{"collection":"scripture-revelation","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_65390/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_65390","id":"gutenberg_65390","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/65390","summary":null,"tags":["Category: Architecture","Category: History - British","Category: Religion/Spirituality","Cathedrals -- England","Church architecture -- England","Gloucester Cathedral","Hereford Cathedral","Worcester Cathedral"],"text":"_THE THREE CHOIRS._\n\n A Handbook to the Cathedrals\n\n OF\n\n GLOUCESTER, HEREFORD,\n\n AND\n\n WORCESTER:\n\n A COMPLETE DESCRIPTION OF THE BUILDINGS, A HISTORY OF EACH DIOCESE,\n AND BIOGRAPHICAL NOTICES OF THE BISHOPS.\n\n BY RICHARD I. KING, B.A.,\n EXETER COLLEGE, OXFORD.\n\n WITH NUMEROUS ILLUSTRATIONS.\n\n\n LONDON:\n JOHN MURRAY, ALBEMARLE STREET.\n 1866.\n\n\n _Uniform with the Present Volume._\n\n A HANDBOOK FOR TRAVELLERS\n\n THROUGH THE COUNTIES\n\n OF\n\n GLOUCESTER, HEREFORD, AND WORCESTER.\n\n One Volume. Post 8vo.\n\n\n LONDON: PRINTED BY W. CLOWES AND SONS, STAMFORD STREET,\n AND CHARING CROSS.\n\n\n\n\n CONTENTS.\n\n\n GLOUCESTER CATHEDRAL. With 16 Illustrations.\n\n HEREFORD CATHEDRAL. With 15 Illustrations.\n\n WORCESTER CATHEDRAL. With 7 Illustrations.\n\n\n \u2042 _Each Cathedral may be obtained, separately, in a Wrapper, Price\n Half-a-Crown._\n\n[Illustration: GLOUCESTER CATHEDRAL.\n\nGLOUCESTER CATHEDRAL, FROM THE SOUTH-EAST.\n\nFRONTISPIECE.\n]\n\n\n\n\n A HANDBOOK\n\n TO\n\n GLOUCESTER CATHEDRAL.\n\n\n WITH 16 ILLUSTRATIONS.\n\n\n LONDON:\n JOHN MURRAY, ALBEMARLE STREET.\n\n 1865.\n\n\n\n\nCONTENTS\n\n\nPART I.\n\nHISTORY AND DETAILS\n\n PAGE\n\nHISTORY AND DATES 3\n\nRESTORATIONS 5\n\nTHE NORMAN CHURCH 6\n\nGENERAL VIEW 7\n\nSOUTH PORCH 9\n\nNAVE 9\n\nNAVE-VAULTING 12\n\nWESTERN BAYS 13\n\nNORTH NAVE-AISLE 15\n\nSOUTH NAVE-AISLE 17\n\nSOUTH TRANSEPT 20\n\nNORTH TRANSEPT 24\n\nRELIQUARY 24\n\nCHOIR--PRESBYTERY 27\n\nCHOIR-VAULTING 28\n\nSTALLS 29\n\nEAST WINDOW 30\n\nMONUMENTS 33\n\nMONUMENT OF EDWARD II. 34\n\nNORTH CHOIR-AISLE 36\n\nEFFIGY OF ROBERT OF NORMANDY 37\n\nLADY CHAPEL 38\n\nSOUTH CHOIR-AISLE 41\n\nTRIFORIUM 42\n\nWHISPERING GALLERY 43\n\nCRYPT 44\n\nCLOISTERS 46\n\nCHAPTER-HOUSE AND LIBRARY 48\n\nEXTERIOR 49\n\nTOWER 50\n\nPART II.\n\nHISTORY OF THE SEE, WITH SHORT NOTICES OF\nTHE PRINCIPAL BISHOPS.\n\n PAGE\n\nCONVERSION OF THE BRITISH KING LUCIUS 52\n\nFOUNDATION AND RESTORATION OF THE MONASTERY 53\n\nPARLIAMENTS HELD IN THE ABBEY 53\n\nLIST OF THE MOST IMPORTANT ABBOTS 53\n\nJOHN WAKEMAN, FIRST BISHOP--JOHN HOOPER, MARTYR 54\n\nBROOKS--CHEYNEY 55\n\nBULLINGHAM--GOLDSBROUGH--RAVIS-PARRY--THOMPSON--SMITH--GOODMAN 56\n\nNICOLSON--PRITCHETT--FRAMPTON--FOWLER--WILLIS--WILCOX--SYDALL 57\n\nBENSON--JOHNSON--WARBURTON 58\n\nYORKE--HALIFAX--BEADON--HUNTINGFORD--RYDER--BETHEL 59\n\nMONK--BARING--THOMSON--ELLICOTT 60\n\n\n\n\nLIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS.\n\n\nGLOUCESTER CATHEDRAL, FROM THE SOUTH-EAST _Frontispiece._\n\nPLAN OF CATHEDRAL _to face_ 3\n\nTHE NAVE \u201d 9\n\nTHE \u201cPRENTICE\u2019S\u201d BRACKET \u201d 22\n\nCONFESSIONAL IN THE SOUTH TRANSEPT \u201d 23\n\nTHE RELIQUARY \u201d 24\n\nTHE CHOIR \u201d 27\n\nMISERERES IN THE CHOIR \u201d 29\n\nMONUMENT OF EDWARD II. \u201d 34\n\nTOMB OF ROBERT, DUKE OF NORMANDY \u201d 37\n\nPLANS OF TRIFORIUM AND CRYPT \u201d 42\n\nCHAPEL, TRIFORIUM \u201d 44\n\nCRYPT \u201d 45\n\nTHE CLOISTERS--THE \u201cCAROLS\u201d IN THE SOUTH WALK _to face_ 46\n\nTHE LAVATORY IN THE CLOISTERS \u201d 47\n\nTHE CHAPTER-HOUSE--THE NORMAN PORTION \u201d 48\n\n[Illustration: PLAN OF GLOUCESTER CATHEDRAL.\n\nScale of 100 ft. to I in.\n\n\nREFERENCES.\n\nA _South Porch._\nB B B _Nave and Aisles._\nC _Organ-screen._\nD _Choir._\nE _Presbytery._\nF _South Transept._\nG _Chapel used as Vestry._\nH H H _Choir-aisles._\nK K _Apsidal Chapels._\nL _Lady-Chapel._\nM _North Transept._\nN _Chapel._\nO O O O _Cloisters._\nP _Chapter-house._\nQ _Abbot\u2019s or Lesser Cloister._\nR _Slype, or Passage to Cloister._\n\n1 _Abbot Seabroke\u2019s Chantry._\n2 _Brydges\u2019 Effigy._\n3 _Monument of Ald. Blackleach._\n4 _Entrance to Crypt._\n5 _Effigy of Abbot Foliot._\n6 _Sedilia._\n7 _Effigy of Osric._\n8 _Monument of Edward II._\n9 _Abbot Parker\u2019s Chantry._\n10 _Effigy of Robert Courtehose._\n11 _Reliquary._\n12 _Stone Lectern._\n13, 14 _Chantries of Abbots Hanley and Farley._\n15 _Abbot\u2019s Door to Cloisters._\n16 _Monks\u2019 Door._\n17 _Lavatory._\n18 _Recess for Towels._\n]\n\n\n\n\nGLOUCESTER CATHEDRAL.\n\n\n\n\nPART I.\n\nHistory and Details.\n\n\nI. Until the year 1539, Gloucester Cathedral was the church of a mitred\nBenedictine abbey, which ranked among the wealthiest and most important\nin England. In 1539 the abbey was surrendered; and in 1541 its church\nbecame the cathedral of the newly established bishopric of Gloucester.\n\nThe single authority for the architectural history of Gloucester\nCathedral is Abbot FROUCESTER\u2019S (1381-1412) Chronicle of the abbey,\nincluding lives of the twenty abbots after the Conquest. Of this\nChronicle transcripts exist in the Chapter Library at Gloucester; in the\nLibrary of Queen\u2019s College, Oxford; and in the British Museum. The\noriginal MS., which was preserved at Gloucester, disappeared\nmysteriously from the Chapter Library during the present century. An\nancient copy, however,--if it be not the original Gloucester MS.,--was\nrecently discovered in a vault under the Rolls Chapel; and is about to\nbe published in the series of Chronicles edited under the direction of\nthe Master of the Rolls[1].\n\nA nunnery was founded at Gloucester in the year 681, by Osric, a\n\u201cminister\u201d or \u201csub-regulus\u201d of Ethelred, King of Mercia. Three abbesses\nruled it successively until 767, after which the convent was dispersed.\nBeornulph of Mercia refounded it, about 821, for secular priests,--who,\nin 1022, were replaced by Benedictine monks. The Saxon Chronicle (A.D.\n1058) records the \u201challowing\u201d of the monastery by Ealdred, Bishop of\nWorcester. In 1088 this building was destroyed by fire, and a new church\nwas commenced by Abbot Serlo, which was completed and dedicated in\n1100[2]. Two years afterwards this church suffered much from fire; and\nstill more in 1122, when the Saxon Chronicle asserts that \u201cin Lent-tide\n... the town of Gloucester was burnt while the monks were singing their\nmass, and the deacon had begun the gospel \u2018Pr\u00e6teriens Jesus.\u2019 Then came\nthe fire on the upper part of the steeple, and burned all the monastery,\nand all the treasures that were there within, except a few books and\nthree mass-robes.\u201d This injury, according to Froucester\u2019s Chronicle, was\nrepaired by the offerings of the faithful; but the abbey suffered again\nfrom fire in 1179 and 1190. The church was re-dedicated to St. Peter,\nin 1239, by Walter de Cantilupe, Bishop of Worcester. In 1242 the nave\nroof was completed. Abbot THOKEY (1306-1329) built the _south aisle_ of\nthe nave in 1318. It was during his abbacy that the body of Edward II.\nwas interred in the church; and it was owing to the great value of the\nofferings made at his tomb that a series of works was commenced, which\nform one of the most peculiar features of this cathedral. Under the\nsucceeding Abbot, WYGEMORE, (1329-1337,) the Norman walls of the _south\ntransept_ (called St. Andrew\u2019s aisle) were cased with tracery; ADAM DE\nSTANTON, abbot from 1337 to 1351, constructed the vaulting of the\n_choir_, and the stalls on the prior\u2019s side; and Abbot HORTON\n(1351-1377) completed the high altar with the choir, and the stalls on\nthe abbot\u2019s side; together with the casing of St. Paul\u2019s aisle, (the\n_north transept_). This abbot also commenced the great _cloister_, which\nWalter FROUCESTER (1381-1412) completed. Abbot MORWENT (1420-1437)\nerected the _west front_, the _south porch_, and two western bays of the\nnave. Abbot SEABROOKE (1450-1457) built the existing _tower_. Abbot\nHANLEY (1457-1472) began the _Lady-chapel_, which Abbot FARLEY\n(1472-1498) completed.\n\nNotwithstanding the long siege of the city, Gloucester Cathedral\nsuffered but little during the Civil War. Within the last ten years\n(1853-1863) extensive restorations have been made within and without the\ncathedral, under the superintendence of Mr. F. S. Waller. These consist\nchiefly of the clearing and draining of the crypt; the restoration of\nthe west front, the south aisle of the nave, the chapter-room, the\nlibrary and sacristies, portions of the cloisters, the whole of the east\nend of the choir, and the interior of the nave: to which must be added\nthe alterations entailed in forming and laying out the grounds round\nnearly the whole of the cathedral; several houses and yards having been\nremoved, and hundreds of loads of soil, the accumulation of years, taken\naway from against the walls.\n\nII. The ground-plan of the Norman church embraced nave and aisles, choir\nand sanctuary, short transepts with apsidal eastern chapels, and a\nchoir-aisle, or \u201cprocession path,\u201d terminating in three eastern chapels,\nalso apsidal. (The plan of Norwich may be compared.) With the addition\nof the Lady-chapel and the cloisters, this ground-plan still remains, as\nin the early part of the twelfth century. The Norman work throughout the\nbuilding belongs either to this original church, built by Abbot Serlo,\nand dedicated in 1100; or to the restorations after the fire of 1122.\nAll of it, but especially the great piers of the nave, which remain\nunaltered, is very interesting and important; but the great peculiarity\nof Gloucester Cathedral is the later work, ranging from 1329 to 1377,\nwith which the original Norman walls and piers of the transepts and\nchoir are cased and transformed. The manner in which this transformation\nis effected not only differs altogether from that in which other Norman\nbuildings (the nave of Winchester for example) were re-cased and\naltered, but the work at Gloucester affords us perhaps the earliest\nexample of English Perpendicular; since it exhibits far more\ncharacteristics of this style than of even the later Decorated, which\nfrom the date of the work we should expect to find. The Perpendicular\nwork thus begun, is continued through a series of magnificent\nexamples,--the cloister, (1377-1412); the great tower, (1450-1460); and\nthe Lady-chapel, (1457-1498,) almost to the last days of Gothic\narchitecture.\n\nIII. The best general views of the cathedral will be obtained from the\nnorth-west and from the south-east; but there are many excellent points\nof view from the lawn by which the building is now happily surrounded.\nThe outlines--owing greatly to the Lady-chapel with its projecting\nchantries, to the eastern chapels of the transepts and choir-aisles, and\nto the open-work of parapets and pinnacles--are unusually varied and\npicturesque. The manner in which the exterior mouldings of the great\neast window, of the west window, and of the openings in the tower, are\ncarried upwards, so as to form a kind of gable, is a marked feature,\nwhich first appears within, in the beautiful arches across the\ntransepts, on which the groining drops; and which was adopted,\napparently from them, by the designers of the succeeding work. But the\nlight and graceful tracery of the parapets, and of the pinnacles of the\ntower, is that which gives especial character to the exterior of\nGloucester. Against a clear, mid-day sky this open-work is sufficiently\nstriking; but when its tracery is projected against the red glow of\nsunset, an effect is produced which is altogether unrivalled. The tower\nof Gloucester may be compared with the central tower of Canterbury\nCathedral, of later date, (Gloucester 1450-1460, height 225 feet;\nCanterbury 1495-1517, height 235 feet,) and of more massive character.\nBoth towers form admirable centres to the masses of building clustered\nround them; and well illustrate the great advantage (which English\narchitects alone seem to have appreciated) of \u201cplacing the principal\nfeatures of their churches on the intersection of the nave with the\ntransept[3].\u201d At Gloucester, even more than at Canterbury, the various\nlines of the Lady-chapel, the transepts, the choir-aisles, and the\nchoir-roof with its eastern gable, lead the eye gradually upwards to the\ngreat tower, with its crowning pinnacles. This effect is perhaps\nincreased by the shortness of the transepts,--which here and at\nWorcester (the parent cathedral of Gloucester) are of the same\ndimensions, (128 feet from north to south[4]).\n\nIV. For a more particular notice of the exterior,\n\n[Illustration: THE NAVE.]\n\nsee \u00a7 XX. The cathedral is generally entered by the _south porch_, a\npart of the Perpendicular work erected by Abbot MORWENT, (1420-1437).\n(This abbot pulled down the towers at the west end of the cathedral, and\nthe two west bays of the nave. The present western portion of the nave,\nas far as the end of the second bay, including the west front and the\nsouth porch, is his work.) The porch, which has an upper chamber, is\ngreatly enriched with niches and canopies, and has buttresses at the\nangles. [_Frontispiece._] The arms in the spandrils of the doorway are\nthose of England and France, and of the Abbey. The pinnacles and open\nparapet are of the same general character as those (earlier) above the\ngable of the great east window, and as those (later) of the central\ntower. The ogee arched moulding, with its finial, which rises in the\ncentre is the feature already noticed (\u00a7 III.) as characteristic of this\ncathedral. It occurs throughout the Perpendicular work. Within the\nporch, the peculiar tracery of the side windows should be noticed. \u201cThe\ninternal arrangement of the panelling of the side walls is continued to\nthe exterior, and made to form the mullions of the windows.\u201d\n\nV. The first impression, on entering the _nave_, is produced by the\nlofty Norman piers. [Plate I.] The whole arrangement differs much from\nthat of the great Norman naves of the Eastern cathedrals, Norwich, Ely,\nand Peterborough. In them the divisions of the nave-arcade and of the\ntriforium above it are very nearly equal in height and width, whilst the\nclerestory range is of little less importance[5]. At Gloucester, the\nmassive nave piers are carried to such a height (30 feet) as to afford\nlittle space for the triforium, which is only a narrow wall passage; and\nthe original Norman clerestory, the circular arches of which may still\nbe traced below the Perpendicular windows, was of nearly the same\ndimensions. The height of the piers is thus made to seem greater than it\nreally is. They must have been still more remarkable when the floor of\nthe nave was at its original level, ten inches lower than at present.\nThe bases of the piers stood on square blocks; and there still exist\nsome remains of an encaustic floor on the lower level. These massive\ncircular piers, which are found also at Tewkesbury, at Pershore, and at\nMalvern Priory, seem to be peculiar to England. They do not, at any\nrate, occur in any church in Normandy, where the rectangular form\nprevails. The good effect of carrying them to such a height as at\nGloucester is perhaps questionable, since the necessary result is to\ndeprive both triforium and clerestory of all dignity and importance.\n\nThe nave consists of nine bays, from the west front to the central\ntower. Of these all are Norman to the top of the triforium, except the\ntwo western bays, which are Perpendicular, (Abbot Morwent\u2019s work). The\nNorman clerestory was altered, and the Norman portion of the nave was\nnewly vaulted, in the first half of the thirteenth century. (The nave\nroof was completed in 1242. The monks themselves, according to\nFroucester\u2019s Chronicle, laboured at it,--considering, suggests Professor\nWillis, that they could do the work better than common workmen.) The\nnave _piers_ have plain bases and cushioned capitals. The arches have\nthe zigzag in the outer moulding and a double cable in the soffete. A\ncable moulding runs along above them. In the _triforium_, two arches in\neach bay circumscribe four smaller ones, the tympana above which are\nquite plain. In constructing the new _clerestory_, the Norman work\nimmediately above the triforium arches was entirely removed; and only\nthe jambs of the side lights which extended beyond the triforium arches,\nwith the wall between them, were allowed to remain. The jambs of these\nNorman lights, with zigzag moulding, may still be traced in each bay of\nthe clerestory. The windows of the Early English clerestory were filled\nwith Perpendicular tracery, possibly by Abbot Morwent.\n\nThe Norman portions of the nave may have belonged to the church of\nAbbot Serlo, (completed in 1100); but it is impossible to say how much\nalteration or rebuilding was rendered necessary by the fires of 1122,\n1179, and 1190. The red colour of parts of the piers where the stone has\nbecome calcined, still bears witness to the fierceness of, most\nprobably, the last of these fires; by which the wooden roof of the\nNorman church was destroyed. This was replaced during the abbacy of\nHENRY FOLIOT, (1228-1243,) by the existing _vaulting_; which is plain\nquadripartite, with a central rib and bosses at the intersections. The\ngroining, of a light porous stone, is plastered on the underside. The\nvaulting-shafts, (of the same date as the roof,) in groups of three, are\nof Purbeck marble, with stone capitals of leafage, and Purbeck abaci.\nThese rest on a series of brackets supported by shafts which descend\nbetween the pier-arches. The first five of these brackets, counting from\nthe third (the first Norman) bay of the nave, are perhaps Transitional\nNorman, and the cable-moulding at the head of the pier-arches passes\nround them. The next three eastward have the cable-moulding cut away for\nthem; and on either side is a shaft of Purbeck marble with foliaged\ncapital, from which a moulding is carried round the bay of the\nclerestory. This part was perhaps more injured by the fire, so that the\nearlier work required greater alteration. (The peculiar arrangement,\nsuggests Professor Willis, may have been one of the consequences of the\nmonks\u2019 amateur workmanship.) The capitals and corbels of the\nvaulting-shafts were richly coloured[6]; and remains of painting were\nfound on the great piers themselves during the late restorations.\nAgainst three of the piers on the north side are Perpendicular brackets,\nfor lamps or for statues.\n\nThe two _western bays_ of the nave were the work of Abbot MORWENT,\n(1420-1437,) who pulled down the Norman front, which had towers north\nand south, intending to re-construct the entire nave,--a design\nfortunately prevented by his death[7]. The contrast between the noble\nNorman columns and the Perpendicular piers is sufficiently striking. The\nwesternmost bay is much wider than the others; there is no triforium;\nthe clerestory windows resemble the others, all of which were probably\ninserted by Morwent; and the vaulting is a rich lierne, with bosses of\nleafage. The west end is filled with a large Perpendicular window of\nvery good design, the glass in which, by WAILES, is a memorial of the\nlate Bishop MONK, (died 1856,) erected at the sole expense of the Rev.\nThomas Murray Browne, Honorary Canon of Gloucester, \u201cin grateful\nremembrance of many years of sincere friendship.\u201d (It should be remarked\nthat the tracery heads and cusps, as seen from the inside of this\nwindow, are not repeated on the outside,--a plain transom only crossing\nthe lights. This peculiarity is repeated in the great east, and in some\nother windows.) The glass is of unusually pictorial character; and if\nnot entirely successful, is at least better than most recent attempts in\na similar direction. The subjects are:--_Lowest tier_, beginning\nsouth--Noah passing out of the Ark after the Deluge; Moses dividing the\nRed Sea; the Baptism of the Ethiopian Eunuch. In the _second tier_--The\nAnnunciation to the Shepherds; the Nativity; the Adoration of the Kings.\nIn the _third tier_--The Presentation in the Temple; the Baptism of our\nLord; St. John Preaching in the Desert. _Above_ are the Baptism of St.\nPaul, of St. Peter, and of the Jailor of Philippi. Below the window is a\nbrass plate with an inscription recording its erection as a memorial to\nBishop Monk.\n\nThe west doorway and the panelling at its sides are very plain. At the\nangle between the nave and the south aisle is a statue of EDWARD JENNER,\nby R. W. SIEVIER. Dr. Jenner, the discoverer of vaccination, was born at\nBerkeley in Gloucestershire, in 1749; and died there in 1823.\n\nThe view eastward from this point is intercepted by the organ; but\nbeyond the massive piers of the nave, portions of the light choir-roof\nare seen; and the superb glass of the east window terminates the choir\nwith such a glow of colour as few other cathedrals can display.\n\nVI. The _north aisle_ of the nave is, like the nave itself, Norman,\nexcept the two western bays, which are Abbot Morwent\u2019s. The half piers\nagainst the wall are of the same height as those of the nave, but are\ndivided into several members with shafts at the angles, the capitals of\nwhich are in some cases enriched. In each bay the Norman window-opening\nremains, with zigzag mouldings and side-shafts. All are filled with\nPerpendicular tracery, which is continued on the Norman wall under the\nwindows. A Perpendicular stone bench runs below. The windows in this\naisle are raised high, in order to clear the roof of the cloister\noutside. The vaulting is ribbed, Norman.\n\nIn the Perpendicular portion of this aisle (second bay) is a very fine\ndoorway into the west walk of the cloister--(the monks\u2019 entrance). A\ncrocketed canopy rises above it, with panellings on either side, in\nwhich were painted figures of the Apostles. On each side of the door are\nniches for figures. In the easternmost bay of this aisle is the abbot\u2019s\nentrance--also Perpendicular, but not so richly decorated. In both these\ndoorways, the half-groined recesses, so constructed as to admit of the\ndoors opening into them, should be noticed.\n\nThe Perpendicular window at the west end of this aisle has been filled\n(1862) with stained glass by HARDMAN; representing the story of the\nBritish King Lucius, who, according to one tradition, died and was\nburied at Gloucester. Under the window is a tablet for Bishop WARBURTON,\n(died 1779); \u201ca prelate,\u201d runs the inscription, \u201cof the most sublime\ngenius and exquisite learning.\u201d The slab which covers his tomb is in the\nfirst bay between the nave and aisle. Two _monuments_ in this aisle\nshould be mentioned: that in the fifth bay by FLAXMAN, for SARAH MORLEY,\nwho died with her young child, at sea, in 1784. She rises from the sea\nsupported by three floating angels. Above are the words, \u201cThe sea shall\ngive up its dead.\u201d The figures are graceful, and the whole composition\nstriking. And that in the last bay, by the choir-screen, for THOMAS\nMACHEN, Alderman of Gloucester, and wife; 1614;--a very good example of\nthe period, but by no means one to be imitated. The window above is\nfilled with excellent stained glass by CLAYTON and BELL, in which the\nwhite and neutral tints give great effect to the brilliant colour. The\nsubjects are the three miracles of our Lord in raising the dead:--The\nRuler\u2019s Daughter, the Widow\u2019s Son, and Lazarus.\n\nVII. The _south aisle_ of the nave was changed to its present state in\n1318, during the abbacy of JOHN THOKEY, (1306-1329). The Norman south\nwall remains in the interior, together with the half piers, which\nresemble those in the north aisle. Abbot Thokey erected the present\nexternal fa\u00e7ade against this Norman wall[8], and re-groined the roof.\nThe exterior of this aisle (see \u00a7 XX.) is a very fine example of early\nDecorated[9]. The deeply recessed windows are enriched with the\nball-flower, and resemble one of the windows in Merton Chapel, Oxford,\nfrom which chapel (founded about 1280), or from that of Gloucester\nCollege, founded for student monks of this monastery in 1283, the\nwindows here may have been directly copied. The ball-flower occurs again\nin profusion at Ledbury, in Herefordshire; but it is rarely used to\nsuch an extent as in this aisle, and in the tower of Hereford Cathedral,\nwhich is nearly of the same date. At Gloucester a horizontal line drawn\nacross the head of the window, just above the spring of the arch, cuts\nno fewer than thirty-two ranks of the ball-flower, sixteen within and\nsixteen without. All the windows of this aisle, as far as the south\nporch, have been filled with stained glass. The _first_ (beginning from\nthe east) is by WARRINGTON; the _second_, by CLAYTON and BELL, contains\nthe story of Edward II.;--his imprisonment in Berkeley Castle; his\nmurder; the Abbot of Gloucester taking possession of the body; the\nprocession of monks with the body to Gloucester; and the entombment.\nThis window is good and interesting. The glass of the _third_ window is\nby BELL of Bristol, and is very bad. The _fourth_, by CLAYTON and BELL,\nrepresents the coronation of Henry III. in Gloucester Cathedral. The\n_fifth_, by WARRINGTON, and the _sixth_, by BELL of Bristol, are equally\nbad. The representations in the stained glass of the cathedral of the\ngreat historical events which have been connected with it is an\nexcellent idea, provided such historical glass is not allowed to intrude\nitself unfittingly. The great defect of the glass in Gloucester\nCathedral is its want of plan and uniformity,--owing to the various\nartists (some very indifferent) who have been employed.\n\nIn altering the south aisle, Abbot Thokey cut off the arches over the\nNorman windows, (those opposite should be compared,) and lowered the\nvaulting. This, in the first four bays from the south porch, greatly\nresembles that of the nave, which is of much earlier date. The vaulting\nof the three last bays has its mouldings filled with the ball-flower.\n\nThe two western bays of this aisle are Abbot Morwent\u2019s work, and differ\nvery slightly from those opposite. Against the west wall is a coloured\nbust of JOHN JONES, \u201cBurgess of Parliament\u201d at the time of the Gunpowder\ntreason. In the aisle is a monument by SIEVIER for SIR GEORGE\nONESEPHORUS PAUL, (died 1820,) who distinguished himself by his active\nexertions in reforming prisons.\n\nThe last bay between this aisle and the south transept is closed on the\nnorth side by the chantry of Abbot SEABROKE, (died 1457,) the builder of\nthe central tower, the south-west pier of which forms the head of his\nchantry. His effigy, in alabaster, was originally in a recess on the\nnorth side, but now occupies the place of the altar. Chantry and effigy\nhave been much mutilated and shattered. In an arched recess under the\nopposite windows are effigies of a knight and lady, long assigned to one\nof the Bohun Earls of Hereford. There is every reason, however, to\nbelieve that the effigies represent members of the Brydges family, whose\ncrest appears on the knight\u2019s sword-belt[10]. He wears a collar of SS.,\nand his armour cannot be earlier than the reign of Henry V.\n\nAgainst the wall on the north side of the entrance to the transept is a\nlarge canopied bracket for a figure.\n\nVIII. Passing into the _south transept_, we enter that portion of the\nNorman cathedral which was transformed and re-cased during the\nfourteenth century. Both transepts, the choir and its aisles, were thus\ntreated, between the years 1329-1377. The work, according to\nFroucester\u2019s Chronicle, was begun in this transept, which was re-cased\nby Abbot WYGEMORE[11], (1329-1337).\n\nIn both transepts the original outline of the _Norman_ work is complete,\nboth in the interior and exterior. Both transepts had eastern chapels,\nbelow and in the triforium, which extends over the choir-aisles, opening\ninto other chapels at the east end. Instead of the lofty piers of the\nnave, the transepts at their eastern sides, and the choir throughout,\nhave low, massive piers and arches below, and piers and arches of nearly\nequal dimensions in the triforium. In the fourteenth century the Norman\nwalls of both transepts were covered on their three sides with an open\nscreen-work or panelling formed by mullions and transoms, enriched with\ntracery and foiled headings. The forms of the triforium arches, of the\nclerestory, and of the arches opening into the chapels and choir-aisles,\nwere changed from round to pointed; but within the triforium the round\narches remain, and the wall on which the panelling is laid is the\noriginal Norman. The great distinction between the work here and that in\nthe nave of Winchester, with which it may be instructively compared, is,\nthat in the latter instance the Norman work was completely hidden, and\nre-cased with Perpendicular masonry: at Gloucester the later work was\nonly laid on the Norman walls and arches. This is more evident in the\nchoir than in the transepts.\n\nThe _south transept_, according to Abbot Froucester, was the first part\nof the Church to be thus treated. The panelling, however, although\ndating from the first half of the fourteenth century, (1329-1337,) has\nmuch of Perpendicular character; and the alterations in this transept\nmay accordingly be regarded as perhaps the earliest approach to\nPerpendicular work in England. The design is indeed wanting in one chief\ncharacteristic of true Perpendicular; as the mullions are not carried\nstraight up to the head of the arch, but branch off into arches before\nreaching it. But although the work in this transept retains much of\nDecorated character, the tendency to change is sufficiently marked; and\nin the rest of the cathedral (north transept and choir) the\nPerpendicular style is completely developed. According to Professor\nWillis, it may have commenced here. \u201cIt must have begun somewhere; in\nsome place the mullion must have been carried up for the first time, and\nno place is so likely as Gloucester to have produced the change of\nstyle[12].\u201d\n\nOn the _east_ side, the entrance to the choir-aisle is closed by an open\nscreen, with two doorways in the lower part, one leading to the aisle,\nthe other into the crypt. The form of their arches is very unusual, and\ndeserves notice. The rib of a great buttress, supporting the wall of the\nchoir, runs through the triforium above. In the south-east bay was an\narch, now closed, leading into the Norman chapel, on either side of\nwhich are canopied brackets for figures. In the panel filling the first\nbay, just above the top of the crypt door, is the so-called _Prentice\u2019s\nbracket_, [Title,] in form resembling a builder\u2019s square. Two figures\nsupport it, curiously placed,--the lower with a bag at his waist. It is\ntraditionally said to be a memorial of the master builder and his son,\nor prentice, but was in all probability a bracket for light. Filling the\ncentre of the blank arch is a monument with medallion for Bishop BENSON,\n(died 1755).\n\nOn the _south_ side of the transept is a large Perpendicular window of\ngood design, below which is a passage, behind an open arcade. The\npassage is entered from a Norman staircase-turret in the south-west\nangle, and leads upward to the triforium. The effect of this arcade,\nwith its unusual depth of shadow, is very good.\n\n[Illustration: THE \u201cPRENTICE\u2019S\u201d BRACKET.]\n\n[Illustration: CONFESSIONAL.\n\nIN THE SOUTH TRANSEPT.]\n\nIn the wall under this passage are two doorways, now closed, above one\nof which (eastward) is a grotesque monster; the other forms what is\ncalled the _confessional_. [Plate II.] Three steps ascend to the door,\nbetween panels which slope like the sides of a chair, and are supported\nby figures which seem to be those of angels. The heads, however, are\ngone, and the figures are otherwise much defaced. The local tradition\nasserts that those who came to confess entered by the first door, with\nthe monster\u2019s head above it, typical of sin; and left by the other, with\nthe sorrowing angels, representing penitence. How far the doorways were\nat all connected with a confessional is, however, quite uncertain.\n\nAgainst this wall is an ugly Elizabethan monument for RICHARD PATES,\n(died 1588); and the high tomb with effigies of Alderman BLACKLEECH,\n\u201cwho was admitted to the glory of eternity 1639,\u201d and his wife Gertrude.\nThe figures are in alabaster, and are wonderful examples of costume. All\nthe details--boots, rosettes, sword-belt and sword-handle, and the\nlady\u2019s lace and short jacket--deserve notice. It was not for her beauty\nthat Dame Gertrude was thus commemorated.\n\nIn the _west_ wall is a Perpendicular window, with blank panelling\nbelow. An open screen-work covers the arch into the nave, and the\nchoir-buttress runs through its upper division. The _roof_ is a plain\nlierne, without bosses, and \u201cone of the earliest specimens of this\ncomplex class of rib-vaulting. Owing to the difference of the angles of\nthe ribs, such a vault was very difficult of construction; most skilful\nworkmanship was necessary to make the ribs join at the intersections;\nand this led to the use of bosses, which while they concealed defective\nwork, greatly enriched the roof. But in this example there are no\nbosses. The ribs join perfectly; and it appears as if the masons desired\nthat the skilfulness of their work should be shewn[13].\u201d The very light\nand beautiful effect of the flying-arch apparently carrying the\nchoir-vaulting, which crosses the main tower-arch, should here be\nnoticed. The whole arrangement is singularly picturesque and original;\n(see \u00a7 X.)\n\nIX. In the _north transept_, cased by Abbot Horton, (1351-1377,) the new\nwork differs in its mouldings, which are here angular instead of round;\nand in the greater richness of the roof. The mullions are here continued\nup to the roof, shewing the complete development of the Perpendicular.\nIn this transept the eastern chapel is open. There is an ascent of seven\nsteps to it, shewing what was the original arrangement of the chapel in\nthe opposite transept. Within this chapel, looking west, the casing of\nthe Norman work with the later is very evident.\n\nAgainst the north wall of this transept, under the open arcade, is a\nstructure of early Decorated character, which has been called, and\nprobably with reason, a _reliquary_[14]. [Plate III.] It is in three\ndivisions, the\n\n[Illustration: THE RELIQUARY.]\n\nentrance being through the central arch. All the arches are enriched\nwith foiled openings, and with intricate and very beautiful leafage.\nThere are Purbeck shafts at the angles, heads at the spring of the\narches, and a series of seated figures, under canopies, much mutilated,\nbetween the outer arch at the entrance and the trefoil within. Inside,\nthe three divisions are groined, with bosses at the intersections; and\neach bay has three blind arches in the wall, between which piers project\nto some distance. The reliquary ends before reaching the north-west\nangle of the transept in which the square Norman turret projects,\nleading upward to the arcaded passage and to the triforium. (Compare the\nprojecting turrets at the angles of the transepts in Worcester\nCathedral.) At the north-east angle the Perpendicular work joins the\nreliquary; a bracket for a figure is placed between it and the steps\nleading to the chapel, and a shield bearing Abbot Parker\u2019s arms has\ntaken the place of the last corbel-head.\n\nThree Norman windows remain at the east end of the chapel opening from\nthis transept. Below them is a Perpendicular reredos, with three niches,\nfrom which the figures have disappeared. This chapel (as will be seen\nfrom the Plan) is of less size than that opening from the south\ntransept, and the altar (owing to the polygonal apse) was not due east.\nA door opens south, into the choir-aisle; and in the opposite wall is a\nvery good Perpendicular doorway, leading to rooms now used as vestries.\nThe Perpendicular cresting, and the angels bearing scrolls in the hollow\nmoulding, are good, and should be noticed. The Norman arch in the wall\nabove this doorway, and the Norman work in the opposite wall, (which\nshould be examined from the choir-aisle as well as from the chapel,)\napparently indicate changes in this part of the building before the\nalteration of the entire transept, which it is not easy to explain. The\ngroin edges of the vault of this chapel are carried down the piers in a\nmanner of which no example occurs elsewhere.\n\nThe steps into the chapel, and a similar ascent into the choir-aisle,\nwere rendered necessary from the height of the crypt, (\u00a7 XVII.), which\nextends under the whole of the building east of the tower, with the\nexception of the Lady-chapel. The very peculiar doorways opening to the\naisle resemble those in the opposite transept. Within the smaller of\nthese arches, on a level with the top of the stairs, is a small stone\nlectern, from which, it is probable, the pilgrims were addressed as they\npassed upwards to the shrine of Edward II.[15]\n\nThe Perpendicular screen below the tower-arch opening to the transept\nenclosed a chapel, now used as a vestry. A similar chapel existed\nbeneath the south tower-arch. Under a Perpendicular window on the west\nside of the transept is a monument for JOHN\n\n[Illustration: THE CHOIR.]\n\nBOWER, (died 1615,) \u201cwho had nyne sones and seaven daughters by his wife\nAnne Bower.\u201d Their names are on shields above this inscription, and\ntheir figures are painted on the wall at the back. Above are the words\n\u201cVayne, Vanytie. All is but Vayne. Witnesse Soloman.\u201d The monument is\ncurious from the manner in which painting is used in it.\n\nX. A heavy organ-screen, erected in 1823 by Dr. GRIFFITH, (for whom\nthere is a tablet on the north side,) divides the nave from the choir,\nand materially interferes with the utility and beauty of both.\n\nThe _choir_, [Plate IV.], as in most Norman churches, extends one bay\nwest of the central tower, under which the stalls are arranged. An\nascent of three steps leads to the _presbytery_, three bays in length;\nand the altar is approached by two additional steps. The unrivalled east\nwindow at once attracts attention on entering the choir; but the whole\nview is rendered especially interesting and peculiar by the panelling\nand open screen-work covering the Norman walls and arches, the form of\nwhich is preserved; by the lofty clerestory; and by the exquisite\nlightness and grace of the lierne roof, which extends unbroken, except\nby a low ribbed arch, from the west wall of the tower to the east\nwindow.\n\nThe choir, according to Froucester\u2019s Chronicle, was cased and vaulted by\nAbbots STAUNTON, (1337-1351,) and HORTON, (1351-1377). Their work must\nalso have embraced the lower portion of the tower, (as far as the roof,)\nsince there is no break in the vaulting, and the work is of the same\ncharacter throughout. As far as the spring of the flying-arch that\ncarries the groining, the piers of the tower are Norman; to this point\nthe walls of the tower, choir, and presbytery were taken down. The\npointed arches opening to the transepts, the slender arches that cross\nthem, and apparently carry the groining, and rank among the most\npeculiar features of this cathedral, and the vaulted roof of the tower,\nall belong to the work of Staunton and Horton: the former of whom\ncompleted the western portion of the choir, with the vaulting; whilst\nthe latter re-constructed the eastern end, with the high altar. The\nchoir _vaulting_ is one of the richest examples in England; and although\nits lines of ornamentation are thrown out in every direction like those\nof a spider\u2019s web, \u201cthe complication is really the effect of\nperspective, since when reduced to drawing the lines form a simple\ngeometrical figure[16].\u201d The tower-vaulting is much higher than the roof\nof the nave, and admits of a window in the west wall of the tower, with\nniches carrying brackets for figures on either side. Over the arch is\nthe inscription,--\n\n \u201cHoc quod digestum specularis opusque politum\n Tullii h\u00e6c ex onere Seabroke Abbate jubente;\u201d\n\nwhich can only record the building of the upper part of the tower, in\nthe time of Abbot Seabroke; (see \u00a7 III.): or possibly, only the\ncompletion of the work, after the death of Abbot Seabroke in 1457, by\nROBERT TULLY,\n\n[Illustration: MISERERES IN THE CHOIR.]\n\na monk of the house. In 1460 Tully became Bishop of St. David\u2019s, and\ndied in 1481.\n\nThe _light arches_ which, cross the main arches of the tower, north and\nsouth, and which look like \u201cpieces of carpentry in stone,\u201d do not in\nreality support the vault, which rests securely on the wall behind. They\nwere not, however, intended to deceive. \u201cUnless some resting-place was\nprovided, the builders must have allowed the capital to hang down to a\nlevel with the others without anything to support it, or altered the\narch above, and thus have disturbed the curvature of the vault. The\nflying-arch was contrived to get rid of these defects. All this appears\nto be characteristic of a school of masons who were extremely skilful,\nand glad of an opportunity of shewing their skill; as a modern engineer\nlikes to carry his railway through a chain of mountains when he has a\nplain valley before him[17].\u201d\n\nThe stalls ranged below the tower are Perpendicular, (those north the\nwork of Abbot Staunton, those south of Abbot Horton,) with, rich\nprojecting canopies. The misereres [Plate V.] below are of the usual\ncharacter, but are so fixed that they can only be seen with difficulty.\nBehind the first stall on the north side is a fragment of Early English\nwork, probably of the date of Elias de Lideford, who erected stalls in\nthe choir, which were removed by Abbots Staunton and Horton.\n\nThe open screen-work which covers the Norman arches of the presbytery,\nis carried upwards into the lofty clerestory windows, so as to cover\nthe entire bay with a uniform panelling. Light vaulting-shafts run up\nbetween, and carry the lierne roof. The termination of the Norman choir\nwas originally circular, as at Norwich; but in order to insert the great\neast window, the two last bays, eastward, were entirely removed, and the\nwalls, from this point, now slope outwards north and south. This part of\nthe work is, in Froucester\u2019s Chronicle, assigned to Abbot HORTON,\n(1351-1377). The _tiling_ of the sacrarium, which displays the arms and\ndevices of Abbot PARKER, (1515-1534,) is no doubt of his time; as are\nthe _sedilia_ on the south side, which indicate the coming change in\ntheir arabesque ornaments. The frieze, a knotted stick passed through a\nriband, should be noticed. On the canopy above are three figures,--one\nwith a drum or tambourine, the others with trumpets.\n\nXI. The great _east window_, which terminates the choir, is the largest\nin England, and is, owing to the ingenious construction of this part of\nthe choir, wider than the side walls which contain it: it is filled with\nwhat is, in many respects, the finest stained glass of the period in\nthis country. The window itself, in its general design and tracery,\ncorresponds with the panelling of the choir and with the windows of the\nclerestory, and is part of Abbot Horton\u2019s work. The tracery-heads and\ncusps on the inside do not appear without, as usual, since the glass\n(probably to save expense) is fitted into a square-headed panel, sunk in\nthe back of the window. A peculiar effect is produced by the roof of the\nLady-chapel beyond, which rises against the lower part of the window,\n(from which it is separated by the ante-chapel); the glass above is\nconsequently always in brighter light than that below. The stone-work of\nthe whole window has been repaired (1862) at a cost of \u00a31,400; and \u00a3600\nhas been expended on the re-leading of the glass by HUGHES[18], under\nthe very careful supervision of Mr. Winston, one of the best authorities\non the subject.\n\nThe window, like the rest of the choir-work, has decided Perpendicular\nfeatures; but the glass \u201cis in all respects thoroughly Decorated in\ncharacter;... As a general rule, it is true that a change in the style\nof architecture has always preceded, by some years, the corresponding\nchange in the style of painted glass....\n\n\u201cThe two first tiers of lights from the ground are filled with coloured\nborders and ornamented white quarries; a shield of arms in a panel is\ninserted in each light, and a small ornamented roundel placed at some\ndistance beneath it. The three next tiers of lights throughout the\nwindow are filled with figures and canopies, and, in the central part of\nthe window, another tier likewise, the spires of this row of canopies\nrunning into the tier of lights above. This arrangement, as might be\nexpected, imparts a grand pyramidical character to the whole design.\nAll the tracery lights of the window are filled with ornamented white\nquarries, and enriched with small roundels of ornament inserted here and\nthere....\n\n\u201cThe colouring of the lower lights--containing figures and canopies--is\narranged on a principle not uncommon in early Perpendicular glass. The\nfigures are almost entirely white, having yellow stained hair, and\nborders to their robes: the architectural work of the canopies is wholly\ncomposed of white and yellow stained glass. The positive colouring is\nconfined to the spire backgrounds of the canopies, and the tapestry\nwhich lines the interior of the niche; and it is carried in uniform\nstreaks, or columns, down the window. Thus the spire grounds and\ntapestries of the central column--which is two lights broad, all the\nother columns being only of the width of one light--are coloured red;\nthose of the next column on each side the centre one are coloured blue;\nthose of the next red, and so on. The large proportion of white used in\nthe most coloured parts prevents any violent transition, from the figure\nand canopy part to the quarry part of the window....\n\n\u201cThe full effect of the Gloucester window, no doubt, depends not only on\nthe simplicity of the composition, the largeness of its parts, and the\nbreadth of its colouring, but also on the excellence of the material of\nwhich the window is composed....\n\n\u201cThe side windows of the choir-clerestory retain enough of their\noriginal glazing--which is precisely of the same date as that of the\neast window--to enable us to perceive that their lower tier of lights\nwas filled with figures and canopies, and their upper tier and\ntracery-lights with borders and quarry patterns, having small roundels\nof ornament inserted of the same character as the pattern-work in the\neast window: a corroborative proof, if any were necessary, of the\noriginality of the arrangement of the glass in the upper part of the\neast window, with which the arrangement of the glass in the side windows\nso perfectly harmonizes[19].\u201d The date assigned by Mr. Winston to the\neast window, and to those of the clerestory, is between 1345 and 1350.\n\nXII. On the _south_ side of the presbytery is a projecting bracket of\nPerpendicular date, on which is placed the earlier effigy of an\nabbot--perhaps that of HENRY FOLIOT, (died 1243). It is too shattered,\nhowever, to be of much interest.\n\nOn the _north_ side of the presbytery, beginning from the east, are:--\n\n(1.) A high tomb with effigy of OSRIC, the Mercian \u201ckinglet,\u201d who is\nsaid to have founded the first religious establishment at Gloucester.\n(See \u00a7 I., and Pt. II.) On the east end of the monument is the\ninscription,--\u201cOsricus Rex primus fundator hujus monasterii--681.\u201d The\ntomb and effigy are said to have been erected during the abbacy of\nWILLIAM PARKER, (1515-1539,) whose arms, together with those of the\nabbey, appear on it. The effigy is crowned and sceptred, and carries\nthe model of a church in the left hand. The ermine collar of the robe is\nunusual.\n\n(2.) The superb tomb, with effigy of EDWARD II. [Plate VI.] It has been\ntruly said that the whole of the choir, as it at present exists, is a\nmemorial of the murdered King; since the alterations in it were\ncommenced after his interment here, and their cost was mainly defrayed\nfrom the rich offerings made at his tomb. The tomb itself, however, is\nnot unworthy a greater king than Edward II.\n\nIt was on the 21st of September, 1327, that King Edward was murdered in\nBerkeley Castle. The monasteries of Bristol, Kingswood, and Malmesbury\nrefused to receive his body for interment, fearing the displeasure of\nthe Queen and her party; but Abbot Thokey of Gloucester, more\nfar-sighted, brought it from Berkeley in his own carriage, and caused it\nto be solemnly interred beneath the existing monument. This was erected\nat the cost of the King\u2019s son, Edward III., and became at once an\nimportant place of pilgrimage. Offerings made here were thought to avert\nthe Divine anger from the nation, and it is said that if all the\noblations presented at the tomb during the reign of Edward III. had been\nexpended on the church, it might have been built anew. Edward III.\nhimself, when in danger of shipwreck, vowed an offering of a golden ship\nat his father\u2019s tomb, which was duly presented, but afterwards redeemed,\nat the request of the Abbot and Convent, for \u00a3100. The Black Prince\noffered a golden crucifix, containing a portion of the holy Cross; the\nQueen of\n\n[Illustration: MONUMENT OF EDWARD II.]\n\nScots, a necklace with a ruby; and Queen Philippa, a heart and ear of\ngold. Such offerings were no doubt hung about the tomb, in the usual\nmanner.\n\nThe monument itself consists of an altar-tomb with effigy, canopied by a\nmass of exquisite tabernacle-work, which fills up the entire arch. The\ngreat Norman piers on either side have been cut away, to give room for\nthe lower part of the tomb, which has canopied niches for figures no\nlonger existing, and on the side toward the choir-aisle (at which the\noblations were made) a bracket for light. The effigy is of alabaster,\nand the King\u2019s features were possibly chiselled from a waxen mask, taken\nafter death. The head is very fine, and should be compared with those of\nEdward III. at Westminster, and of the Black Prince at Canterbury. In\nall these Plantagenet effigies there is a striking resemblance. The\narrangement of the hair and beard should be noticed. At the head are\nangels, and a lion at the feet, finely rendered. On the side of the tomb\n(toward the aisle) is a shield, with an inscription recording the\nrestoration of the monument by the society of Oriel College, Oxford, of\nwhich Edward II. was the founder, at the instance of his Almoner, Adam\nde Brome:--\u201cHoc fundatoris sui monumentum, situ vetustatis deformatum,\ninstaurari curaverunt Pr\u00e6pos. et Soc. Coll. Oriel, Oxon. A.D.\n1737-1789-1798.\u201d\n\nThe capitals of the great piers are painted with the device of Richard\nII., the white hart, chained and collared. Hence a tradition has arisen\nthat the body of the King was drawn by stags from Berkeley to\nGloucester.\n\n(3.) The chantry, with effigy, of Abbot PARKER, (the last Abbot of\nGloucester,) 1515-1539. The chantry has been converted into a pew. The\nscreen enclosing it has a good frieze of vine-leaves and grapes; and the\nniches for statues at the angles should be noticed. The effigy, of\nalabaster, has been much cut and injured. The Abbot wears the chasuble\nand jewelled mitre, (Gloucester ranked as the eleventh of the\ntwenty-seven mitred English abbeys); the top of his staff is broken.\nThere are small figures in the portion left. The base of the monument\nhas shields with the Abbot\u2019s arms, and others bearing the emblems of our\nLord\u2019s Passion.\n\nXIII. The _north choir-aisle_ is entered from the choir through a\nPerpendicular doorway in the bay below Abbot Parker\u2019s chantry. The aisle\nitself is Norman, of the same date as the choir, but has the windows\nfilled with Perpendicular tracery. The low enormous piers of the choir\nare here well seen, and the monuments already described should all be\nnoticed from this side.\n\nAt the north-east angle of the aisle is one of the apsidal _chapels_,\nthree of which terminated the Norman choir. The chapel forms a pentagon,\nthe place of the altar being, very unusually, north-east. The whole\nchapel was altered as a memorial of Abbot BOTELER, (1437-1450). It is\nenclosed by a Perpendicular screen, and the windows are filled with\nPerpendicular tracery. Behind the altar is a very rich Perpendicular\nreredos, having one central and eight smaller niches. Some of the small\nfigures of the Apostles in the canopies above\n\n[Illustration: TOMB OF ROBERT, DUKE OF NORMANDY.]\n\nare perfect; and there are also many shields of benefactors to the\nmonastery. The whole is richly painted.\n\nOn the step of the altar is the effigy of ROBERT COURTEHOSE, [Plate\nVII.,] eldest son of the Conqueror, who died in 1134, at the castle of\nCardiff, where he had been a prisoner twenty-six years. He had been a\ngreat benefactor to the monastery at Gloucester, and was interred here\nbefore the high altar. His monument continued entire until 1641, when it\nwas broken to pieces by Cromwell\u2019s soldiers. The pieces were bought by\nSir Humphrey Tracy, of Stanway, who kept them until after the\nRestoration, when they were put together, and replaced in the cathedral.\nThe monument now consists of a high tomb or chest (on wheels), of Irish\noak, on which is laid the effigy, also of oak. The shields on the tomb,\nand the figure itself, were partly re-coloured, and the former very\nimproperly, during the present century. The tomb has a border of\nleafage, of late Decorated character. The effigy itself may be of the\nsame period (since the material is the same), and may perhaps have been\ncopied from an earlier figure. It is cross-legged, and has a surcoat and\na coronet. Whatever may be its real date, it cannot possibly be older\nthan Henry II.\n\nThe Norman pier remains at the north-east angle of the chapel, with the\naddition of a Perpendicular base, and a panelled ornament cut into it.\nBetween the reredos and the east wall is a Perpendicular arch, which\nassists in carrying the east window, and is so contrived as to relieve\nthe slight Perpendicular pier adjoining of the weight of the\nsuperstructure, which it was not strong enough to bear. The construction\nof all this east end of the choir, which is very ingenious, is best seen\nin the triforium, (\u00a7 XVI.)\n\nXIV. The termination of the Norman choir, as has already been mentioned,\nwas polygonal, with a central and two side chapels. This original\narrangement still remains in the crypt, (\u00a7 XVII.); but the central\nchapel at the east end of the choir, which had been undisturbed by the\nerection of the great east window, was altered about a century later,\nwhen the _Lady-chapel_ was commenced. The walls of the _ante-chapel_, by\nwhich this is entered, are in fact those of the Norman apsidal chapel,\npierced on either side by a Perpendicular window, and having a rich\npanelled lierne vault, crossed by a double row of pendants. The _upper_\nstory of the ante-chapel was the Norman chapel of the triforium. This\nportion is separated from the Lady-chapel by a screen of open-work,\nthrough which is seen the vaulted roof, and three windows at the west\nand on either side. The west window looks across the low gallery\nintervening between it and the east window of the choir, (see \u00a7 V.) The\narch carrying the screen of the upper chapel, and forming the eastern\ntermination of the lower roof, is bordered in front by a series of\nfoiled panels, having shields in their centres.\n\nAll this work, together with the Lady-chapel itself, is due to Abbot\nHANLEY, (1457-1472,) and his successor, Abbot FARLEY, (1472-1498). It\nwas the last great work of the monastery, and worthily closes the fine\nseries of Perpendicular structures, (the re-casing of the choir, the\ncloisters, the tower, and the Lady-chapel,) which rank among the most\ninteresting and important in England.\n\nThe Lady-chapel consists of four bays, with a square-sided eastern end,\nand small square-sided chapels of two stories, projecting from the third\nbay on either side. Each bay is nearly filled by a lofty Perpendicular\nwindow of four divisions. The lights of the two upper tiers are simply\nfoiled. Those below are richer, with ornamented headings. In the wall\nbelow the window is a plain arcade of foiled arches, with a quatrefoil\nabove. The narrow bit of wall which remains in each bay is panelled with\ntracery corresponding to the divisions of the windows; and in the three\nprincipal tiers has brackets and rich canopies for figures. The brackets\nare angels bearing scrolls. Vaulting-shafts run up between these panels;\nand above is a superb lierne roof,--one of the best and purest examples\nof such a roof in the Perpendicular period. The bosses are entirely of\nleafage, and are very numerous. Traces of colour remain on the walls,\nand on some of the canopies; and the headings of the window lights\nretain their original stained glass.\n\nThe effect of the side chapels is unusually picturesque. Each is of two\nstories; the roof of the upper on a level with the upper series of wall\npanellings on either side. A sharply-pointed arch, with pierced\npanellings above and an open parapet below, forms the front of the upper\nchapels; the lower are closed in front by a rich screen-work,\ncorresponding to the window divisions. The east end of the Lady-chapel\nis entirely filled by a Perpendicular window of three divisions, the\ndesign of which resembles those at the sides. The glass in this window\nis original, and very good, although not equal to that in the great east\nwindow of the choir. The extent to which white and yellow are employed\nin it should be noticed.\n\nBelow the window was a rich mass of tabernacle-work, now effectually\nsmashed. Over the altar were three main niches, with pedestals for\nfigures. There are fragments of brackets and canopies in the smaller\ndivisions; and the whole shews remains of colour, gilding, and\nenamelling. The designs at the back of the principal niches should be\nespecially noticed.\n\nMuch of the original tiling remains on this part of the floor. The tiles\nbear inscriptions, \u201cD\u0169e Jh\u0169 miserere;\u201d and \u201cAve Maria gr\u00e3. pl\u1ebd.\u201d In the\ncentre is a device of roses with leaves. Below the window on the south\nside are three sedilia, with graceful pendent canopies. The backs are\npanelled.\n\nThe side chapel _on the north_ has a groined roof, in which the cusps of\nthe foils and other portions are pierced with minute circular hollows,\nadding much to the elaborate effect. The panelling of the west wall has\nbeen filled by the upper part of the monument of Bishop GODFRED, (died\n1604). Below is an altar-tomb with effigy. The upper chapel, or oratory,\nis approached by a staircase on the west side, opening from the bay\nbelow; it has a lierne roof, with bosses of leafage. The _south_ chapel\nresembles the north; and contains a flat altar-tomb for THOMAS\nFITZWILLIAMS, (died 1579: it was repaired by his descendants in 1648).\nThe east window is covered by the hideous monument of Bishop NICHOLSON,\n(died 1671). The upper chapel resembles that opposite. These chapels\nwere apparently the chantries of the two abbots who built the\nLady-chapel; the upper stories, in which there is no trace of an altar,\nserving as oratories.\n\nOn the north side of the Lady-chapel is a monument with effigy for\nELIZABETH WILLIAMS, daughter of Bishop Miles Smith of Gloucester, (died\n1622). Below, again, is a full-length statue of Sir JOHN POWELL, (died\n1713)[20].\n\n\nXV. The _south choir-aisle_ resembles that opposite. The south-east\nchapel opening from it retains its Norman work more completely than the\nnorth-east. The Norman arches and windows remain; the latter filled with\nPerpendicular tracery. As in the chapel opposite, the altar did not\nfront due east.\n\nA door on the platform above the steps descending to the transept opens\nto what was originally the east chapel of the transept itself. The\narrangement resembled that of the south-east chapel. The arch of\nentrance from the transept (transitional Norman, and pointed) remains,\nwalled up. Under the three eastern windows is a rich Perpendicular\nreredos, with three niches for figures.\n\n\nXVI. The _triforium_ of the choir is reached by the staircases at the\nangles of the transepts, and through the open arcade at their north and\nsouth sides. The triforium originally extended quite round the choir,\nthe whole width of the choir-aisles, opening into chapels corresponding\nwith those below. With the exception of the east end--between the\nsouth-east and north-east chapels--it remains entire; of late Norman\ncharacter, with some alterations made during the Decorated period.\n\nIn the chapel above the _south_ transept the Norman windows have been\nreplaced by Decorated, enriched with the ball-flower. The double piscina\nin the small window, and the brackets for figures, with rich canopies,\nare Decorated, and deserve notice. Looking toward the transept, the\nmanner in which it was re-cased is here readily seen. The circular\nNorman arch of the triforium encloses a pointed arch, with shafts at the\nangles. This arch is crossed by the ribs of the screen-work. In this\npart of the triforium is preserved an ancient painting on panel,\nrepresenting the Last Judgment. It dates apparently from the end of the\nfifteenth century, but is of no very great interest.\n\nThe massive piers of the triforium above the choir-aisle remain\nunaltered. The arches are crossed with Perpendicular tracery. The\nsouth-east chapel opens\n\n[Illustration: PLANS OF TRIFORIUM AND CRYPT, GLOUCESTER.]\n\nabove the corresponding chapel in the aisle: it is plain Norman, with\nlate windows inserted.\n\nThe manner in which the east end of the choir was re-constructed, to\nadmit of the insertion of the great east window, and to allow of its\nbeing wider than the original walls of the choir, is best seen from this\npoint. The eastern piers of the choir, and the portion of the triforium\nabove, were entirely removed; but the Norman eastern chapel\n(corresponding to those south-east and north-east) was allowed to remain\nentire, both in the triforium and below. The last bay of the choir was\nextended laterally, so as to admit the light freely from the great\nwindow; and as access to the eastern chapel was cut off by the removal\nof the triforium, it became necessary to construct the passage at the\nback of the window, known as the \u201cWhispering Gallery.\u201d Here three flying\nbuttresses should be remarked, which spring from the outer walls of the\ncathedral at the bend of the apse, and meet in a point behind the wall\nof the choir. These really sustain the weight above the triforium, so\nthat the slight Perpendicular pier below (\u00a7 XIII.) is not called upon to\ndo more than half the duty. In the Whispering Gallery much Norman\nstone-work has been re-used--a practice of common occurrence throughout\nthe cathedral. Sound is transmitted through this gallery, which is 75\nft. long, 3 ft. wide, and 8 ft. high, in a remarkable manner. The lowest\nwhisper, or the slightest scratch with a pin, is distinctly heard from\none end to the other. The chapel into which it opens was part of the\nNorman chapel, altered on the building of the Lady-chapel, into which\nit looks. In it is a stone altar--perhaps that of the Norman chapel.\n\n[Illustration: Chapel, Triforium]\n\nThe north-east Norman chapel beyond the gallery has a Decorated window;\nand in that adjoining the north transept is a very beautiful Decorated\ndouble piscina. The foliated ornament round the inner arch of the\nwindows here and in the chapel opposite should be noticed. Taking into\naccount the many chapels in this triforium, and in the crypt, it may be\nreckoned that there were nearly twice as many altars in this church as\nwere usually to be found in churches of even the same size and\nimportance.\n\nXVII. The _crypt_, which is entered from the south transept, is one of\nfive English eastern crypts founded before 1085; (the others are\nCanterbury, Winchester, Rochester, and Worcester). After that date (with\none exception, the Early English crypt at Hereford--see that cathedral)\nthey ceased to be constructed, except in continuation of former ones.\nThe crypt of Gloucester extends under the whole of the choir, with its\naisles and chapels; and the original form of the eastern end is here at\nonce evident.\n\n[Illustration: Crypt.]\n\n\u201cThe outer walls of the crypt are about 10 ft. thick, and the aisle\nfloor is on an average 8 ft. deep below the level of the soil on the\noutside. The centre part is divided by two rows of small columns, from\nwhich spring groined arches carrying the floor of the choir. The bases\nand capitals of these are much out of level, falling considerably from\nwest to east, and from north to south.... It is evident that great\nalterations have from time to time been made in this part of the\nbuilding: the large semicircular columns against the walls, though of\ngreat antiquity, are not part of the original structure, but are\ncasings, in which are enclosed the former and smaller piers; and the\nribs springing from their capitals are built _under_, and with a view to\nsupport the groins[21].\u201d\n\nMuch soil has been cleared from the crypt, and the original floors of\nthe chapels have been laid open. These are composed of a rough concrete.\nThere is a step into each chapel, and the floors rise gradually toward\nthe east end. All contain remains of altars and piscinas, generally of\nlater date than the crypt itself. The chapel adjoining the north\ntransept was groined and decorated in the latter part of the thirteenth\ncentury. The windows of the crypt have been opened and glazed.\n\nXVIII. The _cloisters_, [Plate VIII.,] which are entered from the nave,\nrank among the finest examples in the kingdom. They were commenced by\nAbbot HORTON, (1351-1377); and completed by Abbot FROUCESTER,\n(1381-1412).\n\nThe view looking down either of the walks is very fine, mainly owing to\nthe richness of the groined roof, which, is the earliest existing\nexample of the fan-vault.\n\n[Illustration: THE CLOISTERS.\n\nTHE \u201cCAROLS\u201d IN THE SOUTH WALK.]\n\n[Illustration: THE LAVATORY IN THE CLOISTERS.]\n\nThis style of vaulting is entirely peculiar to England; and Professor\nWillis has suggested that the school of masons who were employed in this\ncathedral may have originated it[22]. The wall sides of the cloisters\nare panelled; and the windows, divided by a transom, have rich\nPerpendicular tracery. The lights above the transom were glazed. \u201cThe\nconstruction of the outer walls is peculiar as to the arrangement of the\nbuttresses, and the projecting shelf of stone connected with the\ntransoms of the windows, which was evidently meant as a protection from\nthe weather for the lower half of the windows,--which was not\nglazed[23].\u201d Each walk is divided into ten compartments. In the south\nwalk are the \u2018Carols\u2019--places for writing or study, twenty in number,\nformed by a series of arches, running below the main windows. In each\n\u2018carol\u2019 is a small and graceful window, of two lights. (Similar stalls\nor \u2018carols\u2019 existed at Durham.) The very fine view at the angle of the\nsouth and west walks should especially be noticed. In the _north_ walk\nare the _lavatories_, [Plate IX.,] projecting into the cloister garth:\nthese are very perfect. Under the windows is a long trough or basin into\nwhich the water flowed. The roof is groined. Opposite, in the wall of\nthe cloister, is the recess for towels, or _manutergia_.\n\nIn the east walk are some memorial windows of stained glass; and it is\nproposed to fill the whole of the cloisters with glass, forming, when\ncompleted, a History of our Lord. \u201cThis scheme was originated with a\nview to check the disfigurement of the cathedral by monuments of any\nother description.\u201d\n\nXIX. The _chapter-house_ opens from the east walk through a Norman arch\nenriched with zigzag ornament. The chapter-house itself (72 ft. by 34)\nis a long parallelogram of four bays, three of which are Norman, and the\nmost easterly a Perpendicular addition. This part is finely groined, and\nhas a large Perpendicular window. Round the Norman portion [Plate X.] is\nan arcade of four arches in each bay. The manner in which the shafts\ncarrying the vaulting-ribs are set back in the wall, between the shafts\nof the arcade, should be noticed. The plain vault has large ribs, 15 ft.\napart. Rude inscriptions and shields are traceable on the wall-arcade.\nThe floor has been covered with encaustic tiles, copied accurately from\nthe old work.\n\nBetween the chapter-house and the north transept is the short passage\ncalled the \u201cAbbot\u2019s Cloister;\u201d and above it the _Chapter\nLibrary_,--probably the original library of the monastery. This is a\nlong room, of Perpendicular character, with a roof of dark oak, a row of\nsmall windows on the north side, and a large Perpendicular window east.\nThe room has been well and thoroughly restored, and the books properly\narranged. The most important manuscripts are--a transcript of Abbot\nFroucester\u2019s Lives of the Abbots of Gloucester, from the foundation of\nthe monastery to 1381; (the original MS. of this work--unless it be that\nrecently found under the Rolls Chapel--is no longer known to exist. It\nis said to have disappeared from the Chapter\n\n[Illustration: THE CHAPTER-HOUSE.\n\n(THE NORMAN PORTION.)]\n\nLibrary at the beginning of the present century. This transcript was\nmade by Dr. Hall, Master of Pembroke College, Oxford. There are others\nin the library of Queen\u2019s College, Oxford, and in the British\nMuseum).--A Register of Documents relating to the Abbey, also made by\nAbbot Froucester; and another Register, compiled by the last abbot,\nParker, or Malvern.\n\nXX. Returning to the _exterior_ of the church, the _west front_ (Abbot\nMORWENT\u2019s work, 1420-1437, see \u00a7\u00a7 IV., V.) may first be visited. This is\nnot very rich or striking, but the pierced buttresses of the window, and\nthe parapets of open-work below and above, should be noticed. The\ncomposition of Abbot Thokey\u2019s _south aisle_, with its massive buttresses\nand deeply recessed windows, is unusually fine. On the upper part of the\nbuttresses is a series of figures, finely designed, and well deserving\nattention. At the _transept_ commences the Perpendicular transformation.\nThe turrets at the angles are Norman, with interlacing arcades above;\nthe cappings are later. The gables are filled with a series of\nround-headed arches, rising one above another; and traces of the\noriginal Norman window-openings remain in the walls. The parapets and\nwindows shew the later alterations. Buttresses of the central tower pass\nacross the east and west sides of the transept.\n\nThe polygonal shape of the radiating chapels--very unusual in Norman\narchitecture--should here be noticed from the exterior; as well as the\nmanner in which the Lady-chapel is connected with the choir. At the\nnorth-west angle of this chapel is a fragment of the original Norman\nwork which belonged to the central apse, and was turned to account in\nAbbot Horton\u2019s rebuilding of the east end. The light buttresses which\nsupport the great east window are pierced so as not to obstruct the\nlight. The central gable of the open parapet above the window retains a\nfigure of our Lord on the cross.\n\nThe last bay of the Lady-chapel has an open passage below it, which was\nrendered necessary at the time of the building of the chapel, from the\nfact that the boundary wall of the monastery passed north and south in a\nline with the extreme eastern buttresses. (The marks of this wall may\nstill be seen on the buttresses.) The archway is picturesque in itself.\nA very striking view of the north-east portion of the cathedral opens\nbeyond it; full of varied and intricate outlines formed by the\nprojecting chapels and the walls of the cloister and chapter-house, and\ncrowned by the great mass of the central tower with its deep shadows and\nits fretwork of grey stone.\n\nThe _tower_ (see \u00a7 III.) was (as appears from the inscription within, \u00a7\nX.) the work of Abbot SEABROKE, (1450-1457,) and was, said one of the\nmonks to Leland (_temp._ Hen. VIII.), \u201ca pharos to all parts of the\nhills.\u201d The singular beauty of its pinnacles of open-work has already\nbeen noticed.\n\nA passage called the Abbot\u2019s Cloister separates the chapter-house from\nthe north transept. The cloister itself, however, extended beyond this\npassage eastward. The inner walls alone remain. The eastern wall has\nentirely disappeared; and beyond it are some transitional Norman arches,\nwhich belonged to the infirmary of the monastery.\n\n\nNOTE, (p. 33).\n\nSince the foregoing pages were in type, Mr. Winston has arrived at some\nvery important and interesting conclusions relating to the east window\nof the choir. The general design of the figure-work is the Enthronement\nof the Blessed Virgin. The original arms in the window were those of\nwarriors who served in the Cressy campaign, and who were connected with\nthe county of Gloucester by their landed possessions; and there is\nground for a surmise that the donor of the glass was Lord Bradeston,\nGovernor of Gloucester Castle. The conception of the work may be\nattributed to 1347 or 1348, and it was completed not later than 1350.\n\nThe saving of this noble relic from the destructive effects of a\n\u2018restoration\u2019 is due to the energetic remonstrances of the Arch\u00e6ological\nInstitute; in the Journal of which Society the results of Mr. Winston\u2019s\ninvestigations, briefly stated above, will soon, it is to be hoped,\nappear. They will be eagerly welcomed by all who are interested in the\nsubject.\n\n\n\n\nGLOUCESTER CATHEDRAL.\n\nPART II.\n\nHistory of the See, with Short Notices of the principal Bishops.\n\n\n Very ancient traditions, which were accepted as facts throughout\n the Middle Ages, connected Gloucester with the first introduction\n of Christianity to Roman Britain. It was said to have been the\n chief city of Lucius, the British King who, about the year 160,\n sent messengers to Rome with a request that Pope Eleutherius would\n despatch Christian teachers into Britain, who might teach Lucius\n himself and his people. This was accordingly done. Lucius was\n baptized at Gloucester, and after establishing Christianity\n throughout the island, died at Gloucester in the year 201, and was\n buried in a church which he had built on the site of the existing\n cathedral[24]. What amount of truth may be involved in this story\n is altogether uncertain. The first who mentions the conversion of\n Lucius is Bede[25]. His death is placed at Gloucester by Matthew\n Paris, and by others of the later chroniclers; and his legend (for\n it is little more) has been illustrated in a window of stained\n glass, lately inserted in the nave of the Cathedral, (see Pt. I. \u00a7\n VI.)\n\nGloucester, the British _Cair glou_, the Roman _Glevum_, had been walled\nduring the Roman period, and was one of the strong \u201cceasters\u201d of Mercia.\nIn 681 it was granted by Ethelred of Mercia to Osric, as \u201cunderking\u201d or\nviceroy of the district. Osric is said to have completed the\nestablishment of a convent of nuns, which had been commenced in\nGloucester by Wulphere, brother of Ethelred; and Archbishop Theodore of\nCanterbury dedicated it in honour of St. Peter. Osric was accordingly\nregarded as the founder of the monastery, which continued under the rule\nof an abbess until A.D. 767, between which year and 821 it lay desolate,\nand the nuns were dispersed. In A.D. 821, Beornulph of Mercia restored\nthe convent, and established in it a body of secular canons. They\nremained until 1022, when Canute introduced Benedictines in their place.\nFrom that time until the dissolution the abbey increased steadily in\nwealth and importance. The reception of the body of Edward II. brought\nvast sums to its treasury; and under Abbot Froucester it was raised to\nthe dignity of a mitred abbey, by Pope Urban VI. Its income at the\nDissolution was, according to Speed, \u00a31,550.\n\nThe first Parliament after the Conquest was assembled by Henry I. in\nthis abbey, and the young King, Henry III., (then but nine years old,)\nwas crowned in the church, October 28, 1216. Richard II. held a\nParliament in the great hall of the abbey, in November, 1378.\n\nThe most important _Abbots_ were--\n\n [A.D. 1072-1104.] SERLO, who laid the foundation of the present\n church, dedicated in the year 1100. [A.D. 1113-1130.] WILLIAM, in\n whose time (1122) Serlo\u2019s church was greatly injured by fire, (see\n Pt. I.) [A.D. 1139-1148.] GILBERT FOLIOT, who in the latter year\n became Bishop of Hereford, and in 1163 was translated to London. He\n was the well-known opponent of Becket. [A.D. 1306-1329.] JOHN\n THOKEY, who built the south aisle of the nave, (see Pt. I. \u00a7 VII.,)\n and received the body of Edward II., (Pt. I. \u00a7 XII.) [A.D.\n 1329-1337.] JOHN WYGEMORE, who commenced the great change in the\n architecture of the church by his reconstruction of the south\n transept, (Pt. I. \u00a7 VIII.) [A.D. 1337-1351.] ADAM DE STAUNTON; and\n [A.D. 1351-1377] THOMAS DE HORTON; who carried forward the work in\n the choir and north transept. (Pt. I. \u00a7\u00a7 IX., X.) [A.D. 1381-1412.]\n WALTER FROUCESTER, the historian of the Abbey, (see Pt. I. \u00a7\n XVIII.,) who built much of the cloister and who procured the grant\n of the mitre from Urban VI. [A.D. 1420-1437.] JOHN MORWENT, who\n rebuilt part of west end of the church, (Pt. I. \u00a7 VII.) [A.D.\n 1450-1457.] THOMAS SEABROKE, who built the tower, [A.D. 1457-1472.]\n RICHARD HANLEY; and [A.D. 1472-1498] WILLIAM FARLEY, who built the\n Lady-chapel. [A.D. 1515-1539.] WILLIAM MALVERNE, or PARKER, the\n last abbot, who subscribed to the King\u2019s supremacy in 1534, and\n died soon after the Dissolution.\n\nRobert of Gloucester, whose rhyming \u201cChronicle of Englonde,\u201d is\nimportant, both historically and as an example of \u201cmiddle English,\u201d was\na monk of this abbey, during the reigns of Henry III. and John. His\nChronicle was edited by Hearne.\n\nUntil 1541 the whole of Gloucestershire lay within the diocese of\nWorcester. In that year the see of Gloucester was erected, and the abbey\nchurch, which was re-dedicated to the \u201cHoly and Individed Trinity,\u201d\nbecame its cathedral. The first bishop was--\n\n [A.D. 1541-1549.] JOHN WAKEMAN, who had been Abbot of Tewkesbury,\n and one of Henry the Eighth\u2019s chaplains. He was a person of\n considerable learning, and had revised the translation of the Book\n of Revelation, in Cranmer\u2019s Bible.\n\n [A.D. 1551-Feb. 9, 1555.] JOHN HOOPER had been educated at Merton\n College, Oxford, and afterwards became a monk at Cleeves, in\n Somerset, his native county. He returned to Oxford, however, where\n he soon embraced the reformed doctrines, and was consequently\n obliged to leave the University in 1539. After many wanderings in\n Ireland, in France, and in Switzerland, Hooper returned to England\n on the accession of Edward VI.; and in 1549 became one of the\n accusers of Bishop Bonner, who was deprived in that year. Having\n with much difficulty overcome his own scruples as to the lawfulness\n of wearing episcopal robes[26], Hooper, who had been appointed to\n the see of Gloucester by the influence of the Earl of Warwick, was\n consecrated at Lambeth by Archbishop Cranmer. In the following year\n (1552) Bishop Hooper surrendered his see to the Crown. Bishop Heath\n of Worcester was deprived at the same time. Gloucestershire was at\n first converted into an archdeaconry, dependent on Worcester; but\n the two sees were afterwards (Dec. 1552) united, and bestowed on\n Hooper. The bishops were to be entitled of \u201cGloucester and\n Worcester,\u201d and were to reside one year in each city, alternately.\n This arrangement only continued until the death of Edward VI.\n\nAfter the accession of Mary, Hooper was summoned to London, (August\n1553,) and was for some time confined in the Fleet prison; his see was\ndeclared void, and after an examination before Bishop Gardiner and\nothers, he was condemned to be burnt as a heretic. The sentence was\naccordingly carried out at Gloucester, Feb. 9, 1555. A monument has\nlately been erected on the scene of his death.\n\n [A.D. 1554-1558.] JAMES BROOKES, \u201ca zealous papist,\u201d succeeded, but\n to the see of Gloucester only. On his death the see remained vacant\n for three years.\n\n [A.D. 1562-1579.] RICHARD CHEYNEY held the see of Bristol _in\n commendam_. On his death the see remained vacant until\n\n [A.D. 1581-1598,] JOHN BULLINGHAM was appointed to it. Until 1589\n he held Bristol _in commendam_.\n\n [A.D. 1598-1604.] GODFREY GOLDSBROUGH held the see of Worcester _in\n commendam_.\n\n [A.D. 1605, translated to London 1607.] THOMAS RAVIS, Dean of\n Christ Church, Oxford. He was a prelate of some learning, and was\n the translator of part of the New Testament in James the First\u2019s\n Bible.\n\n [A.D. 1607, translated to Worcester 1610.] HENRY PARRY, Dean of\n Chester. James I. said of him that \u201che never heard a better or more\n eloquent preacher.\u201d\n\n [A.D. 1611-1612.] GILES THOMPSON, Dean of Windsor, died without\n having ever visited his new diocese.\n\n [A.D. 1612-1624.] MILES SMITH, a prelate of great learning,\n translator of the whole of the Prophets for James the First\u2019s\n Bible, for which also he wrote the Preface,--\u201cas a comely gate to a\n glorious city, which remains under his own hand in the University\n Library in Oxford[27].\u201d He is called by Sir Robert Atkyns (History\n of Gloucestershire) a \u201cstiff Calvinist, and a great favourer of the\n Puritans.\u201d He was buried in the Lady-chapel of the cathedral,\n \u201cunder a plain stone, without any inscription.\u201d\n\n [A.D. 1625, suspended 1640, died 1656.] GODFREY GOODMAN, Dean of\n Rochester. Bishop Goodman was strongly suspected of an inclination\n to Romanism: a curious entry in a volume now in the Chapter Library\n at Gloucester proves that that suspicion was far from being without\n foundation; and Fuller asserts that he \u201cdied a professed Romanist,\n as appeared by his will[28].\u201d In 1640 he was suspended by\n Archbishop Laud, for refusing to subscribe the Canons, and was\n committed for some time to the Gate House; \u201cwhere,\u201d says Fuller,\n \u201che got by his restraint what he could never have got by his\n liberty, namely, of one reputed Popish to become for a short time\n popular, as the only confessor suffering for not subscribing the\n Canons[29].\u201d He afterwards subscribed, and was restored, but soon\n had to bear his full share of the troubles during the time of the\n Commonwealth. He died in London, 1656, and was buried in St.\n Margaret\u2019s Church, Westminster.\n\n [A.D. 1661-1672.] WILLIAM NICOLSON was appointed to the see on the\n Restoration.\n\n [A.D. 1672-1681.] JOHN PRITCHETT.\n\n [A.D. 1681, deprived 1691.] ROBERT FRAMPTON had been Dean of\n Gloucester since 1673. He was one of the Non-juring bishops, and\n retired, on his deprivation, to the living of Standish, in\n Gloucestershire, which he had held with the bishopric. He died in\n 1708, and was buried in the chancel of the church at Standish.\n\n [A.D. 1691-1714.] EDWARD FOWLER was the son of a Presbyterian who\n had been intruded, during the Commonwealth, into the living of\n Westerleigh, near Bristol. Fowler himself conformed after the\n Restoration, and was raised to the see of Gloucester on the\n deprivation of Bishop Frampton. He belonged to the school of\n \u201cLatitudinarian divines,\u201d then in special favour, and published\n many books which are now of little value. Bishop Fowler died at\n Chelsea, Aug. 26, 1714, and was buried at Hendon, in Middlesex, in\n which church there is a monument to his memory.\n\n [A.D. 1715, translated to Salisbury 1721.] RICHARD WILLIS, Dean of\n Lincoln. From Salisbury Bishop Willis was translated to Winchester,\n in 1725.\n\n [A.D. 1721, translated to Rochester 1731.] JOSEPH WILCOCKS. Bishop\n Wilcocks held the deanery of Westminster with the see of Rochester.\n The western towers of Westminster Abbey were built during his rule.\n\n [A.D. 1731-1733.] ELIAS SYDALL, translated to Gloucester from St.\n David\u2019s. With Gloucester he held the deanery of Canterbury.\n\n [A.D. 1735-1752.] MARTIN BENSON. In 1741 Bishop Benson re-paved the\n choir of the cathedral, and added pinnacles to the Lady-chapel.\n\n [A.D. 1652, translated to Worcester 1759.] JAMES JOHNSON. In 1774\n he was killed by a fall from his horse, at Bath.\n\n [A.D. 1760-1779.] WILLIAM WARBURTON, whose name is better known\n than that of any other prelate who has filled the see; and who was\n not the least remarkable among the men of letters of the eighteenth\n century. Warburton was the eldest son of an attorney at\n Newark-upon-Trent, and was born there, Dec. 24, 1691. He was\n educated at Oakham, in Rutlandshire, and was intended for his\n father\u2019s profession, which he followed for a short time. He left it\n for the Church, however, and was in Orders in 1728, when his\n patron, Sir Robert Sutton, gave him the rectory of Burnt Broughton,\n in Lincolnshire. Here he remained for some years, and wrote here\n the first part of his \u201cDivine Legation of Moses,\u201d which procured\n him an introduction to the Prince of Wales, who made him one of his\n chaplains. In 1746 he was chosen Preacher at Lincoln\u2019s Inn, and in\n 1757 became Dean of Bristol. In 1760 he was raised to the see of\n Gloucester, and died at the palace there, aged 81, June 7, 1779.\n\n Bishop Warburton was the close friend and companion of Pope, who\n derived much assistance from his criticism, and whose works he\n edited. His own most important works are \u201cThe Divine Legation of\n Moses,\u201d and \u201cJulian,\u201d a discourse concerning the earthquake and\n fiery eruption which defeated the Emperor\u2019s attempt to rebuild the\n temple at Jerusalem. The entire list of his works is a long one,\n and his literary life belongs too completely to the literary\n history of the century to be further noticed here. \u201cHe was a man,\u201d\n writes Dr. Johnson, \u201cof vigorous faculties, a mind fervid and\n vehement, supplied by incessant and unlimited enquiry, with\n wonderful extent and variety of knowledge, which yet had not\n oppressed his imagination, nor clouded his perspicacity. To every\n work he brought a memory full fraught, together with a fancy\n fertile of original combinations; and at once exerted the powers of\n the scholar, the reasoner, and the wit. But his knowledge was too\n multifarious to be always exact, and his pursuits were too eager to\n be always cautious. His abilities gave him a haughty consequence,\n which he disdained to conceal or mollify; and his impatience of\n opposition disposed him to treat his adversaries with such\n contemptuous superiority as made his readers commonly his enemies,\n and excited against the advocate the wishes of some who favoured\n the cause. He seems to have adopted the Roman Emperor\u2019s\n determination, \u2018oderint dum metuant;\u2019 he used no allurements of\n gentle language, but wished to compel rather than persuade.\u201d\n\n All that modern readers can desire to know of Bishop Warburton,\n will be found in his Life by the Rev. J. S. Watson. London, 1863.\n He was buried in the nave of his cathedral; (Pt. I. \u00a7 VI.)\n\n [A.D. 1779, translated to Ely 1781.] JAMES YORKE, translated to\n Gloucester from St. David\u2019s. He was the youngest son of Lord\n Chancellor Hardwicke.\n\n [A.D. 1781, translated to St. Asaph 1789.] SAMUEL HALLIFAX; had\n been successively Professor of Arabic and Regius Professor of Civil\n Law in the University of Cambridge.\n\n [A.D. 1789, translated to Bath and Wells 1802.] RICHARD BEADON.\n\n [A.D. 1802, translated to Hereford 1815.] GEORGE ISAAC HUNTINGFORD,\n Warden of Winchester College.\n\n [A.D. 1815, translated to Lichfield 1824.] HENRY RYDER, brother of\n the Earl of Harrowby.\n\n [A.D. 1824, translated to Exeter, and thence to Bangor, 1830.]\n CHRISTOPHER BETHELL.\n\n [A.D. 1830-1856.] JAMES HENRY MONK. In the year 1836 the diocese of\n Bristol was united to that of Gloucester. The bishops of Gloucester\n and Bristol, after Bishop Monk, have been\n\n [A.D. 1856, translated to Durham 1861.] CHARLES BARING.\n\n [A.D. 1861, translated to York 1862.] WILLIAM THOMSON.\n\n [A.D. 1863.] CHARLES J. ELLICOTT.\n\n\nLONDON: PRINTED BY W. CLOWES AND SONS, STAMFORD STREET.\n\n[Illustration]\n\n\n\n\n A HANDBOOK\n\n TO\n\n HEREFORD CATHEDRAL.\n\n WITH 15 ILLUSTRATIONS.\n\n LONDON:\n JOHN MURRAY, ALBEMARLE STREET.\n 1864.\n\n\n\n\nPREFACE.\n\n\nIn preparing the \u2018Handbook of Hereford Cathedral,\u2019 besides a careful\npersonal survey, considerable use has been made of a pamphlet on the\ncondition of the building, printed by Professor Willis before the\nrestoration was commenced under Dean Merewether. Although due\nacknowledgment of this has been made in the notes, it is proper to\nmention it here also. The authority of Professor Willis is in no case to\nbe disregarded.\n\nHereford Cathedral, which has been happily restored to its ancient\nbeauty under the care of Mr. G. G. Scott, is, although not the largest,\none of the most important in the West of England; and contains much of\nvery high interest to the architectural student.\n\n R. J. K.\n\n_August, 1864._\n\n\n\n\nCONTENTS.\n\n\nPART I.\n\nHISTORY AND DETAILS.\n\n\n PAGE\nREPAIRS AND RESTORATIONS 1\n\nHISTORY 3\n\nPROBABLE DATES OF ERECTIONS 4\n\nEXTERIOR VIEW 5\n\nPORCH--NAVE 6\n\nTRIFORIUM AND CLERESTORY--NAVE-AISLES 8\n\nFONT--EFFIGY OF SIR R. PEMBRIDGE 9\n\nNORTH AISLE 10\n\nCHOIR-SCREEN 11\n\nCENTRAL TOWER 13\n\nCHOIR 15\n\nREREDOS 17\n\nEFFIGY OF BISHOP STANBERY 18\n\nNORTH TRANSEPT 20\n\nBISHOP CANTILUPE\u2019S SHRINE 23\n\nNORTH CHOIR-AISLE 27\n\nBISHOP STANBERY\u2019S CHANTRY 28\n\nNORTH-EAST TRANSEPT 29\n\nAMBULATORY, OR RETRO-CHOIR 31\n\nLADY CHAPEL 32\n\nAUDLEY CHAPEL OR CHANTRY 36\n\nSOUTH-EAST TRANSEPT 37\n\nSOUTH CHOIR-AISLE 38\n\nSOUTH TRANSEPT 39\n\nARCHIVE ROOM AND CHAPTER LIBRARY 41\n\nMEDI\u00c6VAL MAP OF THE WORLD 41\n\nCLOISTERS 44\n\nCHAPTER-HOUSE 45\n\nEXTERIOR OF NORTH TRANSEPT 46\n\nSTANBERY CHAPEL--CRYPT 47\n\nCOLLEGE OF VICARS CHORAL 49\n\nEPISCOPAL PALACE 49\n\n\n\n\nPART II.\n\nHISTORY OF THE SEE, WITH SHORT NOTICES OF THE PRINCIPAL BISHOPS.\n\n\n PAGE\n\nPUTTA, THE FIRST SAXON BISHOP 51\n\n\u00c6THELSTAN 52\n\nLEOFGAR 53\n\nWALTER OF LORRAINE--ROBERT DE LOSING 54\n\nGERARD--REINHELM--GEOFFRY DE CLIVE 55\n\nROBERT DE BETHUNE 56\n\nGILBERT FOLIOT 57\n\nPETER D\u2019ACQUABLANCA 59\n\nJOHN BRETON--THOMAS CANTILUPE 60\n\nSWINFIELD--ORLETON 63\n\nJOHN STANBERY 65\n\nFRANCIS GODWIN 69\n\n\n\n\nLIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS.\n\n\nGENERAL VIEW FROM NORTH-EAST _Frontispiece._\n\nPLAN _To face page_ 1\n\nPLATE\n\nI. ARCHES OF NAVE 7\n\nII. THE ALTAR-SCREEN, OR REREDOS 17\n\nIII. BAY OF NORTH TRANSEPT 20\n\nIV. PEDESTAL OF THE SHRINE OF BISHOP CANTILUPE 23\n\nV. MONUMENT OF BISHOP D\u2019ACQUABLANCA, FROM THE\nNORTH TRANSEPT 27\n\nVI. BISHOP STANBERY\u2019S CHAPEL 28\n\nVII. COFFIN-SLAB IN THE NORTH TRANSEPT 31\nWINDOW IN LADY-CHAPEL 32\n\nVIII. EASTERN BAY OF THE LADY-CHAPEL 33\n\nIX. SCREEN OF BISHOP AUDLEY\u2019S CHANTRY 36\n\nX. BOOKS IN THE LIBRARY 41\n\nXI. ANCIENT MAP 42\n\nXII. CLOISTERS AND \u201cLADIES\u2019 ARBOUR\u201d 45\n\n[Illustration: GROUND PLAN, Scale, 100 ft. to 1 in.]\n\n\n\n\nHEREFORD CATHEDRAL.\n\n\nPART I.\n\nHistory and Details.\n\nI. The very interesting cathedral of Hereford, which represents an\nepiscopal see existing, it is possible, before the arrival of St.\nAugustine, (see Pt. II.,) has suffered much from the hand of time, and\nmore perhaps from so-called restoration. On Easter Monday, 1786, the\nwestern tower (a later erection than the Norman nave) fell, carrying\nwith it the west front, and greatly injuring the first bay of the nave.\nThe architect Wyatt was then at work on Salisbury Cathedral; and the\nrestoration of Hereford was unhappily placed in his hands. With Wyatt,\nrestoration meant destruction. Between the years 1788 and 1797 he\nexpended a sum of \u00a320,000 on this cathedral; shortening the nave by one\nentire bay; destroying the Norman triforium and clerestory, which he\nreplaced by others of his own device; and constructing the present west\nfront, which it is to be hoped will not be permitted to exist much\nlonger. In 1841, at the request of the late Bishop MUSGRAVE, a report on\nthe actual condition of the cathedral was drawn up by Professor Willis;\nfrom which it appeared that the piers of the central tower were in a\ncondition of much danger, and that the eastern gable of the Lady-chapel\nwould inevitably fall unless preventive measures were at once taken.\nAccordingly, these and other repairs and \u201crestorations\u201d were effected\nbetween 1841 and 1852, at a cost of \u00a327,000. The architect employed was\nMr. L. N. Cottingham; and the then Dean MEREWETHER\u2019S own\nsuperintendence--whose zeal for the restoration of the building cannot\nbe mentioned with too great respect--was unremitting until his death in\n1850. Mr. Cottingham was not so completely destructive as Wyatt had\nbeen, but he rebuilt rather than restored, and allowed his masons to\nre-work ancient sculptures. Since the year 1858 the final restoration of\nHereford Cathedral has been in the hands of Mr. G. G. Scott, and it need\nhardly be said that the work has been of a very different character.\nWhere reconstruction has been necessary, every stone has been preserved,\nand, if possible, replaced. Whitewash and other defects have been\nremoved with a sort of wire comb, which effectually cleans the stone,\nbut does not remove ancient tool marks; and the sculpture and foliage\nconsequently remain uninjured. These last works, completed in the year\n1863, (when, on the 30th of June, the cathedral was solemnly re-opened,)\neffectually set forth the original beauty of the building, which ranks\namong the most interesting cathedrals in England.\n\nThe extent and nature of the different restorations will be pointed out\nas we proceed. It is no doubt to be regretted that so much rebuilding\nshould have been necessary; but this has been partly owing to original\ndefects of construction, and partly to the nature of the stone, which\nwas taken, apparently without much care in selection, from quarries in\nthe old red sandstone, near the city. This stone is so much weather-worn\nin parts as to resemble the face of a sea cliff. Throughout Wyatt\u2019s\nrebuilding and all the restorations, the new stone has been brought from\nthe Caplar quarries near Fawley; from Lugwardine; and from some quarries\nnearer Hereford; also in the old red sandstone, but yielding blocks of a\nmuch harder and more durable character.\n\nII. The Saxon Bishop ETHELSTAN (1012-1056) built a church from the\nfoundations; which shortly after the accession of his successor,\nLEOFGAR, (1056,) was burnt together with the greater part of the city,\nby the Welsh king Gryffyth. The first Norman bishop, ROBERT DE LOSINGA,\n(1079-1096,) who found his cathedral in ruins, began to rebuild it,\ntaking for his model the church of Aachen, or Aix la Chapelle,--the work\nof Charlemagne[30]. This building was so far completed as to be\ndedicated (in the names of the Blessed Virgin and of Ethelbert King of\nEast Anglia, see \u00a7 X. and Pt. II.) in 1110, during the episcopate of\nREINHELM, (1107-1115). The Norman portions of the existing cathedral\n(the piers of the nave, the choir as high as the clerestory, and the\nsouth transept,) belong to Bishop Robert\u2019s cathedral. With the exception\nof its first foundation, however, and of the walls of the nave-aisles,\n\u201cit is much to be regretted that the period of erection of no one part\nof this cathedral has been recorded[31];\u201d and we are left to assign the\nvarious dates from the character of the architecture alone. They are\nprobably as follows:--\n\n _Norman_, 1079-1115. Piers of nave, choir as high as clerestory,\n and south transept, (which has had Perpendicular alterations).\n\n _Early English_, _circ._ 1190. Vestibule of Lady-chapel.\n\n _Early English_, _circ._ 1220. Lady-chapel.\n\n _Early English_, _circ._ 1260? Clerestory and vaulting of choir.\n\n _Transitional_, from Early English to Decorated, 1282-1287. North\n transept.\n\n _Geometrical_, (Early Decorated,) 1287-1320. Eastern transept.\n Upper part of central tower.\n\n _Late Decorated_, 1360-1364. Outer walls and windows of\n nave-aisles.\n\n _Perpendicular_, 1492-1502. Bishop Audley\u2019s chantry. 1516-1535. The\n north porch.\n\nIt thus appears that (besides the Norman work) Hereford Cathedral is\nprincipally rich in the architecture of the Early English and\nGeometrical periods. The Norman portions are curious and important. The\nEarly English Lady-chapel is an excellent example; but the most\nremarkable part of the building is unquestionably the north transept.\nBishop Cantilupe, who died in 1282, (and was canonized in 1320,) was\nburied in the Lady-chapel, which was the first addition to the Norman\nchurch. The north transept (into which the relics of the bishop were\nremoved in 1287) was to all appearance built expressly for the reception\nof the Cantilupe shrine; and the further changes and additions during\nthe early Decorated period may safely be assigned to the increase of\nriches and consequence which the possession of this shrine brought to\nthe cathedral. In the same manner, at Gloucester (see that Cathedral)\nthe possession of the remains of Edward II. was the cause of the entire\nalteration of the abbey church.\n\nIII. Hereford Cathedral is open on the north side, and a good general\nview may be obtained from the Close, [_Frontispiece_,] through which it\nis approached. On the south side the bishop\u2019s palace and the college of\nthe vicars choral fill the space between it and the river Wye. Eastward\nthe cathedral was closely pressed on by the outworks of the castle,\nanciently one of the strongest on the Welsh marches, but of which only\nthe foundations now remain. The Norman cathedral, built, as has been\nsaid, in imitation of that of Aachen, terminated eastward in a triple\napse. (Compare Norwich, the most perfect example of a Norman ground-plan\nnow existing.) The central apse was destroyed, in all probability, on\nthe formation of the Lady-chapel; and the side apses, at a somewhat\nlater period, were converted into the eastern transept, as it now\nappears. This double transept (possibly suggested by that at Worcester,\nwhich is a century earlier; see that Cathedral) combines, with Bishop\nBooth\u2019s large projecting porch, in producing a degree of intricacy in\nthe general outline, the effect of which is not lessened by the various\nalterations and restorations, which, however necessary, render it\ndifficult to distinguish between the new work and the old.\n\nIV. The cathedral is entered, on the north side, through an elaborate\nPerpendicular _porch_, completed in 1530 by Bishop BOOTH. It is of two\nstages. The lower is formed by three wide, open arches, at the outer\nangles of which are octagonal buttress-turrets, capped by very\npicturesque lanterns. The parvise chamber, forming the second stage, is\nlighted by three large Perpendicular windows, with rich tracery. This\nporch projects beyond an inner and smaller one, of the Decorated period,\nto which the doorway opening to the church (the mouldings of which\nshould be noticed) belongs. The doors themselves are modern, and are\ncovered with very good iron-work, designed by Mr. Cottingham, jun., and\nexecuted by Messrs. Potter of London. The hinges alone cost \u00a3140.\n\nV. On entering the _nave_, the visitor should pass at once to the west\nend, where he will obtain the best general view. The great piers are\nNorman, and part of the original church. The triforium and clerestory\nand the vaulting of the roof are Wyatt\u2019s work, (1788-1797,) as is the\nwestern wall with its doorway. The nave-aisles belong to the Decorated\nperiod. Wyatt, it must be remembered, shortened the original nave by one\nentire bay. The eye is at once struck by the massive grandeur of the\ngreat Norman piers and arches, and by the unusual darkness of the choir.\nBeyond the lofty circular arches of the central tower, and the superb\n\n[Illustration: ARCHES OF NAVE.\n\nPLATE I.\n]\n\nmodern screen on its eastern side, is seen the eastern wall of the\nchoir, pierced below with a wide circular arch, receding in many orders,\nand above by three broad lancet lights. The lower arch is divided by a\ncentral pillar, from which spring two pointed arches, the spandrel\nbetween which is sculptured from a design of Cottingham\u2019s. Beyond,\nagain, is seen the east wall of the Lady-chapel, with its enriched\nlancets, and foliated ornaments above them. The effect of these three\nreceding distances, with their varying light and shade, is unusually\nfine, and is not a little increased by the solemnity of the darkened\nchoir. This darkness results partly from the heavy Norman architecture\nof the choir itself, and partly from the lofty transepts, which abut on\nit on either side. The nave and choir are of the same width (73-1/4 ft.,\nincluding aisles; actual breadth of vaulting to nave and choir 31-1/4\nft.) and height (70 ft.)\n\nThe nave [Plate I.] now consists of seven bays. The massive circular\npiers have double half-shafts set against their north and south fronts.\n(The greater part of these are restorations, the original shafts having\nbeen cut away.) The bases are plain. The capitals of piers and shafts\nare rich and varied, especially those of the four easternmost piers,\nwhich have some very rich knot-work and foliage. The main arches recede\nin three orders, and are much enriched with the billet and other\nmouldings. The Norman work throughout the cathedral, when compared with\nthat of the great buildings of the same age in the eastern counties,\n(Ely, Peterborough, or Norwich,) displays a richer and more involved\nclass of ornament; such as reaches its highest development in the\nelaborate doorways of Kilpeck and Shobdon Churches, both in\nHerefordshire.\n\nThe _triforium_, and _clerestory_, both of which are Wyatt\u2019s work, need\nnot detain us. They are imitated from the Early English of Salisbury;\nand to make way for them, Wyatt destroyed the original Norman work, of\nwhich only a small portion had been injured by the fall of the\ntower[32]. The vaulting-shafts run up in groups of three, between each\nbay. The shafts themselves are restorations of the originals, much of\nwhich had been cut away before the fall of the tower; the corbels, below\nthe capitals, are modern, and were copied by Cottingham from ancient\nexamples. The roof is of wood, vaulted in imitation of stone, a\ndescription which is itself a condemnation. It has been coloured, under\nMr. Cottingham\u2019s direction, in a manner which can by no means be called\nsatisfactory. The pavement throughout the nave has been laid (by Mr.\nCottingham) with plain red and slate-coloured tiles. Two rows of\ngas-standards, the work of Messrs. Skidmore, are placed under the arches\nat intervals, four on each side.\n\nVI. The _nave-aisles_ were almost rebuilt during the late Decorated\nperiod. The Norman walls were allowed to stand for about 2 ft. above the\nfoundations; and upon these bases the existing walls and windows were\nerected. The contracts for this work, dating between the years\n1360-1364, were found by the late Dean Merewether, and are now preserved\nin the archive chamber. The vaulting of the roofs is coloured in the\nsame unpleasing manner as that of the nave. The view looking up the\naisle, into and beyond the transept, is remarkable, owing to the many\nreceding stages. It terminates at the eastern end of the second\ntransept.\n\nIn the second bay (counting from the west) of the _south_ aisle is the\n_font_, of Norman design, and curious. The basin is circular, and has\nfigures of the Apostles beneath arches, in the spandrels of which is a\nleaf-ornament. A lion projects from each corner of the base, an unusual\nand perhaps unique example. In the fourth bay is the very fine alabaster\neffigy of Sir RICHARD PEMBRIDGE, _temp._ Richard II. Sir Richard, an\nancestor of the Chandos family, was one of the first knights of the\nGarter, and was present at Poictiers. The armour is an excellent\nexample. Gold remains on the points of the cap to which the camail is\nattached, and on the jewelled sword-belt. The head rests on a\ntilting-helmet, with a sheaf of feathers coloured green. Between the\nfeathers and the helmet is a coronet of open roses. The garter is on the\nleft leg, and the feet rest on a greyhound. This monument was originally\nin the church of the Black Friars, and was brought thence to the\ncathedral after the Dissolution. The right leg, which had been\ndestroyed, has been restored at the cost of the Rev. Lord Saye and Sele,\nCanon Residentiary.\n\nIn the wall of this aisle, in the _third_ bay from the east, is the\nheadless figure of an ecclesiastic, under a Decorated arch, foliated. In\nthe _second_ bay is an effigy of a priest of the early Decorated period,\nmuch mutilated, under a foliated arch, at the crown of which is a\nbearded head wearing a cap. In the _third_ bay is a door opening to the\ncloisters, with a square heading which rises above the sill of the\nwindow over it. A row of heads in the hollow moulding of the door,--a\nfac-simile of a former composition, which had become entirely\ndecayed,--and the modern iron-work, by Potter, with which the door\nitself is covered, deserve notice.\n\nA narrow and lofty Norman arch opens from this aisle into the transept.\n\nVII. The _north_ aisle is Decorated, of the same character as the south.\nIn the _third_ bay from the tower is the north _porch_, (\u00a7 IV.); and in\nthe bay above it is the monument of Bishop BOOTH, (died 1535,) the\nconstructor of the porch itself. The effigy lies under a foliated arch\nwith canopy. The Bishop, mitred and fully vested, holds the crozier (the\nhead of which has been broken) wrapped with the infula, or fillet. Much\ncolour remains on this monument, which is protected by its original\niron-work, banded with shields and heraldic ornaments.\n\nIn this aisle, a stained-glass window by WARRENTON, with subjects from\nthe life of St. John the Baptist, has been inserted as a memorial of\nCanon CLUTTON and his wife.\n\nVIII. Between the eastern piers of the _central tower_, but projecting\nfrom their bases more than 3 ft. toward the nave, is placed the\nmagnificent _screen_ of wrought iron-work, painted and gilt, executed by\nMessrs. Skidmore of Coventry, from the designs of Mr. G. G. Scott. This\nis the second great work of the kind which has been produced in England.\nIt is in many respects finer and more important than the screen at\nLichfield; but it is designed and constructed on precisely the same\nprinciples; and affords a complete vindication of the advantage and\nbeauty of metal-work for the purpose to which it is here applied. Whilst\nthe screen forms a sufficient division between the nave and choir, its\nextreme lightness permits the use of both tower and transept for\ncongregational purposes.\n\nThe Hereford screen consists of five main arches, each subdivided by a\nslender shaft. The central arch, wider and higher than the rest, forms\nthe entrance, and is surmounted by a lofty gable, on the summit of which\nis the cross. Panels of hollow tracery fill in the lower part of the\narches on either side of the entrance, to the height of about four feet.\nThe heads of the arches and the spandrels between them are enriched with\nelaborate tracery, chiefly formed by flowers and leafage; and the design\nof the cornice and cresting is of similar character. In the tympanum\nabove the shaft which divides the arch of entrance is a figure of the\nSaviour, with hands outstretched in blessing. On either side, placed on\nbrackets supported by the pillars of the main arch, are adoring angels,\ntwo in each group. Single figures of angels, holding instruments of\nmusic, are placed on brackets at the terminations of the screen, north\nand south.\n\nThe screen is wrought by hand throughout. It is mainly constructed of\niron; but copper and brass are largely used; the first in the capitals,\nfigures, and cornice; the second in the shafts of the smaller columns,\nand in parts of the larger. Coloured mosaics have also been employed.\nThe variety of metals is another source of colour; but the hammered\niron-work, forming the whole of the foliage, has been painted\nthroughout. No colours have been used, however, but those of the oxydes\nof iron and copper--the metals employed in the work. The result is\nentirely successful. The beauty of the capitals of leafage, in which\nfine effects of light and shade are produced, and of the foliage and\nflowers in other parts of the screen, is very great; and every band and\nline of ornament deserves notice. The forms of both leafage and flowers\nare to a certain extent conventional, but may easily be recognised. The\npassion-flower especially has been much used, and with admirable effect.\nOn the whole it may safely be said that this screen is the finest and\nmost complete work of its class which has been produced in recent times;\nnor would it be easy to mention any piece of ancient metal-work--at\nleast of equal dimensions--which will bear comparison with it.\n\nNear the south-west corner of the screen is placed an eagle-lectern,\ndesigned by Cottingham and executed by Potter. The projecting branches,\nfor lights, are unusual and picturesque. The cost of the lectern was\ndefrayed by the Misses Rushout; but the money was misappropriated, and\nit was eventually paid for by subscription.\n\nThe old pulpit, of the seventeenth century, now stands against the\nnorth-west tower-pier; but will shortly be replaced by one more worthy\nof the cathedral.\n\nThe four great arches of the tower were in a condition of much danger\nwhen Dean Merewether commenced his restorations in 1841. The piers, and\nthe four arches resting on them, were Norman; but owing to settlements\nin the foundations of the nave and tower, which had taken place at a\nvery early period, they had been cased and otherwise repaired during the\nfourteenth and fifteenth centuries; and still later (probably during the\nepiscopate of Bishop BISSE, 1712-1721) the two smaller arches of the\ntower (north and south) were filled with so-called \u201cox-eye masonry[33],\u201d\nsupported by two segmental arches branching from an octangular central\ncolumn; whilst nearly all the smaller Norman arches in connection with\nthe tower-piers were closed with solid masonry, leaving only doorways.\nIn spite of all that had been done, however, Professor Willis, in his\nReport of 1841, pronounced the masonry of the great arches, and of the\nspandrel walls above, to be \u201cin such a state of ruin as to make an\nimmediate repair absolutely necessary for the preservation of the\ntower.\u201d The piers themselves were in a condition of less danger; but\nMr. Cottingham, to whom the work was entrusted, proceeded to remove all\nthe additions that had been made to them since the Norman period, and,\nin effect, to rebuild them according to their original design. In this\nstate they remain at present. The arches resting on them were at the\nsame time reconstructed, and the ox-eye masonry which filled those north\nand south was entirely removed.\n\nBefore these restorations a vault of the fifteenth century rose\nimmediately above the great arches, and concealed the upper part of the\ntower. This was removed. The whole of the tower above the arches dates\nfrom the beginning of the fourteenth century; and the interior walls,\nwhich are now visible from below, \u201care of a very singular construction;\ntwelve piers of compact masonry on each side, beside angle piers, are\ncarried up to the height of 26 ft., and connected half-way up by a\nhorizontal course of stone, in long pieces, and by an iron bar, which\nruns all round immediately under this bonding course. Upon these\ngigantic _stone gratings_, if I may be allowed the expression, the\ninterior wall of the tower rests; and they also carry the entire weight\nof the bell-chamber and bells. I believe this construction was entirely\nadopted for the sake of lightness[34].\u201d This part of the tower, which\nhas no decorative character, was not originally intended to be seen from\nbelow; and the fifteenth-century vaulting had replaced an earlier wooden\nceiling. It is now completely open, and the flat wooden floor of the\nbell-chamber above it is coloured in blue and gold. From this floor\ndepends a superb corona of wrought iron, by Skidmore--a worthy companion\nof the great choir-screen, and coloured in the same manner.\n\nIX. The peculiar darkness of the _choir_ has already been mentioned. It\nresults mainly (as will be seen from the Plan) from the arrangement of\nthe transepts, which prevents the admission of light to the choir except\nfrom its clerestory.\n\nThe choir and sacrarium, as at present formed, consist of only three\nbays, eastward of the screen. (The Norman choir extended no doubt to the\nwestern arch of the tower, if not into the first bay of the nave.) As\nfar as the top of the triforium, the choir is _Norman_: the clerestory\nand vaulting are _Early English_, and date, apparently, from the middle\nof the thirteenth century. No record of their construction has been\npreserved.\n\nThe _main arches_ of the choir are of three orders, and spring from\nmassive composite piers, with broad, square bases. The capitals of the\nsemi-detached shafts are enriched with leafage and grotesque heads. The\n_triforium_, in each bay, consists of one wide Norman arch\ncircumscribing two smaller, divided by a central shaft, and springing on\neither side from two massive semicircular piers, with small capitals.\nBoth outer and inner arches spring from these piers. The capitals of the\ncentral shafts have square abaci, and are enriched. The tympana of the\nouter arches are covered with scallop, leaf, and billet-ornament. At the\nbase of the triforium runs a square stringcourse, enriched with minute\ncarving. The lozenge ornament prevails round the main arches of the\nchoir, as does the zigzag round those of the nave.\n\nBroad square pilasters, with semi-detached shafts at their angles, fill\nthe spaces between the piers. They terminate at the spring of the\ntriforium arches in double triangular headings, with crocheted sides,\nand finials of leafage. These headings are Early English, of the same\ndate as the clerestory and vaulting; and between each pair rises a group\nof so-called vaulting-shafts, with capitals of leafage, terminating at\nthe base of the clerestory; and connected (under the actual base of the\nclerestory) by a band of open flowers. The _clerestory_ consists of one\nlofty pointed arch in each bay, divided by a central shaft; on either\nside is a smaller trefoiled arch. The windows, of two lights, with a\nquatrefoil in the heading, are placed at the back of the wall-passage,\nand form in effect a double plane with the large inner arches. They are\nfilled on each side with indifferent stained glass. The choir _vaulting_\nis plain quadripartite, with bosses of leafage at the intersections.\n\nX. Before 1841, the east end of the choir was covered with an oaken\nscreen, erected by Bishop Bisse in 1717; and above it was a Decorated\nwindow filled with a copy in stained glass of WEST\u2019S picture of the Last\nSupper. The removal of the screen disclosed the great Norman arch of\nfive orders, within which the reredos is now placed. Above this arch is\na small blind arcade; and instead of the Decorated window,\n\n[Illustration: THE ALTAR-SCREEN.\n\nPLATE II.\n]\n\nthree lancets have been inserted at the back of the clerestory passage.\nOf these, the central window has been filled with stained glass by\nHARDMAN; too minute perhaps in design for the height at which it is\nplaced, but very good. The subjects in this window are the Saviour in\nMajesty, the Resurrection, the Crucifixion. The subjects in the north\nand south lancets will comprise the principal events of our Lord\u2019s\nPassion.\n\nThe _reredos_ [Plate II.] below was designed by Mr. Cottingham, jun., as\na memorial for JOSEPH BAILEY, Esq., M.P. for the county of Hereford, who\ndied in 1850. It is in oolite (Bath stone) and marble; and although too\nhigh for its position, is a fine work. Between the five canopied\ncompartments rise small shafts, supporting angels, who carry the\ninstruments of the Passion. The pierced leafage at the back of the\ncanopies is very beautiful. The subjects in the panels are--the Agony in\nthe Garden, Bearing the Cross, the Crucifixion, with floating angels\nabove the Cross, the Resurrection, and the three Maries at the\nSepulchre.\n\nAt the back of the reredos rises a pier from which spring two pointed\narches, leaving a broad tympanum or spandrel, closing the upper part of\nthe Norman arch. This is a restoration of Mr. Cottingham\u2019s. The pier\nitself is ancient. The spandrel is covered with modern sculpture,\nhaving, above, the Saviour in Majesty, with the Evangelists holding\nscrolls; and below, a figure of Ethelbert, King of East Anglia, who was\nmurdered by Offa, King of Mercia, and is said to have been interred in\nthe first Saxon church on this spot. (See Pt. II.) Miracles were\nreported as having occurred at his tomb, and the second church here was\ndedicated to St. Ethelbert.\n\nThe very good brass of Bishop TRILLECK (died 1360) is placed on the\nchancel floor. The graceful arrangement of the vestments--which do not\ninclude the tunic--and the architectural design of the canopy deserve\nspecial notice. The greater part of the inscription has been lost[35].\n\nAgainst the easternmost pier on the south side of the choir is a small\nfigure on a bracket, which possibly represents St. Ethelbert. It was\nfound about the year 1700, buried at the entrance of the Lady-chapel,\n(where it is said to have been concealed during the siege of 1645,) and\nwas replaced in what is believed to have been its original position. The\nfigure wears a coronet terminating in leaves. The strings of the long\nmantle are crossed on the breast. Whatever the hands once held has been\ndestroyed. The figure is certainly not earlier than the first half of\nthe fourteenth century.\n\nOn the _north_ side of the choir, in the easternmost bay, is the effigy\nof Bishop STANBERY, (died 1474,) whose chantry opens from the aisle\nopposite; (\u00a7 XIV.) The Bishop wears the alb, stole, and chasuble, the\nflowing ornament on which should be noticed. It should here be mentioned\nthat Wyatt, following the same destructive course as at Salisbury,\nremoved many monuments in the cathedral from their original positions;\nthereby rendering even their identification a matter of some difficulty.\n\nIn the next bay is the effigy of a bishop, fully vested, holding the\nmodel of a tower. This is assigned to Bishop GILES DE BRUCE, (died\n1215); and Godwin (_De Pr\u00e6sulibus_) conjectured that the model indicated\nthis bishop as having been the builder of the central tower--a\nconjecture which has been assumed as a certainty by every succeeding\nwriter. But whatever architectural work Bishop Giles may have done, the\ntower, as was pointed out by Professor Willis, is nearly a century\nlater. His effigy is one of ten which were erected during the\nPerpendicular period as memorials of earlier bishops, and which are now\nscattered in different parts of the cathedral. (In the same manner, many\neffigies of earlier bishops were sculptured at Wells (see that\nCathedral) in the first half of the thirteenth century, and are all of\nEarly English character.)\n\nIn the same bay is the monument of Bishop BENNETT, (died 1617). He wears\nthe rochet, and a close black cap, and rests his feet on a lion; an\nunusual instance of the retention of an earlier form. The Bishop was\nburied on this spot.\n\nThe _stalls_ of the choir range up to this bay. They are Decorated, and\nvery good. The small heads and ornaments of the shafts which support the\nprojecting canopies should especially be noticed. The misereres are\ninteresting, but of no special excellence. Two on the south side\nrepresent a cook throwing a platter at an intruder, and a pair of\nwrestlers with ropes about their necks. The whole of this ancient work\nhas been carefully cleaned, and restored where necessary, under the\ndirection of Mr. Scott. The new carving, which is very fine, and well\nworthy of its companionship with fourteenth-century wood-work, is\nentirely by Messrs. Ruddle and Thompson of Peterborough. Some of the new\nmisereres, and the elaborately carved ends or heads, sixteen in number,\ndeserve careful attention. The panel-work in front of the stalls is an\nexact reproduction of that before the episcopal throne.\n\nThe floor of the whole choir has been laid with tiles, manufactured (as\nare those throughout the church with the exception of the nave) by\nGodwin of Lugwardine. The pavement of the sacrarium is especially rich\nand elaborate.\n\nThe organ (by Renatus Harris, but remodelled and reconstructed by\nDavison under the direction of Sir Frederick Ouseley) is to be placed\nwithin the first archway on the south side of the choir.\n\nXI. Through the north arch of the tower we pass into the _north\ntransept_, [Plate III.]; one of the finest and most interesting parts of\nthe church, which fortunately remained untouched until the cathedral was\nplaced under the care of Mr. G. G. Scott, by whom this transept has been\ncarefully restored. The date of its erection has not been recorded; but\nwe cannot be wrong in assigning it to the period between the death of\nBishop CANTILUPE (1282) and his translation in 1287. The Bishop was at\nfirst buried in the Lady-chapel, but was\n\n[Illustration: BAY OF THE NORTH TRANSEPT.\n\nPLATE III.\n]\n\nremoved to this transept in 1287. The miracles reported at his tomb had\nalready brought large sums to the Church; and the rebuilding of the\ntransept for the reception of his shrine must have been completed before\nthe removal of his body in 1287.\n\nThe Norman arches opening to the aisles of nave and choir resemble those\nwhich correspond to them on the south side of the church. The transept\nbeyond them was, as we have seen, entirely rebuilt, and is one of the\nmost remarkable examples of the period remaining in England. The unusual\nform of its arches, and its pure, lofty windows, are sufficiently\nimpressive now; but their effect must have been wonderfully increased\nwhen the windows were filled with glass displaying the history and\nmiracles of the sainted Bishop, and when the shrine itself was standing\non its pedestal within the eastern aisle, rich with the gold and jewels\noffered by the numerous pilgrims who knelt daily before it.\n\nThe _west_ side of the transept (which is of two bays beyond the aisle\npassage) is entirely filled by two very lofty windows, of three lights\neach. The heads of the narrow lights are sharply pointed; and the\ntracery above is formed by three circles enclosing trefoils. These\nwindows are set back within triangular-headed arches. On the _north_\nside is a double window of the same character, divided by a group of\nbanded shafts. The triple lights on either side of these shafts, and the\nfoiled circles above them, precisely resemble the windows on the west\nside of the transept. The central tracery of the window is formed by a\nfoiled circle, with a larger circle, enclosing a sexfoil, above it. The\nwhole window is set back within a segmental pointed arch, with banded\nshafts at the angles of the jambs. The _eastern aisle_ of the transept\nis divided into two bays by a clustered pier, the shafts surrounding\nwhich are alternately of sandstone and dark marble. Their capitals are\nenriched with foliage, and small knots of foliage are placed between the\nbases. The main arches are sharply pointed, and have many plain\nmouldings, with one band of dog-tooth ornament, highly detached. The\n_triforium_ above (which extends beyond the actual transept, over the\nNorman arch opening to the choir-aisle) is especially striking. In each\nbay are two sharply pointed arches, each subdivided into three lesser\narches, with foiled headings; and with three open quatrefoils as tracery\nabove. The main arch is surrounded by a row of dog-tooth. The large\nspandrel spaces between the arches are entirely covered with a diaper of\nleaf-ornament, in low relief. The _clerestory_ windows are octofoils,\nset far back within pointed arches. On the exterior, the form of the\nwindow openings is triangular, like those of the triforium at\nWestminster and those in the clerestory of the nave at Lichfield. On the\ninterior, the sills of the windows slope forward with overlapping\ncourses of stone, to the stringcourse at the top of the triforium. The\nsills of the great windows in the transept are formed in a similar\nmanner, with overlapping courses of stone.\n\n[Illustration: PEDESTAL OF THE SHRINE OF BISHOP CANTILUPE.\n\nPLATE IV.\n]\n\nThe shafts at the angles of all the windows are ringed, and the\ntriangular arches, throughout the transept, are slightly stilted. Such\narches are by no means common. They occur, however, in the clerestory on\nthe south side of the nave in Worcester Cathedral, but of later date\nthan this transept, which was possibly imitated by the Worcester\narchitect.\n\nThis transept has been carefully and truly \u201crestored,\u201d under the\ndirection of Mr. G. G. Scott. The stone-work has been freed from\nwhitewash and cleaned; and the plain quadripartite vaulting has been\ntouched with colour, and the bosses gilt, with excellent effect. The\nvaulting springs from clustered shafts, the corbels supporting which, on\nthe east side, are beautiful and singular, and resemble bunches of\nreeds, terminating in a small open flower. The small heads below these\ncorbels, at the intersection of the main arches, should also be noticed.\n\nThe transept has been laid with red and green tiles in panels, the\ndivisions being marked in grey sandstone.\n\nXII. The eastern aisle is lighted by three very beautiful windows, each\nof three lights, with three quatrefoils in the tracery. They are set\nback within wider arches, as is the case with the windows in the main\ntransept. In this aisle, in a line with the central pier, is the\npedestal of the _Cantilupe Shrine_. [Plate IV.] (For a sketch of the\nlife of St. Thomas Cantilupe, the last Englishman canonized before the\nReformation, see Pt. II.) Bishop Cantilupe died on his way to Rome, at\nCivita Vecchia, Aug. 25, 1282. His remains were divided. A portion was\ninterred near Orvieto; the heart was brought to Ashridge in\nBuckinghamshire; and the bones were brought to his own cathedral at\nHereford, where they were deposited in the Lady-chapel. The reputation\nof Bishop Cantilupe had been great during his life. Numerous miracles\nwere recorded as having taken place at his tomb, which soon became one\nof the most frequented places of pilgrimage in the west of England; and\nin 1286 (April 6) his remains were translated to a more stately\nresting-place in this transept, which had probably been rebuilt in his\nhonour. The King, Edward II., was present at the translation. Bishop\nCantilupe was not canonized until 1320[36]; but the pedestal of his\nshrine, which alone now exists, is (with the exception of the western\nend, which seems to be at least thirty years later) of the date of his\ntranslation.\n\nThis is a long parallelogram, narrowing toward the lower end, and is\nentirely of Purbeck marble. It has two divisions; the lower closed, like\nan altar-tomb, the upper a flat canopy, supported on small open arches.\nUpon this rested the actual shrine, containing the relics of the saint.\nCantilupe was Provincial Grand Master of the Knights Templars in\nEngland; and round the lower division of the pedestal are fifteen\nfigures of Templars in various attitudes, placed in the recesses of a\nfoliated arcade. All are fully armed, in chain-mail, with surcoat,\nshield, and sword. All are seated, and tread on various monsters, among\nwhich are dragons, and swine muzzled. The spandrels in this arcade, and\nthe spandrels between the arches in the upper division, are filled with\nleafage of the most beautiful and varied character. It is the leafage of\nthe first Decorated period, retaining some of the stiff arrangement of\nthe Early English, but directly copied from nature. In the lower\nspandrels it is arranged in sprays; in the upper it is often laid in\nrows of leaves, among which occur oak, maple, and trefoil. The whole of\nthis work will repay the most careful examination. (It should be\ncompared with the foliage of the capitals of the shafts surrounding the\ncentral pier of the aisle, which is far more stiff and conventional.) On\nthe top of the lower division of the pedestal was a brass of the Bishop,\nof which the matrix alone remains.\n\nThe position of the shrine in this transept may be compared with that of\nSt. Frideswide at Oxford, and with that of St. Richard de la Wych at\nChichester. All had an altar immediately adjoining the shrine, which was\ndedicated to the saint, and at which the offerings of pilgrims were\nmade. In these cases, however, the usual position of a great shrine--at\nthe back of the high altar--was, for some special reason, departed from.\nAt Hereford, this position of highest honour was probably occupied by\nthe shrine of St. Ethelbert; and the shrine of St. Thomas Cantilupe must\nhave taken an inferior place, had it been fixed near that. This was\navoided by the dedication of the entire transept to the sainted Bishop.\nIn the same manner, the south transept at Chichester seems to have been\noccupied by the shrine of St. Richard de la Wych; in whose honour the\ngreat south window was probably inserted.\n\nOn a bracket against the wall adjoining the shrine is a bust of Bishop\nFIELD, (died 1636). On the floor is a slab with effigy of JOHN\nD\u2019ACQUABLANCA, Dean of Hereford, (died 1320). He was the nephew of\nBishop d\u2019Acquablanca, whose monument (see _post_) is close by. Under the\nnorth window of the aisle is a stone coffin, found under the centre of\nthe north arch of the tower, during the restoration of the piers. It may\nbe the coffin of Bishop JOHN DE BRETON, (died 1275).\n\nUnder the great north window of the transept is a richly canopied tomb\nwith effigy of Bishop THOMAS CHARLTON, (died 1369). This effigy was not\ndisturbed by Wyatt, and remains in its original position. West of this\nmonument is the effigy of Bishop WESTFALING, (died 1602). The canopy was\ndestroyed by Wyatt. This is the bishop who is said so rarely to have\nsmiled after his consecration to the episcopate; (see Pt. II.)\n\nIn the pavement adjoining the choir-aisle, a very good small brass has\nbeen inserted for JOHN PHILIPS, (died 1708, aged 32,) whose family were\nnatives of Herefordshire, although the poet himself was born at Bampton\nin Oxfordshire, of which place his father was rector. His principal\nwork, however, \u201cCider,\u201d belongs essentially to Herefordshire. A monument\nto Philips was placed in Westminster Abbey by Lord Chancellor Harcourt,\nand bears an inscription written by Bishop Atterbury.\n\n[Illustration: MONUMENT OF BISHOP D\u2019AQUABLANCA.\n\n(FROM THE NORTH TRANSEPT.) PLATE V.\n]\n\nXIII. The _north choir-aisle_ is entered through the original Norman\narch; which (together with that opening from the nave-aisle) was cleared\nby Mr. Cottingham from the masonry with which it had been nearly closed,\nin order to strengthen the tower piers. Between this aisle and the\neastern aisle of the transept is the very beautiful monument of Bishop\nD\u2019ACQUABLANCA, (1240-1268). [Plate V.] The effigy lies under a canopy\nsupported by light shafts of Purbeck marble. The gables of the canopy\nare crowned with floriated crosses, the central cross bearing a figure\nof the crucified Saviour. The monument may be compared with that of\nBishop Bridport at Salisbury, (died 1262,) which is, however, far richer\nand more elaborate. The tomb of Bishop d\u2019Acquablanca was originally\nrichly coloured; and an attempt at restoration was made by an amateur in\n1861. It was soon, however, discontinued,--not unwisely, as the\ncommencement remains to prove.\n\nThe Norman piers of the choir and the monuments described in \u00a7 X. should\nbe noticed from the aisle, the pavement of which has been laid in square\npanels of red and green tiles, with a border of grey stone. In the north\nwall of the aisle is a series of arched recesses, of Decorated\ncharacter, with the open-flower ornament in the mouldings, episcopal\nheads at the crown of the arches, and heads of ecclesiastics at the\nintersections. In the first of these recesses east of the transept, is\nan effigy assigned to Bishop GEOFFRY DE CLIVE, (died 1120). This is one\nof the series of Perpendicular effigies already noticed, (\u00a7 X.) Beyond\nthis recess a door opens to the turret staircase leading to the Archive\nRoom and Chapter Library, (see \u00a7 XXIII.,) above the north transept. The\neffigy in the next recess (also Perpendicular) is given to Bishop HUGH\nDE MAPENORE, (died 1219). The window above is filled with stained glass,\nby Clayton and Bell, as a memorial of JOHN HUNT, organist, died 1842,\nand his nephew James, \u201cwho died of grief three days after his uncle;\u201d as\nappears from an inscription on a small brass plate at the side of the\nwindow. Beyond the entrance to Bishop Stanbery\u2019s chapel is an arch open\nto the chapel itself, under which is a Perpendicular effigy assigned to\nBishop RICHARD, (called \u201cde Capella,\u201d) died 1127.\n\nXIV. _Bishop Stanbery\u2019s Chantry_ (1453-1474) [Plate VI.] is a good\nexample of rich late Perpendicular. It is 16 ft. by 8 ft.; with two\nwindows on the north side, (filled with stained glass, which forms part\nof the Musgrave memorial; see _post_,) and on the south the entrance,\nand the arch with effigy already mentioned. The west end is covered with\ntracery and shields in panels; and the east has shields with emblems\nabove the place of the altar. The ceiling is richly groined. The\ngrotesque capitals at the angles of the chapel should be remarked; as\nshould the shields with emblems of St. Matthias, St. Thomas, and St.\nBartholomew, over the arch on the south side. Other shields bear the\narms of the see and of the deanery, with those assigned to St.\nEthelbert, and to Leofric of Mercia.\n\nBishop Stanbery\u2019s monument (\u00a7 X.) is on the wall of the choir\nimmediately opposite his chantry. On the\n\n[Illustration: BISHOP STANBERY\u2019S CHAPEL.\n\nPLATE VI.\n]\n\npanels toward the aisle are figures of saints, and angels bearing\nshields. In the wall of the aisle above the chantry, which is only 11\nft. in height, is a Decorated window filled with stained glass as a\nmemorial of the late Dr. MUSGRAVE, Archbishop of York; who, as Bishop of\nHereford, was among the first to set on foot the restoration of his\ncathedral. The glass, which is by WARRENTON, exhibits the principal\nevents in the life of St. Paul. The subjects are continued in the\nwindows of the chantry, which form part of the memorial.\n\nXV. The _north-east transept_ opens immediately beyond Bishop Stanbery\u2019s\nchantry. The main character of this lesser, or eastern transept, is at\npresent early Decorated, (geometrical); but it retains traces of the\noriginal Norman ground-plan. The Norman cathedral, like most great\nchurches in England of that period, seems to have terminated in a triple\napse, of which the arrangement may have resembled the eastern apses of\nNorwich and Gloucester, (see those Cathedrals). Portions of the central\napse remain in the walls of the vestibule to the Lady-chapel; and parts\nof the apses which opened from the choir-aisles have been retained in\nthe existing transept. These are all of transitional Norman character;\nand are considerably later than the Norman choir or nave.\n\nExtensive alterations had been made in this part of the Norman cathedral\nbefore the great north transept was rebuilt in order to receive the\nshrine of St. Thomas Cantilupe. The Lady-chapel, dating from the early\npart of the thirteenth century, was the first addition; and its\nbuilding must have followed very closely on the completion of the Norman\nretro-choir with its apses, the side walls of which were retained in the\nvestibule of the Lady-chapel. Considerably later, (at the beginning of\nthe fourteenth century), after the completion of the north transept, the\nterminal apses of the choir-aisles were almost entirely removed, and the\nexisting transept constructed. It is much to be regretted that none of\nthese works have any recorded date.\n\nA peculiar character is given to this transept by an octagonal pier,\nwhich rises in the centre, and assists in carrying the vaulting. The\nvaulting is quadripartite, with very good bosses of leafage. The windows\nare early Decorated. In the west wall of the transept are some Norman\narches, which belonged to the original apse.\n\nThe transept has been restored under the direction of Mr. G. G. Scott.\nThe tiles of the pavement are laid in panels, in which red and yellow\nare the prevailing colours. In one of the panels is a good modern brass\nfor members of the TERRY family.\n\nUnder the north-east window is a monument which has been assigned to\nBishop GODWIN, (died 1633); but which is in reality much earlier. Under\nthe adjoining window, west, is the canopied tomb of Bishop SWINFIELD,\n(1283-1317). The episcopal effigy has long disappeared, and that which\nis now seen on the tomb is the effigy of some unknown lay person, dug up\nin the cloisters. The arched canopy has the ball-flower in its\nmouldings; and at the back of the recess is a much\n\n[Illustration: COFFIN SLAB IN THE NORTH-EAST TRANSEPT.\n\nPLATE VII.\n]\n\nmutilated sculpture of the Crucifixion, surrounded by vine-leaves and\ntendrils. The work resembles the leafage of the Cantilupe Shrine, and is\npossibly by the same hand. In a recess decorated with the ball-flower\nunder the arch opening to the vestibule of the Lady-chapel, is the\neffigy of an unknown lady, (fourteenth century,) dug up outside the\nchurch during the restorations. Against the walls of the transept are\nranged some coffin slabs, with floriated and enriched crosses, found at\ndifferent times and in various parts of the cathedral. One of these\n(_circa_ 1250?) is given in Plate VII.\n\nXVI. From the transept we pass into the _ambulatory_, or _retro-choir_,\nat the back of the altar. This is transitional Norman, and its two bays\nare divided by a pointed arch, which springs from circular shafts, at\nthe back of the altar and at the entrance to the vestibule of the\nLady-chapel. The ribs of the quadripartite vaulting are enriched with\nchevron and diamond mouldings of late character. The arches at the back\nof the choir-screen were decorated (see \u00a7 X.) by Mr. Cottingham. On the\nbase of the central shaft is an inscription recording the erection of\nthe screen as a memorial of the late JOSEPH BAILEY, Esq.; (see \u00a7 X.)\n\nThe existing arrangement seems to indicate (although this has not been\ndirectly proved) that the Norman ground-plan, like that of Norwich,\ncomprised an ambulatory or \u201cprocession-path,\u201d passing round at the back\nof the high altar, and giving access to the central and side apses,\nwhich opened from it.\n\n[Illustration: Window in vestibule of Lady-chapel.]\n\nXVII. The walls of this central apse are retained in the _vestibule_ to\nthe Lady-chapel. They are pierced north and south with transitional\nNorman window openings; pointed arches, with massive mouldings, one of\nwhich, an enriched diamond, runs round the soffete, and is carried on\nthe capitals of triple side shafts. The foliage of the capitals is of\ncompletely Early English character. These windows (the glass in which,\nas is indicated by their rebated jambs, was fixed in wooden\n\n[Illustration: EASTERN BAY OF LADY-CHAPEL.\n\nPLATE VIII.\n]\n\nframes) were built up in the wall, until the restoration of this part of\nthe cathedral by Mr. Cottingham.\n\nIn the south wall of the vestibule is the very interesting monument,\nwith effigy, of Dean BEREW, or BEAURIE\u00da, (died 1462). The head of the\neffigy, delicately featured and full of expression, and the arrangement\nof the robe, especially at the feet, are very striking, and should be\nnoticed. The feet rest on a boar; and in the hollow of the arch-moulding\nare boars and rue leaves, forming a \u201crebus\u201d of the Dean\u2019s name. Over the\nwhole monument there are traces of painting, and at the back of the\nrecess the kneeling figure of an ecclesiastic is distinguishable;\npossibly that of Dean Berew himself.\n\nOn the floor is the very fine _brass_ of Richard Delamare (1435) and his\nwife Isabella. There is also here the _brass_ of a priest in cope,\n_circa_ 1450.\n\nXVIII. An ascent of five steps (rendered necessary by the height of the\ncrypt below; see \u00a7 XXVI.) leads to the _Lady-chapel_, [Plate VIII.];\nvery rich Early English, and dating from the first half of the\nthirteenth century, (_circ._ 1220). It is 45 ft. by 24, and consists of\nthree bays, in each of which, on either side, (except where the bay on\nthe south side is filled by the Audley Chantry,) are two large windows.\nWhen Professor Willis made his report in 1841, the eastern gable of this\nchapel (then used as the Chapter Library) was in a state of \u201cruinous\ndisintegration;\u201d and one of the first works entrusted to Mr. Cottingham\nwas the rebuilding of this eastern end. The pavement of the\nLady-chapel, and other restorations, have happily been completed under\nthe direction of Mr. G. G. Scott.\n\nAt the east end are five narrow lancets, set back within arches resting\non clustered shafts, and much enriched with the dog-tooth ornament. The\nwall above these windows is pierced with five foiled openings; of which\nthe three central are oval, the exterior on either side circular. The\nwindows have been filled with stained glass designed by Cottingham and\nexecuted by GIBBS, as a memorial to the late Dean MEREWETHER,--to whom\nthe cathedral is so greatly indebted,--who is interred at the north-east\nangle of the chapel. The subjects commence with the early life of the\nVirgin, and proceed through that of our Lord, terminating with the\nsupper in the house of Mary and Martha. The glass is good, but suffers\nfrom the want of white and neutral tints.\n\nA black marble slab, with a brass plate by Hardman, has been placed over\nthe grave of Dean Merewether. The inscription bears record that \u201cto the\nrestoration of this cathedral he devoted the unwearied energies of his\nlife till its close on the 4th of April, 1850.\u201d\n\nThe very rich clustered shafts and arches of the side windows should be\nespecially noticed. The capitals of the shafts are of Early English\nleafage; and there are small heads at the intersections and crowns of\nthe arches. A circle enclosing a quatrefoil pierces the wall above these\nwindows. The vaulting is plain quadripartite, and springs from shafts\nwhich descend upon a base raised slightly above the pavement.\n\nThe modern pavement of the Lady-chapel is laid with red and green tiles,\nin large square panels. The whole design is broad and good in outline;\nand is somewhat richer at the altar end, which is raised on one step.\nThe aumbry and double piscina on the south side of the altar are\nreproductions of the originals, which were in a state of extreme decay.\nOf the two stained windows on the south side, the most eastern (of late\nfourteenth-century character) was removed from St. Peter\u2019s Church in\nHereford, and was given to the cathedral by the late R. B. Phillipps,\nEsq. The window below is filled with Munich glass.\n\nIn the central bay on the north side of the chapel is a very fine\nPerpendicular monumental recess, within which is laid the effigy (much\nearlier than the recess) of a knight of the Bohun family. The recess\nitself has an upper stage or canopy, with open tabernacle-work, in the\narches of which figures have been placed, none of which originally\nbelonged to it, with the exception of the two central ones, now\nheadless, representing the Saviour and the Blessed Virgin. The figures\non either side were found imbedded in a mass of mortar behind the oaken\nchoir-screen, on its removal by Mr. Cottingham. They represent St. John\nthe Baptist, St. Thomas Cantilupe, and St. Thomas of Canterbury,--the\nlatter distinguished by the pall and the patriarchal cross,--the fourth\nfigure is uncertain.\n\nThe effigy placed in this recess has generally been assigned to Humphrey\nde Bohun, Earl of Hereford, _temp._ Edward III. He was not however\ninterred in this cathedral; and although the effigy is certainly of\nthat date, it probably represents some less distinguished member of that\ngreat family. The features, uninjured, are fine. The chain-mail, the\nfringed poleyns at the knees, the surcoat, and all the details, should\nbe noticed. The dog at the feet turns upward, licking his paw.\n\nThe monument, with effigy, in the most eastern bay on this side, is that\nof JOANNA DE BOHUN, Countess of Hereford, (called Joanna de Kilpeck,\nfrom her castle there,) (died 1327). It has been painted in accordance\nwith the remains of colour on its several portions; but with very\nindifferent success. The effigy is a good example of costume. Male and\nfemale heads project at the angles of the canopy; and the border of the\nslab on which the effigy rests has small human heads and roses with\ntheir leaves, alternately. The will of the Countess bequeaths a\nconsiderable estate to the cathedral.\n\nXIX. In the central bay on the south side is the _Audley Chapel or\nChantry_, [Plate IX.,] constructed by Bishop EDMUND AUDLEY, (1492-1502,)\nbefore his translation to Salisbury in the latter year. The chantry here\nwas no doubt intended for the place of his own interment; but during his\nepiscopate at Salisbury (1502-1524) he built a second chantry in the\nchoir of that cathedral, (see Handbook for SALISBURY,) within which he\nwas buried.\n\nThe Audley Chapel at Hereford is of two stages, access to the upper\nbeing afforded by a circular staircase at the south-west angle. The\nlower story is separated\n\n[Illustration: THE SCREEN OF BISHOP AUDLEY\u2019S CHANTRY.\n\nPLATE IX.\n]\n\nfrom the Lady-chapel by a lofty stone screen with pierced panels.\nFigures of saints and of religious persons are represented on this\nscreen, which has been restored and painted. The iron-work on the door\nopening to the staircase is excellent as an example, and should be\nnoticed. The lock bears the Bishop\u2019s initials.\n\nThe chapel is five-sided, and is lighted by two windows. There is a\nthird window, opening through the screen into the Lady-chapel. The\nvaulted ceiling shews the remains of rich colour; and at the east end,\nover the place of the altar, are traces of a large painting with trees\nand figures. The upper story has five windows, in which are some good\nremains of the original glass. On the central boss of the groining is\nthe Virgin, crowned, and surrounded by an aureole of rays. The arms of\nthe Deanery, (Azure, five bends or,) and those of Bishop Audley, appear\non other parts of the ceiling, with a shield bearing the initials (R.\nI.) of some unknown person. The top of the screen forms a parapet,\ndividing this story from the Lady-chapel. There are no traces of an\naltar here; and the upper story of this chantry probably served--like\nthose of the chantries of Abbots Farley and Hanley at Gloucester, (see\nthat Cathedral,) which are also attached to the Lady-chapel, and are\nconstructed on a similar plan--as an oratory.\n\nXX. The _south-east transept_ resembles that opposite; but it was\nperhaps altered from the Norman apse at a somewhat later date. Its\ndetails are not so good as those of the north-east transept; and the\nwindow tracery is of almost flamboyant character. Bases of the earlier\nwork remain in the walls.\n\nUnder the wall dividing the vestibule of the Lady-chapel from this\ntransept is the monument, with effigy, of Bishop LEWIS CHARLTON, (died\n1369). Above it is that of Bishop COKE, (died 1646). In a square recess,\nin the east wall, is the fine bust of a Mr. JAMES THOMAS, who is buried\nnear this place; and under it the brass of Sir RICHARD DELABERE, (1514,)\nand two wives. In the recess, with the bust, are placed some carved\nNorman capitals, of early character. Under the south wall of the\ntransept are monuments for Bishop LINDSELL, (died 1634,) and Dean\nHARVEY, (died 1500); neither of any great interest. Some fragments of\nbrasses are attached to the walls of this transept, but are of little\nimportance. The north-east window has been filled with stained glass by\nWARRENTON, at the sole expense of Lord Saye and Sele, as a memorial of\nBishop HUNTINGFORD, (1815-1834). The subjects are from the life of St.\nPeter.\n\nXXI. In the south wall of the _south choir-aisle_ are four arched\nrecesses, of the same date and character (Decorated) as those in the\naisle opposite. They contain four Perpendicular effigies; assigned\n(beginning from the east) to Bishop WILLIAM DE VERE, (died 1199); Bishop\nHUGH FOLIOT, (died 1234); Bishop ROBERT DE BETUN, (died 1148); and\nBishop ROBERT DE MELUN, (died 1167). On the floor is the fine brass of\nDean EDMUND FROWSETOURE, (died 1529,) in a richly diapered cope. Among\nthe figures in the canopy are those of St. Ethelbert and of St. Thomas\nCantilupe.\n\nBetween the two easternmost piers of the choir is the monument, with\neffigy, of Bishop MAYEW, (1504-1516; see Pt. II.) The elaborate canopy\nhas been restored, so far as any authority remained for the details. The\npanels in front of the monument are filled with figures of saints. The\neffigy, fully vested, and wearing a richly jewelled mitre, should be\nespecially noticed. Under an arch opening to the choir, in the next bay,\nis a Perpendicular effigy assigned to Bishop DE LOSINGA, (died 1096).\nAbove it is a fragment of good wooden screen-work, of Decorated\ncharacter.\n\nA door in the westernmost bay of this aisle opens to two plain Norman\nrooms, now used as vestries. In the Perpendicular period an \u201ceastern\nchamber\u201d of two stories was added to this Norman building, and served as\nthe treasury of the cathedral.\n\nXXII. The great _south transept_ retains much of its Norman work, but\nwas much altered during the Perpendicular period. The east wall is\nentirely Norman, and is covered with five ranges of arcades, all of\nwhich are blank except those at the levels of the triforium and\nclerestory, which open to a wall-passage. The transept is only lighted\non this side by two Norman windows in the clerestory. A large Norman\narch, including two smaller, all much enriched, occupies the triforium\nspace above the arch opening to the choir-aisle; and perhaps indicates\nthat the Norman triforium\n\n[Illustration: BOOKS IN THE LIBRARY.\n\nPLATE X.\n]\n\nhas been already mentioned, to the _Archive Room_ and _Chapter Library_,\nabove the great north transept. This room has been thoroughly restored\nby Mr. G. G. Scott. The Library contains about 2,000 volumes, many of\ngreat rarity and interest. Nearly all are chained to the shelves; and\nthe general appearance of the carefully guarded treasures is\nsufficiently curious. [Plate X.] Among the most remarkable printed books\nare--A series of Bibles, ranging from 1480 to 1690; Higden\u2019s\n_Polychronicon_, by Caxton, 1495; Caxton\u2019s _Legenda Aurea_, 1483; and\nLyndewode _Super Constitutiones Provinciales_, 1475. Of the MSS., by far\nthe most interesting is an ancient _Antiphonarium_ containing the old\n\u201cHereford Use.\u201d This \u201csets forth not only the services of particular\ndays, the chants to be used and the lectures to be read, but contains a\ntreatise on music and an ample calendar, in which are noted the obits of\nthe benefactors and bishops of the church; and by which, with the aid of\nthe Dominical letter, we are enabled to assign to the volume the date of\n1265[37]\u201d. It was purchased at a book-stall in Drury-lane about the year\n1820; and redeemed by the Dean and Chapter, who restored it to its\noriginal and legitimate resting-place. Here also is preserved, carefully\nprotected by plate glass, the remarkable _Map of the World_, [Plate\nXI.,] which is one of the most valuable relics of medi\u00e6val geography. It\nwas the work of a certain Richard of Haldingham and of Lafford,\n(Holdingham and Sleaford in Lincolnshire,) who has commemorated himself\nin the following verses:--\n\n \u201cTuz ki cest estorie ont\n Ou oyront, ou luront, ou veront,\n Prient \u00e0 Jhesu en deyt\u00e9\n De Richard de Haldingham e de Lafford eyt pit\u00e9\n Ki l\u2019at fet e compass\u00e9\n Ke joie en cel li seit don\u00e9.\u201d\n\nThe latter part of the thirteenth century is the date which has usually\nbeen assigned to it; but M. D\u2019Avezac, President of the Geographical\nSociety of Paris, who has recently examined the map with much care,\narrives, from internal evidence, at the conclusion that it was designed\nat the beginning of the year 1314[38]. The map itself (drawn on thick\nvellum, and glued to a framework of oak) is founded on the medi\u00e6val\nbelief that all geographical knowledge resulted from the observations of\nthree philosophers, (here named Nichodoxus, Theodotus, and Policlitus,)\nwho were sent forth by Augustus C\u00e6sar to survey the three divisions of\nthe world, when it was about to be taxed at the birth of our Lord. The\nEmperor is accordingly figured giving his directions to the\nphilosophers. The world is represented as round, and surrounded by the\nocean. At the top of the map, which represents the east, is Paradise,\n\n[Illustration: ANCIENT MAP.\n\nPLATE XI.\n]\n\nwith the Tree of Life, and Adam and Eve. Above is the Last Judgment,\nwith the Virgin interceding for mankind. Jerusalem appears in the centre\nof the map; and near it, the crucifix is planted on \u201cMount Calvary.\u201d\nBabylon has its famous tower; Rome bears the inscription, \u201cRoma caput\nmundi tenet orbis frena rotundi;\u201d and Troy is described as \u201cTroja\ncivitas bellicosissima.\u201d (These four cities were regarded as the most\nimportant in the world: Troy, in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries,\nwas a favourite subject of romance.) The British Isles occupy a\nconsiderable space; and Hereford, with its cathedral, is by no means\nobscurely placed. A great part of the map is filled with inscriptions\ntaken from Solinus, Isidore of Seville, and others; and with drawings of\nthe monstrous animals and peoples which the medi\u00e6val cosmography\nsupposed to exist in different parts of the world. The monkey is\nassigned to Norway; the scorpion to the banks of the Rhine; and the\n\u201coroc\u201d (aurochs) to Provence. Lot\u2019s wife, the labyrinth of Crete, the\ncolumns of Hercules, and Scylla and Charybdis, should also be noticed.\n\u201cThe portrait of Abraham is seen in Chald\u00e6a, and that of Moses on Mount\nSinai. Amid the deserts of Ethiopia St. Anthony is recognised, with his\nhook-beaked satyrs and fauns. St. Augustine in his pontifical habit\nmarks the situation of his own Hippo[39].\u201d\n\nThe history of this very remarkable map is uncertain. It was discovered,\nprobably about a century ago, under the floor of Bishop Audley\u2019s\nChapel; and Dean Merewether suggested (but apparently without the\nslightest authority) that it might have served originally as an\naltar-piece[40].\n\nIn the church is preserved a very curious chair of the thirteenth or\nfourteenth century, closely resembling those often represented in early\nsculpture and painting. It is formed in great measure of little turned\nbalusters; and may be compared with a chair figured by M.\nViollet-le-Duc[41] from sculpture at Auxerre. The Hereford chair (which\nat first sight looks like work of the seventeenth century, but is\nundoubtedly early, and a most valuable remnant of antiquity) may perhaps\nhave served as the bishop\u2019s throne, before the construction, in the\nfourteenth century, of that now in use;--or it may have been the\nbishop\u2019s chair at the altar.\n\nXXIV. A door at the eastern end of the south nave-aisle opens to the\n_cloisters_, of which only two walks, the east and south, remain. The\nwest walk was pulled down in the reign of Edward VI. to make room for\nthe\n\n[Illustration: THE CLOISTERS, WITH THE LADIES\u2019 ARBOUR.\n\nPLATE XII.\n]\n\nGrammar School, (taken down in 1836,) and a north walk never existed.\n(Hereford Cathedral, it should be remembered, had no monastic\nestablishment attached to it; and this cloister, [Plate XII.] unlike\nthat at Gloucester, was little more than an ornamental walk, connected\nwith the Bishop\u2019s Palace). The cloister is of Perpendicular date, with\nwindow-openings which deserve notice. The south walk is more richly\ngroined than the east. At the south-east corner is a square turreted\ntower, called the \u201cLadies\u2019,\u201d or \u201cLadye Arbour,\u201d the original purpose of\nwhich is not clear; nor has it been possible to trace the origin of the\nname, which apparently has some reference to the Virgin.\n\nSome good old iron-work on a door between the cloister and the\nchapter-yard should be noticed. In the cloister are placed monuments\nfor--Dr. MATTHEWS, (with sculptured figures); Bishop HUNTINGFORD, (died\n1832); and Bishop GREY, (died 1837).\n\nBetween the cloister and the Bishop\u2019s Palace, a remarkable chapel, which\nseems to have been early Norman, existed until it was pulled down by\nBishop EGERTON, (1724-1746). It had an upper and a lower story, in which\nwere altars dedicated respectively to St. Mary Magdalene and to St.\nCatherine. One wall alone remains, and deserves notice.\n\nFrom the east walk of the cloister a door opened to the vestibule of the\n_chapter-house_. This was ruined by the Parliamentarian troops; and much\nof its stone-work was used by Bishop BISSE, (died 1721,) and by his\nsuccessors until recently, for the repairs of the episcopal palace. The\nfoundations and fragments which remain shew that it was rich Decorated,\nin shape a decagon, with a projecting buttress at each angle.\n\nAt the south-west angle of the lesser transept is an entrance to the\nVicars\u2019 Cloister; (see \u00a7 XXVII.)\n\nXXV. The _exterior_ of the great _north transept_ should be especially\nnoticed. The remarkable windows shew to great advantage from the\noutside, in connection with the massive buttresses, of which those at\nthe angles are turreted, with spiral cappings. The clerestory windows\nare, as has already (\u00a7 XI.) been mentioned, triangular on the exterior,\nand resemble those in the outer wall of the triforium in the nave of\nWestminster. The upper window in the north wall opens from the Archive\nRoom, (\u00a7 XXIII.) The external sills of all these windows resemble those\nof the interior, (\u00a7 XI.) They were walled up, but have been restored by\nMr. Scott from original portions found embedded in the walls, partly in\ntheir places, and partly detached.\n\nThe date of the _central tower_, which rises above this transept, has\nnot been recorded, but it may safely be placed between 1300 and 1310. It\nwas probably undertaken immediately after the completion of the north\ntransept, and the cost of its erection, like that of the transept, was\nno doubt defrayed from the sums which continued to be offered at the\nshrine of St. Thomas Cantilupe[42]. The tower (161 ft. high to the top\nof the pinnacles) is of two stages above the roofs, with buttresses at\nthe angles. (The pinnacles which cap these buttresses are modern, and\ndate from 1830.) The arcades and window-openings, as well as the\nbuttresses, are covered with the ball-flower ornament, which is scarcely\nanywhere found in such profusion as here, and in the south aisle of the\nnave of Gloucester; (see that Cathedral).\n\nThe _Stanbery Chapel_ (\u00a7 XIV.) projects between the great and the\neastern transept. The graceful Decorated window of the choir aisle,\nwhich rises above it, and the Early English arcades which cover the wall\nof the choir between the clerestory windows, as well as the windows\nthemselves, (see \u00a7 IX.,) should here be noticed.\n\nXXVI. On the south side of the Lady-chapel a _porch_ opens to a\nstaircase leading to the _crypt_. The porch (which is finely recessed)\nis, like the crypt, of the same date--Early English (see \u00a7 XVIII.)--as\nthe Lady-chapel, under which it extends. The crypt extends under the\nwhole of the Lady-chapel; and is the solitary example in an English\ncathedral of a crypt constructed after the end of the eleventh\ncentury[43]. It is lighted by plain lancets, and consists of a nave and\naisles 50 ft. long, and divided by plain clustered shafts. The crypt was\nrepaired in 1497 by Andrew Jones, \u201cMercator hujus civitatis,\u201d whose\naltar-tomb,--covered with an incised slab of large dimensions and\nelaborate decoration, representing the merchant and his wife--remains in\nthe centre. This crypt is called the \u201cGolgotha\u201d--from its having been\nused as the charnel or _domus carnaria_--the place appropriated for the\ndecent reception of disinterred fragments of the bodies of the defunct,\nand special services for the repose of their souls. Adjoining Worcester,\nNorwich, and some other cathedrals, a chapel, separated from the\ncathedral itself, was used for this purpose.\n\nThe _east end_ of the Lady-chapel was, it must be remembered, rebuilt by\nMr. Cottingham, (\u00a7 XVIII.) The gable above the five lancet windows is by\nno means an exact reproduction of the original, and the work is not too\ngood. The Audley Chantry (\u00a7 XIX.) projects very picturesquely on the\nsouth side of the Lady-chapel. The side pinnacles were reproduced by Mr.\nScott from old drawings; the finials are original, having been preserved\nin the crypt.\n\nThe existing _west front_ of the cathedral is, as has already been said,\na composition of Wyatt\u2019s, and is unworthy of notice. The total exterior\nlength of the church, including the buttresses, is 344 ft.\n\nXXVII. On the south side of the Lady-chapel is the entrance to the\n_College of Vicars Choral_, (incorporated in 1396,) a very picturesque\nquadrangle, with an inner cloister. It is for the most part\nPerpendicular, (_circa_ 1474). A long cloistral walk (109 ft.) leading\nfrom the quadrangle of the college to the south-east transept of the\ncathedral has the oaken beams of its roof very finely carved.\n\nThe _episcopal palace_ lies south between the cathedral and the river\nWye. It is almost entirely formed out of an ancient Norman hall with\npillars of timber, and is consequently of considerable interest. In the\nDeanery is preserved a small reliquary, of Limoges work, dating from the\nearly part of the thirteenth century. On it is represented the martyrdom\nof St. Thomas of Canterbury: on the lower part the murder, on the upper\npart the entombment of the saint. It no doubt contained a relic of the\nArchbishop. Similar reliquaries, with the same subjects, exist in the\npossession of the Society of Antiquaries, and of Sir Philip Egerton.\n\n\n\n\nHEREFORD CATHEDRAL.\n\nPART II.\n\nHistory of the See, with Short Notices of the principal Bishops.\n\n\n Archbishop Usher asserts that Hereford was the place of an\n episcopal see in the first half of the sixth century, when (A.D.\n 544) one of its bishops was present at a synod convened by the\n Archbishop of Caerleon. However this may have been, it is certain\n that the existing succession of bishops dates from A.D. 676; when\n Putta, Bishop of Rochester, whose Kentish cathedral had been\n plundered and desolated by Ethelred of Mercia, was placed at\n Hereford by Sexwulf, Bishop of Lichfield. Hereford was at this time\n a place of no great consequence. It lay about one mile distant from\n the Roman road which ran from Magna Castra (Kenchester) to Wigornia\n (Worcester); but it was not itself a station, and its later\n importance arose mainly from its position on a ford of the Wye,\n which Athelstane fixed as the boundary between the English and\n Welsh, in the same manner as he made the Tamar the boundary of the\n English and the Cornish of \u201cWest Wales.\u201d Hereford thus became a\n frontier town; and one of the strongest castles on the marches of\n Wales rose near the cathedral, on its south side.\n\n [A.D. 676-688.] PUTTA, the first Saxon bishop, received no great\n wealth with the church of Hereford. He was, says Bede, \u201cmore\n careful about ecclesiastical than secular matters.\u201d During his rule\n here he taught, \u201cwherever he was asked,\u201d the chants of the\n Church,--those ancient Gregorian tones which Augustine had\n introduced at Canterbury, and which Archbishop Theodorus was now\n carefully disseminating throughout England.\n\n The permanent establishment of Hereford as the place of an\n episcopal see was also the work of Archbishop Theodore, who after\n the Council at Hertford (A.D. 673) divided the great diocese of\n Mercia, as he had done that of East Anglia, into several\n bishoprics. (See LICHFIELD, Pt. II.) Of the bishops of Hereford\n between (688-1012) Putta and \u00c6thelstan little is recorded beyond\n their names. CUTHBERT (736-740) is an exception. In the latter year\n he was translated to Canterbury. (See that Cathedral, Pt. II.) It\n was during his archiepiscopate that the Lord\u2019s Prayer and the Creed\n were ordered to be universally taught in English.\n\n [A.D. 1012-1056.] \u00c6THELSTAN, (\u201cvir magn\u00e6 sanctitatis,\u201d according to\n Florence of Worcester,) rebuilt his cathedral from the foundations.\n He was blind for thirteen years before his death; and the affairs\n of his diocese were administered by Tremerig, Bishop of St.\n David\u2019s. In 1055, the year before Bishop \u00c6thelstan\u2019s death, the\n town of Hereford (Herefordport as it is called in the Saxon\n Chronicle[44]) was harried by a large body of Irish and Welsh,\n under \u00c6lfgar, the exiled Earl of Mercia. \u201cThey burned the town,\u201d\n says the Chronicle; \u201cand the great mynstre which the venerable\n Bishop \u00c6thelstan had before caused to be built, that they\n plundered, and bereaved of relics and of vestments, and of all\n things; and slew the folk, and led some away[45].\u201d In the following\n year Bishop \u00c6thelstan died, and was buried in this desolated\n church.\n\n The great treasure of \u00c6thelstan\u2019s minster was the body of ST.\n ETHELBERT, King of East Anglia; whose head, says the Saxon\n Chronicle, was \u201cstricken off by the command of Offa, King of the\n Mercians, A.D. 792.\u201d This is the only notice of Ethelbert in the\n Chronicle; and Florence of Worcester is almost as brief. We know\n nothing of the real history of Ethelbert. Later accounts asserted\n that he was murdered at Sutton\u2019s Walls, a chief palace of the\n Mercian kings, about eight miles from Hereford, where he had gone\n at the invitation of Offa, who had offered him the hand of his\n daughter Elfrida. His body was secretly interred at Marden, close\n to Sutton\u2019s Walls. Three nights afterwards, Ethelbert appeared to a\n certain Brithfrid, and telling him where he had been buried,\n ordered him to remove his body to the \u201cchapel of Our Lady at\n Fernlege,\u201d--generally supposed, but without much authority, to have\n been on the site of the existing cathedral of Hereford. Brithfrid\n obeyed; and the translation took place, not without the occurrence\n of miracles on the way. Many others followed. The murdered king of\n the East Angles was recognised as a saint; and a sumptuous monument\n was raised over his remains by Offa, in token of his penitence.\n Bishop \u00c6thelstan translated the relics into his new \u201cminster,\u201d\n which was dedicated to St. Ethelbert. His festival was duly\n celebrated until the Reformation. A fine Early English church,\n dedicated to St. Mary and St. Ethelbert, remains at Marden, where\n the body was first interred.\n\n [A.D. 1056.] LEOFGAR, \u201cEarl Harold\u2019s mass-priest,\u201d succeeded\n \u00c6thelstan. \u201cHe,\u201d says the Chronicle, \u201cwore his kenepas (headpiece?)\n in his priesthood, until he was a bishop; he forsook his chrism and\n his rood, his ghostly weapons, and took to his spear and to his\n sword, after his bishophood, and so went in the force against\n Griffith the Welsh king; and he was there slain, and his priests\n with him, and \u00c6lfnoth the shire-reeve, and many good men with\n them, and the others fled away. This was eight nights before\n Midsummer[46].\u201d After Leofgar\u2019s death the see remained vacant for\n four years, during which it was under the rule of Ealdred, Bishop\n of Worcester.\n\n [A.D. 1061-1079.] _Walter of Lorraine_, chaplain of Queen Edith,\n was consecrated at Rome by Pope Nicholas II. (He had accompanied\n Bishop Ealdred of Worcester to Rome, on his elevation to the see of\n York.) Bishop Walter was a prelate of questionable sanctity, if the\n story told of him by William of Malmesbury is not an invention of\n his enemies.\n\n [A.D. 1079-1095.] ROBERT DE LOSING, like his predecessor a native\n of Lorraine, is said to have been one of the most learned of the\n bishops consecrated by Lanfranc. Bishop Robert found his cathedral\n in ruins. It had apparently remained uncared for during the\n troubled times of the Conquest, and it had been partly burnt, as we\n have seen, by the Welshmen under Earl \u00c6lfgar. The Bishop rebuilt\n it, taking for his model the church of Aachen, (Aix la Chapelle,)\n founded by Charlemagne. The existing choir (see Pt. I. \u00a7 II.) has\n been regarded as part of Bishop Robert\u2019s work.\n\n Remigius of Lincoln, who had also been rebuilding his cathedral,\n had fixed the day for its dedication, and invited Bishop Robert of\n Hereford to be present. He refused to undertake the journey,\n however, saying, according to William of Malmesbury, that the stars\n assured him the dedication would not take place in the lifetime of\n Remigius; who died, in fact, the day before that appointed. Bishop\n Robert is said by Malmesbury to have received a forewarning of his\n own death from St. Wulfstan, Bishop of Worcester, with whom he had\n lived in the closest friendship. When Wulfstan was on his\n death-bed, Robert was absent with the King. His friend, says the\n Chronicler, appeared to him in a dream, and directed him to hasten\n to Worcester if he wished to see him once more. Bishop Robert set\n out at once, but whilst resting at Cricklade he was again visited\n by Wulfstan, who said, \u201cThou hast done what was possible, but in\n vain, for I have now departed. Thou, however, shalt not remain here\n long; and as a token that I speak true, thou shalt to-morrow\n receive a gift from me.\u201d Accordingly, the Prior of Worcester, where\n Robert arrived the next day, presented him with a cope lined with\n lamb-skins, which St. Wulfstan had been in the habit of wearing on\n his journeys. The Bishop recognised the token, and returning to\n Hereford died there in the following June, (1095). St. Wulfstan\u2019s\n death occurred in January.\n\n [A.D. 1096, trans. to York 1101.] GERARD, nephew of Walkelin,\n Bishop of Winchester, and Chancellor under the Conqueror and\n William II. On his translation to York, Roger Lardarius was\n nominated to the see of Hereford by the King, Henry I. He died\n before he could be consecrated. Reinhelm was then chosen, and\n received the temporalities as bishop-elect from the King, by the\n delivery of the ring and pastoral staff. Anselm (see CANTERBURY,\n Pt. II.) refused to consecrate the bishops who had been thus\n invested; and Reinhelm accordingly restored the temporalities to\n the King, who, enraged by his submission to the Archbishop,\n banished him from the court.\n\n [A.D. 1107-1115.] REINHELM, the Queen\u2019s Chancellor, was, however,\n consecrated by Anselm in 1107, after the King had conceded the main\n points in dispute, and the Archbishop had returned from his exile.\n (See CANTERBURY, Pt. II.) Reinhelm is commemorated in an obituary\n of the Canons of Hereford, as \u201cfundator ecclesi\u00e6 S. Ethelberti;\u201d\n and it has accordingly been considered that he completed the church\n begun by Robert de Losing. But of this there is no direct proof.\n\n [A.D. 1115-1120.] GEOFFRY DE CLIVE succeeded. \u201cBonus quidem et\n ille,\u201d says William of Malmesbury, \u201ccontinentissimusque;\n indifferenter cibis et vestibus qu\u00e6 minori pretio taxarentur utens;\n agricultur\u00e6 studens.\u201d He greatly improved the lands belonging to\n the see; but was more careful to increase than to distribute;\n \u201cleaving great stores behind him to no heir.\u201d\n\n [A.D. 1121-1127.] RICHARD, called \u201cde Capella,\u201d a clerk of the\n King\u2019s chapel. A bridge across the Wye, at Hereford, was partly\n built by this bishop. His successor,\n\n [A.D. 1131-1148.] ROBERT DE BETHUNE, had been nominated by the King\n (Henry I.) in 1129, but was not consecrated until 1131. Bishop\n Robert was a member of the noble house of Bethune; and received his\n early education from his own brother Gunfrid, a teacher of some\n celebrity. He became a canon in the Augustinian priory of\n Llanthony; and on the death of Hugh de Lacy, Earl of Hereford, was\n appointed to superintend the building of a religious house at\n Weobly, where the great Earl was buried. Here he worked as a common\n labourer, and is said to have injured his health so greatly, that\n he was recalled to his priory, of which he soon afterwards became\n the superior. When the see of Hereford became vacant, Robert de\n Bethune was recommended to the King by the Earl of Gloucester, and\n at last accepted the bishopric, \u201cquamvis invitus.\u201d During the\n troubles of Stephen\u2019s reign Hereford suffered greatly. The\n cathedral was deserted and desecrated, and the Bishop himself was\n compelled to take flight in disguise. On his return, he \u201ccleansed\n and repaired\u201d the building. In 1148, Bishop Robert was present at\n the Council of Rheims, convened by Pope Eugenius III., then an\n exile in France; and died there, (April 16). His remains were\n brought to England, and interred in his own cathedral.\n\n A short life of Bishop de Bethune, who was one of the best and\n worthiest bishops of his age,--a man of peace and religion, when by\n far the greater number of English bishops were little better than\n the most turbulent barons,--was written by William of Wycumb, his\n successor in the priory of Llanthony, and was printed by Wharton\n in the second volume of his _Anglia Sacra_.\n\n [A.D. 1148, trans. to London 1163.] GILBERT FOLIOT, Abbot of\n Gloucester, the inflexible antagonist of Becket. Foliot \u201cwas\n admitted to be a man of unimpeachable life, of austere habits, and\n great learning. He was in correspondence with Popes C\u00e6lestine II.,\n Lucius II., Eugenius III., and Alexander, and with a familiarity\n which implies a high estimation for ability and experience. He is\n interfering in matters remote from his diocese, and commending\n other bishops, Lincoln and Salisbury, to the favourable\n consideration of the pontiff. All his letters reveal as imperious\n and conscientious a Churchman as Becket himself, and in Becket\u2019s\n position Foliot might have resisted the King as inflexibly. He was,\n in short, a bold and stirring ecclesiastic, who did not scruple to\n wield, as he had done in several instances, that last terrible\n weapon of the clergy which burst on his own head,\n excommunication[47].\u201d It was Foliot who uttered the \u201cbitter\n sarcasm\u201d on Becket\u2019s consecration as primate, \u201cThe King has wrought\n a miracle, he has turned a soldier and a layman into an\n archbishop;\u201d but in spite of this, Becket \u201cacquiesced in, if he did\n not promote, the advancement of Foliot to the see of London,\u201d\n vacant when Becket was consecrated, at Whitsuntide, 1161. Foliot\u2019s\n translation took place in 1163. From that time he appears on the\n King\u2019s side, in opposition to the Archbishop, and Becket accuses\n him of aspiring to the primacy. The life of Foliot belongs too\n completely to the public history of his time, and is too closely\n associated with the career of Becket, to be dwelt on here at any\n length. He was among the bishops excommunicated by Becket on\n Ascension-day, 1169, and again in Canterbury Cathedral, on the\n Christmas-day before the Archbishop\u2019s murder; and it was Foliot who\n preached in that cathedral on the memorable day (July 12, 1174) of\n King Henry\u2019s penance. He died in 1187.\n\n The letters of Bp. Foliot have been edited by Dr. Giles, (Oxon.\n 1845,) and form two volumes of the series illustrating the life of\n Becket. Foliot was annually commemorated by the canons of Hereford,\n as one who \u201cmulta bona contulit Herefordensi capitulo.\u201d\n\n [A.D. 1163-1167.] ROBERT DE MELUN (of Maledon), called by the\n annalist of St. David\u2019s \u201cEpiscopus Anglorum sapientissimus.\u201d He was\n present at the famous scene between Becket and Henry at\n Northampton, when he attempted, with Foliot, to take the cross from\n the hands of the Archbishop, to whose side he seems to have\n adhered.\n\n [A.D. 1174-1186.] ROBERT FOLIOT, a friend and fellow-student of\n Becket, and probably a relative of Bishop Gilbert of London,\n although this is not certain. He was one of the four English\n bishops who in 1179 attended the Lateran Council convened by\n Alexander III., in which the Albigenses and Waldenses were\n excommunicated[48].\n\n [A.D. 1186-1199.] WILLIAM DE VERE, son of Alberic de Vere, third\n Earl of Oxford. Bishop de Vere is said by Godwin to have built\n much, (_multa dicitur construxisse_,) but no part of the existing\n cathedral can be assigned to him, and indeed the authority for\n Godwin\u2019s statement does not appear.\n\n [A.D. 1200-1215.] GILES DE BRUCE, or DE BRAOSE, son of William,\n Lord Brecknock. He sided with the barons against King John, and was\n compelled to leave his see, the temporalities of which were seized\n by the Crown. He was afterwards allowed to return, and died at\n Gloucester in 1215. Bishop Giles is generally said to have built\n the central tower of his cathedral, but this (see Pt. I. \u00a7 X.) is\n undoubtedly an error.\n\n [A.D. 1216-1219.] HUGH DE MAPENORE, Dean of Hereford.\n\n [A.D. 1219-1234.] HUGH FOLIOT, Archdeacon of Salop; founded and\n endowed a hospital at Ledbury.\n\n [A.D. 1234-1239.] RALPH OF MAIDSTONE, \u201cvir magn\u00e6 literatur\u00e6, et in\n theologia nominatissimus,\u201d according to Wyke the chronicler. He\n bought for the see a house in London, together with the advowson of\n the adjoining church, St. Mary Monthalt. In 1239 Bishop Ralph\n resigned his see, and became a Franciscan at Oxford, whence he\n afterwards passed to the house of the Franciscans at Gloucester,\n where he died.\n\n [A.D. 1240-1268.] PETER D\u2019ACQUABLANCA, whose fine tomb remains in\n the cathedral, (Pt. I. \u00a7 XIII.,) was one of the intruding\n \u201cforeigners\u201d by whom England was oppressed during the long reign of\n Henry III., and whose exactions and tyranny were among the chief\n causes of the rising of the barons under Simon de Montfort. Like\n the contemporary Archbishop of Canterbury, Boniface, Bishop Peter\n was a native of Savoy, and had come to England in the train of\n William of Valence. He obtained the see of Hereford in opposition\n to a canon of Lichfield,--\u201cvir per omnia commendabilis,\u201d says\n Matthew Paris,--who had been elected by the canons; but the King\n affected none but strangers. In 1250 Bishop Peter took the cross,\n and went, under the banner of the King of France, to the Holy Land.\n He returned in 1258, bringing letters, which are said to have been\n forged, but which professed to be those of the Pope, Innocent IV.,\n commanding all religious houses to grant a tenth of their property\n toward the crusade. During his absence (in 1257) he spent large\n sums in endeavouring to procure for himself the see of Bordeaux,\n when the death of the Archbishop had been reported. But after the\n money had been spent, the Archbishop of Bordeaux proved to be still\n alive, and the unfortunate Bishop Peter became, says Paris, the\n subject of infinite jests. In 1263, with other \u201cforeigners,\u201d he was\n expelled from England; but he returned to the country, though not\n to his diocese, in the following year, when Henry III. reprimands\n him by letter, saying, that \u201ccoming to Hereford to take order for\n the disposing the garrisons in the marches of Wales, he found in\n the church of Hereford neither bishop, dean, vicar, or other\n officer to discharge the spiritual functions, and that the church\n and ecclesiastical establishment was in a state of ruin and\n decay[49].\u201d The Bishop was soon afterwards in Hereford, where he\n was taken by Simon de Montfort, who seized all his wealth, and\n imprisoned Bishop Peter in \u201cOrdelay\u201d [Urdley] Castle. He died in\n 1268, leaving behind him no good reputation, although he had bought\n the manor of Holme Lacy for the cathedral, and left money for the\n annual distribution of much corn to the clergy of his church and to\n the poor. He founded a monastery at his birthplace, Aquabella, or\n Aquablanca, in Savoy, where his heart was conveyed for entombment,\n and where a monument with an inscription still remains. His body\n was interred in his own cathedral, under the canopied tomb already\n noticed.\n\n [A.D. 1269-1275.] JOHN BRETON; has usually been considered the\n author of a treatise _De Juribus Anglicanis_, and is described by\n Sir Edward Coke as \u201ca man of great and profound judgment in the\n common laws, an excellent ornament to his profession, and a\n satisfaction and solace to himself.\u201d Selden, however, proved that\n the treatise contains references to statutes passed long after the\n death of Bishop Breton; and Bishop Nicholson suggests, with much\n probability, that the true writer of the abstract was a \u201cJohn\n Breton,\u201d one of the king\u2019s justices (together with Ralph and Roger\n de Hengham) in the first year of Edward II.\n\n [A.D. 1275-1282.] THOMAS CANTILUPE, who succeeded, was the last\n Englishman canonized before the Reformation. He was the son of\n William Lord Cantilupe, and his wife Millicent, Countess of Evreux.\n The future bishop and saint was educated at Oxford and at Paris,\n and after being made Chancellor of the former University, became\n Chancellor of England under Henry III. in 1265. He was, moreover, a\n clerical pluralist of the first order, being at once canon and\n chantor of York, archdeacon and canon of Lichfield and Coventry,\n canon of London, canon of Hereford, and archdeacon of Stafford. It\n is possible, however, that as in the case of Bishop Walter de\n Merton, who held the great seal immediately before Cantilupe, the\n King may have found no more ready means of paying his great officer\n than by such preferments. In 1275 he became bishop of Hereford. His\n episcopate was not a tranquil one. He vigorously maintained the\n rights of his see against both Gilbert de Clare, Earl of\n Gloucester, and John Peckham, Archbishop of Canterbury, the latter\n of whom insisted on the visitation of Bishop Cantilupe\u2019s diocese,\n as his metropolitan; a claim which the archbishops were then\n vigorously prosecuting. After a long dispute, Peckham solemnly\n excommunicated the refractory Bishop of Hereford, who at once\n proceeded to Rome, to lay his case before the Pope, Martin IV.\n There is reason to believe, however, that as an excommunicated\n person he could obtain from the Pope nothing more than \u201cthe promise\n of a quick despatch and removal of delays;\u201d and that he only\n received absolution in the hour of his death, which occurred near\n Orvieto, August 23, 1282. Richard Swinfield, his successor in the\n see of Hereford, who had accompanied Bishop Cantilupe to Italy,\n proceeded, probably at his own request, to separate the flesh of\n his body from the bones by boiling. The flesh was interred in the\n church of Santo Severo, near Orvieto; the heart was conveyed to the\n monastic church of Ashridge in Buckinghamshire, founded by Edmund,\n Earl of Cornwall; and the bones were brought to his own cathedral\n at Hereford. As they were being conveyed into the church, says the\n compiler of the Bishop\u2019s \u201cLife and Gests,\u201d Gilbert Earl of\n Gloucester approached and touched the casket which contained them,\n whereupon they \u201cbled afresh.\u201d The Earl was struck with\n compunction, and made full restitution to the Church of all the\n lands which Bishop Cantilupe had rightly claimed from him.\n\n Swinfield, who had been the constant companion of Cantilupe, and\n many of the contemporary chroniclers, bear witness to the purity\n and excellence of the Bishop\u2019s life, and his tomb soon became\n distinguished by miracles. The first of these, according to the\n annalist of Worcester, occurred in April, 1287; at the time,\n apparently, of the removal of his remains from the tomb in the\n Lady-chapel to the shrine which had been provided for them in the\n north transept. The number of marvels increased daily; for,\n \u201csuperstition,\u201d in Fuller\u2019s words, \u201cis always fondest of the\n youngest saint;\u201d and in 1289, Bishop Swinfield, who had brought\n Cantilupe\u2019s bones from Italy, wrote to the Pope requesting his\n canonization. Many difficulties, however, were interposed; and in\n spite of numerous letters from Edward I. and his son Edward II., it\n was not until May, 1320, that the bull of canonization was issued\n by Pope John XXII.[50] It is possible that the excommunication of\n Cantilupe, and his connection with the Knights Templars, of which\n Order he was Provincial Grand Master in England, were among the\n causes of the delay. The Templars were arrested throughout England\n in 1307; condemned in 1310; and in 1312 the Order was finally\n dissolved in the Council of Vienne.\n\n A book entitled \u201cThe Life and Gests of Saint Thomas Cantilupe,\u201d\n said to be compiled from evidences at Rome, collected before his\n canonization, was published at Ghent in 1674. \u201cNo fewer than four\n hundred and twenty-five miracles,\u201d says Fuller, \u201care registered,\n reported to be wrought at his tomb.... Yea, it is recorded in his\n legend, that by his prayers were raised from death to life\n three-score several persons, one-and-twenty lepers healed, and\n three-and-twenty blind and dumb men to have received their sight\n and speech[51].\u201d\n\n The arms of Cantilupe--Gules, three leopards\u2019 heads jessant, with a\n fleur-de-lis issuing from the mouth, or--have since his\n canonization been assumed as those of the see of Hereford.\n\n [A.D. 1283-1317.] RICHARD SWINFIELD, a native of Swinfield in Kent,\n from which place he is said to have transported a small colony of\n Kentish men to Herefordshire, laboured throughout his episcopate to\n procure the canonization of his predecessor, which was not effected\n until 1320. Bishop Swinfield, however, translated the remains of\n St. Thomas Cantilupe to the new transept in 1287; and besides this\n transept, the clerestory and upper portion of the choir, the\n central tower above the roof, and the eastern transept as it now\n exists, were either completed, or were in progress during his\n episcopate. A curious roll of the household expenses of this Bishop\n for the years 1289-1290 has been edited for the Camden Society,\n with some very interesting annotations, by the Rev. John Webb.\n\n [A.D. 1317, trans. to Worcester 1327.] ADAM ORLETON This Bishop had\n joined the barons, under the Earl of Lancaster, against Edward II.\n and the Spencers; and in 1323,--two years after the defeat of the\n barons at Boroughbridge,--he was impeached in Parliament as having\n given \u201ccountenance and assistance to the rebellion.\u201d He refused, as\n a Churchman, to be so tried, and was delivered to the custody of\n the Archbishop of Canterbury, whence he was afterwards brought\n before the bar of the King\u2019s Bench. \u201cThese proceedings being looked\n upon as a violation of the liberties of the Church, the Archbishops\n of Canterbury, York, and Dublin, came immediately, with their\n crosses erected, into the court, and carried off the Bishop\n without giving him time to answer to the indictment[52].\u201d The\n Bishop was tried in his absence, however,--(the first English\n bishop brought to trial in a temporal court,)--found guilty, and\n his temporalities confiscated. But these had been restored before\n 1326, when Bishop Orleton joined the party of Queen Isabella. He\n preached before her at Oxford, on the text \u201cdoleo caput,\u201d (2 Kings\n iv. 19,) inferring that a distempered \u201chead\u201d should be removed; and\n the Queen proceeded with him to Hereford, where the younger Spencer\n was hanged. Thence the Bishop wrote his famous letter to the\n keepers of Edward II. at Berkeley Castle,--\u201cEdwardum regem occidere\n nolite timere bonum est.\u201d In 1327 he was translated, by the\n influence of the Queen, to Worcester; and in 1333 to Winchester,\n where he died in 1345.\n\n [A.D. 1327-1344.] THOMAS CHARLTON, Canon of York. In 1329 he was\n Treasurer of England. In 1337 he was sent to Ireland as Chancellor,\n and was afterwards Justiciary and \u201cWarden\u201d of that kingdom. In 1340\n he returned to Hereford.\n\n [A.D. 1344-1360.] JOHN TRILLECK. Little is recorded of this Bishop,\n whose fine brass remains in the choir of the cathedral. (Pt. I. \u00a7\n X.) He prohibited the performance of miracle-plays in churches\n within his diocese.\n\n [A.D. 1361-1369.] LEWIS CHARLTON; of some distinction as a\n theologian.\n\n [A.D. 1370, trans. to London 1375.] WILLIAM COURTENAY, son of Hugh\n Courtenay, Earl of Devon. From London Bishop Courtenay passed to\n Canterbury in 1381, and died 1396. As Bishop of London, and as\n Archbishop, he was a strong opposer of Wickliffe. (See CANTERBURY\n CATHEDRAL, Pt. II.)\n\n [A.D. 1375, trans. to St. David\u2019s 1389.] JOHN GILBERT; was\n translated to Hereford from Bangor. In 1386 he was Treasurer of\n England.\n\n [A.D. 1389-1404.] JOHN TREVENANT: sent on an embassy to Rome by\n Henry IV. in 1400.\n\n [A.D. 1404-1416.] ROBERT MASCALL: had been a Carmelite friar at\n Ludlow; whence he proceeded to Oxford, and there, by his learning,\n attracted the notice of Henry IV., who employed him on various\n embassies. He built great part of the church of the Carmelites in\n London, where he was buried. Bishop Mascall was present with Bishop\n Hallam of Salisbury, at the Council of Constance, 1415, 1416.\n\n [A.D. 1417, trans. to Exeter 1420.] EDMUND LACY. (See EXETER\n CATHEDRAL, Pt. II.)\n\n [A.D. 1420, trans. to Chichester 1421.] THOMAS POLTON, Dean of\n York. From Chichester he passed to Worcester in 1426.\n\n [A.D. 1422-1448.] THOMAS SPOFFORD, Abbot of St. Mary\u2019s at York; to\n which monastery he returned in 1448, having resigned his see. \u201cThe\n record of his abdication is printed in Rymer\u2019s _F\u0153dera_, vol. x. p.\n 215: in Wilkins\u2019s _Concilia_, vol. iii. p. 538, is a writ of pardon\n for abdicating in favour of his successor, who was to allow him one\n hundred pounds yearly out of the revenues. The Pope testified by\n his bull that Spofford had expended on the buildings of his\n cathedral upwards of two thousand eight hundred marks[53].\u201d No part\n of the cathedral itself can be of Bishop Spofford\u2019s time; but\n possibly he erected the cloisters.\n\n [A.D. 1449, trans. to Salisbury 1450.] RICHARD BEAUCHAMP. For this\n Bishop, one of the best architects of his time,--the superintendent\n of the works at St. George\u2019s Chapel, Windsor,--see SALISBURY\n CATHEDRAL, Pt. II.\n\n [A.D. 1451, trans. to Lichfield 1453.] REGINALD BOULERS, Abbot of\n Gloucester.\n\n [A.D. 1453-1477.] JOHN STANBERY, translated to Hereford from\n Bangor. Bishop Stanbery was born at Stanbery, in the parish of\n Morwenstow, on the north coast of Cornwall; and bequeathed a\n \u201ccross of silver gilt\u201d to his baptismal church there. \u201cHe was\n bred,\u201d says Fuller, \u201ca Carmelite in Oxford, and became generally as\n learned as any of his order, deserving all the dignity which the\n University did or could confer on him. King Henry the Sixth highly\n favoured, and made him the first Provost of Eton; being much ruled\n by his advice in ordering that, his new foundation. He was by the\n King designed Bishop of Norwich, but William de la Pole, Duke of\n Suffolk, got it from him for his own chaplain, and Stanbery was\n fain to stay his stomach on the poor bishopric of Bangor, till,\n anno 1453, he was advanced Bishop of Hereford[54].\u201d The Bishop was\n faithful to Henry VI. throughout his adversity, but was taken\n prisoner after the battle of Northampton, (July, 1460,) and was\n long confined in Warwick Castle. After his release he retired to\n the Carmelite monastery at Ludlow, and died there in May, 1474. He\n was interred in his own cathedral, in the chantry which he had\n built and endowed during his life. (Pt. I. \u00a7 XIV.)\n\n [A.D. 1474-1492.] THOMAS MILLING, Abbot of Westminster, Privy\n Councillor of Edward IV., and godfather to his son, Edward V. He\n was buried at Westminster, where a stone coffin remains which is\n supposed to have contained his body.\n\n [A.D. 1492, trans. to Salisbury 1502.] EDMUND AUDLEY. (See\n SALISBURY, Pt. II.) During his tenure of the see of Hereford he\n constructed the chantry on the south side of the Lady-chapel. (Pt.\n I. \u00a7 XIX.) He was interred in the chantry he afterwards built at\n Salisbury.\n\n [A.D. 1502, trans. to Bath and Wells 1504.] HADRIAN DE CASTELLO,\n who had been entrusted by Henry VII. with the management of all\n business between England and the Papal Court, received both his\n English bishoprics at Rome, and never saw either. (See, for a\n fuller notice of him, WELLS CATHEDRAL, Pt. II.)\n\n [A.D. 1504-1516.] RICHARD MAYEW, Archdeacon of Oxford, President of\n Magdalen College, and Chancellor of the University, was Henry the\n Seventh\u2019s Almoner, and was sent to Spain in order to conduct\n Catherine of Arragon to England. He received the bishopric of\n Hereford after his return. His fine tomb and effigy remain on the\n south side of the choir. (Pt. I. \u00a7 XXI.)\n\n [A.D. 1516-1535.] CHARLES BOOTH, Chancellor of the Welsh Marches,\n is best known as the builder of the north porch of his cathedral at\n Hereford. His tomb adjoins it. (Pt. I. \u00a7 VII.)\n\n [A.D. 1535-1539.] EDWARD FOX, Provost of King\u2019s College, Cambridge,\n Almoner to Henry VIII., by whom he was employed on various\n embassies. It was Fox who first introduced Cranmer to the King, and\n Fuller calls him \u201cthe principal pillar of the Reformation, as to\n the management of the politic and prudential part thereof, being of\n more activity, and no less ability, than Cranmer himself[55].\u201d He\n had been the first to instigate Wolsey, as papal legate, to\n commence a visitation of the professed as well as secular clergy,\n in 1523, in consequence of the general complaint against their\n manners. Bishop Fox died in London in 1538, and was interred in the\n church of St. Mary Monthalt.\n\n [A.D. 1539-1552.] JOHN SKIP. On Fox\u2019s death, Edmund Bonner was\n elected Bishop of Hereford, but before his consecration to that see\n he was removed to London. Bishop Skip had been Archdeacon of\n Dorset. He was one of the \u201cnotable learned men\u201d associated with\n Cranmer in drawing up the \u201cOrder of Communion,\u201d (1548,) and was\n probably one of those who assisted in compiling the first Common\n Prayer-book of Edward VI.[56]\n\n [A.D. 1553-1554.] JOHN HARLEY, was compelled to resign on the\n accession of Mary because he was a \u201cmarried priest,\u201d and died a few\n months afterwards.\n\n [A.D. 1554-1558.] ROBERT PARFEW, or WHARTON, was translated from\n St. Asaph.\n\n [A.D. 1559-1585.] JOHN SCORY, translated from Chichester. As Bishop\n of Hereford, Bishop Scory alienated many of the best manors\n belonging to the see, but it is very doubtful whether it was in his\n power to resist effectually the rapacity of the courtiers. It has\n been proved (see EXETER CATHEDRAL, Pt. II.--Bishop Veysey) that in\n many cases the bishops of this period have been blamed for\n alienations which they had done their best to resist.\n\n [A.D. 1586-1602.] HERBERT WESTFALING, Prebendary of Christ Church,\n Oxford. Godwin, who knew him intimately, describes him as a bishop\n of unusual excellence, of great purity of life, of great honesty\n and integrity, and of such serious gravity that he was hardly ever\n seen to smile. Sir John Harrington relates, that while Bishop\n Westfaling was preaching in his cathedral, a mass of frozen snow\n fell from the tower upon the roof, and so frightened the\n congregation that they endeavoured to escape in all haste. But the\n Bishop remained unmoved in his pulpit, calmly exhorting them to sit\n still and fear no harm. All the revenues of his see were expended\n in works of piety and hospitality by Bishop Westfaling, who left\n nothing but his private inheritance to his family. He was buried in\n the north transept, where his effigy remains. (Pt. I. \u00a7 12.)\n\n [A.D. 1603-1617.] ROBERT BENNETT, Dean of Windsor. Bishop Bennett\n was educated at Trinity College, Cambridge, where, says Sir John\n Harrington, he was \u201can active man, who played well at tennis, and\n could toss an argument in the schools even better than a ball in\n the tennis court.\u201d He was a vigorous defender of the privileges of\n his see against the corporation of Hereford, and both he and his\n predecessor Westfaling expended large sums in the restoration of\n the episcopal residences at Hereford and at Whitbourn. Bishop\n Bennett\u2019s tomb with effigy remains on the north side of the choir.\n (Pt. I. \u00a7 X.)\n\n [A.D. 1617-1633.] FRANCIS GODWIN, translated to Hereford from\n Llandaff. Bishop Godwin was the compiler of the \u201cCatalogue of the\n Bishops of England,\u201d to which all succeeding writers on English\n Church history have been greatly indebted. He was the son of Thomas\n Godwin, Bishop of Bath and Wells, and was born at Harsington in\n Northamptonshire. In the year 1601 he became Bishop of Llandaff,\n and in 1605 published the first edition, in English, of his\n \u201cCatalogue.\u201d It was again published in Latin, in 1616, and in 1743\n this Latin version was edited, in a large folio volume, by Dr.\n Richardson, Canon of Lincoln, and Master of Emmanuel College,\n Cambridge. Richardson made considerable additions to the book,\n besides correcting numerous errors; and it is his edition of the\n Commentary _De Pr\u00e6sulibus Angli\u00e6_ that is alone to be relied upon.\n \u201cBishop Godwin,\u201d says Fuller, \u201cwas a good man, grave divine,\n skilful mathematician, pure Latinist, and incomparable historian.\n The Church of Llandaff was much beholding to him; yea, the whole\n Church of England; yea, the whole Church Militant; yea, many now in\n the Church Triumphant had had their memories utterly lost on earth,\n if not preserved by his painful endeavours. I am sorry to see that\n some have since made so bad use of his good labours, who have\n lighted their candles from his torch, thereby merely to discover\n the faults of our bishops, that their personal failing may be an\n argument against the prelatical function[57].\u201d Bishop Godwin also\n wrote a life of Queen Mary, inserted in Kennet\u2019s History of\n England, vol. ii.; and \u201cAnnals of England under Henry VIII., Edward\n VI., and Mary.\u201d He was interred at Whitbourn, where the bishops of\n Hereford had a palace, April 29, 1633. A good portrait of Godwin,\n engraved by Vertue, is prefixed to Richardson\u2019s folio.\n\n [A.D. 1634, died in November of the same year.] AUGUSTINE LINDSELL,\n translated from Peterborough.\n\n [A.D. 1635, trans. to Norwich in the same year.] MATTHEW WREN. (See\n NORWICH CATHEDRAL, Pt. II.)\n\n [A.D. 1635-1636.] THEOPHILUS FIELD, had been Bishop successively of\n Llandaff and St. David\u2019s.\n\n [A.D. 1636-1646.] GEORGE COKE, translated from Bristol. He was\n brother of Sir John Coke, Secretary of State under James I. and\n Charles I. Bishop Coke fell upon the evil days of the civil war,\n and like the rest of the bishops, was deprived of his see. \u201cHe was\n a meek, grave, and quiet man,\u201d says Fuller, \u201cmuch beloved of such\n as were subjected to his jurisdiction[58].\u201d He died in 1650.\n\n For fifteen years the see remained vacant. In\n\n [A.D. 1661, died the same year,] NICHOLAS MONK, Provost of Eton,\n was consecrated Bishop of Hereford. He was the brother of the great\n Duke of Albemarle. Bishop Monk never visited his diocese, but,\n dying at Westminster, was interred in the abbey church there.\n\n [A.D. 1662-1691.] HERBERT CROFT, had been Dean of Hereford before\n the Rebellion. In his youth he had embraced Romanism, and had been\n received into the Order of Jesuits, but was reconverted by Bishop\n Morton of Durham. Bishop Croft is said to have been especially\n careful to promote none but the clergy of his own diocese to\n honourable positions within it.\n\n [A.D. 1691-1701.] GILBERT IRONSIDE, translated from Bristol.\n\n [A.D. 1701-1712.] HUMFREY HUMPHRIES, translated from Bangor. Wood\n declares him to have been \u201cexcellently versed in antiquities.\u201d\n\n [A.D. 1713-1721.] PHILIP BISSE, translated from St. David\u2019s. Bishop\n Bisse expended much on the cathedral and on the palace. In the\n former he erected a Grecian altar-screen, which has been happily\n removed during the late restoration.\n\n [A.D. 1721, trans. to Salisbury 1723.] BENJAMIN HOADLY, trans. from\n Bangor. See WINCHESTER CATHEDRAL, (to which see he was trans. from\n Salisbury,) Pt. II.; but it should be added that the passage there\n quoted from Hallam\u2019s Constitutional History is far too favourable\n to the character of Bishop Hoadly.\n\n [A.D. 1724-1746.] HENRY EGERTON, fifth son of the third Earl of\n Bridgewater.\n\n [A.D. 1746-1787.] JAMES BEAUCLERK, eighth son of the Duke of St.\n Alban\u2019s.\n\n [A.D. 1787-1788.] JOHN HARLEY, third son of the third Earl of\n Oxford.\n\n [A.D. 1788-1802.] JOHN BUTLER, translated from Oxford. Bishop\n Butler owed his elevation to his powers as a political pamphleteer.\n He was an effective assistant to Lord North in vindicating the\n American War.\n\n [A.D. 1803, trans. to Worcester 1808.] FFOLLIOTT HERBERT WALKER\n CORNEWALL, translated from Bristol.\n\n [A.D. 1808, trans. to St. Asaph 1815.] JOHN LUXMOORE, translated\n from Bristol.\n\n [A.D. 1815-1832.] GEORGE J. HUNTINGFORD, translated from\n Gloucester. Bishop Huntingford had been made Warden of Winchester\n College in 1789, and retained the wardenship until his death.\n\n [A.D. 1832-1837.] EDWARD GREY.\n\n [A.D. 1837, trans. to York 1847.] THOMAS MUSGRAVE.\n\n [A.D. 1848--.] RENN D. HAMPDEN.\n\n\nLONDON: PRINTED BY WILLIAM CLOWES AND SONS, STAMFORD STREET\n\n[Illustration]\n\n\n\n\n A HANDBOOK\n\n TO\n\n WORCESTER CATHEDRAL.\n\n WITH 7 ILLUSTRATIONS.\n\n LONDON:\n JOHN MURRAY, ALBEMARLE STREET.\n 1866.\n\n\n\n\nCONTENTS.\n\n\nPART I.\n\nHISTORY AND DETAILS.\n\n PAGE\nHISTORY AND DATES 3\nGENERAL CHARACTER 7\nNORTH PORCH 8\nNAVE 10\nWESTERN BAYS 10\nTRIFORIUM 10\nCLERESTORY 14\nNAVE VAULTING 15\nSOUTH NAVE AISLE 16\nNORTH NAVE AISLE 18\nCENTRAL TOWER, PIERS OF 19\nGREAT TRANSEPT 19\nSOUTH TRANSEPT 20\nNORTH TRANSEPT 22\nCHOIR-SCREEN 23\nCHOIR 25\nSTONE PULPIT 29\nMONUMENTS 30\nTOMB AND EFFIGY OF KING JOHN 30\nPRINCE ARTHUR\u2019S CHANTRY 33\nSOUTH CHOIR-AISLE 34\nSOUTH-EAST TRANSEPT 35\nSCULPTURE AND MONUMENTS IN SOUTH-EAST TRANSEPT 37\nEFFIGY OF AUDELA DE WARREN 38\nRETRO-CHOIR 38\nLADY-CHAPEL 40\nEFFIGIES IN THE RETRO-CHOIR 41\nNORTH-EASTERN TRANSEPT 44\nNORTH CHOIR-AISLE 45\nCLOISTERS 46\nSEPULCHRAL SLAB, \u201cMISERRIMUS\u201d 47\nSLYPE 48\nCHAPTER-HOUSE 48\nREFECTORY 49\nDORMITORY 49\nCRYPT 50\nNORTH AND WEST DOORS 53\nCENTRAL TOWER 54\nGUESTEN HALL 55\nEDGAR TOWER 56\nDEANERY 57\n\n\nPART II.\n\nHISTORY OF THE SEE, WITH SHORT NOTICES OF\nTHE PRINCIPAL BISHOPS.\n\nHISTORY OF SEE 58\nSAXON BISHOPS, OSWALD--WOLFSTAN--LIVING--ALDRED--WOLFSTAN II. 59-62\nLIST OF BISHOPS FROM 1096 TO 1861 67-81\nMAUGER--CANTILUPE 68, 69\nGIFFARD 70\nCARPENTER 73\nLATIMER 74\nPRIDEAUX--STILLINGFLEET 77, 78\nHOUGH--HURD 79-80\n\n\n\n\nLIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS.\n\n\nGENERAL VIEW _Frontispiece._\nTOMB OF KING JOHN _to face_ 1\nPLAN OF CATHEDRAL \u201d 1\nPART OF CHOIR AND LADY-CHAPEL \u201d 25\nCHANTRY OF PRINCE ARTHUR \u201d 34\nCHAPTER-HOUSE \u201d 48\nCRYPT \u201d 50\n\n[Illustration: TOMB OF KING JOHN.]\n\n[Illustration: GROUND-PLAN, WORCESTER CATHEDRAL.\n\nScale, 100 ft. to 1 in.]\n\n\n\n\nWORCESTER CATHEDRAL.\n\n\nPART I.\n\nHistory and Details.\n\nI. The chief authorities for the architectural history of Worcester\nCathedral are--the Chronicle of Florence of Worcester, and the _Annales\nEcclesi\u00e6 Wygorniensis_, compiled by a monk of Worcester at the beginning\nof the fourteenth century[59]. From these it appears that in the year\n1084 Bishop WULFSTAN \u201cbegan the work of the Minster;\u201d into which the\nmonks entered four years afterwards; and in 1092 Wulfstan held a synod\nin the crypt, which he had \u201cbuilt from the foundations, and by the mercy\nof God had dedicated[60].\u201d Wulfstan died in 1095. In 1113 the city of\nWorcester, with the cathedral church and the castle, were greatly\ninjured by fire. In 1175 the \u201cnew tower\u201d--probably the central tower of\nthe cathedral--fell, as many other Norman towers had fallen; and in 1189\nanother great fire destroyed nearly the whole of Worcester. On this\noccasion the cathedral escaped; but in 1202, at Eastertide, it was\nburnt, (_igne conflagravit alieno_,) together with all the buildings and\noffices attached to it. During the whole of the year before, however,\ngreat miracles had been manifested at the tomb of St. Wulfstan, and many\nsick persons were said to be cured there daily. Accordingly, on St.\nGiles\u2019s Day, (Sept. 1,) 1202, Hubert Walter, Archbishop of Canterbury,\ncame to Worcester with other bishops to enquire into the truth of the\nreported miracles. Certain monks of Worcester took his favourable\njudgment to Rome; and in the following year, 1203, St. Wulfstan was\ncanonized by Pope Innocent III., who so far honoured the new English\nsaint as to compose a prayer for his Office.\n\nFrom this time offerings poured in daily at the tomb of St. Wulfstan;\nand it was no doubt with the wealth thus acquired by the monastery that\nthe cathedral was restored. In 1207 King John visited Worcester; and\nafter praying at Wulfstan\u2019s tomb, gave three hundred marks for the\nrepair of the cathedral. He was interred in the church in the year 1216,\n(see \u00a7 IX.); and in 1218 the cathedral was dedicated \u201cin honour of the\nBlessed Virgin and St. Peter, and of the holy confessors Oswald and\nWulfstan.\u201d The young King, Henry III., was present, with a great company\nof bishops, abbots, and nobles; and after the dedication the body of St.\nWulfstan was translated to its shrine near the high altar.\n\nThe cathedral, up to this period, had been a Norman and transition\nNorman building. In 1221, on St. Andrew\u2019s Day, during a great storm, the\ntwo \u201clesser towers\u201d of Worcester fell. There is no evidence that the\nNorman nave terminated in western towers; and Professor Willis has\nsuggested that these \u201clesser towers\u201d may have flanked the Norman choir\nof Worcester, like those still remaining at Canterbury. Their fall may\nhave injured the choir, and the ruin thus effected may have assisted the\ndetermination of the Bishop and Convent to expend the wealth which was\nstill pouring in before the shrine of St. Wulfstan, in the erection of a\nmore sumptuous church. At any rate, in 1224 the existing choir and\nLady-chapel were begun; Bishop William of Blois laying the foundations\nof the new work of the east front; (_novum opus frontis_[61]). In 1281\nthe sacrist of the monastery received from the executors of Nicholas of\nEly, Bishop of Winchester, a sum of sixty marks, the Bishop\u2019s legacy\ntoward the \u201crebuilding of the tower,\u201d--no doubt the central tower of the\ncathedral,--which was not, however, effected for nearly a century,\n(1374). In the meantime, the Norman nave was partly removed and rebuilt.\nBishop Cobham vaulted the north aisle of the nave between 1317 and 1321;\nand in 1377 Bishop Wakefield vaulted the nave itself.\n\nII. These dates will assist us in examining the existing cathedral. Of\nST. WULFSTAN\u2019s Church, begun as we have seen, in 1084, the crypt, which\nextends at present under the choir and aisles, is the only certain\nrelic. But portions of Norman work, belonging, according to Willis, to\nthe first three quarters of the twelfth century, remain in the nave, at\nthe western end of the choir, and in the walls of the great transept.\nThe two westernmost bays of the nave are transition Norman, and there is\nNorman work of the same period (the last quarter of the twelfth century)\nin the great transept.\n\nThe choir, retro-choir, and Lady-chapel, with the choir-aisles and the\neastern transepts, are _Early English_, and were commenced in 1224. The\nnave, with the exception of the two western bays, is of later date,\n_Decorated_, (1317-1327,) on the north side; and Decorated with a strong\ntendency to Perpendicular (_circ._ 1360?) on the south. The central\ntower is also Decorated, and was no doubt the tower for which the\nlegacy of Bishop Nicholas of Winchester (1281) was intended. The\ncloisters are Perpendicular.\n\nThe _Early English_ portion of the cathedral (the whole of the church\neast of the central tower) is by far the most interesting, and affords\nsome very good examples of design and sculpture. On the whole, however,\nalthough the entire building deserves, and will repay, careful\nexamination, it can hardly be said to rank among English churches of the\nfirst class. The Norman cathedral, which covered nearly the same ground\nas that which now exists, terminated eastward (as appears from the\ncrypt, \u00a7 XXII.) in a broad apse, with small apsidal chapels attached at\nthe sides. The ground-plan of the existing building forms a double or\npatriarchal cross[62], with a square eastern end. The whole north front\nof the cathedral is seen at once as the Close is entered from the\nHigh-street; but although the length (450 ft.) and general mass are\nimposing, the view is hardly picturesque [_Frontispiece_]. The transepts\ndo not project far enough to break the long line satisfactorily, and\nthe whole work of the exterior (including the central tower) is\nunusually plain. This view has, however, been greatly improved by the\nrecent (1865) lowering of the ground on the north side of the church\n(including St. Michael\u2019s churchyard) to the depth of at least four feet.\nNo good general point of view can be obtained on the south side of the\ncathedral.\n\nSince the year 1857 very extensive works, amounting in fact to a\nrebuilding of much of the eastern portion of the church, have been\ncarried on under the superintendence of Mr. A. E. Perkins, architect to\nthe Dean and Chapter. These will be pointed out as we proceed. It may be\nsaid here, however, that besides the great desecration and injury which\nthe building suffered from the troops of Essex in 1642, and again from\nCromwell\u2019s soldiers after the battle of Worcester in 1651, it underwent\nmuch unfortunate \u201crestoration\u201d during the eighteenth century. Much of\nthe work then done it was desirable to remove; and the condition of the\nstone in many parts of the cathedral was such as to render extensive\nrepair absolutely necessary[63]. The stone used by the Norman and Early\nEnglish builders was from the Higley quarries, near Bridgenorth; these\nquarries are in the sandstone; as are those at Holt, which were used by\nthe builders of the Perpendicular period. For the repairs and rebuilding\n(1857-1863) stone has been brought from Ombersley, near Droitwich.\n\nIII. The entrance in the west front of the cathedral is said to have\nbeen closed by Bishop WAKEFIELD, (1375-1395); who re-opened the original\nnorth entrance, which had been closed, and built the present _north\nporch_, through which we enter the cathedral. This is plain and of\nlittle interest. The details of the original composition, which had been\nmuch mutilated by injudicious repairs, have been carefully restored\nunder the direction of Mr. Perkins; and the lowering of the ground on\nthis side of the cathedral has permitted the removal of a flight of\nsteps, within the porch, which formerly descended to the level of the\nnave. The roof is groined.\n\nIV. The _nave_ (which has undergone, 1863-1865, a complete restoration,\nexternally and internally), is of nine bays, from the west front to the\ncentral tower. It covers the same ground as the original Norman nave,\nportions of which remain--at the north-east angle of the north aisle, (a\nshaft and capital); on the west side of the outer face of the north\ndoor, (a shaft and capital); and in the centre of the second piers from\nthe west, from both of which great Norman shafts project. There is also\na series of Norman arched recesses in the south aisle[64]. All these\nfragments are pure Norman, and belong to the first three quarters of the\neleventh century. The two western bays are transition Norman, of the\nlast quarter of the century, and remain in their original state.\n\nThe piers of the two western bays are recessed in three orders, and,\ntogether with the pointed arches that rest on them, have more Early\nEnglish feeling than Norman. The capitals of the shafts are of plain\nNorman character. The _triforium_ is very peculiar. A pointed arch (of\nwhich there are two in each bay) encloses three circular ones. Between\nand beyond these inner arches rise reeded shafts, from the capitals of\nwhich springs a zigzag moulding, repeating, in the tympana, the forms\nof the circular arches. Below and above the zigzag are placed knots of\ncurled leafage, giving a dotted appearance to the whole composition,\nwhich has neither the dignity of the earlier Norman nor the grace of the\nDecorated work east of it. The clerestory has three arches in each bay;\nthe central arch round, with the zigzag moulding, and much higher than\nthe pointed side arches. The window openings, at the back of the central\narch, are filled with Perpendicular tracery. \u201cIn the pier arches and\ntriforium arches a plain round molding is employed, which runs without a\nbase up the pier, and continuously over the arch, forming an external\norder or frame to it. A similar molding in front of this runs by the\nside of a triple group of vaulting-shafts up to the clerestory string,\nbut is there cut off by the later vaulting-shafts.... Continuous\nmoldings are in Norman work usually confined to the inner arches of\ndoors and to windows. But I have observed the molding just described, as\nframing a group of shafted pier arches, in several cases in the west of\nEngland--as at Gloucester, the north side aisle of the choir at\nLichfield, and at Bredon Church, near Worcester--the latter evidently\nthe work of the architect of the western compartments of the\ncathedral[65].\u201d The clustered vaulting-shafts terminate in capitals of\ntransitional character, at the base of the clerestory. The vaulting\nitself is of the same apparent character (Perpendicular) as that\neastward of these two bays; but Professor Willis has shewn that it must\nhave been erected before (though perhaps not much before) the vaulting\nof the rest of the nave[66].\n\nThe west end of the nave was entirely altered by Bishop WAKEFIELD,\n(1375-1395). He closed the western entrance; but the pointed arch, with\na circular arch on either side, which, until the late restoration, were\nseen on the wall below the window, dated only from the last century.\nTraces of Norman doors, however, were discovered by Mr. Perkins at the\nends of the aisles and in the central wall; proving that Bishop\nWakefield retained the original wall, and shewing us the extent of the\nNorman nave. The space above the arches was entirely filled by a large\ndebased window, the glass in which was inserted in 1792. This window has\nbeen happily replaced (1865) by an Early Decorated window of eight\nlights, of the same architectural character as the Decorated work on the\nnorth side of the nave, and equally enriched. (It is the gift of the\nHon. and Rev. John Fortescue, Canon of Worcester.) The Norman portal\nbeneath this window, the jambs of which were quite perfect, has been\nopened.\n\nBeyond the two western bays the nave is Decorated on the north side, and\nearly Perpendicular on the south, and the main arches rise much higher.\nThe two sides differ in the capitals and bases of their piers, in the\ncapitals of the vaulting-shafts, in the clerestory arches, and in the\nornamentation of the triforium. The north side, which is the earlier, is\nalso the richer.\n\nLeland asserts that Bishop COBHAM (1317-1327) vaulted the north aisle of\nthe nave. This fixes the date of the Decorated work on the north side.\nThe bases of the piers differ from those opposite, and the capitals of\nthe shafts are enriched with excellent leafage, much undercut. This\n\u201cruns continuously round the pier, being inflected around the shafts, so\nas to distinguish the groups without separating them, and with the\nrichest effect.\u201d At the angles of the exterior hood-mouldings are small\nheads of kings and bishops. The triforium has two pointed arches in each\nbay, each arch enclosing two smaller ones. The shafts which support\nthese arches have capitals of leafage, and the tympana in the heads of\nthe larger arches are filled with sculptured figures. These, before the\nlate restoration, were so greatly decayed as to be quite undecipherable.\nThey have been re-worked as carefully as possible, but in most instances\nthe original subject was completely uncertain. The clerestory consists\nof three pointed arches, with leafage on the capitals of the shafts, and\nat the angles of the outer mouldings. The windows at the back are\nPerpendicular insertions. Professor Willis has been the first to point\nout that the triforium and clerestory of the two bays adjoining the\ntransition Norman work on this side of the nave, differ from the rest,\nand are in fact Perpendicular, of the same character as the entire south\nside. \u201cWe may conclude, therefore, that the north side of the Norman\nnave was taken down first, and that when the portion in the Decorated\nstyle had been completed, a pause in the work or a change of architects\nhappened, and the triforium and clerestory of these bays were then\ncompleted in a different style[67].\u201d\n\nThe vaulting-shafts run upward between each bay in groups of three. The\nabacus from which the groining-ribs apparently spring, is partly a\ncontinuation of the stringcourse at the base of the clerestory, and is\ngracefully trefoiled.\n\nThe whole work on the north side of the nave is bolder and more\neffective than that on the _south_. We have no record of the\nconstruction of this side, but from its strong Perpendicular character\nit can hardly be earlier than 1360. The clustered pier-shafts have much\nsmaller capitals of leafage than those opposite, and the leafage does\nnot pass round continuously. The design of the triforium resembles that\non the north side; but at the junction of the two smaller arches is a\nbracket, once no doubt the support of a figure which rose against the\ntympanum of the larger arch. All traces of these figures, however, had\ndisappeared, and they have been replaced by modern sculpture, executed\nby BOULTON, under the direction of the architect. Small ancient figures\nremain at the sides and intersections of the larger arches.\n\nThe clerestory is formed by three triangular-headed arches, of which the\ncentre arch, much higher and wider than the other two, follows nearly\nthe lines of the groining rib. The window at the back of the passage is\nfilled with tracery of Decorated character. The triangular form, which\nis by no means usual, is that which prevails in the north transept of\nHereford, (see the Handbook for that Cathedral,) built at the end of the\nthirteenth century for the reception of the shrine of St. Thomas\nCantilupe.\n\nThe groined vaulting of the nave--the work of Bishop Wakefield in\n1377--has ridge and intermediate ribs, with bosses of foliage at the\nintersections. The nave, which was covered with whitewash by the\n\u201crestorers\u201d of the last century, has been thoroughly cleaned; and the\nrich foliage of its capitals is now properly displayed. The present\nflooring of the nave was laid down in 1748.\n\nOn the north side of the nave, in the fourth bay from the east, is the\nhigh tomb, with effigies, of SIR JOHN BEAUCHAMP, of Holt, in\nWorcestershire, (died 1388,) and his wife. The effigies, which are in\nalabaster, have been terribly defaced. The knight\u2019s armour is a good\nexample. The lady\u2019s head rests on a swan with expanded wings--the crest\nof the Beauchamps. The panels of the tomb itself are filled with shields\nof arms. Immediately opposite, on the south side of the nave, is the\ntomb, with effigies, of ROBERT WILDE (died 1608) and his wife. His body\nrests in this cathedral, but his immortal part--\n\n \u201cF\u0153lices rapuere anim\u00e6, heroesque beati,\n Illud ad \u00e6ternas, Elysiasque domos.\u201d\n\nThe sides of the tomb, divided into compartments by sun-flowers rising\nfrom vases, and the scroll-work at the lower end, deserve notice.\n\nOn the south side of the nave, toward the west, is the canopied tomb,\nwith effigy, of RICHARD EEDES, Dean of Worcester, (died 1608). The Dean\nis represented with moustache and beard, skull-cap, ruff, and gown open\nin front, with hanging sleeves. Opposite, on the north side, is the\ntomb, with effigy, of Bishop THORNBOROUGH, died 1641,--the latest\nrecumbent effigy of a bishop in the cathedral: he wears the rochet and\nchimere with full sleeves.\n\nV. The two western bays of the _south aisle_ of the nave are _transition\nNorman_, like the western bays of the nave. The vaulting is\nquadripartite. The rest of the aisle has late Decorated windows, filled\nwith a kind of flowing tracery, high in the wall, on account of the\ncloister which runs outside; and into which there are two plainly-arched\nentrances--the prior\u2019s door in the bay nearest the transept, and the\nmonks\u2019 door in the third bay from the west end. The vaulting of this\npart of the aisle is lierne.\n\nThe wall of this aisle is, however, that of the Norman nave, as is\nproved by a series of five Norman arched recesses, one opposite to each\nof the present pier-arches. \u201cTwo of these at the east end are filled up\nwith monumental arches of the period of the present south architecture\nof the nave. This is enough to shew that the semicircular arches existed\npreviously.... They were probably meant to receive the monumental arches\nof distinguished persons, in the same way as at Hereford[68].\u201d\n\nThe monuments in the south aisle are--in the second bay\nfrom the transept, the much mutilated effigy of an unknown\necclesiastic,--probably one of the priors of the monastery, represented\nas vested for the eucharistic office,--under a canopied recess. The\ndate, according to Mr. Bloxam, is late in the fourteenth or early in the\nfifteenth century. In the third bay, within a Decorated recess, is the\neffigy of Bishop PARRY, (1610-1616,) \u201cwearing the rochet and the\nchimere, the latter reaching a little below the knees;\u201d in the fourth is\na Perpendicular altar-tomb, with panelled front, of some unknown\npersonage; in the fifth is the tomb of THOMAS LITTLETON, Judge of the\nCourt of Common Pleas, died Aug. 23, 1481. The brass, which represented\nhim in his robes as Judge, was destroyed in the civil wars of the\nseventeenth century. This is the celebrated Judge whose treatise on land\ntenures was commented on by Sir Edward Coke in the reign of James I.,\nand has still, in Fuller\u2019s words, an \u201cauthentical reputation.\u201d Littleton\nwas born at Frankley in Worcestershire, and was in great favour with\nboth Henry VI. and Edward IV. The Lords Lyttelton, of Hagley, are\ndescended from this family. In the sixth bay is an altar-tomb in a\nrecess for Bishop FREKE, (1584-1591,) with inscriptions in Greek, Latin,\nand English. In the two last bays are mural monuments, both by BACON,\nfor SIR HENRY ELLIS, Colonel of the 23rd Regt., (Welsh Fusileers,) who\nfell at Waterloo; and for RICHARD SOLLY, Esq., (died 1804); neither of\nwhich deserve much notice. In the westernmost bay has been placed the\nmonument of Bishop GAUDEN, (died 1662,) the probable author of the\n_Icon Basilike_. His effigy represents him with long hair, moustache,\nand beard, wearing the rochet and chimere. This monument was formerly\nagainst the wall on the north side of the choir, which has been removed.\n(See \u00a7 VII.)\n\nThe two western bays of the _north aisle_ are transition Norman, like\nthose opposite; but the Decorated vaulting (plain quadripartite, with\nbosses) is carried throughout the aisle, and was the work of Bishop\nCobham between 1317 and 1321. The rest of the aisle, including the\nwindows, is Decorated. The west window contains some portions of ancient\nglass; but is chiefly filled with modern glass of the worst description.\nIn the first bay counting from the west is a monument by WESTMACOTT for\nthe EARL OF STRAFFORD, and the officers and men of the 29th\n(Worcestershire) Regiment, who fell in the Indian campaigns of 1845-6.\nUnlike most memorials of this class, it possesses a little religious\ncharacter. In the second bay is a monument for the wife of GODFREY\nGOLDSBOROUGH, Bishop of Gloucester, (died 1613). In the third bay is a\nmonument with small kneeling figures for the MOORE family, of Worcester;\ndate 1613.\n\nThe north porch opens from the fifth bay. From the eighth a small\nDecorated chapel, called the _Jesus chapel_, is entered; which was\nopened to the nave, as it now is, about 1750, when a new and singularly\nhideous font was placed in it. The Decorated window on the north side\nhas been filled with stained glass by WAILES, as a memorial for the wife\nof the Rev. CANON WOOD. The east window of the chapel has been closed.\nAgainst the walls are tablets for Bishop FLEETWOOD, (died 1683); for\nBishop BLANDFORD, (died 1675); and for Bishop BULLINGHAM, (died 1576).\nThe upper and lower portions only of the effigy appear, the intervening\nwall and inscription dividing them. (Similar monuments exist at\nLichfield and elsewhere.) \u201cThe dress is not very clearly developed, but\nit certainly does not appear to have consisted of the episcopal robes.\nPerhaps he was one interested in the vestiarian controversy of\n1564[69].\u201d This monument was removed from the choir wall. (See \u00a7 VII.)\n\nVI. The piers of the _central tower_ are Decorated, with small capitals\nof leafage, of the same date and character as the south side of the\nnave. It is certain, however, that a core of Norman masonry remains\nwithin them, since Norman work is visible on the choir side of the\neastern piers, (see \u00a7 VII.,) in the roof of the triforium of the choir,\nand at the south corner of the east end of the north triforium of the\nnave. The vaulting resembles that of the nave.\n\nThe _great transept_ has undergone much alteration. The walls, as high\nas the level of the clerestory, are Norman; and, as appeared when they\nwere stripped of their plaster, are built of \u201cuncoursed rubble work,\nroughly laid with wide joints of mortar[70].\u201d They may belong to the\nfirst Norman church; but after the fall of the great tower in 1175 many\nrepairs and changes were made, to which the Norman work now apparent\nevidently belongs. Further alterations were made in the thirteenth, and\nagain (perhaps by Bishop WAKEFIELD, died 1395) in the latter part of the\nfourteenth century. The transept, like the rest of the church, is narrow\n(32 feet) in proportion to its height (66 feet), and projects only 28\nfeet beyond the aisle wall. Like the transept at Gloucester, it is\nwithout aisles. The circular staircase-turrets which project into the\ntransept at the north-west and south-west angles are peculiar, and are\nfar more decided features than those at Gloucester (see the Handbook for\nthat Cathedral) in the same situations. These are Norman as high as the\nclerestory, where the change to Perpendicular is marked by a difference\nof masonry. The masonry of the Norman portion is unusually good, and\nshould be noticed. The scraping of the walls of these towers \u201cdisclosed\nthe fact that they are built of stones of two colours, the one a white\nor rather cream-coloured stone, the other a green stone. These are laid\nin bands at the lower part, not regularly; but above the doorway the\ncourses are for a short distance alternately white and green in\nhorizontal stripes, after the manner of the cathedrals of Pisa, Siena,\nand other Italian examples of the eleventh and twelfth centuries[71].\u201d\nThe transition Norman work at the west end of the nave, and the\nchapter-house, also display this particoloured masonry.\n\nIn the _south transept_, the south end has three divisions. The lowest\nis plain, and shews the Norman wall. In the second are two transition\nNorman window-arches, now closed. The capitals of the side shafts are of\nEarly English character, and the arches have a broad hollow zigzag\nmoulding. In the uppermost division is a fine three-light lancet window,\ndeeply splayed, and with a passage through the jambs. This has been\nfilled with stained glass, which can hardly be called good, by ROGERS,\nfrom designs by PREEDY, as a memorial of QUEEN ADELAIDE. The subject is\na tree of Jesse. On the east side of the transept the arch into the\nchoir-aisle is Decorated; and in the adjoining bay a very fine Norman\narch, long closed, opens to an eastern chapel. This archway was\nre-opened in 1862, and through it a very picturesque view is obtained of\nthe chapel beyond. The bays on this side of the transept are divided by\na group of transition Norman vaulting-shafts, which terminate at the\nlevel of the clerestory, and support later groining.\n\nThe east and west walls of this transept were altered in the\nPerpendicular period, in a manner which recalls the work in Gloucester\nCathedral, although the screen of tracery with which the Norman walls\nhave been overlaid is not so complete. On the east side this work begins\nin the triforium, the openings in which are formed by a series of narrow\npierced panels, with transoms and foliated headings. As at Gloucester,\nthe wall behind this screen-work is Norman, and in the course of\nrestoration here the remains of the ancient triforium were discovered,\n(1863). They are of transitional Norman character, much enriched. The\nclerestory above is entirely Perpendicular. A pierced parapet runs along\nat the base, and slender Perpendicular vaulting-shafts pass through both\nthe triforium and clerestory stages. The west wall has been overlaid\nmore completely with a Perpendicular screen-work, pierced for window\nopenings in all three stages. There is also a Perpendicular clerestory\nwindow above the arch of the nave-aisle. Remains of two arches of the\nNorman triforium have been found on this side of the transept. They are\nplainer than those opposite, but may possibly be of the same date. The\nvaulting of the transept is a plain lierne.\n\nOn the south side of this transept is a monument designed by ADAMS, and\nexecuted by NOLLEKENS, for Bishop JOHNSON, (1759-1774). The bust is\nfine. There is also a memorial of Bishop HURD, (1781-1808.)\n\nIn the east wall of the _north transept_ a Norman arch has been\ndiscovered during the late restorations, occupying the same position as\nthat in the transept opposite, and of the same date. It now remains\nopen, to the thickness of the outer wall. The vaulting-shafts here are\nEarly English, banded, with capitals of Early English foliage. On the\nnorth side was a modern Perpendicular window, which has been removed,\nand replaced by a new window of early Decorated character. The east and\nwest walls have been overlaid with Perpendicular work in the same manner\nas the opposite transept. The triforium panelling on the east side,\nwhich had been built up, has been re-opened and restored. The\nscreen-work on the west wall is only pierced for a window in the\nclerestory stage.\n\nIn this transept are monuments for--(north wall), Bishop STILLINGFLEET,\n(1689-1699,) \u201cjam tibi, quicumque h\u00e6c leges, nisi et Europ\u00e6 et literati\norbis hospes es, ipse per se notus;\u201d and (east wall), Bishop HOUGH,\n(1717-1743,) by ROUBILIAC. A full-length effigy of the Bishop reclines\non the top of a sepulchre, upheld by a figure of Religion. The\ninscription gives due praise to the \u201cunbounded charity, the courteous\naffability, and the engaging condescension\u201d of the Bishop,--the\n\u201cever-memorable President of Magdalen College, Oxford, who\nprovidentially for this nation opposed the rage of Popish superstition\nand tyranny.\u201d A small bas-relief below the effigy represents the\nPresident\u2019s expulsion from Magdalen. There is also a tablet for Dean\nHOOK, (died 1828,) brother of the more celebrated Theodore Hook.\n\nVII. A flight of steps, rendered necessary by the elevation of the\ncrypt, which extends eastward from this point, ascends to the\n_choir-screen_, between the two eastern piers of the tower; an atrocious\ncomposition of lath and plaster, erected in 1812, and shortly, no doubt,\nto be removed. Some of the small figures in the frieze were taken from\nmisereres in the choir, and will eventually be returned.\n\nPassing beyond the screen, we enter the most interesting portion of the\ncathedral. The whole building, east of the tower, is far richer and\nbetter in detail than any part of the nave. The convent, in all\nprobability, was receiving larger sums from the pilgrims to the shrine\nof St. Wulfstan during the thirteenth century, when the choir and the\nparts connected with it were built, than during the fourteenth, when the\nnave was erected. By that time the neighbouring churches of Hereford and\nGloucester had each their great shrine[72], which must have attracted\nmuch of the wealth that would otherwise have found its way into the\ntreasury of Worcester.\n\nBishop William of Blois is recorded as having \u201cbegun the new work of the\nfront\u201d in the year 1224. The plan of the new building involved a great\nextension of the cathedral eastward. Beyond the site of the crypt, the\nwork was carried \u201cto a length equal to double that of the Norman\npresbytery, (exclusive of the probable Lady-chapel of the latter,) and\nso adjusted as to place the central tower of the church exactly midway\nbetween the east and west extremities of the entire building[73].\u201d\nEastern transepts were also adopted. Professor Willis has been the first\nto shew the order in which, in all probability, this new work was\nerected. This is indicated by a difference in the moulding of the\nvaulting-ribs. \u201cThe transverse vault-ribs of the side aisles and centre\nof the work between the great tower and the small transepts (namely, the\npresent choir) have a hollow mold in their soffits; and this is also the\ncase\n\n[Illustration: PART OF CHOIR AND LADY-CHAPEL.]\n\nin those pier-arches of the work which have the dog-tooth. But the\ntransverse vault-ribs throughout the remainder of this work, namely, the\neastern transepts and Lady-chapel, have a projecting rib in their\nsoffit, corresponding to the moldings of their pier-arches[74].\u201d \u201cThe\nribbed soffit, in fact, is confined to the portion of Early English work\nwhich is founded upon the open ground of the cemetery, and was capable\nof being erected complete, without disturbing any more of the existing\nNorman presbytery than the circumscribing aisle and radiating chapels.\nThe hollow soffit, on the contrary, is used throughout the part of the\nEarly English work, which is based upon the walls of that portion of the\ncrypt which was allowed to remain. I conclude, therefore, that the\nribbed soffit-work was begun in 1224, and carried on without disabling\nthe Norman presbytery and the high altar; so that the services of the\nChurch continued in their original place, until the completion of this\nfirst portion of the work made it necessary to pull down the Norman\npresbytery, and erect the hollow soffit-work in its room, by which the\nEarly English structure was connected with the tower[75].\u201d\n\nThe _choir_, [Plate I.,] like all the cathedral eastward of the tower,\nhas been restored under the direction of Mr. Perkins, architect to the\nDean and Chapter. (A design has (1866) been supplied by Mr. G. G. Scott,\nfor the stalls and fittings of the choir, a reredos and a western\nscreen, to be of metal and wood combined. This, it is hoped, may soon\nbe carried into execution.) The choir consists of five bays, the\neasternmost of which, in a line with the eastern transepts, is\nconsiderably wider than the others. The destruction of the Norman choir\nwas not complete; a portion of its walls was allowed to remain; and in\nthe present triforium, which extends over the aisles, Norman buttresses\nexist, of the same character as those in the triforium of the two\nwestern bays of the nave. Except at the southern surface of the north\nwall of the choir, however, where it joins the tower, whatever Norman\nmasonry remained was entirely hidden by the rich Early English work of\nthe new choir. This has been compared to the Early English of Salisbury\nCathedral, begun in 1220, with which, no doubt, there is a certain\ngeneral resemblance. On the other hand, Lincoln Cathedral--probably the\nfirst great Early English church built in England--was far advanced at\nthe death of St. Hugh in 1200; and there are some peculiarities at\nWorcester--especially the ornamentation of the tympana in the triforium\narches, and the sculpture in the spandrils of the wall-arcades--which\nstrongly recall Lincoln. At any rate, Worcester Cathedral was one of the\nearliest churches in England built in the new style, which, there is\nmuch reason for believing, was invented by St. Hugh\u2019s architect at\nLincoln.\n\nThe design first seen in the transition Norman portion of each bay of\nthe nave--one arch below, two in the triforium, and three in the\nclerestory, (see \u00a7 IV.)--was followed in this Early English work, as it\nwas in all the later portions of the cathedral. The octangular piers of\nthe choir have large shafts of Purbeck marble, alternating with white\nstone; the Purbeck shafts ringed half way up. The shafts have foliaged\ncapitals; and the dog-tooth ornament is used (as at Salisbury) in the\nmouldings of the main arches. The triforium in each bay consists of two\nlarge arches, each enclosing two smaller, divided by a slender shaft,\nwith a plain capital of Purbeck. The groups of shafts between and at the\nsides of the larger arches have capitals of leafage worked in oolite,\nwith Purbeck above. In the spandrils or tympana above the small central\nshafts are sculptured figures. At the back of the outer triforium arches\nis a wall, covered by an arcade with semi-detached shafts, so arranged\nthat the crowns of the arches are nearly on a level with the capitals of\nthe shafts in the main arcade. A very rich and intricate effect is thus\nproduced, which may be compared with that of the double arcades in the\nchoir-aisles of Lincoln Cathedral,--in all probability part of St.\nHugh\u2019s work. The triforium passage itself, which extends over the\naisles, is shut out, by this arcaded wall, from the choir, which was no\ndoubt rendered much warmer by this arrangement. The clerestory has in\neach bay three sharply-pointed arches; that in the centre being much\nhigher than the two others, with slender shafts and capitals of Purbeck\nmarble. The windows at the back, which had been filled with mean\nPerpendicular tracery, have been restored to their original Early\nEnglish condition. A single vaulting-shaft of Purbeck rests on a\ncorbelled head at the intersection of the main arches, and terminates\nin a capital of leafage at the base of the triforium. A second shaft\nrises through the triforium stage, and terminates in a small capital at\nthe base of the clerestory. The vaulting itself is quadripartite, with\ncarved bosses.\n\nThe restoration of the choir, under Mr. Perkins, was begun in 1859. Much\nof the stone-work was in so ruinous a condition that it was necessary to\nreplace it with new; but although the building has thus lost something\nof its interest in the eyes of arch\u00e6ologists, it should here be said\nthat the repairs have been made with good judgment, and that no\nunnecessary destruction of ancient work has taken place. Wherever it was\npossible the old stone-work has been carefully cleaned, and is otherwise\nuntouched. This is the case with nearly all the leafage of the capitals,\nwhich is unusually good and varied. The greater part of the figures in\nthe tympana of the triforium arches, however, were unfortunately\nsculptured in the local stone, and had crumbled away so completely,\npartly from the effects of time and partly perhaps before the matchlocks\nof Cromwell\u2019s troopers, that their subjects were hardly to be\ndeciphered. They have been restored, in accordance, as far as could be\nascertained, with the original design, by Boulton of Worcester, under\nthe direction of Mr. Perkins.\n\nVIII. Evidences remain in the choir of earlier alterations and\nadditions. The piers adjoining the north-east transept had been thrown\ngreatly out of the perpendicular by the thrust of the arches. These\npiers have now been reconstructed with the old materials in a sound\nmanner; and a wall pierced with quatrefoils, which had been built for\ntheir support, between the two easternmost piers on the north side, has\nbeen removed. The second pier from the organ, on the same side, also\nappears to have shewn signs of weakness, and has been re-cased and\nenlarged in Jacobean Gothic, with a curious base of masonry in the shape\nof a tulip.\n\nThe _stone pulpit_, on the north side of the choir, was removed from the\nwest end of the nave about the middle of last century. It is late\nPerpendicular work, with the emblems of the Evangelists placed on\ntruncated shafts in the panels. The sculpture at the back of the pulpit\napparently represents the Heavenly Jerusalem, with the Tree of Life in\nthe centre. The ancient stalls were partly destroyed by the Puritan\nsoldiery, the seats alone remaining. The present canopies date from the\nreign of Charles II., but are of no great interest.\n\nIt is proposed to replace the present (modern) reredos by one of better\ndesign and character; and to erect a low stone screen, allowing a view\ninto the transept beyond it, between the piers on the north side of the\naltar.\n\nIn December, 1861, a leaden coffin, moulded to the shape of a body,\nwhich had been enclosed in an outer coffin of wood, was discovered\nbeneath the flooring at the east end of the choir. It no doubt contained\nthe embalmed body of WILLIAM, fourth MARQUIS and second DUKE OF\nHAMILTON, who was mortally wounded at the battle of Worcester in 1651,\nand was interred here,--since his body was not allowed to be conveyed to\nScotland.\n\nIX. The monuments of especial interest in the choir, are the tomb with\neffigy of King John and the chantry of Prince Arthur.\n\nThe tomb of KING JOHN [_Title-page_] stands in the centre of the second\nbay from the east, immediately before the step ascending to the\nsanctuary. In 1797 a coffin with the remains of the King, was found\nbelow the pavement. It is expressly said that King John was buried\nbetween the shrines of SS. Oswald and Wulfstan, (see Pt. II. for short\nnotices of both saints,) and that a prophecy of Merlin (who is\nconstantly mentioned by the chroniclers of this period) was thereby\nfulfilled:--\u201cEt inter sanctos collocabitur.\u201d The King was buried, it\nmust be remembered, in the Norman presbytery, the apse of which\nterminated nearly in a line with the third piers (counting from the\neast) of the existing choir. On the reconstruction of the choir and\npresbytery by the Early English builders, the altar was removed to\nnearly its present position, and the King\u2019s coffin and tomb were also\ncarried eastward, so as to occupy the same position with respect to the\nhigh altar and the shrines as they had done in the Norman Church. In\nboth the Norman and the Early English presbyteries the shrines of the\ntwo saints \u201cwere deposited in front of the high altar, in the same\nmanner as St. Dunstan and St. Elfege in the cathedral of\nCanterbury[76].\u201d In either case the King might be said to have been laid\n\u201cbetween\u201d them. King John died at Newark, October 19, 1216, commending\nhis body and soul to God, and to St. Wulfstan, the last great English\nsaint who had been canonized. His body, arrayed in royal apparel, was\naccordingly conveyed to Worcester, where it was interred by the Bishop,\nSilvester of Evesham[77].\n\nThe high tomb on which the King\u2019s effigy rests is a work of the\nsixteenth century, and was probably constructed when Prince Arthur\u2019s\nchantry was erected[78]. \u201cThe sides of the tomb are divided into three\nsquare compartments by panelled buttresses; each compartment contains a\nshield, bearing the royal arms, within a quatrefoil richly cusped; the\nspandrels are also foliated and cusped. Though of no unusual design it\nhas a rich effect, and the base mouldings are numerous[79].\u201d On this\ntomb rests the effigy of King John, the earliest effigy of an English\nmonarch remaining in this country. It was no doubt originally the cover\nof the stone coffin in which the King\u2019s remains were discovered in 1797.\nThe effigy was evidently sculptured soon after the interment of the\nKing; and represents him in the regal habiliments. \u201cFirst, the tunic,\nyellow, or of cloth of gold, reaching nearly to the ancles, with\nclose-fitting sleeves, little of which is apparent. Over the tunic is\nworn the dalmatic, or outer robe, of a crimson colour, with wide\nsleeves, edged with a gold and jewelled border: this is girt about the\nwaist by a girdle, and buckled in front; the pendent end of the girdle,\nwhich is jewelled, falling down to the skirt of the dalmatic. At the\nback is worn the mantle; but little of this is visible. On the feet are\nsandals, to the heels of which are affixed spurs. On the hands are\ngloves, jewelled at the back; the right hand has held a sceptre, the\nlower portion of which only is left; the left hand grasps the hilt of\nthe sword. On the head is worn the crown; the face has both the\nmoustache and beard, and the hair is long. On either side of the head is\nthe figure of a bishop holding a thurible or censer, perhaps intended to\nrepresent St. Oswald and St. Wulfstan. Roger de Hoveden, in his Annals,\ntreating of the coronation of Richard I., enumerates the regal\nvestments, and how worn, and his description may be applied to this\neffigy. In the crown, in the mitres of the bishops, and on different\nportions of the robes appear cavities for stones, paste, or glass,\nimitative of jewels. The feet of the effigy rest against a lion, in\nwhose jaws the point of the sword is inserted[80].\u201d\n\nThe coffin in which the King\u2019s remains were discovered in 1797 (at the\nbeginning of some repairs in the cathedral) was found at the bottom of\nthe tomb, level with the pavement. It was cut out of Higley stone, and\nonly covered with two elm boards. \u201cPart of the royal apparel was firm in\ntexture, but the colour was gone; part of the sword and leather sheath\nwere lying on the left side of the body, but much mouldered; the boots\non the feet were more perfect; part of one of the robes appeared to have\nbeen embroidered: the head was covered with a close-fitting scull-cap,\nwhich appeared to have been buckled under the chin. A quantity of a sort\nof white paste, which lay in lumps, was, I think, the salt of which\nMatthew Paris speaks, used for preserving the body for a time. The tomb\nwas shortly after closed. It is hardly to be doubted that the body of\nthe King had been arrayed in the same apparel as that exhibited on his\neffigy[81].\u201d\n\nX. PRINCE ARTHUR, the eldest son of Henry VII., born at Winchester in\n1486, died at Ludlow Castle April 2, 1502, and was brought to this\ncathedral for interment. His chantry fills the whole bay on the south\nside of the altar, and is a very rich example of late and elaborate\nGothic. [Plate II.] The sides are formed of open and closed panel-work,\nenriched with figures and heraldic devices, among which occur the rose,\nfetter-lock, and portcullis. The small figures, however, are rudely\nexecuted, and have been greatly injured. Within, the chantry has a flat\ngroined roof, with curious flying supports. In the central panel are the\narms of the Prince, with stags as supporters. At the west end is a small\nseated figure of Henry VII. The east wall is covered by a rich mass of\ntabernacle-work, with niches. In the central niche is a small figure of\nthe Saviour on the Cross, with censing angels at the head. On either\nside are figures of saints, one of which is apparently St. George. The\nwhole has been terribly shattered, but the details deserve attention. In\nthe centre of the chantry is the high tomb of the Prince, with shields\nand armorial bearings in the side panels. There is no effigy.\n\nXI. Passing out of the choir we ascend from the transept into the _south\nchoir-aisle_ by a flight of five steps, rendered necessary by the crypt\nbelow. The aisle is of the same date and character as the choir, and an\nEarly English chapel, which, has been restored in the same manner as the\nchoir, opens from the two westernmost bays. The view into this chapel\nfrom the south transept has already (\u00a7 VII.) been noticed. From within\nthe chapel the fine and lofty Norman arch, receding in three orders,\nwhich opens to the\n\n[Illustration: CHANTRY OF PRINCE ARTHUR.]\n\ntransept, is well seen. It is of late Norman character. A doorway in the\nsouth wall, close to this arch, now opens to the apartments formerly\nused as treasuries, over the narrow \u2018slype\u2019 or passage between the great\nsouth transept and the chapter-house.\n\nXII. A descent of five steps, indicating the termination of the crypt,\nwhich extends only beneath the choir and its aisles, leads into the\n_south-east transept_. The bay on the north side is filled by the screen\nof Prince Arthur\u2019s Chapel. The transept itself is Early English, of the\nsame general character as the choir. The northern bay is precisely\nsimilar to the choir in the arrangement and design of its lower arches\n(opening to the aisles east and west), the triforium, and clerestory.\nThe southern bay has its three sides pierced with two tiers of triple\nlancet windows set back in the wall, with a passage through the jambs.\nThe inner arches are supported by clustered shafts of Purbeck marble,\nringed. An arcade, with sculptures in the spandrils, runs below the\nwindows. The vaulting is quadripartite, with bosses of leafage, of\nunusual beauty, at the intersections.\n\nThe south, east, and west walls, with the windows of this transept, were\nin so ruinous a condition before the late restoration, that it was found\nnecessary to take it entirely down. Every stone was marked, and it has\nbeen rebuilt precisely as before. The sculptures in the spandrils of the\narcade were also much shattered, and those on the east side are in\neffect modern works by Boulton of Worcester. They are, however, direct\nreproductions of the old ones, as far as they could be deciphered. It\nhas been suggested, and apparently with truth, although the arrangement\nis by no means clear, that the entire series was intended to represent\nthe life present, and that to come. Beginning at the north-west angle,\nthe subjects are--A bishop giving his benediction; knights fighting with\nlions and centaurs, (the world and its temptations); St. Michael\nweighing souls; demons torturing souls over flames, (purgatory); the\nmouth of hell--demons drawing in souls. North side--Two figures carrying\na body, (the burial of Adam?); the expulsion from Paradise; an angel\ndismissing souls to punishment(?). (From this point the figures look in\nthe opposite direction.) The Resurrection; the dead breaking their\ncoffin-lids; an angel sounding a trumpet; an angel bearing the cross;\nthe Saviour in judgment. East side--An angel with a trumpet; a seraph;\nan angel with a lute; the coronation of the just(?); St. Gabriel with a\nlily; St. Michael with the dragon; an angel bearing a crown.\n\nThe sculptures may be compared, for both design and execution, with\nthose on the west front of Wells Cathedral, which are nearly of the same\ndate. The imagery used here is not of so refined or dignified an order\nas that at Wells, but the whole work deserves careful attention.\n\nThere is a piscina in the south wall, and aumbries remain in the walls\neast and west.\n\nXIII. Against the south wall of this transept, and connected with the\narcade in a remarkable manner, is the effigy of a knight, on a raised\ntomb of comparatively recent date. The effigy is that of a knight of the\nHARCOURT family, and belongs to the early part of the fourteenth\ncentury. The armour is of ringed mail, with the exception of the poleyns\nat the knees, which are of plate. The shield has the arms of\nHarcourt--Gules, two bars or. The small brass plate below, with the\ninscription \u201cIci gist sur Guilliamme de Harcourt,\u201d is not coeval with\nthe effigy, which is slightly raised on the left side.\n\nIn the centre of the transept is a high tomb, of good character, from\nwhich the brasses had been removed, for SIR GRYFFYTH RYCE, (died 1523).\nThe ancient inscription remains; and brasses by HARDMAN have taken the\nplaces of the originals.\n\nInclosed within the screen-work of Prince Arthur\u2019s chantry are two high\ntombs, with effigies, which deserve especial attention. They are both\napparently of the same date, (early in the fourteenth century,) and have\nbeen assigned, the westernmost to Bishop GIFFARD, (died 1302,) and the\neastern to AUDELA, wife of JOHN DE WARREN. The fronts of the tombs,\nwhich are of Purbeck, have quatrefoiled compartments, in which are\nsculptures, now much mutilated. Bishop GIFFARD\u2019S effigy \u201crepresents the\nchin close shaven. The mitre is ornamented with quatrefoiled and other\nconcavities, in which stones, glass, or paste have been set, to\nrepresent jewels.\u201d The square apparel of the amice in front of the\nbreast, the collar, and the episcopal boots, seem also to have been set\nwith stones. \u201cThe folds of the chasuble are well and tastefully\narranged[82].\u201d\n\nThe effigy of AUDELA DE WARREN, \u201cwhich is beautifully executed,\nrepresents her in the veiled headdress, and the wimple or gorget, ...\nthe latter perhaps a sign of widowhood, leaving but a small portion of\nthe face visible. The veil is very tastefully disposed.... Over the gown\nis worn a mantle, on the left side of which is a lozenge-shaped fermail,\nto fasten the mantle in front, in a somewhat unusual fashion. The left\narm is gone; the right arm reclines on the breast, and in the hand is\nheld a string of prayer-beads, or, as they were anciently called, a pair\nof paternosters, with larger ones at intervals; an early and singular\ninstance of their being thus represented, the beads being gracefully\ndisposed, and not hanging down formally. The feet rest against a whelp.\nThe admirable manner in which this effigy is treated is worthy of all\npraise. The mantle and gown were formerly covered with painted shields,\nrepresenting the arms of Warren, Checky, argent and sable, and those of\nBlanchminster, Argent, fretty gules[83].\u201d Audela was the daughter and\nheiress of Griffin de Blanchminster.\n\nXIV. Immediately beyond the transept a good general view occurs of the\n_retro-choir_ and Lady-chapel. The aisles extend to the end of the\nretro-choir, which is three bays in depth. The Lady-chapel forms an\nadditional eastern bay. All this part of the cathedral is of the same\ngeneral design as the choir; but, as a result of the lower level, the\nmain arches are loftier than those of the choir, and a much finer effect\nis consequently produced. Together with the eastern transepts, this part\nof the church was, as has been already shewn, constructed before the\nwestern end of the choir; and besides the difference of mouldings, it is\ndistinguished by the rich wall-arcade which runs round below the\nwindows. Bishop GIFFARD (1268-1302) is said to have ornamented the\ncolumns \u201cof the east part of the church\u201d with brass rings, (which still\nremain, occupying the usual place of stone bands in Early English\nshafts,) but the main work was probably completed long before his\naccession. The brass rings occur on the intermediate piers throughout\nchoir, presbytery, and Lady-chapel. Similar rings occur in Westminster\nAbbey, (in that portion of the nave which contains the choir stalls,)\nwhere they are probably of the same date as those at Worcester.\nProfessor Willis has shewn that the shafts in this cathedral were\noriginally fixed to the piers by iron cramps, such as may still be seen\nin the church at Pershore; and that the brass rings were additions for\ncovering the joint[84].\n\nThe dog-tooth moulding does not occur in the arches of the retro-choir,\nand there are some slight differences between the foliage of the\ncapitals in this part of the cathedral and of those in the choir. The\nrestoration has included this part of the church, and the sculptures in\nthe spandrils of the triforium (which were little more than shapeless\nmasses of stone) have been restored by Boulton, under the direction of\nthe architect.\n\nThe windows in the aisles are triple lancets, at the back of inner\narches, supported by slender shafts of Purbeck marble. The dilapidated\nPerpendicular tracery with which the lights were filled has been\nremoved, leaving the windows in their original state. Under the windows\nruns a wall-arcade resembling that already described in the transept,\nwith trefoiled arches, and sculptures in the spandrils. Many of these\nhave been restored, but all deserve careful notice. The subjects\nare--masses of foliage; knights fighting with monsters; mystic animals,\nsuch as the basilisk and cockatrice, and others described in early\nbestiaries. In the north aisle is a bishop offering a church, and in the\nsouth the Crucifixion. Nothing like a definite arrangement can be traced\nthroughout the series. The vaulting of both aisles is quadripartite,\nwith small bosses.\n\nThe east window of the north aisle has been filled with very good\nstained glass by HARDMAN, in memory of the late Hon. and Rev. Canon\nCOCKS. That in the south aisle is a memorial of the Rev. ALLEN WHEELER,\nB.D.\n\nThe _eastern bay_, in which stood the altar of the Lady-chapel, was\ndisfigured by a large debased window, inserted early in the present\ncentury; and was, before the restorations, in a dangerous condition. It\nwas found necessary to rebuild the east wall entirely; and two tiers of\nlancet lights, five in each tier, have been inserted, in strict keeping\nwith the architecture of all this part of the cathedral. Two lancets,\none above another, are placed in the north and south walls. A very\nbeautiful wall-arcade, of the same character as that in the aisles and\ntransepts, but more enriched, runs round below the windows. This is\nentirely new, and the very good sculptures in the spandrils were\nexecuted, under direction, by BOULTON of Worcester. The subjects at the\neast end are--Isaiah; Abraham and Isaac; the selling of Joseph; the\nbrazen serpent; Jonah; and Jeremiah. Foliage and grotesques, copied from\nthe older spandrils, are repeated at the sides. The eastern lancets have\nbeen filled with stained glass by HARDMAN, given to the cathedral by the\ncitizens of Worcester. In the central lower light is the Crucifixion;\nabove, the Ascension. A series of medallions, representing the principal\nevents in the life of our Lord, fill the remaining lancets. The glass is\nvery good, though perhaps a little thin in quality. The spandrils above\nthe lights in both tiers have been filled with sculpture by BOULTON;\nchiefly figures of angels.\n\nXV. On the north side of the chapel is a small mural slab, with flowers\nat the sides and an urn above, for ANNE, wife of IZAAC WALTON, who no\ndoubt wrote the inscription, which is as follows:--\u201cEx terris ... M.S.\nHere lyeth buried so much as could die of Anne, the wife of Isaac\nWalton, who was a woman of remarkable prudence, and of the Primitive\nPiety. Her great and generall knowledge being adorned with such true\nhumility, and blest with so much Christian meeknesse as made her worthy\nof a more memorable monument. She died (alas that she is dead!) the 17th\nof April, 1662, aged 52. Study to be like her.\u201d The wife thus\ncommemorated was the sister of Bishop Ken. Walton himself survived until\n1683, and was interred in Winchester Cathedral.\n\nXVI. In the arcade of the south aisle are monuments for JOHN BANKS\nJENKINSON, Bishop of St. David\u2019s, who died at Malvern in 1840; and for\nPrebendary DAVISON, Fellow of Oriel, who died in 1834, the author of a\nwell-known work on Prophecy. On the floor of this aisle is the recumbent\neffigy of an _unknown lady_, of the fourteenth century. The head is\ncovered with a veil. \u201cThe folds of the gown are disposed with great\nbreadth, taste, and skill.... The feet rest against a whelp or dog. This\neffigy is sculptured in high relief out of a slab somewhat\ncoffin-shaped, and is one of the most beautiful medi\u00e6val monumental\nrelics in the cathedral. It is indeed well worthy of artistic\nstudy[85].\u201d This effigy is not in its original position. The much\nmutilated figure near it, also of the fourteenth century, was found\nrecently at the foot of the steps of the south-east transept.\n\nAt the back of the choir-screen, to which place it was removed within\nthe last century, is a high tomb with an effigy, which probably\nrepresents the last Abbot of EVESHAM, Philip Ballard de Hawford, who\ndied between 1550 and 1558. The tomb is of earlier date. The Abbot, who\nwears the _mitra preciosa_, is fully vested. The pastoral staff, placed\non the left side, is covered with the veil. The effigy is of alabaster.\n\nOn the floor, and immediately in front of the easternmost bay which\ncontained the altar of the Lady-chapel, are three episcopal effigies,\ntwo of which are of much interest. The most northernly, which according\nto Mr. Bloxam is the earliest episcopal effigy in the cathedral, is\nassigned by him to Bishop WILLIAM OF BLOIS, (died 1236,) who laid the\nfoundation of this part of the church. \u201cThe effigy is sculptured in low\nrelief, on a coffin-shaped slab, and was probably set originally on the\nstone coffin which contained the remains of the Bishop.... On the head\nis the low mitre; about the neck is seen the amice. In front of the\nbreast, on the chasuble, is a lozenge-shaped ornament like a morse, in\nwhich stones, glass, or paste have been inserted.\u201d Under the chasuble\nappears the alb, above which one of the fringed extremities of the stole\nis visible. The maniple hangs on the left arm. The pastoral staff\ncrosses the body diagonally, from the left shoulder to the right foot.\nOn each side of the head is Early English foliage. The southernmost\neffigy is assigned by Mr. Bloxam to Bishop WALTER DE CANTILUPE, who died\nFeb. 12, 1266. It is sculptured in Purbeck marble, and represents the\nBishop with a moustache and beard, wearing the low mitre, the alb, the\nstole, the dalmatic, and the chasuble. The amice is round the neck. \u201cI\nbelieve,\u201d writes Mr. Bloxam, \u201cthis effigy to have been originally placed\nas the lid to and on the stone coffin of Bishop Walter de Cantilupe, and\nto have been sculptured and prepared during the lifetime of that\nbishop. Great care has evidently been taken in its execution, and as a\nspecimen of the monumental sculpture of the middle of the thirteenth\ncentury it is not without considerable merit[86].\u201d A coffin, containing\nthe remains of a bishop in his episcopal vestments, in all probability\nWalter de Cantilupe, was found in December, 1861, under the wall on the\nnorth side of the choir, near the east end. On measuring this coffin,\nand comparing it with the effigy described above, they were found to\ncorrespond exactly. The central effigy, which is much mutilated, is\neither that of Bishop BRIAN (died 1361) or Bishop LYNN (died 1373).\n\nIn the central bay of the _north_ aisle is the effigy of an _unknown\nlady_, of the thirteenth century, and the earliest female effigy in the\ncathedral. It \u201cis not of much merit as a work of art, but if the lady is\nhere represented of the natural size, she must have been 6 ft. 3 in. in\nheight. I think, however, from the examination of not a few examples,\nthat many early sepulchral effigies were greatly exaggerated as to\nsize[87].\u201d In the adjoining bay is the effigy (also 6 ft. 3 in. in\nheight) of an unknown _knight_, temp. Henry III. He wears mailed armour,\nwith the long surcoat over it.\n\nXVII. The _north-eastern transept_ precisely resembles that opposite.\nThe windows have been rebuilt, and restored where necessary, but without\nany alteration of the original design. The sculptures in the\nwall-arcade are curious and interesting, but no principle of\narrangement is evident.\n\nOn a high tomb in the centre of the transept is a full-length figure, by\nCHANTREY, of CHARLOTTE ELIZABETH, wife of the Rev. WILLIAM DIGBY, who\ndied in 1820. The sculpture is fine, but the design is scarcely\nappropriate, and suffers infinitely when compared with the repose and\ndignity of the earlier effigies in this cathedral.\n\nAgainst the south wall of the transept, between it and the choir, under\na Decorated arch, is an effigy which has been ascribed to Bishop COBHAM,\n(died 1337). \u201cThe head, which is mitred, reposes on a square double\ncushion, supported by much mutilated figures of angels. The vestments,\nconsisting of the chasuble, dalmatic, tunic, and alb, are not well\ndefined[88].\u201d Below this, \u201con a high tomb of the seventeenth century,\nand under a pointed arch of the fourteenth century,\u201d is an effigy\nassigned to Bishop WULSTAN BRANSFORD, died 1349. He wears the chasuble,\nthe dalmatic, and the alb. \u201cThe chasuble is enriched with the orfrey, or\nsuper-humerale, an ornament not unlike the archiepiscopal pall, hanging\ndown in front, and fringed at the lower extremity[89].\u201d\n\nXVIII. The _north choir-aisle_, of the same general character as that\nopposite, has also been restored. The beauty of the capitals and bosses\nof foliage is here especially noticeable. In the last bay toward the\nwest, on the west side of the window, and high in the wall, is a small\noriel window, of Perpendicular date, formerly communicating with the\nsacrist\u2019s lodgings. There is now no access whatever to it; but Norman\narches in the wall (evident from without) indicate the existence of a\nsacrist\u2019s chamber, and probably of a window afterwards replaced by that\nnow existing, before the rebuilding of the choir in the thirteenth\ncentury. From the window the position of the great shrines at the head\nof the choir was commanded, and it perhaps served as a watching-chamber.\n\nIn this aisle (removed from the south transept) is the monument of\nBishop MADDOX, (1743-1759,) who had \u201can exact knowledge of the\nconstitution of this national Church.\u201d\n\nXIX. In the easternmost bay of the south aisle of the nave a door (the\nPrior\u2019s entrance) opens to the _cloisters_. These are of Perpendicular\ndate, but their construction has not been recorded. They are (1866)\nundergoing a complete restoration, externally and internally; and the\ndebased stone-work, inserted in the windows in 1762, has been removed.\nThe exterior was so dilapidated that an entire re-casing was necessary;\nbut the ancient details have been most carefully decyphered and\nrestored. Although very perfect, however, the cloisters are of no great\ninterest or beauty. The arrangement of the vaulting-shafts on the piers\nbetween the windows should be noticed, as well as the flowing tracery on\nthe sides of the arches. The use of the squared openings in the piers,\non three sides of the cloisters, is quite uncertain, and Professor\nWillis has suggested that it may have been a mere caprice of the\nbuilder[90]. The vaulting of the cloisters is lierne, with bosses of\nfoliage. In the west walk the ancient lavatory remains.\n\nIn the north walk is the well-known sepulchral slab, with the single\nword _Miserrimus_. This \u201cmost wretched one\u201d was the Rev. THOMAS MORRIS,\nMinor Canon of Worcester, and Vicar of Claines, about two miles north of\nthe city. At the Revolution he refused to take the oaths to William\nIII., and consequently lost his preferments. He was supported by the\nricher Nonjurors, and in allusion to his destitute condition ordered\nthis single word to be engraved on his tomb-stone. The inscription thus\nreally intimates a very different feeling from that suggested in\nWordsworth\u2019s sonnet:--\n\n \u201c ... Himself alone\n Could thus have dared the grave to agitate,\n And claim, among the dead, this awful crown.\n Nor doubt that he marked also for his own,\n Close to these cloistral steps a burial place,\n That every foot might fall with heavier tread,\n Trampling upon his vileness. Stranger, pass\n Softly!--To save the contrite, Jesus bled.\u201d\n\nXX. Although the cloisters are not in themselves of any unusual\ninterest, they afford one of the best illustrations remaining in England\nof the manner in which the chief monastic buildings were grouped about\nthem. On the _east_ side is a passage formerly leading to the prior\u2019s\nhouse, and beyond it the chapter-house. On the _south_ side is the\nrefectory, now used as a school-room. On the _west_ side, close to the\nlavatory in the wall, is the entrance to the _dormitory_, which has\nitself been destroyed; and beyond again is a narrow passage (in which\nare staircases communicating with the triforium of the nave, and with\nthe upper part of the dormitory) by which the west front of the church\nwas approached from the cloisters.\n\nThe _slype_, or arched passage in the east walk, is Norman, (with some\ndetails, on the north side, of very early character,) and separates the\nchapter-house from the south wall of the great transept. Between the\nentrance to this passage and the chapter-house are two recesses in the\nwall, which may be compared with those in a similar position at Norwich;\n(see the Handbook for that Cathedral). Their original use is unknown.\n\nThe _chapter-house_ [Plate III.] is circular within, (as it was without\nuntil the Perpendicular casing was added,) but is divided into ten bays\nby vaulting-ribs which spring from a central column, and from shafts at\nthe sides. Without, the building is decagonal, with a buttress between\neach bay. The lower part of the chapter-house, the central column, and\nthe vaulting, are transition Norman, of nearly the same date as the two\nwestern bays of the nave. Early in the sixteenth century, however, a\nPerpendicular window was inserted in the upper part of each bay, and the\nexterior of the building was entirely cased with Perpendicular masonry.\nThe doorway\n\n[Illustration: THE CHAPTER-HOUSE.]\n\nopening from the cloisters is Perpendicular. A plain circular arcade,\nslightly recessed, runs round the interior, above a stone bench. A\nsecond arcade, of interlacing arches, covers the upper part of the wall,\nand is surmounted by a stringcourse with the billet-moulding, the whole\nbeing in alternate courses of grey and white stone. Above this are the\nPerpendicular windows. The chapter-house has shared in the late\nrestoration.\n\nXXI. At the end of the east walk of the cloisters is a passage under the\nrefectory, to the Close beyond. The _refectory_ (120 ft. long) extends\nthe whole length of the south walk. There is an entrance to it near the\nsouth-west end. The lower part, or crypt, is early Norman; the room\nabove, a long parallelogram, is Decorated, of the reign of Edward III.\nIt is now used as the school-room of the \u201cKing\u2019s school,\u201d founded by\nHenry VIII. after the dissolution of the priory.\n\nIn the west walk is the lavatory (Perpendicular), already mentioned, and\nthe entrance (Perpendicular) to the _dormitory_; this, like the\nrefectory, was a long parallelogram. The foundations of the walls have\nbeen traced, and portions of a row of columns (Perpendicular) which ran\ndown the centre of the undercroft.\n\nAt the north-west angle of the cloister is the monks entrance to the\ncathedral. The cloister terminates nearly in a line with the third bay\nof the nave. Parallel with the last two, or transition Norman bays, is a\nnarrow arched and vaulted passage, also transition Norman, of very good\ncharacter, with a doorway of the same date at the western end. On the\nsouth side of this passage there is a staircase which led to the\ndormitory, and at the north-west angle one which leads to the triforium\nof the south aisle of the nave.\n\nBeyond this passage a view is obtained of the very plain _west front_,\nwith its Norman portals and modern Decorated window.\n\nXXII. On the _north side_ of the cathedral, between the north porch and\nthe west front, stood the \u201cCarnerie,\u201d or charnel-house chapel, built by\nBishop William de Blois in the thirteenth century, and demolished in\n1677. The crypt is still remaining, although no trace of it is visible\nabove ground. The two transition Norman bays on this side had apparently\nshewn signs of weakness in the Perpendicular period, when the existing\nflying buttresses were erected. A third occurs between the two\ntransepts, and close beyond it is the entrance to the _crypt_. [Plate\nIV.]\n\nThis is by no means the least interesting portion of the cathedral,\nsince it is unquestionably the work of WULFSTAN, and the only part of\nthe building which can be assigned to him. In 1084 Wulfstan began the\nrebuilding of the monastery, and in 1094 he held a synod in the crypt of\nthe cathedral, \u201cwhich he had built from the foundation.\u201d This was no\ndoubt the existing crypt, which extends under the choir and its aisles.\nThe main piers, which are solid masses of masonry, stand immediately\nbelow those in the choir. In the central division of the crypt, the\nvaulting is carried on three rows of pillars, with plain cushioned\ncapitals and\n\n[Illustration: THE CRYPT.]\n\nsquare abaci. There are also semi-detached shafts, of similar character,\nconnected with the main piers on either side. In the aisles of the crypt\nthe vaulting springs from semi-detached shafts on either side, and rests\non a single row of columns in the centre. The east end of the central\ndivision (which remains entire) is apsidal; and the curious and\nintricate arrangement of the vaulting at this point (arising \u201cfrom the\ncomplicated slopes which had to be adjusted there\u201d) should be especially\nnoticed. The aisles of the crypt terminate at present nearly at the bend\nof the apse, but they were originally carried quite round it, so as to\nform a circular procession-path. \u201cThere are but four apsidal crypts in\nEngland, which in chronological order are,--Winchester (1079), Worcester\n(1084), Gloucester (1089), and Canterbury (1096). In all these the side\naisles run completely round the apse. Amongst them, Worcester is\nremarkable for the multiplicity of small pillars employed to sustain the\nvaults. The side aisle has a row of small pillars running along the\ncentre, which are not employed in the other examples. The central\nportion has three rows of intermediate pillars, whereas Gloucester and\nCanterbury have but two rows, and Winchester but one. Yet the width of\nthe central crypt of Worcester is less than the others. The increased\nnumber of pillars, by diminishing the span of the arches, and dividing\nthe weight of the vault upon so many supports, enables the diameters of\nthe pillars to be reduced, and gives greater lightness to the\narchitecture. For the height of all these crypts is nearly the same; so\nthat at Winchester and Gloucester the arches are flattened into\nellipses, the pillars are low and squat, and the crypts appear as\nsepulchral vaults; while at Worcester, where the arches are semicircular\nand the pillars more slender, the crypt is a complex and beautiful\ntemple[91].\u201d It has been compared to the mosque (now the cathedral) of\nCordova. We may re-people this crypt in imagination with the venerable\nabbots and priests of the synod convened by Wulfstan[92].\n\nIt is probable that small apsidal chapels flanked the crypt at its\nwestern termination, on both sides. On the south side such a chapel\nstill exists, immediately under that which opens from the south aisle of\nthe choir. The western, and part of the southern, wall of this chapel is\nNorman, as are the central pillars. The square eastern end, however, is\nEarly English, of the same date as the chapel above it.\n\nIn the crypt are preserved the ancient north doors of the cathedral,\nremoved about the year 1820. They date from the fourteenth century, and\nare coeval with Bishop Wakefield\u2019s work. These doors are said to have\nbeen covered with human skin. Tradition asserts that a man who stole the\nsanctus-bell from the high altar was flayed alive for the sacrilege; and\nportions of skin, which the late Mr. Quekitt, Assistant Conservator of\nthe Museum of the Royal College of Surgeons, declared to be human,\nremain fixed to the inside of the doors, under the iron-work.\n\nThe west doors of Rochester Cathedral, and the north doors of Hadstock\nand Copford Churches, both in Essex, were also covered with skins, said\nto have been those of piratical Northmen. The Rochester doors have\nentirely disappeared. Those of Copford have been removed, but portions\nof them are still in existence. The doors of Hadstock Church remain in\nplace. Fragments of skin from Hadstock and Copford were examined by Mr.\nQuekitt, who pronounced it human in both cases[93].\n\nXXIII. The great Norman tower fell in 1175, \u201ca circumstance of such\ncommon occurrence that there is some evidence against a tower being\nNorman work if it had not fallen down[94].\u201d The existing _central tower_\ndates from 1374, but the general design alone remained before its\nrestoration (still, 1866, in progress) was commenced. The soft sandstone\nof which it is built had crumbled away to such an extent, that all the\ndetails had perished. The tower, which is 196 ft. in height, is of good\nproportion. It was by no means improved by the modern parapet and\npinnacles which were placed on it in the last century, and somewhat\naltered in the early part of this. A new peal of ten, or possibly twelve\nbells will be hung in the tower after its complete restoration.\n\nClose beyond the north-east transept stood an octangular \u201cclocherium,\u201d\nor bell-tower, which was taken down in 1647. It was of very early\ncharacter. The east end of the cathedral has been rebuilt, as already\ndescribed, (\u00a7 XIV.,) by Mr. Perkins. The walls of the south-east\ntransept have also been rebuilt, and its very fine buttresses with open\nturrets deserve special notice. A little west of this transept, and\nbetween it and the chapter-house, are the remains of the _Guesten Hall_.\nThis was a very fine hall of the fourteenth century, built for the\nentertainment of noble guests of the priory and of the more illustrious\npilgrims to the shrine of St. Wulfstan. Like \u201cLa Gloriole\u201d at\nCanterbury, and the guest-chambers of other great monasteries, it\nclosely adjoined the prior\u2019s lodgings. These were assigned to the Dean\non the creation of the Dean and Chapter after the dissolution, and the\nGuesten Hall formed part of the deanery until 1842, when the\nEcclesiastical Commissioners made over the episcopal palace to the Dean,\nand the former deanery was pulled down. The Guesten Hall was then\ndisclosed, and attracted much attention, not only from its own beauty,\nbut as a very interesting historical relic. It was, however, much out of\nrepair, and a considerable sum would no doubt have been required to\neffect its restoration. Accordingly, in 1860, the greater part of it was\npulled down, and the roof was given by the Dean and Chapter to a new\nchurch which it is proposed to erect in the city of Worcester.\n\nThe Guesten Hall was commenced in 1320 by Wulstan Bransford, then prior\nof the monastery, and afterwards Bishop of Worcester. The beauty of the\nDecorated tracery, which still remains in the windows, calls for\nespecial notice; and the oaken roof was a very fine example. It is\nevident that nothing but absolute necessity could justify the\ndestruction of such a relic. \u201cThis magnificent guest-chamber of the\nfourteenth century was an historical monument of considerable\nimportance, as shewing the splendid hospitality of the clergy of those\ndays, and as illustrating in a remarkable manner the manners and customs\nof the time of Edward III. It was the last of these structures that we\nhad remaining, and with it we have erased a chapter out of the history\nof England[95].\u201d\n\nXXIV. The College Green, on the south side of the cathedral, is entered\nthrough an archway under the _Edgar tower_, which tradition asserts to\nhave been erected by Ethelred II., son of Edgar. It may possibly occupy\nthe site of an older building, but the present tower is late work, and\nof little interest. In a niche on the east front is a much shattered\nfigure of King Edgar. The rooms in the tower are now used as the chapter\nlibrary, and as offices of the diocesan registry. Among the MSS. of the\nchapter library is one of great interest--An Epitome of Roman Law by\nVacarius, an Italian who was brought to this country by Theobald,\nArchbishop of Canterbury, and who introduced the study of Roman or\n\u201cCivil\u201d Law at Oxford in the reign of Stephen. This is the only copy of\nthe work of Vacarius known to exist in England, and only four copies are\nknown on the continent--in the libraries of Konigsberg, Prague, and\nBruges, and one in the possession of the Emperor of Russia[96].\n\nThe _deanery_, north-west of the cathedral, was the episcopal palace\nuntil 1842. It contains a fine hall, and some ancient portions. The east\nfront was built by Bishop Hough in 1723.\n\n\n\n\nWORCESTER CATHEDRAL.\n\nPART II.\n\nHistory of the See, with Short Notices of the principal Bishops.\n\n\n Worcester was one of five episcopal dioceses into which the great\n Mercian province was divided during the archiepiscopate of\n Theodorus of Canterbury, (A.D. 668-690). Peada, son of the fierce\n heathen Penda of Mercia, and son-in-law of the Christian Oswi of\n Northumbria, had established the first Mercian see at Lichfield\n (see that Cathedral, Pt. II.) about the year 653. Mercia then\n comprised not only the whole of central England, but the greater\n part of Lincolnshire; and in accordance with a design expressed at\n the Council of Hertford, (673,) but not then carried into\n execution, Archbishop Theodorus divided the unwieldy diocese, which\n must still have contained a vast number of heathen, into five. The\n original see remained at LICHFIELD. The see of HEREFORD was\n established in 676, those of WORCESTER and LEICESTER in 680, and\n that of LINDISSE, or LINDSEY, in 678. The two latter, Leicester and\n Lindsey, were afterwards incorporated in the great diocese of\n Lincoln. (See that Cathedral, Pt. II.)\n\n [A.D. 680-961.] Worcester, (_Wigornaceaster_,) a \u201cceaster\u201d or\n stronghold of the Hwiccas, who occupied Worcestershire and\n Gloucestershire, had possibly been a Roman station, (although this\n is uncertain,) and was at all events situated on the line of a\n Roman road--a matter of no small importance to the earlier Saxon\n bishops, who, like the Saxon kings, were perpetually moving from\n manor to manor throughout their diocese[97]. A priest named\n Tatfrid,--\u201cvir strenuissimus et doctissimus, atque excellentis\n ingenii[98],\u201d--belonging to the monastery founded by St. Hilda at\n Whitby (_Streaneshalch_), had been chosen by Archbishop Theodore to\n be the first Bishop of Worcester; but he died before his\n consecration; and BOSEL, of whose history nothing is known, was\n consecrated to the new see, A.D. 680. Before his death he became\n disabled by illness, (_corporis infirmitate depressus_,) and OFTFOR\n was consecrated as his coadjutor and successor by Wilfrid of York,\n who was at that time directing the ecclesiastical affairs of Sussex\n and of Kent[99]. Oftfor, like Tatfrid, had belonged to St. Hilda\u2019s\n monastery, but had gone for the sake of study, first to Archbishop\n Theodore at Canterbury, and thence to Rome. On his return he\n \u201cturned aside to the province of the Hwiccas, and remained there a\n long time, preaching the word of faith, and affording a pattern of\n life to all who saw and heard him[100].\u201d He held the bishopric for\n one year only. In 693 he was succeeded by EGWIN, the founder of the\n monastery at Evesham. Egwin died in 717. Of his successors,\n WEREFRITH (873-915) was a man of considerable learning, a friend\n and assistant of King Alfred, by whose direction he translated into\n Saxon the Dialogues of Gregory the Great. St. DUNSTAN held the see\n of Worcester between the years 957 and 961.\n\n [A.D. 961-992.] OSWALD, the successor of Dunstan, the founder of\n the monastery, and one of the patron saints of Worcester, is best\n known from his unceasing patronage of the monks, in opposition to\n the secular clergy. Oswald, the son of Danish parents of high rank,\n was the nephew of Odo, the predecessor of Dunstan in the see of\n Canterbury; and was appointed by King Edgar to the see of Worcester\n at the request of Dunstan himself, with whose zeal for the monastic\n cause Oswald (who had passed some of the earlier years of his life\n in the famous monastery of Fleury) more than sympathized. In 972\n Oswald became Archbishop of York, which see he held, together with\n Worcester, until his death in 992--in the same manner as Dunstan\n had held the sees of London and Worcester together, before his\n elevation to the primacy. Little is recorded \u201cof what he did at\n York, although he presided over that see for twenty years. There\n was no Northern writer to speak of what he effected in\n Northumbria[101].\u201d The condition of the province, \u201cseamed and\n scarred\u201d by the struggles of the native princes, and by Danish\n incursions, may have prevented him from working there. But at\n Worcester, and throughout the south, Oswald was active as a great\n ecclesiastical reformer. He was powerful enough to remodel the\n monasteries of Ely and St. Albans. The Church of Worcester had\n hitherto been served by secular canons. These Oswald determined to\n replace by Benedictine monks; \u201cand succeeded by the following\n artifice. Having erected in its vicinity a new church to the honour\n of the Virgin Mary, he intrusted it to the care of a community of\n monks, and frequented it himself for the solemn celebration of\n mass. The presence of the Bishop attracted that of the people; the\n ancient clergy saw their church gradually abandoned; and after some\n delay, Wensine, their dean, a man advanced in years and of\n unblemished character, took the monastic habit, and was advanced\n three years later to the office of prior. The influence of his\n example, and the honour of his promotion, held out a strong\n temptation to his brethren, till at last the number of canons was\n so diminished by repeated desertions, that the most wealthy of the\n churches of Mercia became without dispute or violence, by the very\n act of its old possessors, a monastery of Benedictine monks[102].\u201d\n Oswald is said to have introduced monks in the room of secular\n clergy, in six other churches of his diocese; and charges of\n extreme tyranny and arrogance have been brought against him in\n consequence. But there is every reason to believe that a severe\n ecclesiastical reform was necessary; and there is proof that the\n eviction of the canons from Worcester was very gradual, and was not\n completed in Oswald\u2019s lifetime. It is also certain that, although\n he held the archbishopric of York during twenty years, \u201cwe we do\n not read that he introduced a single colony of monks, or changed\n the constitution of a single clerical establishment, within that\n diocese[103].\u201d\n\n The church and monastery of St. Mary, built by Oswald, were on the\n site of the existing cathedral, and were pulled down by Wulfstan to\n make way for his new minster. (See _post_, WULFSTAN.) During the\n construction of St. Oswald\u2019s monastery, says Eadmer, one large\n squared block of stone became all at once immoveable, and in spite\n of the exertions of the workmen, could not be brought to the place\n prepared for it. St. Oswald, after praying earnestly, beheld\n \u201cEthiopem quendam\u201d sitting upon the stone, and mocking the\n builders. The sign of the cross removed him effectually.\n\n A life of St. Oswald, by Eadmer of Canterbury, will be found in\n Wharton\u2019s _Anglia Sacra_, vol. ii. This, however, is a compilation\n from a far more important life by an unknown monk of Ramsey,\n written within twenty or thirty years after Oswald\u2019s death, and\n hitherto unprinted. This life (of which there is a MS. in the\n British Museum, MSS. Cotton, Nero, E. 1) is quoted among Mr.\n Raine\u2019s numerous authorities for the very interesting life of St.\n Oswald contained in his \u201cLives of the Archbishops of York.\u201d\n (London, 1863.) Oswald died at Worcester, and was interred in his\n own church there. His relics were translated, and placed in a rich\n shrine, by Aldulf, his successor in both sees. The portiphor of St.\n Oswald is still preserved in the library of C.C.C., Cambridge.\n\n The two immediate successors of Oswald, Aldulf and Wulfstan I.,\n held the see of York together with that of Worcester, probably\n because, Northumbria being ravaged by the Danes, the possession of\n the southern bishopric was found to be necessary for the\n maintenance of the northern primate. Wulfstan succeeded in 1003,\n and died in 1023. In 1016, seven years before his death, LEOFSIN\n was appointed to the bishopric of Worcester; Wulfstan retaining\n York.\n\n [A.D. 992-1062.] Between the death of Oswald and the accession of\n Wulfstan II., the only remarkable bishops of Worcester were LIVING,\n the friend and minister of Canute, who held the see of Worcester\n together with that of Crediton; and ALDRED, his successor, who was\n translated to York in 1061, and as archbishop of that see crowned\n successively both Harold and the Conqueror. In 1062 Edward the\n Confessor made a grant to Aldred of the church of Worcester, on\n account of the desolate condition of the see of York. The grant\n was, however, personal, and not in perpetuity; and Bishop Wulfstan\n of Worcester only remained a suffragan of York until the death of\n Aldred. The deed is to be found in Thomas\u2019s \u201cWorcester,\u201d Appendix\n I.\n\n [A.D. 1062-1095.] WULFSTAN II., the founder of the existing\n cathedral, and the great patron saint of Worcester. Wulfstan was\n born at Long Itchinton, in Warwickshire. Both his father and mother\n had embraced monasticism in mature life; and their son, after\n having been educated in the great monastery of Peterborough, became\n himself a monk at Worcester, and, eventually, the prior of his\n convent. \u201cAn anecdote must be referred to this period, which is\n valuable, because it is characteristic of the man and of his times.\n Wulfstan enjoyed the pleasures of the table, and had a particular\n liking for roast goose. Boiled meats were generally placed on an\n Anglo-Saxon table; therefore special directions were to be given\n when anything roast or fried was to be prepared. The order was\n given by Wulfstan that a roast goose was to be prepared for his\n dinner. He then went about his ordinary business. There were many\n clients of the Bishop to whom he had to pay attention, and he was\n involved in secular duties. He had not broken his fast when he was\n called upon to officiate at the Mass. In due time he enters the\n church extremely hungry; he passes into the chancel, near to which,\n unfortunately, the kitchen is placed. A whiff of goose soon affects\n his olfactory nerves; the savour interferes with his devotions; his\n thoughts wander to his dinner, (_studio culin\u00e6 tenetur_); his\n conscience reproaches him. His resolution is immediately formed.\n Then and there before the altar he vowed that from that time forth\n he would never taste meat; and he remained a vegetarian all the\n days of his life, except on festivals, when he regaled on fish.\n What was a fast to others was a luxury to him[104].\u201d On the\n translation of Aldred to the see of York, Wulfstan became Bishop of\n Worcester. \u201cIn right of his authority over the diocese of\n Worcester, Aldred took away from it twelve vills, and appropriated\n them to York. As that Archbishop had only a life-interest in the\n see, it is clear that these estates ought to have been restored to\n it at his decease. When he died, however, (1069,) they passed with\n his other estates into the hands of the King. Wulfstan was not\n disposed to give them up. He desired that they should be restored\n at the Council of Winchester, at Easter, 1070; but as the\n archbishopric of York was then vacant, the consideration of the\n question was deferred. When Thomas (the new Archbishop of York)\n went to Rome for the pall, he claimed the Bishop of Worcester as a\n suffragan. This question was left by the Pope to the determination\n of Lanfranc. It was settled in a synod which was held in 1072. Odo,\n Bishop of Bayeux, was on the side of Thomas, but Lanfranc decided\n against him. The twelve vills were to be given up, and Worcester\n was for the future to be subordinated to Canterbury, and not to\n York. In this judgment Thomas seems to have quietly\n acquiesced[105].\u201d Lanfranc, however, looked with extreme doubt and\n jealousy on the Saxon clergy; and at the synod of Pedrede\n (Petherton in Somersetshire) in 1070, he charged Wulfstan with\n \u201cinsufficiency and want of learning,\u201d intending to remove him from\n his see, as Egelmar had been deposed from the East Anglian\n bishopric in the early part of the same year. But Wulfstan\u2019s\n competency was fully proved[106], and it is possible that the whole\n charge against him may have arisen from his ignorance of\n Norman-French. A later legend (first mentioned by Ailred of\n Rievaulx, who did not live till the next century) asserted that\n when Wulfstan was called upon to deliver up his pastoral staff, he\n refused to do so, unless to the Confessor, from whom he had\n received it; that he laid the staff accordingly on the Confessor\u2019s\n tomb, which opened to receive it; and that no one could withdraw\n the staff from the tomb but Wulfstan himself, who was of course\n permitted to retain his see.\n\n The simplicity, earnestness, and incessant labour of Wulfstan\u2019s\n pastoral life--\u201cvir magn\u00e6 pietatis et columbin\u00e6 simplicitatis,\u201d\n says Malmesbury--are borne witness to by all the chroniclers; and\n especially by William of Malmesbury, in his _Gesta Pontificum_, and\n in his Life of Wulfstan. On his episcopal manors he built no halls\n or \u201cdining chambers,\u201d giving his whole attention to more important\n matters, and even in the churches which he built, he disapproved of\n rich and elaborate ornamentation[107]. The church and monastery of\n St. Oswald proved too small for the increasing number of monks.\n Wulfstan pulled them down, and laid the foundations of the existing\n cathedral. He lived, apparently, to complete much of his work; but\n all that now remains of his cathedral is the crypt. (Pt. I. \u00a7\n XXII.) Whilst witnessing the destruction of Oswald\u2019s church,\n Wulfstan burst into tears, declaring that he was pulling down the\n work of a far holier man than himself--a church in which so many\n saints had served God[108].\n\n In the year 1088, the Norman barons who had risen to support the\n cause of Robert of Normandy against the Red King, attacked\n Worcester. \u201cThe venerable Bishop Wulfstan,\u201d says the Saxon\n Chronicle, \u201cwas sorely troubled in his mind, because the castle had\n been committed to his keeping. Nevertheless, the men of his\n household went out with a few men from the castle, and through\n God\u2019s mercy, and through the Bishop\u2019s deserts, slew and captured\n five hundred men, and put all the others to flight[109].\u201d Wulfstan\n died, at a great age, in 1095, and was interred in his new\n cathedral. He was unquestionably one of the best and worthiest of\n the later Saxon bishops. The fullest and most important life of\n Wulfstan is that by William of Malmesbury, printed in the second\n volume of Wharton\u2019s _Anglia Sacra_. A very interesting notice of\n his \u201cLife and Times,\u201d by the Dean of Chichester, will be found in\n the twentieth volume of the Arch\u00e6ological Journal.\n\n Early in 1201, miracles were reported at the tomb of Wulfstan[110].\n They continued throughout the year, fifteen or sixteen persons\n being healed daily, as it was asserted. On St. Giles\u2019s Day, (Sept.\n 1,) 1202, Archbishop Hubert of Canterbury came, with other bishops,\n to Worcester, to enquire into the truth of the reported miracles.\n Certain monks of Worcester went to Rome with their report; and in\n the following year (1203) St. Wulfstan was duly canonized by the\n Pope, Innocent III. King John more than once performed his\n devotions, and made his offerings, before the shrine of the new\n saint; and in the hour of his death at Newark (October, 1216,) he\n commended his body and soul to \u201cGod and to St. Wulfstan.\u201d He was\n buried in the cathedral. In 1218 the restored church (see Pt. I. \u00a7\n I.) was dedicated in honour of St. Mary and St. Peter, and of the\n Confessors Oswald and Wulfstan; and the relics of St. Wulfstan were\n translated into a new shrine. Miracles are again frequently\n recorded. Edward I. entertained a \u201cspecial affection\u201d for St.\n Wulfstan; and, besides many other visits, came to worship before\n his shrine in December, 1273, after the conquest of Wales[111]. The\n shrine of St. Wulfstan was placed, together with that of St.\n Oswald, in front of the high altar, one on either side. (See Pt. I.\n \u00a7 IX.)\n\n [A.D. 1096-1112.] SAMSON, a canon of Bayeux, succeeded Wulfstan;\n \u201cnon parv\u00e6 literatur\u00e6 vir,\u201d says Malmesbury, \u201cnec contemnend\u00e6\n facundi\u00e6; antiquorum homo morum; ipse liberaliter vesci, et aliis\n dapsiliter largiri[112].\u201d His elder brother, Thomas, was Archbishop\n of York; and a son of Bishop Samson (at what time born is not\n evident) became also Archbishop of York in 1109, during his\n father\u2019s lifetime. Another son, Richard, was Bishop of Bayeux from\n 1108 to 1133.\n\n [A.D. 1112-1123.] THEULF; also a canon of Bayeux, and Chaplain to\n Henry I.\n\n [A.D. 1125-1150.] SIMON, Chaplain and Chancellor to Adelais, queen\n of Henry I. \u201cAffabilitate et morum dulcedine munificentiaque (quoad\n res Episcopatus angust\u00e6 pati possent) insignem habitum[113].\u201d\n\n [A.D. 1151-1158.] JOHN DE PAGEHAM; died at Rome.\n\n [A.D. 1158-1160.] ALFRED, Chaplain of Henry II. For four years the\n see remained vacant.\n\n [A.D. 1164-1179.] ROGER FITZ COUNT, a natural son of Robert, Earl\n of Gloucester, himself son of Henry I. The piety and strict life of\n Bishop Roger are praised by Giraldus Cambrensis. He was the friend\n and steady supporter of Becket; and was chosen by Henry II., after\n the death of the Archbishop, to convey to Pope Alexander II. the\n King\u2019s assurance that he had neither encouraged nor directed the\n murder. The Bishop died at Tours, August 9, 1179, on his homeward\n journey from Rome.\n\n [A.D. 1180, translated to Canterbury 1185.] BALDWIN, the preacher\n of the Crusade; who died (Dec., 1190,) in the camp of C\u0153ur de Lion\n before Acre. (See CANTERBURY CATHEDRAL, Pt. II.)\n\n [A.D. 1186-1190] WILLIAM NORTHALL, Archdeacon of Gloucester.\n\n [A.D. 1191-1193] ROBERT FITZ RALPH, Canon of Lincoln, and\n Archdeacon of Nottingham. Son of William Fitz Ralph, Seneschall of\n Normandy.\n\n [A.D. 1193-1195] HENRY DE SOILLI, Abbot of Glastonbury; from which\n great monastery he was removed, to make way for Savaricus, who held\n it together with the bishopric of Bath and Wells. (See WELLS\n CATHEDRAL, Pt. II.)\n\n [A.D. 1196-1198] JOHN OF COUTANCES, Dean of Rouen: \u201ccujus\n sanctitatis refulgent insignia. Nam corpus ejus sacrum cum\n indumentis Pontificalibus, usque hodie manet integrum et\n incorruptum[114].\u201d\n\n [A.D. 1200-1212] MAUGER, Archdeacon of Evreux, and physician of\n Richard I. His election had been declared void by the Archbishop of\n Canterbury, on the score of his illegitimacy. But Mauger proceeded\n to Rome; and the Pope, Innocent III., \u201cvidens elegantiam tanti\n viri,\u201d confirmed his election, \u201cet illud pulchrum Decretale pro eo\n composuit quod sic incipit \u2018_Innotuit_[115].\u2019\u201d It was during\n Mauger\u2019s episcopate that St. Wulfstan was canonized. (See Pt. I. \u00a7\u00a7\n I. and VII.) He was one of the bishops who, in 1208, pronounced\n the Interdict and the excommunication of King John; and, with the\n others, took refuge in France; where he died (1212) in the\n Cistercian Abbey of Pontigny, the same which gave a refuge to\n Becket and to Stephen Langton, and in which Edmund Rich, the\n sainted Archbishop of Canterbury, afterwards (1240) died. The death\n of Bishop Mauger occurred before the reconciliation of England with\n the Papacy.\n\n [A.D. 1214, translated to York 1215.] WALTER DE GRAY, was appointed\n to the see of Worcester after the removal of the Interdict. He had\n been King John\u2019s Chancellor.\n\n [A.D. 1216-1218.] SILVESTER OF EVESHAM, Prior of Worcester. He\n interred King John; and shortly before his death he dedicated the\n Norman church, which had been restored, and translated the relics\n of St. Wulfstan. (Pt. I. \u00a7 I.; and _ante_, WULFSTAN.)\n\n [A.D. 1218-1236.] WILLIAM DE BLOIS, Archdeacon of Buckingham, was\n intruded by the Legate Guala, in spite of the protests of the\n monks, who afterwards consented to receive him. The eastern portion\n of the existing Cathedral was built during his episcopate. (Pt. I.\n \u00a7 XIV.)\n\n [A.D. 1237-1266.] WALTER CANTILUPE, son of William, Lord Cantilupe;\n uncle of the sainted Bishop of Hereford. He was ordained deacon by\n the Pope at Viterbo, April 4; priest, April 18; and consecrated\n bishop, May 3,--in the same year, 1237. Bishop Walter was one of\n the most vigorous defenders of English liberty during great part of\n the reign of Henry III., when \u201cEngland was held by successive Popes\n as a province of the Papal territory[116].\u201d In 1237, the year of\n his consecration, he opposed the Cardinal Legate, Otho, at a\n council in St. Paul\u2019s; and nearly twenty years afterwards, in 1255,\n made an equally firm stand against another Legate, Rustand, who had\n demanded an enormous subsidy from the clergy--nominally for the\n Holy Land, but really for the Pope and the King. Bishop Cantilupe\n declared he would rather be hanged on a gibbet than consent to such\n an extortion. He was one of the firmest adherents to the party of\n Simon de Montfort; and it was this Bishop who absolved the whole\n army of the Barons as it lay at Fletching, on the morning of the\n battle of Lewes;--bidding them fight boldly, and with as much\n certainty of salvation as if they were fighting in a crusade. With\n the other bishops who had espoused this cause, Cantilupe was\n excommunicated by the Pope; and was only reconciled and absolved on\n his deathbed. He died at his manor of Blocklewe, Feb. 12, 1265, and\n was interred before the high altar of his cathedral. His\n coffin-lid, with effigy, is now in the retro-choir, (Pt. I. \u00a7\n XVI.); and the coffin containing, in all probability, his remains\n was discovered during the late restoration. (Pt. I. \u00a7 XVI.)\n\n [A.D. 1266, trans. to Winchester 1268.] NICHOLAS, Archdeacon of\n Ely; Chancellor of England 1260, 1261; and again, 1263.\n\n [A.D. 1268-1301.] GODFREY GIFFARD, Archdeacon of Wells; Chancellor\n of England 1267-1269. He was the brother of Walter Giffard,\n Archbishop of York; and was related to the King, Henry III. Bishop\n Giffard, in the year of his consecration, obtained a licence to\n build (_\u00e6dificare_) the castle of Hartlebury--which has ever since\n been the principal palace of the bishops of Worcester. The tomb of\n Bishop Giffard remains in the south choir-aisle. (Pt. I. \u00a7 XIII.)\n He had constructed a tomb for himself, in his lifetime, \u201cprope\n magnum altare, supra B. Oswaldi feretrum,\u201d and had disturbed the\n remains of Bishop John of Coutances in preparing it: but Archbishop\n Winchelsea ordered the bones of Bishop John to be replaced in their\n old position; and Bishop Giffard\u2019s were removed to the place they\n now occupy. According to Wharton, the Romanists after the\n Reformation took Bishop Giffard\u2019s tomb and effigy for those of St.\n Wulfstan; and used to visit it \u201cmagna cum religione\u201d on St.\n Wulfstan\u2019s Day, Jan. 19[117].\n\n [A.D. 1302-1307.] WILLIAM DE GAINSBOROUGH, a Franciscan of Oxford;\n intruded by the Pope.\n\n [A.D. 1308, translated to Canterbury 1313.] WALTER REYNOLDS. (See\n CANTERBURY, Pt. II.)\n\n [A.D. 1313-1317.] WALTER MAIDSTONE.\n\n [A.D. 1317-1327.] THOMAS COBHAM, canon and subdean of Salisbury. In\n 1313 he had been duly elected Archbishop of Canterbury by the monks\n of Christ Church; but the King, Edward II., strongly supported\n Walter Reynolds, Cobham\u2019s predecessor in the see of Worcester, and\n the elect of the monks was compelled to resign his claim. Bishop\n Cobham was a man of considerable learning, and of so great\n excellence of life that he was generally known as \u201cthe good\n clerk[118].\u201d\n\n [A.D. 1327, translated to Winchester 1333.] ADAM ORLTON; translated\n from Hereford. (See HEREFORD, Pt. II.) He was the third English\n bishop (Stigand, and Richard Poer of Salisbury, were the two\n former) who, up to this time, had ruled three sees successively. An\n ancient verse concerning him ran,--\n\n \u201cTrinus erat Adam; talem suspendere vadam.\n Thomam despexit; Wlstanum non bene rexit.\n Swithunum maluit. Cur? quia plus valuit.\u201d\n\n [A.D. 1334, translated to Ely 1337.] SIMON MONTACUTE. (See ELY, Pt.\n II.)\n\n [A.D. 1337-1338.] THOMAS HEMENHALE, a monk of Norwich.\n\n [A.D. 1339-1349.] WULSTAN BRANSFORD, Prior of Worcester. He was\n the builder of the ancient Prior\u2019s Lodgings, and of the Guesten\n Hall, recently pulled down.\n\n [A.D. 1350, translated to York 1352.] JOHN THORESBY, translated to\n Worcester from St. David\u2019s. (See YORK.)\n\n [A.D. 1352-1361.] REGINALD BRIAN, translated to Worcester from St.\n David\u2019s.\n\n [A.D. 1362, translated to Bath and Wells 1363.] JOHN BARNET. From\n Bath he was advanced to Ely. (See that Cathedral, Pt. II.)\n\n [A.D. 1364, translated to Canterbury 1368.] WILLIAM WHITTLESEY,\n translated to Worcester from Rochester. (See Canterbury, Pt. II.).\n\n [A.D. 1368-1373.] WILLIAM DE LYNN, translated from Chichester.\n\n [A.D. 1375-1395.] HENRY WAKEFIELD, Treasurer of England. It was\n this Bishop who altered the west front of his cathedral, and added\n the north porch. (Pt. I. \u00a7\u00a7 III., IV.)\n\n [A.D. 1395-1401.] TIDEMAN DE WINCHCOMB, translated from Llandaff. A\n Cistercian, and the physician of Richard II.\n\n [A.D. 1401, translated to London 1407.] RICHARD CLIFFORD, had been\n nominated by the Pope to the see of Bath and Wells, but the King\n (Henry IV.) refused to confirm the nomination, and subsequently\n made Clifford Bishop of Worcester. He had been one of the \u201cclerks,\u201d\n and a special favourite, of Richard II.\n\n [A.D. 1407-1419.] THOMAS PEVERELL, translated from Llandaff. A\n Carmelite of much learning. Peverell had been made Bishop of Ossory\n by Richard II. in 1397, and in the following year was translated to\n Llandaff.\n\n [A.D. 1419, translated to Ely 1426.] PHILIP MORGAN, had been\n Chancellor of Normandy. (See ELY, Pt. II.)\n\n [A.D. 1426-1433.] THOMAS POLTON, translated from Chichester. Bishop\n Polton died whilst attending the Council of Basle, (Aug. 13, 1433,)\n and was interred in that city.\n\n [A.D. 1435, translated to Ely 1443, and thence to Canterbury\n 1454.] THOMAS BOURCHIER. (See CANTERBURY, Pt. II.) It is there\n stated that Archbishop Bourchier\u2019s episcopate, of fifty-one years,\n is the longest on record in the English Church. This is only true\n so far as his predecessors are concerned. Bishop Wilson\u2019s\n (fifty-seven years) is the longest English episcopate. (See ELY,\n Pt. II.)\n\n [A.D. 1444-1476.] JOHN CARPENTER, Provost of Oriel, and Chancellor\n of Oxford. He was born at Westbury, in Gloucestershire, and had so\n great a favour toward his native place that he restored and richly\n endowed the collegiate church there, of which the first Dean, under\n Bishop Carpenter\u2019s foundation, was William Canynges, the great\n Bristol merchant, one of the principal contributors toward the\n building of St. Mary Redcliffe. Carpenter intended that the bishops\n of his see should henceforth bear the double title \u201cof Worcester\n and Westbury;\u201d \u201cbut,\u201d says Fuller, \u201cthough running cleverly on the\n tongue\u2019s end, it never came in request, because therein _impar\n conjunctio_, the matching of a cathedral and collegiate church\n together[119].\u201d Bishop Carpenter was buried at Westbury. The\n collegiate buildings were destroyed during the civil war.\n\n [A.D. 1476, translated to Ely 1486.] JOHN ALCOCK. (See ELY, Pt.\n II.)\n\n [A.D. 1487-1497.] ROBERT MORTON, Archdeacon of Winchester, and\n nephew of Cardinal Morton, Archbishop of Canterbury.\n\n The next four bishops were Italian intruders.\n\n [A.D. 1497-1498.] JOHN DE GIGLIIS, a native of Lucca, the Pope\u2019s\n collector in England. He was already Canon of Wells and Archdeacon\n of Gloucester.\n\n [A.D. 1498-1521.] SILVESTER DE GIGLIIS, nephew of his predecessor,\n and, like him, Papal collector.\n\n [A.D. 1521-1522.] JULIUS DE MEDICIS, uncle of Leo X., afterwards\n himself Pope Clement VII. He was made \u201cperpetual commendator or\n administrator of the see of Worcester\u201d by Papal bull, and resigned\n voluntarily in the following year.\n\n [A.D. 1522-1535.] JEROME GHINUCCI, succeeded by papal provision,\n but probably with the consent of Henry VIII., to whom this last of\n the Italian bishops of Worcester was of great service. He was\n employed on many embassies, both to Spain and Italy, and laboured\n much in both countries to procure from their universities and\n theologians opinions in favour of the King\u2019s divorce. After\n Wolsey\u2019s disgrace, however, and the marriage with Anne Boleyn, the\n Bishop fell into disfavour, and was removed from his see by Act of\n Parliament in 1535, as \u201can alien and non-resident.\u201d At the same\n time Cardinal Campeggio was removed from Salisbury.\n\n During this foreign occupation of Worcester the affairs of the see\n were administered by suffragan bishops, of whom several will be\n found recorded in Mr. Stubbs\u2019 _Registrum Sacrum Anglicanum_,\n Appendix V.\n\n [A.D. 1535, resigned 1539.] HUGH LATIMER. The life of this most\n vigorous reformer belongs so completely to the history of his time\n that only the principal events in it can be mentioned here. Latimer\n was born at Thurcaston, in Leicestershire. The passage from his\n sermons in which he describes his father\u2019s condition has been often\n quoted:--\u201cMy father was a yeoman, and had no lands of his own; only\n he had a farm of three or four pounds a-year at the uttermost, and\n hereupon he tilled so much as kept half-a-dozen men; he had walk\n for a hundred sheep, and my mother milked thirty kine. He was able\n and did find the king an harness with himself and his horse, whilst\n he came unto the place that he should receive the king\u2019s wages. I\n can remember I buckled his harness when he went to Blackheath\n field. He kept me to school, or else I had not been able to have\n preached before the King\u2019s Majesty now. He married my sisters with\n five pounds, or twenty nobles, a-piece; so that he brought them up\n in godliness and fear of God. He kept hospitality for his poor\n neighbours, and some alms he gave to the poor; and all this did he\n of the same farm where he that now hath it payeth sixteen pounds by\n the year or more, and is not able to do anything for his prince,\n for himself, nor for his children, or give a cup of drink to the\n poor.\u201d\n\n Latimer was educated at Christ\u2019s College, Cambridge, where he was\n at first well known as a defender of the \u201cold religion,\u201d and\n afterwards, by the persuasion of his friend Thomas Bilney, became\n as zealous a reformer. He was more than once silenced by the\n University, but had powerful friends, and was introduced at court\n by the King\u2019s physician, Dr. Butts, and by Cromwell, the latter of\n whom procured for him the living of West Kington, in Wiltshire.\n Here he was accused of favouring strange and novel doctrines\n touching the saints and purgatory, and was compelled to appear\n before Stokesley, Bishop of London. He escaped with some\n difficulty, the King himself interfering; and in 1535, after\n Ghinucci\u2019s deprivation, Latimer was made Bishop of Worcester. In\n his diocese he laboured zealously, until the Parliament of 1539,\n which, by the influence of Gardiner, passed the famous Six\n Articles. For these Latimer would not vote, and at once resigned\n his see, as did Shaxton, Bishop of Salisbury. He was very shortly\n afterwards sent to the Tower, on a charge of having spoken against\n the Six Articles. He remained in prison during the last six years\n of Henry\u2019s reign, but was set at liberty on the accession of\n Edward. He would not be reinstated in his see, however, but\n remained with Cranmer at Lambeth, occasionally preaching at Paul\u2019s\n Cross, until the fall of the Duke of Somerset. He then retired into\n the country. On Mary\u2019s accession he was apprehended by Gardiner\u2019s\n order, and was sent to Oxford with Cranmer and Ridley, where he\n suffered Oct. 16, 1555.\n\n The fullest and best account of Latimer will be found in Foxe,\n although, like the rest of the \u201cBook of Martyrs,\u201d it must be read\n with due caution. His sermons, with a life, were edited by Watkins\n in 1824, and with other remains, for the Parker Society, in 1844.\n\n [A.D. 1539, resigned 1543.] JOHN BELL, Archdeacon of Gloucester.\n The cause of his resignation is unknown. He died in 1556, and was\n buried in the church of Clerkenwell, London.\n\n [A.D. 1543, translated to York 1554.] NICHOLAS HEATH, translated\n from Rochester. In 1551 Bishop Heath was deprived, for\n non-compliance with the new order introduced under Edward VI., and\n was imprisoned in the Fleet until Mary\u2019s accession. He was restored\n by her, and was made President of Wales and Chancellor of England\n after the death of Gardiner. During the imprisonment of Heath,\n Bishop Hooper of Gloucester held the see _in commendam_, together\n with his own.\n\n [A.D. 1554-1559.] RICHARD PATES, said to have been consecrated\n Bishop of Worcester in 1534, after the deprivation of Ghinucci, and\n to have been then removed to make way for Latimer. The proofs of\n this, however, are not evident, although Godwin asserts that Pates\n was present at the Council of Trent, and there signed himself\n Bishop of Worcester. He was, at any rate, placed in full possession\n of the see on the translation of Bishop Heath to York in 1554. On\n Elizabeth\u2019s accession he was deprived, and died at Louvain after a\n life of some vicissitude.\n\n The dates already given shew that five ex-bishops of Worcester,\n Pates, Latimer, Bell, Heath, and Hooper, were living at the same\n time.\n\n [A.D. 1559, translated to London 1570.] EDWIN SANDYS, President of\n Catherine Hall, Cambridge.\n\n [A.D. 1571-1576.] NICOLAS BULLINGHAM, translated from Lincoln.\n\n [A.D. 1577, translated to Canterbury 1583.] JOHN WHITGIFT. (See\n CANTERBURY, Pt. II.)\n\n [A.D. 1584-1591.] EDMUND FREKE, translated from Norwich.\n\n [A.D. 1593, translated to London 1595.] RICHARD FLETCHER,\n translated from Bristol. (See that Cathedral, Pt. II.)\n\n [A.D. 1596, translated to Winchester 1597.] THOMAS BILSON. (See\n WINCHESTER, Pt. II.)\n\n [A.D. 1597-1610.] GERVAS BABINGTON, translated from Exeter.\n\n [A.D. 1610-1616.] HENRY PARRY, translated from Gloucester.\n\n [A.D. 1616-1641.] JOHN THORNBOROUGH, translated from Bristol. (See\n that Cathedral, Pt. II.)\n\n [A.D. 1641-1650.] JOHN PRIDEAUX, was born at Stowford, in the\n parish of Harford, in Devonshire. His family, although entitled to\n bear the arms of Prideaux, was in poor circumstances; and the\n future Bishop became a candidate for the place of parish clerk at\n Ugborough, and was disappointed. A friend sent him to school for a\n short time; and he then travelled on foot to Oxford, where he was\n employed in the kitchen of Exeter College. In 1596, when his\n abilities had become known, he was admitted a member of the\n college, of which he eventually became Rector. In 1615 he was made\n Regius Professor of Divinity, and in 1641 became Bishop. \u201cIf I\n could have been clerk of Ugborough,\u201d he used often to say, \u201cI had\n never been Bishop of Worcester.\u201d\n\n Bishop Prideaux was an unflinching Royalist, and excommunicated all\n in his diocese who took up arms against the King. He was of course\n severely treated in his turn; his palace was plundered, and he was\n obliged to sell his library as a last means of support. He died at\n Bredon, in Worcestershire, in 1650, in the house of his son-in-law,\n Dr. Sutton. An elegy on his death will be found among the works of\n the Cavalier poet Cleveland. A full account of Bishop Prideaux,\n with some interesting local anecdotes, is given by Prince in his\n \u201cWorthies of Devon.\u201d\n\n [A.D. 1660-1662.] The first Bishop of Worcester after the\n Restoration was GEORGE MORLEY, translated to Winchester 1662. (See\n that Cathedral, Pt. II.)\n\n [A.D. 1662, died the same year.] JOHN GAUDEN, translated from\n Exeter. (See that Cathedral, Pt. II.)\n\n [A.D. 1662, translated to Salisbury 1663.] JOHN EARLE. (See\n SALISBURY, Pt. II.)\n\n [A.D. 1663-1670.] ROBERT SKINNER, had been consecrated to the see\n of Bristol in 1637, and had been translated to Oxford in 1641.\n During the civil war he was imprisoned by the Puritans. He died at\n the age of eighty, the last English bishop who had been consecrated\n before the Great Rebellion.\n\n [A.D. 1671-1675.] WALTER BLANDFORD, Warden of Wadham College,\n Oxford, translated from Oxford.\n\n [A.D. 1675-1683.] JAMES FLEETWOOD, Provost of King\u2019s College,\n Cambridge. Bishop Fleetwood was the seventh son of Sir George\n Fleetwood of Lancashire, and whilst all the rest of his family\n joined the Puritans, he alone remained a Royalist.\n\n [A.D. 1683-1689.] WILLIAM THOMAS, translated from St. David\u2019s.\n Bishop Thomas was a Nonjuror; and, with the other nonjuring\n bishops, would have been deprived of his see, had not his death\n occurred, June 25, 1689.\n\n [A.D. 1689-1699.] EDWARD STILLINGFLEET, \u201ca man deeply versed in\n ecclesiastical antiquity, of an argumentative mind, excellently\n fitted for polemical dispute.... In the critical reign of James II.\n he may be considered as the leader on the Protestant side[120].\u201d\n Stillingfleet was, however, strongly tenacious of the authority of\n the Church, and was decidedly opposed to the \u201clatitudinarian\u201d\n theology of his time. He was born, 1635, at Cranbourne, in\n Dorsetshire, was educated at St. John\u2019s, Cambridge, and afterwards\n became Rector of Sutton, in Nottinghamshire, where he wrote and\n published his _Irenicum_, and (1662) his \u201c_Origines Sacr\u00e6_, or, A\n Rational Account of the Grounds of Natural and Revealed Religion;\u201d\n a book of considerable importance, which brought him into great\n notice. Passing from one preferment to another, he became in 1689\n Bishop of Worcester. In 1699 he died at his house in Westminster.\n His body was conveyed to his own cathedral for interment, when the\n monument which still remains (Pt. I. \u00a7 VI.) was erected by his son.\n The inscription was written by Dr. Bentley, who had been the\n Bishop\u2019s chaplain.\n\n The _Origines Sacr\u00e6_ is the most important of Bishop\n Stillingfleet\u2019s works; but his entire writings, collected and\n reprinted in 1710, fill six folio volumes. After he became Bishop\n of Worcester, he wrote a \u201cVindication of the Doctrine of the\n Trinity,\u201d in answer to some parts of Locke\u2019s Essay.\n\n [A.D. 1699-1717.] WILLIAM LLOYD, translated from Lichfield. In 1680\n he had been consecrated to the see of St. Asaph, and was one of the\n seven bishops sent to the Tower by James II. He died in 1717, aged\n ninety-one; and was buried in the parish church of Fladbury, near\n Evesham, of which his son was rector. Bishop Lloyd\u2019s learning was\n considerable, although few of his works are now remembered.\n\n [A.D. 1717-1743.] JOHN HOUGH, translated from Lichfield. Bishop\n Hough was the famous President of Magdalen College, Oxford,\n forcibly dispossessed in 1687 by James II., who had ordered the\n Fellows to elect Samuel Parker, Bishop of Oxford, and a Romanist.\n The story, which will best be read in Macaulay\u2019s \u201cHistory of\n England,\u201d (vol. ii.,) need not be repeated here. Dr. Hough was\n restored to the presidency in 1688, together with the twenty-five\n fellows who had been expelled at the same time. In 1690, King\n William made him Bishop of Oxford, with liberty to retain the\n headship of his college. In 1699 he was translated to the see of\n Lichfield, and thence in 1717 to Worcester. On the death of\n Archbishop Tenison in 1715 the primacy had been offered to, and\n declined by, him. All who mention Bishop Hough bear witness to the\n simplicity and excellence of his character.\n\n [A.D. 1743-1759.] ISAAC MADDOX, translated from St. Asaph. Bishop\n Maddox is best known as the author of \u201cA Vindication of the\n Government, Doctrine, and Worship of the Church of England,\n established in the reign of Queen Elizabeth.\u201d He was the founder of\n the Worcester Infirmary, to which the story of the Good Samaritan\n on his monument refers. (Pt. I. \u00a7 XVIII.)\n\n [A.D. 1759-1774.] JAMES JOHNSON, translated from Gloucester.\n\n [A.D. 1774, translated to Winchester 1781.] BROWNLOW NORTH,\n translated from Lichfield.\n\n [A.D. 1781-1808.] RICHARD HURD, translated from Lichfield. Bishop\n Hurd is now best remembered as the friend and biographer of\n Warburton; but he was himself conspicuous among the scholars of his\n time. He was born, the son of a small farmer, at Penkridge, in\n Staffordshire, in 1720; was educated at the grammar school at\n Brewood, and was sent as a sizar to Emmanuel College, Cambridge,\n where he afterwards obtained a fellowship. Ten years later he made\n the acquaintance of Warburton, whose friend he remained through\n life. In 1763 he was elected Preacher of Lincoln\u2019s Inn; and in 1765\n Warburton made him Archdeacon of Gloucester. George III., who\n greatly admired his \u201cMoral and Political Dialogues,\u201d made him\n Bishop of Lichfield and Coventry in 1774: and in 1776 Preceptor to\n the Prince of Wales and the Duke of York. In 1781 Hurd was\n translated to Worcester; and declined the see of Canterbury on the\n death of Archbishop Cornwallis in 1783.\n\n Some curious anecdotes are told of Bishop Hurd\u2019s bad temper, the\n sharpness of which is sufficiently evident in his letters. Madam\n D\u2019Arblay, however, says of him,--\u201cPiety and goodness are so marked\n on his countenance, which is truly a fine one, that he has been\n named, and very justly, the \u2018Beauty of Holiness.\u2019 Indeed, in face,\n manner, demeanour, and conversation, he seems precisely what a\n bishop should be,--and what would make a looker on--were he not a\n bishop, and a see vacant--call out, \u2018Take Dr. Hurd!--that is the\n man.\u2019\u201d George III. spoke of him as the \u201cmost naturally polite man\n he had ever known.\u201d\n\n Bishop Hurd died in 1808, at Hartlebury Castle, where he had built\n a library for the reception of Warburton\u2019s books, which he left as\n a legacy to the see. A life of Bishop Hurd, containing some\n interesting selections from his correspondence, has been published\n by the Rev. Francis Kilvert. (London, 1860.)\n\n [A.D. 1808-1831.] FFOLLIOTT H. W. CORNEWALL, translated from\n Hereford.\n\n [A.D. 1831-1841.] ROBERT JAMES CARR, translated from Chichester.\n\n [A.D. 1841-1861.] HENRY PEPYS.\n\n [A.D. 1861.] HENRY PHILPOTT.\n\n\nPRINTED BY JAMES PARKER AND CO., CROWN-YARD, OXFORD.\n\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[1] A volume of excellent plans and sketches, illustrative of\nGloucester Cathedral, has been published by Mr. F. S. Waller, Architect\nto the Dean and Chapter, (London, 1856). To it we are indebted for the\nplan of the cathedral contained in this volume.\n\n[2] Froucester\u2019s Chronicle.\n\n[3] Fergusson.\n\n[4] The transepts of Oxford (102 ft.) and Rochester (122 ft.) are\nshorter: but neither of these cathedrals at all approaches the general\ndimensions of Gloucester or Worcester. The tower of Malvern Priory\nChurch much resembles that of Gloucester, and was perhaps an imitation\nof it. \u201cIn dignity the central tower of Gloucester is perhaps surpassed\nby that of Canterbury, and in expression by that of Lincoln.\u201d--_G. A.\nP._\n\n[5] Comparing the relative proportions of Gloucester and Norwich, the\ndifference will be found greater than could be conceived compatible\nwith the same style. They are--\n\n NORWICH. GLOUCESTER.\n Height of piers 15 feet. 30 feet.\n Diameter of piers 7 \u201d 6 \u201c\n Height to base of triforium 25 \u201d 40 \u201c\n Height of triforium 24 \u201d 10 \u201c\n Height of clerestory 25 \u201d 24 \u201c\n\nThus at Norwich the three great divisions are nearly of equal height;\nat Gloucester the lower portion is more than equal to the other two. At\nNorwich the piers are about two diameters, at Gloucester nearly five in\nheight.\n\n[6] \u201cThe painting may be thus generally described. The hollow of the\nabacus of the capitals red, the lower member of the same, green; the\nwhole of the bell red, the leaves alternately green and yellow, with\nthe stalks running down of the same colour into the red bell of the\ncapital; the vertical mouldings between the marble shafts red and blue\nalternately; the lower shafts green or blue, with red in the hollows:\nthe foliage on these also is green and yellow. Some of the horizontal\nmouldings are partly coloured also. The bosses in the groining are\nyellow and red, as in the capitals. All the colouring, which was very\nrich, was effected with water-colours; in one instance only has any\ngold been discerned, and that upon one of the bosses in the roof.\u201d--_F.\nS. Waller._\n\n[7] The Norman towers or turrets had, however, been rebuilt in the\nEarly English period. \u201cFrom an account of an accident which occurred\nbetween 1163 and 1179, we know that the west front was flanked by\ntwo towers; for while Roger, Bp. of Worcester, was celebrating mass\nbefore the high altar, the north-west tower, owing to a defect in its\nfoundation, fell. It may be a question, however, whether these towers\nwere not rather turrets, like those at Tewkesbury. The very fact that\nat Tewkesbury we have turrets rather than towers, is sufficient to\nmake the suggestion very probable, for there is a great resemblance\nbetween the two churches. Moreover, if Abbot Morwent found a design\nwith towers, properly so called, he substituted for it one provokingly\ninferior. This is hardly likely.\u201d--(_G. A. P._) The rebuilding of the\nnorth-west tower was commenced in 1222, and its companion was also\nrebuilt between the years 1228-1243. These were the towers or turrets\ndestroyed by Abbot Morwent.\n\n[8] \u201cIn the interior this wall falls outwards eleven inches in its full\nheight; and on the exterior the more recent work inclines not more than\nfour inches; from which it is evident that the Norman wall must have\nbeen out of perpendicular seven inches, prior to the erection of Abbot\nThokey\u2019s work.\u201d--_F. S. Waller._\n\n[9] \u201cThe south aisle has this great advantage, which other altered\nbuildings do not possess;--in other buildings the proportions very\noften constrain the designs in the new work, and give it a mixed\ncharacter, spoiling both,--giving, for example, heaviness to the\nNorman, and flimsiness to the Decorated. But this is not the case at\nGloucester.\u201d--_Willis._\n\n[10] The attention of the public was first called to this fact in\na paper read before the meeting of the Arch\u00e6ological Institute at\nWorcester, in the summer of 1862, by the Rev. Samuel Lysons, F.S.A.\n\n[11] Froucester\u2019s Chronicle asserts that Abbot Wygemore re-cased the\n\u201caisle of St. Andrew,\u201d and Abbot Horton \u201cthe aisle of St. Paul.\u201d These\naisles are identified with the south and north transepts, by comparing\nthe Chronicle with an account given by one of the monks which Leland\nhas recorded in his Itinerary. See Willis\u2019s notice of the cathedral at\nthe meeting of the Arch\u00e6ological Institute at Gloucester in 1860, Gent.\nMag., Sept. 1860.\n\n[12] Report of Professor Willis\u2019s lecture at Gloucester, Gent. Mag.,\nSept. 1860.\n\n[13] Willis.\n\n[14] It has, however, been suggested that this structure may have been\na lavatory, and the work of Elias de Lideford, sacrist during the early\npart of the thirteenth century, who, it is recorded, (by Froucester,)\nbrought an \u201caqueduct\u201d into the church. A lavatory in a church is not\nuncommon.\n\n[15] This is the most probable explanation of this lectern. There was\nperhaps a desk in Canterbury Cathedral, in a similar position, from\nwhich the pilgrims were exhorted as they approached Becket\u2019s shrine. At\nall events, in later times, the desk for the Bible and \u201cFox\u2019s Martyrs\u201d\nwas erected in that cathedral, at the angle of the stairs ascending to\nthe choir-aisle.\n\n[16] Willis.\n\n[17] Willis.\n\n[18] The restoration of this window is the result of the untiring\nenergy and able administration of the Chapter revenues by the\nTreasurer, Dr. Jeune, Master of Pembroke College, Oxford, and Canon\nof Gloucester. A new Chapter school has been built, extensive repairs\nand restorations made in the cathedral, and the ground round it thrown\nopen, by special funds derived from the same source.\n\n[19] C. Winston, Stained Glass of Gloucester, &c., in the Bristol\nvolume of the Arch\u00e6ological Institute. (For some further important\nremarks on this window, see Note at the end of Part I.)\n\n[20] It has been asserted that this Sir John Powell was one of the\njudges who tried the seven bishops. This is an error. There were three\nJudge Powells living at the same time; two \u201cSir Johns,\u201d and one \u201cSir\nThomas.\u201d Sir John who tried the bishops was of Caermarthenshire; the\nSir John buried in this cathedral was of a Gloucestershire family. See\n\u201cGloucestershire Achievements\u201d by the Rev. S. Lysons, 2nd edit., note,\npp. 42, 43.\n\n[21] F. S. Waller.\n\n[22] Gent. Mag., Sept. 1860.\n\n[23] F. S. Waller.\n\n[24] Other traditions connect Lucius with Kent, and make Chilham\nCastle, near Canterbury, his principal stronghold. Besides Gloucester,\nhe is the traditional founder of Canterbury and Winchester Cathedrals,\nand of many churches. Another legend asserts that he resigned his\ncrown, and after preaching Christianity throughout France and Germany,\nbecame Bishop of Coire in the Grisons, where he died, and where his\nrelics are still shewn.\n\n[25] Hist. Eccl., lib. i. cap. 4.\n\n[26] See the whole discussion in Collier\u2019s Church History, Pt.\nII. bk. iv.\n\n[27] Fuller\u2019s Worthies--Herefordshire.\n\n[28] Worthies--Denbighshire.\n\n[29] Church Hist., bk. xi.\n\n[30] William of Malmesbury. No work of this early period now remains at\nAix.\n\n[31] Report of a Survey of the Dilapidated Portions of Hereford\nCathedral, in the year 1841. By Professor Willis. Hereford, 1842.\n\n[32] The Norman triforium, which was a mere wall-arcade without a\npassage, consisted of two circular arches in each bay, each arch\ncircumscribing two smaller ones. The clerestory had one lofty circular\narch in each bay, and had a passage throughout.\n\n[33] \u201cThe oxe-eye masonry is so termed because the centre of it is\npierced by an opening in the form of the ancient _vesica piscis_,\ncalled by workmen an ox-eye.\u201d--_Willis._\n\n[34] Willis\u2019s Report on Hereford Cathedral, p. 20.\n\n[35] This brass is engraved as the frontispiece to Haines\u2019s \u201cManual of\nMonumental Brasses.\u201d\n\n[36] See Pt. II. for the confirmation of this date.\n\n[37] Dean Merewether\u2019s Memorials.\n\n[38] A translation of M. D\u2019Avezac\u2019s paper will be found in the\nGentleman\u2019s Magazine for May, 1863. The division of France from\nFlanders, and \u201can inscription, most significant, placed across the\nSaone and the Rhone, marking, between Lyons and Vienne, the separation\nof France from Burgundy,\u201d are the indications on which M. D\u2019Avezac\nrelies for his date.\n\n[39] D\u2019Avezac.\n\n[40] For a further notice of this map, see Mr. Wright\u2019s paper in\nthe Gloucester volume of the Arch\u00e6ological Association, and that by\nM. D\u2019Avezac already mentioned. One of the earliest medi\u00e6val maps\naccompanies the text of the _Periegesis_ of Priscian, an Anglo-Saxon\nMS. of the end of the tenth century, (Cott. Lib.) \u201cA map of the world,\nin a MS. of the thirteenth century in the British Museum, contains a\ncurious note, in which the author refers to four maps which were then\nlooked upon in England as being of chief authority. These were, the\nmap of Robert de Melkeleia, that of the Abbey of Waltham, that in the\nKing\u2019s Chamber at Westminster, and that of Matthew Paris.\u201d--_Wright._\n\n[41] \u201cMobiliers.\u201d\n\n[42] \u201cThis may account for the omission of any recorded founder or\nbenefactor in connection with either the work of the north transept or\nof this tower; for it may be generally observed, with respect to the\nbuildings of the Middle Ages, that, when they were carried on by their\nmonasteries no record is preserved of the work, but only when some\nconsiderable portion of it, as a tower, a transept, or the vaulting of\nan aisle, was undertaken at the expense of an individual.\u201d--_Willis\u2019s\nReport_, p. 10.\n\n[43] \u201cThe English eastern crypts are Canterbury, Winchester,\nGloucester, Rochester, Worcester;--all founded before 1085. After this\nthey were discontinued, except as a continuation of former ones, as at\nCanterbury and Rochester. The Early English crypt of the Lady-chapel\nat Hereford is an exception.\u201d--_Willis_, _Architectural History of\nCanterbury Cathedral_, p. 71, note.\n\n[44] \u201c_Port_ strictly means an enclosed place for sale or purchase--a\nmarket.\u201d--_Kemble._\n\n[45] Angl.-Sax. Chron., ed. Thorpe, s. ann. 1055. Another version of\nthe Chronicle asserts that the minster was burned, and it is probable\nthat it was greatly ruined. (See _post_, Bishop LOSING.)\n\n[46] Sax. Chron., ad ann. 1056.\n\n[47] Milman, Hist. of Latin Christianity, iii. 455.\n\n[48] Collier, Eccles. Hist., bk. v. cent. 12.\n\n[49] Wilkins, Concil. Mag. Brit. i. p. 76, quoted by Britton.\n\n[50] Reg. Orleton--quoted by the Rev. John Webb, in his notes on\nthe Swinfield Roll. It was in the time of Bishop Orleton that the\ncanonization was decreed.\n\n[51] Worthies--Herefordshire.\n\n[52] Collier, Eccles. Hist., bk. vi. cent. 14.\n\n[53] Britton.\n\n[54] Worthies--Devonshire. Fuller gives Churchill, in the parish of\nBratton, as Stanbery\u2019s birthplace; but the bequest in his will renders\nit certain that he was born at Stanbery in Morwenstow.\n\n[55] Worthies--Gloucestershire.\n\n[56] See Procter\u2019s Hist. of the Prayer-book, p. 23, note.\n\n[57] Worthies--Northamptonshire.\n\n[58] Worthies--Derbyshire.\n\n[59] The Chronicle of Florence of Worcester ends with the year 1117,\nbut has been carried on by an unknown Continuator as late as 1295.\nIt has been printed by the English Historical Society. It is not so\nvaluable for the architectural history of Worcester as the _Annales\nEcclesi\u00e6 Wygorniensis_, which will be found in the first volume of\nWharton\u2019s _Anglia Sacra_.\n\nProfessor Willis\u2019s most valuable and elaborate \u201cArchitectural History\nof Worcester Cathedral\u201d will be found in the twentieth volume of the\nJournal of the Arch\u00e6ological Institute. In the \u201cGentleman\u2019s Magazine\u201d\nfor October, 1862, is printed Mr. Bloxam\u2019s paper on the \u201cSepulchral\nRemains and Monuments\u201d in the cathedral. Great use has been made of\nboth these papers, and especially of the latter, in preparing the\nfollowing account. Professor Willis\u2019s dates and conclusions have been\nadopted throughout. Some very interesting features of the building are\npointed out, for the first time, in his \u201cArchitectural History.\u201d\n\n[60] \u201cEgo Wlstanus ... decrevi synodum congregare in monasterio\nS. Mari\u00e6, in cryptis, quas ego a fundamentis \u00e6dificavi, et per\nmisericordiam Dei postea dedicavi.\u201d--_Anglia Sacra_, i. p. 542.\n\n[61] \u201c_Caput_, the \u2018head\u2019 of the church, was exclusively applied to\nthe altar end thereof. _Frons_, the \u2018front,\u2019 however, can be shewn\nby many examples to have been employed for _either end_ of the\nbuilding.\u201d--_Willis\u2019s Architectural History of Canterbury_, p. 45,\nnote. There can be no doubt, as Professor Willis himself pointed out at\nWorcester, that in this instance the east end, or front, is intended.\n\n[62] The eastern transept, forming the second transverse limb of the\ncross, was an addition of the Early English builders. Such a transept,\n\u201cequal in height to the central alley of the presbytery, is only to be\nfound elsewhere in England in the late Norman of Canterbury (c. 1096),\nand York (c. 1160); and in the Early English of Lincoln (c. 1186),\nSalisbury (c. 1220), Beverley, and Rochester. On the Continent the only\nknown examples of this feature are S. Benoit sur Loire (c. 1080), and\nCluny (c. 1089), the former of which was doubtless the prototype of\nthe English examples.\u201d--_Willis\u2019s Architectural History of Worcester\nCathedral._\n\n[63] On this subject it may be well to quote the remarks of Professor\nWillis:--\n\n\u201cIn criticizing these repairs and restorations, it is necessary to\nrecollect that the crumbling material of the cathedral had decayed\nto such an extent on the exterior as to destroy the whole of the\ndecorative features; and that, in the interior, settlements of the\npiers and arches in the Early English work had attained so alarming a\nmagnitude as to threaten the stability of the structure. Attempts had\nbeen made to mitigate these settlements by the introduction of walls\nand arches in 1712; but these, beside disfiguring and obstructing the\ninterior, were themselves giving way, having served rather to change\nthe direction of the settlements than to stop them.\n\n\u201cThe outside of the cathedral had been also overloaded and disfigured\nby additional buttresses to prop up its falling walls. Most of these\nhave been removed or repaired, and the walls themselves thoroughly\nand skilfully restored to soundness by renewing the whole of the\nexterior ashlar, and pointing the interior, resetting it when\nrequired. This process has necessarily destroyed all appearance of\nantiquity in the exterior of the choir and Lady-chapel; but it must\nbe remembered that all the decorative features of the original had\nvanished long since, and given place to the mean and uninteresting\nbotchings of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries; and that we\nhave now a reproduction of its original aspect, as far as that can be\ndetermined.\u201d--_Archit. Hist. of Worcester Cathedral_, p. 123.\n\n[64] These relics of the Norman nave have been carefully pointed out by\nProfessor Willis, _Arch. Hist. of Worcester Cathedral_, p. 93.\n\n[65] Willis.\n\n[66] See Arch. Hist. of Worcester Cathedral, p. 112.\n\n[67] Willis, p. 110.\n\n[68] Willis, p. 94.\n\n[69] M. H. Bloxam.\n\n[70] Willis.\n\n[71] Willis, p. 97. The white oolite was obtained from Bredon Hill at\nBath; the green stone from Higley on the Severn.\n\n[72] That of St. Thomas de Cantilupe at Hereford--translated 1287; and\nof King Edward II. at Gloucester, _circa_ 1330.\n\n[73] Willis, p. 100.\n\n[74] Willis, p. 102.\n\n[75] Id., 103.\n\n[76] Willis.\n\n[77] \u201cEt his ita gestis, sciscitatus est ab eo Abbas de Croestuna\nsi ipsum mori contingeret, ubi vellet eligere sepulturam. Cui Rex\nrespondens, dixit, Deo et Sancto Wlstano corpus et animam meam\ncommendo. Qui postea in nocte quae diem sancti Luc\u00e6 Evangelist\u00e6 proxime\nsequuta est, ex hac vita migravit. Cujus corpus regio schemate ornatum\nad Wigorniam delatum est; et in ecclesia Cathedrali ab Episcopo loci\nhonorifice tumulatum.\u201d--_Matt. Paris_, p. 288.\n\n[78] Leland (Itin.) thus notices the tomb:--\u201cIn presbyterio, Johannes\nRex, cujus sepulchrum Alchirch, sacrista, nuper renovavit.\u201d The time at\nwhich Alchirch was sacristan has not been ascertained, but it cannot\nhave been long before Leland\u2019s visit.\n\n[79] M. H. Bloxam, \u201cOn the Sepulchral Remains and Monuments in\nWorcester Cathedral,\u201d read before the Arch\u00e6ological Institute at\nWorcester, in 1862. (Gent. Mag., Oct., 1862.)\n\n[80] Bloxam.\n\n[81] Id.\n\n[82] M. H. Bloxam.\n\n[83] Id., Gent. Mag., Oct., 1862.\n\n[84] Willis, p. 106.\n\n[85] Bloxam.\n\n[86] Bloxam.\n\n[87] Id.\n\n[88] Bloxam.\n\n[89] Id.\n\n[90] Gent. Mag., Sept. 1862. \u201cIt was said to be for the purpose of the\nmonks conferring with each other; but he had seen such openings in\nplaces where no such construction could be put upon them.\u201d\n\n[91] Willis, p. 90.\n\n[92] An account of this synod, drawn up by Wulfstan himself, is printed\nin the _Anglia Sacra_. The Dean of Chichester thus translates the\ncommencement:--\u201cI, Wulfstan, by the grace of God Bishop of Worcester,\ndetermined to hold a synod in the Minster of St. Mary\u2019s, in the crypt\nof the church, which I built from the foundations, and by the mercy of\nGod afterwards consecrated. This synod was held in the year of our Lord\n1092, the fifteenth indiction. There were assembled all the wisest men\ninvited from the three shires in our diocese, Worcester, Gloucester,\nand Warwick; because that I, being full of days, sensible of my bodily\nweakness, and perceiving the end of my life approaching, was desirous\nof disposing canonically the ecclesiastical affairs committed to our\ncharge, and by their wise concert, of correcting and amending whatever\nrequired amendment.\u201d\n\n[93] See Mr. Albert Way\u2019s paper on \u201cThe Tradition of Flaying Inflicted\nin Punishment of Sacrilege,\u201d Arch\u00e6ological Journal, vol. v. The\nWorcester doors are said to have been fixed originally in the west\nentrance, and to have been removed thence by Bishop Wakefield. The Dean\nof Chichester (Life of Wulfstan, p. 7,) remarks that the west side of\nthe cathedral, fronting the Severn, was that from which a Danish attack\nmight naturally be expected; and suggests that the doors are as old\nas the eleventh century, when the citizens of Worcester, like other\nEnglishmen, resisted the imposition of the Danegelt, and killed (May,\n1041) Feadu and Thurstan, the huscarls of Hardicanute, who had been\nsent to Worcester to collect it. Their skins may have been stretched on\nthe church doors. In the following November a Danish army plundered the\ntown and ruined the cathedral, from which the monks had fled. The sight\nof the skins, it is suggested, may have been the especial cause of this\nlatter act of vengeance.\n\n[94] Report of Professor Willis\u2019s Lecture in Gent. Mag., Sept. 1862.\n\n[95] J. H. Parker, Gent. Mag., Oct. 1862. Professor Willis considered\nthe hall to be \u201cin so ruinous a state that the expense of restoring it\nwould have been greater than justifiable on such an object (especially\nas there would have been no use for it when done), and the Dean and\nChapter had to keep up and maintain the cathedral in a state worthy of\nits original purpose.\u201d--_Gent. Mag._, Sept. 1862.\n\n[96] Rev. C. H. Hartshorne.\n\n[97] See Kemble, Sax. in England, i. p. 300; and Exeter Cathedral, Pt.\nII.\n\n[98] Bede, Hist. Eccles., 1. iv. c. 23.\n\n[99] Archbishop Theodore died in 690. The see of Canterbury remained\nvacant for two years after his death.\n\n[100] Bede _ut sup._\n\n[101] Raine\u2019s Lives of the Archbishops of York, p. 123.\n\n[102] Lingard\u2019s Anglo-Saxon Church, ii. 294, quoted and accepted by\nKemble.\n\n[103] Lingard, ut sup. On the whole question of the dispute between the\nsecular and regular clergy, see the excellent chapter on \u201cThe Clergy\nand Monks\u201d in Kemble\u2019s \u201cSaxons in England,\u201d vol. ii.\n\n[104] Dr. Hook, Life and Times of Wulfstan; Arch\u00e6ological Journal, vol.\nxx.\n\n[105] Raine\u2019s Archbishops of York, p. 150.\n\n[106] \u201cQui non ita hebes in literis ut putabatur, c\u00e6tera sciebat,\npr\u00e6ter fabulas poetarum, et tortiles syllogismos dialecticorum, qu\u00e6 nec\nnosset, nec nosse dignaretur.\u201d--_W. Malmes._, _De Gest. Pontif._, l. iv.\n\n[107] \u201cNusquam enim in villis suis aulas, nusquam triclinia fecit.\nNimirum qui non solum in istis forensibus, sed etiam in Ecclesiis\noperos\u00e2 gravaretur architectur\u00e2. Magis enim deputabat talia human\u00e6\npomp\u00e6 et jactanti\u00e6 quam divin\u00e6 voluntati et grati\u00e6.\u201d--_W. Malmes._,\n_Vita S. Wulfstan._, l. iii. cap. 10.\n\n[108] \u201cStabat ipse in c\u00e6miterio tacitus, et subinde congemiscens.\nScaturibat quippe in animo ejus cogitatio; qu\u00e6 ingentem imbrem\nlacrimarum ferens, tandem erupit. \u2018Nos, inquit, miseri Sanctorum\ndestruimus opera, pompatice putantes nos facere meliora. Quanto\npr\u00e6stantior nobis S. Oswaldus qui hanc fecit Ecclesiam? Quot sancti\nviri religiosi in e\u00e2 Deo servierunt?\u2019 Et licet astantes referrent non\ndebere illum tristari, sed potius l\u00e6tari, quem Deus ad hanc serv\u00e2sset\ngratiam ut sic videret magnificari Ecclesiam, in lacrimarum proposito\ntenax fuit. Nec desunt qui dicant pr\u00e6dixisse illum Ecclesi\u00e6 nov\u00e6\nincendium, quo subsequentibus conflagrata est annis. Sed non placuit\npro vero pr\u00e6sumere, quod discrepat. Tunc autem et novam Ecclesiam\nperfecit; nec facile invenias ornamentum, quod eam non decoraverit.\nIta erat in singulis mirabilis, et in omnibus singularis. Quocirca ut\nmagnificenti\u00e6 nihil deesset, lxxii. marcas argenti scrinio innexuit;\nin quo beatissimi Oswaldi pr\u00e6decessoris sui exuvias, simulque multorum\nSanctorum locavit.\u201d--_W. Malmes._, _Vita S. Wulfstan._, l. iii. cap. 10.\n\n[109] Sax. Chron., ad ann. 1088.\n\n[110] \u201c1201. Miracula de S. Wlstano inc\u00e6perunt xiv. Kal. Februarii;\nqu\u00e6 per totum annum et amplius adeo crebrescebant, ut nunc xv. nunc\nxvi. uno die curarentur ab omnibus languoribus.\u201d--_Annales Eccles.\nWigorniensis. Anglia Sac._, i. 479.\n\n[111] Annales Eccles. Wigorn., ad ann. 1283. \u201cRex Edwardus subjugata\ntotaliter Wallia, venit Wigorniam gratia visitandi S. Wlstanum, erga\nquem amorem habuit specialem.\u201d\n\n[112] Malmes., De Gest. Pontif., lib. iv.\n\n[113] Ibid.\n\n[114] Annales Eccles. Wigorn., ad ann. 1198.\n\n[115] Id., ad ann. 1199.\n\n[116] Milman.\n\n[117] Wharton\u2019s note to Annales Eccles. Wigorn., s. a. 1268; Anglia\nSacra, i. p. 497:--\u201cTumulum namque ejus magna cum religione Pontificii\ndie 19 Januarii, qu\u00e6 S. Wlstano sacra est, _hodienum_ visitare solent,\nWlstani esse perperam credentes.\u201d The Anglia Sacra was published in\n1691.\n\n[118] Walsingham.\n\n[119] Worthies--Gloucestershire.\n\n[120] Hallam, Literary History, Pt. IV. chap. ii.","title":"The Three Choirs: A Handbook to the Cathedrals of Gloucester, Hereford, and Worcester: A Complete Description of the Buildings, a History of Each Diocese and Biographical Notices of the Bishops","tradition":"scripture-revelation","translated_text":null,"word_count":56432}