diff options
109 files changed, 17 insertions, 8724 deletions
diff --git a/.gitattributes b/.gitattributes new file mode 100644 index 0000000..d7b82bc --- /dev/null +++ b/.gitattributes @@ -0,0 +1,4 @@ +*.txt text eol=lf +*.htm text eol=lf +*.html text eol=lf +*.md text eol=lf diff --git a/LICENSE.txt b/LICENSE.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..6312041 --- /dev/null +++ b/LICENSE.txt @@ -0,0 +1,11 @@ +This eBook, including all associated images, markup, improvements, +metadata, and any other content or labor, has been confirmed to be +in the PUBLIC DOMAIN IN THE UNITED STATES. + +Procedures for determining public domain status are described in +the "Copyright How-To" at https://www.gutenberg.org. + +No investigation has been made concerning possible copyrights in +jurisdictions other than the United States. Anyone seeking to utilize +this eBook outside of the United States should confirm copyright +status under the laws that apply to them. diff --git a/README.md b/README.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..2efec1b --- /dev/null +++ b/README.md @@ -0,0 +1,2 @@ +Project Gutenberg (https://www.gutenberg.org) public repository for +eBook #52728 (https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/52728) diff --git a/old/52728-0.txt b/old/52728-0.txt deleted file mode 100644 index 04d287b..0000000 --- a/old/52728-0.txt +++ /dev/null @@ -1,4138 +0,0 @@ -Project Gutenberg's Bell's Cathedrals: St. David's, by Philip A. Robson - -This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with -almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or -re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included -with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org/license - - -Title: Bell's Cathedrals: St. David's - -Author: Philip A. Robson - -Release Date: August 5, 2016 [EBook #52728] - -Language: English - -Character set encoding: UTF-8 - -*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK BELL'S CATHEDRALS: ST. DAVID'S *** - - - - -Produced by Jonathan Ingram, Chuck Greif and the Online -Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net - - - - - - - - - - BELL’S CATHEDRAL SERIES - - SAINT DAVID’S - - [Illustration: _Photo. F. Frith & Co._ - - ST. DAVID’S CATHEDRAL, FROM THE N.E.] - - - - - THE CATHEDRAL CHURCH OF - - SAINT DAVID’S - - A SHORT HISTORY AND - DESCRIPTION OF THE FABRIC - AND EPISCOPAL BUILDINGS - - BY - PHILIP A. ROBSON, A.R.I.B.A. - - - WITH FIFTY [Illustration] ILLUSTRATIONS - - LONDON GEORGE BELL & SONS 1901 - - - Dedication. - - TO THE - - MEMORY OF - - THE VERY REVEREND - - JAMES ALLEN, M.A., - - DEAN OF ST. DAVID’S, - - OF - - TRINITY COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE, - - THIS SHORT HISTORY - - IS DEDICATED - - IN THE HOPE THAT ST. DAVID’S - - MAY EVER FIND SUCCESSORS TO BENEFIT BY - - THE EXAMPLE OF THIS HER MOST SELF-SACRIFICING - - AND CAREFUL OF CUSTODIANS. - - - - -AUTHOR’S PREFACE - - -This treatise is little more than a careful digest of numerous works, of -the more important of which a list is given. A sincere note of -obligation is due to Messrs. Jones and Freeman’s scholarly and accurate -_History of St. David’s_ and to Mr. John Murray’s _Handbook to the Welsh -Cathedrals_; but the list is given quite as much to assist future -students as to emphasise those writers to whom the author has been under -special obligations. - -Those who may wish to visit St. David’s will find it remarkably -inaccessible, and they will be well advised to travel to Haverfordwest -by train, sleep there, and drive on, over the sixteen miles and -seventeen hills, to St. David’s on the next day. For cyclists there is a -much better road from Letterston station, but the other is preferable -from the picturesque point of view. - -The illustrations are mostly from the author’s own photographs, but his -special thanks are due to Mr. A. David and Mr. Morgan, to whose hearty -co-operation on the spot a large meed of whatever success they may -attain is unhesitatingly given. The general views are from photographs -by Valentine, Frith and Co., and Poulton; the general measured drawings -are reduced from the elaborate plans of J. Taylor Scott, F.R.I.B.A., -which won the silver medal of the Royal Institute of British Architects -in 1882; a few illustrations are taken from old prints in the author’s -collection, and for some reproductions we have been indebted to the -excellent plates in Messrs. Jones and Freeman’s _History of St. -David’s_. - -PHILIP A. ROBSON. - -PALACE CHAMBERS, -9, BRIDGE STREET, WESTMINSTER. - - - - -LIST OF PRINCIPAL WORKS CONSULTED - - -OWEN’S DESCRIPTION OF PEMBROKESHIRE. London, 2 vols., 1603 [reprinted -1892 and 1897], 8vo, pp. xxviii and 286, and pp. iv and from 287-578, -paper covers. Edited with notes and appendix by Henry Owen (Cymmrodorion -Record Series, No. 1). - -CAMBRIA TRIUMPHANS. London (A. Crooke), 1661, folio, pp. 256; a -preliminary in sixes and three folding plates of arms; Russia extra; two -vols. in one; numerous woodcuts. _Note._--Very rare. Briant’s, £30 9s.; -Heathcote’s, £29 18s. 6d. - -A SURVEY OF THE CATHEDRAL CHURCH OF ST. DAVID’S AND THE EDIFICES -BELONGING TO IT, AS THEY STOOD IN THE YEAR 1715. London, 1717, sm. 410, -pp. xii, 202, vii, panelled calf. By Browne Willis. Illustrated “with -draughts,” consisting of two treble-folding plates opposite p. 1, “The -Iconography” (_i.e._, plan) and “South Prospect,” and opposite p. 91 a -double-folding plate containing fifty-two shields. Very rare. Towneley -copy sold for £1 11s. 6d. Considering its date, a most excellent book. - -HISTORY AND ANTIQUITIES OF THE PARISH OF ST. DAVID. London (E. Harding), -1801, 4to, pp. viii and 206, boards. By George W. Manby. Nine whole-page -aquatints. _Note._--Rare, but amusing rather than veracious when not -copying Browne Willis. - -THE HISTORY AND ANTIQUITIES OF ST. DAVID’S. London and Tenby, 1856, 4to, -pp. xii, 400, cloth. By W. B. Jones, M.A., and E. A. Freeman, M.A. -Illustrated. _Note._--The best work on the subject. - -CAMBRIAN JOURNAL. Vol. iii., London, 1856, 8vo; contains an elaborate -review of J. and F.’s History, with illustrations. - -ST. DAVID’S. THE CATHEDRAL OF SS. ANDREW AND DAVID. Tenby, n.d., but -reprinted from the _Cambrian Journal_, 1864, 8vo, pp. 18, paper covers. -By M. E. C. Walcott. - -HANDBOOK TO THE CATHEDRALS OF WALES. 1st ed., 1873, pp. xx and 334, 2nd -ed., 1887, post 8vo, pp. 334, cloth [by R. J. King], illustrated. -_Note._--2nd edition was revised by the late Dean Allen. - -ST. DAVID’S; ITS EARLY HISTORY AND PRESENT STATE. London and Derby, -1868, sm. 8vo, pp. 42, limp cloth. By an Ecclesiologist (Fox). Three -illustrations. - -H.M. COMMISSIONERS’ REPORT ON CATHEDRAL CHURCHES. London (Eyre and -Spottiswoode), 1883, folio (pp. 24 on _St. David’s_), irregularly -paged. - -ST. DAVID’S (Diocesan Histories). London (S.P.C.K.), Brighton, and New -York, 1888, post 8vo, pp. x, 254, fancy cloth. By W. L. Bevan, M.A. With -map. _Note._--Best history of the Diocese. - -THE BUILDER. Vol. lxiii., No. 2,600 (Cathedral Series). An article, -three full-page plates (including a good plan) and sketches. Folio. -London, December 3, 1892. - -A GUIDE TO THE CATHEDRAL OF ST. DAVID’S, THE BISHOP’S PALACE, AND THE -COAST CHAPELS. London (Jones and Evans), Tenby (Mason), 1896, crn. 8vo, -pp. 90, paper covers. By Travers J. Briant. - -PEMBROKESHIRE ANTIQUITIES. Solva (H. H. Williams), 1897, 8vo, pp. vi. -and 84, paper boards (consisting of reprints from the _Pembroke County -Guardian_ by various authors). St. David’s is mentioned on pp. 8, 34, -37, 53, 68, and 77. - -THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW. Vol. v., Nos. 27, 8, 9, folio. London, 1899; -many photographic illustrations by P. A. Robson. - -CATHEDRAL ORGANISTS. London (Novello), 1899, 8vo, pp. xii and 142, -cloth. By John K. West (St. David’s, pp. 76 and 77). - - - - -LIST OF CONTENTS - - - CHAPTER PAGE - - List of Works consulted xi - - I. THE SITE AND GENERAL HISTORY OF THE FABRIC 2 - Previous Churches--Bishop de Leiâ--Fall of the Tower 4 - Bishop Gower--The Perpendicular Period 5 - The Civil War--West Front rebuilt--Scott’s Restoration 6 - - II. THE EXTERIOR 9 - The Cathedral Precincts 9 - The Church 11 - The Tower 12 - The South Side 14 - The South Porch 14 - The South Transept 16 - The East End 16 - The Ruined Chapels 19 - The North Side 19 - The Library or Chapter House 19 - The North Transept 20 - The North Doorway 20 - The West Front 21 - - III. THE INTERIOR--THE NAVE 23 - The Font 28 - The Rood Screen 30 - The Organ 32 - - THE CHOIR AND TRANSEPTS 36 - The Parclose Screen 44 - The Stalls 44 - The Chapel of St. Thomas 46 - The Chapter House or Library 47 - The Throne 48 - The Sedilia 48 - - THE SHRINE OF ST. DAVID 50 - - THE SHRINE OF ST. CARADOC 54 - The Aisles of the Presbytery 55 - - THE CHAPELS EAST OF THE PRESBYTERY 57 - Bishop Vaughan’s or Trinity Chapel 60 - The South Chapel Aisle 65 - The Ante Chapel 65 - The Lady Chapel 66 - The North Chapel Aisle 68 - - MONUMENTS IN THE CHURCH (otherwise than in the - Eastern Chapels) 71 - Bishop Gower’s Tomb 71 - - IV. THE PRECINCTS 83 - - THE CLOISTERS AND ST. MARY’S COLLEGE 83 - - THE BISHOP’S PALACE 85 - The Parapet 88 - The East Chapel 89 - The Bishop’s Hall and Study 89 - The Great Hall 89 - The West Chapel 92 - - APPENDIX I.--BISHOPS of St. David’s 93 - Precentors and Deans 94 - Organists 95 - - APPENDIX II.--Extracts from Sir G. G. Scott’s Report, 1869 97 - - - - -LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS - - - PAGE - -St. David’s Cathedral from the N.E. _Frontispiece_ - -Arms of the See _Title-page_ - -The West Front before the restoration of 1862 2 - -The Cross and Cathedral Tower 3 - -St. David’s from Speed’s Map 5 - -South-west View before the restoration of 1862 7 - -South View about 1700 9 - -Plan of St. David’s, 1806, by John Carter 10 - -Top of the Tower 11 - -Ceiling of Central Tower 13 - -South Elevation (drawn by J. Taylor Scott) 15 - -South Doorway 17 - -The Nave, looking East 22 - -Elevation of a Bay of the Nave, looking East (drawn by J. T. Scott) 24 - -Norman Shaft with Re-carved Capital 25 - -Details of Pier Arches (from Jones and Freeman) 26 - -Carved Panels and Arch-ornaments in the Triforium (from Jones and -Freeman) 26 - -Groining of Rood Screen showing the flying ribs 31 - -The Rood Screen and Organ 33 - -The Presbytery in 1856 (from Jones and Freeman) 36 - -The Choir and Presbytery, 1895 37 - -The Parclose Screen 43 - -Arch between the S. Transept and Choir Aisle 45 - -Double Piscina, St. Thomas’s Chapel 46 - -The Sedilia 49 - -The Shrine of St. David (Base) 51 - -The Shrine of St. Caradoc (Base) 55 - -Screen of Bishop Vaughan’s Chapel 57 - -Roof of Bishop Vaughan’s Chapel 59 - -Recess in Bishop Vaughan’s Chapel 61 - -Bosses on the Cornice 62 - -Window in Bishop Vaughan’s Chapel 62 - -Niche 63 - -Bishop Vaughan’s Chapel 64 - -View from Ante Chapel to Lady Chapel 66 - -Sedilia and Tomb in Lady Chapel 67 - -The North Chapel Aisle 68 - -Tomb of a Priest, N. Chapel 70 - -Tomb of Bishop Morgan 72 - -Bishop Gower’s Tomb 73 - -Tomb of a Knight 77 - -Abraham Stone 79 - -North Doorway of Nave 80 - -The College of St. Mary (after H. Gastineau) 82 - -The Bishop’s Palace, 1779 (after Paul Sandby, R.A.) 86 - -Section of Chimney in Kitchen 89 - -Bishops’ Palace 90 - -Bishops’ Palace; View of Courtyard (from Jones and Freeman) 91 - -Gable-Cross lying in Bishop Vaughan’s Chapel 96 - -Plan of the Cathedral _At end_ - -[Illustration: THE WEST FRONT BEFORE THE RESTORATION OF 1862. - -(_The figures in the foreground are those of Sir G. G. Scott, Dean -Allen, Prof. E. A. Freeman, the Bishop and Mrs. Jones._)] - -[Illustration: THE CROSS AND CATHEDRAL TOWER.] - - - - -ST. DAVID’S CATHEDRAL - - - - -CHAPTER I - -THE SITE AND GENERAL HISTORY OF THE FABRIC - - -The see of Minevia, or St. David’s, was founded in the sixth century. It -has always included the whole of Pembrokeshire, and is by far the most -important of the four Welsh sees--St. David’s, St. Asaph, Bangor, and -Llandaff. The impressively wild and open scenery which surrounds St. -David’s gives it also a natural advantage irrespective of its greater -size. But the site of the cathedral cannot be regarded as satisfactory, -being close to the little river Alan, on almost marshy ground. Its -drainage has consequently always been a source of trouble and expense. -In questioning the founder’s choice of site it must always be clearly -remembered that the buildings were originally monastic, and that -seclusion, combined with a good natural water supply, were regarded by -the old monastic builders as primary essentials. Once selected by St. -David, however, this site has always been regarded with veneration by -those who in later times added to the original foundation. - -The existing church is not less than the fourth on this site. The -monastic church was destroyed by fire in 645 and the second in 1088, and -the third was that visited by Henry II. in 1171 and 1172 (_vide_ -Giraldus). The first view of the church generally seen is that from the -south-east and from almost on a level with the top of the central tower. -The _tout ensemble_ is certainly remarkable, and few thoughtful visitors -fail to find a pigeon-hole in their memory for this first impression, -which is invariably conjured up by the name “St. David’s.” - -Calixtus II. (Pope 1119-1134) canonised St. David in 1131,[1] and the -church was solemnly dedicated to him in conjunction with St. Andrew, to -whom the previous church had been dedicated. Of this primitive British -church, which St. David himself founded long before the coming of St. -Augustine, nothing is now visible. For in 1180 Peter de Leiâ, the third -Norman bishop (1176-1198), replanned the whole building. Indeed, in -consideration of the works being in progress (1189), the Cardinal Legate -excused the bishop, Giraldus, and certain others from joining in the -Crusade, provided that they contributed towards the expenses of those -going and towards the completion of St. David’s Cathedral. It is to this -Bishop de Leiâ that St. David’s, even as we see it now, mainly owes its -grandeur. - -But soon after the completion of the new church the central tower fell, -seriously damaging all the adjacent parts, which were rebuilt, including -one stage of the tower, by 1248. The foundations, however, on the wet -site caused further trouble, and it was not till 1866 that they were -properly laid and the tower secured by the late Sir (then Mr.) G. G. -Scott. In 1248 an earthquake shook the building in a serious manner, and -probably started or aggravated the curious outward inclination of the -nave arcade, which can be seen in the illustration, p. 22. The fall of -the tower also necessitated alterations in the buildings which had just -been erected to the east of the crossing, and no doubt the earthquake -also prevented any attempt to complete the stone groining of the nave, -for about the year 1500 huge buttresses were added on the north or river -side to prevent further settlements. Bishop Martyn (1296-1328) -completed De Leiâ’s plan by adding the Lady Chapel; but his immediate -successor, Bishop Gower (1328-1347), has, more surely than any -prelate--not excepting De Leiâ--left his impress on the present -buildings. Under his direction a stage was added to the tower; the south -porch was built; the walls of the aisles were raised to their present -height and preparations made for vaulting; the eastern chapel to the -south transept and alterations to those east of the north transept were -carried out; the aisles received Decorated windows and their walls -buttresses; and the very remarkable Rood-screen and its adjuncts were -then first added. Of his splendid episcopal palace across the Alan more -anon. - -[Illustration: FROM SPEED’S MAP OF PEMBROKE.] - -In the Perpendicular period the principal alterations were the renewal -of the main roofs; the addition of the huge buttresses on the north side -of the nave; the vaulting of the chapel just east of the Presbytery, and -the addition of one more stage to the tower. It should be noted that -this was the only period in which the difficulties of vaulting were -overcome, although extensive preparations for a sexpartite system had -been made. - -Nothing of note was done to the fabric for a long period after this, -till Bishop Field whitewashed the cathedral internally in 1630! Then we -find that during the Civil War much damage was done, traces of which can -be easily found in the ruined chapels east of the Presbytery. The -transepts and Lady Chapel were stripped of their lead, and consequently -fell into a state of ruin. The roofs of the former were reconstructed in -1696, but the vaulting to the latter did not fall till nearly eighty -years later. Sundry precautions were taken to prevent the main fabric -from falling into absolute ruin--_e.g._, the southern arch of the tower -was filled up; but St. David’s had fallen on evil days, and it is not -till nearly 1800 that we read of a subscription for rebuilding the West -Front from plans by Nash which are said to have been approved by the -Society of Antiquaries. The frontispiece to this chapter shows this -front as it was before Scott’s great restoration of 1862. The additions -from 1800 to 1862, as given by Messrs. Jones and Freeman, make extensive -reading, but do not count for very much in the building. The Chapel of -St. Thomas, east of the North Transept, was converted into a Chapter -House 1827. During the forties the South Transept was re-arranged as a -parish church and the seventeenth-century vestry was treated as a kind -of eastern aisle. Butterfield added some Decorated windows--notably the -great North Transept window--and the north aisle of the Presbytery again -received a roof. - -In 1862 Scott was requisitioned by Bishop Thirlwall to examine the -fabric and make a report on its proposed complete restoration, and in -1869 he was able, in his second report, to announce the satisfactory -repair of the tower. This work was one of extreme difficulty, as will be -seen from the Appendix (see p. 97). The church was then for the first -time properly drained; and the next parts to be taken in hand by Scott -were the Choir, Presbytery and their aisles, and after that De Leiâ’s -original Transitional work, at a cost of about £40,000. This amount -included Willis’s organ, and the reconstruction of the West Front in -memory of Bishop Thirlwall (of which latter the Very Rev. James Allen, - -[Illustration: SOUTH-WEST VIEW OF THE CATHEDRAL BEFORE THE RESTORATION -OF 1862.] - -afterwards Dean, was the inaugurator). Dean Allen contributed in a most -generous way towards the restoration, as, _inter alia_, the expenses of -the renovation of the North Transept, St. Thomas’s Chapel, Library, and -Treasury, and the roofs of Bishop Vaughan’s Chapel and the ante-chapels -he defrayed entirely. The Rev. J. M. Treherne and his wife each gave -£2,000 by legacy, and the latter gave an annual subscription of £200 -during her life. - -It is most welcome news that the present Dean and Chapter have already -started a fund for the final section of the restoration, viz., that of -the ruinous eastern chapels, wherein is exquisite work being surely -destroyed. And it is hardly too much to expect that the Welsh will not -fail to respond to this dual opportunity for at once reverencing their -Patron Saint and removing what is to-day indeed a national reproach. - -[Illustration: SOUTH VIEW ABOUT 1700, FROM AN OLD PRINT.] - - - - -CHAPTER II - -THE EXTERIOR - - -=The Cathedral Precincts.=--The wall of the Close, which extends to almost -a mile, dates from 1330, but of the four GATEWAYS only one remains. -This, to the south-east of the cathedral, is the main entrance to the -Close from the secular part of the city. It is about 60 feet high, and -the gateway is flanked on the north by an early Decorated (or -Transitional) octagonal tower--once the janitor’s lodge--and on the -south by a semicircular tower of an earlier character. This latter was -probably a detached bell-tower and contained a prison. It also formed a -Record Office and Consistory Court. The Precentor’s house abuts on the -southern enclosure; the Chanter’s orchard is to the south-west; the -Archdeacon has his residence to the west, and north of this is another -for the Archdeacon of Brecon; beyond this again are the Chancellor’s, -the Archdeacon of Cardigan’s, and the Treasurer’s houses. Adjoining the -bridge is a prebendal house. - -[Illustration: PLAN OF ST. DAVID’S, 1806, BY JOHN CARTER. - -A. Tower Gateway; B. City Wall; C. Cathedral; D. Bishop’s Palace; E. St. -Mary’s College; F. Garden; G. Great Hall; H. Kitchen; I. Bishop’s Hall; -K. West Chapel; L. Cloister Garth; M. God’s Acre (graves); O. -Subordinate Cathedral Buildings.] - -On the north side of the Nave and parallel with it, but separated by the -Cloister garth, are the remains of the College of St. Mary; to the north -of its dignified tower are traces, possibly, of the infirmary, and to -the north and east of this again are the remains of the houses of the -Master and seven Priest-fellows of St. Mary’s, forming three sides of a -quadrangle, on the north side of which was an entrance gateway tower. -Across the Alan to the north-west are the attractive ruins of Bishop -Gower’s once splendid palace. - -[Illustration: TOP OF TOWER (S.W. ANGLE) AND TENOR BELL.] - -=The Church.=--An important feature in the general exterior appearance of -St. David’s is the walling material. Greys, reds, and purples, and -mottle-blends of all three, lend a peculiar richness and warmth to the -building on a sunny day, and the converse in wet weather. The quarries -from which the cathedral stone was obtained are at Caerbwdy, in the -immediate neighbourhood, and as these are almost the oldest sedimentary -rocks known, it is conjectured that some part of this locality existed -as an island in more than one primæval sea.[2] This ancient cathedral, -then, of the British Church has the distinction of being built of more -primitive stone than any other important building in the country. Many -things combine to render the general character of the exterior -architecturally uninteresting. There is a decided feeling of dignity, -but not of the grandeur with which one is apt to associate the idea of a -cathedral. It lies low; the roofs are of a flat pitch, with the -exception of those of the transepts; the highly picturesque and -exquisite ruin of Bishop Gower’s palace to the west, with its chequered -rampart, and the immense amount of new material used in the very -necessary restoration, at present combine to mask the real age of the -cathedral; and, finally, there is no hint of the gorgeous work within. - -=The Tower.=--Few Norman towers, situated on the crossing of the nave, -transepts, and choir, have not fallen[3] or been in extreme danger of -doing so owing to the early architects having a very limited knowledge -of the weight of superimposed masses and of the thrust of arches, which, -as the orientals declare, “never rest.” The central tower of St. David’s -was no exception; it fell in 1220. But it can hardly be that any tower -has suffered worse than has this one from injudicious attentions even -till the general restorations under Sir G. Scott in 1862. After the fall -of 1220 the western piers and arch were allowed to remain, and the other -three arches and piers were rebuilt from the ground. This, however, did -not deter Bishops Gower and Vaughan adding, the first a Decorated and -the latter a Perpendicular stage on to the same faulty substructure. In -the rebuilding after the disaster of 1220 apparently but little effort -was made towards fully introducing the new style in vogue. In fact, it -is one of the most curious features of the whole of the details of the -building that all the work is behind the accepted contemporary types in -the matter of architectural advancement. - -Internally the one old arch remaining is, of course, more or less -semicircular, but the three new ones are pointed and consequently the -string-course above them is carried at a higher level. Over this -string-course on the west side is an arcade of pointed arches with -slender shafts and foliated capitals. A corbel composed of a fox’s head -carries the centre shaft. Altogether these form a graceful combination -of shafts, corbels, and large bowtells with shaft-bases. Above is the -characteristic Norman billet string-course. - -[Illustration: CEILING OF CENTRAL TOWER.] - -Bishop Gower’s stage, above a string with the ball-flower ornament, -contains on each face a tall two-light window, having pointed arches -opening to a wall-passage, and externally a niche on either side. The -third storey (of Bishop Vaughan, c. 1515) has a top-heavy effect and a -most unusual parapet, with polygonal angle-shafts and a set of eight -pinnacles. There are at present three bells, and the one that is used -most and strikes from the clock is outside on the tower roof under a -wooden diminutive belfry. There are two bells at the west end on the -nave floor. Apparently there was an octave in the middle of the -fourteenth century, when the bells were recast and the largest was lost -at sea. About 1690 there were five (some cracked), and in 1748 the -Chapter ordered that the four large bells should be taken down as they -were both useless and dangerous, and in 1765 two were sold. The upper -part of the interior of the tower consists of an elaborate wooden vault, -which was raised by Scott and finely emblazoned. As the roof of the -tower must obviously have been raised at least twice before, it seems -hardly necessary for Scott to apologise (_vide_ Report, 1869, Appendix) -for doing so again. His success, however, is very patent. - -=The South Side.=--Beginning at the west end, the first noticeable feature -is the =South Porch= in the second bay, with the parvise or first floor -chamber. The inner doorway has been, as Freeman[4] justly says, “one of -the most magnificent displays of ornament in the whole building ... and, -contrary to the common rule, the original Norman doorway has given way -to a later successor.... The present doorway is Decorated (Bishop Gower, -1328-47), without shafts, but with a superb display of sculptured -decoration, besides crockets and the ordinary four-leaved flower. The -arch is adorned with a series of sculptures, which are sadly mutilated, -but in which we may still trace the familiar representation of the Root -of Jesse. The position, however, necessarily involves some -singularities, and, as in the better known example of the Dorchester -window, the genealogy is by no means easy to follow. The western impost -is occupied by what appears to be a figure of Adam, with Eve issuing -from his side; the other supports the recumbent figure of Jesse, from -whom springs the branch, along which the figures are introduced, -somewhat after the manner of the Norman medallions at Iffley. Some of -the figures may still be discerned reading at desks; David with his harp -may also plainly be seen, as well as a representation of the -Crucifixion. Over the apex is an effigy of the Holy Trinity, with angels -on each side bearing censers. The doorway has pinnacles at the sides, -but they are cut off by the vaulting of the porch, which is plain -quadripartite, springing from corbels, - -[Illustration: SOUTH ELEVATION. - -_Drawn by F. Taylor Scott._] - -among which we may observe the ornament called the mask, the only -example of that form to be found in the cathedral.” This porch is the -work of Gower, and the peculiar mouldings are readily traceable to the -same artist who designed the rood-screen. Scraps of the previous Norman -doorway, which was done away with by Gower, are still to be seen in the -plinth. At one time there were five steps in the porch, but these were -removed in 1885. The entrance to the upper chamber (added by Vaughan, c. -1515) is obtained from the nave by a turret-stair, and the room is now -used as a clerk-of-work’s drawing office. - -In 1849 Butterfield renewed the tracery of the aisle windows as it -originally was in Decorated times, but it is not very attractive. - -The Clerestory is Norman, of ashlar work, and the windows are rather -wide, stumpy, and round-headed, with flat pilaster-like buttresses -between each pair. But the restoration has deprived the exterior of much -of its interest, although one can easily imagine that those of the next -century will enjoy a very pleasing contrast between the purples of the -Caerfai buttresses and the yellows of the window dressings, which are of -Somersetshire oolite. - -=The South Transept= still retains the outline of the arch of the great -south window which was blocked up when the four existing Perpendicular -windows of four lights each were inserted. A double buttress supports -the south-east corner of the transept, and behind this is the present -Chapter House. - -=The East End.=--The south Presbytery aisle was put into proper repair at -the time of the general restoration, and new windows were inserted. The -upper tier of windows at the east end of the Presbytery have been well -restored also by Scott, and his own description[5] may well be given: - - “In restoring the eastern arm of the church, a question arose - which, though but slightly suggested in my first Report, grew upon - my mind as we proceeded to such a degree, that it was more than a - twelvemonth before I could make up my mind as to which course to - take. The case was this: - - “This wall of the church had originally side walls, much lower than - at present, with a high-pitched roof, and was constructed with - some view to stone groining, though it is clear that this was never - carried out, and was, in fact, deliberately relinquished. - - “The east end had two ranges of windows, three most magnificent - lights below and four above. - -[Illustration: SOUTH DOORWAY.] - - “In the fifteenth century the high roof was taken off, the side - walls raised by the addition of some six feet of dead wall, the - gable lowered, and a very flat, though handsome roof placed upon - the walls thus altered; at the same time the upper tier of lancet - windows was removed, all but the outer jambs, and the space they - occupied converted into a single window in the Perpendicular style, - with a very flat arch. - - “Sometime later still the three great lancet lights below were - walled up, owing to the erection of Bishop Vaughan’s chapel behind - them. - - “Finding that the dead wall, thus added to the sides, was a - _perfect mine_ of the _débris_ of the ancient upper tier of - windows, that the Perpendicular window substituted for them was so - decayed as to require renewal, and that the timbers of the late and - low-pitched roof were much decayed, it was a tempting idea to - restore this limb of the church to its ancient design, and to add - groining (if not of stone, at least of oak) as at first - contemplated; while opposed to this was the judicious rule laid - down by Messrs. Freeman and Jones, the historians of the cathedral, - that when ancient alterations had become stereotyped as a part of - an historical monument, all change in them not included under the - term _restoration_ is set down as to be in itself reprehended, only - to be justified by special circumstances, the burden of proving - whose existence rests, in every case, with the innovator. - - “This rule would certainly demand the repair and retention of the - later roof, and even, at first sight, of the later window, and - between these conflicting views I for a considerable time - oscillated, in a way which may have appeared weak to others, and - was certainly most painful to myself. - - “I eventually took an intermediate course, which I think will be - admitted to be justified by the result. - - “As regards the roof, though it was so bad as to necessitate its - being taken down, and though all its main beams (I think) but one - had to be renewed, the remainder, including much good carving and - many armorial bearings, was capable of reparation. As regards the - original intention of groining, I found unquestionable proofs that - it had been relinquished, if not by the original builders, yet - certainly by the reconstructors after the fall of the tower in - 1220, for these builders had inserted niches just where the - vaulting would come. They had also erected the upper range of - lancet lights at the east end in a form incompatible with vaulting. - - “These considerations led me at length to determine to relinquish - the idea of groining, and to return to my first intention of - restoring the later and existing roof. - - “The case, however, was different with the upper east windows, for - not only was the later insertion so decayed as to demand renewal, - but on searching below its cill we found those of the original - lights still _in situ_, while on working the mine of _débris_ which - existed in the dead walls added to the original sides, we found not - only evidence sufficient to show the precise design of the ancient - eastern lancets, but sufficient to go a considerable way in - reconstructing them with their own ancient materials, though we - found no details to enable us to complete either the high gable or - its flanking turrets. - - “While, then, I arrived at the conclusion that the - fifteenth-century roof should be restored, I also felt convinced - that, as regards the lancet lights, I had discovered just such - _special circumstances_ as would justify and almost demand the - restitution of their original forms. - - “The design of the windows, thus reproduced from their original - materials after being for four centuries immured, is very excellent - and interesting. Internally they form a continuous arcade, - supported on little clusters of light shafts, while externally--the - lights being narrow, and the piers between them wide--the latter - are occupied each by a double niche, a fellow to which flanks - either jamb, so that while the arcade within consists of four - arches, that without is formed of four _groups_ of arches, making - twelve in all--four being windows and eight niches. The details of - all are excellent; unfortunately, however, the roof of Bishop - Vaughan’s Chapel prevents the external group from being seen with - any effect, though within we have now, so far as the forms of the - windows go, the ancient arrangement complete, and a most effective - and beautiful one it is.” - -On the east wall of the tower the various weather-courses of previous -roofs are visible, which make a not unnatural appeal to the imagination -of the spectator. For the great defect of the exterior generally is that -the roofs are of such a very flat pitch. - -=The Ruined Chapels=--on the south KING EDWARD’S, on the east that of OUR -LADY, on the north of ST. NICHOLAS, and the Ante-Chapel--will be -described later, as it is only by an unfortunate chance that they are -now roofless (except the last), and will, we hope, shortly be correctly -regarded as part of the interior if the proposed restoration takes -place. - -Not far from the east end of the Lady Chapel is the spring which St. -David is credited with creating. Giraldus[6] has a very pretty legend -concerning this spring, which was known as St. Mary’s Well. It seems to -have been of somewhat variable quality, as its waters were sometimes -changed into milk and at others into wine. Sir G. Scott, however, with -scant respect for its saintly origin, caused it to be drained! - -=The North Side= is much the more interesting of the two. After passing -the chapels we come to a very curious three-storied building, the roof -of which is higher than that of the cathedral. On the ground-floor was -the Chantry of St. Thomas, now a vestry, entered from the east side of -the north transept, and above this the turret stair from the north aisle -of the presbytery leads to the old Chapter House, now the Library, and -above this again is a disused room, once the Treasury. - -No parallel has yet been found for this remarkable building, which -Freeman (1856) very accurately describes thus:[7] - - “It is continued from the face of the north transept, which it - slightly exceeds in point of elevation. The external work is - Decorated; the east is flanked by two flat buttresses of very - singular character, which are terminated by rich pinnacles, now - mutilated. Equally singular is the buttress dividing its two bays - on the north side; flat at the bottom, after its first stage its - projection becomes angular, and so runs up the whole height of the - wall, becoming much smaller in its upper portion; its pinnacle is - quite destroyed (but is now restored). At the junction with the - transept a staircase is attached, in a singular and almost - indescribable way, to the upper portion of the broad pilaster at - the north-east corner of the transept....The east end has a very - strange appearance, having three windows over each other, and a - niche, not unlike a window, above all; that in the third stage is a - blocked spherical triangle (now restored). The lower part of the - wall is of ashlar, the occurrence of which is so rare in the - exterior of this church; the upper is of rubble, excepting the - buttresses.” - -Butterfield is responsible for the large Decorated window in the =North -Transept=, and Scott raised the roof to its original pitch and rebuilt -the north-west angle turret. In the west wall are two Transitional -windows (but the northern one has long been filled in), and above is a -corbelled parapet. Below, but at a lower level than the transept floor, -is a doorway to the cloisters, with a semicircular outer arch having a -solid tympanum and segmental head within. At a contemporary period half, -and much later the whole, of this entrance was built up, and in the -recess thus formed was placed a lavatory and drain. - -The east wall of the cloisters connects St. Mary’s College with the -north transept. An imposing view is obtained on going through the door -at the north-east corner of the cloisters. We now see the north side of -the nave, with flying buttresses supported on huge masses of masonry, -the ruins and graceful tower of St. Mary’s and, in the distance across -the Alan, the magnificent ruins of the episcopal palace. - -The =North Doorway= (see p. 80) corresponds in position to the south -porch, and is a good example of a Transitional (Norman to Early English) -doorway, but it is much decayed. The principal ornament is, like those -in the arcade, a kind of hybrid composed of the Norman chevron and the -Early-English dog-tooth ornaments. There is a depressed arch to this -doorway, which, with other evidence, leads us to suppose that it has -been higher. Another feature which calls for comment--it is the same in -the arcade but in less marked degree--is that no matter what the size of -the stone, a complete part of the ornament has been carved upon it, thus -obtaining an irregular but not unpleasing effect. - -The present =West Front= is from a design by Sir G. G. Scott, who based it -upon a drawing which he found in the library of the Society of -Antiquaries showing the church as it was before Nash’s alterations. - -The illustrations on pages 2 and 7 show Nash’s design of 1793, which -seems to have received the sanction of the Society of Antiquaries. The -figures that appear in the first are Bishop Jones, Professor Freeman, -the authors of the best history of St. David’s, Dean Allen, and Sir G. -G. Scott. This execrable composition was a hopeless conglomeration of -Norman, Decorated, and Perpendicular, with a couple of heavy-arched -buttresses, which were apparently standing as recently as 1887.[8] The -rebuilding of the _West Front_ was undertaken at a cost of about £4,000 -as a memorial to Bishop Thirlwall, who first seriously began to restore -the church in 1864, and his statue stands over the west door. The -material is Caerfai stone from the neighbouring quarries of Caerbwdy, -and suffers from its newness in appearance. In fact the design and the -purple stone combine to give the whole front a very heavy appearance, -which only years of exposure to the sea air will partially remedy. - -[Illustration: _Photo. J. Valentine._ - -THE NAVE, LOOKING EAST.] - - - - -CHAPTER III - -THE INTERIOR--THE NAVE - - -At the South Porch, by which the visitor usually enters, the ogee-headed -holy-water stoup should be noticed, and a general view be made of the -church, as it is most unusual and has a character all its own. The -majority of the work is that of Bishop Peter de Leiâ (1176-1198), and is -therefore Transitional in character; that is to say, it is at the point -of fusion between Norman and Early English. The pointed arch of the -latter is not yet adopted, but the round (more or less) arch is still -employed, probably in some degree to avoid the greater height otherwise -entailed, but the details verge on the purity of the most refined Early -English. De Leiâ evidently intended sexpartite groining to form an -internal ceiling, but an earthquake and the fall of the tower doubtless -instilled caution--even if funds were forthcoming--and the project was -never carried out. The exceedingly rich ceiling, however, of Irish oak -does not make one regret this circumstance, for its very bizarrerie and -semi-arabesque character, coming so closely in contact with the great -Norman arches, combine to make the interior of St. David’s one of -unusual beauty. The more so, by contrast, on entering from the almost -bald exterior. - -“Possibly the circumstances which conduced to the lack of external -ornament may have led its designers to counterbalance this deficiency by -a superabundance of internal decoration. Certain it is that very few -structures of the same size equal this cathedral in richness and -elaborateness of execution lavished upon this portion of the interior. -In fact, much of the solemnity of a Romanesque nave is lost, an effect -which is - -[Illustration: ELEVATION OF A BAY OF THE NAVE, N. SIDE. - -_From a Drawing by J. Taylor Scott._] - -certainly far better produced by more massive proportions and a greater -extent of unadorned surface.”[9] - -[Illustration: NORMAN SHAFT WITH RE-CARVED CAPITAL, EASTERN PIER IN S. -NAVE ARCADE. (See p. 27.)] - -But although we miss the characteristic massiveness of most Norman -naves, we also enjoy the freedom--which may fairly be claimed as the -structural note of this interior--from their attendant heaviness. In -fact, the very large span of the arches detracts from the size of the -piers, the actual bulk of which is great. - -[Illustration: DETAILS OF PIER ARCHES. - -(From J. & F. p. 58.)] - -[Illustration: CARVED PANELS AND ARCH ORNAMENTS IN THE TRIFORIUM. - -(From J. & F. p. 58.)] - -The details of the arcade are of an interesting character. The piers are -alternately round and octagonal (irregular), with attached shafts at the -cardinal points. Towards the aisles the shafts are clustered, being -intended for vaulting. The plinths are more varied than is usual, but -the tongue of foliage, which is a favourite method of ornamenting the -space caused by the change from the square to the round or octagonal, is -here conspicuous by only one example, and that a timid one on the south -side. The bases are of quite an Early English type, with the usual -hollow, but the capitals prove an instructive study. The most frequent -type of these is the rather common “cushion,” which the Transitional -carvers have vivified in the most exquisite way by, apparently, -experimenting with several forms of stiff-leaved foliage, some of which -approach more nearly to the classic type than is usual in this country, -and least of all was it to be expected at the land’s end of Wales. On -the south side towards the east is one of special beauty, where one sees -how the carver has treated the Norman cushion cap as a boss on which to -let his fancy play. The arches are of exceptional richness and -elaborately moulded towards the nave--in fact, just as little of the -Romanesque character as is consistent with the Norman arch is retained. -The westernmost arches, being narrower in span than the others, are -skilfully kept the same in height by being pointed, and the details -differ; which prompts the suggestion that De Leiâ, finding his nave -somewhat short in appearance, decided to lengthen it by another bay, and -was only confined by the river Alan, which at the north-west corner even -now runs quite close to the foundations. A strong horizontal line is -carried east and west, close above the Norman hood-moulding, which, -combined with the great width of the nave and the huge span of the -arches, conduces towards the feeling of stuntedness already noticed in -the exterior. - -The deeply recessed clerestory of round-headed windows is curiously -amalgamated with the triforium of couplets having pointed arches; in the -spandril between each of which latter are elaborately decorated circles, -some with a kind of rude dog-tooth star and others with a kind of -eternal interlacing which looks something like an interwoven horseshoe -pattern. In other instances, as at Southwell Minster, the triforium -absorbs the clerestory, but at St. David’s it retains its character and -becomes a screen to the passage over the arcade. The result is a very -rich confusion. The amalgamation of distinct members not only precludes -either the usual appearance of a church with or without a triforium, but -the treatment of the triforial arches themselves is clever without being -pleasing (see illustrations, pp. 22, 24, 25). The arches which enclose -both the triforium and clerestory are again very rich, and the -ornamentation is carried down their whole length without shafts or -cappings. Clustered shafts with the Norman cushion capitals having -square abaci receive the shafts of the wooden ceiling. - -Of the previous nave-roof we have no date, but very possibly it may have -resembled that at Peterborough or St. Alban’s, as something similar -seems to have existed at Llandaff. The present roof is generally -accredited to the Treasurer, Owen Pole (1472-1509), and in all -likelihood that of the choir may be also. - - “This very singular, if not unique, structure is, in its - construction, simply a flat ceiling of timber laid upon the walls; - but, by some, certainly unjustifiable, violations of the laws of - architectural reality, such as are not uncommon even in the stone - roofs of that period, it is made to assume a character wholly its - own, and which it is very difficult to describe in an intelligible - manner. By the employment of vast pendants, which at the sides take - the form of overlapping capitals to the small shafts already - mentioned, the ceiling appears to be supported by a system of - segmental arches effecting a threefold longitudinal division of the - roof, and crossed by a similar range springing from the walls. Of - course these arches in reality support nothing, but are in fact - borne up by what appears to rest on them. Notwithstanding this - unreality and the marked inconsistency of the roof with the - architecture below, notwithstanding that its general character - would have been much more adapted to some magnificent state - apartment in a royal palace, still the richness and singularity of - such an interminable series of fretted lines renders this on the - whole one of the most attractive features of the cathedral. Both - the arches themselves, and the straight lines which divide the - principal panels, drip with minute foliations like lace-work in a - style of almost Arabian gorgeousness. It is much to be regretted - that this ceiling cuts off the top of the western arch of the - lantern, which at once spoils the effect of the latter, and gives - an unpleasant appearance to the unfinished pendants of the ceiling, - when seen from behind, out of the choir. Still this very view of - the roof, in which hardly any other part of the nave is visible, is - wonderful in the extreme” (J. & F., p. 59). - -Having noticed the details and their curious effects in the nave, the -observant visitor still feels that he has not fully explained to his -satisfaction the complete secret of its bizarre effect. It only unfolds -itself on measuring and levelling. The whole nave floor slopes -considerably--more than two feet--from east to west, following the -natural fall of the ground, and the arcades slope outwards respectively -north and south, and, in consequence, their piers lengthen as one nears -the west end. A settlement, owing to the very wet site and bad -foundations, probably aided by an earthquake (1248) and the unusual -width of the nave (for a Norman church) are enough to account for these -peculiarities; and the slope of the nave floor seems to have been -purposely so devised for the sake of drainage in flood-time. - -At the west end of the south aisle, on three octagonal steps, stands the -=Font=. Its original shaft is missing. The marble base is octagonal, and -rudely arcaded with sixteen pointed arches, but no part is specially -beautiful. - -The nave aisles do not call for any very special remarks. At the east -end of both will be seen traces of the original vaulting, and on the -north side the vaulting-shafts are taller than on the south. Also on -that side the Perpendicular flying-buttresses are seen which make such a -strange show outside, where once was the cloister garth, with their huge -props. Speaking of the aisles generally, Freeman says: “It must be -remembered that none of these preparations for vaulting were ever -carried into effect. This is, indeed, no unusual phenomenon, yet there -is certainly something striking in so many designs for a stone roof -being traced out upon the same walls, and none of them being ever -brought to perfection. In the nave aisles it may perhaps be accounted -for by the strange and untoward shapes which the great width of the pier -arches compelled the lateral arches of the vaulting to assume; it may -have been found actually impossible to vault the aisles either at this -(1328-1347) or the earlier Romanesque period. But this argument does not -apply to any of the other unfinished vaults in the church of whatever -date.”[10] - -The interior of the west front has been as nearly as possible restored -to its former state, but has now no triforium passage. There are a -couple of tiers of windows over the original west entrance. All the -lights are round-headed and are set in a Norman rear-arch. - -Some of the nave piers still show traces of polychromatic decoration. On -the north and south sides, on the easternmost pier but one, are the -remains of some frescoes, as also on the middle pier of the south -arcade. But Bishop Field’s white-wash of 1630, which was removed about -1830 under the careful superintendence of the Ven. Archdeacon Davies, -doubtless spoilt whatever beauty these mural decorations ever had. - -It requires considerable discernment to distinguish very clearly what -the designs are, but Freeman[11] made out that on the third southern -pier (from the east) is a representation of the Blessed Virgin seated -beneath a canopy. The figure is within a vesica, vested in a cope and -has a nimbus; beneath which is an inscription, “Virgo Maria.” Above is -our Lord and the emblems of the four Evangelists, and on the small -attached shafts are figures of seven candlesticks, evidently referring -to the vision of St. John.[12] - -On the south-east face there is a full-length crowned figure of a king -in plate-armour with the basanet and camaille, holding a sword and -standing under a canopy. On the left arm is the initial =H=, which--the -date of the plate-armour with knee-caps and elbow-pieces -corresponding--has been taken to denote Henry IV. - -On the two other piers are achievements of arms which Freeman[13] states -to be “a banner bearing a bend, a shield party per chevron, and a casque -with crest and mantlings, the crest being a head crowned.” - -=The Rood Screen.=--The elaborate rood-screen, which separates the nave -and choir, projects into the nave nearly half a bay. A daïs[14] of three -steps in height occupies the remainder of the bay. The entrance to the -choir is vaulted in two bays, and there are some very unusual flying -groin-ribs, which are shown in the illustration. The work is -unmistakably that of Bishop Gower (1328-1347), and was perhaps the -completion of the Decorated scheme which he inaugurated throughout the -fabric. On the sunny south side the tomb of the Bishop gains by contrast -with the heavy arch-shadow. - -On the north side, facing the nave is a peculiarly flat and shallow -arcade in three bays, which formed a kind of reredos to the altar of the -Holy Cross--the piscina being on the north. On the oblique side, facing -north-west is a doorway with a semi-octagonal arch leading to the roof -and organ loft. - -On the south side of the western bay are two tombs, and on the north -one, all of which will be described with the monuments in the nave (see -p. 71). - -The backing to the screen was, when Freeman wrote, solid, and he -surmised, with some accuracy, what Sir G. G. Scott found on his -restoration of the screen. In Scott’s words:[15] - - “I mentioned in my first Report the massive stonework, some seven - or eight feet in thickness, which blocked the rood-screen, and - which I suppose to have been added to strengthen the tower piers. - On examination this was found originally to have been hollow, but - to have been filled up solid for the purpose suggested. The - entrance to the choir was through a roof and uncouth archway in - this vast wall, but on searching the contents of the - -[Illustration: GROINING OF ROOD SCREEN, SHOWING THE FLYING RIBS.] - - wall the _débris_ was discovered of the original archway, and of - the side doorways into the hollow spaces. These details were found - to be parts of a beautifully groined space, closely resembling the - existing archway through the rood-screen, and forming a second, - though varied, bay of that beautiful entrance. We have been - enabled to reconstruct this feature, using the old remains so far - as they would go. This beautiful addition to the choir was wholly - beyond anything I had anticipated.” - -In the _Computus_ under 1492 is an entry recording that the sum of 100 -shillings[16] for materials for a work which would seem to be for the -blocking up of the screen, and no doubt the constant trouble arising -from the weakness of the western tower arch rendered some such course -imperative. - -In De Leiâ’s time, or rather later, the screen probably stood between -the tower piers, as the bases of their eastern responds are raised above -those of the nave and suggest an earlier screen and its platform. And it -is not unlikely that the pleasing incongruity of the western side of the -screen is due to the retention of some portions of earlier work. There -are two steps to the first bay of the screen, and on the second stand -the wrought-iron gates (1847), and to the second bay there are three -more steps before we reach the level of the choir. Gower’s -characteristic ornaments and mouldings are somewhat lavishly bestowed -about the screen, and doubtless his statue was intended to stand in the -niche on the south side towards the nave above the curious aperture -fitted with intersecting tracery. For a description of the tombs, see p. -71. - -Along the length of the screen runs an oak cove cornice--possibly -Butterfield’s work--copied from an existing piece which is original. The -arches are fitted with late Perpendicular tracery, very white in -appearance, and the springers of the vaulting seem not to have been -completed. The groining has now been finished and an oak cornice added, -and on the rood-screen is the organ. In 1571 30_s_. seems to have been -paid for taking down the rood-loft, but it is now almost impossible to -be sure what precisely this meant.[17] - -The views north, south, east, and west are well worth the little walk on -to the organ-loft level. Various details are well seen from this height, -notably the interior of the tower, the nave-roof, and the general -arrangements and fittings of the choir. - -=The Organ.=--The present organ and case can hardly be - -[Illustration: THE ROOD-SCREEN AND ORGAN.] - -described as things of beauty, though in point of tone the instrument is -undoubtedly strong, yet sweet. It was built by Messrs. Willis in 1883, -and is almost entirely new. Like the organ at Winchester, it used to -occupy the north lantern arch, and was re-erected there in 1843 by -Lincoln of London, but the present instrument stands on the rood-screen, -care being, however, taken that it should obstruct as little of the view -as possible. The tubular pneumatic system has been here adopted, and -there are three manuals. A few points concerning the previous organs may -be of interest, as it is not unusual to neglect this branch of -archæology. According to tradition the present position of the organ is -the original one. Browne Willis[18] says: “The Organ, before the -Rebellion Stood in the Rood-Loft, under the _West_ Arch, and fac’d the -Altar; it is now removed to the _North_ Arch: It is a new one, and those -that are Judges, say, a pretty good one.” This amusing criticism gives -further evidence to the notion that Browne Willis did not visit the -church before--or at any rate very recently before--he wrote his -interesting but somewhat unreliable little survey, which has now become -very rare in any form. The items--“Et Sol Willō Warryn organizanti -40ˢ” and “to yᵉ mʳ of yᵉ children for keeping of yᵉ -organs and teaching of yᵉ quoristers, £10,” and others from the -_Liber Communis_, imply the existence of an organ in 1490, 1492, 1557 -and 1565. In the last year the magnificent sum of 6d. was spent on two -stops “for yᵉ great organs,” from which we may infer that our organs -of to-day are far larger than in 1565. At any rate some small organ -might easily have stood under the western arch of the tower, although -this arch was then built up as it “fac’d the altar.”[19] - - “Probably the tradition of the organ having stood there, led Browne - Willis to suppose that the arch had been recently built up. However - this may be, there are strong signs of its having occupied that - position subsequently to the erection of the wall. The balustrade - which surmounts the canopies of the stalls projects at this point, - as if to give greater room for a small organ; and the door which - pierces the wall, and is apparently coeval with it, is not set in - the centre, where it would have interfered with the organ, but near - the northern pier of the arch. This seems to have been the usual - place of the organ in our churches, and to have been retained from - the mere force of habit to the present time, when, from the greater - size of our instruments, it is far less convenient.”[20] - -A new organ was built in 1581--“ad usum divini servitii”--but was ruined -in the great rebellion.[21] The ever-interesting Manby, however, gives -another account, by which the organist, hearing some rebel discussing -the demolition of the organ, and fearing that he might lose his -position, dropped a stone from the loft and killed a Roundhead, an -“aids-du-camp.” The organist fled and thus diverted attention from his -instrument, having found a hiding place in the great bell by holding on -to the clapper! This same bell the rebels stole, but their vessel was -wrecked off Ramsey Sound, and the superstitious still say that the -tolling of this bell presages a great storm! - -It is clear there was an organ in 1691, as Precentor Ellis, in his -answer to Bishop Watson’s Visitation Articles, says: “I answeare that we -have an Organ, but out of order, for how long I doe not remember.” - -Early in the eighteenth century Bernard Schmidt, the celebrated builder -of that in St. Paul’s Cathedral, constructed an organ as the result of -an order of the Chapter (1695), by which £10 was, for five years, to be -set apart “out of the allowance to the Master of the Fabric”; and in -1698 each canon was ordered to advance £10 towards the new organ, for -which the canons had expressed a great desire. - -A very interesting communication from Archdeacon Davies to Archdeacon -Yardley, of August 3, 1740, gives further particulars: - - “What Particular time yᵉ new Organ was set up here, I cannot be - positive, but do believe, from yᵉ accounts, it must be in the - year 1704 or 1705. What Exact Su[~m] it stood yᵉ Chapter In, I - cannot for certain say, but am apt to think, from Various Items in - various Years picked up about it, in their Accounts it could not be - less, including all Charges, than £300, whatever More; and in a - very little time after it was set up, they were at a Considerable - Expense in repairing it again, after it had been damaged by a - Storm, which uncovered yᵉ very part of yᵉ Roof of yᵉ - Church under which it lay, and exposed it to yᵉ Rain and yᵉ - open Sky; and they were obliged to have an Organ Builder (down from - London I think) at a great Expense to put things to rights again. - - “Upon looking over some loose Papers in yᵉ Chest at St. David’s, - I have found these Receipts from Mr. Bernard Smith of London, Organ - Builder (who made this Organ at St. David’s) for yᵉ Summe of - £290 paid to Him only upon that Account. So that when yᵉ Charge - of bringing it down, yᵉ Necessary workmanship here, and other - articles relating to it are put together, I dare say, before it - could be compleatly set up, yᵉ Expense was much nearer to £400 - than £300.”[22] - -This organ seems to have been used till that consisting of a choir organ -and swell was put up by Lincoln in 1843 (as already noted), and the old -case “of Norway oak”[23] was re-used. Six of the present stops are -Father Smith’s originals.[24] - -In the present restoration this organ was removed, and, to the very -great discredit of all concerned, the splendid case with carvings if -not actually by, certainly worthy of, Grinling Gibbons, was allowed to -be broken up. A few of the best pieces were recently put together and a -neat organ-screen constructed for the Church of St. Martin, -Haverfordwest. A brief list of organists will be found on p. 95. - -[Illustration: THE PRESBYTERY IN 1856. - -_Drawn by J. H. Le Keux_ (_from Jones & Freeman_).] - - -THE CHOIR AND TRANSEPTS. - -On passing through the rood-screen up five steps from the daïs the choir -is reached, which affords one of the most - -[Illustration: _Photo: F. Frith & Co._ - -THE CHOIR AND PRESBYTERY IN 1895.] - -pleasing prospects in the cathedral. This view gains by comparison with -the nave because of the latter’s over-intricacy, which complication is -avoided in the choir by the absence of a triforium. There are four -Transitional bays of very good proportions, if we except perhaps a -tendency to heaviness in the alternately round and octagonal piers. Here -we have--what the nave-bay design so much wants--strong vertical lines -in the clustered shafts. The Transitional vaulting-shafts stop a little -above the string over the arcade, and continuing them are slender -Decorated ones with elaborate capitals. The clerestory lights (also -Transitional) are beautifully detailed with a bold kind of chevron. - -The east end is one of the finest pieces of Norman blending with Early -English in the cathedral, or, for the matter of that, in the kingdom. It -is composed of three lancets below and four above, Sir G. G. Scott -having restored it to the state in which it was after the rebuilding of -1220, consequent upon the fall of the tower, except that Bishop -Vaughan’s Chapel has made it desirable that the three lower lights -should not be open as they originally were. They are now filled with -mosaics. - -In the fifteenth century, when the Perpendicular window was inserted, -the stonework of the previous wall and upper tier of lights was used for -heightening the side walls. Finding these walls to be a mine of the -_débris_ of the earlier windows, and the Perpendicular window in a bad -state of decay, Scott determined to replace the old work. - -After the fall of the tower the rebuilders were astonishingly -conservative in their avoidance of novelty. It cannot have been from any -want of ability, and we incline to the belief that it was the result of -a genuine desire to make the new work harmonise with that in the nave -and, by re-using a certain amount of old material, to relieve a possibly -not overflowing exchequer of a larger disbursement. In the fifteenth -century the steep-pitched roof of cradle-pattern, marks of which remain -on the tower, was removed, the gable lowered, and the walls at each side -raised about six feet. A roof of very flat pitch (as now) and the -Perpendicular east window were added. - -Finally, when Bishop Vaughan added his chapel behind the east end the -lower lancets were walled up. During the Civil War the lead was stripped -from the aisle roofs and the main arcades of the presbytery were filled -up by walling, and the huge props to the roof were inserted which appear -in Freeman’s view. The eastern windows are deeply recessed, and the -banded shafts have caps of stiff-leaved foliage, and angels form the -termination to the hood-moulding. Just below the cills is an early -example of an embattled band, almost Greek in its severity, and beneath -this again are numbers of intersecting semicircular arches with a ball -ornament. - -After four centuries of immurement the upper range of lights are -restored to their former arcaded glory, behind the graceful shafts of -which runs a passage. The restored portions are readily recognisable by -their being made of oolite, whilst the original stones are all of purple -Caerfai. These windows are now filled with stained glass by Hardman, the -gift of the Rev. J. Lucy. The subjects are the Last Supper, Gethsemane, -the Transfiguration, and the Nativity. The large lower lancets are -filled with mosaics by Salviati, which are good of their kind. They form -a fixed reredos, and were also part of a memorial by the Reverend John -Lucy, Rector of Hampton Lucy, Warwickshire, to his ancestor, William -Lucy, Bishop of St. David’s, 1660-1677. The designer of the mosaics as -well as the glass above was Powell, of Hardman’s glass works in -Birmingham. - - “The subjects are--in the central window, the Crucifixion, with the - attendant figures of the Virgin and St. John; the Magdalene kneels - at the foot of the cross. In the side windows are full-lengths of - ‘Ecclesia’ and ‘Synagoga,’ the Christian Church and the Jewish. In - a predella below the central mosaic is a representation of the - brazen serpent, with figures of Moses and Aaron. Below the others - are--St. David distributing alms to the poor, and St. David - addressing the Synod of Llandewi Brefi. Each of the larger subjects - has a rich architectural canopy, and a broad border of very - beautiful design surrounds the whole.... - - “Immediately under the Crucifixion are the words, ‘Ecce Agnus Dei, - ecce qui tollit peccata mundi’; and below again, within an arcade - of three arches are the brazen serpent, Moses, and Aaron--one - bearing his rod, the other his ‘rod that budded.’ Under the figure - of Ecclesia is St. David, in a grey monastic robe, bestowing alms. - Under Synagoga, he is addressing the Bishops at Brefi.... He stands - in the centre, while the Bishops are seated round, with a white - robed Abbot in the foreground.”[25] - -The golden ground which backs the mosaics sets off advantageously the -delicate garb and pale flesh-tinting of the principal figures. The -borders and other ornaments are rich and varied in colour; and -considering that the east end of the presbytery is somewhat dimly lit, -it was unquestionably desirable that the designs of the mosaics should -be firm in drawing. The heads are perhaps the best part, which is no -small achievement, being as a rule the worst executed. The effect of the -mosaics, with their shimmer of gold, and solemn figures lighting up the -dark wall of the sanctuary, is by no means bad, and, moreover, they -harmonise with the deep hues of the surrounding stonework. There is a -pleasing fitness, too, in the “Old coat” of the Lucys being placed in -the pavement of the presbytery, and stained glass above--a memorial no -less of the former Bishop than of the giver of these handsome -decorations. - -Under the central recess on a brass is: - - “In honorem Dei, et in memoriam Gulielmi Lucy, S.T.P., hujus - Ecclesiæ Cathedralis regnante Carolo Secundo, præclari episcopi; - has picturas murales et fenestras superne pietate adductus, dat - dedicat Johannes Lucy per multos annos Hamptoni Luci Rector, A.D. - 1871.” - -The panelled roof of the presbytery is of flat pitch, and dates from the -period of Owen Pole’s treasurership (1472-1509), to whom also that same -feature of the nave is attributed. Scott restored the ancient -decorations, ignoring that of the seventeenth century, when he was -forced to repair and largely renovate the much-decayed beams, &c. The -beams are so large that considerable difficulty was experienced before -suitable oaks could be found; these were eventually procured from Salop, -Radnor, Hereford, and the Forest of Dean. The main bosses are richly -blazoned with shields and gilt, and the armorial bearings include those -of Bishop Robert Tully (1461-1481), Bishop Richard Martyn (1482-1483), -and those of Edmund, Earl of Richmond, impaling Lady Margaret. Freeman -says[26] “the arms of Tully and Martyn occurred also in the clearly -contemporary upper east window.” If this was contemporary glass we trust -it has been carefully preserved. The entry in 1490, which is repeated in -1492, “Et sol 9£ 4ᵈ. Dʳ ⁱ Oweno Pole Mʳᵒ operis ad usũ fabriciæ -per venerabilẽ patrem Robertū nuper Menev. Epūm per suas litteras -patentes assignat,”[27] seems to imply an annual payment, and that -probably this roof was completed soon after this date. The colouring is -rather bright in black, white, and red, and the ornaments are on a -ground of yellowish white. The shields adorn their original positions, -and those not mentioned above are France and England quartered, Edward -V., Richard III., Henry VII., Rhys ap Tudor, Bishop Gomeg, and that -assigned to Rhodri Mawr, King of Gwynedd, killed 877. The corbels -receiving the walling shafts had lost their decorations, and Scott -re-blazoned them with the arms of the Bishop, Dean, Canons, and -Archdeacons of 1864.[28] - -The rise from the choir to the eastern bay containing the altar is of -four steps.[29] The tiles in the presbytery are excellent examples of -fifteenth-century encaustics in the usual red-brown and yellow, set -diagonally. Some are, of course, modern, and these are good copies of -the old ones, which are decorated with the arms of Edward III., the -Berkeley and Beauchamp families, and the Tudor rose. Near the sedilia -are some ancient bordering tiles. From the continual repetition of the -Berkeley arms Freeman traces these encaustics to the celebrated Malvern -factory.[30] - -On the second step of the presbytery, and at about its centre, is a -squared mortice. This may have received the stem of the reader’s -lectern, which was distinct from those often found in the nave. It may -possibly have received even the processional cross or the cross which -Alcuin tells us was placed in this position on Good Friday to be kissed -by both the clerics and the laity. - -The altar slab of grey sandstone and its supports of oak are new. These -are kept clear of the east wall, as there is a peculiar opening into -Bishop Vaughan’s Chapel just behind. A description of this will be found -on p. 62. On the floor near the altar and behind it are placed sundry -altar slabs brought from disused altars. One of these (to the south), -being only 14¾ inches by 9 inches, is let into a larger stone. It is -marked with the usual quintette of crosses and seems to be a picked -piece of Caerfai stone in fine state, from which we may infer that it -probably was used as an “altare portabile.” In the history of St. David -we read of one of these altar stones which was presented to him by the -Patriarch of Jerusalem. King suggests[31] that this stone may have been -a “seal” for a reliquary or receptacle for altar relics, and if so, this -one and - -[Illustration: THE PARCLOSE SCREEN, E. SIDE.] - -that recently unearthed in the Jesus Chapel of Norwich Cathedral are the -only known ones extant. - -The woodwork in the choir has many points of interest, notably the -=Parclose Screen=, which is unique. It divides the presbytery and choir, -and serves to emphasise the ancient three-fold ritual arrangement of -nave, choir, and presbytery. Freeman considers the position of this -screen very remarkable “in this country at least,” and the only churches -with analogous indications that he can instance are Malmesbury and -Dorchester. These divisions were usually well marked in large churches, -but not with an actual screen. In the middle of the fourteenth century -the parclose seems to have been moved to make room for Bishop Morgan’s -throne, but as it always occupied a corresponding position, it is not -unlikely that we here find a very ancient tradition in the church of St. -David’s. - -Apart from its position, however, the screen itself is not particularly -noteworthy. The style is Decorated, verging towards Perpendicular. The -upper part is open and filled with sexfoiled tracery, and the lower is, -as usual, panelled. The centre is devoted to a wide entrance, and at -different dates three others have been pierced. - -The =Stalls= are inscribed as follows:[32] - - SOUTH RETURN. NORTH RETURN. - 1. Decanus. 15. Præcentor. - 2. Archᵈ Meneue. 16. Archᵈ Brecon. - 3. P. Llan Dewi. 17. P. S ᵗⁱ Nicholi. - - SOUTH SIDE. NORTH SIDE. - 4. P. Cursalis. 18. P. Langan. - 5. P. Treflodⁿ. 19. P. Cursalis. - 6. ..... 20. .... - 7. Vicʳ Episcop. 21. Succentor. - 8. P. Cursalis. 22. P. Cursalis. - 9. P. Cursalis. 23. P. Cursalis. - 10. P. Cludeu. 24. P. Caer-Fai. - 11. .... 25. .... - 12. P. Caer-Farchell. 26. Archᵈ Cardigⁿ. - 13. Archᵈ Carmarⁿ. 27. P. Aurea. - 14. Cancellarius. 28. Thesaurarius. - -The constructional arches in the transepts are pointed throughout, with -an occasional decorative circular arch, but are - -[Illustration: ARCH BETWEEN THE S. TRANSEPT AND THE CHOIR AISLE.] - -much plainer than those in the nave and choir. “The peculiar character -of the more slender shafts has freer scope than in the nave and choir, -where a more massive pier is employed; we may observe the general -omission of the neck-moulding and the use of the ogee keel as at -Llandaff. The latter is here applied very curiously, being, in several -members, doubled and set laterally, the effect of which is by no means -pleasing, though it may have had some influence on the architecture of -the period.”[33] - -[Illustration: DOUBLE PISCINA, ST. THOMAS’S CHAPEL.] - -The transepts are approached from the nave--not, as is usual, through an -open arch, but through original Transitional doorways. The wall which -contains these doors effectually cuts off the view from the transept to -the nave, and also serves somewhat to make the contrast between the -elaborate nave and the rather bare transepts less marked. - -The =Chapel of St. Thomas the Martyr=, north of the north transept, and -the buildings above form one of the many unique points of St. David’s. -On reference to the ground-plan it will be seen that this remarkable -building is placed at an unexpected angle, the reason for which is not -apparent and remains unexplained. - -The year of the fall of the tower--1220--was also that in which the body -of St. Thomas, the martyred primate of Canterbury, was translated from -the crypt of Canterbury Cathedral to the choir. St. David’s, in common -with many other great churches, determined to dedicate a chapel to his -memory. In 1329 this chapel was probably remodelled, when Sir R. Symonds -gave his manor of St. Dogmell to secure two chaplains to celebrate daily -mass for his soul and his wife’s at the altar of St. Thomas. It has the -only original completed Decorated vaulting in the building (except the -south porch), and two stages were added above, making the building -taller than the transept and giving the remarkable external effect seen -from the north-east. The chapel has served as a chapter-house, library, -and vestry, and on its south side has a very beautiful double piscina, -in character purely Early English. The trefoiled heads are -characteristically moulded and the spandrils richly carved, one with -stiff-leaved foliage, another with a bird and foliage, and the third -represents a fight between a man and a devil which is trying to devour -another man. This piscina is interesting, apart from its beauty, as -showing that the Early English architects could work purely in that -style when they desired, and that in all probability their use of -Transitional detail was prompted by their artistic sense and desire to -make their work harmonise with their predecessors’. The vaulting rises -from octagonal shafts with round flowered caps, and the bosses at the -crossing of the ribs are elaborate. One contains the head of our Lord, -and another a similar subject, but the Head censed by angels. - -The storey above was the original =Chapter House=, later the Grammar -School, now the =Library=. This position is, we think, unique for a -chapter-house. It is very plain and has a mediæval recessed closet; also -a fine Decorated fireplace (and in it a most unworthy stove), which is -obviously the work of Gower, as it is almost precisely similar to one in -the residential part of his palace over the river. There are also some -Early English bracket capitals, one foliated and the other with the -nail-head, probably to carry lights. On the cill of the north window is -a fragment from the old organ-case, showing how well it was worthy of -being, at any rate, attributed to Grinling Gibbons. - -The room above this (third stage) was used as the Treasury, but is not -of any great interest. - -Scott did away with an unsightly temporary wooden stair leading to the -chapter-house from the transept, and re-used the original entrance from -the north choir aisle; but we do not consider the present arrangement -very satisfactory, as it still has a temporary appearance. - -The =Throne= (Bishop Morgan, 1496-1505) stands on the south side of the -choir, and is a peculiar structure, rendered the more puzzling by being -a blend of Decorated and Perpendicular, judging by the detail. If the -Decorated parts, however, are not of that period, they are copied from -similar work on the parclose screen. There are three seats, the centre -being the Bishop’s, and the others probably for the Canonici -Collaterales. Above are innumerable crocketed canopies, pinnacles, -pediments, &c., terminating in a kind of open spire. The total height is -little short of thirty feet. - -At the time of the restoration of the tower all the woodwork in the -immediate vicinity had necessarily to be removed, and under Scott’s -direction was extensively repaired, “the greatest care being taken to -preserve the ancient work as nearly untouched as possible.” - -The =Sedilia= are of a pleasing Perpendicular design, with a cornice in -oak of a peculiar white colour, which leads one to suppose that they -were once coloured. The canopy work and coved cornice are better in -detail and general design than those of the stalls. The buttresses which -divide the seats are pierced with tracery, and are surmounted with -crocketed pinnacles. - -The oaken stalls--like almost all the woodwork in the choir--belong to -the Perpendicular period, and were erected during the episcopate of -Bishop Tully (1460-1480). They have plain arms, but the return stalls -and those of the Chancellor and Treasurer are decorated with grotesque -heads. The misereres are also conceived in a serio-humorous vein, some, -indeed, being very unusual, the monks being represented as suffering -from _mal de mer_ and crapula. One carving exhibits a cowled fox -offering the wafer to a goose with a human head, which Freeman thinks -may have some bearing on the religious controversy of the time.[34] He -also regards the cowled fox as “the carver’s version of the proverb -‘Cucullus non facit monachum.’” - -[Illustration: THE SEDILIA.] - -The decanal stall was formerly assigned to the Bishop as Dean, and -accordingly inscribed _Dom. Epī._, but when the Precentor in 1840 -assumed the title of Dean[35] this was changed. It will be observed that -the seats of most dignity are the extremes, and the western end and -southern side take precedence. As in the arrangement of stalls which -existed in the colleges of Abergwili and Llanddewi Brefi, founded by -Bishop Beck in this diocese, the Bishop’s Vicar (Subdean) sits on the -decanal side, and the Subchanter in a similar position on the -Precentor’s side. - -The delicate silver altar-cross was designed by Mr. T. G. Jackson, and -is a choice addition to the cathedral plate. The east end hangings are -at once recognisable as one of the happiest of Mr. Bodley’s exquisite -designs. - - -THE SHRINE OF ST. DAVID. - -This shrine, which is, and always has been, one of the most important in -the country, occupies a very modest position in the presbytery, viz., -the third bay from the east on the north side. It is, however, rather a -base and a frame for a _movable_ feretrum, for we know it was carried to -battle. Although the shrine of Edward the Confessor at Westminster and -St. Thomas à Beckett at Canterbury--to mention two great instances--were -placed behind the high altar with much dignity and with plenty of room -for pilgrims to circulate, yet it seems most likely that the somewhat -extraordinary position of the shrine of the patron Saint of Wales is due -to a retention of an ancient British custom.[36] The tombs of St. Trilo -and St. Dubricius rest in similar places in Llandaff Cathedral, and that -of St. Ninian at Whitherne, in Galloway, occupies an identical position. -On the other hand, Dr. Rock[37] writes: “I cannot bring myself to think -that the shrine stood anywhere but _behind_ the high altar, in its full -dignity and splendour;” which, however, has not been the case, certainly -since the fifteenth century, as the stone altar stood against the east -wall of the presbytery. - -We are inclined to think that the monks divided these relics, which were -so infinitely precious that kings came to venerate, and that some were -kept in a movable shrine or feretory, and that the remainder were shown -in a recently - -[Illustration: _Photo, J. Valentine._ - -THE SHRINE OF ST. DAVID.] - -discovered recess behind the high altar.[38] Probably these are the same -relics which were found in the lower part of the recess run with mortar -and formed into a solid mass, evidently to prevent desecration. The -relics have been extracted and are carefully preserved in the cathedral. - -St. David, whom Walcott[39] gives as Bishop from 519-542 (when he -presumably died), was canonised by Pope Calixtus II. (Guido of -Vienne)[40] 1119-1124, and judging by the numerous Edwardian coins found -in the neighbourhood the shrine attained the height of its celebrity -during the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries. Bishop Gower was thus -able to build his magnificent palace as a hostelry for the many -distinguished pilgrims. Amongst the kings who paid homage to St. David -were William I. in 1081,[41] when he subdued Wales, and this shrine -doubtless formed in some sense a common bond between conquerors and -conquered; Henry II., on his way to and from Ireland (1171-1172) when he -gave _inter alia_ two velvet copes “for the singers in serving God and -St. David,”[42] and it was while waiting here for a fair wind that Henry -is reported to have learnt from a bard that King Arthur was buried in -the Isle of Avalon; whilst the last royal visit recorded is that of -Edward I. and Queen Eleanor in 1284.[43] - -It appears that the remains of St. David’s confessor, St. Justinian, -were translated from Porthotinan, near St. David’s, to a new tomb in the -cathedral in which he himself was also subsequently interred.[44] But it -is not clear at what date the relics were translated to a movable -feretory. However, it is certain that it was portable, as in 1086 it was -stolen and despoiled.[45] In spite of William of Malmesbury definitely -stating that the relics were transferred to Glastonbury in 946,[46] they -were still in their place when Henry II. made his pilgrimage, and a -century later (1275) we find Bishop Richard de Carew building a new -shrine which agrees with the general architectural character of the -existing structure.[47] But we find that the relics, or some of them, -were inclosed in a portable shrine long after this. An Extent of the -Bishop’s lands made in the year 1326 informs us that the burgesses of -St. David’s were bound to follow the Bishop in time of war with the -shrine of St. David for one day’s journey in either direction,[48] and -under a statute of Bishop Nicholas the chantry priests were enjoined to -carry the shrine in procession on the instructions of the precentor or -president of the Chapter.[49] Yet the evidence[50] of those who -certainly saw the shrine before the Reformation, convinces us that this -structure is the same that anciently bore the name, and, as Freeman[51] -says, “the term feretrum, in spite of its etymology, was continually -applied to standing shrines, as, for instance, to the celebrated shrine -of St. Cuthbert at Durham.” By a statute[52] of Bishop Beck, 1287, -recited and confirmed by Bishop Gower in 1342, three officers are -directed to take charge of all things given or left “tam ad fabricam, -quam ad Feretrum, sive caput.” - -The style of the shrine is Early English merging towards Decorated. The -base extends from pier to pier of the third arch from the east on the -north side of the presbytery. On this are three low chamfered and -pointed arches, about 12 inches high, and four deeply-sunk quatrefoils -occupy the spandrils; the recesses beneath the arches are also about 12 -inches in depth and backed with a stone wall. The outer quatrefoils are -merely ornamental, but the two central ones communicate with lockers at -the back for offerings. Above these arches is a flat table, restored in -many places, on which rested the movable feretory and which also bears -the principal structure of three arches and round shafts. The capitals -are rather Early English in character, as are the heads[53] at the -junctions of the arches, but the crocketed hood-moulding and label -running across the archway are most undesirable Perpendicular additions. -The arches contained frescoes on the wall at the back. According to -Browne Willis,[54] “_St. David_ himself is painted in his -Pontificalibus; and on each side of him is a Bishop Saint; one by the -Inscription is known to be _St. Patrick_ (to the west); the other is -somewhat defac’d.” It is a figure in episcopal attire and said to be St. -Denis. He goes on to say that the whole was formerly surmounted by a -wooden canopy--“a fair Arch of Timber work painted”--and marks of this -remain. The back--towards the north choir aisle--is supposed to be -imperfect. It has three low rounded arches, the centre being the widest, -and over each was a chamfered quatrefoil, and between these were two -rather high niches. A string runs round the each opening, but does not -run along the base of the quatrefoils. Quite recently stones were to be -seen in the pavement hollowed by continual friction with the knees of -the pilgrims. Undoubtedly this shrine suffered when the presbytery -arcade was walled up owing to the collapse of the aisle roofs, but now -that all is dry and in good repair the three saints might well be -repainted. - - -THE SHRINE OF ST. CARADOC. - -Often mistaken for, somewhat similar to, and of about the same date as, -the shrine of St. David, is that of St. Caradoc on the south side of the -north transept (dedicated to St. Andrew), where he was buried by his own -express wish near the altar of St. Stephen. He died in 1124, and at the -instance of the historian Giraldus was canonised by Pope Innocent -III.[55] The tomb consists of a round arch, with a stone shelf below -supported by a wall in which are two pointed arches and a couple of -quatrefoils chamfered inwards. Above the arch is a small portion of wall -containing some air-holes. It has been suggested that as this transept -has been dedicated to St. Andrew, one of the patron saints of the -Church, that it was designed as a receptacle of relics of that -saint.[56] - -=The Aisles of the Presbytery=, except for sundry attractive monuments, -are not very interesting, but have undergone various changes. After the -fall of the tower they were reconstructed in the prevalent Transitional -style. In the Early English period the wall of the south aisle was -rebuilt further south.[57] The old roofs were removed, the walls raised, -and new windows inserted in the Decorated period by Bishop Gower -(1328-1347). Three hundred years later they were in a ruined condition. -In the general restoration of the latter part of this century they have -been re-roofed and extensively repaired. - -[Illustration: THE SHRINE OF ST. CARADOC.] - -The capitals of the pier-shafts on the aisle side resemble those in the -presbytery, but the piers themselves are peculiar. A group of shafts is -attached to each pier; these, however, finish below the capitals of each -pier with a bracket. It has been supposed that these were intended for -figures, and it is quite likely that this may have been the best way the -Transitional architects saw of avoiding a raw appearance when they gave -up their groining system. - -The eastern walls of the presbytery aisles both show the very steep -pitch of the early roof, which apparently remained till the walls were -raised by Gower. - -In the south-east angle of the north aisle is a doorway leading to the -arcaded passage in front of the main east windows. Scott restored the -original Decorated windows, which he found much decayed on the north -side; but on the south side, where no remains of the tracery were extant -“and even the jambs were so shattered that it was only by a fragment -here and there that the mouldings were recovered,”[58] the tracery he -introduced was “founded on fragmentary evidence from other parts of the -church of the same date.” But this archæologic proceeding has not -resulted in any specially beautiful design, though, doubtless, it was -the best thing that could be done. - -The modern roofs are decidedly good and solid--of a Decorated character -and well carven. - -The north choir aisle is different to the south on account of the Chapel -of St. Thomas, which blocks up the westernmost bay. A modern wooden -staircase near the west end of the north aisle leads to the -chapter-house. - -The large north window in the north transept was inserted in 1846 by -Butterfield. It is based on one at Sleaford, Lincolnshire, and replaced -another of late and inferior design. The west wall of both transepts is -of De Leiâ’s time, and the remainder, after the fall of the tower, about -1220. The north transept is dedicated to St. Andrew, and his altar stood -in the central eastern arch and the south transept was known as the -Chanters’ Chapel, with an altar dedicated to the Holy Innocents and -almost certainly one to St. David. This transept had at first but a -single chapel (Decorated), with a space between it and the aisle of the -choir, but in the sixteenth century these two were joined and the chapel -became a vestry. In this century, when the south transept was fitted up -as a parish church it formed the eastern aisle. Scott restored the -original arrangement. - -[Illustration: SCREEN OF BISHOP VAUGHAN’S CHAPEL.] - -The transepts show more clearly than any other part of the church the -influence of the west of England on Welsh architecture, and it is -remarkable that it should have started thus early. The Transitional and -even Early English architecture at St. David’s and Llandaff resembles in -mouldings that at Slymbridge and in foliage some of the great -Gloucestershire churches. It is not surprising that the later splendid -Perpendicular and Decorated examples of Somerset and the Bristol -district should have made their impress felt in Wales. But this Early -English connection certainly seems wonderful. - - -THE CHAPELS EAST OF THE PRESBYTERY. - -The chapels at the far east end of the church are extraordinarily -extensive and most remarkable for a comparatively small cathedral like -St. David’s. This being so it is best to refer to the plan, which will -simplify what seems bewildering in mere description. Generally speaking -the ground-plan may be considered as an extension of the main body of -the church, terminating in a Lady Chapel, with aisles continuing those -of the choir for part of the length. But, inasmuch as no part of the -cathedral seems to have attracted the attention of the various prelates -who were successively benefactors to the church, more than this; and, as -the changes were numerous and but little regard appears to have been -paid to preceding plans, the inevitable result is a kind of -architectural _pot-pourri_. It is, however, a very attractive medley. - -De Leiâ’s church clearly terminated at the existing east wall of the -presbytery and aisles, and apparently at the time of the rebuilding -occasioned by the fall of the tower in 1220, no attempt was made to -lengthen the church eastwards. It is not unlikely, however, that shortly -before the time of the earthquake of 1248 a Lady Chapel or retro-choir -was contemplated and even begun, but discontinued. As we see it now it -is also not improbable that the original plan may have been followed, -with many changes in detail in the succeeding centuries. The aisles -continuing those of the presbytery are connected by a sort of -retro-choir or ambulatory--embracing the space now occupied by Bishop -Vaughan’s Chapel between it and the east wall of the presbytery. This is -all Early English, _i.e._, thirteenth century, work. Bishop Martyn -(1290-1328) completed the present ground-plan by adding his Lady Chapel. - -Bishop Gower (1328-1347), the Menevian Wykeham, raised the north and -east walls of the north chapel aisle and rebuilt the south and east -walls of the south aisle from the ground, probably on Early English -foundations. Also, this aisle was projected a few feet in an easterly -direction and many changes made in the Lady Chapel, where Gower founded -a charity in 1334. Bishop Vaughan (1509-1522) appropriated the space -east of the presbytery which was described[59] as “vilissimus sive -sordidissimus locus in totâ ecclesiâ,” and converted it into the -beautiful chapel which bears his name. Previous to this we can find no -early references to this space which was walled in north, - -[Illustration: ROOF OF BISHOP VAUGHAN’S CHAPEL.] - -south, east, and west (according to Freeman) and may previously never -have been roofed. With regard to this numerous suggestions have been -made which do not seem entirely satisfactory. At any rate the east -windows of the cathedral were glazed and required light, which we -venture to suggest may have been obtained from the open passage left -for pilgrims to reach the ancient recess in the east wall, which is -apparently _in situ_ and bears unmistakable marks of having been -polished by use. And, that the remainder of the space was screened off -and roofed for the immurement of a recluse, who could perhaps watch -unseen the movements of the pilgrims. It must be remembered also that -stealing relics carried its own absolution. This might account, too, for -its filthy state which necessitated the four pence of 1492[60] to clean. -In those days an unusually large sum. In making this Trinity Chapel, -Bishop Vaughan blocked up the lower east windows of the cathedral and -probably added the upper tier shown on p. 36, and then added his -fan-traceried roof and other ornaments. - -The Lady Chapel and the ambulatory or vestibule were evidently twice -prepared for vaulting before Bishop Vaughan actually completed the -scheme, but during the Civil War it was denuded of lead, which -eventuated in its collapse about 1775 and in the erection of the -extraordinary modern buttresses which prop up the inner walls of the -chapel and its aisles. - -This brief general description may help the visitor to realise the many -changes which produced these peculiar eastern adjuncts, and we will now -discuss each more in detail. - -=Bishop Vaughan’s, or The Trinity, Chapel.=--This chapel is a peculiarly -subtle example of Perpendicular, and retains both its internal and -external roofs. Freeman, who does not usually pay high tribute to any -phase of Perpendicular, says,[61] “Bishop Vaughan’s Chapel is an -extremely fine specimen of late Perpendicular, and that of the best -kind, and is the more conspicuous, as being the only portion of the -cathedral of any merit or importance belonging to that style. It -exhibits the same chasteness of design and delicacy of execution which -distinguishes King’s College Chapel, opposed alike to the meagreness of -Bath Abbey and the corrupt form and overdone ornament of Henry the -Seventh’s Chapel. The arches, one on each side, which divide the chapel -from the aisles, command admiration for the justness of their -proportions and the purity of their detail, being well moulded, and -having shafts with good capitals and bases; the stone screens also with -which they are fitted up increase the effect of elegant richness. It is -much to be regretted that they should remain exposed to the effect of -the weather, even comparatively sheltered as they are by the main body -of the cathedral. - -[Illustration: RECESS IN BISHOP VAUGHAN’S CHAPEL.] - -The roof is of excellent fan-tracery, consisting of two bays, running -north and south, with a small portion of panelled barrel vaulting at -each end. It rises from shafts, of which the central ones at each end -are corbelled off. The eastern one would have interfered with the altar -of the chapel, the western with the doorway[62] which then opened behind -the high altar, and whose arch may still be traced.” The angel which -acts as a corbel over the Transitional recess is very finely conceived -and carved, as also are the bosses of sculpture on the screens. Indeed -they are as fine as anything the Perpendicular men ever did. The recess -itself is shown on p. 61. The centre cross is 2 feet 3 inches square and -is cut out of a stone 1 ft. 9 in. thick, the four spandrils between the -arms being pierced through to the high altar. The height of the top of -the cill is about 3 feet from the present floor of the chapel and 1 ft. -6 in. from that of the sanctuary. As already mentioned,[63] the lower -part was found to contain human bones, run into a solid mass with mortar -to prevent desecration, which probably was done at the time of the -religious changes in the sixteenth century. The other crosses -surrounding the large one are probably some of those cut for dedication -purposes; and as the lowest at any rate is earlier than the centre, it -is probably a once much venerated relic of St. David’s own church before -that of De Leiâ. - -[Illustration: BOSSES ON THE CORNICE.] - -On the opposite side of this chapel--_i.e._, in the wall between Bishop -Vaughan’s Chapel and the ante-chapel--is more finely detailed -Perpendicular work. - -[Illustration: RECENTLY DISCOVERED WINDOW IN BISHOP VAUGHAN’S CHAPEL.] - -In 1898 an interesting discovery was made, and our view was taken the -same year immediately after. On the west side of this wall stood the -altar to the Holy Trinity, with a tall canopied niche on each side. - -On either side of these again traces of a four-centred arch showed -faintly through the smooth ashlar at the back, and on removing the -ashlar two beautiful windows were disclosed. They have their saddle-bars -and stancheons _in situ_, in some places almost rusted through, and it -is clear that the windows have not been, nor were they intended to be, -glazed. Another interesting point is that they seem scarcely to have -been finished before they were walled up again, for the masonry has not -even been rubbed down. This seems so unusual a treatment for windows of -such refinement, that one is tempted to conjecture that some zealous -subordinate of the Bishop’s, anxious to give him a pleasant surprise, -had, during his absence, caused these windows to be made, but on his -return the incensed prelate promptly ordered their immurement. A squint -was, however, left in the centre light of each window, so that from the -Trinity Chapel altar the celebrations at those at the east end of the -north and south aisles could be seen. When removing the masonry in 1898, -it was decided to leave these squint-stones in order not to destroy an -important link in the history of these windows. - -[Illustration: NICHE, BISHOP VAUGHAN’S CHAPEL.] - -Curiously enough, the backs of the windows, towards the ambulatory are -different from the fronts (one of which we illustrate) and have merely -four-centred arches. - -[Illustration: BISHOP VAUGHAN’S CHAPEL.] - -At the north end of this chapel is the tomb of Archdeacon Hiot and that -of Sir John Wogan, recently brought here for the sake of preservation. -The former stood in the chapel of St. Nicholas. Bishop Vaughan’s own -tomb is in front of the altar, the leger-stone once bearing a brass on -which was engraved his effigy.[64] - -Several Celtic stones bearing crosses, which were found at Pen Arthur, -are at present in this chapel. The earliest--from the eighth to the -eleventh century--Professor Westwood found doing duty as a gate-post on -a farm. The holes show the marks where the hinges were. At the top, on -the left, can be read Α Ω and (?) JHS. On the right is XPS, cut after -the corner was broken away, and below is “Gurmarc.” On the back is -another cross of a still earlier character. It is supposed to have -commemorated some battle fought in the neighbourhood, and was found on -the moor. - -=The South Chapel Aisle.=--On coming through the east door of the south -choir aisle we enter the Chapel of King Edward the Confessor, and we -notice on the right a Decorated recess said to have contained the -monument of a priest; but the great buttresses, which meet the eye -looking east, are only temporary supports and in no sense form part of -the original design. Opposite the Decorated recess is the tomb of a -knight (8), but unfortunately this has been badly treated at the hands -of the buttress builders. On the north side of the altar is a piscina -with a pointed arch, cinquefoiled, and a projecting bracket of -singularly bold design which seems to interrupt the Decorated -string.[65] A curious groining boss, apparently in order to preserve it, -is let into the wall to the west above the piscina. It is carven into -the form of three beasts (asses or rabbits) with long ears. The -peculiarity of the design, which is met with elsewhere, is that there -are only three ears, yet each beast has its full complement. - -=The Ante-Chapel.=--Briant (p. 57) says this chapel is known locally as -the _Chapel of the Seven Sisters_, on account of the seven hideous heads -which are said to be types of the beauty of South Wales. We can find no -such record. - -This narrow space, which intervenes between Bishop Vaughan’s Chapel and -the Lady Chapel to the east, is separated from the aisles by pairs of -very elegant Early English arches north and south, and Freeman is of -opinion that they differ slightly in date. The capitals have a delicate -nail-head moulding not to be found elsewhere in the cathedral. One of -the arches on the southern side has a figure lying down doing duty for a -corbel which was designed to carry the vaulting; it is, however, more -curious than beautiful. A segmental relieving arch in rough ashlar -embraces both arches. In this chapel was found the “Abraham” stone now -placed in the south transept (see p. 79). - -[Illustration: VIEW LOOKING N. IN ANTE-CHAPEL TO LADY CHAPEL.] - -This chapel is roofed with a neat Perpendicular vault and lit with a -poor Perpendicular window, and a couple of depressed arches (_i.e._, -with their springing below the capitals) open into the =Lady Chapel=. An -enormous buttress, however, is an unsightly necessity to prevent the -wall above these arches falling eastwards. Our view (page 67) is taken -from the east, looking west, and shows one of these arches and, on the -south side, the fine Decorated tomb of Bishop Martyn. The composition -was that of a five-foiled arch, with open foliations between crocketed -pinnacles rising from octagonal attached shafts with floriated -capitals, all beneath a lofty straight-sided canopy. The detail seems to -point to Bishop Gower as the author. The canopy blocks an Early -Decorated window and cuts through a string, but its finial was evidently -utilised as a corbel by Bishop Vaughan for his vaulted roof, traces of -which are clearly discernible in the view at the south-west corner. - -[Illustration: SEDILIA AND TOMB, S. SIDE OF LADY CHAPEL.] - -The sedilia, of three seats, is a fine design by Gower, the finials of -the crocketed ogee arches forming bosses in the cornice as in some of -his other designs. - -The cross lying on the ground is one which once stood on the east end of -the presbytery, probably designed by Sir G. Scott from an old example. - -Nearly opposite is a recess for a tomb which seems to have been similar -to that of Bishop Martyn. This was wrongly supposed to be that of Bishop -Houghton, who founded and was buried in his own chapel of St. Mary’s -College, not St. Mary’s Chapel, hence confusion. Archdeacon Yardley -conjectures with plausibility that Gower erected these two tombs to his -immediate predecessors, Martyn and Beck[66] (1280-1328). Externally, and -to some extent even now internally, the Lady Chapel has assumed the -appearance of a Perpendicular building, but as a matter of fact it is, -in the main, a blend of Early English and Early Decorated. - -[Illustration: THE NORTH CHAPEL AISLE.] - -=The North Chapel Aisle.=--At the east end of this aisle stood the altar -to St. Nicholas, and in the south-east corner is a trefoil-headed -piscina with a quatrefoil drain. The changes which took place in the -Early Decorated period in this aisle are not so extensive as those of -the same date in its sister, where the whole of the southern and eastern -walls were rebuilt, but the result is even more of a patchwork in -appearance. The walls were raised, windows inserted and preparations -made for vaulting, but, nevertheless, the round Early English vaulting -shafts (c. 1248) appear below the octagonal ones of the Decorated -period. On reference to the plan it will be noticed that the Lady Chapel -is not on the central axis of the choir, and that between it and the -north aisle is a space, which, we cannot but think, was occasioned by -the timidity which we find throughout the cathedral in dealing with -vaults. The north wall of the Lady Chapel was thus moved inwards to -reduce the span and obtain--as they undoubtedly did, from whatever -cause--a much better proportioned building. The monuments in both aisles -are much decayed owing to their long exposure to the weather. East of -the screen opening to Bishop Vaughan’s Chapel is a small piece of a -Decorated tomb canopy, but the chapel arch has cut through the -remainder. “Its existence seems to prove that the ‘waste place’ now -occupied by the chapel must have been closed at the sides by walls; -although there must surely have been some door or entrance, however -narrow.”[67] Just beneath[68] this crocketed fragment of a canopy is a -small stone with a finely-conceived representation of a crucifixion in -relief with the figures of SS. Mary and John, obviously placed here for -preservation; and low down under this is an altar-tomb with a panelled -arcade, which once bore the figure of a priest in eucharistic vestments, -and above the panelling the inscription, “Orate pro Anima Johannis -[Hiot] nuper Archi....” which indicates that it was the monument of John -Hiot, Archdeacon of St. David’s, who died in 1419. - -In this aisle a chantry was founded early in the fourteenth century by -Sir John Wogan, of Picton, Chief Justiciary of Ireland under Edward the -First, and it is conjectured that the two monuments opposite (_i.e._, in -the north wall) were erected by and to members of this family. The one -to the west (No. 2) is a mutilated figure of a knight in chain armour -about the date of Henry III.; the other (No. 1) is an exceedingly fine -example of a recumbent, eucharistically vested priest having - -[Illustration: TOMB OF A PRIEST, N. SIDE OF N. CHAPEL.] - -his feet resting on a dog and his hands clasped. The head rests on a -canopy of a spherical triangle crocketed. Freeman (p. 120) notes that a -similar canopy occurs elsewhere in the cathedral, also in a small tomb -in the chancel of Carew Church, and in an external tomb at Nangle in -Pembrokeshire. But it is the main arch or canopy of the tomb that is its -chief glory, and, strangely enough, the part least noticed by previous -writers. The subtlety and delicacy of the mouldings is worth careful -examination. The under side of the arch has been elaborately cusped, and -might easily be restored. The top member is curved back to admit of a -very unusual form of crocket, viz., two ivy leaves point to point, well -conventionalised and most effective. At the west end this springs from -the head of a greyhound, the other is defective. On the whole we are -inclined to think that the priest’s effigy has been placed here as a -convenient spot for its preservation and is a later insertion. Beneath -is some panelling consisting of triangles trefoiled, but it is very -flat and tame and in great contrast to the skilful treatment of the -upper part. The material is Caerfai stone. Browne Willis shows on his -plan[69] two monuments under the third and fourth windows of this aisle -from the east, and calls them “Knights Templars”--possibly also -Wogans--but they no longer remain. - - -MONUMENTS IN THE CHURCH OTHER THAN IN THE EASTERN CHAPELS. - -Beginning with the remarkable rood-screen, we find three ecclesiastical -effigies. During the excavations for the new foundations of the -tower-piers and shoring it was necessary to disturb the tombs in the -rood-screen, but the remains were carefully and severally restored to -their original resting-places, and such rings, chalices, crosiers, and -other valuables as were found were removed by the Chapter. The most -interesting of these objects are in the Chapter House under glass. They -comprise a Decorated gilt bronze pastoral staff (probably Gower’s) with -a fragment of its standard, two chalices, and a quantity of cere cloth. - -Two of the effigies cannot be with certainty identified, and we have -only the tradition handed down by Browne Willis: “I should guess them to -have been erected for Bishops of S. David’s, tho’ they have a Tradition -here, that one belongs to a Chancellor, or, as some say, a Chantor; and -the other to a Treasurer of this Church.” - -However, we know that =Bishop Gower’s Tomb= occupies (No. 25) the southern -compartment of the screen. He died in 1347, and is represented as vested -eucharistically with a mitre and pastoral staff veiled in his left hand, -and at his feet is a lion. The right hand is broken and was originally -in the act of benediction. Before the rebellion Browne Willis[70] stated -that this tomb was “inclos’d to the South and West with a Brass -Pallisade: Upon the Facio of which, was this Inscription:[71] - - ‘=Hic jacet= Henricus Gower, =Structor Palatii & hujus Ecclesiae. - Menevensis Archiepiscopus qui obiit, &c.=’” - -But on pp. 19 and 71 he corrects himself, on the authority apparently -of an eye-witness, and gives the following as being more correct: - -“Henricus Gower, =Episcopalis Palatii constructor=.” - -“The Rebels took that, and all the Brass upon the other Tombs of the -Church, quite away; and now there are Wooden[72] Rails in Lieu of the -Brass Pallisade. His body lies at length in his Episcopal Robes.” On the -south side of the altar-tomb are eight figures of the Apostles in -relief. - -[Illustration: TOMB OF BISHOP MORGAN IN NAVE.] - -The altar-tomb in the second bay from the east on the south side of the -nave is to Bishop John Morgan (1496-1564). The whole is in Bath stone. -The mitred bishop is sculptured at full length in his chasuble, -dalmatic, stole, alb, and maniple, and holds his veiled pastoral staff. -He wears somewhat unusual gloves. Two kneeling angels support the -cushioned head. Freeman[73] is very hard on the architecture of this -tomb: “The head, foot, and north side of the tomb are - -[Illustration: BISHOP GOWER’S TOMB.] - -adorned with rectangular panels having their upper angles rounded off -without any kind of foliation, and exhibiting cases of interpenetration -in its worst form. Altogether the architectural ornaments are extremely -poor, and nearly resemble much of the German work of that period.” This -unnecessarily severe censure is, however, tempered with discriminating -praise of the sculpture: “The sculpture, on the other hand, is extremely -spirited and graceful, as well that of the principal figure, as those of -the smaller images which adorn the sides. In the two panels on the north -side there are six images of Apostles; six more evidently decorated the -south side, but these have been cut away to make room for a pew. At the -foot there is a group representing the resurrection of our Saviour, -sculptured in alto-relievo with remarkable grace and freedom. At the -head there is a griffin, Bishop Morgan’s bearing, supporting a shield -with the letters W and I, or J, in a cypher. Whose initials they may be, -we are at a loss to say; the heraldic bearing taken in connection with -authority almost contemporaneous leaves us in doubt to whom we are to -attribute the monument. This tomb, with its very advanced sculpture, and -very debased architecture, is a striking commentary on the state of the -arts at that important period of transition; and it is extremely curious -to observe the corruptions of the latter art manifesting themselves in -tombs in the first instance. The monument of Henry VII. in Westminster -Abbey, is of course a remarkable case of the same kind.” - -Opposite Morgan’s tomb, under the eastern window of the south aisle, is -a Decorated recess containing the tomb of an unknown priest (No. 27), -all in Caerfai stone. The canopy is very fine.[74] It is part of a -concave-sided octagon, at the points of which are radial finials. This -form is to be found in Bristol Cathedral, and “is clearly a development -of the idea which produced the semi-octagonal doorways in the -rood-screen and the palace.”[75] Gower’s characteristic ornaments--the -pellet, four-leaved flower and wave-moulding--spring from octagonal -shafts with a big projection. On each side is a pinnacle having an odd -and ugly decoration at the offsets, but it is on the whole preferable to -Gower’s customary flat quatrefoil. The altar-tomb is of plain ashlar, -and on it lies a priest in eucharistic vestments, his head on a double -cushion carried by angels, and at his feet a dog. - -There are some slabs with crosses near here and some shells before the -daïs, which once contained matrices of the brasses, with figures about -half full size to William Wilcock (1502) and Richard Ragader[76] (1530), -prebendaries of St. Nicholas and masters of St. Mary’s College Chapel, -which will probably account for several unidentifiable slabs in the -choir and elsewhere. - -The monument occupying the most important position in the presbytery is -that (No. 6)[77] to Edmond Tudor, Earl of Richmond, son of Owen Tudor -and Queen Catherine of Valois (widow of Henry V.) and father of Henry -VII., who died in 1456, and was buried in the church of the Grey Friars -at Caermarthen.[78] But at the dissolution the remains and the tomb were -together brought to St. David’s. The position is close to the shrine of -St. David, and, as it was unusual to permit any interment in the -immediate vicinity of a great shrine, it may be well to note that this -tomb was not placed here till after the probable shrine of St. David had -been removed. The altar-tomb is in Purbeck marble, and is ornamented -with shallow Perpendicular quatrefoils reticulated. Each panel has a -shield in the centre, and a brass occupied the leger-stone. These -inscriptions were restored by Jones and Freeman[79] from some drawings -bound up with a MS. in the possession of the Earl of Cawdor. On the -verge: - -_“Under this Marble Stone here enclos’d, resteth the Bones of that noble -Lord_ Edmond, _Earl of_ Richmond, _Father and Brother to Kings, the -which departed out of this World in the Year of our Lord God, a thousand -four hundred fifty and six, the first Day of the Month of_ November; _on -whose Soul, Almighty_ Jesu _have Mercy. Amen.”_ - -On the tomb (at its foot probably) was: - - _“Heu! Regum Genitor, & Frater splendidus Heros,_ - _Omnis quo micuit Regia Virtus, obit._ - _Herculeus Comes Ille tuus_, Richmondia _Duxque_ - _Conditur_ Edmundus _his modo Marmoribus._ - _Qui Regni Clypeus, Comitum Flos, Malleus Hostis,_ - _Vitæ Dexteritas, Pacis Amator erat._ - _Hic meditare Vians Te semper vivere posse!_ - _Non morieris Homo? Nonne miselle vides_ - Cæsar _quem Tremeret Armis, nec vinceret_ Hector - _Ipsa devictum Morte ruisse Virum?_ - _Cede Metrum Precibus: Dat Regum Conditor Almus_ - _Ejus Spiritui Lucida Regna Poli_.”[80] - -The length and sentiments of the inscription, however, hardly atone for -the fact that this is a mean ornament to so important a person, and one -cannot help contrasting it with that of his illustrious son--King Henry -VII.’s Chapel in Westminster Abbey. - -With St. David’s shrine we have already dealt (see _ante_, p. 50). - -Turning to the corresponding arch on the south side of the presbytery, -we find two tombs (Nos. 17 and 18). One (18) in Purbeck marble supports -the figure of a bishop eucharistically vested and mitred, with a veiled -pastoral staff in his left hand. The right hand is raised in -benediction. Browne Willis conjectures[81] that this was the tomb of -Bishop Gervase or Jorwerth (1215-1229), but later[82] he definitely -states that it was unknown, but “_was unanimously assur’d to me to be -the Monument of_ Bishop Jerworth.” It is possible that the figure (which -is later than 1229) was placed over the remains of Gervase, during whose -episcopate the present presbytery was largely erected. A pastoral staff -(copper gilt) and part of its wooden stave, of a rich design, were found -near here in 1844, and, Freeman notes[83] “is at present in the -possession of the Bishop of S. David’s.” - -The other (No. 17) is to Bishop Anselm le Gras (1231-47), according to -the inscription on the trefoiled canopy supported by angels and adorned -with foliage: - - PETRA PRECOR DIC SIC ANSELMUS EPISCOPUS EST HIC. - -The Bishop is in relief and wears eucharistic vestments, with a rich -mitre and pastoral staff unveiled but turned outwards, and the right -hand is in the act of benediction. There is a kind of nimbus to the head -and at the feet are two dogs, one of whom is pierced by the staff. - -Proceeding to the next arch further east immediately behind - -[Illustration: TOMB OF A KNIGHT AT THE BACK OF THE SEDILIA.] - -the sedilia, there is a recumbent figure in the armour of the late -fourteenth century. This is attributed to Rhys ap Tewdwr, Prince of -South Wales.[84] “The head, which has the conical basanet and camaille, -is reclining upon a casque surmounted by the crest, _On a chapeau a lion -sejant_. The body armour is covered by a jupon, on the breast and back -of which are embroidered the wearer’s arms _[Gules,] within a bordure -engrailed [or,] a lion rampant [of the second]_. It is not quite clear -whether the jupon, which falls in a fringe round the hips, is meant to -have sleeves, or whether the figure has a hauberk with short sleeves, -those of the tunic appearing beneath them. The hands are clasped; there -is a richly decorated belt and sword; the legs have complete plate -armour, with genouillères; the feet have spurs, and rest on a lion.” - -In a corresponding position in the north choir aisle is another very -similar tomb (No. 11), evidently of a member of the same family, -probably by the same designer. The head lies on a double cushion, and -the heraldic bearings on the jupon have a label of three points.[85] The -general conclusion seems to be that these monuments are to Lord Rhys ap -Tewdwr and his son Rhys Gryg. Before the restoration they stood under -the same arches in the presbytery, not, as now, in the aisles. - -Under the easternmost arch of the presbytery on the south side is a -mutilated figure of a priest (No. 20) in the eucharistic vestments of -Bishop Gower’s time, which is commonly attributed to Giraldus -Cambriensis,[86] but on slight authority. The head rests on a double -cushion supported by angels, the hands are clasped (holding the Host) -and the feet lie on a dog. Opposite in the south choir aisle is a fine -slab (No. 22), with a cross floriated with branches in relief. The -chamfered edge bears the following inscription in Lombardic letters: - - SILVESTER: MEDICUS: IACET: HIC: EIVS[que] RUINA: - MONSTRAT: QVOD MORTI: [non]: OBSISTIT: MEDICINA: - - [Silvester the physician lies here, and his dissolution proves that - medicine withstands not Death.] - -Under the easternmost window in this aisle is the effigy of a vested -priest with raised hands. The recess is Decorated, and has a foliated -canopy which is remarkable as being the only instance of ball-flower in -the church except that in the Decorated stage of the tower. In the -westernmost bay (No. 21) is a much worn tomb of an ecclesiastic holding -a book in his right hand. - -The easternmost bay of the north side of the presbytery (No. 13) is -occupied by the monument to Thomas Lloyd, Treasurer (d. 1613). The -inscription states that it was here placed by his son Marmaduke: -Counsel-at-law of the Middle Temple. It is shown on page 45. At its back -is a Decorated recess, but the effigy has gone. The inscription is:[87] - - MARMADUCUS LLOYDE ARMIGER JURISCONSULTUS ET MEDII TEMPLI SOCIUS HOC - FECIT IN PERPETUAM PATRIS SUI CHARISSIMI THOMÆ LLOYD HUJUS ECCLESIÆ - CATHEDRALIS THESAURARII MEMORIAM QUI OCTAVO DIE MENSIS MARTII AÑO - REGNI SERENISSIMI REGIS JACOBI DECIMO OBIIT ET HIC JACET. - -In the north transept are the tomb of St. Caradoc (see p. 55), and the -effigy of a priest beneath a Decorated canopy. - -In the south transept, near the nave, is an incised slab with a -floriated cross having the head of a priest appearing above it through -an opening in the stone. - -[Illustration: ABRAHAM STONE (CELTIC).] - -In the east wall of this transept are two fragments of very ancient -Celtic slabs. The more important of the two is to Bishop Abraham, and -was found in 1891 in the east wall of the ante-chapel.[88] It is -inscribed with curious characters: - - PONTIFICIS ABRAHAM FILII HIC HED[OM] T ISAC QUIESCUNT. - -A very fine interlacing Celtic cross springing from a root is the -principal attraction of the stone. The uncarven outer circle terminates -at the head with a neat little Maltese cross having an incised border -and a slight depression at the end of each arm. The Greek alpha and -omega appear in the corners, and below are the sacred monograms. Bishop -Abraham (1076-78) was killed when the Northmen pillaged St. David’s in -1078, but it is not known in what way his sons were especially gifted -that so fine a memorial should have been erected to their memory. - -Near by is another stone of a similar character of which nothing is -known. In the new Chapter House the back can be seen, but the large -Latin cross with which it is ornamented seems later. - -[Illustration: NORTH DOORWAY, NAVE (_see p. 20_).] - -[Illustration: THE COLLEGE OF ST. MARY FROM THE S. W. - -_From an engraving after H. Gastineau._] - - - - -CHAPTER IV - -THE PRECINCTS--THE CLOISTERS AND ST. MARY’S COLLEGE - - -The College of St. Mary was founded conjointly by John of Gaunt, Duke of -Lancaster, his wife Blanche, and Bishop Adam Houghton in 1377, but it -was endowed solely by the Bishop for the maintenance of a Master and -seven Priest-Fellows, who were bound by a solemn oath to live in strict -obedience to such regulations as the founder thought fit to ordain. The -priests wore the same dress as the vicars-choral, and were under the -control of the Precentor or Treasurer of the cathedral. They were bound -to say the Hours and Masses of Requiem and perform certain services in -the church. Any view from the northern side of the cathedral must -include the graceful proportions of St. Mary’s, and it is surprising how -well these buildings group with those of the cathedral. The cloisters -and the cloister-garth, which separate the two buildings, date from -about the same time as St. Mary’s and doubtless were common to the -members of both foundations. The Early Perpendicular chapel is built on -a large crypt, being quite contiguous to the river Alan, not unlike the -chapel and hall of Magdalene College, Oxford. At the south-east angle -was a Sacristy, with an upper chamber built over the cloisters, which -had alleys to the north, west, and east; the latter running from the -college to the north wall of the transept. As at Hereford, therefore, a -covered way existed between the cathedral and the college. - -To the north of the cloisters was the square occupied by the college; on -the north side of which, again, was the principal entrance. And on the -south side of the square stood the chapel of which we now see the -remains, showing that it must have been a very fine building of its -kind. The elegance of the proportions and subtlety of the detail betray -the hand of a very skilful architect. The dimensions of the chapel are -69 ft. × 23 ft. 9 in. × 45 ft. high. It was lit by three windows in each -side 24 ft. × 9 ft. broad each, and the east window must have been a -grand affair, as it occupies the whole of the east wall. The tower is 70 -ft. high, to the north of which are the remains of the Infirmary.[89] - -The cathedral cloisters, unlike most English cathedrals, never had an -alley next the church, and it is most probable that no cloister existed -before the time of Bishop Houghton. - -But so fragmentary are the remains of the cloister and so complete its -destruction that we will only give a brief outline of its state as -inferred by Freeman, that the visitor may understand the ruins. - -A reference to the plan will best locate the cloister, but it will be -noticed that the massive western buttresses, which take the thrust of -the nave, show traces of the cloister wall. Also the wall-arcade and -vaulting-springers are visible on the south wall of the chapel of St. -Mary’s. The sacristy to the chapel, which has a piscina, was over the -eastern alley, and under this can be seen the lines of four bays of the -cloister and part of a fifth. Apparently the east side of the cloister -was never completed, as the buttresses show no sign of additions; -therefore, although a covered way was obtained between the cathedral and -college, the north door remained as a separate entrance from the -prebendal and other houses. - -The crypt[90] on which the chapel stands is roofed with a simple -elliptical barrel-vault and rear arches of small lights cut into it on -the northern side. Below the tower was the cloister entrance, but the -steps up to the chapel have quite disappeared. The landing at the top of -these steps and two bays to the north formed an ante-chamber to the -chapel, and a turret-stair on the northern or garden side led down to -the domestic buildings as well as to a room over the vestibule. This -room had two windows, one of which looked into the chapel, as at St. -Cross. It will thus be seen that there could not have been a west -window. - -The chapel is in four bays, but as the eastern bays were utilised, on -the north by the existing recess for the founder’s tomb and on the south -by the sacristy, there are only three windows. The great east window--as -well as others--was denuded of much ashlar-work and tracery to help in -Nash’s extraordinary concoction the west window of the cathedral.[91] -This great east window filled up almost the whole of the wall, and must -have been a fine example of the best sort of Perpendicular. Indeed, it -would not be impossible to reconstruct it even now. - -There is a legend (found by Browne Willis in an Elizabeth manuscript) -that Houghton was excommunicated by the Pope Clement, and that he -retaliated by returning the compliment, and further pictorially -displayed the event in stained glass.[92] Clement died, however, in -1352, before Houghton was made bishop, but was succeeded by Innocent VI. -The names may thus have got confounded, or the Pope may have been the -Anti-Pope, Robert of Geneva, known at Avignon as Clement VII. Although -the story is of doubtful authenticity it is quite in accord with -Houghton’s vigorous character, being as he was the friend of Chaucer and -John of Gaunt. He also established several ordinances for the diocese, -which shows that he was no mere figure-head. He held the office of -chancellor for two years.[93] - -The tower of the chapel--the only part yet undescribed--was evidently -designed for a broached spire, as is shown by the squinches within. But -a settlement, owing to the close proximity of the river, evidently not -only prevented further weights being imposed, but caused the south-west -angle buttress to be added which is so prominent (_vide_ p. 82). - -Of the collegiate domestic buildings there only remain a few vaults, -except a single entrance, with a four-centred arch, to the north. - - -THE BISHOP’S PALACE. - -After crossing a bridge to the north-west of the cathedral we pursue a -most picturesque alley, whence a good view of the tower and north side -is obtained, and shortly, on the left-hand side, we come to the entrance -to the =Bishop’s Palace=.[94] - -In the times before Gower (1328-47), who built the whole of this once -magnificent palace, there undoubtedly was some - -[Illustration: THE BISHOP’S PALACE, 1779. - -_From an engraving after Paul Sandby, R.A._] - -sort of episcopal residence or guest-house, as Kings Henry II. and -Edward I. were here entertained. However, not only is there no trace of -a pre-existent building, but this of Gower is a superb ruin. It is said -that we have to thank the scandalous Bishop Barlow (1536-49) for -initiating the work of destruction, removing, as he did, the lead from -the roofs to provide marriage portions for his daughters who married -five bishops. He also attempted to remove the see to Carmarthen. -“Barlow’s letter to Cromwell on this subject strongly urges the removal, -partly on account of the inconvenient situation and partly because the -hopes of Protestantism rested on getting rid of the _religio loci_.”[95] - -“It is hardly necessary to say that many churches, even of inferior -ecclesiastical rank, greatly surpass St. David’s Cathedral in extent and -in positive beauty, though certainly there is none which could so well -occupy its peculiar position; of the Palace, on the other hand, it is -hardly too much to affirm that it is altogether unsurpassed by any -existing English edifice of its own kind. One can hardly conceive any -structure that more completely proclaims its peculiar purpose. It is -essentially a palace and not a castle; we have not here the moat, the -tower, the frowning gateway, or any feature proclaiming, if not an -intention of hostility, at all events a state of things involving the -necessity of defence. The prominent parts are the superb rose-window of -the hall and the graceful spire of the chapel, importing an abode, not -of warfare, but of hospitality and religion.”[96] - -With all due deference to Messrs. Jones and Freeman, however, the great -arcaded parapet, which is certainly the most noticeable feature of the -building, gives at least a hint that Bishop Gower had an _arrière -pensée_ against defence. As the close was fortified, it was not -necessary to make any elaborate preparations against attack; but it will -be noted that, although there is no moat, the river Alan--then much -larger than now--runs past one side, and that on the others there were -very few windows, and those small; in fact, most of the remainder opens -on to the great quadrangle, which was self-contained. Let us look at it -again from another point of view. Eliminate the parapet, and what do we -find? Truly, except for an excellent plan and mere bulk, nothing at all -extraordinary from an architectural point of view. - -A particular description must be given to the =Parapet=. It consists of a -series of arches, with a hollow ornamented by Gower’s four-leaved -flower, carried down on octagonal shafts, which rest on corbels of -considerable variety about two feet down the wall. Above the arcade is a -corbel-table carrying a projecting battlemented cornice. The battlements -have extremely narrow embrasures and loopholes. The sills of the arcade -are steeply slanted outwards, and the jambs show the old shape of the -roof and finish with a neat weathered projection. Great richness is -obtained above the arcade from the various coloured stones employed. -They are set in squares, alternately purple and grey, in the voussoirs -of the arches and the spandrils above them, and make a mellow and -harmonious chequer-work which greatly adds to the character of the whole -building. - -A similar parapet is only known to occur in two other buildings (also -attributed to Gower), viz., Swansea Castle and Lamphey Palace, near -Pembroke. - -We can place the date of the building about 1340, as an ordinance by -Bishop Gower, dated May 27, 1342, orders that only certain buildings -belonging to the bishop be kept in repair,[97] which includes the -palace. Architecturally, the arrangements are excellent. The leading -idea is a great quadrangle, but so skilfully broken up with projections -that the monotonous rectangular effect of the square gives place to a -most pleasing and picturesque variety, and although the main portion is -kept about the same height throughout, yet the most dignified chambers -are given due prominence and the parts of lesser importance treated with -a fit reticence. - -The building is raised on crypts, which, however, were evidently used -for domestic offices from the windows (once glazed) and the divisions. -The vaults are of the plain barrel description, without ribs, although -there are some which rather suggest ribs. These vaults do not run -longitudinally, as under St. Mary’s Chapel or, indeed, the chapel in the -palace; the reason being that divisions, for living purposes, were -necessary on both floors. - -On entering the quadrangle, which is about 170 feet square, we find a -small building immediately to the left which many call the =East Chapel=. -The West Chapel (K)[98] was probably not built till later, and then -probably this little one became the Bishop’s private chapel. There are -indications of a way through to the ante-room adjoining in the -south-west wall, and a passage also leads to the lower floor. - -The =Bishop’s Hall= (I, about 60 ft. by 23 ft.) is approached from the -quadrangle by seven modern steps and a porch with a semi-octagonal arch. -The point of the octagon is at the centre of the opening, and resembles -that leading to the rood-loft in the cathedral. The small window in the -porch has two five-foil lights. - -The Hall was lit by two windows to the north-west and four to the -south-east. Possibly the recess, which cuts into the window at the south -angle, may have contained the refectory pulpit, and behind it was a -passage and stair leading to the minstrels’ gallery. - -There was a diagonal entrance (just above the head of the I on plan) -leading from the Bishop’s Hall to his =Study= or private apartment. Just -by this entrance there is also a way down. There are two fireplaces and -chimneys, and as there are indications of a divisional wall there were -probably two rooms, the further of which has a blocked doorway and may -have been utilised before the main entrance was built. H is the -_Kitchen_ (about 26 ft. by 23 ft.), to the west end of the Bishop’s -Hall. This room is very interesting, as it was evidently domed, and -later a wall had to be built to support it. The chimney, which was -standing in 1857 when Messrs. Jones and Freeman published their book, is -now lying in a mass on the floor. As this is a good object lesson to the -modern flimsy designers of to-day, the dimensions will not be without -interest: flues, 1 ft. 11 in.; outer walls, 1 ft. 3 in., inner, 1 ft. - -[Illustration: SECTION OF CHIMNEY.] - -On the northern side of the kitchen was an aisle leading behind the -Great Hall, and so out to the garden. - -=The Great Hall= is approached from the quadrangle by a fine porch, richly -adorned and of the whole height of the building. The entrance is an -unusual one at so early a period. - -[Illustration: BISHOP’S PALACE: GREAT WHEEL-WINDOW OF BANQUETING HALL.] - -It is about 9 ft. wide by 11 ft. 6 in. high, and has an ogee six-centred -arch, but the flight of steps are somewhat inconvenient, as the tread is -about fourteen inches and the rise about eleven and a half. Above were -two niches containing statues of King Edward III. and Queen Philippa. -Fragments of one remain now, but where is the other? It seems sad that -this should have disappeared within the last few years. - -[Illustration: BISHOP’S PALACE: GENERAL VIEW OF COURTYARD LOOKING -TOWARDS ENTRANCE TO GREAT HALL. - -(_From Jones and Freeman._)] - -The Hall itself is a magnificent stately apartment, even unroofed as it -is. It measures 116 feet by 31 feet, but this includes a smaller chamber -of about 30 feet which was originally a withdrawing room. At the south -corner is a staircase (down and up), and another at the east leading to -the turret. A doorway from the kitchen aisle is now blocked. In the -south-east wall is an exceptionally beautiful rose-window. The centre is -an upright quatrefoil, and at the cardinal points radiate four strong -mullions, and in between each of these are three lesser ones. The heads -are of the trefoil kind. The inner circle is not concentric with that -enclosing the tracery, but is dropped a little to create, as was often -done in these circular windows, an optical delusion. Thus the splay at -the top is considerably less than at the bottom, but _looks_ about the -same. Gower’s four-leaved flower is again in evidence in the hollow at -the outside edge of the splay. Bedrooms in two floors occupied the -western end of the hall. - -The =West Chapel= is entered from the northern corner of the hall, and -projects from the main building. There must have been a fine window to -the east judging by its proportions, and it has niches with canopies -outside. A large arched piscina can be seen on the south wall inside, -and at the east corner a double-bodied grotesque. In the north-east -angle is the belfry turret, which terminates in a very pleasing broached -spire; but the porch, which occupied the angle between the chapel and -the domestic buildings, is all destroyed. - -Of the _Domestic Buildings_ to the north-west less remains than of any -other part. The well of the palace is to be seen in a crypt, and a fine -example of a stone chimney-place with brackets, like the one in the -library of the cathedral, is also worthy of notice. The northern side -was probably used for stables, and the foundations for the enclosing -wall on the north-east side can still be traced. - -In conclusion, it must be remembered that the very high regard in which -St. David’s was held as a pilgrims’ haven, particularly in the -fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, and that the Bishop was bound to -entertain all who came, necessitated a very large guest-house, and here, -indeed, was one which was deemed worthy of the attention even of royalty -on many occasions. - - - - -APPENDIX I. - - -BISHOPS OF ST. DAVID’S.[99] - - [601] David - Cynog - Teilo - Ceneu - Morfael - Haerwnen - Elwaed - Gwrnwen - Llunwerth - Gwrgwyst - Gwgan - Clydawg - Eineon - Elfod - Ethelman - Elanc - Maelsgwd - [831] Sadurnfen - Cadell - Sulhaithnay - 840. Novis - Idwal - Asser - Arthwael - Samson - Ruelin - [961] Rhydderch - Elwin - Morbiw - 873. Llunwerth - 944. Eneuris - Hubert - Ivor - [999] Morgeneu - Nathan - Ieuan - Arwystl - [1023] Morgeneu - 1023. Ervin - 1039. Trahaearn - [1061] Joseph - 1061. Bleiddud - 1071. Sulien - 1076. Abraham - 1078. Sulien (again) - 1088. Rhyddmarch - 1096. Griffri - 1115. Bernard - 1147. David Fitz-Gerald - 1176. Peter de Leiâ - 1204. Geoffrey de Henelawe - 1215. Iorwerth, alias Gervase - 1230. Anselm de la Grace - 1284. Thomas Wallensis - 1256. Richard de Carew - 1280. Thomas Beck - 1293. David Martyn - 1328. Henry de Gower - 1347. John Thoresby - 1350. Reginald Brian - 1353. Thomas Fastolfe - 1361. Adam Houghton - 1389. John Gilbert - 1397. Guy Mone - 1408. Henry Chicheley - 1414. John Catterick - 1415. Stephen Patrington - 1418. Benedict Nicholls - 1433. Thomas Rodburne - 1442. William Lyndwood - 1447. John Langton - 1447. John Delabere - 1460. Robert Tully - 1482. Richard Martin - 1483. Thomas Langton - 1485. Hugh Pavy - 1496. John Morgan - 1505. Robert Sherborne - 1509. Edward Vaughan - 1523. Richard Rawlins - 1536. William Barlow - 1548. Robert Ferrar - 1554. Henry Morgan - 1559. Thomas Young - 1561. Richard Davies - 1582. Marmaduke Middleton - 1594. Anthony Rudd - 1615. Richard Milbourne - 1621. William Laud - 1627. Theophilus Field - 1635. Roger Mainwaring - 1660. William Lucy - 1677. William Thomas - 1683. Laurence Wornack - 1686. John Lloyd - 1687. Thomas Watson - 1705. George Bull - 1710. Philip Bisse - 1713. Adam Ottley - 1723. Richard Smallbrooke - 1730. Elias Sydall - 1731. Nicholas Claggett - 1742. Edward Willes - 1743. Hon. Richard Trevor - 1752. Anthony Ellis - 1761. Samuel Squire - 1766. Robert Lowth - 1766. Charles Moss - 1774. Hon. James Yorke - 1779. John Warren - 1783. Edward Smallwell - 1788. Samuel Horsley - 1793. Hon. William Stuart - 1800. Lord George Murray - 1803. Thomas Burgess - 1825. John Banks Jenkinson - 1840. Connop Thirlwall - 1874. Basil Jones - John Owen - - -PRECENTORS[100] (DEANS FROM 1840). - - 1224. Richard - W---- - [1237] Philip - [1254] Richard Pue - [1287] John de Swinssey - [1300] Thomas Barry - 1328. Richard de Musselwick - [1334] David Barret - 1339. Adam Houghton - [1352] David Ley - [1399] John Noke - 1413. Thomas Wollaston - 1437. Hugh ab Owen - 1486. Richard Machen - 1492. John Howell - 1509. Lewis ap Rhys - 1534. Thomas Lloyd - 1547. Thomas Young - 1554. Morgan Phillips - 1558. Thomas Young - 1560. Thomas Huett - 1591. Roger Gyfforde - 1596. William Hinton - 1631. Griffith Higgs - 1660. William Thomas - 1663. Richard Watson - 1677. John Ellis - 1693. Charles Pryse - 1696. Hugh Powell - 1717. John Davies - 1733. John Pember - 1735. Joseph Hill - 1753. John Morgan - 1774. John Jekyll - 1777. Francis Wollaston - 1816. Richard Richardson - 1839. Llewelyn Lewellin (assumed the title of Dean in 1840) - 1878. James Allen - 1897. Evan Owen Phillips - 1897. H. Howell - -ORGANISTS OF ST. DAVID’S CATHEDRAL.[101] - - Walter Warryn 1490 - Priest Vicars[102] officiated from 1490-1563 - John Norman 1509-1522 - Thomas Elliott 1563-1577 - Priest Vicars officiated in turn 1577-1713 - R. Mordant 1713-1714 - (Lay Vicar Choral) - Henry Mordant 1714-1719 - (Son of the preceding Lay Vicar Choral) - Richard Tomkins 1719-1719 - (Lay Vicar Choral) - William Bishop 1719-1720 - (Lay Vicar Choral) - Henry Williams 1720-1725 - Matthew Maddox 1725-1734 - (Lay Vicar Choral) - Matthew Philpott 1734-1793 - (Lay Vicar Choral) - Arthur Richardson 1793-1826 - (Lay Vicar Choral, also tuner of the organ. Died 1826?) - John Barrett 1827-1851 - (Lay Vicar Choral) - William Peregrine Propert, LL.D. and M.A., Cantab.; - Mus.B., Oxon. 1851-1883 - (A Lay Vicar Choral of the Cathedral. During the restoration of - the Cathedral, 1864-1883, the organ was not in use) - Frederick S. Garton 1883-1894 - (Organist of St. Martin’s, Haverfordwest, 1894) - D. John D. Codner 1894-1896 - (Born 1851. Organist of St. Bride’s, Fleet Street, E.C.) - Herbert C. Morris, F.R.C.O. 1896 - (Born at Coventry, June 18, 1873) - -[Illustration: GABLE CROSS LYING IN BISHOP VAUGHAN’S CHAPEL. (_See_ p. -67.)] - - - - -APPENDIX II - -EXTRACTS FROM SIR G. G. SCOTT’S REPORT TO THE DEAN AND CHAPTER, 1869 - - -By reference to my first Report, addressed to the Dean and Chapter in -1862, it will be seen that, while the entire building was reported to be -in a state of the most severe dilapidation, and some portions actually -in ruins, the greatest immediate danger was to be apprehended from the -tower, the crushed condition of two of whose sustaining piers rendered -its fall an event by no means improbable--a catastrophe which would -probably involve the destruction of a large portion of the church. - -Before, therefore, embarking upon any other works of restoration, it was -determined to take immediate measures for the removal of this great -danger, and, while the first contract united with this the restoration -of the choir, the actual work in the first instance undertaken, -excepting only some necessary works of drainage, was limited to this -“article of a standing or a falling church.” - -At the risk of being tedious, I will repeat here a detailed description -of these most dangerous and difficult operations, which I wrote -immediately after their completion, in a private Report to the Bishop:-- - -“I do not hesitate to tell you that the operations thus in the main -completed, have caused me the greatest anxiety; for, although it has -been my lot to apply the same process to five other central towers, and -though I have, in each instance, undertaken it not without much -trepidation, I have never met with a case so serious, and involving so -great an amount of apparent and actual danger, as that of your -Cathedral; for not only is the tower far larger and of vastly greater -weight than any other on which I have been called to operate, but its -two western piers were more alarmingly shattered than anything I have -witnessed elsewhere. I take the liberty of quoting the following passage -from my first Report, as showing what were my impressions on this point -after my original survey, and they have been more than verified by the -result:-- - -“‘The present condition of the tower is in the highest degree alarming, -and till it is restored to a state of security, it is quite useless to -think of any extensive reparation of other parts of the building. - -“‘The western piers consist each of two portions, the parts towards the -nave belonging to De Leiâ’s work of the twelfth century, and those -towards the transepts having been added after the catastrophe of 1220. -Of these, the older or western portions are literally, at least so far -as they are open to examination, shattered to fragments, and the same -process has extended itself in a less degree into the later or eastern -parts of each pier; in fact, the only security which the tower has from -actually falling, is the buttressing it sustains from the walls of the -transepts and the nave, though the latter have themselves severely -suffered under the undue pressure thus brought upon them. - -“‘The arch facing the nave is very much injured, and the wall which it -sustains, up to the commencement of the later stages, is utterly -disintegrated, so much so as to render it dangerous very closely to -investigate the defects; and the same state of disintegration extends -itself some feet into the north and south walls, but especially the -former, which is at this point crushed throughout its whole thickness. - -“‘It will be seen from what I have stated, that the whole remaining -portion of the first tower is crushed and left at the mercy of the -various walls which abut against, and, so to speak, bolster it up; and -that this terrible failure extends itself to a certain distance into the -later and, in themselves, better constructed portions; in fact, that of -the four supports of the tower, two are sound, and two wholly -untrustworthy.’ - -“It will be seen from the above, that the object to be aimed at was -little (if anything) less than the rebuilding from their foundation of -two of the four piers which sustained the tower, each of them bearing a -load of 1,150 tons, which had to be supported by timber shoring during -the operation. - -“Our first work, however, was to take measures for binding together, and -otherwise strengthening the tower itself, so as to avoid the danger of -its becoming fractured, or otherwise injured, during the reconstruction -of its supporting piers; and this was rendered the more necessary by the -disintegrated state of the lower walls immediately resting on the -arches, and the enormous cracks by which the north and south walls were -rent throughout their entire height. This object was attained by the -introduction of permanent iron ties of great strength, at several -different levels, binding all the walls together; by the use of -temporary girders of massive timber-work round the exterior of the -tower, throughout the greater part of its height; and by repairing with -new stone and strong cement many parts of the disintegrated walls. - -“The shoring by which the weight of the western half of the tower has -been temporarily supported is of three descriptions--1st, direct -supports under the western, northern, and southern arches (the two -former consisting of timber framing, and the latter being provided by an -old stone wall, by which the arch was blocked); 2ndly, vertical shores -of immense strength, supporting “needles,” or horizontal masses of -timber, passing through the walls; and 3rdly, by ‘raking’ or inclined -shores abutting against the walls in all directions, and both supporting -weight and preventing lateral motion. All these had to be provided with -firm foundations, having to bear the actual weight of the tower. The -magnitude of the work may be judged of when I mention that, of the six -main supports of the ‘needles,’ two consisted each of _nine_, and the -others of _six_ full-sized balks of timber, bound together into one mass -by irons, and thus making timber supports, the first 3 feet 6 inches -square, and the others 3 feet 6 inches by 2 feet 4 inches in thickness, -and all of them 36 feet in length. The ‘needles’ are of oak, 2 feet 4 -inches deep and 2 feet 4 inches thick, and shod with wrought iron. The -raking shores are arranged in systematic groups, giving supports at all -heights, from immediately over the piers to nearly the top of the tower. - -“The shoring has required the use of nearly 12,000 cubic feet of timber. - -“The state of the west wall of the tower was rendered alarmingly -apparent by the difficulties encountered in making the holes for the -‘needles.’ - -“Mr. Clear, the Clerk of the Works, and myself, foreseeing some -difficulty, arranged a plan by which, before cutting through the wall, a -sort of tunnel of strong stone should be formed through it, by inserting -the stones, one at a time, in the shattered rubble work, and then -removing the enclosed wall. This was done, with some difficulty, to a -depth of 2 feet from either side, but as the wall is 6 feet thick, there -remained 2 feet in the middle untunnelled, and when the enclosed wall -was attempted to be removed, the middle mass began to pour out like an -avalanche, which was only stopped by the immediate insertion of -sand-bags, and by subsequently running the wall from above with liquid -cement, and thus solidifying the disintegrated rubbish. - -“These systems of supports having been completed, the actual operations -commenced, and for this another and less permanent system of shoring was -requisite. If the main shoring may be compared to the solid masses of an -army, those I am now speaking of may be viewed as the _skirmishers_. -They consist of needles and props inserted immediately above the part to -be operated on, and supporting a portion of the shattered pier while -that below it was renewed, and as soon as this was effected, a new -needle was inserted above the first one, to make way for the renewal of -another batch, each lower needle being in its turn removed, when that -above it was secured. Besides this, however, endless extemporised -precautions had at every hour to be taken, to provide against -contingencies which were ever arising; blocks of timber inserted under -stones threatening to fall; struts and shields against masses in danger -of bursting; sand-bags, &c., against the rushing out of the avalanches -of rubbish; temporarily running together, with liquid cement, of parts -which, though eventually to be removed, had not yet been reached, and -threatened, if not consolidated, to bury the workmen in their ruins. All -these, and many more precautions, had to be taken to meet the exigencies -of every day and every hour; and when it is considered that each pier -took months to reinstate, that these dangerous operations could not, in -many cases, be suspended day or night, and that the Clerk of the Works -would never leave the spot while any dangerous work was pending, you may -judge of the wearing anxiety which he and others engaged in the work -have undergone. - -“By the process I have thus briefly sketched, the entire piers, -excepting a small central portion, have been rebuilt from their -foundations to their capitals; the new stone-work having to be inserted -a little at a time, has been aided, in all cases, by strong copper -cramps, so as to tie its courses together in their circuit round the -pier. - -“All the stones are laid in strong cement, and all that remains within -of the old work is run together at each course with liquid cement till -it will hold no more. I saw, myself, ten pails full of this material -poured into a single hole. - -“The stone made use of is the purple stone of the neighbouring cliffs, -and closely resembles the old stone, though somewhat harder, and is -worked in a similar manner. Any old stones which are unshattered (of -which I regret to say that but very few were found) have been re-used. - -“I had hoped that the southern pier, which was the second operated upon, -would have proved less dangerous than the northern one, but on a close -examination of it, just before the work on it was commenced, I found -that it was really as much shattered as the other had been, and, in -point of fact, was ready to burst at the middle of its height. The Clerk -of the Works, when he reached this point, told me that a cat could walk -in and out of the cracks which intersected the pier! - -“I have been the more minute in describing our operations, and the state -in which we found the old piers to be, because, when such a work is -completed, there is a tendency to forget, or to discredit, the danger -which has been avoided; indeed, to any one who sees the piers as now -reconstructed, it would be impossible to believe that the tower could -have stood on such masses of shattered fragments as those which they -have replaced.” - -At the time that the above description was written the shoring had not -been removed. This has now been the case for several years, and the -piers, I am thankful to say, have sustained the weight perfectly. - -When the crushed substructure had been thus rendered trustworthy, we not -only proceeded with the restoration of the remainder of the choir, which -formed a part of the same contract, but your orders were given to -proceed also with the repairs of the upper portions of the tower, which -were sadly dilapidated, and with the aisles of the choir, one of which -had long been in ruins and roofless, and the other in but little better -condition. - - (For extract here see pp. 16-19, _ante_.) - -I have had to bear some little ridicule for taking down the dead wall, -by which the sides had been heightened, and building it up again. I can -only say that the roof having been of necessity temporarily removed, and -these additions to the walls, being devoid of any character or value of -their own, being a mine of wealth in the debris they contained, I simply -worked them _as a mine_, and having obtained the treasure which lay -hidden within them, I reconstructed them with their old materials. - -In doing this we discovered the curious eaves-course and gutters of the -original roof, which is of a remarkable construction, and is now exposed -to view with some restoration. - -Among the timbers of the later roof were found portions of that of the -earlier date, shewing that it was perfectly plain, though massive, and -of the cradled form so usual at early periods. - -The design of the early stonework of the eastern arm, apart from its -intrinsic merits, is interesting from the evidences it presents of its -_double_ date, being a union of the original work of Bishop De Leiâ -(begun in 1180) with that resulting from the reparations after the fall -of the tower in 1220. The tower falling eastward would of course destroy -the parts immediately adjoining it, and it would appear that it, by the -fall of its upper portions, must also have reached and damaged the -eastern wall. - -We accordingly find that, while the eastward portions of the side walls -and the lower parts of the east end are of the original date, the -western bays of the sides and the upper parts of the end are of the -later date. This is made very manifest on the south side of the -clerestory by a triforium passage, originally communicating with that in -the south transept, but which was omitted in the reconstructed parts, -thus cutting off the communication. - -Curiously enough, we also find that in the reconstructed portions of the -sides a very marked preparation was commenced for vaulting, which, -however, was suspended at a few feet in height, and on one side niches -added just where the groining arches would come; while at the east end -the upper range of windows (as already mentioned) was designed without -reference to vaulting. - -We made a curious discovery in the eastern end, where a walled-up arch -was visible below the cill of the central window in Bishop Vaughan’s -Chapel (formerly the exterior of the end). On opening this we found it -to be a deep recess into the thickness of the wall, at the back of which -are some ornamental crosses of the older period, in the principal of -which (which is very beautiful) the intervals between the arms of the -cross are perforated through into the interior, opening just behind the -high altar, as if to allow a person while kneeling in the external -recess to participate in the services going on within. - -Returning for a moment to the choir roof, I will mention that we have -restored it precisely to its old form, retaining every part not unfitted -by decay. The chief exceptions are the beams, which were hopelessly -decayed, and which were of so great a size as to cause us much -difficulty and delay in obtaining trees of sufficient size to contain -them. They were eventually procured from Radnorshire, Shropshire, -Herefordshire, and the Forest of Dean. - -The old roof was decorated throughout with colour, which has been -carefully restored. The panels had been repainted in the seventeenth -century, in a discordant style; these have been now decorated in a -manner agreeing with the older work. - -The roof contains ancient shields, bearing the arms of Bishop Tully, the -Earl of Richmond, Roderic the Great, Bishop Martin, Owen Poole, -treasurer to the church; the arms of France and England quartered; those -of Edward V., Richard III., and (perhaps) Henry VII., of Rhys ap Tudor -and of Bishop Young. Those which were affixed to the corbels had been -obliterated, and have been supplied by the arms of the present bishop, -dean, canons, and archdeacons, thus marking the period of the -restoration. - -The walls, pillars, arches, &c., of the eastern arm, are now put into a -thorough state of repair; and the beauty of the interior will be greatly -increased by the munificence of the Rev. John Lucy, of Hampton Lucy, in -Warwickshire, who, as a memorial of Bishop Lucy, a member of the ancient -family to which he belongs, has undertaken to fill the upper tier of -windows in the east end with stained glass, and the lower tier (blocked -up by Bishop Vaughan’s Chapel) with Venetian enamel mosaic work, the -opaque co-relative of stained glass, though a much more costly form of -art. This will give to these noble lancets just the relief and beauty -which they had lost when deprived of their light, and that in a form -more unique and striking than stained glass itself. I had in my first -report suggested for these blank windows that “possibly some more -durable kind of decoration (than painting) may be introduced,” and Mr. -Lucy’s benefaction precisely meets the want.[103] - -The aisles of the eastern arm, which owing to their ruined condition had -been walled off, have now been opened out and brought back to a perfect -state, which of course brings out the beauty of the interior in a very -marked degree. In opening the second arch from the east the old sedilia -were found. They are of wood, and of the fifteenth century. These have -been carefully restored. The piscina, which occupied the south-eastern -arch, is too ruined for its design to be recovered, though I think that -a beautiful basin dug up in the churchyard must have belonged to it. -Three arches on the north side are occupied by ancient tombs (including -the substructure of St. David’s shrine). These are a good deal ruined, -and must be in some degree restored. The tombs similarly placed in the -northern arch of the tower, and which had to be removed for the repairs, -have been carefully replaced. - -The aisles of the choir have been twice prepared for vaulting, first in -the original structure, and again when the aisles were widened, and the -walls raised and remodelled, by Bishop Gower. I doubt whether in either -case it was carried out, as I could find no evidences of it on the inner -side, and after some perplexity I determined not to attempt it, but to -cover them with handsome oak roofs, suited in character to Bishop -Gower’s work. - -The windows were in a most ruined condition. We found on the north side -evidences of the old form of their tracery, which we have followed. -Those of the south aisle had no remains of the tracery left, and even -the jambs were so shattered that it was only by a fragment here and -there that the mouldings were recovered. These were found to be -curiously varied, out of four windows two only being alike. The tracery -introduced has been founded on fragmentary evidences from other parts of -the church of the same date. - -One thing caused us a little puzzle: we found the remains of windows in -_all four bays_, though the westernmost of them would be blocked up by -the eastern aisle of the transept. On close scrutiny, however, we found -that the place of this aisle was at first only occupied by a single -chapel,[104] with a space between it and the aisle of the choir, which -had been at a later period built over, so as to form the aisle which -stopped the window in question. This we have restored to its older form, -at the same time repairing the adjoining stair turret of the transept, -which was in a dangerous state. - -I will now return to the space beneath the tower, which in this church -is the _choir_ proper, as containing the stalls; the eastern arm of the -church being more correctly the _presbytery_. - -The great engineering works already described necessitated the temporary -removal of the stalls. They have subsequently been restored to their old -position, and have undergone a most careful process of reparation. On -close examination they were found to have been deprived of many of the -more delicate of their decorative details. These have been or still are -in process of being restored from fragments, more or less extensive, -which have been discovered; the greatest care being taken to preserve -the ancient work as nearly untouched as is possible. The whole is a very -excellent and interesting specimen of ancient woodwork, and retains -traces of coloured decoration, including some armorial bearings. - -The same process of careful reparation has been applied to the Bishop’s -throne, and the unique screen, which severs the choir proper from the -presbytery, neither of which have been moved from their positions, but -have been repaired as they stood. The similarity of the panels of the -lower parts of the screen and the throne, show them to be practically -one work. I suppose their date to be late in the fourteenth or early in -the fifteenth century. Both are very curious and valuable ancient works. -I am aware that the conservative manner in which they have been dealt -with has provoked some criticism from those who undervalue these relics -of ancient workmanship. For myself, I do not hesitate to express my high -satisfaction at the manner in which they have been both preserved and -restored; and I trust that the hand of spoliation and innovation will -never be permitted to tamper with the works I have thus endeavoured to -hand down in their integrity to future generations. - - (For extract here see pp. 30-32, _ante_.) - -One thing I will mention which stands, I think, alone, as a deliberate -deviation on my part from the old work. - -Bishop Gower, in building the middle stage of the tower, had made it -form a fine lantern storey to the choir. Late in the fifteenth or early -in the sixteenth century, wooden groining had been introduced, which, -strangely enough, cut Gower’s lantern windows in two, entirely hiding -their traceried heads. I have done away with this desight, by lifting -the wood groining a stage higher, so as to show Gower’s windows in their -integrity, which forms the lantern into a very fine feature. I trust -that, as regards the general principle of _conservative restoration_, -this exception will be accepted as one of the class which _proves the -rule_. The wood groining was decorated with colour, and has been -repainted. - - * * * * * - -Since the date of the last Report the works have been proceeding. The -restoration of the roofs of the nave and south aisle with their ceilings -has been accomplished. The clerestory of the nave has been fully -restored externally and internally; some of its windows which had been -walled up have been opened out, and the whole of them have been -reglazed. - -In carrying out this portion of the work it was found that the parapets -had been corbelled in the same manner as those of the presbytery, -although the corbels had been cut off flush with the face of the wall. -Fortunately in a sheltered corner next the tower two or three of the -corbels remained in a perfect state; these have been the guide in the -restoration. The parapet was probably of less height originally, but the -position of the sixteenth century roof would not allow of the height -being kept lower than at present. - -The ceiling of the south aisle, which until lately was open, showing the -rough timbers above, has been panelled in completion of the ancient -design. The parapet and pinnacles have also been repaired. - -The walls internally of the nave and south aisle and the piers and -arches have been cleaned, restored, and pointed. - -The north transept has been groined in oak, carrying out the design -which had been commenced in stone. The modern roof, which was truncated -and of very slight timbers, has been strengthened, and the pitch carried -up to fit the fifteenth century gable. The ruined pinnacle at the -north-west angle has been completed. - -Whilst speaking of this transept, it will be well to call attention to -the doorway on the western side, which was originally of considerable -width, but at a period very shortly after its erection was narrowed, -the later jamb with its shaft, cap, and base being precisely like the -original jamb which remains built up in the wall; and at a still later -period the doorway appears to have been walled up to form a recess, in -which was placed a hollowed stone sink with a stone shoot projecting -through the wall. - -The roofs of Bishop Vaughan’s Chapel and of the cross aisle eastward -(page 6) have been thoroughly repaired and releaded. - -The works now in progress (July, 1873) are the reparation of the roof of -the north aisle of the nave and the restoration of the upper part of the -Chapter-house building. The windows in the north aisle, two of which -have lost their tracery, are being restored, and the walls internally -will be cleaned. - -The modern roof of the Chapter-house building, which has for years been -in a very unsafe condition, is now being removed, and will be replaced -by a new roof covered with lead. The walls, &c., of the upper part of -the building will be restored as far down as the floor of the -Chapter-house. This will include the completion of the triangular window -in the gable, and the windows in the north side of the uppermost storey -or “Treasury.” The window in the north wall of the Chapter-house has -enough of its tracery remaining to enable the design to be completed -with certainty, and will be restored. The pinnacles flanking the eastern -gable, which are of very curious design, will be completed. - -The cost of these works on the Chapter-house building is being defrayed -by one of the Canons Residentiary, to whose liberality the new roof and -groined ceiling of the north transept, and the renewal of the roofs of -Bishop Vaughan’s Chapel, and of the adjacent ante-chapel are also due. - -Now that the substantial repair of the nave with its aisles is so nearly -completed, the nave should without further delay be paved and provided -with fittings for the parochial services. - -The pavement of the north transept should follow, with the restoration -of St. Thomas’s Chapel, stone tracery being substituted for its present -wooden window-frames, and an open screen for the existing partition -between it and the transept. - -The south transept should be dealt with in a similar manner to the -northern one. The unseemly condition of its roof is rendered more -apparent by contrast with the restored roofs and ceilings of other parts -of the church. - -There would still remain the porch, with sundry external repairs to the -north and south aisles. There is also the eastern group of unroofed -chapels, for which some provision should be made, to prevent further -dilapidation to their walls and injury to the delicately wrought tombs -still remaining within them. - -It is unnecessary at present to give estimates for the works enumerated -above, or for the amelioration of the western front. - -The extent to which these very desirable objects will be effected, must -depend on the liberality with which the present appeal is responded to. - -The outlay and liabilities up to the present time are--for the Drainage, -£500; the Tower, with the Presbytery and its Aisles, £15,700; the South -Transept Chapel and Stair Turret, £600; the Nave and its Aisles, £6,500. - - CHISWICK PRESS: PRINTED BY CHARLES WHITTINGHAM AND CO. - TOOKS COURT, CHANCERY LANE, LONDON. - - -DIMENSIONS OF THE CATHEDRAL. - - Total length (interior) 298 feet. - Length of nave 130 “ - “ from crossing to E. wall of choir 56 “ - Width of nave and choir 68 “ - Length along transept 131 “ - “ of crossing (E. to W.) 30 “ - - Area 21,950 sq. ft. - -[Illustration: S^{T}. David’s Cathedral. S. Wales., Ground Plan] - - * * * * * - -Bell’s Cathedral Series. - -_Profusely Illustrated. Cloth, crown 8vo, =1s. 6d.= net each._ - - -NOW READY. - - CANTERBURY. By HARTLEY WITHERS. 3rd Edition, revised. - CARLISLE. By C. K. ELEY. - CHESTER. By CHARLES HIATT. 2nd Edition, revised. - DURHAM. By J. E. BYGATE, A.R.C.A. 2nd Edition. - EXETER. By PERCY ADDLESHAW, B.A. 2nd Edition. - GLOUCESTER. By H. J. L. J. MASSÉ, M.A. 2nd Edition. - HEREFORD. By A. HUGH FISHER, A. R. E. - LICHFIELD. By A. B. CLIFTON. 2nd Edition, revised. - LINCOLN. By A. F. KENDRICK, B.A. 2nd Edition, revised. - NORWICH. By C. H. B. QUENNELL. 2nd Edition. - OXFORD. By Rev. PERCY DEARMER, M.A. 2nd Edition, revised. - PETERBOROUGH. By Rev. W. D. SWEETING, M.A. 2nd Edition. - ROCHESTER. By G. H. PALMER, B.A. 2nd Edition. - ST. PAUL’S. By Rev. ARTHUR DIMOCK, M. A. 2nd Edition, - SALISBURY. By GLEESON WHITE. 2nd Edition, revised. - SOUTHWELL. By Rev. ARTHUR DIMOCK, M. A. - WELLS. By Rev. PERCY DEARMER, M.A. 2nd Edition, revised. - WINCHESTER. By P. W. SERGEANT. 2nd Edition, revised. - WORCESTER. By EDWARD F. STRANGE. - YORK. By A. CLUTTON BROCK. 2nd Edition, revised. - - -_Preparing._ - -ST. DAVID’S. By PHILIP ROBSON, A.R.I.B.A. CHICHESTER. By H. C. CORLETTE, -A.R.I.B.A. RIPON. By CECIL HALLET, B.A. ELY. By Rev. W. D. SWEETING, -M.A. ST. ALBANS. By Rev. W. D. SWEETING, M.A. BRISTOL. By H. J. L. J. -MASSÉ, M.A. ST. ASAPH’S and BANGOR. By P. B. IRONSIDE BAX. GLASGOW. By -P. MACGREGOR CHALMERS, I.A., F.S.A. (Scot). - - -_Uniform with above Series. =1s. 6d.= each._ - -ST. MARTIN’S CHURCH, CANTERBURY. By Rev. CANON ROUTLEDGE, M.A., F.S.A. -24 Illustrations. - -BEVERLEY MINSTER. By CHARLES HIATT. 47 Illustrations. - -WIMBORNE MINSTER AND CHRISTCHURCH PRIORY. By Rev. T. PERKINS, M.A., -F.R.A.S. 65 Illustrations. - -TEWKESBURY ABBEY AND DEERHURST PRIORY. By H. J. L. J. MASSÉ, M.A. 44 -Illustrations. - -WESTMINSTER ABBEY. By CHARLES HIATT. - -[_Preparing._ - - * * * * * - -Bell’s Handbooks to Continental Churches. - -_Profusely Illustrated. Crown 8vo, Cloth, =2s. 6d.= each._ - - -CHARTRES: The Cathedral and Other Churches. By H. J. L. J. MASSÉ, M.A. - -[_Ready._ - -ROUEN: The Cathedral and Other Churches. By the Rev. T. PERKINS, M.A. - -[_Ready._ - -PARIS (NOTRE-DAME). By CHARLES HIATT. - -[_Preparing._ - -LONDON: GEORGE BELL AND SONS, -YORK STREET, COVENT GARDEN, W.C. - - * * * * * - - -Opinions of the Press. - -“For the purpose at which they aim they are admirably done, and there -are few visitants to any of our noble shrines who will not enjoy their -visit the better for being furnished with one of these delightful books, -which can be slipped into the pocket and carried with ease, and is yet -distinct and legible.... A volume such as that on Canterbury is exactly -what we want, and on our next visit we hope to have it with us. It is -thoroughly helpful, and the views of the fair city and its noble -cathedral are beautiful. Both volumes, moreover, will serve more than a -temporary purpose, and are trustworthy as well as delightful.”--_Notes -and Queries._ - -“We have so frequently in these columns urged the want of cheap, -well-illustrated, and well-written handbooks to our cathedrals, to take -the place of the out-of-date publications of local booksellers, that we -are glad to hear that they have been taken in hand by Messrs George Bell -& Sons.”--_St. James’s Gazette._ - -“The volumes are handy in size, moderate in price, well illustrated, and -written in a scholarly spirit. The history of cathedral and city is -intelligently set forth and accompanied by a descriptive survey of the -building in all its detail. The illustrations are copious and well -selected, and the series bids fair to become an indispensable companion -to the cathedral tourist in England.”--_Times._ - -“They are nicely produced in good type, on good paper, and contain -numerous illustrations, are well written, and very cheap. We should -imagine architects and students of architecture will be sure to buy the -series as they appear, for they contain in brief much valuable -information.”--_British Architect._ - -“Bell’s ‘Cathedral Series,’ so admirably edited, is more than a -description of the various English cathedrals. It will be a valuable -historical record, and a work of much service also to the architect. The -illustrations are well selected, and in many cases not mere bald -architectural drawings but reproductions of exquisite stone fancies, -touched in their treatment by and guided by art.”--_Star._ - -“Each of them contains exactly that amount of information which the -intelligent visitor, who is not a specialist, will wish to have. The -disposition of the various parts is judiciously proportioned, and the -style is very readable. The illustrations supply a further important -feature; they are both numerous and good. A series which cannot fail to -be welcomed by all who are interested in the ecclesiastical buildings of -England.”--_Glasgow Herald._ - -“Those who, either for purposes of professional study or for a cultured -recreation, find it expedient to ‘do’ the English cathedrals will -welcome the beginning of Bell’s ‘Cathedral Series.’ This set of books is -an attempt to consult, more closely, and in greater detail than the -usual guide-books do, the needs of visitors to the cathedral towns. The -series cannot but prove markedly successful. In each book a -business-like description is given of the fabric of the church to which -the volume relates, and an interesting history of the relative diocese. -The books are plentifully illustrated, and are thus made attractive as -well as instructive. They cannot but prove welcome to all classes of -readers interested either in English Church history or in ecclesiastical -architecture.”--_Scotsman._ - -“They have nothing in common with the almost invariably wretched local -guides save portability, and their only competitors in the quality and -quantity of their contents are very expensive and mostly rare works, -each of a size that suggests a packing-case rather than a coat-pocket. -The ‘Cathedral Series’ are important compilations concerning history, -architecture, and biography, and quite popular enough for such as take -any sincere interest in their subjects.”--_Sketch._ - - LONDON: GEORGE BELL AND SONS - - * * * * * - - -FOOTNOTES: - - [1] Jones and Freeman, p. 140. - - [2] King’s “Handbook to the Cathedrals of Wales” (Murray), 1887, p. - 115. - - [3] Winchester central tower fell 1107; Ely central tower in 1321. - - [4] J. & F., p. 54. - - [5] Report, 1869, p. 16. - - [6] Giraldus, “Vita S. Dav.” Ang. Sac. ii. 634. - - [7] J. & F., pp. 72-73. - - [8] King’s “Handbook,” 1887, plan p. 105. - - [9] J. & F., p. 56. - - [10] J. & F., p. 161. - - [11] P. 127. - - [12] King’s “Handbook,” p. 123. - - [13] P. 128. - - [14] Pronounced _Dice_ locally. - - [15] _Vide_ Scott’s Report, 1869. - - [16] “El sol pro factura muri in solaris Ste. Cyencis calce & lapid’ - & aliis nēriis ad idem opus pertinent, ut palet per billam inde - examinat, 100_s_.”--_Lib. Comm._ vol. i., p. 24. - - [17] Lib. Com., vol. i., p. 47. - - [18] “A Survey of the Cathedral Church of St. David’s” (1715), 8vo, - London, 1717. - - [19] Browne Willis, p. 8. - - [20] J. & F., p. 94. - - [21] Manby’s “History and Antiquities of the Parish of St. David’s,” - 1801, pp. 20, 30. “Mens. Sac.,” vol. i., p. 23. - - [22] J. & F., p. 95. “Mens. Sac.,” vol. ii., Appendix, fol. 54. - - [23] “Mens. Sac.,” vol. i., p. 23. - - [24] “Guide to St. David’s,” &c., T. J. Bryant, 1896, 12mo, p. 49. - - [25] King’s “Handbook,” pp. 143, 144. - - [26] J. & F., p. 163. - - [27] “Lib. Comm.,” vol. i., p. 15, an. 1490. - - [28] _Vide_ Appendix. - - [29] _Vide_ Plan, _at end_. - - [30] J. & F., p. 129. - - [31] “Handbook,” p. 147. - - [32] J. & F., pp. 84-85. - - [33] J. & F., p. 65. - - [34] J. & F., p. 86. - - [35] 3 & 4 Vic., c. 113, § I. _Vide_ also p. 94. - - [36] J. & F., p. 105. - - [37] “Church of Our Fathers,” vol. iii., p. 473. - - [38] See _post_, pp. 61, 62. - - [39] McKenzie Walcott’s “St. David’s,” p. 17, and “Anglia Sacra,” vol. - ii., p. 640. - - [40] Two other doings by this Pope are worthy of passing notes. (1) - Being a Frenchman, he was the first to make France a traditional ally - of the Roman See. (2) He concluded the celebrated Concordat of Worms, - 1122, by which the rights of the Roman Church in relation to the Crown - were defined. - - [41] Given as 1079 in “Anglia Sacra,” p. 649. - - [42] “Brut y Twwysogion, sub annis.” Haddan and Stubbs, vol. i., p. - 377. - - [43] “Anglia Sacra,” p. 651: “Annales Cambriæ,” in ann. 1284. - - [44] “St. Justinianus martir 5 die decembris in vigilia Sancti - Nicholai; jacet in capella in ecclesia Sancti David sub ejus tumba, - confessor Sancti David.”--Itinerarium _Willielmi de Worcestre_ - (Nasmyth, 1778, p. 164). - - [45] “Anno MLXXXVI. Scrinium Sancti David de Ecclesiâ suâ furator, & - juxta civitatem ex toto spoliator.”--_Anglia Sacra_, vol. ii., p. 649. - - [46] Gale, “Scriptores,” vol. xv., p. 299. - - [47] “Anno MCCLXXV. Incœptum fuit Feretrum Beati David in Ecclesiâ - Menevensi.”--_An. Sac._, p 651. - - [48] “Mens. Sac.,” vol. i, pp. 255-257. - - [49] “Lib. Stat.,” p. 299. - - [50] “Browne Willis’ Survey,” pp. 54-55. and 69. - - [51] J. & F., p. 105. - - [52] “Lib. Stat.,” p. 24. - - [53] Removed from the back recently. J. & F., p. 103. - - [54] P. 69. - - [55] “Anglia Sacra,” vol. ii., p. 547. - - [56] Fenton’s “Pembroke,” p. 84. - - [57] Freeman, p. 155. King’s “Handbook,” p. 148. - - [58] Report, 1869, p. 21. - - [59] George Owen’s MS. history, see Fenton, p. 98. - - [60] J. & F., p. 152. - - [61] J. & F., p. 70. - - [62] During Scott’s restoration this was subsequently found to be a - recess only (of De Leiâ’s period). - - [63] P. 52. - - [64] Briant, p. 67. - - [65] J. & F., p. 96. - - [66] “I take it to be This Bp. who began S. Mary’s Chapel, & that He - lies buried in it on yᵉ N. Side, which Tomb is by Mistake said to - be Bp. Houghton’s.” “Mens. Sac.,” vol. i., p. 49. J. & F., p. 121. - Fenton, p. 87, _note_. - - [67] King, “Handbook,” 1873. - - [68] On Plan No. 4. - - [69] Browne Willis, opp. p. 1. - - [70] J. & F., p. 71. - - [71] Browne Willis, p. 4. - - [72] Now wrought iron (_vide_ opposite). - - [73] P. 108. - - [74] Finton, p. 423, gives a similar design. - - [75] J. & F., p. 159. - - [76] “Mens. Sac.,” p. 232. - - [77] See p. 36. - - [78] Fenton, p. 73. - - [79] P. 112. - - [80] J. & F., p. 112, from Browne Willis. - - [81] “Survey,” p. 12. - - [82] Pp. 68-69. - - [83] J. & F., p. 113. - - [84] J. & F., p. 114. - - [85] For a learned disquisition on these tombs see Jones and Freeman, - pp. 114-116. - - [86] Browne Willis, p. 101. - - [87] J. & F., p. 116. - - [88] T. J. Briant, p. 54. - - [89] McKenzie Walcott, p. 16. - - [90] Formerly a charnel-house (Browne Willis, p. 25). - - [91] See plates, pp. 2 and 7. - - [92] King, 1887, p. 239; Briant, p. 71. - - [93] _Vide_ Campbell’s “Lives of the Chancellors.” - - [94] Reference to the plan on page 10 is here desirable. - - [95] J. & F., p. 330. - - [96] _Ibid._, p. 189. - - [97] J. & F., p. 190; _Lib. Stat._, p. 24. - - [98] The references are to the plan on p. 10. - - [99] J. & F., pp. 358, 359. - - [100] The List of Precentors is from Eardley as far as the middle of - the eighteenth century, from the Cathedral Registers from then to - 1854. Freeman (footnote p. 358) states that the Registers have never - been very carefully kept, but both lists were revised by Le Neve’s - “Fasti” (ed. Hardy); the accuracy of this latter, however, is not very - remarkable. - - [101] Condensed from pp. 76-77 “Cathedral Organists,” by J. C. West, - 8vo, London, 1899, which was apparently compiled from information - supplied by D. J. D. Codner. - - [102] “Mens. Sacra.” - - [103] The stained glass and mosaics have since been fixed. Mr. Lucy - has also undertaken the repair of the Earl of Richmond’s altar-tomb in - the presbytery. - - [104] This chapel was added in the fourteenth century, being a part of - Gower’s work. Its extension into an aisle was probably of modern date. - It will be seen that the old base-moulds concealed by that extension - still remain. - - - - - - - - -End of Project Gutenberg's Bell's Cathedrals: St. David's, by Philip A. Robson - -*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK BELL'S CATHEDRALS: ST. DAVID'S *** - -***** This file should be named 52728-0.txt or 52728-0.zip ***** -This and all associated files of various formats will be found in: - http://www.gutenberg.org/5/2/7/2/52728/ - -Produced by Jonathan Ingram, Chuck Greif and the Online -Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net - - -Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions -will be renamed. - -Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no -one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation -(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without -permission and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules, -set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to -copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to -protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark. Project -Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you -charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission. If you -do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the -rules is very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose -such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and -research. They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do -practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks. Redistribution is -subject to the trademark license, especially commercial -redistribution. - - - -*** START: FULL LICENSE *** - -THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE -PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK - -To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free -distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work -(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project -Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at -http://gutenberg.org/license). - - -Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works - -1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to -and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property -(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all -the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy -all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession. -If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the -terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or -entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8. - -1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be -used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who -agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few -things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See -paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement -and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic -works. See paragraph 1.E below. - -1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation" -or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the -collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an -individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are -located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from -copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative -works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg -are removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project -Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by -freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of -this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with -the work. You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by -keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project -Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others. - -1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern -what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in -a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check -the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement -before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or -creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project -Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no representations concerning -the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United -States. - -1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: - -1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate -access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently -whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the -phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project -Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, -copied or distributed: - -This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with -almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or -re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included -with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org/license - -1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived -from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is -posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied -and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees -or charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a work -with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the -work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 -through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the -Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or -1.E.9. - -1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted -with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution -must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional -terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked -to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the -permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work. - -1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm -License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this -work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm. - -1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this -electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without -prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with -active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project -Gutenberg-tm License. - -1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, -compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any -word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or -distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than -"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version -posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org), -you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a -copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon -request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other -form. Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm -License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. - -1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, -performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works -unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing -access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided -that - -- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from - the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method - you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is - owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he - has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the - Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments - must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you - prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax - returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and - sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the - address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to - the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation." - -- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies - you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he - does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm - License. You must require such a user to return or - destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium - and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of - Project Gutenberg-tm works. - -- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any - money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the - electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days - of receipt of the work. - -- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free - distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works. - -1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set -forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from -both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael -Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark. Contact the -Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below. - -1.F. - -1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable -effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread -public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm -collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic -works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain -"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or -corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual -property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a -computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by -your equipment. - -1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right -of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project -Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all -liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal -fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT -LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE -PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE -TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE -LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR -INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH -DAMAGE. - -1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a -defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can -receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a -written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you -received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with -your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with -the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a -refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or entity -providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to -receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy -is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further -opportunities to fix the problem. - -1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth -in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS' WITH NO OTHER -WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO -WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. - -1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied -warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages. -If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the -law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be -interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by -the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any -provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions. - -1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the -trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone -providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance -with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production, -promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works, -harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, -that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do -or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm -work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any -Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause. - - -Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm - -Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of -electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers -including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists -because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from -people in all walks of life. - -Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the -assistance they need, are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's -goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will -remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure -and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations. -To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation -and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 -and the Foundation web page at http://www.pglaf.org. - - -Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive -Foundation - -The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit -501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the -state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal -Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification -number is 64-6221541. Its 501(c)(3) letter is posted at -http://pglaf.org/fundraising. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg -Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent -permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws. - -The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S. -Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered -throughout numerous locations. Its business office is located at -809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email -business@pglaf.org. Email contact links and up to date contact -information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official -page at http://pglaf.org - -For additional contact information: - Dr. Gregory B. Newby - Chief Executive and Director - gbnewby@pglaf.org - - -Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg -Literary Archive Foundation - -Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide -spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of -increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be -freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest -array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations -($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt -status with the IRS. - -The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating -charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United -States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a -considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up -with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations -where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To -SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any -particular state visit http://pglaf.org - -While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we -have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition -against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who -approach us with offers to donate. - -International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make -any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from -outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. - -Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation -methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other -ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. -To donate, please visit: http://pglaf.org/donate - - -Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic -works. - -Professor Michael S. Hart is the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm -concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared -with anyone. For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project -Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support. - - -Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed -editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S. -unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily -keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition. - - -Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility: - - http://www.gutenberg.org - -This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, -including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to -subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. diff --git a/old/52728-0.zip b/old/52728-0.zip Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index bbf0e2b..0000000 --- a/old/52728-0.zip +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h.zip b/old/52728-h.zip Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index d1c5eb4..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h.zip +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/52728-h.htm b/old/52728-h/52728-h.htm deleted file mode 100644 index 186e737..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/52728-h.htm +++ /dev/null @@ -1,4586 +0,0 @@ -<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" -"http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd"> - -<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" lang="en" xml:lang="en"> - <head> <link rel="coverpage" href="images/cover.jpg" /> -<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=utf-8" /> -<title> - The Project Gutenberg eBook of Bell's Cathedrals: St. David's Cathedral, by Philip A. Robson. -</title> -<style type="text/css"> - p {margin-top:.2em;text-align:justify;margin-bottom:.2em;text-indent:4%;} - -.c {text-align:center;text-indent:0%;} - -.cb {text-align:center;text-indent:0%;font-weight:bold;} - -.chug {text-align:center;text-indent:0%;font-weight:bold; -font-size:250%;} - -.ditto {margin:auto 1em auto 1em;} - -.dottsp {text-align:center;text-indent:0%;font-weight:bold; -letter-spacing:4em;} - -.eng {font-family: "Old English Text MT",fantasy,sans-serif; -font-weight:bold;} - -.hang {text-indent:-2%;margin-left:4%;} - -.nind {text-indent:0%;} - -.nonvis {display:inline;} - @media print, handheld - {.nonvis - {display: none;} - } - -.r {text-align:right;margin-right: 5%;} - -.rt {text-align:right;} - -.rtlt {text-align:right;border-left:1px solid black; -padding-left:2em;} - -.sans {font-family:sans-serif,serif;text-align:center;text-indent:0%;font-weight:bold;} - -small {font-size: 70%;} - -.spc {letter-spacing:.15em;} -.spc1 {letter-spacing:.075em;} - -big {font-size: 130%;} - - h1 {margin-top:5%;text-align:center;clear:both; -letter-spacing:.05em;font-weight:normal;} - - h2 {margin-top:4%;margin-bottom:2%;text-align:center;clear:both; - font-size:120%;} - - h3 {margin:4% auto 2% auto;text-align:center;clear:both;font-size:90%; -font-weight:normal;} - - hr {width:90%;margin:2em auto 2em auto;clear:both;color:black;} - - hr.full {width: 60%;margin:2% auto 2% auto;border-top:1px solid black; -padding:.1em;border-bottom:1px solid black;border-left:none;border-right:none;} - - table {margin-top:2%;margin-bottom:2%;margin-left:auto;margin-right:auto;border:none; -font-size:90%;} - - body{margin-left:4%;margin-right:6%;background:#ffffff;color:black;font-family:"Times New Roman", serif;font-size:medium;} - -a:link {background-color:#ffffff;color:blue;text-decoration:none;} - - link {background-color:#ffffff;color:blue;text-decoration:none;} - -a:visited {background-color:#ffffff;color:purple;text-decoration:none;} - -a:hover {background-color:#ffffff;color:#FF0000;text-decoration:underline;} - -.smcap {font-variant:small-caps;font-size:100%;} - - img {border:none;} - -.blockquot {margin-top:2%;margin-bottom:2%;font-size:90%;} - - sup {font-size:75%;vertical-align:top;} - -.caption {font-weight:bold;} - -.caption p{font-weight:bold;font-size:75%;text-align:center;text-indent:0%;} - -.figcenter {margin-top:3%;margin-bottom:3%;clear:both; -margin-left:auto;margin-right:auto;text-align:center;text-indent:0%;} - @media print, handheld - {.figcenter - {page-break-before: avoid;} - } - -.figleft {float:left;clear:left;margin-left:0;margin-bottom:1em;margin-top:1em;margin-right:1em;padding:0;text-align:center;} - -.figright {float:right;clear:right;margin-left:1em;margin-bottom:1em;margin-top:1em;margin-right:0;padding:0;text-align:center;} - -.footnotes {border:dotted 3px gray;margin-top:5%;clear:both;} - -.footnote {width:95%;margin:auto 3% 1% auto;font-size:0.9em;position:relative;} - -.label {position:relative;left:-.5em;top:0;text-align:left;font-size:.8em;} - -.fnanchor {vertical-align:30%;font-size:.8em;} - -div.poetry {text-align:center;} -div.poem {font-size:90%;margin:auto auto;text-indent:0%; -display: inline-block; text-align: left;} -.poem .stanza {margin-top: 1em;margin-bottom:1em;} -.poem span.i0 {display: block; margin-left: 0em; padding-left: 3em; text-indent: -3em;} -.poem span.i1 {display: block; margin-left: .45em; padding-left: 3em; text-indent: -3em;} - -.pagenum {font-style:normal;position:absolute; -left:95%;font-size:55%;text-align:right;color:gray; -background-color:#ffffff;font-variant:normal;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;text-decoration:none;text-indent:0em;} -@media print, handheld -{.pagenum - {display: none;} - } - -.padd {padding-left:2em;} - -.padds {padding-left:2em;font-size:80%;} - -</style> - </head> -<body> - - -<pre> - -Project Gutenberg's Bell's Cathedrals: St. David's, by Philip A. Robson - -This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with -almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or -re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included -with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org/license - - -Title: Bell's Cathedrals: St. David's - -Author: Philip A. Robson - -Release Date: August 5, 2016 [EBook #52728] - -Language: English - -Character set encoding: UTF-8 - -*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK BELL'S CATHEDRALS: ST. DAVID'S *** - - - - -Produced by Jonathan Ingram, Chuck Greif and the Online -Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net - - - - - - -</pre> - -<hr class="full" /> - -<div class="figcenter"> -<a href="images/cover_lg.jpg"> -<img src="images/cover.jpg" width="311" height="500" alt="[Image -of the book's cover unavailable.]" /></a> -</div> - -<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" summary="" -style="border: 2px black solid;margin:auto auto;max-width:50%; -padding:1%;"> -<tr><td> - -<p class="c"><a href="#LIST_OF_CONTENTS">List of Contents.</a></p> -<p class="c"><a href="#LIST_OF_ILLUSTRATIONS">List of Illustrations</a><br /> <span class="nonvis">(In certain versions of this etext [in certain browsers] -clicking on the image -will bring up a larger version.)</span></p> - -<p class="c">(etext transcriber's note)</p></td></tr> -</table> - -<p class="cb">BELL’S CATHEDRAL SERIES<br /><br /> -SAINT DAVID’S -</p> - -<p><a name="front" id="front"></a></p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 501px;"> -<a href="images/image01_lg.jpg"> -<img src="images/image01_sml.jpg" width="501" height="323" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a> -<div class="caption"><p><i>Photo. F. Frith & Co.</i></p> - -<p class="c">ST. DAVID’S CATHEDRAL, FROM THE N.E.</p></div> -</div> - -<h1><small>THE CATHEDRAL CHURCH OF</small><br /> -<big><span class="spc1">SAINT DAVID’S</span></big><br /> -<small>A <span class="spc">SHORT HISTORY AND</span><br /> -DESCRIPTION OF THE FABRIC<br /> -AND EPISCOPAL BUILDINGS</small><br /> -</h1> - -<p class="c">BY<br /> -PHILIP A. ROBSON, A.R.I.B.A.<br /> -<br /><br /> -WITH FIFTY<a name="title" id="title"></a> -<img src="images/colophon.png" -style="vertical-align:middle;" -width="185" -height="226" -alt="colophon" -/> -ILLUSTRATIONS<br /><br /> -<br /> -LONDON GEORGE BELL & SONS 1901<br /> -<br /><br /><br /> -<span class="eng">Dedication</span>.<br /> -<br /> -TO THE<br /> -<br /> -MEMORY OF<br /> -<br /> -THE VERY REVEREND<br /> -<br /> -JAMES ALLEN, M.A.,<br /> -<br /> -DEAN OF ST. DAVID’S,<br /> -<br /> -OF<br /> -<br /> -TRINITY COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE,<br /> -<br /> -THIS SHORT HISTORY<br /> -<br /> -IS DEDICATED<br /> -<br /> -IN THE HOPE THAT ST. DAVID’S<br /> -<br /> -MAY EVER FIND SUCCESSORS TO BENEFIT BY<br /> -<br /> -THE EXAMPLE OF THIS HER MOST SELF-SACRIFICING<br /> -<br /> -AND CAREFUL OF CUSTODIANS.<br /> -</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="page_ix" id="page_ix"></a>{ix}</span></p> - -<h2><a name="AUTHORS_PREFACE" id="AUTHORS_PREFACE"></a>AUTHOR’S PREFACE</h2> - -<p class="nind"><span class="smcap">This</span> treatise is little more than a careful digest of numerous works, of -the more important of which a list is given. A sincere note of -obligation is due to Messrs. Jones and Freeman’s scholarly and accurate -<i>History of St. David’s</i> and to Mr. John Murray’s <i>Handbook to the Welsh -Cathedrals</i>; but the list is given quite as much to assist future -students as to emphasise those writers to whom the author has been under -special obligations.</p> - -<p>Those who may wish to visit St. David’s will find it remarkably -inaccessible, and they will be well advised to travel to Haverfordwest -by train, sleep there, and drive on, over the sixteen miles and -seventeen hills, to St. David’s on the next day. For cyclists there is a -much better road from Letterston station, but the other is preferable -from the picturesque point of view.</p> - -<p>The illustrations are mostly from the author’s own photographs, but his -special thanks are due to Mr. A. David and Mr. Morgan, to whose hearty -co-operation on the spot a large meed of whatever success they may -attain is unhesitatingly given. The general views are from photographs -by Valentine, Frith and Co., and Poulton; the general measured drawings -are reduced from the elaborate plans of J. Taylor Scott, F.R.I.B.A., -which won the silver medal of the Royal Institute of British Architects -in 1882; a few illustrations are taken from old prints in the author’s -collection, and for some reproductions we have been indebted to the -excellent plates in Messrs. Jones and Freeman’s <i>History of St. -David’s</i>.</p> - -<p class="r"> -PHILIP A. ROBSON.<br /> -</p> - -<p class="hang"> -<span class="smcap">Palace Chambers</span>,<br /> -9, <span class="smcap">Bridge Street, Westminster</span>.<br /> -</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="page_x" id="page_x"></a>{x}</span> </p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="page_xi" id="page_xi"></a>{xi}</span> </p> - -<h2><a name="LIST_OF_PRINCIPAL_WORKS_CONSULTED" id="LIST_OF_PRINCIPAL_WORKS_CONSULTED"></a>LIST OF PRINCIPAL WORKS CONSULTED</h2> - -<p><span class="smcap">Owen’s Description of Pembrokeshire</span>. London, 2 vols., 1603 [reprinted -1892 and 1897], 8vo, pp. xxviii and 286, and pp. iv and from 287-578, -paper covers. Edited with notes and appendix by Henry Owen (Cymmrodorion -Record Series, No. 1).</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Cambria Triumphans</span>. London (A. Crooke), 1661, folio, pp. 256; a -preliminary in sixes and three folding plates of arms; Russia extra; two -vols. in one; numerous woodcuts. <i>Note.</i>—Very rare. Briant’s, £30 9s.; -Heathcote’s, £29 18s. 6d.</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">A Survey of the Cathedral Church of St. David’s and the Edifices -Belonging to It, as They Stood in the Year 1715.</span> London, 1717, sm. 410, -pp. xii, 202, vii, panelled calf. By Browne Willis. Illustrated “with -draughts,” consisting of two treble-folding plates opposite p. 1, “The -Iconography” (<i>i.e.</i>, plan) and “South Prospect,” and opposite p. 91 a -double-folding plate containing fifty-two shields. Very rare. Towneley -copy sold for £1 11s. 6d. Considering its date, a most excellent book.</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">History and Antiquities of the Parish of St. David</span>. London (E. Harding), -1801, 4to, pp. viii and 206, boards. By George W. Manby. Nine whole-page -aquatints. <i>Note.</i>—Rare, but amusing rather than veracious when not -copying Browne Willis.</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">The History and Antiquities of St. David’s</span>. London and Tenby, 1856, 4to, -pp. xii, 400, cloth. By W. B. Jones, M.A., and E. A. Freeman, M.A. -Illustrated. <i>Note.</i>—The best work on the subject.</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Cambrian Journal</span>. Vol. iii., London, 1856, 8vo; contains an elaborate -review of J. and F.’s History, with illustrations.</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">St. David’s. The Cathedral of SS. Andrew and David</span>. Tenby, n.d., but -reprinted from the <i>Cambrian Journal</i>, 1864, 8vo, pp. 18, paper covers. -By M. E. C. Walcott.</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Handbook to the Cathedrals of Wales</span>. 1st ed., 1873, pp. xx and 334, 2nd -ed., 1887, post 8vo, pp. 334, cloth [by R. J. King], illustrated. -<i>Note.</i>—2nd edition was revised by the late Dean Allen.</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">St. David’s; its Early History and Present State</span>. London and Derby, -1868, sm. 8vo, pp. 42, limp cloth. By an Ecclesiologist (Fox). Three -illustrations.</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">H.M. Commissioners’ Report on Cathedral Churches</span>. London (Eyre and -Spottiswoode), 1883, folio (pp. 24 on <i>St. David’s</i>), irregularly -paged.<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_xii" id="page_xii"></a>{xii}</span></p> - -<p><span class="smcap">St. David’s</span> (Diocesan Histories). London (S.P.C.K.), Brighton, and New -York, 1888, post 8vo, pp. x, 254, fancy cloth. By W. L. Bevan, M.A. With -map. <i>Note.</i>—Best history of the Diocese.</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">The Builder</span>. Vol. lxiii., No. 2,600 (Cathedral Series). An article, -three full-page plates (including a good plan) and sketches. Folio. -London, December 3, 1892.</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">A Guide to the Cathedral of St. David’s, the Bishop’s Palace, and the -Coast Chapels</span>. London (Jones and Evans), Tenby (Mason), 1896, crn. 8vo, -pp. 90, paper covers. By Travers J. Briant.</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Pembrokeshire Antiquities</span>. Solva (H. H. Williams), 1897, 8vo, pp. vi. -and 84, paper boards (consisting of reprints from the <i>Pembroke County -Guardian</i> by various authors). St. David’s is mentioned on pp. 8, 34, -37, 53, 68, and 77.</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">The Architectural Review</span>. Vol. v., Nos. 27, 8, 9, folio. London, 1899; -many photographic illustrations by P. A. Robson.</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Cathedral Organists</span>. London (Novello), 1899, 8vo, pp. xii and 142, -cloth. By John K. West (St. David’s, pp. 76 and 77).</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="page_xiii" id="page_xiii"></a>{xiii}</span></p> - -<h2><a name="LIST_OF_CONTENTS" id="LIST_OF_CONTENTS"></a>LIST OF CONTENTS</h2> - -<table border="0" cellpadding="1" cellspacing="0" summary=""> - -<tr><td class="rt"><small>CHAPTER</small></td><td> </td> -<td class="rt"><small>PAGE</small></td></tr> - -<tr><td> </td><td class="padd" valign="top">List of Works consulted </td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_xi">xi</a></td></tr> - -<tr><td class="rt" valign="top"><a href="#CHAPTER_I">I.</a></td><td> <span class="smcap">The Site and General History of the Fabric</span></td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_002">2</a></td></tr> -<tr><td> </td><td class="padd" valign="top">Previous Churches—Bishop de Leiâ—Fall of the Tower </td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_004">4</a></td></tr> -<tr><td> </td><td class="padd" valign="top">Bishop Gower—The Perpendicular Period</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_005">5</a></td></tr> -<tr><td> </td><td class="padd" valign="top">The Civil War—West Front rebuilt—Scott’s Restoration</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_006">6</a></td></tr> - -<tr><td class="rt" valign="top"><a href="#CHAPTER_II">II.</a></td><td> <span class="smcap">The Exterior</span></td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_009">9</a></td></tr> -<tr><td> </td><td class="padd" valign="top">The Cathedral Precincts</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_009">9</a></td></tr> -<tr><td> </td><td class="padd" valign="top">The Church</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_011">11</a></td></tr> -<tr><td> </td><td class="padd" valign="top">The Tower</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_012">12</a></td></tr> -<tr><td> </td><td class="padd" valign="top">The South Side</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_014">14</a></td></tr> -<tr><td> </td><td class="padd" valign="top">The South Porch</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_014">14</a></td></tr> -<tr><td> </td><td class="padd" valign="top">The South Transept</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_016">16</a></td></tr> -<tr><td> </td><td class="padd" valign="top">The East End</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_016">16</a></td></tr> -<tr><td> </td><td class="padd" valign="top">The Ruined Chapels</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_019">19</a></td></tr> -<tr><td> </td><td class="padd" valign="top">The North Side</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_019">19</a></td></tr> -<tr><td> </td><td class="padd" valign="top">The Library or Chapter House</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_019">19</a></td></tr> -<tr><td> </td><td class="padd" valign="top">The North Transept</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_020">20</a></td></tr> -<tr><td> </td><td class="padd" valign="top">The North Doorway</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_020">20</a></td></tr> -<tr><td> </td><td class="padd" valign="top">The West Front</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_021">21</a></td></tr> - -<tr><td class="rt" valign="top"><a href="#CHAPTER_III">III.</a></td><td> <span class="smcap">The Interior—The Nave</span></td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_023">23</a></td></tr> -<tr><td> </td><td class="padd" valign="top">The Font</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_028">28</a></td></tr> -<tr><td> </td><td class="padd" valign="top">The Rood Screen</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_030">30</a></td></tr> -<tr><td> </td><td class="padd" valign="top">The Organ</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_032">32</a></td></tr> - -<tr><td> </td><td valign="top"><span class="smcap">The Choir and Transepts</span></td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_036">36</a></td></tr> -<tr><td> </td><td class="padd" valign="top">The Parclose Screen</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_044">44</a></td></tr> -<tr><td> </td><td class="padd" valign="top">The Stalls</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_044">44</a></td></tr> -<tr><td> </td><td class="padd" valign="top">The Chapel of St. Thomas</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_046">46</a></td></tr> -<tr><td> </td><td class="padd" valign="top">The Chapter House or Library</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_047">47</a></td></tr> -<tr><td> </td><td class="padd" valign="top">The Throne</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_048">48</a></td></tr> -<tr><td> </td><td class="padd" valign="top">The Sedilia</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_048">48</a></td></tr> - -<tr><td> </td><td valign="top"><span class="smcap">The Shrine of St. David</span></td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_050">50</a></td></tr> - -<tr><td> </td><td valign="top"><span class="smcap">The Shrine of St. Caradoc</span></td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_054">54</a></td></tr> -<tr><td> </td><td class="padd" valign="top">The Aisles of the Presbytery</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_055">55</a></td></tr> - -<tr><td> </td><td valign="top"><span class="smcap">The Chapels East of the Presbytery</span></td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_057">57</a></td></tr> -<tr><td> </td><td class="padd" valign="top">Bishop Vaughan’s or Trinity Chapel</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_060">60</a></td></tr> -<tr><td> </td><td class="padd" valign="top">The South Chapel Aisle</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_065">65</a></td></tr> -<tr><td> </td><td class="padd" valign="top">The Ante Chapel</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_065">65</a></td></tr> -<tr><td> </td><td class="padd" valign="top">The Lady Chapel</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_066">66</a></td></tr> -<tr><td> </td><td class="padd" valign="top">The North Chapel Aisle</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_068">68</a></td></tr> - -<tr><td> </td><td valign="top"><span class="smcap">Monuments in the Church</span> (otherwise than in the Eastern Chapels)<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_xiv" id="page_xiv"></a>{xiv}</span></td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_071">71</a></td></tr> -<tr><td> </td><td class="padd" valign="top">Bishop Gower’s Tomb</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_071">71</a></td></tr> - -<tr><td class="rt" valign="top"><a href="#CHAPTER_IV">IV.</a></td><td> <span class="smcap">The Precincts</span></td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_083">83</a></td></tr> - -<tr><td> </td><td valign="top"><span class="smcap">The Cloisters and St. Mary’s College</span></td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_083">83</a></td></tr> - -<tr><td> </td><td valign="top"><span class="smcap">The Bishop’s Palace</span></td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_085">85</a></td></tr> -<tr><td> </td><td class="padd" valign="top">The Parapet</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_088">88</a></td></tr> -<tr><td> </td><td class="padd" valign="top">The East Chapel</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_089">89</a></td></tr> -<tr><td> </td><td class="padd" valign="top">The Bishop’s Hall and Study</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_089">89</a></td></tr> -<tr><td> </td><td class="padd" valign="top">The Great Hall</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_089">89</a></td></tr> -<tr><td> </td><td class="padd" valign="top">The West Chapel</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_092">92</a></td></tr> - -<tr><td valign="top"><span class="smcap"><a href="#APPENDIX_I">Appendix</a></span> </td><td>I.—<span class="smcap">Bishops</span> of St. David’s</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_093">93</a></td></tr> -<tr><td> </td><td class="padd" valign="top">Precentors and Deans</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_094">94</a></td></tr> -<tr><td> </td><td class="padd" valign="top">Organists</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_095">95</a></td></tr> - -<tr><td valign="top"><span class="smcap"><a href="#APPENDIX_II">Appendix</a></span></td><td> II.—Extracts from Sir G. G. Scott’s Report, 1869</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_097">97</a></td></tr> -</table> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="page_xv" id="page_xv"></a>{xv}</span></p> - -<h2><a name="LIST_OF_ILLUSTRATIONS" id="LIST_OF_ILLUSTRATIONS"></a>LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS</h2> - -<table border="0" cellpadding="1" cellspacing="0" summary=""> -<tr><td> </td><td class="rt"><small>PAGE</small></td></tr> -<tr><td valign="top">St. David’s Cathedral from the N.E.</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#front"><i>Frontispiece</i></a></td></tr> - -<tr><td valign="top">Arms of the See</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#title"><i>Title-page</i></a></td></tr> - -<tr><td valign="top">The West Front before the restoration of 1862</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_002">2</a></td></tr> - -<tr><td valign="top">The Cross and Cathedral Tower</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_003">3</a></td></tr> - -<tr><td valign="top">St. David’s from Speed’s Map</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_005">5</a></td></tr> - -<tr><td valign="top">South-west View before the restoration of 1862</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_007">7</a></td></tr> - -<tr><td valign="top">South View about 1700</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_009">9</a></td></tr> - -<tr><td valign="top">Plan of St. David’s, 1806, by John Carter</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_010">10</a></td></tr> - -<tr><td valign="top">Top of the Tower</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_011">11</a></td></tr> - -<tr><td valign="top">Ceiling of Central Tower</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_013">13</a></td></tr> - -<tr><td valign="top">South Elevation (drawn by J. Taylor Scott)</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_015">15</a></td></tr> - -<tr><td valign="top">South Doorway</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_017">17</a></td></tr> - -<tr><td valign="top">The Nave, looking East</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_022">22</a></td></tr> - -<tr><td valign="top">Elevation of a Bay of the Nave, looking East (drawn by J. T. Scott)</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_024">24</a></td></tr> - -<tr><td valign="top">Norman Shaft with Re-carved Capital</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_025">25</a></td></tr> - -<tr><td valign="top">Details of Pier Arches (from Jones and Freeman)</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_026">26</a></td></tr> - -<tr><td valign="top">Carved Panels and Arch-ornaments in the Triforium (from Jones and Freeman)</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_026">26</a></td></tr> - -<tr><td valign="top">Groining of Rood Screen showing the flying ribs</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_031">31</a></td></tr> - -<tr><td valign="top">The Rood Screen and Organ</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_033">33</a></td></tr> - -<tr><td valign="top">The Presbytery in 1856 (from Jones and Freeman)</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_036">36</a></td></tr> - -<tr><td valign="top">The Choir and Presbytery, 1895</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_037">37</a></td></tr> - -<tr><td valign="top">The Parclose Screen</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_043">43</a></td></tr> - -<tr><td valign="top">Arch between the S. Transept and Choir Aisle</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_045">45</a></td></tr> - -<tr><td valign="top">Double Piscina, St. Thomas’s Chapel</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_046">46</a></td></tr> - -<tr><td valign="top">The Sedilia</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_049">49</a></td></tr> - -<tr><td valign="top">The Shrine of St. David (Base)</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_051">51</a></td></tr> - -<tr><td valign="top">The Shrine of St. Caradoc (Base)</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_055">55</a></td></tr> - -<tr><td valign="top">Screen of Bishop Vaughan’s Chapel</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_057">57</a></td></tr> - -<tr><td valign="top">Roof of Bishop Vaughan’s Chapel</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_059">59</a></td></tr> - -<tr><td valign="top">Recess in Bishop Vaughan’s Chapel</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_061">61</a></td></tr> - -<tr><td valign="top">Bosses on the Cornice</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_062">62</a></td></tr> - -<tr><td valign="top">Window in Bishop Vaughan’s Chapel</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_062">62</a></td></tr> - -<tr><td valign="top">Niche</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_063">63</a></td></tr> - -<tr><td valign="top">Bishop Vaughan’s Chapel</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_064">64</a></td></tr> - -<tr><td valign="top">View from Ante Chapel to Lady Chapel</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_066">66</a></td></tr> - -<tr><td valign="top">Sedilia and Tomb in Lady Chapel</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_067">67</a></td></tr> - -<tr><td valign="top">The North Chapel Aisle</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_068">68</a></td></tr> - -<tr><td valign="top">Tomb of a Priest, N. Chapel</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_070">70</a></td></tr> - -<tr><td valign="top">Tomb of Bishop Morgan<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_xvi" id="page_xvi"></a>{xvi}</span></td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_072">72</a></td></tr> - -<tr><td valign="top">Bishop Gower’s Tomb</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_073">73</a></td></tr> - -<tr><td valign="top">Tomb of a Knight</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_077">77</a></td></tr> - -<tr><td valign="top">Abraham Stone</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_079">79</a></td></tr> - -<tr><td valign="top">North Doorway of Nave</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_080">80</a></td></tr> - -<tr><td valign="top">The College of St. Mary (after H. Gastineau)</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_082">82</a></td></tr> - -<tr><td valign="top">The Bishop’s Palace, 1779 (after Paul Sandby, R.A.)</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_086">86</a></td></tr> - -<tr><td valign="top">Section of Chimney in Kitchen</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_089">89</a></td></tr> - -<tr><td valign="top">Bishops’ Palace</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_090">90</a></td></tr> - -<tr><td valign="top">Bishops’ Palace; View of Courtyard (from Jones and Freeman)</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_091">91</a></td></tr> - -<tr><td valign="top">Gable-Cross lying in Bishop Vaughan’s Chapel</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#page_096">96</a></td></tr> - -<tr><td valign="top">Plan of the Cathedral</td><td class="rt" valign="bottom"><a href="#end"><i>At end</i></a></td></tr> -</table> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="page_001" id="page_001"></a>{1}</span> </p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="page_002" id="page_002"></a>{2}</span> </p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 485px;"> -<a href="images/image03_lg.jpg"> -<img src="images/image03_sml.jpg" width="485" height="323" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a> -<div class="caption"><p>THE WEST FRONT BEFORE THE RESTORATION OF 1862.</p> - -<p>(<i>The figures in the foreground are those of Sir G. G. Scott, Dean -Allen, Prof. E. A. Freeman, the Bishop and Mrs. Jones.</i>)</p></div> -</div> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="page_003" id="page_003"></a>{3}</span></p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 325px;"> -<a href="images/image04_lg.jpg"> -<img src="images/image04_sml.jpg" width="325" height="217" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a> -<div class="caption"><p>THE CROSS AND CATHEDRAL TOWER.</p></div> -</div> - -<h1>ST. DAVID’S CATHEDRAL</h1> - -<h2><a name="CHAPTER_I" id="CHAPTER_I"></a>CHAPTER I<br /><br /> -<small>THE SITE AND GENERAL HISTORY OF THE FABRIC</small></h2> - -<p class="nind"><span class="smcap">The</span> see of Minevia, or St. David’s, was founded in the sixth century. It -has always included the whole of Pembrokeshire, and is by far the most -important of the four Welsh sees—St. David’s, St. Asaph, Bangor, and -Llandaff. The impressively wild and open scenery which surrounds St. -David’s gives it also a natural advantage irrespective of its greater -size. But the site of the cathedral cannot be regarded as satisfactory, -being close to the little river Alan, on almost marshy ground. Its -drainage has consequently always been a source of trouble and expense. -In questioning the founder’s choice of site it must always be clearly -remembered that the buildings were originally monastic, and that -seclusion, combined with a good natural water supply, were regarded by -the old monastic builders as primary essentials. Once selected by St. -David,<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_004" id="page_004"></a>{4}</span> however, this site has always been regarded with veneration by -those who in later times added to the original foundation.</p> - -<p>The existing church is not less than the fourth on this site. The -monastic church was destroyed by fire in 645 and the second in 1088, and -the third was that visited by Henry II. in 1171 and 1172 (<i>vide</i> -Giraldus). The first view of the church generally seen is that from the -south-east and from almost on a level with the top of the central tower. -The <i>tout ensemble</i> is certainly remarkable, and few thoughtful visitors -fail to find a pigeon-hole in their memory for this first impression, -which is invariably conjured up by the name “St. David’s.”</p> - -<p>Calixtus II. (Pope 1119-1134) canonised St. David in 1131,<a name="FNanchor_1_1" id="FNanchor_1_1"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_1" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> and the -church was solemnly dedicated to him in conjunction with St. Andrew, to -whom the previous church had been dedicated. Of this primitive British -church, which St. David himself founded long before the coming of St. -Augustine, nothing is now visible. For in 1180 Peter de Leiâ, the third -Norman bishop (1176-1198), replanned the whole building. Indeed, in -consideration of the works being in progress (1189), the Cardinal Legate -excused the bishop, Giraldus, and certain others from joining in the -Crusade, provided that they contributed towards the expenses of those -going and towards the completion of St. David’s Cathedral. It is to this -Bishop de Leiâ that St. David’s, even as we see it now, mainly owes its -grandeur.</p> - -<p>But soon after the completion of the new church the central tower fell, -seriously damaging all the adjacent parts, which were rebuilt, including -one stage of the tower, by 1248. The foundations, however, on the wet -site caused further trouble, and it was not till 1866 that they were -properly laid and the tower secured by the late Sir (then Mr.) G. G. -Scott. In 1248 an earthquake shook the building in a serious manner, and -probably started or aggravated the curious outward inclination of the -nave arcade, which can be seen in the illustration, <a href="#page_022">p. 22</a>. The fall of -the tower also necessitated alterations in the buildings which had just -been erected to the east of the crossing, and no doubt the earthquake -also prevented any attempt to complete the stone groining of the nave, -for about the year 1500 huge buttresses were added on the north or river -side to prevent further settlements. Bishop Martyn (1296-1328)<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_005" id="page_005"></a>{5}</span> -completed De Leiâ’s plan by adding the Lady Chapel; but his immediate -successor, Bishop Gower (1328-1347), has, more surely than any -prelate—not excepting De Leiâ—left his impress on the present -buildings. Under his direction a stage was added to the tower; the south -porch was built; the walls of the aisles were raised to their present -height and preparations made for vaulting; the eastern chapel to the -south transept and alterations to those east of the north transept were -carried out; the aisles received Decorated windows and their walls -buttresses; and the very remarkable Rood-screen and its adjuncts were -then first added. Of his splendid episcopal palace across the Alan more -anon.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 321px;"> -<a href="images/image05_lg.jpg"> -<img src="images/image05_sml.jpg" width="321" height="259" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a> -<div class="caption"><p>FROM SPEED’S MAP OF PEMBROKE.</p><p>FROM SPEED’S MAP OF PEMBROKE.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>In the Perpendicular period the principal alterations were the renewal -of the main roofs; the addition of the huge buttresses on the north side -of the nave; the vaulting of the chapel just east of the Presbytery, and -the addition of one<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_006" id="page_006"></a>{6}</span> more stage to the tower. It should be noted that -this was the only period in which the difficulties of vaulting were -overcome, although extensive preparations for a sexpartite system had -been made.</p> - -<p>Nothing of note was done to the fabric for a long period after this, -till Bishop Field whitewashed the cathedral internally in 1630! Then we -find that during the Civil War much damage was done, traces of which can -be easily found in the ruined chapels east of the Presbytery. The -transepts and Lady Chapel were stripped of their lead, and consequently -fell into a state of ruin. The roofs of the former were reconstructed in -1696, but the vaulting to the latter did not fall till nearly eighty -years later. Sundry precautions were taken to prevent the main fabric -from falling into absolute ruin—<i>e.g.</i>, the southern arch of the tower -was filled up; but St. David’s had fallen on evil days, and it is not -till nearly 1800 that we read of a subscription for rebuilding the West -Front from plans by Nash which are said to have been approved by the -Society of Antiquaries. The frontispiece to this chapter shows this -front as it was before Scott’s great restoration of 1862. The additions -from 1800 to 1862, as given by Messrs. Jones and Freeman, make extensive -reading, but do not count for very much in the building. The Chapel of -St. Thomas, east of the North Transept, was converted into a Chapter -House 1827. During the forties the South Transept was re-arranged as a -parish church and the seventeenth-century vestry was treated as a kind -of eastern aisle. Butterfield added some Decorated windows—notably the -great North Transept window—and the north aisle of the Presbytery again -received a roof.</p> - -<p>In 1862 Scott was requisitioned by Bishop Thirlwall to examine the -fabric and make a report on its proposed complete restoration, and in -1869 he was able, in his second report, to announce the satisfactory -repair of the tower. This work was one of extreme difficulty, as will be -seen from the Appendix (<a href="#page_097">see p. 97</a>). The church was then for the first -time properly drained; and the next parts to be taken in hand by Scott -were the Choir, Presbytery and their aisles, and after that De Leiâ’s -original Transitional work, at a cost of about £40,000. This amount -included Willis’s organ, and the reconstruction of the West Front in -memory of Bishop Thirlwall (of which latter the Very Rev. James Allen,<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_007" id="page_007"></a>{7}</span></p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 485px;"> -<a href="images/image06_lg.jpg"> -<img src="images/image06_sml.jpg" width="485" height="323" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a> -<div class="caption"><p>SOUTH-WEST VIEW OF THE CATHEDRAL BEFORE THE RESTORATION -OF 1862.</p></div> -</div> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="page_008" id="page_008"></a>{8}</span></p> - -<p class="nind">afterwards Dean, was the inaugurator). Dean Allen contributed in a most -generous way towards the restoration, as, <i>inter alia</i>, the expenses of -the renovation of the North Transept, St. Thomas’s Chapel, Library, and -Treasury, and the roofs of Bishop Vaughan’s Chapel and the ante-chapels -he defrayed entirely. The Rev. J. M. Treherne and his wife each gave -£2,000 by legacy, and the latter gave an annual subscription of £200 -during her life.</p> - -<p>It is most welcome news that the present Dean and Chapter have already -started a fund for the final section of the restoration, viz., that of -the ruinous eastern chapels, wherein is exquisite work being surely -destroyed. And it is hardly too much to expect that the Welsh will not -fail to respond to this dual opportunity for at once reverencing their -Patron Saint and removing what is to-day indeed a national reproach.<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_009" id="page_009"></a>{9}</span></p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 322px;"> -<a href="images/image07_lg.jpg"> -<img src="images/image07_sml.jpg" width="322" height="245" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a> -<div class="caption"><p>SOUTH VIEW ABOUT 1700, FROM AN OLD PRINT.</p></div> -</div> - -<h2><a name="CHAPTER_II" id="CHAPTER_II"></a>CHAPTER II<br /><br /> -<small>THE EXTERIOR</small></h2> - -<p><b>The Cathedral Precincts.</b>—The wall of the Close, which extends to almost -a mile, dates from 1330, but of the four <span class="smcap">Gateways</span> only one remains. -This, to the south-east of the cathedral, is the main entrance to the -Close from the secular part of the city. It is about 60 feet high, and -the gateway is flanked on the north by an early Decorated (or -Transitional) octagonal tower—once the janitor’s lodge—and on the -south by a semicircular tower of an earlier character. This latter was -probably a detached bell-tower and contained a prison. It also formed a -Record Office and Consistory Court. The Precentor’s house abuts on the -southern enclosure; the Chanter’s orchard is to the south-west; the -Archdeacon has his residence to the west, and north of this is another -for the Archdeacon of Brecon; beyond this again are the Chancellor’s, -the Archdeacon of Cardigan’s, and the Treasurer’s houses. Adjoining the -bridge is a prebendal house.<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_010" id="page_010"></a>{10}</span></p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 328px;"> -<a href="images/image08_lg.jpg"> -<img src="images/image08_sml.jpg" width="328" height="372" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a> -<div class="caption"><p>PLAN OF ST. DAVID’S, 1806, BY JOHN CARTER.</p> - -<p>A. Tower Gateway; B. City Wall; C. Cathedral; D. Bishop’s Palace; E. St. -Mary’s College; F. Garden; G. Great Hall; H. Kitchen; I. Bishop’s Hall; -K. West Chapel; L. Cloister Garth; M. God’s Acre (graves); O. -Subordinate Cathedral Buildings.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>On the north side of the Nave and parallel with it, but separated by the -Cloister garth, are the remains of the College of St. Mary; to the north -of its dignified tower are traces, possibly, of the infirmary, and to -the north and east of this again are the remains of the houses of the -Master and seven<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_011" id="page_011"></a>{11}</span> Priest-fellows of St. Mary’s, forming three sides of a -quadrangle, on the north side of which was an entrance gateway tower. -Across the Alan to the north-west are the attractive ruins of Bishop -Gower’s once splendid palace.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 326px;"> -<a href="images/image09_lg.jpg"> -<img src="images/image09_sml.jpg" width="326" height="259" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a> -<div class="caption"><p>TOP OF TOWER (S.W. ANGLE) AND TENOR BELL.</p></div> -</div> - -<p><b>The Church.</b>—An important feature in the general exterior appearance of -St. David’s is the walling material. Greys, reds, and purples, and -mottle-blends of all three, lend a peculiar richness and warmth to the -building on a sunny day, and the converse in wet weather. The quarries -from which the cathedral stone was obtained are at Caerbwdy, in the -immediate neighbourhood, and as these are almost the oldest sedimentary -rocks known, it is conjectured that some part of this locality existed -as an island in more than one primæval sea.<a name="FNanchor_2_2" id="FNanchor_2_2"></a><a href="#Footnote_2_2" class="fnanchor">[2]</a> This ancient cathedral, -then, of the British Church<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_012" id="page_012"></a>{12}</span> has the distinction of being built of more -primitive stone than any other important building in the country. Many -things combine to render the general character of the exterior -architecturally uninteresting. There is a decided feeling of dignity, -but not of the grandeur with which one is apt to associate the idea of a -cathedral. It lies low; the roofs are of a flat pitch, with the -exception of those of the transepts; the highly picturesque and -exquisite ruin of Bishop Gower’s palace to the west, with its chequered -rampart, and the immense amount of new material used in the very -necessary restoration, at present combine to mask the real age of the -cathedral; and, finally, there is no hint of the gorgeous work within.</p> - -<p><b>The Tower.</b>—Few Norman towers, situated on the crossing of the nave, -transepts, and choir, have not fallen<a name="FNanchor_3_3" id="FNanchor_3_3"></a><a href="#Footnote_3_3" class="fnanchor">[3]</a> or been in extreme danger of -doing so owing to the early architects having a very limited knowledge -of the weight of superimposed masses and of the thrust of arches, which, -as the orientals declare, “never rest.” The central tower of St. David’s -was no exception; it fell in 1220. But it can hardly be that any tower -has suffered worse than has this one from injudicious attentions even -till the general restorations under Sir G. Scott in 1862. After the fall -of 1220 the western piers and arch were allowed to remain, and the other -three arches and piers were rebuilt from the ground. This, however, did -not deter Bishops Gower and Vaughan adding, the first a Decorated and -the latter a Perpendicular stage on to the same faulty substructure. In -the rebuilding after the disaster of 1220 apparently but little effort -was made towards fully introducing the new style in vogue. In fact, it -is one of the most curious features of the whole of the details of the -building that all the work is behind the accepted contemporary types in -the matter of architectural advancement.</p> - -<p>Internally the one old arch remaining is, of course, more or less -semicircular, but the three new ones are pointed and consequently the -string-course above them is carried at a higher level. Over this -string-course on the west side is an arcade of pointed arches with -slender shafts and foliated capitals. A corbel composed of a fox’s head -carries the centre shaft. Altogether these form a graceful combination -of shafts,<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_013" id="page_013"></a>{13}</span> corbels, and large bowtells with shaft-bases. Above is the -characteristic Norman billet string-course.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 330px;"> -<a href="images/image10_lg.jpg"> -<img src="images/image10_sml.jpg" width="330" height="340" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a> -<div class="caption"><p>CEILING OF CENTRAL TOWER.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>Bishop Gower’s stage, above a string with the ball-flower ornament, -contains on each face a tall two-light window, having pointed arches -opening to a wall-passage, and externally a niche on either side. The -third storey (of Bishop Vaughan, c. 1515) has a top-heavy effect and a -most unusual parapet, with polygonal angle-shafts and a set of eight -pinnacles. There are at present three bells, and the one that is used -most and strikes from the clock is outside on the tower roof<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_014" id="page_014"></a>{14}</span> under a -wooden diminutive belfry. There are two bells at the west end on the -nave floor. Apparently there was an octave in the middle of the -fourteenth century, when the bells were recast and the largest was lost -at sea. About 1690 there were five (some cracked), and in 1748 the -Chapter ordered that the four large bells should be taken down as they -were both useless and dangerous, and in 1765 two were sold. The upper -part of the interior of the tower consists of an elaborate wooden vault, -which was raised by Scott and finely emblazoned. As the roof of the -tower must obviously have been raised at least twice before, it seems -hardly necessary for Scott to apologise (<i>vide</i> Report, 1869, Appendix) -for doing so again. His success, however, is very patent.</p> - -<p><b>The South Side.</b>—Beginning at the west end, the first noticeable feature -is the <b>South Porch</b> in the second bay, with the parvise or first floor -chamber. The inner doorway has been, as Freeman<a name="FNanchor_4_4" id="FNanchor_4_4"></a><a href="#Footnote_4_4" class="fnanchor">[4]</a> justly says, “one of -the most magnificent displays of ornament in the whole building ... and, -contrary to the common rule, the original Norman doorway has given way -to a later successor.... The present doorway is Decorated (Bishop Gower, -1328-47), without shafts, but with a superb display of sculptured -decoration, besides crockets and the ordinary four-leaved flower. The -arch is adorned with a series of sculptures, which are sadly mutilated, -but in which we may still trace the familiar representation of the Root -of Jesse. The position, however, necessarily involves some -singularities, and, as in the better known example of the Dorchester -window, the genealogy is by no means easy to follow. The western impost -is occupied by what appears to be a figure of Adam, with Eve issuing -from his side; the other supports the recumbent figure of Jesse, from -whom springs the branch, along which the figures are introduced, -somewhat after the manner of the Norman medallions at Iffley. Some of -the figures may still be discerned reading at desks; David with his harp -may also plainly be seen, as well as a representation of the -Crucifixion. Over the apex is an effigy of the Holy Trinity, with angels -on each side bearing censers. The doorway has pinnacles at the sides, -but they are cut off by the vaulting of the porch, which is plain -quadripartite, springing from corbels,<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_015" id="page_015"></a>{15}</span></p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 536px;"> -<a href="images/image11_lg.jpg"> -<img src="images/image11_sml.jpg" width="536" height="351" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a> -<div class="caption"><p>SOUTH ELEVATION.</p> - -<p><i>Drawn by F. Taylor Scott.</i></p></div> -</div> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="page_016" id="page_016"></a>{16}</span></p> - -<p class="nind">among which we may observe the ornament called the mask, the only -example of that form to be found in the cathedral.” This porch is the -work of Gower, and the peculiar mouldings are readily traceable to the -same artist who designed the rood-screen. Scraps of the previous Norman -doorway, which was done away with by Gower, are still to be seen in the -plinth. At one time there were five steps in the porch, but these were -removed in 1885. The entrance to the upper chamber (added by Vaughan, c. -1515) is obtained from the nave by a turret-stair, and the room is now -used as a clerk-of-work’s drawing office.</p> - -<p>In 1849 Butterfield renewed the tracery of the aisle windows as it -originally was in Decorated times, but it is not very attractive.</p> - -<p>The Clerestory is Norman, of ashlar work, and the windows are rather -wide, stumpy, and round-headed, with flat pilaster-like buttresses -between each pair. But the restoration has deprived the exterior of much -of its interest, although one can easily imagine that those of the next -century will enjoy a very pleasing contrast between the purples of the -Caerfai buttresses and the yellows of the window dressings, which are of -Somersetshire oolite.</p> - -<p><b>The South Transept</b> still retains the outline of the arch of the great -south window which was blocked up when the four existing Perpendicular -windows of four lights each were inserted. A double buttress supports -the south-east corner of the transept, and behind this is the present -Chapter House.</p> - -<p><b>The East End.</b>—The south Presbytery aisle was put into proper repair at -the time of the general restoration, and new windows were inserted. The -upper tier of windows at the east end of the Presbytery have been well -restored also by Scott, and his own description<a name="FNanchor_5_5" id="FNanchor_5_5"></a><a href="#Footnote_5_5" class="fnanchor">[5]</a> may well be given:</p> - -<div class="blockquot"><p>“In restoring the eastern arm of the church, a question arose -which, though but slightly suggested in my first Report, grew upon -my mind as we proceeded to such a degree, that it was more than a -twelvemonth before I could make up my mind as to which course to -take. The case was this:</p> - -<p>“This wall of the church had originally side walls, much lower than -at<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_017" id="page_017"></a>{17}</span> present, with a high-pitched roof, and was constructed with -some view to stone groining, though it is clear that this was never -carried out, and was, in fact, deliberately relinquished.</p> - -<p>“The east end had two ranges of windows, three most magnificent -lights below and four above.</p></div> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 326px;"> -<a href="images/image12_lg.jpg"> -<img src="images/image12_sml.jpg" width="326" height="364" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a> -<div class="caption"><p>SOUTH DOORWAY.</p></div> -</div> - -<div class="blockquot"><p>“In the fifteenth century the high roof was taken off, the side -walls raised by the addition of some six feet of dead wall, the -gable lowered, and a very flat, though handsome roof placed upon -the walls thus altered; at the same time the upper tier of lancet -windows was removed, all but the<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_018" id="page_018"></a>{18}</span> outer jambs, and the space they -occupied converted into a single window in the Perpendicular style, -with a very flat arch.</p> - -<p>“Sometime later still the three great lancet lights below were -walled up, owing to the erection of Bishop Vaughan’s chapel behind -them.</p> - -<p>“Finding that the dead wall, thus added to the sides, was a -<i>perfect mine</i> of the <i>débris</i> of the ancient upper tier of -windows, that the Perpendicular window substituted for them was so -decayed as to require renewal, and that the timbers of the late and -low-pitched roof were much decayed, it was a tempting idea to -restore this limb of the church to its ancient design, and to add -groining (if not of stone, at least of oak) as at first -contemplated; while opposed to this was the judicious rule laid -down by Messrs. Freeman and Jones, the historians of the cathedral, -that when ancient alterations had become stereotyped as a part of -an historical monument, all change in them not included under the -term <i>restoration</i> is set down as to be in itself reprehended, only -to be justified by special circumstances, the burden of proving -whose existence rests, in every case, with the innovator.</p> - -<p>“This rule would certainly demand the repair and retention of the -later roof, and even, at first sight, of the later window, and -between these conflicting views I for a considerable time -oscillated, in a way which may have appeared weak to others, and -was certainly most painful to myself.</p> - -<p>“I eventually took an intermediate course, which I think will be -admitted to be justified by the result.</p> - -<p>“As regards the roof, though it was so bad as to necessitate its -being taken down, and though all its main beams (I think) but one -had to be renewed, the remainder, including much good carving and -many armorial bearings, was capable of reparation. As regards the -original intention of groining, I found unquestionable proofs that -it had been relinquished, if not by the original builders, yet -certainly by the reconstructors after the fall of the tower in -1220, for these builders had inserted niches just where the -vaulting would come. They had also erected the upper range of -lancet lights at the east end in a form incompatible with vaulting.</p> - -<p>“These considerations led me at length to determine to relinquish -the idea of groining, and to return to my first intention of -restoring the later and existing roof.</p> - -<p>“The case, however, was different with the upper east windows, for -not only was the later insertion so decayed as to demand renewal, -but on searching below its cill we found those of the original -lights still <i>in situ</i>, while on working the mine of <i>débris</i> which -existed in the dead walls added to the original sides, we found not -only evidence sufficient to show the precise design of the ancient -eastern lancets, but sufficient to go a considerable way in -reconstructing them with their own ancient materials, though we -found no details to enable us to complete either the high gable or -its flanking turrets.</p> - -<p>“While, then, I arrived at the conclusion that the -fifteenth-century roof should be restored, I also felt convinced -that, as regards the lancet lights, I had discovered just such -<i>special circumstances</i> as would justify and almost demand the -restitution of their original forms.</p> - -<p>“The design of the windows, thus reproduced from their original -materials after being for four centuries immured, is very excellent -and<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_019" id="page_019"></a>{19}</span> interesting. Internally they form a continuous arcade, -supported on little clusters of light shafts, while externally—the -lights being narrow, and the piers between them wide—the latter -are occupied each by a double niche, a fellow to which flanks -either jamb, so that while the arcade within consists of four -arches, that without is formed of four <i>groups</i> of arches, making -twelve in all—four being windows and eight niches. The details of -all are excellent; unfortunately, however, the roof of Bishop -Vaughan’s Chapel prevents the external group from being seen with -any effect, though within we have now, so far as the forms of the -windows go, the ancient arrangement complete, and a most effective -and beautiful one it is.”</p></div> - -<p>On the east wall of the tower the various weather-courses of previous -roofs are visible, which make a not unnatural appeal to the imagination -of the spectator. For the great defect of the exterior generally is that -the roofs are of such a very flat pitch.</p> - -<p><b>The Ruined Chapels</b>—on the south <span class="smcap">King Edward’s</span>, on the east that of <span class="smcap">Our -Lady</span>, on the north of <span class="smcap">St. Nicholas</span>, and the Ante-Chapel—will be -described later, as it is only by an unfortunate chance that they are -now roofless (except the last), and will, we hope, shortly be correctly -regarded as part of the interior if the proposed restoration takes -place.</p> - -<p>Not far from the east end of the Lady Chapel is the spring which St. -David is credited with creating. Giraldus<a name="FNanchor_6_6" id="FNanchor_6_6"></a><a href="#Footnote_6_6" class="fnanchor">[6]</a> has a very pretty legend -concerning this spring, which was known as St. Mary’s Well. It seems to -have been of somewhat variable quality, as its waters were sometimes -changed into milk and at others into wine. Sir G. Scott, however, with -scant respect for its saintly origin, caused it to be drained!</p> - -<p><b>The North Side</b> is much the more interesting of the two. After passing -the chapels we come to a very curious three-storied building, the roof -of which is higher than that of the cathedral. On the ground-floor was -the Chantry of St. Thomas, now a vestry, entered from the east side of -the north transept, and above this the turret stair from the north aisle -of the presbytery leads to the old Chapter House, now the Library, and -above this again is a disused room, once the Treasury.</p> - -<p>No parallel has yet been found for this remarkable building, which -Freeman (1856) very accurately describes thus:<a name="FNanchor_7_7" id="FNanchor_7_7"></a><a href="#Footnote_7_7" class="fnanchor">[7]</a></p> - -<div class="blockquot"><p>“It is continued from the face of the north transept, which it -slightly exceeds in point of elevation. The external work is -Decorated; the east is<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_020" id="page_020"></a>{20}</span> flanked by two flat buttresses of very -singular character, which are terminated by rich pinnacles, now -mutilated. Equally singular is the buttress dividing its two bays -on the north side; flat at the bottom, after its first stage its -projection becomes angular, and so runs up the whole height of the -wall, becoming much smaller in its upper portion; its pinnacle is -quite destroyed (but is now restored). At the junction with the -transept a staircase is attached, in a singular and almost -indescribable way, to the upper portion of the broad pilaster at -the north-east corner of the transept....The east end has a very -strange appearance, having three windows over each other, and a -niche, not unlike a window, above all; that in the third stage is a -blocked spherical triangle (now restored). The lower part of the -wall is of ashlar, the occurrence of which is so rare in the -exterior of this church; the upper is of rubble, excepting the -buttresses.”</p></div> - -<p>Butterfield is responsible for the large Decorated window in the <b>North -Transept</b>, and Scott raised the roof to its original pitch and rebuilt -the north-west angle turret. In the west wall are two Transitional -windows (but the northern one has long been filled in), and above is a -corbelled parapet. Below, but at a lower level than the transept floor, -is a doorway to the cloisters, with a semicircular outer arch having a -solid tympanum and segmental head within. At a contemporary period half, -and much later the whole, of this entrance was built up, and in the -recess thus formed was placed a lavatory and drain.</p> - -<p>The east wall of the cloisters connects St. Mary’s College with the -north transept. An imposing view is obtained on going through the door -at the north-east corner of the cloisters. We now see the north side of -the nave, with flying buttresses supported on huge masses of masonry, -the ruins and graceful tower of St. Mary’s and, in the distance across -the Alan, the magnificent ruins of the episcopal palace.</p> - -<p>The <b>North Doorway</b> (<a href="#page_080">see p. 80</a>) corresponds in position to the south -porch, and is a good example of a Transitional (Norman to Early English) -doorway, but it is much decayed. The principal ornament is, like those -in the arcade, a kind of hybrid composed of the Norman chevron and the -Early-English dog-tooth ornaments. There is a depressed arch to this -doorway, which, with other evidence, leads us to suppose that it has -been higher. Another feature which calls for comment—it is the same in -the arcade but in less marked degree—is that no matter what the size of -the stone, a complete part of the ornament has been carved upon it, thus -obtaining an irregular but not unpleasing effect.<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_021" id="page_021"></a>{21}</span></p> - -<p>The present <b>West Front</b> is from a design by Sir G. G. Scott, who based it -upon a drawing which he found in the library of the Society of -Antiquaries showing the church as it was before Nash’s alterations.</p> - -<p>The illustrations on pages 2 and 7 show Nash’s design of 1793, which -seems to have received the sanction of the Society of Antiquaries. The -figures that appear in the first are Bishop Jones, Professor Freeman, -the authors of the best history of St. David’s, Dean Allen, and Sir G. -G. Scott. This execrable composition was a hopeless conglomeration of -Norman, Decorated, and Perpendicular, with a couple of heavy-arched -buttresses, which were apparently standing as recently as 1887.<a name="FNanchor_8_8" id="FNanchor_8_8"></a><a href="#Footnote_8_8" class="fnanchor">[8]</a> The -rebuilding of the <i>West Front</i> was undertaken at a cost of about £4,000 -as a memorial to Bishop Thirlwall, who first seriously began to restore -the church in 1864, and his statue stands over the west door. The -material is Caerfai stone from the neighbouring quarries of Caerbwdy, -and suffers from its newness in appearance. In fact the design and the -purple stone combine to give the whole front a very heavy appearance, -which only years of exposure to the sea air will partially remedy.<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_022" id="page_022"></a>{22}</span></p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 500px;"> -<a href="images/image13_lg.jpg"> -<img src="images/image13_sml.jpg" width="500" height="346" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a> -<div class="caption"><p><i>Photo. J. Valentine.</i></p> - -<p>THE NAVE, LOOKING EAST.</p></div> -</div> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="page_023" id="page_023"></a>{23}</span></p> - -<h2><a name="CHAPTER_III" id="CHAPTER_III"></a>CHAPTER III<br /><br /> -<small>THE INTERIOR—THE NAVE</small></h2> - -<p class="nind"><span class="smcap">At</span> the South Porch, by which the visitor usually enters, the ogee-headed -holy-water stoup should be noticed, and a general view be made of the -church, as it is most unusual and has a character all its own. The -majority of the work is that of Bishop Peter de Leiâ (1176-1198), and is -therefore Transitional in character; that is to say, it is at the point -of fusion between Norman and Early English. The pointed arch of the -latter is not yet adopted, but the round (more or less) arch is still -employed, probably in some degree to avoid the greater height otherwise -entailed, but the details verge on the purity of the most refined Early -English. De Leiâ evidently intended sexpartite groining to form an -internal ceiling, but an earthquake and the fall of the tower doubtless -instilled caution—even if funds were forthcoming—and the project was -never carried out. The exceedingly rich ceiling, however, of Irish oak -does not make one regret this circumstance, for its very bizarrerie and -semi-arabesque character, coming so closely in contact with the great -Norman arches, combine to make the interior of St. David’s one of -unusual beauty. The more so, by contrast, on entering from the almost -bald exterior.</p> - -<p>“Possibly the circumstances which conduced to the lack of external -ornament may have led its designers to counterbalance this deficiency by -a superabundance of internal decoration. Certain it is that very few -structures of the same size equal this cathedral in richness and -elaborateness of execution lavished upon this portion of the interior. -In fact, much of the solemnity of a Romanesque nave is lost, an effect -which is<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_024" id="page_024"></a>{24}</span></p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 326px;"> -<a href="images/image14_lg.jpg"> -<img src="images/image14_sml.jpg" width="326" height="451" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a> -<div class="caption"><p>ELEVATION OF A BAY OF THE NAVE, N. SIDE.</p> - -<p><i>From a Drawing by J. Taylor Scott.</i></p></div> -</div> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="page_025" id="page_025"></a>{25}</span></p> - -<p class="nind">certainly far better produced by more massive proportions and a greater -extent of unadorned surface.”<a name="FNanchor_9_9" id="FNanchor_9_9"></a><a href="#Footnote_9_9" class="fnanchor">[9]</a></p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 330px;"> -<a href="images/image15_lg.jpg"> -<img src="images/image15_sml.jpg" width="330" height="333" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a> -<div class="caption"><p>NORMAN SHAFT WITH RE-CARVED CAPITAL, EASTERN PIER IN S. -NAVE ARCADE. (<a href="#page_027">See p. 27</a>.)</p></div> -</div> - -<p>But although we miss the characteristic massiveness of most Norman -naves, we also enjoy the freedom—which may fairly be claimed as the -structural note of this interior—from their attendant heaviness. In -fact, the very large span of the arches detracts from the size of the -piers, the actual bulk of which is great.<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_026" id="page_026"></a>{26}</span></p> - -<div class="figleft" style="width: 167px;"> -<a href="images/image16a_lg.jpg"> -<img src="images/image16a_sml.jpg" width="167" height="116" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a> -<div class="caption"><p>DETAILS OF PIER ARCHES.</p> - -<p>(From J. & F. p. 58.)</p></div> -</div> - -<div class="figleft" style="width: 193px;"> -<a href="images/image16b_lg.jpg"> -<img src="images/image16b_sml.jpg" width="193" height="218" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a> -<div class="caption"><p>CARVED PANELS AND ARCH ORNAMENTS IN THE TRIFORIUM.</p> - -<p>(From J. & F. p. 58.)</p></div> -</div> - -<p>The details of the arcade are of an interesting character. The piers are -alternately round and octagonal (irregular), with attached shafts at the -cardinal points. Towards the aisles the shafts are clustered, being -intended for vaulting. The plinths are more varied than is usual, but -the tongue of foliage, which is a favourite method of ornamenting the -space caused by the change from the square to the round or octagonal, is -here conspicuous by only one example, and that a timid one on the south -side. The bases are of quite an Early English type, with the usual -hollow, but the capitals prove an instructive study. The most frequent -type of these is the rather common “cushion,” which the Transitional -carvers have vivified in the most exquisite way by, apparently, -experimenting with several forms of stiff-leaved foliage, some of which -approach more nearly to the classic type than is usual in this<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_027" id="page_027"></a>{27}</span> country, -and least of all was it to be expected at the land’s end of Wales. On -the south side towards the east is one of special beauty, where one sees -how the carver has treated the Norman cushion cap as a boss on which to -let his fancy play. The arches are of exceptional richness and -elaborately moulded towards the nave—in fact, just as little of the -Romanesque character as is consistent with the Norman arch is retained. -The westernmost arches, being narrower in span than the others, are -skilfully kept the same in height by being pointed, and the details -differ; which prompts the suggestion that De Leiâ, finding his nave -somewhat short in appearance, decided to lengthen it by another bay, and -was only confined by the river Alan, which at the north-west corner even -now runs quite close to the foundations. A strong horizontal line is -carried east and west, close above the Norman hood-moulding, which, -combined with the great width of the nave and the huge span of the -arches, conduces towards the feeling of stuntedness already noticed in -the exterior.</p> - -<p>The deeply recessed clerestory of round-headed windows is curiously -amalgamated with the triforium of couplets having pointed arches; in the -spandril between each of which latter are elaborately decorated circles, -some with a kind of rude dog-tooth star and others with a kind of -eternal interlacing which looks something like an interwoven horseshoe -pattern. In other instances, as at Southwell Minster, the triforium -absorbs the clerestory, but at St. David’s it retains its character and -becomes a screen to the passage over the arcade. The result is a very -rich confusion. The amalgamation of distinct members not only precludes -either the usual appearance of a church with or without a triforium, but -the treatment of the triforial arches themselves is clever without being -pleasing (see illustrations, pp. 22, 24, 25). The arches which enclose -both the triforium and clerestory are again very rich, and the -ornamentation is carried down their whole length without shafts or -cappings. Clustered shafts with the Norman cushion capitals having -square abaci receive the shafts of the wooden ceiling.</p> - -<p>Of the previous nave-roof we have no date, but very possibly it may have -resembled that at Peterborough or St. Alban’s, as something similar -seems to have existed at Llandaff. The present roof is generally -accredited to the Treasurer, Owen<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_028" id="page_028"></a>{28}</span> Pole (1472-1509), and in all -likelihood that of the choir may be also.</p> - -<div class="blockquot"><p>“This very singular, if not unique, structure is, in its -construction, simply a flat ceiling of timber laid upon the walls; -but, by some, certainly unjustifiable, violations of the laws of -architectural reality, such as are not uncommon even in the stone -roofs of that period, it is made to assume a character wholly its -own, and which it is very difficult to describe in an intelligible -manner. By the employment of vast pendants, which at the sides take -the form of overlapping capitals to the small shafts already -mentioned, the ceiling appears to be supported by a system of -segmental arches effecting a threefold longitudinal division of the -roof, and crossed by a similar range springing from the walls. Of -course these arches in reality support nothing, but are in fact -borne up by what appears to rest on them. Notwithstanding this -unreality and the marked inconsistency of the roof with the -architecture below, notwithstanding that its general character -would have been much more adapted to some magnificent state -apartment in a royal palace, still the richness and singularity of -such an interminable series of fretted lines renders this on the -whole one of the most attractive features of the cathedral. Both -the arches themselves, and the straight lines which divide the -principal panels, drip with minute foliations like lace-work in a -style of almost Arabian gorgeousness. It is much to be regretted -that this ceiling cuts off the top of the western arch of the -lantern, which at once spoils the effect of the latter, and gives -an unpleasant appearance to the unfinished pendants of the ceiling, -when seen from behind, out of the choir. Still this very view of -the roof, in which hardly any other part of the nave is visible, is -wonderful in the extreme” (J. & F., p. 59).</p></div> - -<p>Having noticed the details and their curious effects in the nave, the -observant visitor still feels that he has not fully explained to his -satisfaction the complete secret of its bizarre effect. It only unfolds -itself on measuring and levelling. The whole nave floor slopes -considerably—more than two feet—from east to west, following the -natural fall of the ground, and the arcades slope outwards respectively -north and south, and, in consequence, their piers lengthen as one nears -the west end. A settlement, owing to the very wet site and bad -foundations, probably aided by an earthquake (1248) and the unusual -width of the nave (for a Norman church) are enough to account for these -peculiarities; and the slope of the nave floor seems to have been -purposely so devised for the sake of drainage in flood-time.</p> - -<p>At the west end of the south aisle, on three octagonal steps, stands the -<b>Font</b>. Its original shaft is missing. The marble base is octagonal, and -rudely arcaded with sixteen pointed arches, but no part is specially -beautiful.<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_029" id="page_029"></a>{29}</span></p> - -<p>The nave aisles do not call for any very special remarks. At the east -end of both will be seen traces of the original vaulting, and on the -north side the vaulting-shafts are taller than on the south. Also on -that side the Perpendicular flying-buttresses are seen which make such a -strange show outside, where once was the cloister garth, with their huge -props. Speaking of the aisles generally, Freeman says: “It must be -remembered that none of these preparations for vaulting were ever -carried into effect. This is, indeed, no unusual phenomenon, yet there -is certainly something striking in so many designs for a stone roof -being traced out upon the same walls, and none of them being ever -brought to perfection. In the nave aisles it may perhaps be accounted -for by the strange and untoward shapes which the great width of the pier -arches compelled the lateral arches of the vaulting to assume; it may -have been found actually impossible to vault the aisles either at this -(1328-1347) or the earlier Romanesque period. But this argument does not -apply to any of the other unfinished vaults in the church of whatever -date.”<a name="FNanchor_10_10" id="FNanchor_10_10"></a><a href="#Footnote_10_10" class="fnanchor">[10]</a></p> - -<p>The interior of the west front has been as nearly as possible restored -to its former state, but has now no triforium passage. There are a -couple of tiers of windows over the original west entrance. All the -lights are round-headed and are set in a Norman rear-arch.</p> - -<p>Some of the nave piers still show traces of polychromatic decoration. On -the north and south sides, on the easternmost pier but one, are the -remains of some frescoes, as also on the middle pier of the south -arcade. But Bishop Field’s white-wash of 1630, which was removed about -1830 under the careful superintendence of the Ven. Archdeacon Davies, -doubtless spoilt whatever beauty these mural decorations ever had.</p> - -<p>It requires considerable discernment to distinguish very clearly what -the designs are, but Freeman<a name="FNanchor_11_11" id="FNanchor_11_11"></a><a href="#Footnote_11_11" class="fnanchor">[11]</a> made out that on the third southern -pier (from the east) is a representation of the Blessed Virgin seated -beneath a canopy. The figure is within a vesica, vested in a cope and -has a nimbus; beneath which is an inscription, “Virgo Maria.” Above is -our Lord and the emblems of the four Evangelists, and on the small<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_030" id="page_030"></a>{30}</span> -attached shafts are figures of seven candlesticks, evidently referring -to the vision of St. John.<a name="FNanchor_12_12" id="FNanchor_12_12"></a><a href="#Footnote_12_12" class="fnanchor">[12]</a></p> - -<p>On the south-east face there is a full-length crowned figure of a king -in plate-armour with the basanet and camaille, holding a sword and -standing under a canopy. On the left arm is the initial <b>H</b>, which—the -date of the plate-armour with knee-caps and elbow-pieces -corresponding—has been taken to denote Henry IV.</p> - -<p>On the two other piers are achievements of arms which Freeman<a name="FNanchor_13_13" id="FNanchor_13_13"></a><a href="#Footnote_13_13" class="fnanchor">[13]</a> states -to be “a banner bearing a bend, a shield party per chevron, and a casque -with crest and mantlings, the crest being a head crowned.”</p> - -<p><b>The Rood Screen.</b>—The elaborate rood-screen, which separates the nave -and choir, projects into the nave nearly half a bay. A daïs<a name="FNanchor_14_14" id="FNanchor_14_14"></a><a href="#Footnote_14_14" class="fnanchor">[14]</a> of three -steps in height occupies the remainder of the bay. The entrance to the -choir is vaulted in two bays, and there are some very unusual flying -groin-ribs, which are shown in the illustration. The work is -unmistakably that of Bishop Gower (1328-1347), and was perhaps the -completion of the Decorated scheme which he inaugurated throughout the -fabric. On the sunny south side the tomb of the Bishop gains by contrast -with the heavy arch-shadow.</p> - -<p>On the north side, facing the nave is a peculiarly flat and shallow -arcade in three bays, which formed a kind of reredos to the altar of the -Holy Cross—the piscina being on the north. On the oblique side, facing -north-west is a doorway with a semi-octagonal arch leading to the roof -and organ loft.</p> - -<p>On the south side of the western bay are two tombs, and on the north -one, all of which will be described with the monuments in the nave (see -p. 71).</p> - -<p>The backing to the screen was, when Freeman wrote, solid, and he -surmised, with some accuracy, what Sir G. G. Scott found on his -restoration of the screen. In Scott’s words:<a name="FNanchor_15_15" id="FNanchor_15_15"></a><a href="#Footnote_15_15" class="fnanchor">[15]</a></p> - -<div class="blockquot"><p>“I mentioned in my first Report the massive stonework, some seven -or eight feet in thickness, which blocked the rood-screen, and -which I suppose to have been added to strengthen the tower piers. -On examination this was found originally to have been hollow, but -to have been filled up solid for the purpose suggested. The -entrance to the choir was through a roof and uncouth archway in -this vast wall, but on searching the contents of the</p></div> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="page_031" id="page_031"></a>{31}</span></p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 323px;"> -<a href="images/image17_lg.jpg"> -<img src="images/image17_sml.jpg" width="323" height="425" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a> -<div class="caption"><p>GROINING OF ROOD SCREEN, SHOWING THE FLYING RIBS.</p></div> -</div> - -<div class="blockquot"><p class="nind">wall the <i>débris</i> was discovered of the original archway, and of -the side doorways into the hollow spaces. These details were found -to be parts of a beautifully groined space, closely resembling the -existing archway through the rood-screen, and forming a second, -though varied, bay of that beautiful<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_032" id="page_032"></a>{32}</span> entrance. We have been -enabled to reconstruct this feature, using the old remains so far -as they would go. This beautiful addition to the choir was wholly -beyond anything I had anticipated.”</p></div> - -<p>In the <i>Computus</i> under 1492 is an entry recording that the sum of 100 -shillings<a name="FNanchor_16_16" id="FNanchor_16_16"></a><a href="#Footnote_16_16" class="fnanchor">[16]</a> for materials for a work which would seem to be for the -blocking up of the screen, and no doubt the constant trouble arising -from the weakness of the western tower arch rendered some such course -imperative.</p> - -<p>In De Leiâ’s time, or rather later, the screen probably stood between -the tower piers, as the bases of their eastern responds are raised above -those of the nave and suggest an earlier screen and its platform. And it -is not unlikely that the pleasing incongruity of the western side of the -screen is due to the retention of some portions of earlier work. There -are two steps to the first bay of the screen, and on the second stand -the wrought-iron gates (1847), and to the second bay there are three -more steps before we reach the level of the choir. Gower’s -characteristic ornaments and mouldings are somewhat lavishly bestowed -about the screen, and doubtless his statue was intended to stand in the -niche on the south side towards the nave above the curious aperture -fitted with intersecting tracery. For a description of the tombs, <a href="#page_071">see p. -71</a>.</p> - -<p>Along the length of the screen runs an oak cove cornice—possibly -Butterfield’s work—copied from an existing piece which is original. The -arches are fitted with late Perpendicular tracery, very white in -appearance, and the springers of the vaulting seem not to have been -completed. The groining has now been finished and an oak cornice added, -and on the rood-screen is the organ. In 1571 30<i>s</i>. seems to have been -paid for taking down the rood-loft, but it is now almost impossible to -be sure what precisely this meant.<a name="FNanchor_17_17" id="FNanchor_17_17"></a><a href="#Footnote_17_17" class="fnanchor">[17]</a></p> - -<p>The views north, south, east, and west are well worth the little walk on -to the organ-loft level. Various details are well seen from this height, -notably the interior of the tower, the nave-roof, and the general -arrangements and fittings of the choir.</p> - -<p><b>The Organ.</b>—The present organ and case can hardly be<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_033" id="page_033"></a>{33}</span></p> - -<div class="figright" style="width: 201px;"> -<a href="images/image18_lg.jpg"> -<img src="images/image18_sml.jpg" width="201" height="458" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a> -<div class="caption"><p>THE ROOD-SCREEN AND ORGAN.</p></div> -</div> - -<p class="nind">described as things of beauty, though in point of tone the instrument is -undoubtedly strong, yet sweet. It was built by Messrs. Willis in 1883, -and is almost entirely new. Like the organ at Winchester, it used to -occupy the north lantern arch, and was re-erected there in 1843 by -Lincoln of London, but the present instrument stands on the rood-screen, -care being, however, taken that it should obstruct as little of the view -as possible. The tubular pneumatic system has been here adopted, and -there are three manuals. A few points concerning the previous organs may -be of interest, as it is not unusual to neglect this branch of -archæology. According to tradition the present position of the organ is -the original one. Browne Willis<a name="FNanchor_18_18" id="FNanchor_18_18"></a><a href="#Footnote_18_18" class="fnanchor">[18]</a> says: “The Organ, before the -Rebellion Stood in the Rood-Loft, under the<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_034" id="page_034"></a>{34}</span> <i>West</i> Arch, and fac’d the -Altar; it is now removed to the <i>North</i> Arch: It is a new one, and those -that are Judges, say, a pretty good one.” This amusing criticism gives -further evidence to the notion that Browne Willis did not visit the -church before—or at any rate very recently before—he wrote his -interesting but somewhat unreliable little survey, which has now become -very rare in any form. The items—“Et Sol Willō Warryn organizanti -40<sup>s</sup>” and “to y<sup>e</sup> m<sup>r</sup> of y<sup>e</sup> children for keeping of y<sup>e</sup> -organs and teaching of y<sup>e</sup> quoristers, £10,” and others from the -<i>Liber Communis</i>, imply the existence of an organ in 1490, 1492, 1557 -and 1565. In the last year the magnificent sum of 6d. was spent on two -stops “for y<sup>e</sup> great organs,” from which we may infer that our organs -of to-day are far larger than in 1565. At any rate some small organ -might easily have stood under the western arch of the tower, although -this arch was then built up as it “fac’d the altar.”<a name="FNanchor_19_19" id="FNanchor_19_19"></a><a href="#Footnote_19_19" class="fnanchor">[19]</a></p> - -<div class="blockquot"><p>“Probably the tradition of the organ having stood there, led Browne -Willis to suppose that the arch had been recently built up. However -this may be, there are strong signs of its having occupied that -position subsequently to the erection of the wall. The balustrade -which surmounts the canopies of the stalls projects at this point, -as if to give greater room for a small organ; and the door which -pierces the wall, and is apparently coeval with it, is not set in -the centre, where it would have interfered with the organ, but near -the northern pier of the arch. This seems to have been the usual -place of the organ in our churches, and to have been retained from -the mere force of habit to the present time, when, from the greater -size of our instruments, it is far less convenient.”<a name="FNanchor_20_20" id="FNanchor_20_20"></a><a href="#Footnote_20_20" class="fnanchor">[20]</a></p></div> - -<p>A new organ was built in 1581—“ad usum divini servitii”—but was ruined -in the great rebellion.<a name="FNanchor_21_21" id="FNanchor_21_21"></a><a href="#Footnote_21_21" class="fnanchor">[21]</a> The ever-interesting Manby, however, gives -another account, by which the organist, hearing some rebel discussing -the demolition of the organ, and fearing that he might lose his -position, dropped a stone from the loft and killed a Roundhead, an -“aids-du-camp.” The organist fled and thus diverted attention from his -instrument, having found a hiding place in the great bell by holding on -to the clapper! This same bell the rebels stole, but their vessel was -wrecked off Ramsey Sound, and the<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_035" id="page_035"></a>{35}</span> superstitious still say that the -tolling of this bell presages a great storm!</p> - -<p>It is clear there was an organ in 1691, as Precentor Ellis, in his -answer to Bishop Watson’s Visitation Articles, says: “I answeare that we -have an Organ, but out of order, for how long I doe not remember.”</p> - -<p>Early in the eighteenth century Bernard Schmidt, the celebrated builder -of that in St. Paul’s Cathedral, constructed an organ as the result of -an order of the Chapter (1695), by which £10 was, for five years, to be -set apart “out of the allowance to the Master of the Fabric”; and in -1698 each canon was ordered to advance £10 towards the new organ, for -which the canons had expressed a great desire.</p> - -<p>A very interesting communication from Archdeacon Davies to Archdeacon -Yardley, of August 3, 1740, gives further particulars:</p> - -<div class="blockquot"><p>“What Particular time y<sup>e</sup> new Organ was set up here, I cannot be -positive, but do believe, from y<sup>e</sup> accounts, it must be in the -year 1704 or 1705. What Exact Sum̃ it stood y<sup>e</sup> Chapter In, I -cannot for certain say, but am apt to think, from Various Items in -various Years picked up about it, in their Accounts it could not be -less, including all Charges, than £300, whatever More; and in a -very little time after it was set up, they were at a Considerable -Expense in repairing it again, after it had been damaged by a -Storm, which uncovered y<sup>e</sup> very part of y<sup>e</sup> Roof of y<sup>e</sup> -Church under which it lay, and exposed it to y<sup>e</sup> Rain and y<sup>e</sup> -open Sky; and they were obliged to have an Organ Builder (down from -London I think) at a great Expense to put things to rights again.</p> - -<p>“Upon looking over some loose Papers in y<sup>e</sup> Chest at St. David’s, -I have found these Receipts from Mr. Bernard Smith of London, Organ -Builder (who made this Organ at St. David’s) for y<sup>e</sup> Summe of -£290 paid to Him only upon that Account. So that when y<sup>e</sup> Charge -of bringing it down, y<sup>e</sup> Necessary workmanship here, and other -articles relating to it are put together, I dare say, before it -could be compleatly set up, y<sup>e</sup> Expense was much nearer to £400 -than £300.”<a name="FNanchor_22_22" id="FNanchor_22_22"></a><a href="#Footnote_22_22" class="fnanchor">[22]</a></p></div> - -<p>This organ seems to have been used till that consisting of a choir organ -and swell was put up by Lincoln in 1843 (as already noted), and the old -case “of Norway oak”<a name="FNanchor_23_23" id="FNanchor_23_23"></a><a href="#Footnote_23_23" class="fnanchor">[23]</a> was re-used. Six of the present stops are -Father Smith’s originals.<a name="FNanchor_24_24" id="FNanchor_24_24"></a><a href="#Footnote_24_24" class="fnanchor">[24]</a></p> - -<p>In the present restoration this organ was removed, and, to the very -great discredit of all concerned, the splendid case<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_036" id="page_036"></a>{36}</span> with carvings if -not actually by, certainly worthy of, Grinling Gibbons, was allowed to -be broken up. A few of the best pieces were recently put together and a -neat organ-screen constructed for the Church of St. Martin, -Haverfordwest. A brief list of organists will be found on p. 95.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 278px;"> -<a href="images/image19_lg.jpg"> -<img src="images/image19_sml.jpg" width="278" height="351" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a> -<div class="caption"><p>THE PRESBYTERY IN 1856.</p> - -<p><i>Drawn by J. H. Le Keux</i> (<i>from Jones & Freeman</i>).</p></div> -</div> - -<h3>THE CHOIR AND TRANSEPTS.</h3> - -<p>On passing through the rood-screen up five steps from the daïs the choir -is reached, which affords one of the most<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_037" id="page_037"></a>{37}</span></p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 503px;"> -<a href="images/image20_lg.jpg"> -<img src="images/image20_sml.jpg" width="503" height="344" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a> -<div class="caption"><p><i>Photo: F. Frith & Co.</i></p> - -<p>THE CHOIR AND PRESBYTERY IN 1895.</p></div> -</div> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="page_038" id="page_038"></a>{38}</span></p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="page_039" id="page_039"></a>{39}</span></p> - -<p class="nind">pleasing prospects in the cathedral. This view gains by comparison with -the nave because of the latter’s over-intricacy, which complication is -avoided in the choir by the absence of a triforium. There are four -Transitional bays of very good proportions, if we except perhaps a -tendency to heaviness in the alternately round and octagonal piers. Here -we have—what the nave-bay design so much wants—strong vertical lines -in the clustered shafts. The Transitional vaulting-shafts stop a little -above the string over the arcade, and continuing them are slender -Decorated ones with elaborate capitals. The clerestory lights (also -Transitional) are beautifully detailed with a bold kind of chevron.</p> - -<p>The east end is one of the finest pieces of Norman blending with Early -English in the cathedral, or, for the matter of that, in the kingdom. It -is composed of three lancets below and four above, Sir G. G. Scott -having restored it to the state in which it was after the rebuilding of -1220, consequent upon the fall of the tower, except that Bishop -Vaughan’s Chapel has made it desirable that the three lower lights -should not be open as they originally were. They are now filled with -mosaics.</p> - -<p>In the fifteenth century, when the Perpendicular window was inserted, -the stonework of the previous wall and upper tier of lights was used for -heightening the side walls. Finding these walls to be a mine of the -<i>débris</i> of the earlier windows, and the Perpendicular window in a bad -state of decay, Scott determined to replace the old work.</p> - -<p>After the fall of the tower the rebuilders were astonishingly -conservative in their avoidance of novelty. It cannot have been from any -want of ability, and we incline to the belief that it was the result of -a genuine desire to make the new work harmonise with that in the nave -and, by re-using a certain amount of old material, to relieve a possibly -not overflowing exchequer of a larger disbursement. In the fifteenth -century the steep-pitched roof of cradle-pattern, marks of which remain -on the tower, was removed, the gable lowered, and the walls at each side -raised about six feet. A roof of very flat pitch (as now) and the -Perpendicular east window were added.</p> - -<p>Finally, when Bishop Vaughan added his chapel behind the east end the -lower lancets were walled up. During the Civil War the lead was stripped -from the aisle roofs and the main<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_040" id="page_040"></a>{40}</span> arcades of the presbytery were filled -up by walling, and the huge props to the roof were inserted which appear -in Freeman’s view. The eastern windows are deeply recessed, and the -banded shafts have caps of stiff-leaved foliage, and angels form the -termination to the hood-moulding. Just below the cills is an early -example of an embattled band, almost Greek in its severity, and beneath -this again are numbers of intersecting semicircular arches with a ball -ornament.</p> - -<p>After four centuries of immurement the upper range of lights are -restored to their former arcaded glory, behind the graceful shafts of -which runs a passage. The restored portions are readily recognisable by -their being made of oolite, whilst the original stones are all of purple -Caerfai. These windows are now filled with stained glass by Hardman, the -gift of the Rev. J. Lucy. The subjects are the Last Supper, Gethsemane, -the Transfiguration, and the Nativity. The large lower lancets are -filled with mosaics by Salviati, which are good of their kind. They form -a fixed reredos, and were also part of a memorial by the Reverend John -Lucy, Rector of Hampton Lucy, Warwickshire, to his ancestor, William -Lucy, Bishop of St. David’s, 1660-1677. The designer of the mosaics as -well as the glass above was Powell, of Hardman’s glass works in -Birmingham.</p> - -<div class="blockquot"><p>“The subjects are—in the central window, the Crucifixion, with the -attendant figures of the Virgin and St. John; the Magdalene kneels -at the foot of the cross. In the side windows are full-lengths of -‘Ecclesia’ and ‘Synagoga,’ the Christian Church and the Jewish. In -a predella below the central mosaic is a representation of the -brazen serpent, with figures of Moses and Aaron. Below the others -are—St. David distributing alms to the poor, and St. David -addressing the Synod of Llandewi Brefi. Each of the larger subjects -has a rich architectural canopy, and a broad border of very -beautiful design surrounds the whole....</p> - -<p>“Immediately under the Crucifixion are the words, ‘Ecce Agnus Dei, -ecce qui tollit peccata mundi’; and below again, within an arcade -of three arches are the brazen serpent, Moses, and Aaron—one -bearing his rod, the other his ‘rod that budded.’ Under the figure -of Ecclesia is St. David, in a grey monastic robe, bestowing alms. -Under Synagoga, he is addressing the Bishops at Brefi.... He stands -in the centre, while the Bishops are seated round, with a white -robed Abbot in the foreground.”<a name="FNanchor_25_25" id="FNanchor_25_25"></a><a href="#Footnote_25_25" class="fnanchor">[25]</a></p></div> - -<p>The golden ground which backs the mosaics sets off advantageously<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_041" id="page_041"></a>{41}</span> the -delicate garb and pale flesh-tinting of the principal figures. The -borders and other ornaments are rich and varied in colour; and -considering that the east end of the presbytery is somewhat dimly lit, -it was unquestionably desirable that the designs of the mosaics should -be firm in drawing. The heads are perhaps the best part, which is no -small achievement, being as a rule the worst executed. The effect of the -mosaics, with their shimmer of gold, and solemn figures lighting up the -dark wall of the sanctuary, is by no means bad, and, moreover, they -harmonise with the deep hues of the surrounding stonework. There is a -pleasing fitness, too, in the “Old coat” of the Lucys being placed in -the pavement of the presbytery, and stained glass above—a memorial no -less of the former Bishop than of the giver of these handsome -decorations.</p> - -<p>Under the central recess on a brass is:</p> - -<div class="blockquot"><p>“In honorem Dei, et in memoriam Gulielmi Lucy, S.T.P., hujus -Ecclesiæ Cathedralis regnante Carolo Secundo, præclari episcopi; -has picturas murales et fenestras superne pietate adductus, dat -dedicat Johannes Lucy per multos annos Hamptoni Luci Rector, A.D. -1871.”</p></div> - -<p>The panelled roof of the presbytery is of flat pitch, and dates from the -period of Owen Pole’s treasurership (1472-1509), to whom also that same -feature of the nave is attributed. Scott restored the ancient -decorations, ignoring that of the seventeenth century, when he was -forced to repair and largely renovate the much-decayed beams, &c. The -beams are so large that considerable difficulty was experienced before -suitable oaks could be found; these were eventually procured from Salop, -Radnor, Hereford, and the Forest of Dean. The main bosses are richly -blazoned with shields and gilt, and the armorial bearings include those -of Bishop Robert Tully (1461-1481), Bishop Richard Martyn (1482-1483), -and those of Edmund, Earl of Richmond, impaling Lady Margaret. Freeman -says<a name="FNanchor_26_26" id="FNanchor_26_26"></a><a href="#Footnote_26_26" class="fnanchor">[26]</a> “the arms of Tully and Martyn occurred also in the clearly -contemporary upper east window.” If this was contemporary glass we trust -it has been carefully preserved. The entry in 1490, which is repeated in -1492, “Et sol 9£ 4<sup>d</sup>. D<sup>ri</sup> Oweno Pole M<sup>ro</sup> operis ad usũ fabriciæ -per venerabilẽ<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_042" id="page_042"></a>{42}</span> patrem Robertū nuper Menev. Epūm per suas litteras -patentes assignat,”<a name="FNanchor_27_27" id="FNanchor_27_27"></a><a href="#Footnote_27_27" class="fnanchor">[27]</a> seems to imply an annual payment, and that -probably this roof was completed soon after this date. The colouring is -rather bright in black, white, and red, and the ornaments are on a -ground of yellowish white. The shields adorn their original positions, -and those not mentioned above are France and England quartered, Edward -V., Richard III., Henry VII., Rhys ap Tudor, Bishop Gomeg, and that -assigned to Rhodri Mawr, King of Gwynedd, killed 877. The corbels -receiving the walling shafts had lost their decorations, and Scott -re-blazoned them with the arms of the Bishop, Dean, Canons, and -Archdeacons of 1864.<a name="FNanchor_28_28" id="FNanchor_28_28"></a><a href="#Footnote_28_28" class="fnanchor">[28]</a></p> - -<p>The rise from the choir to the eastern bay containing the altar is of -four steps.<a name="FNanchor_29_29" id="FNanchor_29_29"></a><a href="#Footnote_29_29" class="fnanchor">[29]</a> The tiles in the presbytery are excellent examples of -fifteenth-century encaustics in the usual red-brown and yellow, set -diagonally. Some are, of course, modern, and these are good copies of -the old ones, which are decorated with the arms of Edward III., the -Berkeley and Beauchamp families, and the Tudor rose. Near the sedilia -are some ancient bordering tiles. From the continual repetition of the -Berkeley arms Freeman traces these encaustics to the celebrated Malvern -factory.<a name="FNanchor_30_30" id="FNanchor_30_30"></a><a href="#Footnote_30_30" class="fnanchor">[30]</a></p> - -<p>On the second step of the presbytery, and at about its centre, is a -squared mortice. This may have received the stem of the reader’s -lectern, which was distinct from those often found in the nave. It may -possibly have received even the processional cross or the cross which -Alcuin tells us was placed in this position on Good Friday to be kissed -by both the clerics and the laity.</p> - -<p>The altar slab of grey sandstone and its supports of oak are new. These -are kept clear of the east wall, as there is a peculiar opening into -Bishop Vaughan’s Chapel just behind. A description of this will be found -on p. 62. On the floor near the altar and behind it are placed sundry -altar slabs brought from disused altars. One of these (to the south), -being only 14¾ inches by 9 inches, is let into a larger stone. It is -marked with the usual quintette of crosses and seems to be a picked -piece of Caerfai stone in fine state, from which we<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_043" id="page_043"></a>{43}</span> may infer that it -probably was used as an “altare portabile.” In the history of St. David -we read of one of these altar stones which was presented to him by the -Patriarch of Jerusalem. King suggests<a name="FNanchor_31_31" id="FNanchor_31_31"></a><a href="#Footnote_31_31" class="fnanchor">[31]</a> that this stone may have been -a “seal” for a reliquary or receptacle for altar relics, and if so, this -one and</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 320px;"> -<a href="images/image21_lg.jpg"> -<img src="images/image21_sml.jpg" width="320" height="372" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a> -<div class="caption"><p>THE PARCLOSE SCREEN, E. SIDE.</p></div> -</div> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="page_044" id="page_044"></a>{44}</span></p> - -<p class="nind">that recently unearthed in the Jesus Chapel of Norwich Cathedral are the -only known ones extant.</p> - -<p>The woodwork in the choir has many points of interest, notably the -<b>Parclose Screen</b>, which is unique. It divides the presbytery and choir, -and serves to emphasise the ancient three-fold ritual arrangement of -nave, choir, and presbytery. Freeman considers the position of this -screen very remarkable “in this country at least,” and the only churches -with analogous indications that he can instance are Malmesbury and -Dorchester. These divisions were usually well marked in large churches, -but not with an actual screen. In the middle of the fourteenth century -the parclose seems to have been moved to make room for Bishop Morgan’s -throne, but as it always occupied a corresponding position, it is not -unlikely that we here find a very ancient tradition in the church of St. -David’s.</p> - -<p>Apart from its position, however, the screen itself is not particularly -noteworthy. The style is Decorated, verging towards Perpendicular. The -upper part is open and filled with sexfoiled tracery, and the lower is, -as usual, panelled. The centre is devoted to a wide entrance, and at -different dates three others have been pierced.</p> - -<p>The <b>Stalls</b> are inscribed as follows:<a name="FNanchor_32_32" id="FNanchor_32_32"></a><a href="#Footnote_32_32" class="fnanchor">[32]</a></p> - -<table border="0" cellpadding="1" cellspacing="0" summary=""> -<tr><td> </td><td align="left"><span class="smcap">South Return</span>.</td><td> </td> -<td align="left"><span class="smcap">North Return</span>.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="rt">1.</td><td> Decanus.</td><td class="rtlt">15.</td><td> Præcentor.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="rt">2.</td><td> Arch<sup>d</sup> Meneue.</td><td class="rtlt">16.</td><td> Arch<sup>d</sup> Brecon.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="rt">3.</td><td> P. Llan Dewi.</td><td class="rtlt">17.</td><td> P. S<sup>ti</sup> Nicholi.</td></tr> -<tr><td> </td></tr> -<tr><td> </td><td align="left"><span class="smcap">South Side</span>.</td> -<td> </td><td align="left"><span class="smcap">North Side</span>.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="rt">4.</td><td> P. Cursalis.</td><td class="rtlt">18.</td><td> P. Langan.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="rt">5.</td><td> P. Treflod<sup>n</sup>.</td><td class="rtlt">19.</td><td> P. Cursalis.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="rt">6.</td><td class="c"> .....</td><td class="rtlt">20.</td><td class="c"> ....</td></tr> -<tr><td class="rt">7.</td><td> Vic<sup>r</sup> Episcop.</td><td class="rtlt">21.</td><td> Succentor.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="rt">8.</td><td> P. Cursalis.</td><td class="rtlt">22.</td><td> P. Cursalis.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="rt">9.</td><td> P. Cursalis.</td><td class="rtlt">23.</td><td> P. Cursalis.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="rt">10.</td><td> P. Cludeu.</td><td class="rtlt">24.</td><td> P. Caer-Fai.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="rt">11.</td><td class="c"> ....</td><td class="rtlt">25.</td><td class="c"> ....</td></tr> -<tr><td class="rt">12.</td><td> P. Caer-Farchell.</td><td class="rtlt">26.</td><td> Arch<sup>d</sup> Cardig<sup>n</sup>.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="rt">13.</td><td> Arch<sup>d</sup> Carmar<sup>n</sup>.</td><td class="rtlt">27.</td><td> P. Aurea.</td></tr> -<tr><td class="rt">14.</td><td> Cancellarius.</td><td class="rtlt">28.</td><td> Thesaurarius.</td></tr> -</table> - -<p>The constructional arches in the transepts are pointed throughout, with -an occasional decorative circular arch, but are<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_045" id="page_045"></a>{45}</span></p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 327px;"> -<a href="images/image22_lg.jpg"> -<img src="images/image22_sml.jpg" width="327" height="391" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a> -<div class="caption"><p>ARCH BETWEEN THE S. TRANSEPT AND THE CHOIR AISLE.</p></div> -</div> - -<p class="nind">much plainer than those in the nave and choir. “The peculiar character -of the more slender shafts has freer scope than in the nave and choir, -where a more massive pier is employed; we may observe the general -omission of the neck-moulding and the use of the ogee keel as at -Llandaff. The latter is here<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_046" id="page_046"></a>{46}</span> applied very curiously, being, in several -members, doubled and set laterally, the effect of which is by no means -pleasing, though it may have had some influence on the architecture of -the period.”<a name="FNanchor_33_33" id="FNanchor_33_33"></a><a href="#Footnote_33_33" class="fnanchor">[33]</a></p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 238px;"> -<a href="images/image23_lg.jpg"> -<img src="images/image23_sml.jpg" width="238" height="200" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a> -<div class="caption"><p>DOUBLE PISCINA, ST. THOMAS’S CHAPEL.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>The transepts are approached from the nave—not, as is usual, through an -open arch, but through original Transitional doorways. The wall which -contains these doors effectually cuts off the view from the transept to -the nave, and also serves somewhat to make the contrast between the -elaborate nave and the rather bare transepts less marked.</p> - -<p>The <b>Chapel of St. Thomas the Martyr</b>, north of the north transept, and -the buildings above form one of the many unique points of St. David’s. -On reference to the ground-plan it will be seen that this remarkable -building is placed at an unexpected angle, the reason for which is not -apparent and remains unexplained.</p> - -<p>The year of the fall of the tower—1220—was also that in which the body -of St. Thomas, the martyred primate of Canterbury, was translated from -the crypt of Canterbury<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_047" id="page_047"></a>{47}</span> Cathedral to the choir. St. David’s, in common -with many other great churches, determined to dedicate a chapel to his -memory. In 1329 this chapel was probably remodelled, when Sir R. Symonds -gave his manor of St. Dogmell to secure two chaplains to celebrate daily -mass for his soul and his wife’s at the altar of St. Thomas. It has the -only original completed Decorated vaulting in the building (except the -south porch), and two stages were added above, making the building -taller than the transept and giving the remarkable external effect seen -from the north-east. The chapel has served as a chapter-house, library, -and vestry, and on its south side has a very beautiful double piscina, -in character purely Early English. The trefoiled heads are -characteristically moulded and the spandrils richly carved, one with -stiff-leaved foliage, another with a bird and foliage, and the third -represents a fight between a man and a devil which is trying to devour -another man. This piscina is interesting, apart from its beauty, as -showing that the Early English architects could work purely in that -style when they desired, and that in all probability their use of -Transitional detail was prompted by their artistic sense and desire to -make their work harmonise with their predecessors’. The vaulting rises -from octagonal shafts with round flowered caps, and the bosses at the -crossing of the ribs are elaborate. One contains the head of our Lord, -and another a similar subject, but the Head censed by angels.</p> - -<p>The storey above was the original <b>Chapter House</b>, later the Grammar -School, now the <b>Library</b>. This position is, we think, unique for a -chapter-house. It is very plain and has a mediæval recessed closet; also -a fine Decorated fireplace (and in it a most unworthy stove), which is -obviously the work of Gower, as it is almost precisely similar to one in -the residential part of his palace over the river. There are also some -Early English bracket capitals, one foliated and the other with the -nail-head, probably to carry lights. On the cill of the north window is -a fragment from the old organ-case, showing how well it was worthy of -being, at any rate, attributed to Grinling Gibbons.</p> - -<p>The room above this (third stage) was used as the Treasury, but is not -of any great interest.</p> - -<p>Scott did away with an unsightly temporary wooden stair<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_048" id="page_048"></a>{48}</span> leading to the -chapter-house from the transept, and re-used the original entrance from -the north choir aisle; but we do not consider the present arrangement -very satisfactory, as it still has a temporary appearance.</p> - -<p>The <b>Throne</b> (Bishop Morgan, 1496-1505) stands on the south side of the -choir, and is a peculiar structure, rendered the more puzzling by being -a blend of Decorated and Perpendicular, judging by the detail. If the -Decorated parts, however, are not of that period, they are copied from -similar work on the parclose screen. There are three seats, the centre -being the Bishop’s, and the others probably for the Canonici -Collaterales. Above are innumerable crocketed canopies, pinnacles, -pediments, &c., terminating in a kind of open spire. The total height is -little short of thirty feet.</p> - -<p>At the time of the restoration of the tower all the woodwork in the -immediate vicinity had necessarily to be removed, and under Scott’s -direction was extensively repaired, “the greatest care being taken to -preserve the ancient work as nearly untouched as possible.”</p> - -<p>The <b>Sedilia</b> are of a pleasing Perpendicular design, with a cornice in -oak of a peculiar white colour, which leads one to suppose that they -were once coloured. The canopy work and coved cornice are better in -detail and general design than those of the stalls. The buttresses which -divide the seats are pierced with tracery, and are surmounted with -crocketed pinnacles.</p> - -<p>The oaken stalls—like almost all the woodwork in the choir—belong to -the Perpendicular period, and were erected during the episcopate of -Bishop Tully (1460-1480). They have plain arms, but the return stalls -and those of the Chancellor and Treasurer are decorated with grotesque -heads. The misereres are also conceived in a serio-humorous vein, some, -indeed, being very unusual, the monks being represented as suffering -from <i>mal de mer</i> and crapula. One carving exhibits a cowled fox -offering the wafer to a goose with a human head, which Freeman thinks -may have some bearing on the religious controversy of the time.<a name="FNanchor_34_34" id="FNanchor_34_34"></a><a href="#Footnote_34_34" class="fnanchor">[34]</a> He -also regards the cowled fox as “the carver’s version of the proverb -‘Cucullus non facit monachum.’ ”<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_049" id="page_049"></a>{49}</span></p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 322px;"> -<a href="images/image24_lg.jpg"> -<img src="images/image24_sml.jpg" width="322" height="455" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a> -<div class="caption"><p>THE SEDILIA.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>The decanal stall was formerly assigned to the Bishop as Dean, and -accordingly inscribed <i>Dom. Epī.</i>, but when the<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_050" id="page_050"></a>{50}</span> Precentor in 1840 -assumed the title of Dean<a name="FNanchor_35_35" id="FNanchor_35_35"></a><a href="#Footnote_35_35" class="fnanchor">[35]</a> this was changed. It will be observed that -the seats of most dignity are the extremes, and the western end and -southern side take precedence. As in the arrangement of stalls which -existed in the colleges of Abergwili and Llanddewi Brefi, founded by -Bishop Beck in this diocese, the Bishop’s Vicar (Subdean) sits on the -decanal side, and the Subchanter in a similar position on the -Precentor’s side.</p> - -<p>The delicate silver altar-cross was designed by Mr. T. G. Jackson, and -is a choice addition to the cathedral plate. The east end hangings are -at once recognisable as one of the happiest of Mr. Bodley’s exquisite -designs.</p> - -<h3>THE SHRINE OF ST. DAVID.</h3> - -<p>This shrine, which is, and always has been, one of the most important in -the country, occupies a very modest position in the presbytery, viz., -the third bay from the east on the north side. It is, however, rather a -base and a frame for a <i>movable</i> feretrum, for we know it was carried to -battle. Although the shrine of Edward the Confessor at Westminster and -St. Thomas à Beckett at Canterbury—to mention two great instances—were -placed behind the high altar with much dignity and with plenty of room -for pilgrims to circulate, yet it seems most likely that the somewhat -extraordinary position of the shrine of the patron Saint of Wales is due -to a retention of an ancient British custom.<a name="FNanchor_36_36" id="FNanchor_36_36"></a><a href="#Footnote_36_36" class="fnanchor">[36]</a> The tombs of St. Trilo -and St. Dubricius rest in similar places in Llandaff Cathedral, and that -of St. Ninian at Whitherne, in Galloway, occupies an identical position. -On the other hand, Dr. Rock<a name="FNanchor_37_37" id="FNanchor_37_37"></a><a href="#Footnote_37_37" class="fnanchor">[37]</a> writes: “I cannot bring myself to think -that the shrine stood anywhere but <i>behind</i> the high altar, in its full -dignity and splendour;” which, however, has not been the case, certainly -since the fifteenth century, as the stone altar stood against the east -wall of the presbytery.</p> - -<p>We are inclined to think that the monks divided these relics, which were -so infinitely precious that kings came to venerate, and that some were -kept in a movable shrine or feretory, and that the remainder were shown -in a recently<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_051" id="page_051"></a>{51}</span></p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 325px;"> -<a href="images/image25_lg.jpg"> -<img src="images/image25_sml.jpg" width="325" height="493" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a> -<div class="caption"><p><i>Photo, J. Valentine.</i></p> - -<p>THE SHRINE OF ST. DAVID.</p></div> -</div> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="page_052" id="page_052"></a>{52}</span></p> - -<p class="nind">discovered recess behind the high altar.<a name="FNanchor_38_38" id="FNanchor_38_38"></a><a href="#Footnote_38_38" class="fnanchor">[38]</a> Probably these are the same -relics which were found in the lower part of the recess run with mortar -and formed into a solid mass, evidently to prevent desecration. The -relics have been extracted and are carefully preserved in the cathedral.</p> - -<p>St. David, whom Walcott<a name="FNanchor_39_39" id="FNanchor_39_39"></a><a href="#Footnote_39_39" class="fnanchor">[39]</a> gives as Bishop from 519-542 (when he -presumably died), was canonised by Pope Calixtus II. (Guido of -Vienne)<a name="FNanchor_40_40" id="FNanchor_40_40"></a><a href="#Footnote_40_40" class="fnanchor">[40]</a> 1119-1124, and judging by the numerous Edwardian coins found -in the neighbourhood the shrine attained the height of its celebrity -during the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries. Bishop Gower was thus -able to build his magnificent palace as a hostelry for the many -distinguished pilgrims. Amongst the kings who paid homage to St. David -were William I. in 1081,<a name="FNanchor_41_41" id="FNanchor_41_41"></a><a href="#Footnote_41_41" class="fnanchor">[41]</a> when he subdued Wales, and this shrine -doubtless formed in some sense a common bond between conquerors and -conquered; Henry II., on his way to and from Ireland (1171-1172) when he -gave <i>inter alia</i> two velvet copes “for the singers in serving God and -St. David,”<a name="FNanchor_42_42" id="FNanchor_42_42"></a><a href="#Footnote_42_42" class="fnanchor">[42]</a> and it was while waiting here for a fair wind that Henry -is reported to have learnt from a bard that King Arthur was buried in -the Isle of Avalon; whilst the last royal visit recorded is that of -Edward I. and Queen Eleanor in 1284.<a name="FNanchor_43_43" id="FNanchor_43_43"></a><a href="#Footnote_43_43" class="fnanchor">[43]</a></p> - -<p>It appears that the remains of St. David’s confessor, St. Justinian, -were translated from Porthotinan, near St. David’s, to a new tomb in the -cathedral in which he himself was also subsequently interred.<a name="FNanchor_44_44" id="FNanchor_44_44"></a><a href="#Footnote_44_44" class="fnanchor">[44]</a> But it -is not clear at what date the relics were translated to a movable -feretory. However, it is certain that it was portable, as in 1086 it was -stolen and<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_053" id="page_053"></a>{53}</span> despoiled.<a name="FNanchor_45_45" id="FNanchor_45_45"></a><a href="#Footnote_45_45" class="fnanchor">[45]</a> In spite of William of Malmesbury definitely -stating that the relics were transferred to Glastonbury in 946,<a name="FNanchor_46_46" id="FNanchor_46_46"></a><a href="#Footnote_46_46" class="fnanchor">[46]</a> they -were still in their place when Henry II. made his pilgrimage, and a -century later (1275) we find Bishop Richard de Carew building a new -shrine which agrees with the general architectural character of the -existing structure.<a name="FNanchor_47_47" id="FNanchor_47_47"></a><a href="#Footnote_47_47" class="fnanchor">[47]</a> But we find that the relics, or some of them, -were inclosed in a portable shrine long after this. An Extent of the -Bishop’s lands made in the year 1326 informs us that the burgesses of -St. David’s were bound to follow the Bishop in time of war with the -shrine of St. David for one day’s journey in either direction,<a name="FNanchor_48_48" id="FNanchor_48_48"></a><a href="#Footnote_48_48" class="fnanchor">[48]</a> and -under a statute of Bishop Nicholas the chantry priests were enjoined to -carry the shrine in procession on the instructions of the precentor or -president of the Chapter.<a name="FNanchor_49_49" id="FNanchor_49_49"></a><a href="#Footnote_49_49" class="fnanchor">[49]</a> Yet the evidence<a name="FNanchor_50_50" id="FNanchor_50_50"></a><a href="#Footnote_50_50" class="fnanchor">[50]</a> of those who -certainly saw the shrine before the Reformation, convinces us that this -structure is the same that anciently bore the name, and, as Freeman<a name="FNanchor_51_51" id="FNanchor_51_51"></a><a href="#Footnote_51_51" class="fnanchor">[51]</a> -says, “the term feretrum, in spite of its etymology, was continually -applied to standing shrines, as, for instance, to the celebrated shrine -of St. Cuthbert at Durham.” By a statute<a name="FNanchor_52_52" id="FNanchor_52_52"></a><a href="#Footnote_52_52" class="fnanchor">[52]</a> of Bishop Beck, 1287, -recited and confirmed by Bishop Gower in 1342, three officers are -directed to take charge of all things given or left “tam ad fabricam, -quam ad Feretrum, sive caput.”</p> - -<p>The style of the shrine is Early English merging towards Decorated. The -base extends from pier to pier of the third arch from the east on the -north side of the presbytery. On this are three low chamfered and -pointed arches, about 12 inches high, and four deeply-sunk quatrefoils -occupy the spandrils; the recesses beneath the arches are also about 12 -inches in depth and backed with a stone wall. The outer quatrefoils are -merely ornamental, but the two central ones communicate with lockers at -the back for offerings. Above these arches is a flat table, restored in -many places, on which rested the movable feretory and which also bears<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_054" id="page_054"></a>{54}</span> -the principal structure of three arches and round shafts. The capitals -are rather Early English in character, as are the heads<a name="FNanchor_53_53" id="FNanchor_53_53"></a><a href="#Footnote_53_53" class="fnanchor">[53]</a> at the -junctions of the arches, but the crocketed hood-moulding and label -running across the archway are most undesirable Perpendicular additions. -The arches contained frescoes on the wall at the back. According to -Browne Willis,<a name="FNanchor_54_54" id="FNanchor_54_54"></a><a href="#Footnote_54_54" class="fnanchor">[54]</a> “<i>St. David</i> himself is painted in his -Pontificalibus; and on each side of him is a Bishop Saint; one by the -Inscription is known to be <i>St. Patrick</i> (to the west); the other is -somewhat defac’d.” It is a figure in episcopal attire and said to be St. -Denis. He goes on to say that the whole was formerly surmounted by a -wooden canopy—“a fair Arch of Timber work painted”—and marks of this -remain. The back—towards the north choir aisle—is supposed to be -imperfect. It has three low rounded arches, the centre being the widest, -and over each was a chamfered quatrefoil, and between these were two -rather high niches. A string runs round the each opening, but does not -run along the base of the quatrefoils. Quite recently stones were to be -seen in the pavement hollowed by continual friction with the knees of -the pilgrims. Undoubtedly this shrine suffered when the presbytery -arcade was walled up owing to the collapse of the aisle roofs, but now -that all is dry and in good repair the three saints might well be -repainted.</p> - -<h3>THE SHRINE OF ST. CARADOC.</h3> - -<p>Often mistaken for, somewhat similar to, and of about the same date as, -the shrine of St. David, is that of St. Caradoc on the south side of the -north transept (dedicated to St. Andrew), where he was buried by his own -express wish near the altar of St. Stephen. He died in 1124, and at the -instance of the historian Giraldus was canonised by Pope Innocent -III.<a name="FNanchor_55_55" id="FNanchor_55_55"></a><a href="#Footnote_55_55" class="fnanchor">[55]</a> The tomb consists of a round arch, with a stone shelf below -supported by a wall in which are two pointed arches and a couple of -quatrefoils chamfered inwards. Above the arch is a small portion of wall -containing some air-holes. It has been suggested that as this transept -has been dedicated to St.<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_055" id="page_055"></a>{55}</span> Andrew, one of the patron saints of the -Church, that it was designed as a receptacle of relics of that -saint.<a name="FNanchor_56_56" id="FNanchor_56_56"></a><a href="#Footnote_56_56" class="fnanchor">[56]</a></p> - -<p><b>The Aisles of the Presbytery</b>, except for sundry attractive monuments, -are not very interesting, but have undergone various changes. After the -fall of the tower they were reconstructed in the prevalent Transitional -style. In the Early English period the wall of the south aisle was -rebuilt further south.<a name="FNanchor_57_57" id="FNanchor_57_57"></a><a href="#Footnote_57_57" class="fnanchor">[57]</a> The old roofs were removed, the walls raised, -and new windows inserted in the Decorated period by Bishop Gower -(1328-1347). Three hundred years later they were in a ruined condition. -In the general restoration of the latter part of this century they have -been re-roofed and extensively repaired.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 324px;"> -<a href="images/image26_lg.jpg"> -<img src="images/image26_sml.jpg" width="324" height="248" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a> -<div class="caption"><p>THE SHRINE OF ST. CARADOC.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>The capitals of the pier-shafts on the aisle side resemble those<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_056" id="page_056"></a>{56}</span> in the -presbytery, but the piers themselves are peculiar. A group of shafts is -attached to each pier; these, however, finish below the capitals of each -pier with a bracket. It has been supposed that these were intended for -figures, and it is quite likely that this may have been the best way the -Transitional architects saw of avoiding a raw appearance when they gave -up their groining system.</p> - -<p>The eastern walls of the presbytery aisles both show the very steep -pitch of the early roof, which apparently remained till the walls were -raised by Gower.</p> - -<p>In the south-east angle of the north aisle is a doorway leading to the -arcaded passage in front of the main east windows. Scott restored the -original Decorated windows, which he found much decayed on the north -side; but on the south side, where no remains of the tracery were extant -“and even the jambs were so shattered that it was only by a fragment -here and there that the mouldings were recovered,”<a name="FNanchor_58_58" id="FNanchor_58_58"></a><a href="#Footnote_58_58" class="fnanchor">[58]</a> the tracery he -introduced was “founded on fragmentary evidence from other parts of the -church of the same date.” But this archæologic proceeding has not -resulted in any specially beautiful design, though, doubtless, it was -the best thing that could be done.</p> - -<p>The modern roofs are decidedly good and solid—of a Decorated character -and well carven.</p> - -<p>The north choir aisle is different to the south on account of the Chapel -of St. Thomas, which blocks up the westernmost bay. A modern wooden -staircase near the west end of the north aisle leads to the -chapter-house.</p> - -<p>The large north window in the north transept was inserted in 1846 by -Butterfield. It is based on one at Sleaford, Lincolnshire, and replaced -another of late and inferior design. The west wall of both transepts is -of De Leiâ’s time, and the remainder, after the fall of the tower, about -1220. The north transept is dedicated to St. Andrew, and his altar stood -in the central eastern arch and the south transept was known as the -Chanters’ Chapel, with an altar dedicated to the Holy Innocents and -almost certainly one to St. David. This transept had at first but a -single chapel (Decorated), with a space between it and the aisle of the -choir, but in the sixteenth century these two were joined and the chapel -became a vestry. In this century,<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_057" id="page_057"></a>{57}</span> when the south transept was fitted up -as a parish church it formed the eastern aisle. Scott restored the -original arrangement.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 328px;"> -<a href="images/image27_lg.jpg"> -<img src="images/image27_sml.jpg" width="328" height="257" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a> -<div class="caption"><p>SCREEN OF BISHOP VAUGHAN’S CHAPEL.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>The transepts show more clearly than any other part of the church the -influence of the west of England on Welsh architecture, and it is -remarkable that it should have started thus early. The Transitional and -even Early English architecture at St. David’s and Llandaff resembles in -mouldings that at Slymbridge and in foliage some of the great -Gloucestershire churches. It is not surprising that the later splendid -Perpendicular and Decorated examples of Somerset and the Bristol -district should have made their impress felt in Wales. But this Early -English connection certainly seems wonderful.</p> - -<h3>THE CHAPELS EAST OF THE PRESBYTERY.</h3> - -<p>The chapels at the far east end of the church are extraordinarily<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_058" id="page_058"></a>{58}</span> -extensive and most remarkable for a comparatively small cathedral like -St. David’s. This being so it is best to refer to the plan, which will -simplify what seems bewildering in mere description. Generally speaking -the ground-plan may be considered as an extension of the main body of -the church, terminating in a Lady Chapel, with aisles continuing those -of the choir for part of the length. But, inasmuch as no part of the -cathedral seems to have attracted the attention of the various prelates -who were successively benefactors to the church, more than this; and, as -the changes were numerous and but little regard appears to have been -paid to preceding plans, the inevitable result is a kind of -architectural <i>pot-pourri</i>. It is, however, a very attractive medley.</p> - -<p>De Leiâ’s church clearly terminated at the existing east wall of the -presbytery and aisles, and apparently at the time of the rebuilding -occasioned by the fall of the tower in 1220, no attempt was made to -lengthen the church eastwards. It is not unlikely, however, that shortly -before the time of the earthquake of 1248 a Lady Chapel or retro-choir -was contemplated and even begun, but discontinued. As we see it now it -is also not improbable that the original plan may have been followed, -with many changes in detail in the succeeding centuries. The aisles -continuing those of the presbytery are connected by a sort of -retro-choir or ambulatory—embracing the space now occupied by Bishop -Vaughan’s Chapel between it and the east wall of the presbytery. This is -all Early English, <i>i.e.</i>, thirteenth century, work. Bishop Martyn -(1290-1328) completed the present ground-plan by adding his Lady Chapel.</p> - -<p>Bishop Gower (1328-1347), the Menevian Wykeham, raised the north and -east walls of the north chapel aisle and rebuilt the south and east -walls of the south aisle from the ground, probably on Early English -foundations. Also, this aisle was projected a few feet in an easterly -direction and many changes made in the Lady Chapel, where Gower founded -a charity in 1334. Bishop Vaughan (1509-1522) appropriated the space -east of the presbytery which was described<a name="FNanchor_59_59" id="FNanchor_59_59"></a><a href="#Footnote_59_59" class="fnanchor">[59]</a> as “vilissimus sive -sordidissimus locus in totâ ecclesiâ,” and converted it into the -beautiful chapel which bears his name. Previous to this we can find no -early references to this space which was walled in north,<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_059" id="page_059"></a>{59}</span></p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 323px;"> -<a href="images/image28_lg.jpg"> -<img src="images/image28_sml.jpg" width="323" height="394" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a> -<div class="caption"><p>ROOF OF BISHOP VAUGHAN’S CHAPEL.</p></div> -</div> - -<p class="nind">south, east, and west (according to Freeman) and may previously never -have been roofed. With regard to this numerous suggestions have been -made which do not seem entirely satisfactory. At any rate the east -windows of the cathedral were glazed and required light, which we -venture to suggest may have been<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_060" id="page_060"></a>{60}</span> obtained from the open passage left -for pilgrims to reach the ancient recess in the east wall, which is -apparently <i>in situ</i> and bears unmistakable marks of having been -polished by use. And, that the remainder of the space was screened off -and roofed for the immurement of a recluse, who could perhaps watch -unseen the movements of the pilgrims. It must be remembered also that -stealing relics carried its own absolution. This might account, too, for -its filthy state which necessitated the four pence of 1492<a name="FNanchor_60_60" id="FNanchor_60_60"></a><a href="#Footnote_60_60" class="fnanchor">[60]</a> to clean. -In those days an unusually large sum. In making this Trinity Chapel, -Bishop Vaughan blocked up the lower east windows of the cathedral and -probably added the upper tier shown on p. 36, and then added his -fan-traceried roof and other ornaments.</p> - -<p>The Lady Chapel and the ambulatory or vestibule were evidently twice -prepared for vaulting before Bishop Vaughan actually completed the -scheme, but during the Civil War it was denuded of lead, which -eventuated in its collapse about 1775 and in the erection of the -extraordinary modern buttresses which prop up the inner walls of the -chapel and its aisles.</p> - -<p>This brief general description may help the visitor to realise the many -changes which produced these peculiar eastern adjuncts, and we will now -discuss each more in detail.</p> - -<p><b>Bishop Vaughan’s, or The Trinity, Chapel.</b>—This chapel is a peculiarly -subtle example of Perpendicular, and retains both its internal and -external roofs. Freeman, who does not usually pay high tribute to any -phase of Perpendicular, says,<a name="FNanchor_61_61" id="FNanchor_61_61"></a><a href="#Footnote_61_61" class="fnanchor">[61]</a> “Bishop Vaughan’s Chapel is an -extremely fine specimen of late Perpendicular, and that of the best -kind, and is the more conspicuous, as being the only portion of the -cathedral of any merit or importance belonging to that style. It -exhibits the same chasteness of design and delicacy of execution which -distinguishes King’s College Chapel, opposed alike to the meagreness of -Bath Abbey and the corrupt form and overdone ornament of Henry the -Seventh’s Chapel. The arches, one on each side, which divide the chapel -from the aisles, command admiration for the justness of their -proportions and the purity of their detail, being well moulded, and -having shafts with good capitals and bases; the stone screens also with -which they are fitted up increase the effect of elegant<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_061" id="page_061"></a>{61}</span> richness. It is -much to be regretted that they should remain exposed to the effect of -the weather, even comparatively sheltered as they are by the main body -of the cathedral.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 327px;"> -<a href="images/image29_lg.jpg"> -<img src="images/image29_sml.jpg" width="327" height="388" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a> -<div class="caption"><p>RECESS IN BISHOP VAUGHAN’S CHAPEL.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>The roof is of excellent fan-tracery, consisting of two bays, running -north and south, with a small portion of panelled barrel vaulting at -each end. It rises from shafts, of which the<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_062" id="page_062"></a>{62}</span> central ones at each end -are corbelled off. The eastern one would have interfered with the altar -of the chapel, the western with the doorway<a name="FNanchor_62_62" id="FNanchor_62_62"></a><a href="#Footnote_62_62" class="fnanchor">[62]</a> which then opened behind -the high altar, and whose arch may still be traced.” The angel which -acts as a corbel over the Transitional recess is very finely conceived -and carved, as also are the bosses of sculpture on the screens. Indeed -they are as fine as anything the Perpendicular men ever did. The recess -itself is shown on p. 61. The centre cross is 2 feet 3 inches square and -is cut out of a stone 1 ft. 9 in. thick, the four spandrils between the -arms being pierced through to the high altar. The height of the top of -the cill is about 3 feet from the present floor of the chapel and 1 ft. -6 in. from that of the sanctuary. As already mentioned,<a name="FNanchor_63_63" id="FNanchor_63_63"></a><a href="#Footnote_63_63" class="fnanchor">[63]</a> the lower -part was found to contain human bones, run into a solid mass with mortar -to prevent desecration, which probably was done at the time of the -religious changes in the sixteenth century. The other crosses -surrounding the large one are probably some of those cut for dedication -purposes; and as the lowest at any rate is earlier than the centre, it -is probably a once much venerated relic of St. David’s own church before -that of De Leiâ.</p> - -<div class="figleft" style="width: 98px;"> -<a href="images/image30_lg.jpg"> -<img src="images/image30_sml.jpg" width="98" height="207" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a> -<div class="caption"><p>BOSSES ON THE CORNICE.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>On the opposite side of this chapel—<i>i.e.</i>, in the wall between Bishop -Vaughan’s Chapel and the ante-chapel—is more finely detailed -Perpendicular work.</p> - -<div class="figright" style="width: 141px;"> -<a href="images/image31_lg.jpg"> -<img src="images/image31_sml.jpg" width="141" height="162" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a> -<div class="caption"><p>RECENTLY DISCOVERED WINDOW IN BISHOP VAUGHAN’S CHAPEL.</p></div> -</div> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="page_063" id="page_063"></a>{63}</span></p> - -<p>In 1898 an interesting discovery was made, and our view was taken the -same year immediately after. On the west side of this wall stood the -altar to the Holy Trinity, with a tall canopied niche on each side.</p> - -<p>On either side of these again traces of a four-centred arch showed -faintly through the smooth ashlar at the back, and on removing the -ashlar two beautiful windows were disclosed. They have their saddle-bars -and stancheons <i>in situ</i>, in some places almost rusted through, and it -is clear that the windows have not been, nor were they intended to be, -glazed. Another interesting point is that they seem scarcely to have -been finished before they were walled up again, for the masonry has not -even been rubbed down. This seems so unusual a treatment for windows of -such refinement, that one is tempted to conjecture that some zealous -subordinate of the Bishop’s, anxious to give him a pleasant surprise, -had, during his absence, caused these windows to be made, but on his -return the incensed prelate promptly ordered their immurement. A squint -was, however, left in the centre light of each window, so that from the -Trinity Chapel altar the celebrations at those at the east end of the -north and south aisles could be seen. When removing the masonry in 1898, -it was decided to leave these squint-stones in order not to destroy an -important link in the history of these windows.</p> - -<div class="figright" style="width: 147px;"> -<a href="images/image32_lg.jpg"> -<img src="images/image32_sml.jpg" width="147" height="323" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a> -<div class="caption"><p>NICHE, BISHOP VAUGHAN’S CHAPEL.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>Curiously enough, the backs of the windows, towards the<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_064" id="page_064"></a>{64}</span> ambulatory are -different from the fronts (one of which we illustrate) and have merely -four-centred arches.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 327px;"> -<a href="images/image33_lg.jpg"> -<img src="images/image33_sml.jpg" width="327" height="385" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a> -<div class="caption"><p>BISHOP VAUGHAN’S CHAPEL.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>At the north end of this chapel is the tomb of Archdeacon Hiot and that -of Sir John Wogan, recently brought here for the sake of preservation. -The former stood in the chapel of<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_065" id="page_065"></a>{65}</span> St. Nicholas. Bishop Vaughan’s own -tomb is in front of the altar, the leger-stone once bearing a brass on -which was engraved his effigy.<a name="FNanchor_64_64" id="FNanchor_64_64"></a><a href="#Footnote_64_64" class="fnanchor">[64]</a></p> - -<p>Several Celtic stones bearing crosses, which were found at Pen Arthur, -are at present in this chapel. The earliest—from the eighth to the -eleventh century—Professor Westwood found doing duty as a gate-post on -a farm. The holes show the marks where the hinges were. At the top, on -the left, can be read Α Ω and (?) JHS. On the right is XPS, cut after -the corner was broken away, and below is “Gurmarc.” On the back is -another cross of a still earlier character. It is supposed to have -commemorated some battle fought in the neighbourhood, and was found on -the moor.</p> - -<p><b>The South Chapel Aisle.</b>—On coming through the east door of the south -choir aisle we enter the Chapel of King Edward the Confessor, and we -notice on the right a Decorated recess said to have contained the -monument of a priest; but the great buttresses, which meet the eye -looking east, are only temporary supports and in no sense form part of -the original design. Opposite the Decorated recess is the tomb of a -knight (8), but unfortunately this has been badly treated at the hands -of the buttress builders. On the north side of the altar is a piscina -with a pointed arch, cinquefoiled, and a projecting bracket of -singularly bold design which seems to interrupt the Decorated -string.<a name="FNanchor_65_65" id="FNanchor_65_65"></a><a href="#Footnote_65_65" class="fnanchor">[65]</a> A curious groining boss, apparently in order to preserve it, -is let into the wall to the west above the piscina. It is carven into -the form of three beasts (asses or rabbits) with long ears. The -peculiarity of the design, which is met with elsewhere, is that there -are only three ears, yet each beast has its full complement.</p> - -<p><b>The Ante-Chapel.</b>—Briant (p. 57) says this chapel is known locally as -the <i>Chapel of the Seven Sisters</i>, on account of the seven hideous heads -which are said to be types of the beauty of South Wales. We can find no -such record.</p> - -<p>This narrow space, which intervenes between Bishop Vaughan’s Chapel and -the Lady Chapel to the east, is separated from the aisles by pairs of -very elegant Early English arches north and south, and Freeman is of -opinion that they differ slightly in date. The capitals have a delicate -nail-head<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_066" id="page_066"></a>{66}</span> moulding not to be found elsewhere in the cathedral. One of -the arches on the southern side has a figure lying down doing duty for a -corbel which was designed to carry the vaulting; it is, however, more -curious than beautiful. A segmental relieving arch in rough ashlar -embraces both arches. In this chapel was found the “Abraham” stone now -placed in the south transept (<a href="#page_079">see p. 79</a>).</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 326px;"> -<a href="images/image34_lg.jpg"> -<img src="images/image34_sml.jpg" width="326" height="245" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a> -<div class="caption"><p>VIEW LOOKING N. IN ANTE-CHAPEL TO LADY CHAPEL.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>This chapel is roofed with a neat Perpendicular vault and lit with a -poor Perpendicular window, and a couple of depressed arches (<i>i.e.</i>, -with their springing below the capitals) open into the <b>Lady Chapel</b>. An -enormous buttress, however, is an unsightly necessity to prevent the -wall above these arches falling eastwards. Our view (page 67) is taken -from the east, looking west, and shows one of these arches and, on the -south side, the fine Decorated tomb of Bishop Martyn. The composition -was that of a five-foiled arch, with open foliations between crocketed -pinnacles rising from octagonal<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_067" id="page_067"></a>{67}</span> attached shafts with floriated -capitals, all beneath a lofty straight-sided canopy. The detail seems to -point to Bishop Gower as the author. The canopy blocks an Early -Decorated window and cuts through a string, but its finial was evidently -utilised as a corbel by Bishop Vaughan for his vaulted roof, traces of -which are clearly discernible in the view at the south-west corner.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 324px;"> -<a href="images/image35_lg.jpg"> -<img src="images/image35_sml.jpg" width="324" height="251" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a> -<div class="caption"><p>SEDILIA AND TOMB, S. SIDE OF LADY CHAPEL.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>The sedilia, of three seats, is a fine design by Gower, the finials of -the crocketed ogee arches forming bosses in the cornice as in some of -his other designs.</p> - -<p>The cross lying on the ground is one which once stood on the east end of -the presbytery, probably designed by Sir G. Scott from an old example.</p> - -<p>Nearly opposite is a recess for a tomb which seems to have been similar -to that of Bishop Martyn. This was wrongly supposed to be that of Bishop -Houghton, who founded and<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_068" id="page_068"></a>{68}</span> was buried in his own chapel of St. Mary’s -College, not St. Mary’s Chapel, hence confusion. Archdeacon Yardley -conjectures with plausibility that Gower erected these two tombs to his -immediate predecessors, Martyn and Beck<a name="FNanchor_66_66" id="FNanchor_66_66"></a><a href="#Footnote_66_66" class="fnanchor">[66]</a> (1280-1328). Externally, and -to some extent even now internally, the Lady Chapel has assumed the -appearance of a Perpendicular building, but as a matter of fact it is, -in the main, a blend of Early English and Early Decorated.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 326px;"> -<a href="images/image36_lg.jpg"> -<img src="images/image36_sml.jpg" width="326" height="249" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a> -<div class="caption"><p>THE NORTH CHAPEL AISLE.</p></div> -</div> - -<p><b>The North Chapel Aisle.</b>—At the east end of this aisle stood the altar -to St. Nicholas, and in the south-east corner is a trefoil-headed -piscina with a quatrefoil drain. The changes which took place in the -Early Decorated period in this aisle<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_069" id="page_069"></a>{69}</span> are not so extensive as those of -the same date in its sister, where the whole of the southern and eastern -walls were rebuilt, but the result is even more of a patchwork in -appearance. The walls were raised, windows inserted and preparations -made for vaulting, but, nevertheless, the round Early English vaulting -shafts (c. 1248) appear below the octagonal ones of the Decorated -period. On reference to the plan it will be noticed that the Lady Chapel -is not on the central axis of the choir, and that between it and the -north aisle is a space, which, we cannot but think, was occasioned by -the timidity which we find throughout the cathedral in dealing with -vaults. The north wall of the Lady Chapel was thus moved inwards to -reduce the span and obtain—as they undoubtedly did, from whatever -cause—a much better proportioned building. The monuments in both aisles -are much decayed owing to their long exposure to the weather. East of -the screen opening to Bishop Vaughan’s Chapel is a small piece of a -Decorated tomb canopy, but the chapel arch has cut through the -remainder. “Its existence seems to prove that the ‘waste place’ now -occupied by the chapel must have been closed at the sides by walls; -although there must surely have been some door or entrance, however -narrow.”<a name="FNanchor_67_67" id="FNanchor_67_67"></a><a href="#Footnote_67_67" class="fnanchor">[67]</a> Just beneath<a name="FNanchor_68_68" id="FNanchor_68_68"></a><a href="#Footnote_68_68" class="fnanchor">[68]</a> this crocketed fragment of a canopy is a -small stone with a finely-conceived representation of a crucifixion in -relief with the figures of SS. Mary and John, obviously placed here for -preservation; and low down under this is an altar-tomb with a panelled -arcade, which once bore the figure of a priest in eucharistic vestments, -and above the panelling the inscription, “Orate pro Anima Johannis -[Hiot] nuper Archi....” which indicates that it was the monument of John -Hiot, Archdeacon of St. David’s, who died in 1419.</p> - -<p>In this aisle a chantry was founded early in the fourteenth century by -Sir John Wogan, of Picton, Chief Justiciary of Ireland under Edward the -First, and it is conjectured that the two monuments opposite (<i>i.e.</i>, in -the north wall) were erected by and to members of this family. The one -to the west (No. 2) is a mutilated figure of a knight in chain armour -about the date of Henry III.; the other (No. 1) is an exceedingly fine -example of a recumbent, eucharistically vested priest having<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_070" id="page_070"></a>{70}</span></p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 326px;"> -<a href="images/image37_lg.jpg"> -<img src="images/image37_sml.jpg" width="326" height="251" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a> -<div class="caption"><p>TOMB OF A PRIEST, N. SIDE OF N. CHAPEL.</p></div> -</div> - -<p class="nind">his feet resting on a dog and his hands clasped. The head rests on a -canopy of a spherical triangle crocketed. Freeman (p. 120) notes that a -similar canopy occurs elsewhere in the cathedral, also in a small tomb -in the chancel of Carew Church, and in an external tomb at Nangle in -Pembrokeshire. But it is the main arch or canopy of the tomb that is its -chief glory, and, strangely enough, the part least noticed by previous -writers. The subtlety and delicacy of the mouldings is worth careful -examination. The under side of the arch has been elaborately cusped, and -might easily be restored. The top member is curved back to admit of a -very unusual form of crocket, viz., two ivy leaves point to point, well -conventionalised and most effective. At the west end this springs from -the head of a greyhound, the other is defective. On the whole we are -inclined to think that the priest’s effigy has been placed here as a -convenient spot for its preservation and is a later insertion. Beneath -is some panelling consisting of triangles trefoiled, but<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_071" id="page_071"></a>{71}</span> it is very -flat and tame and in great contrast to the skilful treatment of the -upper part. The material is Caerfai stone. Browne Willis shows on his -plan<a name="FNanchor_69_69" id="FNanchor_69_69"></a><a href="#Footnote_69_69" class="fnanchor">[69]</a> two monuments under the third and fourth windows of this aisle -from the east, and calls them “Knights Templars”—possibly also -Wogans—but they no longer remain.</p> - -<h3>MONUMENTS IN THE CHURCH OTHER THAN IN THE EASTERN CHAPELS.</h3> - -<p>Beginning with the remarkable rood-screen, we find three ecclesiastical -effigies. During the excavations for the new foundations of the -tower-piers and shoring it was necessary to disturb the tombs in the -rood-screen, but the remains were carefully and severally restored to -their original resting-places, and such rings, chalices, crosiers, and -other valuables as were found were removed by the Chapter. The most -interesting of these objects are in the Chapter House under glass. They -comprise a Decorated gilt bronze pastoral staff (probably Gower’s) with -a fragment of its standard, two chalices, and a quantity of cere cloth.</p> - -<p>Two of the effigies cannot be with certainty identified, and we have -only the tradition handed down by Browne Willis: “I should guess them to -have been erected for Bishops of S. David’s, tho’ they have a Tradition -here, that one belongs to a Chancellor, or, as some say, a Chantor; and -the other to a Treasurer of this Church.”</p> - -<p>However, we know that <b>Bishop Gower’s Tomb</b> occupies (No. 25) the southern -compartment of the screen. He died in 1347, and is represented as vested -eucharistically with a mitre and pastoral staff veiled in his left hand, -and at his feet is a lion. The right hand is broken and was originally -in the act of benediction. Before the rebellion Browne Willis<a name="FNanchor_70_70" id="FNanchor_70_70"></a><a href="#Footnote_70_70" class="fnanchor">[70]</a> stated -that this tomb was “inclos’d to the South and West with a Brass -Pallisade: Upon the Facio of which, was this Inscription:<a name="FNanchor_71_71" id="FNanchor_71_71"></a><a href="#Footnote_71_71" class="fnanchor">[71]</a></p> - -<div class="poetry"> -<div class="poem"> -‘<span class="eng">Hic jacet</span> Henricus Gower, <span class="eng">Structor Palatii & hujus Ecclesiae.</span><br /> - <span class="eng">Menevensis Archiepiscopus qui obiit, &c.</span>’ ”<br /> -</div></div> - -<p class="nind">But on pp. 19 and 71 he corrects himself, on the authority<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_072" id="page_072"></a>{72}</span> apparently -of an eye-witness, and gives the following as being more correct:</p> - -<p class="c">“Henricus Gower, <span class="eng">Episcopalis Palatii constructor</span>.”</p> - -<p>“The Rebels took that, and all the Brass upon the other Tombs of the -Church, quite away; and now there are Wooden<a name="FNanchor_72_72" id="FNanchor_72_72"></a><a href="#Footnote_72_72" class="fnanchor">[72]</a> Rails in Lieu of the -Brass Pallisade. His body lies at length in his Episcopal Robes.” On the -south side of the altar-tomb are eight figures of the Apostles in -relief.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 323px;"> -<a href="images/image38_lg.jpg"> -<img src="images/image38_sml.jpg" width="323" height="238" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a> -<div class="caption"><p>TOMB OF BISHOP MORGAN IN NAVE.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>The altar-tomb in the second bay from the east on the south side of the -nave is to Bishop John Morgan (1496-1564). The whole is in Bath stone. -The mitred bishop is sculptured at full length in his chasuble, -dalmatic, stole, alb, and maniple, and holds his veiled pastoral staff. -He wears somewhat unusual gloves. Two kneeling angels support the -cushioned head. Freeman<a name="FNanchor_73_73" id="FNanchor_73_73"></a><a href="#Footnote_73_73" class="fnanchor">[73]</a> is very hard on the architecture of this -tomb: “The head, foot, and north side of the tomb are<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_073" id="page_073"></a>{73}</span></p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 328px;"> -<a href="images/image39_lg.jpg"> -<img src="images/image39_sml.jpg" width="328" height="427" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a> -<div class="caption"><p>BISHOP GOWER’S TOMB.</p></div> -</div> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="page_074" id="page_074"></a>{74}</span></p> - -<p class="nind">adorned with rectangular panels having their upper angles rounded off -without any kind of foliation, and exhibiting cases of interpenetration -in its worst form. Altogether the architectural ornaments are extremely -poor, and nearly resemble much of the German work of that period.” This -unnecessarily severe censure is, however, tempered with discriminating -praise of the sculpture: “The sculpture, on the other hand, is extremely -spirited and graceful, as well that of the principal figure, as those of -the smaller images which adorn the sides. In the two panels on the north -side there are six images of Apostles; six more evidently decorated the -south side, but these have been cut away to make room for a pew. At the -foot there is a group representing the resurrection of our Saviour, -sculptured in alto-relievo with remarkable grace and freedom. At the -head there is a griffin, Bishop Morgan’s bearing, supporting a shield -with the letters W and I, or J, in a cypher. Whose initials they may be, -we are at a loss to say; the heraldic bearing taken in connection with -authority almost contemporaneous leaves us in doubt to whom we are to -attribute the monument. This tomb, with its very advanced sculpture, and -very debased architecture, is a striking commentary on the state of the -arts at that important period of transition; and it is extremely curious -to observe the corruptions of the latter art manifesting themselves in -tombs in the first instance. The monument of Henry VII. in Westminster -Abbey, is of course a remarkable case of the same kind.”</p> - -<p>Opposite Morgan’s tomb, under the eastern window of the south aisle, is -a Decorated recess containing the tomb of an unknown priest (No. 27), -all in Caerfai stone. The canopy is very fine.<a name="FNanchor_74_74" id="FNanchor_74_74"></a><a href="#Footnote_74_74" class="fnanchor">[74]</a> It is part of a -concave-sided octagon, at the points of which are radial finials. This -form is to be found in Bristol Cathedral, and “is clearly a development -of the idea which produced the semi-octagonal doorways in the -rood-screen and the palace.”<a name="FNanchor_75_75" id="FNanchor_75_75"></a><a href="#Footnote_75_75" class="fnanchor">[75]</a> Gower’s characteristic ornaments—the -pellet, four-leaved flower and wave-moulding—spring from octagonal -shafts with a big projection. On each side is a pinnacle having an odd -and ugly decoration at the offsets, but it is on the whole preferable to -Gower’s customary flat quatrefoil. The altar-tomb is of plain ashlar, -and on it lies a priest<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_075" id="page_075"></a>{75}</span> in eucharistic vestments, his head on a double -cushion carried by angels, and at his feet a dog.</p> - -<p>There are some slabs with crosses near here and some shells before the -daïs, which once contained matrices of the brasses, with figures about -half full size to William Wilcock (1502) and Richard Ragader<a name="FNanchor_76_76" id="FNanchor_76_76"></a><a href="#Footnote_76_76" class="fnanchor">[76]</a> (1530), -prebendaries of St. Nicholas and masters of St. Mary’s College Chapel, -which will probably account for several unidentifiable slabs in the -choir and elsewhere.</p> - -<p>The monument occupying the most important position in the presbytery is -that (No. 6)<a name="FNanchor_77_77" id="FNanchor_77_77"></a><a href="#Footnote_77_77" class="fnanchor">[77]</a> to Edmond Tudor, Earl of Richmond, son of Owen Tudor -and Queen Catherine of Valois (widow of Henry V.) and father of Henry -VII., who died in 1456, and was buried in the church of the Grey Friars -at Caermarthen.<a name="FNanchor_78_78" id="FNanchor_78_78"></a><a href="#Footnote_78_78" class="fnanchor">[78]</a> But at the dissolution the remains and the tomb were -together brought to St. David’s. The position is close to the shrine of -St. David, and, as it was unusual to permit any interment in the -immediate vicinity of a great shrine, it may be well to note that this -tomb was not placed here till after the probable shrine of St. David had -been removed. The altar-tomb is in Purbeck marble, and is ornamented -with shallow Perpendicular quatrefoils reticulated. Each panel has a -shield in the centre, and a brass occupied the leger-stone. These -inscriptions were restored by Jones and Freeman<a name="FNanchor_79_79" id="FNanchor_79_79"></a><a href="#Footnote_79_79" class="fnanchor">[79]</a> from some drawings -bound up with a MS. in the possession of the Earl of Cawdor. On the -verge:</p> - -<p><i>“Under this Marble Stone here enclos’d, resteth the Bones of that noble -Lord</i> Edmond, <i>Earl of</i> Richmond, <i>Father and Brother to Kings, the -which departed out of this World in the Year of our Lord God, a thousand -four hundred fifty and six, the first Day of the Month of</i> November; <i>on -whose Soul, Almighty</i> Jesu <i>have Mercy. Amen.”</i></p> - -<p>On the tomb (at its foot probably) was:</p> - -<div class="poetry"> -<div class="poem"><div class="stanza"> -<span class="i0"><i>“Heu! Regum Genitor, & Frater splendidus Heros,</i><br /></span> -<span class="i1"><i>Omnis quo micuit Regia Virtus, obit.</i><br /></span> -<span class="i1"><i>Herculeus Comes Ille tuus</i>, Richmondia <i>Duxque</i><br /></span> -<span class="i1"><i>Conditur</i> Edmundus <i>his modo Marmoribus.</i><br /></span> -<span class="i1"><i>Qui Regni Clypeus, Comitum Flos, Malleus Hostis,</i><br /></span> -<span class="i1"><i>Vitæ Dexteritas, Pacis Amator erat.</i><span class="pagenum"><a name="page_076" id="page_076"></a>{76}</span><br /></span> -<span class="i1"><i>Hic meditare Vians Te semper vivere posse!</i><br /></span> -<span class="i1"><i>Non morieris Homo? Nonne miselle vides</i><br /></span> -<span class="i1">Cæsar <i>quem Tremeret Armis, nec vinceret</i> Hector<br /></span> -<span class="i1"><i>Ipsa devictum Morte ruisse Virum?</i><br /></span> -<span class="i1"><i>Cede Metrum Precibus: Dat Regum Conditor Almus</i><br /></span> -<span class="i1"><i>Ejus Spiritui Lucida Regna Poli</i>.”<a name="FNanchor_80_80" id="FNanchor_80_80"></a><a href="#Footnote_80_80" class="fnanchor">[80]</a><br /></span> -</div></div> -</div> - -<p class="nind">The length and sentiments of the inscription, however, hardly atone for -the fact that this is a mean ornament to so important a person, and one -cannot help contrasting it with that of his illustrious son—King Henry -VII.’s Chapel in Westminster Abbey.</p> - -<p>With St. David’s shrine we have already dealt (see <i>ante</i>, p. 50).</p> - -<p>Turning to the corresponding arch on the south side of the presbytery, -we find two tombs (Nos. 17 and 18). One (18) in Purbeck marble supports -the figure of a bishop eucharistically vested and mitred, with a veiled -pastoral staff in his left hand. The right hand is raised in -benediction. Browne Willis conjectures<a name="FNanchor_81_81" id="FNanchor_81_81"></a><a href="#Footnote_81_81" class="fnanchor">[81]</a> that this was the tomb of -Bishop Gervase or Jorwerth (1215-1229), but later<a name="FNanchor_82_82" id="FNanchor_82_82"></a><a href="#Footnote_82_82" class="fnanchor">[82]</a> he definitely -states that it was unknown, but “<i>was unanimously assur’d to me to be -the Monument of</i> Bishop Jerworth.” It is possible that the figure (which -is later than 1229) was placed over the remains of Gervase, during whose -episcopate the present presbytery was largely erected. A pastoral staff -(copper gilt) and part of its wooden stave, of a rich design, were found -near here in 1844, and, Freeman notes<a name="FNanchor_83_83" id="FNanchor_83_83"></a><a href="#Footnote_83_83" class="fnanchor">[83]</a> “is at present in the -possession of the Bishop of S. David’s.”</p> - -<p>The other (No. 17) is to Bishop Anselm le Gras (1231-47), according to -the inscription on the trefoiled canopy supported by angels and adorned -with foliage:</p> - -<p class="c"> -<span class="smcap">Petra Precor Dic Sic Anselmus Episcopus Est Hic.</span><br /> -</p> - -<p class="nind">The Bishop is in relief and wears eucharistic vestments, with a rich -mitre and pastoral staff unveiled but turned outwards, and the right -hand is in the act of benediction. There is a kind of nimbus to the head -and at the feet are two dogs, one of whom is pierced by the staff.</p> - -<p>Proceeding to the next arch further east immediately behind<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_077" id="page_077"></a>{77}</span></p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 329px;"> -<a href="images/image40_lg.jpg"> -<img src="images/image40_sml.jpg" width="329" height="379" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a> -<div class="caption"><p>TOMB OF A KNIGHT AT THE BACK OF THE SEDILIA.</p></div> -</div> - -<p class="nind">the sedilia, there is a recumbent figure in the armour of the late -fourteenth century. This is attributed to Rhys ap Tewdwr, Prince of -South Wales.<a name="FNanchor_84_84" id="FNanchor_84_84"></a><a href="#Footnote_84_84" class="fnanchor">[84]</a> “The head, which has the conical basanet and camaille, -is reclining upon a casque surmounted by the crest, <i>On a chapeau a lion -sejant</i>. The body armour is covered by a jupon, on the breast and back -of which are<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_078" id="page_078"></a>{78}</span> embroidered the wearer’s arms <i>[Gules,] within a bordure -engrailed [or,] a lion rampant [of the second]</i>. It is not quite clear -whether the jupon, which falls in a fringe round the hips, is meant to -have sleeves, or whether the figure has a hauberk with short sleeves, -those of the tunic appearing beneath them. The hands are clasped; there -is a richly decorated belt and sword; the legs have complete plate -armour, with genouillères; the feet have spurs, and rest on a lion.”</p> - -<p>In a corresponding position in the north choir aisle is another very -similar tomb (No. 11), evidently of a member of the same family, -probably by the same designer. The head lies on a double cushion, and -the heraldic bearings on the jupon have a label of three points.<a name="FNanchor_85_85" id="FNanchor_85_85"></a><a href="#Footnote_85_85" class="fnanchor">[85]</a> The -general conclusion seems to be that these monuments are to Lord Rhys ap -Tewdwr and his son Rhys Gryg. Before the restoration they stood under -the same arches in the presbytery, not, as now, in the aisles.</p> - -<p>Under the easternmost arch of the presbytery on the south side is a -mutilated figure of a priest (No. 20) in the eucharistic vestments of -Bishop Gower’s time, which is commonly attributed to Giraldus -Cambriensis,<a name="FNanchor_86_86" id="FNanchor_86_86"></a><a href="#Footnote_86_86" class="fnanchor">[86]</a> but on slight authority. The head rests on a double -cushion supported by angels, the hands are clasped (holding the Host) -and the feet lie on a dog. Opposite in the south choir aisle is a fine -slab (No. 22), with a cross floriated with branches in relief. The -chamfered edge bears the following inscription in Lombardic letters:</p> - -<div class="poetry"> -<div class="poem"><div class="stanza"> -<span class="i0">SILVESTER: MEDICUS: IACET: HIC: EIVS[que] RUINA:<br /></span> -<span class="i0">MONSTRAT: QVOD MORTI: [non]: OBSISTIT: MEDICINA:<br /></span> -</div></div> -</div> - -<p class="c"> -[Silvester the physician lies here, and his dissolution proves that<br /> -medicine withstands not Death.]<br /> -</p> - -<p>Under the easternmost window in this aisle is the effigy of a vested -priest with raised hands. The recess is Decorated, and has a foliated -canopy which is remarkable as being the only instance of ball-flower in -the church except that in the Decorated stage of the tower. In the -westernmost bay (No. 21) is a much worn tomb of an ecclesiastic holding -a book in his right hand.<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_079" id="page_079"></a>{79}</span></p> - -<p>The easternmost bay of the north side of the presbytery (No. 13) is -occupied by the monument to Thomas Lloyd, Treasurer (d. 1613). The -inscription states that it was here placed by his son Marmaduke: -Counsel-at-law of the Middle Temple. It is shown on page 45. At its back -is a Decorated recess, but the effigy has gone. The inscription is:<a name="FNanchor_87_87" id="FNanchor_87_87"></a><a href="#Footnote_87_87" class="fnanchor">[87]</a></p> - -<div class="blockquot"><p class="hang">MARMADUCUS LLOYDE ARMIGER JURISCONSULTUS ET MEDII TEMPLI SOCIUS HOC -FECIT IN PERPETUAM PATRIS SUI CHARISSIMI THOMÆ LLOYD HUJUS ECCLESIÆ -CATHEDRALIS THESAURARII MEMORIAM QUI OCTAVO DIE MENSIS MARTII AÑO -REGNI SERENISSIMI REGIS JACOBI DECIMO OBIIT ET HIC JACET.</p></div> - -<p>In the north transept are the tomb of St. Caradoc (<a href="#page_055">see p. 55</a>), and the -effigy of a priest beneath a Decorated canopy.</p> - -<p>In the south transept, near the nave, is an incised slab with a -floriated cross having the head of a priest appearing above it through -an opening in the stone.</p> - -<div class="figright" style="width: 120px;"> -<a href="images/image41_lg.jpg"> -<img src="images/image41_sml.jpg" width="120" height="218" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a> -<div class="caption"><p>ABRAHAM STONE (CELTIC).</p></div> -</div> - -<p>In the east wall of this transept are two fragments of very ancient -Celtic slabs. The more important of the two is to Bishop Abraham, and -was found in 1891 in the east wall of the ante-chapel.<a name="FNanchor_88_88" id="FNanchor_88_88"></a><a href="#Footnote_88_88" class="fnanchor">[88]</a> It is -inscribed with curious characters:</p> - -<div class="poetry"> -<div class="poem"><div class="stanza"> -<span class="i0">PONTIFICIS ABRAHAM FILII HIC HED[OM] T ISAC QUIESCUNT.<br /></span> -</div></div> -</div> - -<p>A very fine interlacing Celtic cross springing from a root is the -principal attraction of the stone. The uncarven outer circle terminates -at the head with a neat little Maltese cross having an incised border -and a slight depression at the end of each arm. The Greek alpha and -omega appear in the corners, and below are the sacred monograms. Bishop -Abraham (1076-78) was killed when the Northmen pillaged St. David’s in -1078,<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_080" id="page_080"></a>{80}</span> but it is not known in what way his sons were especially gifted -that so fine a memorial should have been erected to their memory.</p> - -<p>Near by is another stone of a similar character of which nothing is -known. In the new Chapter House the back can be seen, but the large -Latin cross with which it is ornamented seems later.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 321px;"> -<a href="images/image42_lg.jpg"> -<img src="images/image42_sml.jpg" width="321" height="326" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a> -<div class="caption"><p>NORTH DOORWAY, NAVE (<i><a href="#page_020">see p. 20</a></i>).</p></div> -</div> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="page_081" id="page_081"></a>{81}</span></p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="page_082" id="page_082"></a>{82}</span></p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 323px;"> -<a href="images/image43_lg.jpg"> -<img src="images/image43_sml.jpg" width="323" height="508" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a> -<div class="caption"><p>THE COLLEGE OF ST. MARY FROM THE S. W.</p> - -<p><i>From an engraving after H. Gastineau.</i></p></div> -</div> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="page_083" id="page_083"></a>{83}</span></p> - -<h2><a name="CHAPTER_IV" id="CHAPTER_IV"></a>CHAPTER IV<br /><br /> -<small>THE PRECINCTS—THE CLOISTERS AND ST. MARY’S COLLEGE</small></h2> - -<p>The College of St. Mary was founded conjointly by John of Gaunt, Duke of -Lancaster, his wife Blanche, and Bishop Adam Houghton in 1377, but it -was endowed solely by the Bishop for the maintenance of a Master and -seven Priest-Fellows, who were bound by a solemn oath to live in strict -obedience to such regulations as the founder thought fit to ordain. The -priests wore the same dress as the vicars-choral, and were under the -control of the Precentor or Treasurer of the cathedral. They were bound -to say the Hours and Masses of Requiem and perform certain services in -the church. Any view from the northern side of the cathedral must -include the graceful proportions of St. Mary’s, and it is surprising how -well these buildings group with those of the cathedral. The cloisters -and the cloister-garth, which separate the two buildings, date from -about the same time as St. Mary’s and doubtless were common to the -members of both foundations. The Early Perpendicular chapel is built on -a large crypt, being quite contiguous to the river Alan, not unlike the -chapel and hall of Magdalene College, Oxford. At the south-east angle -was a Sacristy, with an upper chamber built over the cloisters, which -had alleys to the north, west, and east; the latter running from the -college to the north wall of the transept. As at Hereford, therefore, a -covered way existed between the cathedral and the college.</p> - -<p>To the north of the cloisters was the square occupied by the college; on -the north side of which, again, was the principal entrance. And on the -south side of the square stood the chapel of which we now see the -remains, showing that it must have been a very fine building of its -kind. The elegance of the proportions and subtlety of the detail betray -the hand of a very skilful architect. The dimensions of the chapel are -69 ft. × 23 ft. 9 in. × 45 ft. high. It was lit by three windows in each -side 24 ft. × 9 ft. broad each, and the east window must<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_084" id="page_084"></a>{84}</span> have been a -grand affair, as it occupies the whole of the east wall. The tower is 70 -ft. high, to the north of which are the remains of the Infirmary.<a name="FNanchor_89_89" id="FNanchor_89_89"></a><a href="#Footnote_89_89" class="fnanchor">[89]</a></p> - -<p>The cathedral cloisters, unlike most English cathedrals, never had an -alley next the church, and it is most probable that no cloister existed -before the time of Bishop Houghton.</p> - -<p>But so fragmentary are the remains of the cloister and so complete its -destruction that we will only give a brief outline of its state as -inferred by Freeman, that the visitor may understand the ruins.</p> - -<p>A reference to the plan will best locate the cloister, but it will be -noticed that the massive western buttresses, which take the thrust of -the nave, show traces of the cloister wall. Also the wall-arcade and -vaulting-springers are visible on the south wall of the chapel of St. -Mary’s. The sacristy to the chapel, which has a piscina, was over the -eastern alley, and under this can be seen the lines of four bays of the -cloister and part of a fifth. Apparently the east side of the cloister -was never completed, as the buttresses show no sign of additions; -therefore, although a covered way was obtained between the cathedral and -college, the north door remained as a separate entrance from the -prebendal and other houses.</p> - -<p>The crypt<a name="FNanchor_90_90" id="FNanchor_90_90"></a><a href="#Footnote_90_90" class="fnanchor">[90]</a> on which the chapel stands is roofed with a simple -elliptical barrel-vault and rear arches of small lights cut into it on -the northern side. Below the tower was the cloister entrance, but the -steps up to the chapel have quite disappeared. The landing at the top of -these steps and two bays to the north formed an ante-chamber to the -chapel, and a turret-stair on the northern or garden side led down to -the domestic buildings as well as to a room over the vestibule. This -room had two windows, one of which looked into the chapel, as at St. -Cross. It will thus be seen that there could not have been a west -window.</p> - -<p>The chapel is in four bays, but as the eastern bays were utilised, on -the north by the existing recess for the founder’s tomb and on the south -by the sacristy, there are only three windows. The great east window—as -well as others—was denuded of much ashlar-work and tracery to help in -Nash’s<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_085" id="page_085"></a>{85}</span> extraordinary concoction the west window of the cathedral.<a name="FNanchor_91_91" id="FNanchor_91_91"></a><a href="#Footnote_91_91" class="fnanchor">[91]</a> -This great east window filled up almost the whole of the wall, and must -have been a fine example of the best sort of Perpendicular. Indeed, it -would not be impossible to reconstruct it even now.</p> - -<p>There is a legend (found by Browne Willis in an Elizabeth manuscript) -that Houghton was excommunicated by the Pope Clement, and that he -retaliated by returning the compliment, and further pictorially -displayed the event in stained glass.<a name="FNanchor_92_92" id="FNanchor_92_92"></a><a href="#Footnote_92_92" class="fnanchor">[92]</a> Clement died, however, in -1352, before Houghton was made bishop, but was succeeded by Innocent VI. -The names may thus have got confounded, or the Pope may have been the -Anti-Pope, Robert of Geneva, known at Avignon as Clement VII. Although -the story is of doubtful authenticity it is quite in accord with -Houghton’s vigorous character, being as he was the friend of Chaucer and -John of Gaunt. He also established several ordinances for the diocese, -which shows that he was no mere figure-head. He held the office of -chancellor for two years.<a name="FNanchor_93_93" id="FNanchor_93_93"></a><a href="#Footnote_93_93" class="fnanchor">[93]</a></p> - -<p>The tower of the chapel—the only part yet undescribed—was evidently -designed for a broached spire, as is shown by the squinches within. But -a settlement, owing to the close proximity of the river, evidently not -only prevented further weights being imposed, but caused the south-west -angle buttress to be added which is so prominent (<i>vide</i> p. 82).</p> - -<p>Of the collegiate domestic buildings there only remain a few vaults, -except a single entrance, with a four-centred arch, to the north.</p> - -<h3>THE BISHOP’S PALACE.</h3> - -<p>After crossing a bridge to the north-west of the cathedral we pursue a -most picturesque alley, whence a good view of the tower and north side -is obtained, and shortly, on the left-hand side, we come to the entrance -to the <b>Bishop’s Palace</b>.<a name="FNanchor_94_94" id="FNanchor_94_94"></a><a href="#Footnote_94_94" class="fnanchor">[94]</a></p> - -<p>In the times before Gower (1328-47), who built the whole of this once -magnificent palace, there undoubtedly was some<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_086" id="page_086"></a>{86}</span></p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 516px;"> -<a href="images/image44_lg.jpg"> -<img src="images/image44_sml.jpg" width="516" height="320" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a> -<div class="caption"><p>THE BISHOP’S PALACE, 1779.</p> - -<p><i>From an engraving after Paul Sandby, R.A.</i></p></div> -</div> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="page_087" id="page_087"></a>{87}</span></p> - -<p class="nind">sort of episcopal residence or guest-house, as Kings Henry II. and -Edward I. were here entertained. However, not only is there no trace of -a pre-existent building, but this of Gower is a superb ruin. It is said -that we have to thank the scandalous Bishop Barlow (1536-49) for -initiating the work of destruction, removing, as he did, the lead from -the roofs to provide marriage portions for his daughters who married -five bishops. He also attempted to remove the see to Carmarthen. -“Barlow’s letter to Cromwell on this subject strongly urges the removal, -partly on account of the inconvenient situation and partly because the -hopes of Protestantism rested on getting rid of the <i>religio loci</i>.”<a name="FNanchor_95_95" id="FNanchor_95_95"></a><a href="#Footnote_95_95" class="fnanchor">[95]</a></p> - -<p>“It is hardly necessary to say that many churches, even of inferior -ecclesiastical rank, greatly surpass St. David’s Cathedral in extent and -in positive beauty, though certainly there is none which could so well -occupy its peculiar position; of the Palace, on the other hand, it is -hardly too much to affirm that it is altogether unsurpassed by any -existing English edifice of its own kind. One can hardly conceive any -structure that more completely proclaims its peculiar purpose. It is -essentially a palace and not a castle; we have not here the moat, the -tower, the frowning gateway, or any feature proclaiming, if not an -intention of hostility, at all events a state of things involving the -necessity of defence. The prominent parts are the superb rose-window of -the hall and the graceful spire of the chapel, importing an abode, not -of warfare, but of hospitality and religion.”<a name="FNanchor_96_96" id="FNanchor_96_96"></a><a href="#Footnote_96_96" class="fnanchor">[96]</a></p> - -<p>With all due deference to Messrs. Jones and Freeman, however, the great -arcaded parapet, which is certainly the most noticeable feature of the -building, gives at least a hint that Bishop Gower had an <i>arrière -pensée</i> against defence. As the close was fortified, it was not -necessary to make any elaborate preparations against attack; but it will -be noted that, although there is no moat, the river Alan—then much -larger than now—runs past one side, and that on the others there were -very few windows, and those small; in fact, most of the remainder opens -on to the great quadrangle, which was self-contained. Let us look at it -again from another point of view. Eliminate the parapet, and what do we -find? Truly, except<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_088" id="page_088"></a>{88}</span> for an excellent plan and mere bulk, nothing at all -extraordinary from an architectural point of view.</p> - -<p>A particular description must be given to the <b>Parapet</b>. It consists of a -series of arches, with a hollow ornamented by Gower’s four-leaved -flower, carried down on octagonal shafts, which rest on corbels of -considerable variety about two feet down the wall. Above the arcade is a -corbel-table carrying a projecting battlemented cornice. The battlements -have extremely narrow embrasures and loopholes. The sills of the arcade -are steeply slanted outwards, and the jambs show the old shape of the -roof and finish with a neat weathered projection. Great richness is -obtained above the arcade from the various coloured stones employed. -They are set in squares, alternately purple and grey, in the voussoirs -of the arches and the spandrils above them, and make a mellow and -harmonious chequer-work which greatly adds to the character of the whole -building.</p> - -<p>A similar parapet is only known to occur in two other buildings (also -attributed to Gower), viz., Swansea Castle and Lamphey Palace, near -Pembroke.</p> - -<p>We can place the date of the building about 1340, as an ordinance by -Bishop Gower, dated May 27, 1342, orders that only certain buildings -belonging to the bishop be kept in repair,<a name="FNanchor_97_97" id="FNanchor_97_97"></a><a href="#Footnote_97_97" class="fnanchor">[97]</a> which includes the -palace. Architecturally, the arrangements are excellent. The leading -idea is a great quadrangle, but so skilfully broken up with projections -that the monotonous rectangular effect of the square gives place to a -most pleasing and picturesque variety, and although the main portion is -kept about the same height throughout, yet the most dignified chambers -are given due prominence and the parts of lesser importance treated with -a fit reticence.</p> - -<p>The building is raised on crypts, which, however, were evidently used -for domestic offices from the windows (once glazed) and the divisions. -The vaults are of the plain barrel description, without ribs, although -there are some which rather suggest ribs. These vaults do not run -longitudinally, as under St. Mary’s Chapel or, indeed, the chapel in the -palace; the reason being that divisions, for living purposes, were -necessary on both floors.</p> - -<p>On entering the quadrangle, which is about 170 feet square,<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_089" id="page_089"></a>{89}</span> we find a -small building immediately to the left which many call the <b>East Chapel</b>. -The West Chapel (K)<a name="FNanchor_98_98" id="FNanchor_98_98"></a><a href="#Footnote_98_98" class="fnanchor">[98]</a> was probably not built till later, and then -probably this little one became the Bishop’s private chapel. There are -indications of a way through to the ante-room adjoining in the -south-west wall, and a passage also leads to the lower floor.</p> - -<p>The <b>Bishop’s Hall</b> (I, about 60 ft. by 23 ft.) is approached from the -quadrangle by seven modern steps and a porch with a semi-octagonal arch. -The point of the octagon is at the centre of the opening, and resembles -that leading to the rood-loft in the cathedral. The small window in the -porch has two five-foil lights.</p> - -<p>The Hall was lit by two windows to the north-west and four to the -south-east. Possibly the recess, which cuts into the window at the south -angle, may have contained the refectory pulpit, and behind it was a -passage and stair leading to the minstrels’ gallery.</p> - -<p>There was a diagonal entrance (just above the head of the I on plan) -leading from the Bishop’s Hall to his <b>Study</b> or private apartment. Just -by this entrance there is also a way down. There are two fireplaces and -chimneys, and as there are indications of a divisional wall there were -probably two rooms, the further of which has a blocked doorway and may -have been utilised before the main entrance was built. H is the -<i>Kitchen</i> (about 26 ft. by 23 ft.), to the west end of the Bishop’s -Hall. This room is very interesting, as it was evidently domed, and -later a wall had to be built to support it. The chimney, which was -standing in 1857 when Messrs. Jones and Freeman published their book, is -now lying in a mass on the floor. As this is a good object lesson to the -modern flimsy designers of to-day, the dimensions will not be without -interest: flues, 1 ft. 11 in.; outer walls, 1 ft. 3 in., inner, 1 ft.</p> - -<div class="figright" style="width: 94px;"> -<a href="images/image45_lg.jpg"> -<img src="images/image45_sml.jpg" width="94" height="59" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a> -<div class="caption"><p>SECTION OF CHIMNEY.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>On the northern side of the kitchen was an aisle leading behind the -Great Hall, and so out to the garden.</p> - -<p><b>The Great Hall</b> is approached from the quadrangle by a fine porch, richly -adorned and of the whole height of the building. The entrance is an -unusual one at so early a period.<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_090" id="page_090"></a>{90}</span></p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 517px;"> -<a href="images/image46_lg.jpg"> -<img src="images/image46_sml.jpg" width="517" height="325" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a> -<div class="caption"><p>BISHOP’S PALACE: GREAT WHEEL-WINDOW OF BANQUETING HALL.</p></div> -</div> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="page_091" id="page_091"></a>{91}</span></p> - -<p>It is about 9 ft. wide by 11 ft. 6 in. high, and has an ogee six-centred -arch, but the flight of steps are somewhat inconvenient, as the tread is -about fourteen inches and the rise about eleven and a half. Above were -two niches containing statues of King Edward III. and Queen Philippa. -Fragments of one remain now, but where is the other? It seems sad that -this should have disappeared within the last few years.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 319px;"> -<a href="images/image47_lg.jpg"> -<img src="images/image47_sml.jpg" width="319" height="211" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a> -<div class="caption"><p>BISHOP’S PALACE: GENERAL VIEW OF COURTYARD LOOKING -TOWARDS ENTRANCE TO GREAT HALL.</p> - -<p>(<i>From Jones and Freeman.</i>)</p></div> -</div> - -<p>The Hall itself is a magnificent stately apartment, even unroofed as it -is. It measures 116 feet by 31 feet, but this includes a smaller chamber -of about 30 feet which was originally a withdrawing room. At the south -corner is a staircase (down and up), and another at the east leading to -the turret. A doorway from the kitchen aisle is now blocked. In the -south-east wall is an exceptionally beautiful rose-window. The centre is -an upright quatrefoil, and at the cardinal points radiate four strong -mullions, and in between each of these are three lesser ones. The heads -are of the trefoil kind. The inner circle is not concentric with<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_092" id="page_092"></a>{92}</span> that -enclosing the tracery, but is dropped a little to create, as was often -done in these circular windows, an optical delusion. Thus the splay at -the top is considerably less than at the bottom, but <i>looks</i> about the -same. Gower’s four-leaved flower is again in evidence in the hollow at -the outside edge of the splay. Bedrooms in two floors occupied the -western end of the hall.</p> - -<p>The <b>West Chapel</b> is entered from the northern corner of the hall, and -projects from the main building. There must have been a fine window to -the east judging by its proportions, and it has niches with canopies -outside. A large arched piscina can be seen on the south wall inside, -and at the east corner a double-bodied grotesque. In the north-east -angle is the belfry turret, which terminates in a very pleasing broached -spire; but the porch, which occupied the angle between the chapel and -the domestic buildings, is all destroyed.</p> - -<p>Of the <i>Domestic Buildings</i> to the north-west less remains than of any -other part. The well of the palace is to be seen in a crypt, and a fine -example of a stone chimney-place with brackets, like the one in the -library of the cathedral, is also worthy of notice. The northern side -was probably used for stables, and the foundations for the enclosing -wall on the north-east side can still be traced.</p> - -<p>In conclusion, it must be remembered that the very high regard in which -St. David’s was held as a pilgrims’ haven, particularly in the -fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, and that the Bishop was bound to -entertain all who came, necessitated a very large guest-house, and here, -indeed, was one which was deemed worthy of the attention even of royalty -on many occasions.<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_093" id="page_093"></a>{93}</span></p> - -<h2><a name="APPENDIX_I" id="APPENDIX_I"></a>APPENDIX I.</h2> - -<p class="c">BISHOPS OF ST. DAVID’S.<a name="FNanchor_99_99" id="FNanchor_99_99"></a><a href="#Footnote_99_99" class="fnanchor">[99]</a></p> - -<table border="0" cellpadding="1" cellspacing="0" summary=""> - -<tr><td>[601]</td><td>David</td></tr> -<tr><td></td><td>Cynog</td></tr> -<tr><td></td><td>Teilo</td></tr> -<tr><td></td><td>Ceneu</td></tr> -<tr><td></td><td>Morfael</td></tr> -<tr><td></td><td>Haerwnen</td></tr> -<tr><td></td><td>Elwaed</td></tr> -<tr><td></td><td>Gwrnwen</td></tr> -<tr><td></td><td>Llunwerth</td></tr> -<tr><td></td><td>Gwrgwyst</td></tr> -<tr><td></td><td>Gwgan</td></tr> -<tr><td></td><td>Clydawg</td></tr> -<tr><td></td><td>Eineon</td></tr> -<tr><td></td><td>Elfod</td></tr> -<tr><td></td><td>Ethelman</td></tr> -<tr><td></td><td>Elanc</td></tr> -<tr><td></td><td>Maelsgwd</td></tr> -<tr><td>[831]</td><td>Sadurnfen</td></tr> -<tr><td></td><td>Cadell</td></tr> -<tr><td></td><td>Sulhaithnay</td></tr> -<tr><td>840.</td><td>Novis</td></tr> -<tr><td></td><td>Idwal</td></tr> -<tr><td></td><td>Asser</td></tr> -<tr><td></td><td>Arthwael</td></tr> -<tr><td></td><td>Samson</td></tr> -<tr><td></td><td>Ruelin</td></tr> -<tr><td>[961]</td><td>Rhydderch</td></tr> -<tr><td></td><td>Elwin</td></tr> -<tr><td></td><td>Morbiw</td></tr> -<tr><td>873.</td><td>Llunwerth</td></tr> -<tr><td>944.</td><td>Eneuris</td></tr> -<tr><td></td><td>Hubert</td></tr> -<tr><td></td><td>Ivor</td></tr> -<tr><td>[999]</td><td>Morgeneu</td></tr> -<tr><td></td><td>Nathan</td></tr> -<tr><td></td><td>Ieuan</td></tr> -<tr><td></td><td>Arwystl</td></tr> -<tr><td>[1023]</td><td>Morgeneu</td></tr> -<tr><td>1023.</td><td>Ervin</td></tr> -<tr><td>1039.</td><td>Trahaearn</td></tr> -<tr><td>[1061]</td><td>Joseph</td></tr> -<tr><td>1061.</td><td>Bleiddud</td></tr> -<tr><td>1071.</td><td>Sulien</td></tr> -<tr><td>1076.</td><td>Abraham</td></tr> -<tr><td>1078.</td><td>Sulien (again)</td></tr> -<tr><td>1088.</td><td>Rhyddmarch</td></tr> -<tr><td>1096.</td><td>Griffri</td></tr> -<tr><td>1115.</td><td>Bernard</td></tr> -<tr><td>1147.</td><td>David Fitz-Gerald</td></tr> -<tr><td>1176.</td><td>Peter de Leiâ</td></tr> -<tr><td>1204.</td><td>Geoffrey de Henelawe</td></tr> -<tr><td>1215.</td><td>Iorwerth, alias Gervase</td></tr> -<tr><td>1230.</td><td>Anselm de la Grace</td></tr> -<tr><td>1284.</td><td>Thomas Wallensis</td></tr> -<tr><td>1256.</td><td>Richard de Carew</td></tr> -<tr><td>1280.</td><td>Thomas Beck</td></tr> -<tr><td>1293.</td><td>David Martyn</td></tr> -<tr><td>1328.</td><td>Henry de Gower</td></tr> -<tr><td>1347.</td><td>John Thoresby</td></tr> -<tr><td>1350.</td><td>Reginald Brian<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_094" id="page_094"></a>{94}</span></td></tr> -<tr><td>1353.</td><td>Thomas Fastolfe</td></tr> -<tr><td>1361.</td><td>Adam Houghton</td></tr> -<tr><td>1389.</td><td>John Gilbert</td></tr> -<tr><td>1397.</td><td>Guy Mone</td></tr> -<tr><td>1408.</td><td>Henry Chicheley</td></tr> -<tr><td>1414.</td><td>John Catterick</td></tr> -<tr><td>1415.</td><td>Stephen Patrington</td></tr> -<tr><td>1418.</td><td>Benedict Nicholls</td></tr> -<tr><td>1433.</td><td>Thomas Rodburne</td></tr> -<tr><td>1442.</td><td>William Lyndwood</td></tr> -<tr><td>1447.</td><td>John Langton</td></tr> -<tr><td>1447.</td><td>John Delabere</td></tr> -<tr><td>1460.</td><td>Robert Tully</td></tr> -<tr><td>1482.</td><td>Richard Martin</td></tr> -<tr><td>1483.</td><td>Thomas Langton</td></tr> -<tr><td>1485.</td><td>Hugh Pavy</td></tr> -<tr><td>1496.</td><td>John Morgan</td></tr> -<tr><td>1505.</td><td>Robert Sherborne</td></tr> -<tr><td>1509.</td><td>Edward Vaughan</td></tr> -<tr><td>1523.</td><td>Richard Rawlins</td></tr> -<tr><td>1536.</td><td>William Barlow</td></tr> -<tr><td>1548.</td><td>Robert Ferrar</td></tr> -<tr><td>1554.</td><td>Henry Morgan</td></tr> -<tr><td>1559.</td><td>Thomas Young</td></tr> -<tr><td>1561.</td><td>Richard Davies</td></tr> -<tr><td>1582.</td><td>Marmaduke Middleton</td></tr> -<tr><td>1594.</td><td>Anthony Rudd</td></tr> -<tr><td>1615.</td><td>Richard Milbourne</td></tr> -<tr><td>1621.</td><td>William Laud</td></tr> -<tr><td>1627.</td><td>Theophilus Field</td></tr> -<tr><td>1635.</td><td>Roger Mainwaring</td></tr> -<tr><td>1660.</td><td>William Lucy</td></tr> -<tr><td>1677.</td><td>William Thomas</td></tr> -<tr><td>1683.</td><td>Laurence Wornack</td></tr> -<tr><td>1686.</td><td>John Lloyd</td></tr> -<tr><td>1687.</td><td>Thomas Watson</td></tr> -<tr><td>1705.</td><td>George Bull</td></tr> -<tr><td>1710.</td><td>Philip Bisse</td></tr> -<tr><td>1713.</td><td>Adam Ottley</td></tr> -<tr><td>1723.</td><td>Richard Smallbrooke</td></tr> -<tr><td>1730.</td><td>Elias Sydall</td></tr> -<tr><td>1731.</td><td>Nicholas Claggett</td></tr> -<tr><td>1742.</td><td>Edward Willes</td></tr> -<tr><td>1743.</td><td>Hon. Richard Trevor</td></tr> -<tr><td>1752.</td><td>Anthony Ellis</td></tr> -<tr><td>1761.</td><td>Samuel Squire</td></tr> -<tr><td>1766.</td><td>Robert Lowth</td></tr> -<tr><td>1766.</td><td>Charles Moss</td></tr> -<tr><td>1774.</td><td>Hon. James Yorke</td></tr> -<tr><td>1779.</td><td>John Warren</td></tr> -<tr><td>1783.</td><td>Edward Smallwell</td></tr> -<tr><td>1788.</td><td>Samuel Horsley</td></tr> -<tr><td>1793.</td><td>Hon. William Stuart</td></tr> -<tr><td>1800.</td><td>Lord George Murray</td></tr> -<tr><td>1803.</td><td>Thomas Burgess</td></tr> -<tr><td>1825.</td><td>John Banks Jenkinson</td></tr> -<tr><td>1840.</td><td>Connop Thirlwall</td></tr> -<tr><td>1874.</td><td>Basil Jones</td></tr> -<tr><td> </td><td>John Owen</td></tr> -</table> - -<p class="c">PRECENTORS<a name="FNanchor_100_100" id="FNanchor_100_100"></a><a href="#Footnote_100_100" class="fnanchor">[100]</a> (DEANS FROM 1840).</p> - -<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" summary=""> - -<tr><td>1224.</td><td>Richard</td></tr> -<tr><td></td><td>W——</td></tr> -<tr><td>[1237]</td><td>Philip</td></tr> -<tr><td>[1254]</td><td>Richard Pue</td></tr> -<tr><td>[1287]</td><td>John de Swinssey</td></tr> -<tr><td>[1300]</td><td>Thomas Barry</td></tr> -<tr><td>1328.</td><td>Richard de Musselwick</td></tr> -<tr><td>[1334]</td><td>David Barret<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_095" id="page_095"></a>{95}</span></td></tr> -<tr><td>1339.</td><td>Adam Houghton</td></tr> -<tr><td>[1352]</td><td>David Ley</td></tr> -<tr><td>[1399]</td><td>John Noke</td></tr> -<tr><td>1413.</td><td>Thomas Wollaston</td></tr> -<tr><td>1437.</td><td>Hugh ab Owen</td></tr> -<tr><td>1486.</td><td>Richard Machen</td></tr> -<tr><td>1492.</td><td>John Howell</td></tr> -<tr><td>1509.</td><td>Lewis ap Rhys</td></tr> -<tr><td>1534.</td><td>Thomas Lloyd</td></tr> -<tr><td>1547.</td><td>Thomas Young</td></tr> -<tr><td>1554.</td><td>Morgan Phillips</td></tr> -<tr><td>1558.</td><td>Thomas Young</td></tr> -<tr><td>1560.</td><td>Thomas Huett</td></tr> -<tr><td>1591.</td><td>Roger Gyfforde</td></tr> -<tr><td>1596.</td><td>William Hinton</td></tr> -<tr><td>1631.</td><td>Griffith Higgs</td></tr> -<tr><td>1660.</td><td>William Thomas</td></tr> -<tr><td>1663.</td><td>Richard Watson</td></tr> -<tr><td>1677.</td><td>John Ellis</td></tr> -<tr><td>1693.</td><td>Charles Pryse</td></tr> -<tr><td>1696.</td><td>Hugh Powell</td></tr> -<tr><td>1717.</td><td>John Davies</td></tr> -<tr><td>1733.</td><td>John Pember</td></tr> -<tr><td>1735.</td><td>Joseph Hill</td></tr> -<tr><td>1753.</td><td>John Morgan</td></tr> -<tr><td>1774.</td><td>John Jekyll</td></tr> -<tr><td>1777.</td><td>Francis Wollaston</td></tr> -<tr><td>1816.</td><td>Richard Richardson</td></tr> -<tr><td>1839.</td><td>Llewelyn Lewellin (assumed the title of Dean in 1840)</td></tr> -<tr><td>1878.</td><td>James Allen</td></tr> -<tr><td>1897.</td><td>Evan Owen Phillips</td></tr> -<tr><td>1897.</td><td>H. Howell</td></tr> -</table> - -<p class="c">ORGANISTS OF ST. DAVID’S CATHEDRAL.<a name="FNanchor_101_101" id="FNanchor_101_101"></a><a href="#Footnote_101_101" class="fnanchor">[101]</a></p> -<table border="0" cellpadding="1" cellspacing="0" summary=""> - -<tr><td valign="top">Walter Warryn </td><td valign="bottom">1490</td></tr> -<tr><td valign="top">Priest Vicars<a name="FNanchor_102_102" id="FNanchor_102_102"></a><a href="#Footnote_102_102" class="fnanchor">[102]</a> officiated from</td><td valign="bottom">1490-1563</td></tr> -<tr><td valign="top">John Norman</td><td valign="bottom">1509-1522</td></tr> -<tr><td valign="top">Thomas Elliott</td><td valign="bottom">1563-1577</td></tr> -<tr><td valign="top">Priest Vicars officiated in turn</td><td valign="bottom">1577-1713</td></tr> -<tr><td valign="top">R. Mordant</td><td valign="bottom">1713-1714</td></tr> -<tr><td class="padds">(Lay Vicar Choral)</td></tr> -<tr><td valign="top">Henry Mordant</td><td valign="bottom">1714-1719</td></tr> -<tr><td class="padds">(Son of the preceding Lay Vicar Choral)</td></tr> -<tr><td valign="top">Richard Tomkins</td><td valign="bottom">1719-1719</td></tr> -<tr><td class="padds">(Lay Vicar Choral)</td></tr> -<tr><td valign="top">William Bishop</td><td valign="bottom">1719-1720</td></tr> -<tr><td class="padds">(Lay Vicar Choral)</td></tr> -<tr><td valign="top">Henry Williams</td><td valign="bottom">1720-1725</td></tr> -<tr><td valign="top">Matthew Maddox</td><td valign="bottom">1725-1734</td></tr> -<tr><td class="padds">(Lay Vicar Choral)</td></tr> -<tr><td valign="top">Matthew Philpott</td><td valign="bottom">1734-1793</td></tr> -<tr><td class="padds">(Lay Vicar Choral)</td></tr> -<tr><td valign="top">Arthur Richardson</td><td valign="bottom">1793-1826</td></tr> -<tr><td class="padds">(Lay Vicar Choral, also tuner of the organ. Died 1826?)</td></tr> -<tr><td valign="top">John Barrett</td><td valign="bottom">1827-1851</td></tr> -<tr><td class="padds">(Lay Vicar Choral)<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_096" id="page_096"></a>{96}</span></td></tr> -<tr><td valign="top">William Peregrine Propert, LL.D. and M.A., Cantab.;</td></tr> -<tr><td valign="top">Mus.B., Oxon.</td><td valign="bottom">1851-1883</td></tr> -<tr><td class="padds">(A Lay Vicar Choral of the Cathedral. During the restoration of</td></tr> -<tr><td valign="top">the Cathedral, 1864-1883, the organ was not in use)</td></tr> -<tr><td valign="top">Frederick S. Garton</td><td valign="bottom">1883-1894</td></tr> -<tr><td class="padds">(Organist of St. Martin’s, Haverfordwest, 1894)</td></tr> -<tr><td valign="top">D. John D. Codner</td><td valign="bottom">1894-1896</td></tr> -<tr><td class="padds">(Born 1851. Organist of St. Bride’s, Fleet Street, E.C.)</td></tr> -<tr><td valign="top">Herbert C. Morris, F.R.C.O.</td><td valign="bottom">1896</td></tr> -<tr><td class="padds">(Born at Coventry, June 18, 1873)</td></tr> -</table> - -<div class="figcenter"> -<a href="images/image48_lg.jpg"> -<img src="images/image48_sml.png" width="100" height="114" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a> -<div class="caption"><p>GABLE CROSS LYING<br /> -IN BISHOP<br /> -VAUGHAN’S CHAPEL.<br /> -(<a href="#page_067"><i>See</i> p. -67.</a>)</p> -</div> -</div> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="page_097" id="page_097"></a>{97}</span></p> - -<h2><a name="APPENDIX_II" id="APPENDIX_II"></a>APPENDIX II<br /><br /> -<small>EXTRACTS FROM SIR G. G. SCOTT’S REPORT TO THE DEAN AND CHAPTER, 1869</small></h2> - -<p class="nind"><span class="smcap">By</span> reference to my first Report, addressed to the Dean and Chapter in -1862, it will be seen that, while the entire building was reported to be -in a state of the most severe dilapidation, and some portions actually -in ruins, the greatest immediate danger was to be apprehended from the -tower, the crushed condition of two of whose sustaining piers rendered -its fall an event by no means improbable—a catastrophe which would -probably involve the destruction of a large portion of the church.</p> - -<p>Before, therefore, embarking upon any other works of restoration, it was -determined to take immediate measures for the removal of this great -danger, and, while the first contract united with this the restoration -of the choir, the actual work in the first instance undertaken, -excepting only some necessary works of drainage, was limited to this -“article of a standing or a falling church.”</p> - -<p>At the risk of being tedious, I will repeat here a detailed description -of these most dangerous and difficult operations, which I wrote -immediately after their completion, in a private Report to the Bishop:—</p> - -<p>“I do not hesitate to tell you that the operations thus in the main -completed, have caused me the greatest anxiety; for, although it has -been my lot to apply the same process to five other central towers, and -though I have, in each instance, undertaken it not without much -trepidation, I have never met with a case so serious, and involving so -great an amount of apparent and actual danger, as that of your -Cathedral; for not only is the tower far larger and of vastly greater -weight than any other on which I have been called to operate, but its -two western piers were more alarmingly shattered than anything I have -witnessed elsewhere. I take the liberty of quoting the following passage -from my first Report, as showing what were my impressions on this point -after my original survey, and they have been more than verified by the -result:—</p> - -<p>“ ‘The present condition of the tower is in the highest degree alarming, -and till it is restored to a state of security, it is quite useless to -think of any extensive reparation of other parts of the building.</p> - -<p>“ ‘The western piers consist each of two portions, the parts towards the -nave belonging to De Leiâ’s work of the twelfth century, and those -towards the transepts having been added after the catastrophe of 1220. -Of these, the older or western portions are literally, at least so far -as they are open to examination, shattered to fragments, and the same -process has extended itself in a less degree into the later or eastern -parts of each pier; in fact, the only security which the tower has from -actually falling, is the buttressing it sustains from the walls of the -transepts and the nave, though the latter have themselves severely -suffered under the undue pressure thus brought upon them.<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_098" id="page_098"></a>{98}</span></p> - -<p>“ ‘The arch facing the nave is very much injured, and the wall which it -sustains, up to the commencement of the later stages, is utterly -disintegrated, so much so as to render it dangerous very closely to -investigate the defects; and the same state of disintegration extends -itself some feet into the north and south walls, but especially the -former, which is at this point crushed throughout its whole thickness.</p> - -<p>“ ‘It will be seen from what I have stated, that the whole remaining -portion of the first tower is crushed and left at the mercy of the -various walls which abut against, and, so to speak, bolster it up; and -that this terrible failure extends itself to a certain distance into the -later and, in themselves, better constructed portions; in fact, that of -the four supports of the tower, two are sound, and two wholly -untrustworthy.’</p> - -<p>“It will be seen from the above, that the object to be aimed at was -little (if anything) less than the rebuilding from their foundation of -two of the four piers which sustained the tower, each of them bearing a -load of 1,150 tons, which had to be supported by timber shoring during -the operation.</p> - -<p>“Our first work, however, was to take measures for binding together, and -otherwise strengthening the tower itself, so as to avoid the danger of -its becoming fractured, or otherwise injured, during the reconstruction -of its supporting piers; and this was rendered the more necessary by the -disintegrated state of the lower walls immediately resting on the -arches, and the enormous cracks by which the north and south walls were -rent throughout their entire height. This object was attained by the -introduction of permanent iron ties of great strength, at several -different levels, binding all the walls together; by the use of -temporary girders of massive timber-work round the exterior of the -tower, throughout the greater part of its height; and by repairing with -new stone and strong cement many parts of the disintegrated walls.</p> - -<p>“The shoring by which the weight of the western half of the tower has -been temporarily supported is of three descriptions—1st, direct -supports under the western, northern, and southern arches (the two -former consisting of timber framing, and the latter being provided by an -old stone wall, by which the arch was blocked); 2ndly, vertical shores -of immense strength, supporting “needles,” or horizontal masses of -timber, passing through the walls; and 3rdly, by ‘raking’ or inclined -shores abutting against the walls in all directions, and both supporting -weight and preventing lateral motion. All these had to be provided with -firm foundations, having to bear the actual weight of the tower. The -magnitude of the work may be judged of when I mention that, of the six -main supports of the ‘needles,’ two consisted each of <i>nine</i>, and the -others of <i>six</i> full-sized balks of timber, bound together into one mass -by irons, and thus making timber supports, the first 3 feet 6 inches -square, and the others 3 feet 6 inches by 2 feet 4 inches in thickness, -and all of them 36 feet in length. The ‘needles’ are of oak, 2 feet 4 -inches deep and 2 feet 4 inches thick, and shod with wrought iron. The -raking shores are arranged in systematic groups, giving supports at all -heights, from immediately over the piers to nearly the top of the tower.</p> - -<p>“The shoring has required the use of nearly 12,000 cubic feet of timber.</p> - -<p>“The state of the west wall of the tower was rendered alarmingly -apparent by the difficulties encountered in making the holes for the -‘needles.’<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_099" id="page_099"></a>{99}</span></p> - -<p>“Mr. Clear, the Clerk of the Works, and myself, foreseeing some -difficulty, arranged a plan by which, before cutting through the wall, a -sort of tunnel of strong stone should be formed through it, by inserting -the stones, one at a time, in the shattered rubble work, and then -removing the enclosed wall. This was done, with some difficulty, to a -depth of 2 feet from either side, but as the wall is 6 feet thick, there -remained 2 feet in the middle untunnelled, and when the enclosed wall -was attempted to be removed, the middle mass began to pour out like an -avalanche, which was only stopped by the immediate insertion of -sand-bags, and by subsequently running the wall from above with liquid -cement, and thus solidifying the disintegrated rubbish.</p> - -<p>“These systems of supports having been completed, the actual operations -commenced, and for this another and less permanent system of shoring was -requisite. If the main shoring may be compared to the solid masses of an -army, those I am now speaking of may be viewed as the <i>skirmishers</i>. -They consist of needles and props inserted immediately above the part to -be operated on, and supporting a portion of the shattered pier while -that below it was renewed, and as soon as this was effected, a new -needle was inserted above the first one, to make way for the renewal of -another batch, each lower needle being in its turn removed, when that -above it was secured. Besides this, however, endless extemporised -precautions had at every hour to be taken, to provide against -contingencies which were ever arising; blocks of timber inserted under -stones threatening to fall; struts and shields against masses in danger -of bursting; sand-bags, &c., against the rushing out of the avalanches -of rubbish; temporarily running together, with liquid cement, of parts -which, though eventually to be removed, had not yet been reached, and -threatened, if not consolidated, to bury the workmen in their ruins. All -these, and many more precautions, had to be taken to meet the exigencies -of every day and every hour; and when it is considered that each pier -took months to reinstate, that these dangerous operations could not, in -many cases, be suspended day or night, and that the Clerk of the Works -would never leave the spot while any dangerous work was pending, you may -judge of the wearing anxiety which he and others engaged in the work -have undergone.</p> - -<p>“By the process I have thus briefly sketched, the entire piers, -excepting a small central portion, have been rebuilt from their -foundations to their capitals; the new stone-work having to be inserted -a little at a time, has been aided, in all cases, by strong copper -cramps, so as to tie its courses together in their circuit round the -pier.</p> - -<p>“All the stones are laid in strong cement, and all that remains within -of the old work is run together at each course with liquid cement till -it will hold no more. I saw, myself, ten pails full of this material -poured into a single hole.</p> - -<p>“The stone made use of is the purple stone of the neighbouring cliffs, -and closely resembles the old stone, though somewhat harder, and is -worked in a similar manner. Any old stones which are unshattered (of -which I regret to say that but very few were found) have been re-used.</p> - -<p>“I had hoped that the southern pier, which was the second operated upon, -would have proved less dangerous than the northern one, but on a close -examination of it, just before the work on it was commenced, I found<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_100" id="page_100"></a>{100}</span> -that it was really as much shattered as the other had been, and, in -point of fact, was ready to burst at the middle of its height. The Clerk -of the Works, when he reached this point, told me that a cat could walk -in and out of the cracks which intersected the pier!</p> - -<p>“I have been the more minute in describing our operations, and the state -in which we found the old piers to be, because, when such a work is -completed, there is a tendency to forget, or to discredit, the danger -which has been avoided; indeed, to any one who sees the piers as now -reconstructed, it would be impossible to believe that the tower could -have stood on such masses of shattered fragments as those which they -have replaced.”</p> - -<p>At the time that the above description was written the shoring had not -been removed. This has now been the case for several years, and the -piers, I am thankful to say, have sustained the weight perfectly.</p> - -<p>When the crushed substructure had been thus rendered trustworthy, we not -only proceeded with the restoration of the remainder of the choir, which -formed a part of the same contract, but your orders were given to -proceed also with the repairs of the upper portions of the tower, which -were sadly dilapidated, and with the aisles of the choir, one of which -had long been in ruins and roofless, and the other in but little better -condition.</p> - -<div class="poetry"> -<div class="poem"><div class="stanza"> -<span class="i0">(For extract here see <a href="#page_016">pp. 16-19</a>, <i>ante</i>.)<br /></span> -</div></div> -</div> - -<p>I have had to bear some little ridicule for taking down the dead wall, -by which the sides had been heightened, and building it up again. I can -only say that the roof having been of necessity temporarily removed, and -these additions to the walls, being devoid of any character or value of -their own, being a mine of wealth in the debris they contained, I simply -worked them <i>as a mine</i>, and having obtained the treasure which lay -hidden within them, I reconstructed them with their old materials.</p> - -<p>In doing this we discovered the curious eaves-course and gutters of the -original roof, which is of a remarkable construction, and is now exposed -to view with some restoration.</p> - -<p>Among the timbers of the later roof were found portions of that of the -earlier date, shewing that it was perfectly plain, though massive, and -of the cradled form so usual at early periods.</p> - -<p>The design of the early stonework of the eastern arm, apart from its -intrinsic merits, is interesting from the evidences it presents of its -<i>double</i> date, being a union of the original work of Bishop De Leiâ -(begun in 1180) with that resulting from the reparations after the fall -of the tower in 1220. The tower falling eastward would of course destroy -the parts immediately adjoining it, and it would appear that it, by the -fall of its upper portions, must also have reached and damaged the -eastern wall.</p> - -<p>We accordingly find that, while the eastward portions of the side walls -and the lower parts of the east end are of the original date, the -western bays of the sides and the upper parts of the end are of the -later date. This is made very manifest on the south side of the -clerestory by a triforium passage, originally communicating with that in -the south transept, but which was omitted in the reconstructed parts, -thus cutting off the communication.</p> - -<p>Curiously enough, we also find that in the reconstructed portions of the -sides a very marked preparation was commenced for vaulting, which, -however,<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_101" id="page_101"></a>{101}</span> was suspended at a few feet in height, and on one side niches -added just where the groining arches would come; while at the east end -the upper range of windows (as already mentioned) was designed without -reference to vaulting.</p> - -<p>We made a curious discovery in the eastern end, where a walled-up arch -was visible below the cill of the central window in Bishop Vaughan’s -Chapel (formerly the exterior of the end). On opening this we found it -to be a deep recess into the thickness of the wall, at the back of which -are some ornamental crosses of the older period, in the principal of -which (which is very beautiful) the intervals between the arms of the -cross are perforated through into the interior, opening just behind the -high altar, as if to allow a person while kneeling in the external -recess to participate in the services going on within.</p> - -<p>Returning for a moment to the choir roof, I will mention that we have -restored it precisely to its old form, retaining every part not unfitted -by decay. The chief exceptions are the beams, which were hopelessly -decayed, and which were of so great a size as to cause us much -difficulty and delay in obtaining trees of sufficient size to contain -them. They were eventually procured from Radnorshire, Shropshire, -Herefordshire, and the Forest of Dean.</p> - -<p>The old roof was decorated throughout with colour, which has been -carefully restored. The panels had been repainted in the seventeenth -century, in a discordant style; these have been now decorated in a -manner agreeing with the older work.</p> - -<p>The roof contains ancient shields, bearing the arms of Bishop Tully, the -Earl of Richmond, Roderic the Great, Bishop Martin, Owen Poole, -treasurer to the church; the arms of France and England quartered; those -of Edward V., Richard III., and (perhaps) Henry VII., of Rhys ap Tudor -and of Bishop Young. Those which were affixed to the corbels had been -obliterated, and have been supplied by the arms of the present bishop, -dean, canons, and archdeacons, thus marking the period of the -restoration.</p> - -<p>The walls, pillars, arches, &c., of the eastern arm, are now put into a -thorough state of repair; and the beauty of the interior will be greatly -increased by the munificence of the Rev. John Lucy, of Hampton Lucy, in -Warwickshire, who, as a memorial of Bishop Lucy, a member of the ancient -family to which he belongs, has undertaken to fill the upper tier of -windows in the east end with stained glass, and the lower tier (blocked -up by Bishop Vaughan’s Chapel) with Venetian enamel mosaic work, the -opaque co-relative of stained glass, though a much more costly form of -art. This will give to these noble lancets just the relief and beauty -which they had lost when deprived of their light, and that in a form -more unique and striking than stained glass itself. I had in my first -report suggested for these blank windows that “possibly some more -durable kind of decoration (than painting) may be introduced,” and Mr. -Lucy’s benefaction precisely meets the want.<a name="FNanchor_103_103" id="FNanchor_103_103"></a><a href="#Footnote_103_103" class="fnanchor">[103]</a></p> - -<p>The aisles of the eastern arm, which owing to their ruined condition had -been walled off, have now been opened out and brought back to a perfect -state, which of course brings out the beauty of the interior in a very -marked degree. In opening the second arch from the east the old sedilia<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_102" id="page_102"></a>{102}</span> -were found. They are of wood, and of the fifteenth century. These have -been carefully restored. The piscina, which occupied the south-eastern -arch, is too ruined for its design to be recovered, though I think that -a beautiful basin dug up in the churchyard must have belonged to it. -Three arches on the north side are occupied by ancient tombs (including -the substructure of St. David’s shrine). These are a good deal ruined, -and must be in some degree restored. The tombs similarly placed in the -northern arch of the tower, and which had to be removed for the repairs, -have been carefully replaced.</p> - -<p>The aisles of the choir have been twice prepared for vaulting, first in -the original structure, and again when the aisles were widened, and the -walls raised and remodelled, by Bishop Gower. I doubt whether in either -case it was carried out, as I could find no evidences of it on the inner -side, and after some perplexity I determined not to attempt it, but to -cover them with handsome oak roofs, suited in character to Bishop -Gower’s work.</p> - -<p>The windows were in a most ruined condition. We found on the north side -evidences of the old form of their tracery, which we have followed. -Those of the south aisle had no remains of the tracery left, and even -the jambs were so shattered that it was only by a fragment here and -there that the mouldings were recovered. These were found to be -curiously varied, out of four windows two only being alike. The tracery -introduced has been founded on fragmentary evidences from other parts of -the church of the same date.</p> - -<p>One thing caused us a little puzzle: we found the remains of windows in -<i>all four bays</i>, though the westernmost of them would be blocked up by -the eastern aisle of the transept. On close scrutiny, however, we found -that the place of this aisle was at first only occupied by a single -chapel,<a name="FNanchor_104_104" id="FNanchor_104_104"></a><a href="#Footnote_104_104" class="fnanchor">[104]</a> with a space between it and the aisle of the choir, which -had been at a later period built over, so as to form the aisle which -stopped the window in question. This we have restored to its older form, -at the same time repairing the adjoining stair turret of the transept, -which was in a dangerous state.</p> - -<p>I will now return to the space beneath the tower, which in this church -is the <i>choir</i> proper, as containing the stalls; the eastern arm of the -church being more correctly the <i>presbytery</i>.</p> - -<p>The great engineering works already described necessitated the temporary -removal of the stalls. They have subsequently been restored to their old -position, and have undergone a most careful process of reparation. On -close examination they were found to have been deprived of many of the -more delicate of their decorative details. These have been or still are -in process of being restored from fragments, more or less extensive, -which have been discovered; the greatest care being taken to preserve -the ancient work as nearly untouched as is possible. The whole is a very -excellent and interesting specimen of ancient woodwork, and retains -traces of coloured decoration, including some armorial bearings.</p> - -<p>The same process of careful reparation has been applied to the Bishop’s -throne, and the unique screen, which severs the choir proper from the -presbytery, neither of which have been moved from their positions, but<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_103" id="page_103"></a>{103}</span> -have been repaired as they stood. The similarity of the panels of the -lower parts of the screen and the throne, show them to be practically -one work. I suppose their date to be late in the fourteenth or early in -the fifteenth century. Both are very curious and valuable ancient works. -I am aware that the conservative manner in which they have been dealt -with has provoked some criticism from those who undervalue these relics -of ancient workmanship. For myself, I do not hesitate to express my high -satisfaction at the manner in which they have been both preserved and -restored; and I trust that the hand of spoliation and innovation will -never be permitted to tamper with the works I have thus endeavoured to -hand down in their integrity to future generations.</p> - -<div class="poetry"> -<div class="poem"><div class="stanza"> -<span class="i0">(For extract here see <a href="#page_030">pp. 30-32</a>, <i>ante</i>.)<br /></span> -</div></div> -</div> - -<p>One thing I will mention which stands, I think, alone, as a deliberate -deviation on my part from the old work.</p> - -<p>Bishop Gower, in building the middle stage of the tower, had made it -form a fine lantern storey to the choir. Late in the fifteenth or early -in the sixteenth century, wooden groining had been introduced, which, -strangely enough, cut Gower’s lantern windows in two, entirely hiding -their traceried heads. I have done away with this desight, by lifting -the wood groining a stage higher, so as to show Gower’s windows in their -integrity, which forms the lantern into a very fine feature. I trust -that, as regards the general principle of <i>conservative restoration</i>, -this exception will be accepted as one of the class which <i>proves the -rule</i>. The wood groining was decorated with colour, and has been -repainted.</p> - -<p class="dottsp">. . . .</p> - -<p>Since the date of the last Report the works have been proceeding. The -restoration of the roofs of the nave and south aisle with their ceilings -has been accomplished. The clerestory of the nave has been fully -restored externally and internally; some of its windows which had been -walled up have been opened out, and the whole of them have been -reglazed.</p> - -<p>In carrying out this portion of the work it was found that the parapets -had been corbelled in the same manner as those of the presbytery, -although the corbels had been cut off flush with the face of the wall. -Fortunately in a sheltered corner next the tower two or three of the -corbels remained in a perfect state; these have been the guide in the -restoration. The parapet was probably of less height originally, but the -position of the sixteenth century roof would not allow of the height -being kept lower than at present.</p> - -<p>The ceiling of the south aisle, which until lately was open, showing the -rough timbers above, has been panelled in completion of the ancient -design. The parapet and pinnacles have also been repaired.</p> - -<p>The walls internally of the nave and south aisle and the piers and -arches have been cleaned, restored, and pointed.</p> - -<p>The north transept has been groined in oak, carrying out the design -which had been commenced in stone. The modern roof, which was truncated -and of very slight timbers, has been strengthened, and the pitch carried -up to fit the fifteenth century gable. The ruined pinnacle at the -north-west angle has been completed.</p> - -<p>Whilst speaking of this transept, it will be well to call attention to -the doorway on the western side, which was originally of considerable -width,<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_104" id="page_104"></a>{104}</span> but at a period very shortly after its erection was narrowed, -the later jamb with its shaft, cap, and base being precisely like the -original jamb which remains built up in the wall; and at a still later -period the doorway appears to have been walled up to form a recess, in -which was placed a hollowed stone sink with a stone shoot projecting -through the wall.</p> - -<p>The roofs of Bishop Vaughan’s Chapel and of the cross aisle eastward -(page 6) have been thoroughly repaired and releaded.</p> - -<p>The works now in progress (July, 1873) are the reparation of the roof of -the north aisle of the nave and the restoration of the upper part of the -Chapter-house building. The windows in the north aisle, two of which -have lost their tracery, are being restored, and the walls internally -will be cleaned.</p> - -<p>The modern roof of the Chapter-house building, which has for years been -in a very unsafe condition, is now being removed, and will be replaced -by a new roof covered with lead. The walls, &c., of the upper part of -the building will be restored as far down as the floor of the -Chapter-house. This will include the completion of the triangular window -in the gable, and the windows in the north side of the uppermost storey -or “Treasury.” The window in the north wall of the Chapter-house has -enough of its tracery remaining to enable the design to be completed -with certainty, and will be restored. The pinnacles flanking the eastern -gable, which are of very curious design, will be completed.</p> - -<p>The cost of these works on the Chapter-house building is being defrayed -by one of the Canons Residentiary, to whose liberality the new roof and -groined ceiling of the north transept, and the renewal of the roofs of -Bishop Vaughan’s Chapel, and of the adjacent ante-chapel are also due.</p> - -<p>Now that the substantial repair of the nave with its aisles is so nearly -completed, the nave should without further delay be paved and provided -with fittings for the parochial services.</p> - -<p>The pavement of the north transept should follow, with the restoration -of St. Thomas’s Chapel, stone tracery being substituted for its present -wooden window-frames, and an open screen for the existing partition -between it and the transept.</p> - -<p>The south transept should be dealt with in a similar manner to the -northern one. The unseemly condition of its roof is rendered more -apparent by contrast with the restored roofs and ceilings of other parts -of the church.</p> - -<p>There would still remain the porch, with sundry external repairs to the -north and south aisles. There is also the eastern group of unroofed -chapels, for which some provision should be made, to prevent further -dilapidation to their walls and injury to the delicately wrought tombs -still remaining within them.</p> - -<p>It is unnecessary at present to give estimates for the works enumerated -above, or for the amelioration of the western front.</p> - -<p>The extent to which these very desirable objects will be effected, must -depend on the liberality with which the present appeal is responded to.</p> - -<p>The outlay and liabilities up to the present time are—for the Drainage, -£500; the Tower, with the Presbytery and its Aisles, £15,700; the South -Transept Chapel and Stair Turret, £600; the Nave and its Aisles, £6,500.</p> - -<p class="c"> -CHISWICK PRESS: PRINTED BY CHARLES WHITTINGHAM AND CO.<br /> -TOOKS COURT, CHANCERY LANE, LONDON.<br /> -</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="page_105" id="page_105"></a>{105}</span></p> - -<p class="c"><span class="smcap">Dimensions of the Cathedral.</span></p> - -<table border="0" cellpadding="1" cellspacing="0" summary=""> -<tr><td>Total length (interior)</td><td class="rt">298</td><td class="c">feet.</td></tr> -<tr><td>Length of nave</td><td class="rt">130</td><td class="c">“</td></tr> -<tr><td><span class="ditto">“</span> from crossing to E. wall of choir</td><td class="rt">56</td><td align="left">“</td></tr> -<tr><td>Width of nave and choir</td><td class="rt">68</td><td class="c">“</td></tr> -<tr><td>Length along transept</td><td class="rt">131</td><td class="c">“</td></tr> -<tr><td><span class="ditto">“</span> of crossing (E. to W.)</td><td class="rt">30</td><td class="c">“</td></tr> -<tr><td>Area</td><td class="rt">21,950</td><td class="c">sq. ft.</td></tr> -</table> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="page_106" id="page_106"></a>{106}</span> </p> - -<p><a name="end" id="end"></a></p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 841px;"> -<a href="images/image49_lg.jpg"> -<img src="images/image49_sml.jpg" width="841" height="606" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a> -<div class="caption"> -<p>[<a href="images/image49_lg.jpg">Larger version</a> (150kb)] -[<a href="images/image49_huge.jpg">Largest version</a> (500kb)] -</p> -</div> -</div> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="page_107" id="page_107"></a>{107}</span> </p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="page_108" id="page_108"></a>{108}</span> </p> - -<hr /> - -<p class="chug">Bell’s Cathedral Series.</p> - -<p class="c"><i>Profusely Illustrated. Cloth, crown 8vo, <b>1s. 6d.</b> net each.</i></p> - -<p class="sans">NOW READY.</p> - -<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" summary=""> -<tr><td> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">CANTERBURY. By <span class="smcap">Hartley Withers</span>. 3rd Edition, revised.</span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">CARLISLE. By <span class="smcap">C. K. Eley</span>.</span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">CHESTER. By <span class="smcap">Charles Hiatt</span>. 2nd Edition, revised.</span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">DURHAM. By <span class="smcap">J. E. Bygate</span>, A.R.C.A. 2nd Edition.</span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">EXETER. By <span class="smcap">Percy Addleshaw</span>, B.A. 2nd Edition.</span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">GLOUCESTER. By <span class="smcap">H. J. L. J. Massé</span>, M.A. 2nd Edition.</span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">HEREFORD. By <span class="smcap">A. Hugh Fisher</span>, A. R. E.</span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">LICHFIELD. By <span class="smcap">A. B. Clifton</span>. 2nd Edition, revised.</span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">LINCOLN. By <span class="smcap">A. F. Kendrick</span>, B.A. 2nd Edition, revised.</span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">NORWICH. By <span class="smcap">C. H. B. Quennell</span>. 2nd Edition.</span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">OXFORD. By Rev. <span class="smcap">Percy Dearmer</span>, M.A. 2nd Edition, revised.</span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">PETERBOROUGH. By Rev. <span class="smcap">W. D. Sweeting</span>, M.A. 2nd Edition.</span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">ROCHESTER. By <span class="smcap">G. H. Palmer</span>, B.A. 2nd Edition.</span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">ST. PAUL’S. By Rev. <span class="smcap">Arthur Dimock</span>, M. A. 2nd Edition,</span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">SALISBURY. By <span class="smcap">Gleeson White</span>. 2nd Edition, revised.</span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">SOUTHWELL. By Rev. <span class="smcap">Arthur Dimock</span>, M. A.</span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">WELLS. By Rev. <span class="smcap">Percy Dearmer</span>, M.A. 2nd Edition, revised.</span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">WINCHESTER. By <span class="smcap">P. W. Sergeant</span>. 2nd Edition, revised.</span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">WORCESTER. By <span class="smcap">Edward F. Strange</span>.</span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">YORK. By <span class="smcap">A. Clutton Brock</span>. 2nd Edition, revised.</span><br /> -</td></tr></table> - -<p class="c"><i>Preparing.</i></p> - -<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" summary=""> -<tr><td> -ST. DAVID’S. By <span class="smcap">Philip Robson</span>, A.R.I.B.A.<br /> -CHICHESTER. By <span class="smcap">H. C. Corlette</span>, -A.R.I.B.A.<br /> -RIPON. By <span class="smcap">Cecil Hallet</span>, B.A.<br /> -ELY. By Rev. <span class="smcap">W. D. Sweeting</span>, -M.A.<br /> -ST. ALBANS. By Rev. <span class="smcap">W. D. Sweeting</span>,<br /> - M.A. BRISTOL. By <span class="smcap">H. J. L. J. -Massé</span>, M.A.<br /> - ST. ASAPH’S and BANGOR. By <span class="smcap">P. B. Ironside Bax</span>. -<br /> GLASGOW. By -<span class="smcap">P. Macgregor Chalmers</span>, I.A., F.S.A. (Scot). -</td></tr></table> - -<p class="c"><i>Uniform with above Series. <b>1s. 6d.</b> each.</i></p> - -<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" summary=""> -<tr><td> -ST. MARTIN’S CHURCH, CANTERBURY. By Rev. <span class="smcap">Canon Routledge</span>, M.A., F.S.A. -24 Illustrations.<br /> - -BEVERLEY MINSTER. By <span class="smcap">Charles Hiatt</span>. 47 Illustrations.<br /> -WIMBORNE MINSTER AND CHRISTCHURCH PRIORY. By Rev. <span class="smcap">T. Perkins</span>, M.A., -F.R.A.S. 65 Illustrations.<br /> -TEWKESBURY ABBEY AND DEERHURST PRIORY. By <span class="smcap">H. J. L. J. Massé</span>, M.A. 44 -Illustrations.<br /> -WESTMINSTER ABBEY. By <span class="smcap">Charles Hiatt</span>. [<i>Preparing.</i></td></tr> -</table> - -<hr /> - -<p class="c"><big>Bell’s Handbooks to Continental Churches.</big></p> - -<p class="c"><i>Profusely Illustrated. Crown 8vo, Cloth, <b>2s. 6d.</b> each.</i></p> - -<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" summary=""> -<tr><td> -CHARTRES: The Cathedral and Other Churches. By <span class="smcap">H. J. L. J. Massé</span>, M.A. -[<i>Ready.</i><br /> - -ROUEN: The Cathedral and Other Churches. By the Rev. <span class="smcap">T. Perkins</span>, M.A. -[<i>Ready.</i><br /> - -PARIS (NOTRE-DAME). By <span class="smcap">Charles Hiatt</span>. -[<i>Preparing.</i></td></tr> -</table> - -<p class="c"> -LONDON: GEORGE BELL AND SONS,<br /> -YORK STREET, COVENT GARDEN, W.C.<br /> -</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="page_109" id="page_109"></a>{109}</span></p> - -<hr /> - -<p class="cb">Opinions of the Press.</p> - -<p>“For the purpose at which they aim they are admirably done, and there -are few visitants to any of our noble shrines who will not enjoy their -visit the better for being furnished with one of these delightful books, -which can be slipped into the pocket and carried with ease, and is yet -distinct and legible.... A volume such as that on Canterbury is exactly -what we want, and on our next visit we hope to have it with us. It is -thoroughly helpful, and the views of the fair city and its noble -cathedral are beautiful. Both volumes, moreover, will serve more than a -temporary purpose, and are trustworthy as well as delightful.”—<i>Notes -and Queries.</i></p> - -<p>“We have so frequently in these columns urged the want of cheap, -well-illustrated, and well-written handbooks to our cathedrals, to take -the place of the out-of-date publications of local booksellers, that we -are glad to hear that they have been taken in hand by Messrs George Bell -& Sons.”—<i>St. James’s Gazette.</i></p> - -<p>“The volumes are handy in size, moderate in price, well illustrated, and -written in a scholarly spirit. The history of cathedral and city is -intelligently set forth and accompanied by a descriptive survey of the -building in all its detail. The illustrations are copious and well -selected, and the series bids fair to become an indispensable companion -to the cathedral tourist in England.”—<i>Times.</i></p> - -<p>“They are nicely produced in good type, on good paper, and contain -numerous illustrations, are well written, and very cheap. We should -imagine architects and students of architecture will be sure to buy the -series as they appear, for they contain in brief much valuable -information.”—<i>British Architect.</i></p> - -<p>“Bell’s ‘Cathedral Series,’ so admirably edited, is more than a -description of the various English cathedrals. It will be a valuable -historical record, and a work of much service also to the architect. The -illustrations are well selected, and in many cases not mere bald -architectural drawings but reproductions of exquisite stone fancies, -touched in their treatment by and guided by art.”—<i>Star.</i></p> - -<p>“Each of them contains exactly that amount of information which the -intelligent visitor, who is not a specialist, will wish to have. The -disposition of the various parts is judiciously proportioned, and the -style is very readable. The illustrations supply a further important -feature; they are both numerous and good. A series which cannot fail to -be welcomed by all who are interested in the ecclesiastical buildings of -England.”—<i>Glasgow Herald.</i></p> - -<p>“Those who, either for purposes of professional study or for a cultured -recreation, find it expedient to ‘do’ the English cathedrals will -welcome the beginning of Bell’s ‘Cathedral Series.’ This set of books is -an attempt to consult, more closely, and in greater detail than the -usual guide-books do, the needs of visitors to the cathedral towns. The -series cannot but prove markedly successful. In each book a -business-like description is given of the fabric of the church to which -the volume relates, and an interesting history of the relative diocese. -The books are plentifully illustrated, and are thus made attractive as -well as instructive. They cannot but prove welcome to all classes of -readers interested either in English Church history or in ecclesiastical -architecture.”—<i>Scotsman.</i></p> - -<p>“They have nothing in common with the almost invariably wretched local -guides save portability, and their only competitors in the quality and -quantity of their contents are very expensive and mostly rare works, -each of a size that suggests a packing-case rather than a coat-pocket. -The ‘Cathedral Series’ are important compilations concerning history, -architecture, and biography, and quite popular enough for such as take -any sincere interest in their subjects.”—<i>Sketch.</i></p> - -<p class="c"> -LONDON: GEORGE BELL AND SONS<br /> -</p> - -<hr style="width: 45%;" /> - -<div class="footnotes"><p class="cb">FOOTNOTES:</p> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_1_1" id="Footnote_1_1"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_1"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> Jones and Freeman, p. 140.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_2_2" id="Footnote_2_2"></a><a href="#FNanchor_2_2"><span class="label">[2]</span></a> King’s “Handbook to the Cathedrals of Wales” (Murray), -1887, p. 115.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_3_3" id="Footnote_3_3"></a><a href="#FNanchor_3_3"><span class="label">[3]</span></a> Winchester central tower fell 1107; Ely central tower in -1321.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_4_4" id="Footnote_4_4"></a><a href="#FNanchor_4_4"><span class="label">[4]</span></a> J. & F., p. 54.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_5_5" id="Footnote_5_5"></a><a href="#FNanchor_5_5"><span class="label">[5]</span></a> Report, 1869, p. 16.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_6_6" id="Footnote_6_6"></a><a href="#FNanchor_6_6"><span class="label">[6]</span></a> Giraldus, “Vita S. Dav.” Ang. Sac. ii. 634.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_7_7" id="Footnote_7_7"></a><a href="#FNanchor_7_7"><span class="label">[7]</span></a> J. & F., pp. 72-73.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_8_8" id="Footnote_8_8"></a><a href="#FNanchor_8_8"><span class="label">[8]</span></a> King’s “Handbook,” 1887, plan p. 105.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_9_9" id="Footnote_9_9"></a><a href="#FNanchor_9_9"><span class="label">[9]</span></a> J. & F., p. 56.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_10_10" id="Footnote_10_10"></a><a href="#FNanchor_10_10"><span class="label">[10]</span></a> J. & F., p. 161.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_11_11" id="Footnote_11_11"></a><a href="#FNanchor_11_11"><span class="label">[11]</span></a> P. 127.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_12_12" id="Footnote_12_12"></a><a href="#FNanchor_12_12"><span class="label">[12]</span></a> King’s “Handbook,” p. 123.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_13_13" id="Footnote_13_13"></a><a href="#FNanchor_13_13"><span class="label">[13]</span></a> P. 128.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_14_14" id="Footnote_14_14"></a><a href="#FNanchor_14_14"><span class="label">[14]</span></a> Pronounced <i>Dice</i> locally.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_15_15" id="Footnote_15_15"></a><a href="#FNanchor_15_15"><span class="label">[15]</span></a> <i>Vide</i> Scott’s Report, 1869.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_16_16" id="Footnote_16_16"></a><a href="#FNanchor_16_16"><span class="label">[16]</span></a> “El sol pro factura muri in solaris Ste. Cyencis calce & -lapid’ & aliis nēriis ad idem opus pertinent, ut palet per billam inde -examinat, 100<i>s</i>.”—<i>Lib. Comm.</i> vol. i., p. 24.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_17_17" id="Footnote_17_17"></a><a href="#FNanchor_17_17"><span class="label">[17]</span></a> Lib. Com., vol. i., p. 47.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_18_18" id="Footnote_18_18"></a><a href="#FNanchor_18_18"><span class="label">[18]</span></a> “A Survey of the Cathedral Church of St. David’s” (1715), -8vo, London, 1717.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_19_19" id="Footnote_19_19"></a><a href="#FNanchor_19_19"><span class="label">[19]</span></a> Browne Willis, p. 8.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_20_20" id="Footnote_20_20"></a><a href="#FNanchor_20_20"><span class="label">[20]</span></a> J. & F., p. 94.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_21_21" id="Footnote_21_21"></a><a href="#FNanchor_21_21"><span class="label">[21]</span></a> Manby’s “History and Antiquities of the Parish of St. -David’s,” 1801, pp. 20, 30. “Mens. Sac.,” vol. i., p. 23.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_22_22" id="Footnote_22_22"></a><a href="#FNanchor_22_22"><span class="label">[22]</span></a> J. & F., p. 95. “Mens. Sac.,” vol. ii., Appendix, fol. -54.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_23_23" id="Footnote_23_23"></a><a href="#FNanchor_23_23"><span class="label">[23]</span></a> “Mens. Sac.,” vol. i., p. 23.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_24_24" id="Footnote_24_24"></a><a href="#FNanchor_24_24"><span class="label">[24]</span></a> “Guide to St. David’s,” &c., T. J. Bryant, 1896, 12mo, p. -49.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_25_25" id="Footnote_25_25"></a><a href="#FNanchor_25_25"><span class="label">[25]</span></a> King’s “Handbook,” pp. 143, 144.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_26_26" id="Footnote_26_26"></a><a href="#FNanchor_26_26"><span class="label">[26]</span></a> J. & F., p. 163.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_27_27" id="Footnote_27_27"></a><a href="#FNanchor_27_27"><span class="label">[27]</span></a> “Lib. Comm.,” vol. i., p. 15, an. 1490.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_28_28" id="Footnote_28_28"></a><a href="#FNanchor_28_28"><span class="label">[28]</span></a> <i>Vide</i> Appendix.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_29_29" id="Footnote_29_29"></a><a href="#FNanchor_29_29"><span class="label">[29]</span></a> <i>Vide</i> Plan, <i>at end</i>.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_30_30" id="Footnote_30_30"></a><a href="#FNanchor_30_30"><span class="label">[30]</span></a> J. & F., p. 129.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_31_31" id="Footnote_31_31"></a><a href="#FNanchor_31_31"><span class="label">[31]</span></a> “Handbook,” p. 147.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_32_32" id="Footnote_32_32"></a><a href="#FNanchor_32_32"><span class="label">[32]</span></a> J. & F., pp. 84-85.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_33_33" id="Footnote_33_33"></a><a href="#FNanchor_33_33"><span class="label">[33]</span></a> J. & F., p. 65.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_34_34" id="Footnote_34_34"></a><a href="#FNanchor_34_34"><span class="label">[34]</span></a> J. & F., p. 86.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_35_35" id="Footnote_35_35"></a><a href="#FNanchor_35_35"><span class="label">[35]</span></a> 3 & 4 Vic., c. 113, § I. <i>Vide</i> also p. 94.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_36_36" id="Footnote_36_36"></a><a href="#FNanchor_36_36"><span class="label">[36]</span></a> J. & F., p. 105.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_37_37" id="Footnote_37_37"></a><a href="#FNanchor_37_37"><span class="label">[37]</span></a> “Church of Our Fathers,” vol. iii., p. 473.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_38_38" id="Footnote_38_38"></a><a href="#FNanchor_38_38"><span class="label">[38]</span></a> See <i>post</i>, pp. 61, 62.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_39_39" id="Footnote_39_39"></a><a href="#FNanchor_39_39"><span class="label">[39]</span></a> McKenzie Walcott’s “St. David’s,” p. 17, and “Anglia -Sacra,” vol. ii., p. 640.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_40_40" id="Footnote_40_40"></a><a href="#FNanchor_40_40"><span class="label">[40]</span></a> Two other doings by this Pope are worthy of passing notes. -(1) Being a Frenchman, he was the first to make France a traditional -ally of the Roman See. (2) He concluded the celebrated Concordat of -Worms, 1122, by which the rights of the Roman Church in relation to the -Crown were defined.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_41_41" id="Footnote_41_41"></a><a href="#FNanchor_41_41"><span class="label">[41]</span></a> Given as 1079 in “Anglia Sacra,” p. 649.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_42_42" id="Footnote_42_42"></a><a href="#FNanchor_42_42"><span class="label">[42]</span></a> “Brut y Twwysogion, sub annis.” Haddan and Stubbs, vol. -i., p. 377.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_43_43" id="Footnote_43_43"></a><a href="#FNanchor_43_43"><span class="label">[43]</span></a> “Anglia Sacra,” p. 651: “Annales Cambriæ,” in ann. 1284.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_44_44" id="Footnote_44_44"></a><a href="#FNanchor_44_44"><span class="label">[44]</span></a> “St. Justinianus martir 5 die decembris in vigilia Sancti -Nicholai; jacet in capella in ecclesia Sancti David sub ejus tumba, -confessor Sancti David.”—Itinerarium <i>Willielmi de Worcestre</i> (Nasmyth, -1778, p. 164).</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_45_45" id="Footnote_45_45"></a><a href="#FNanchor_45_45"><span class="label">[45]</span></a> “Anno MLXXXVI. Scrinium Sancti David de Ecclesiâ suâ -furator, & juxta civitatem ex toto spoliator.”—<i>Anglia Sacra</i>, vol. -ii., p. 649.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_46_46" id="Footnote_46_46"></a><a href="#FNanchor_46_46"><span class="label">[46]</span></a> Gale, “Scriptores,” vol. xv., p. 299.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_47_47" id="Footnote_47_47"></a><a href="#FNanchor_47_47"><span class="label">[47]</span></a> “Anno MCCLXXV. Incœptum fuit Feretrum Beati David in -Ecclesiâ Menevensi.”—<i>An. Sac.</i>, p 651.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_48_48" id="Footnote_48_48"></a><a href="#FNanchor_48_48"><span class="label">[48]</span></a> “Mens. Sac.,” vol. i, pp. 255-257.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_49_49" id="Footnote_49_49"></a><a href="#FNanchor_49_49"><span class="label">[49]</span></a> “Lib. Stat.,” p. 299.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_50_50" id="Footnote_50_50"></a><a href="#FNanchor_50_50"><span class="label">[50]</span></a> “Browne Willis’ Survey,” pp. 54-55. and 69.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_51_51" id="Footnote_51_51"></a><a href="#FNanchor_51_51"><span class="label">[51]</span></a> J. & F., p. 105.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_52_52" id="Footnote_52_52"></a><a href="#FNanchor_52_52"><span class="label">[52]</span></a> “Lib. Stat.,” p. 24.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_53_53" id="Footnote_53_53"></a><a href="#FNanchor_53_53"><span class="label">[53]</span></a> Removed from the back recently. J. & F., p. 103.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_54_54" id="Footnote_54_54"></a><a href="#FNanchor_54_54"><span class="label">[54]</span></a> P. 69.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_55_55" id="Footnote_55_55"></a><a href="#FNanchor_55_55"><span class="label">[55]</span></a> “Anglia Sacra,” vol. ii., p. 547.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_56_56" id="Footnote_56_56"></a><a href="#FNanchor_56_56"><span class="label">[56]</span></a> Fenton’s “Pembroke,” p. 84.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_57_57" id="Footnote_57_57"></a><a href="#FNanchor_57_57"><span class="label">[57]</span></a> Freeman, p. 155. King’s “Handbook,” p. 148.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_58_58" id="Footnote_58_58"></a><a href="#FNanchor_58_58"><span class="label">[58]</span></a> Report, 1869, p. 21.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_59_59" id="Footnote_59_59"></a><a href="#FNanchor_59_59"><span class="label">[59]</span></a> George Owen’s MS. history, see Fenton, p. 98.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_60_60" id="Footnote_60_60"></a><a href="#FNanchor_60_60"><span class="label">[60]</span></a> J. & F., p. 152.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_61_61" id="Footnote_61_61"></a><a href="#FNanchor_61_61"><span class="label">[61]</span></a> J. & F., p. 70.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_62_62" id="Footnote_62_62"></a><a href="#FNanchor_62_62"><span class="label">[62]</span></a> During Scott’s restoration this was subsequently found to -be a recess only (of De Leiâ’s period).</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_63_63" id="Footnote_63_63"></a><a href="#FNanchor_63_63"><span class="label">[63]</span></a> P. 52.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_64_64" id="Footnote_64_64"></a><a href="#FNanchor_64_64"><span class="label">[64]</span></a> Briant, p. 67.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_65_65" id="Footnote_65_65"></a><a href="#FNanchor_65_65"><span class="label">[65]</span></a> J. & F., p. 96.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_66_66" id="Footnote_66_66"></a><a href="#FNanchor_66_66"><span class="label">[66]</span></a> “I take it to be This Bp. who began S. Mary’s Chapel, & -that He lies buried in it on y<sup>e</sup> N. Side, which Tomb is by Mistake -said to be Bp. Houghton’s.” “Mens. Sac.,” vol. i., p. 49. J. & F., p. -121. Fenton, p. 87, <i>note</i>.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_67_67" id="Footnote_67_67"></a><a href="#FNanchor_67_67"><span class="label">[67]</span></a> King, “Handbook,” 1873.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_68_68" id="Footnote_68_68"></a><a href="#FNanchor_68_68"><span class="label">[68]</span></a> On Plan No. 4.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_69_69" id="Footnote_69_69"></a><a href="#FNanchor_69_69"><span class="label">[69]</span></a> Browne Willis, opp. p. 1.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_70_70" id="Footnote_70_70"></a><a href="#FNanchor_70_70"><span class="label">[70]</span></a> J. & F., p. 71.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_71_71" id="Footnote_71_71"></a><a href="#FNanchor_71_71"><span class="label">[71]</span></a> Browne Willis, p. 4.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_72_72" id="Footnote_72_72"></a><a href="#FNanchor_72_72"><span class="label">[72]</span></a> Now wrought iron (<i>vide</i> opposite).</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_73_73" id="Footnote_73_73"></a><a href="#FNanchor_73_73"><span class="label">[73]</span></a> P. 108.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_74_74" id="Footnote_74_74"></a><a href="#FNanchor_74_74"><span class="label">[74]</span></a> Finton, p. 423, gives a similar design.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_75_75" id="Footnote_75_75"></a><a href="#FNanchor_75_75"><span class="label">[75]</span></a> J. & F., p. 159.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_76_76" id="Footnote_76_76"></a><a href="#FNanchor_76_76"><span class="label">[76]</span></a> “Mens. Sac.,” p. 232.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_77_77" id="Footnote_77_77"></a><a href="#FNanchor_77_77"><span class="label">[77]</span></a> <a href="#page_036">See p. 36</a>.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_78_78" id="Footnote_78_78"></a><a href="#FNanchor_78_78"><span class="label">[78]</span></a> Fenton, p. 73.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_79_79" id="Footnote_79_79"></a><a href="#FNanchor_79_79"><span class="label">[79]</span></a> P. 112.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_80_80" id="Footnote_80_80"></a><a href="#FNanchor_80_80"><span class="label">[80]</span></a> J. & F., p. 112, from Browne Willis.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_81_81" id="Footnote_81_81"></a><a href="#FNanchor_81_81"><span class="label">[81]</span></a> “Survey,” p. 12.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_82_82" id="Footnote_82_82"></a><a href="#FNanchor_82_82"><span class="label">[82]</span></a> Pp. 68-69.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_83_83" id="Footnote_83_83"></a><a href="#FNanchor_83_83"><span class="label">[83]</span></a> J. & F., p. 113.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_84_84" id="Footnote_84_84"></a><a href="#FNanchor_84_84"><span class="label">[84]</span></a> J. & F., p. 114.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_85_85" id="Footnote_85_85"></a><a href="#FNanchor_85_85"><span class="label">[85]</span></a> For a learned disquisition on these tombs see Jones and -Freeman, pp. 114-116.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_86_86" id="Footnote_86_86"></a><a href="#FNanchor_86_86"><span class="label">[86]</span></a> Browne Willis, p. 101.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_87_87" id="Footnote_87_87"></a><a href="#FNanchor_87_87"><span class="label">[87]</span></a> J. & F., p. 116.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_88_88" id="Footnote_88_88"></a><a href="#FNanchor_88_88"><span class="label">[88]</span></a> T. J. Briant, p. 54.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_89_89" id="Footnote_89_89"></a><a href="#FNanchor_89_89"><span class="label">[89]</span></a> McKenzie Walcott, p. 16.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_90_90" id="Footnote_90_90"></a><a href="#FNanchor_90_90"><span class="label">[90]</span></a> Formerly a charnel-house (Browne Willis, p. 25).</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_91_91" id="Footnote_91_91"></a><a href="#FNanchor_91_91"><span class="label">[91]</span></a> See plates, pp. 2 and 7.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_92_92" id="Footnote_92_92"></a><a href="#FNanchor_92_92"><span class="label">[92]</span></a> King, 1887, p. 239; Briant, p. 71.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_93_93" id="Footnote_93_93"></a><a href="#FNanchor_93_93"><span class="label">[93]</span></a> <i>Vide</i> Campbell’s “Lives of the Chancellors.”</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_94_94" id="Footnote_94_94"></a><a href="#FNanchor_94_94"><span class="label">[94]</span></a> Reference to the plan on page 10 is here desirable.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_95_95" id="Footnote_95_95"></a><a href="#FNanchor_95_95"><span class="label">[95]</span></a> J. & F., p. 330.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_96_96" id="Footnote_96_96"></a><a href="#FNanchor_96_96"><span class="label">[96]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i>, p. 189.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_97_97" id="Footnote_97_97"></a><a href="#FNanchor_97_97"><span class="label">[97]</span></a> J. & F., p. 190; <i>Lib. Stat.</i>, p. 24.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_98_98" id="Footnote_98_98"></a><a href="#FNanchor_98_98"><span class="label">[98]</span></a> The references are to the plan on p. 10.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_99_99" id="Footnote_99_99"></a><a href="#FNanchor_99_99"><span class="label">[99]</span></a> J. & F., pp. 358, 359.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_100_100" id="Footnote_100_100"></a><a href="#FNanchor_100_100"><span class="label">[100]</span></a> The List of Precentors is from Eardley as far as the -middle of the eighteenth century, from the Cathedral Registers from then -to 1854. Freeman (footnote p. 358) states that the Registers have never -been very carefully kept, but both lists were revised by Le Neve’s -“Fasti” (ed. Hardy); the accuracy of this latter, however, is not very -remarkable.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_101_101" id="Footnote_101_101"></a><a href="#FNanchor_101_101"><span class="label">[101]</span></a> Condensed from pp. 76-77 “Cathedral Organists,” by J. C. -West, 8vo, London, 1899, which was apparently compiled from information -supplied by D. J. D. Codner.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_102_102" id="Footnote_102_102"></a><a href="#FNanchor_102_102"><span class="label">[102]</span></a> “Mens. Sacra.”</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_103_103" id="Footnote_103_103"></a><a href="#FNanchor_103_103"><span class="label">[103]</span></a> The stained glass and mosaics have since been fixed. Mr. -Lucy has also undertaken the repair of the Earl of Richmond’s altar-tomb -in the presbytery.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_104_104" id="Footnote_104_104"></a><a href="#FNanchor_104_104"><span class="label">[104]</span></a> This chapel was added in the fourteenth century, being a -part of Gower’s work. Its extension into an aisle was probably of modern -date. It will be seen that the old base-moulds concealed by that -extension still remain.</p></div> - -</div> - -<hr class="full" /> - - - - - - - -<pre> - - - - - -End of Project Gutenberg's Bell's Cathedrals: St. David's, by Philip A. Robson - -*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK BELL'S CATHEDRALS: ST. DAVID'S *** - -***** This file should be named 52728-h.htm or 52728-h.zip ***** -This and all associated files of various formats will be found in: - http://www.gutenberg.org/5/2/7/2/52728/ - -Produced by Jonathan Ingram, Chuck Greif and the Online -Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net - - -Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions -will be renamed. - -Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no -one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation -(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without -permission and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules, -set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to -copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to -protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark. Project -Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you -charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission. If you -do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the -rules is very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose -such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and -research. They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do -practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks. Redistribution is -subject to the trademark license, especially commercial -redistribution. - - - -*** START: FULL LICENSE *** - -THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE -PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK - -To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free -distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work -(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project -Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at -http://gutenberg.org/license). - - -Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works - -1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to -and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property -(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all -the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy -all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession. -If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the -terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or -entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8. - -1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be -used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who -agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few -things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See -paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement -and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic -works. See paragraph 1.E below. - -1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation" -or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the -collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an -individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are -located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from -copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative -works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg -are removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project -Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by -freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of -this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with -the work. You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by -keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project -Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others. - -1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern -what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in -a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check -the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement -before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or -creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project -Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no representations concerning -the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United -States. - -1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: - -1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate -access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently -whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the -phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project -Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, -copied or distributed: - -This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with -almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or -re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included -with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org/license - -1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived -from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is -posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied -and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees -or charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a work -with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the -work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 -through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the -Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or -1.E.9. - -1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted -with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution -must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional -terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked -to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the -permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work. - -1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm -License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this -work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm. - -1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this -electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without -prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with -active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project -Gutenberg-tm License. - -1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, -compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any -word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or -distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than -"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version -posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org), -you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a -copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon -request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other -form. Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm -License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. - -1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, -performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works -unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing -access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided -that - -- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from - the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method - you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is - owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he - has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the - Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments - must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you - prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax - returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and - sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the - address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to - the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation." - -- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies - you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he - does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm - License. You must require such a user to return or - destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium - and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of - Project Gutenberg-tm works. - -- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any - money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the - electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days - of receipt of the work. - -- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free - distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works. - -1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set -forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from -both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael -Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark. Contact the -Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below. - -1.F. - -1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable -effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread -public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm -collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic -works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain -"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or -corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual -property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a -computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by -your equipment. - -1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right -of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project -Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all -liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal -fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT -LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE -PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE -TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE -LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR -INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH -DAMAGE. - -1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a -defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can -receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a -written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you -received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with -your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with -the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a -refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or entity -providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to -receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy -is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further -opportunities to fix the problem. - -1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth -in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS' WITH NO OTHER -WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO -WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. - -1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied -warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages. -If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the -law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be -interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by -the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any -provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions. - -1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the -trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone -providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance -with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production, -promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works, -harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, -that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do -or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm -work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any -Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause. - - -Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm - -Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of -electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers -including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists -because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from -people in all walks of life. - -Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the -assistance they need, are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's -goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will -remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure -and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations. -To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation -and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 -and the Foundation web page at http://www.pglaf.org. - - -Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive -Foundation - -The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit -501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the -state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal -Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification -number is 64-6221541. Its 501(c)(3) letter is posted at -http://pglaf.org/fundraising. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg -Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent -permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws. - -The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S. -Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered -throughout numerous locations. Its business office is located at -809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email -business@pglaf.org. Email contact links and up to date contact -information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official -page at http://pglaf.org - -For additional contact information: - Dr. Gregory B. Newby - Chief Executive and Director - gbnewby@pglaf.org - - -Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg -Literary Archive Foundation - -Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide -spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of -increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be -freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest -array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations -($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt -status with the IRS. - -The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating -charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United -States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a -considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up -with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations -where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To -SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any -particular state visit http://pglaf.org - -While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we -have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition -against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who -approach us with offers to donate. - -International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make -any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from -outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. - -Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation -methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other -ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. -To donate, please visit: http://pglaf.org/donate - - -Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic -works. - -Professor Michael S. Hart is the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm -concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared -with anyone. For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project -Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support. - - -Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed -editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S. -unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily -keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition. - - -Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility: - - http://www.gutenberg.org - -This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, -including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to -subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. - - -</pre> - -</body> -</html> diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/colophon.png b/old/52728-h/images/colophon.png Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index f9d85e0..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/colophon.png +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/cover.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/cover.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index e0ae66d..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/cover.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/cover_lg.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/cover_lg.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 0372746..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/cover_lg.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image01_lg.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image01_lg.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index f5bb228..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image01_lg.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image01_sml.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image01_sml.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index f76e646..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image01_sml.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image03_lg.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image03_lg.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index b38bbda..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image03_lg.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image03_sml.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image03_sml.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 5ae0c09..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image03_sml.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image04_lg.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image04_lg.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index a868040..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image04_lg.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image04_sml.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image04_sml.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index b6a4630..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image04_sml.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image05_lg.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image05_lg.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 24817e2..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image05_lg.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image05_sml.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image05_sml.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 85a3dbb..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image05_sml.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image06_lg.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image06_lg.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index f23b8a2..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image06_lg.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image06_sml.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image06_sml.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 923a247..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image06_sml.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image07_lg.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image07_lg.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 5fdb09a..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image07_lg.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image07_sml.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image07_sml.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index dbe1609..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image07_sml.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image08_lg.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image08_lg.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 838628e..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image08_lg.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image08_sml.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image08_sml.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index c73fe90..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image08_sml.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image09_lg.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image09_lg.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 53190c9..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image09_lg.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image09_sml.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image09_sml.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 3af7ae0..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image09_sml.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image10_lg.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image10_lg.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index f97e4f1..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image10_lg.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image10_sml.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image10_sml.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 6f01860..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image10_sml.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image11_lg.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image11_lg.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 8e02f7c..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image11_lg.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image11_sml.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image11_sml.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 3d6b040..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image11_sml.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image12_lg.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image12_lg.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index cae5951..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image12_lg.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image12_sml.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image12_sml.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 2a56707..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image12_sml.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image13_lg.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image13_lg.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index ae0e219..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image13_lg.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image13_sml.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image13_sml.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 49ee868..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image13_sml.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image14_lg.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image14_lg.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 2692212..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image14_lg.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image14_sml.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image14_sml.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index e45eb14..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image14_sml.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image15_lg.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image15_lg.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index b6ac7f2..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image15_lg.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image15_sml.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image15_sml.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 1453d6b..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image15_sml.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image16a_lg.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image16a_lg.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index eed2496..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image16a_lg.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image16a_sml.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image16a_sml.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index b5cda28..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image16a_sml.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image16b_lg.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image16b_lg.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index cc1cbcf..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image16b_lg.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image16b_sml.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image16b_sml.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index c443ef8..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image16b_sml.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image17_lg.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image17_lg.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 4aafd09..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image17_lg.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image17_sml.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image17_sml.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 02d34ad..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image17_sml.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image18_lg.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image18_lg.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 0cd81f1..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image18_lg.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image18_sml.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image18_sml.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index cf36735..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image18_sml.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image19_lg.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image19_lg.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 9686970..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image19_lg.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image19_sml.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image19_sml.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index c0f58f0..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image19_sml.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image20_lg.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image20_lg.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 51b9df0..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image20_lg.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image20_sml.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image20_sml.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index c203dc0..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image20_sml.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image21_lg.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image21_lg.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index ad6460c..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image21_lg.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image21_sml.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image21_sml.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 325a4ad..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image21_sml.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image22_lg.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image22_lg.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index bed2e7d..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image22_lg.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image22_sml.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image22_sml.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 57c73c1..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image22_sml.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image23_lg.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image23_lg.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index e676267..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image23_lg.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image23_sml.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image23_sml.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index a17d792..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image23_sml.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image24_lg.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image24_lg.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index da1cda5..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image24_lg.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image24_sml.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image24_sml.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index f59c17a..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image24_sml.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image25_lg.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image25_lg.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 7a1d08c..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image25_lg.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image25_sml.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image25_sml.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 01209f8..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image25_sml.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image26_lg.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image26_lg.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 92fc721..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image26_lg.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image26_sml.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image26_sml.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 032f07b..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image26_sml.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image27_lg.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image27_lg.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 1f4bbc8..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image27_lg.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image27_sml.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image27_sml.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 32140a2..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image27_sml.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image28_lg.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image28_lg.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 28ea513..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image28_lg.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image28_sml.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image28_sml.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index d0a65aa..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image28_sml.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image29_lg.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image29_lg.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 81000ad..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image29_lg.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image29_sml.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image29_sml.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 98f74b5..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image29_sml.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image30_lg.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image30_lg.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index f00ac8d..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image30_lg.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image30_sml.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image30_sml.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 2257ef0..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image30_sml.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image31_lg.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image31_lg.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 9972521..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image31_lg.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image31_sml.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image31_sml.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 85bcc10..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image31_sml.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image32_lg.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image32_lg.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 76f06f4..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image32_lg.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image32_sml.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image32_sml.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 2f7165b..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image32_sml.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image33_lg.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image33_lg.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 7fb4d08..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image33_lg.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image33_sml.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image33_sml.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index d434404..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image33_sml.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image34_lg.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image34_lg.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 8b8f450..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image34_lg.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image34_sml.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image34_sml.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 5f11544..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image34_sml.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image35_lg.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image35_lg.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index bb15c6a..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image35_lg.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image35_sml.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image35_sml.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index d1eea52..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image35_sml.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image36_lg.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image36_lg.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 130734e..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image36_lg.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image36_sml.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image36_sml.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 978c0b7..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image36_sml.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image37_lg.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image37_lg.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 4c48157..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image37_lg.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image37_sml.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image37_sml.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 5319f4a..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image37_sml.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image38_lg.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image38_lg.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index d1b96b7..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image38_lg.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image38_sml.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image38_sml.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 807d665..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image38_sml.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image39_lg.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image39_lg.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 5c61135..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image39_lg.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image39_sml.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image39_sml.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index c273179..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image39_sml.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image40_lg.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image40_lg.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index f325109..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image40_lg.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image40_sml.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image40_sml.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 608e724..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image40_sml.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image41_lg.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image41_lg.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 3d30345..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image41_lg.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image41_sml.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image41_sml.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 03e0f71..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image41_sml.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image42_lg.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image42_lg.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 9d88211..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image42_lg.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image42_sml.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image42_sml.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index fe693a9..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image42_sml.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image43_lg.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image43_lg.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 264bb91..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image43_lg.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image43_sml.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image43_sml.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index f1b2947..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image43_sml.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image44_lg.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image44_lg.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 030a93f..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image44_lg.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image44_sml.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image44_sml.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 359f549..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image44_sml.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image45_lg.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image45_lg.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 614bdd9..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image45_lg.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image45_sml.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image45_sml.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 5b1d779..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image45_sml.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image46_lg.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image46_lg.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 36af66c..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image46_lg.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image46_sml.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image46_sml.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 3eae2f1..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image46_sml.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image47_lg.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image47_lg.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 1b65008..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image47_lg.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image47_sml.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image47_sml.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index e441c60..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image47_sml.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image48_lg.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image48_lg.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index ea70703..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image48_lg.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image48_sml.png b/old/52728-h/images/image48_sml.png Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 0b68f55..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image48_sml.png +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image49_huge.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image49_huge.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 397be1d..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image49_huge.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image49_lg.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image49_lg.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 82f853c..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image49_lg.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/52728-h/images/image49_sml.jpg b/old/52728-h/images/image49_sml.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index a45a2b1..0000000 --- a/old/52728-h/images/image49_sml.jpg +++ /dev/null |
