I took in May 2020, but it’s a view that I’ve seen thousands of times over the last few decades. And I’ve thought on many occasions that the design feels quite odd in places, but I’ve never given it much more thought than that because apparently even I have limits on how much time I can spend worrying about medieval masonry. Those limits have now been tested.

© The Trustees of the British Museum. Shared under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0) licence.
I’ve now found this image which is of the west frontage and although the date isn’t known, it’s between 1655 and 1725 and is from a print by Daniel King. This has surprised and delighted me, because this is in my view a much more beautiful frontage than what we have now.
I’ve pondered before, as I obviously don’t have enough sensible things to worry about in life, about why the windows in the flanking pillars aren’t symmetrical, but they originally were. And there were once two statues under the main window, but they knocked one of those out on each side when widening the pillar which means that the portal looks quite chunky. Inside the cathedral though, there are still two niches either side of the main door so they haven’t changed that.
And, both sides of the flanking towers were once similar designs, but they’ve faffed about with one of them. Not to mention where the nice little spirelets have gone. Probably the same way as Sheringham bus shelter, but that’s a different matter.
All told, I’m reassured that the designers of the original building had attention to detail and liked symmetry. I can’t work out exactly when they mauled the frontage about as there have been a few periods of change, but I’m going to blame the Victorians. This may not be entirely fair as some of the changes do predate that period, but I’ve found that it is often a productive starting point.


I rather liked this advertisement which was placed in the Norwich Mercury 200 years ago this month. It reads:
“TO THE LOVERS OF THE FINE ARTS.
THE Nobility, Gentry, and Public of Norwich and Norfolk, are respectfully informed, that a
Splendid Collection of ANCIENT PICTURES
Will be opened for Exhibition during the Assize Week and a short time succeeding, at the Assembly Rooms, Norwich.
The Paintings are selected from the Works of the most esteemed Masters of the Italian, Dutch, and Flemish Schools. — Among the former will be found a splendid Picture by Titian, in his early style, with others by Caracci, Pietro da Cortona, Canaletti, &c. &c. The latter will include fine Specimens of the most pleasing character, and of Cabinet size, of the following Masters: — Rubens, Rembrandt, Both, Pynacker, Netscher, Cuyp, Decker, Zorg, Schweikhart, B. Gael, P. Potter, Poelemburg, Stoik, Snyers, De Vlieger, &c. &c.
The Exhibition will be opened from Ten in the morning till Four in the afternoon.
ADMITTANCE — ONE SHILLING.”
The exhibition was aimed at “the Nobility, Gentry, and Public of Norwich and Norfolk” and I think it’s evident that they were expecting really only people from what they might have called at the time the educated and wealthy classes. And even within that the nobility came first, the gentry were safely in the middle and the public were graciously permitted to bring up the rear, provided they had a shilling and behaved themselves near the Titian.
This feels like an early art gallery type set-up, there are some quite impressive artists in that list and the Assembly Rooms would have been quite the cultural hotspot that week. A shilling would have been approximately the equivalent of £7 today. I also went to look into the etymology of the word ‘ancient’ and have ascertained that in the art world of the time, it just meant ‘Old Masters‘ as the paintings weren’t that old at the time.
The Assembly Rooms are still there and they have long been part of the city’s cultural centres, so in that respect not much has changed. It’s a shame I can’t find a list of what artworks were displayed though, it all sounds rather decadent.


The below article appeared in the Norwich Mercury 200 years ago.
“Doctrines of the New Jerusalem Church.
ON Sunday, July 9th, THREE DISCOURSES will be delivered at Crook’s Place Chapel, by the Rev. W. Mason, in which it will be shewn what are the views of the New Church in regard to the Quality of that Faith which justifies, and the true nature of Justification — Who the Lord’s Sheep are, and the Goats contrasted with them — and The Nature of the Christian’s Conquest, and the Rewards promised to the Conqueror.
Service to commence in the morning at half-past Ten, Afternoon at half-past Two, and Evening at half-past Six o’clock.”
The New Jerusalem Church was the Swedenborgianism religion and some of this story links to the St Mary the Less church on Queen Street which I’ve written about before. In short, that church was closed during the Reformation, then given to the religious refugees from the Netherlands to use as a cloth hall, with the building being used for services given in French until 1832. It was then leased to the New Jerusalem church of Swedenborgians who remained here until 1852 and they then moved to Park Lane to a building constructed for them. The church was already though in decline at this stage which is rarely the ideal moment to embark on a new building project and in the 1920s they transferred the building to the Mormons and although it was used by another religious group, it was then sold to become a private residential building. It was never fully converted into a home but is no longer used for religious purposes.
This article from 200 years ago tells a little of the story before the Swedenborgians moved to St Mary the Less, it appears that they were using Crook’s Place Chapel. This is in an area of the city that was changed heavily following the Second World War, but Crook’s Place Chapel appears to have been demolished in the 1880s. And back to the article, it’s an interesting look back that there would have been three services held that day for those interested in finding out more about the church. Those attending would have been no doubt fascinated by the discussions about faith, sheep, goats and conquest, but they probably got to have a nice little sit down.
There were concerns nationally about the stability of the Church of England, with the Church Building Acts of 1818 and 1824 trying to fund new Anglican churches. The Norwich Mercury article captures quite nicely this period of religious competition and general anxiety about picking the right religion.