^ ..• L. • .' 
 
 :-^ '■ 
 
 'T;- ' ,,'U- SJf. V ■;. 
 
 ^ 4^ :y-y ■: N. 
 
 ^ ' ■"■.Sk- ■ :d«bl ' i- I . -«iiKJ 
 
 '2Qfj 
 
 ':r : 
 
 
 : r ■' ^ .''^■<£j^V' 1?® t_ -/■ / ' ••«’ '<■ '"s* 
 
 - -vr^. -..m^Ui.Liy , .^; 
 
 . . ■4^. t • * * * : _ »r ^ ^ t . .Si 7t .2 %S - -fJ*** ml 
 
 - 
 
 -> ,-'. : 
 
 ■#^ 
 
 '" A 
 
 
 
 ' X' ‘> r-^- ’ ■ ^ 
 
 H-* .»_. * >" 
 
 ■T*. " 
 
 4- .: r- . i ‘ '■ 
 
 .--•1 .:- *'F:" • - ^.:r'i^*-'^3fe'v. 
 
 
 
 ^1 
 
 
 
 . '^ '' j; Vr-i^ ■ 
 
 
 
tSfe" ^ V . 
 
 ire 
 
 ?rN 
 
 Xf 
 
 
 
 OlS'ifg/c fee.] 
 
 
 .• ^ 
 
 -*v. >*i 
 
 S^- : :•^ 
 
 '* 
 
 ' V-'' Vtv. j 
 
 - :W'- 
 
 r- -. 
 
 
 
 •'^ (jT . •<'. 
 
 
C- / ! \ ^ 
 
 X- ^ 1 ^ \y ' / 
 
 I>'X / 
 
 P.Ju.\ ' 7 - 
 
 /,/,'/ , ±A. ^ 7 // 
 
 GLEANINGS FROM WESTMINSTER ABBEY 
 

 *'V 
 
nil 
 
GLEANINGS 
 
 FROM 
 
 WESTMINSTER ABBEY, 
 
 BY 
 
 GEORGE GILBERT SCOTT, R.A., E.S.A. 
 
 WITH APPENDICES, SUPPLYING EURTHER PARTICULARS, AND 
 COMPLETING THE HISTORY OE THE ABBEY BUILDINGS, 
 
 BY 
 
 W. BURGES, M.R.I.B.A. 
 J. BURTT, F.S.A. 
 
 G. CORNER, F.S.A. 
 
 W. H. HART, F.S.A. 
 
 J. J. HOWARD, F.S.A. 
 
 REV. T. HUGO, M.A.,F.S.A. 
 J. HUNTER, F.S.A. 
 
 H. MOGFORD, F.S.A. 
 
 J. H. PARKER, F S.A. 
 
 REV. M. WALCOTT, M.A., F.S.A. 
 REV. T. W. WEARE, M.A. 
 
 REV. PROFESSOR WILLIS, M.A. 
 
 lUttstraRb bg nummus anb Sioabtuts. 
 
 I 
 
 ^ ymtirou: 
 
 J. H. AND Jas. PARKER.- 
 
 1861. 
 

 Iprinttb bn J)arktr, Cornmarhtt, ©Horb. 
 
TO THE VERY REVEREND 
 
 RICHARD CHENEVIX TRENCH, D.D , 
 
 DEAN OF WESTMINSTER, 
 
 ®{jis CtoIIcctfon of lEssags, 
 
 TO ILLUSTRATE THE HISTORY OF THE ABBEY, 
 
 IS, WITH HIS KIND PERMISSION, RESPECTFULLY INSCRIBED BY 
 
 THE EDITOR. 
 
ADVERTISEMENT. 
 
 rjlHIS little volume owes its origin to a meeting of the London 
 and Middlesex Archaeological Society, held on the 25th of Oc- 
 tober, 1860, in the Precincts of the Abbey, where the Society were 
 most kindly and cordially received by the Dean and Chapter. On 
 that occasion Mr. ScotPs admirable paper on the architectural his- 
 tory, which he modestly calls Gleanings,’’ was repeated, having 
 previously been delivered to the Institute of British Architects. 
 This paper relates chiefly to the church, with slight notices of the 
 other buildings, and concludes with a suggestion that these notices 
 should be enlarged and more thoroughly worked out. The other 
 papers read upon the same occasion, and which are here added as 
 an Appendix to Mr. Scott’s paper, go a good way to supply the 
 want which he pointed out ; and the few connecting links which 
 were still wanting have since been furnished by the kindness of 
 Mr. Weare and others interested in the subject. The Fabric Roll 
 of 1253 had fortunately been discovered by Mr. Burtt a short time 
 before in the Public Record Ofiice, together with some others of 
 less importance, but not without value, which are included in the 
 Appendix, together with the admirable notes of Professor Willis, 
 explaining the technical terms, and making that generally intel- 
 ligible which without this help was a sealed book to most readers. 
 The authentic accounts of the building of the nave in the fifteenth 
 century, and the circumstance that the celebrated Lord Mayor 
 Whittington was one of the Royal Commissioners, and the one 
 who advanced the money for that purpose on the security of cer- 
 tain dues, as stated in the deed here reprinted, are not entirely 
 new facts in the history of the Abbey, but are certainly not gene- 
 
Till 
 
 ADVERTISEMENT. 
 
 rally known. If the tradition that the King, being unable to repay 
 the large sums advanced by the Lord Mayor, generously burnt 
 the bonds, cannot be exactly authenticated, it may at least pos- 
 sibly be true, as the dates correspond, and the King was certainly 
 hard pressed for money at that time. The particulars respecting 
 the abbot's house, opportunely supplied by Mr. Corner, and the 
 division of it into the Deanery, the College Hall, and the Jeru- 
 salem Chamber, as explained by Mr. Hugo and Mr. Weare, have 
 not previously been made out so clearly. The notice of the Modern 
 Buildings within the Abbey precincts, supplied by the Rev. 
 Mackenzie Walcott, brings down the history of the buildings of 
 Westminster Abbey to the present time. 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 OF THE TIME OF EDWARD THE CONFESSOR. 
 
 Early history of the fabric. Notices of it in William of Malmesbury and Matthew 
 Paris, 1. — In the Lives of Edward the Confessor, 2. — By Sir Christopher Wren, 2. — 
 Dimensions of the early church probably the same as of the present one, 3. — Portions 
 of the Confessor’s work still existing, 3. — Substructure of the dormitory, 4. — Early 
 shaft and capital, 4. — Capitals carved afterwards, 5. — Chapel of the Pyx, 6. — Ilobbery 
 of the king’s treasury in the time of Edward I., 7. — Iron gratings introduced into 
 windows, 7. — Early doorway and window, 8. — St. Catherine’s Chapel, c. 1160, was the 
 Chapel of the Infirmary; remains of, 9. — Hall of the Infirmary, rebuilt by Abbot Lit- 
 llngton, 10. 
 
 THE CHURCH OF THE TIME OF HENRY THE THIRD. 
 
 The existing church, its claims upon our study, 11. — The change of style in France 
 and England: English works of this period, 1195 — 1215, more advanced than French, 
 11. — Windows of the two countries compared, 12. — Plate-tracery, 12. — Bar-tracery, 
 earliest example at Rheims, c. 1240, note, 13. — At N6tre Dame, Paris, and other French 
 examples of about the same date, 13. — The French chevet and radiating chapels, 13. — 
 Amiens the type, 14. — Sketch-book of Wilars de Honecort, 14. — The work at West- 
 minster not French, 14. — The earliest example of bar-tracery in England, 14. — Plans 
 of setting out the chevet^ or apse, and radiating chapels, 15. — The chevet at Westminster, 
 16. — Section of the church different from French examples, 17. — Spaciousness and 
 beauty of the upper story, or triforium gallery, 17. — Tlie flying buttresses resemble 
 French work, 18. — Mathematical proportions of the church, 18. — Richness of internal 
 details, 20. — The triforium arcade and wall arcade, 21. — Arch mouldings, 22. — Rose 
 windows, 23. — Pattern of rose window on a paving-tile, 23. — Other paving-tiles, 23. — 
 W'orks of Henry III., completed in 1269, terminated on the west side of the crossing, or 
 transept, 24. — Works of Edward I., 24. — Clerestory window of choir; and of nave at the 
 juMction, 25. — Beautiful carving of the foliage, 26. — One French carver employed, the 
 rest English, 26. — Figures of angels in the spandrels, 27. — Bosses of the vaulting, 27. 
 — Original details of the exterior all destroyed, 27. — The north porch called Solomon’s 
 Porch, 28. — A central tower originally contemplated, 29. 
 
 Cloisters of Henry III. and Edward I., 29. — The eastern wall of the cloister occu- 
 pies the place of the western aisle of the transept under the triforium gallery, 29. — 
 Part of the cloister built by Abbot Litlington in imitation of the earlier work, 31. — 
 Fine doorway in the cloisters, 31. — Windows of the church and chapter-house, 31. 
 
 b 
 
X 
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 The Chapter-house commenced in 1250, 31. — Originally superior to the one at 
 Salisbury, but dreadfully mutilated, 32. — Used by the House of Commons, 32. — After- 
 wards as a Record Office, 32. — Great beauty of the remains, 33.— The fine central pillar, 
 33. — Stalls of stone, carved and painted, 34. — Vestibule of chapter-house, 35. — Fine 
 pavement of encaustic tiles, 37. — External details destroyed, 37. — Chapel of St. Blaise, 
 or the Old Revestry, 37. — Bridge from the dormitory to the church, 38. — Figure of 
 a female saint painted on the wall, 39. — Staircase to the dormitory, 40. — Space under 
 it long filled with dry rubbish, including old parchment rolls, 40. — Door covered with 
 human skins, 40. — Parchments carefully examined, 41. 
 
 The Cloisters continued and completed by Abbot Byrcheston, 1345 ; Langham, 
 1350; and Litlington, 1366; part pure Decorated, other part early Perpendicular, 42. 
 
 The old Norman nave whitewashed in the time of Edward III., 42. — Rebuilding con- 
 tinued by Abbot Litlington, 42. — Gallery of south transept in which the archives of the 
 church are kept, 43. — Oak chests of the thirteenth century, 43. — Another of the time of 
 Henry VII. contains deeds relating to Henry the Seventh’s chapel, 43. — A wooden 
 chest in the Pyx chamber, 43. 
 
 Documentary evidence extracted from the Records by Mr. Burtt, 44. — Date of 
 chapter-house proved to be 1245 to 1253, the same date as the Sainte Chapelle at Paris, 
 44. — Notices from the Fabric Rolls, 45. — Outlay upon the abbey in the first fifteen 
 years exceede 1 half a million of our money, 45. — Shrine of Edward the Confessor, 46. — 
 Tessellated or mosaic pavement before the altar executed by workmen from Rome under 
 Abbot Ware, about 1267 or 1268, 47. — Tombs of Henry III., &c. enriched with early 
 Italian art, 47. — Retabulum of the high altar, preserved in south aisle, a wonderful 
 work of art, 47. — Tomb of William de Valence, 48. — Tomb and effigy of Queen Eleanor, 
 48. — Tombs of Edward Earl of Lancaster and others, 49. — Architectural character and 
 decorations of these tombs, 49, 50. — Remains of the old stalls, 51. — Conclusion, 52. 
 
 APPENDIX I. 
 
 HENRY THE SEVENTH’S CHAPEL. 
 
 CHIEFLY EXTRACTED FROM BRATLEY’S HISTORY. 
 
 Properly the Lady-chapel, at the same time a mortuary chapel, 53. — The best speci- 
 men of the Tudor style, 53. — Built by the royal gang of workmen, 54. — Explanation of 
 free-masons, 54. — Henry VI. and Henry VII. to some extent architects themselves, 54. 
 — Chiefs of the royal masons, 54. — The present low estimation of the Tudor style un- 
 just, 54. — Fan-tracery vaulting exclusively English, 54. — Holinshed’s account of the 
 foundation of this chapel in 1503; repeated by Stow, 55.— Stone from Huddlestone, 
 Yorkshire, 55. — The will of Henry VII. the best history of the chapel, 55. — Extracts 
 from the will relating this history, 55, 56. — The king’s tomb, 55. — The figure of the 
 king, 56. — The iron grating or railing for the tomb, 56. — Finishing of the chapel, with 
 images, &c., 56.— 500/. paid to the monastery for the work, (equal to nearly 10,000/. 
 of our money,) 56 ; and as much more as might be required to be paid, 58. — Inden- 
 tures between the king and the abbot, 57. — Three of the monks, scholars of Oxford of 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 XI 
 
 the degree of B.D., to say divine service daily, 57 ; under the lantern in the middle of 
 the church, 58. — The building complete to the vaulting before the death of Henry VII., 
 58. — Indenture with Torrigiano for making the tomb, 58. — Another indenture with him 
 for an altar with a rich canopy, 58. 
 
 EECENT HISTOET OF THE FABETC, FEOM BEATLEY. 
 
 Little repair for three centuries; exterior ruinous in 1803, 59. — Roof had been re- 
 paired in 1793, 59. — Fire in the roof and lantern of the church deprived the chapter of 
 funds for the chapel, 59. — Dean Vincent applied to the Treasury and to Parliament for 
 funds in 1806 ; referred to the Committee of Taste; 2,0007. granted to begin with in 
 1807 ; repairs carried on till 1822, at a total expense of 42,000/. : James Wyatt, archi- 
 tect ; Jeremiah Glanville, clerk of the works; Thomas Gaylen, mason, 59. — Appli- 
 cation to Parliament for the restoration of the chapter-house recommended : the present 
 state of it a disgrace to the country, 60. 
 
 NOTE BY ME. W. BHEOES ON THE TOMB, &C. 
 
 Tomb made of touch-stone, with copper-gilt effigies ; arrangement of altars ; eastern- 
 most bay of the stalls modern; their place originally occupied by stone screens, 61. — 
 The tomb originally designed in the Gothic style, but the design not carried out; the 
 present tomb executed by Torregiano, in the newly-revived Classical style ; also that of 
 the Countess of Richmond ; gradual change of style ; use of painting and gilding con- 
 tinued ; Caxton’s printing-office over the vaults of the aisles of this chapel, probably 
 in the triforium, 63. 
 
 Cheonological Table of the x\bbots, Peioes, Bishops, and 
 Deans of Westminstee, from 604 to 1861, 64. 
 
 ADDITIONAL PARTICULARS RESPECTING THE NAVE OF THE 
 CHURCH AND THE DOMESTIC BUILDINGS OF THE ABBEY. 
 
 The Nave. — The Royal Commission of Henry V. to Sir Richard Whittington and 
 Richard Harowden, to rebuild the nave, 65-66. — This Sir Richard Whittington was the 
 celebrated Lord Mayor, 65. — Account Rolls of these Commissioners, 66. 
 
 Puethee Remaeks on the Buildings of Edwaed the Confessoe, 
 by the Rev. T. W. Weaee, M.A., Under-master of Westminster School, 
 67—71. 
 
 Narrative of the monk Sulcardus, 67. — Characteristics of the early work in the 
 dormitory and substructure, 68 ; and the late Norman work in St. Catherine’s chapel, 
 69. — Synods held in this chapel in 1162 and 1176, 69. — A violent struggle for pre- 
 cedence between the two archbishops in this chapel in 1176, 69. — Masonry of the south 
 wall of the cloister, part of the Confessor’s work, with shafts inserted and vaults added 
 
XU 
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 by Abbot Litlington, 70. — This wall formed one side of the great refectory of the Con- 
 fessor, and the ornamental wall arcade remains on the inner side of the wall, 71. — 
 Restoration of this great hall of the abbey suggested in note, 71. — The windows inser- 
 tions by Abbot Litlington, 71. 
 
 Abbot Litltngton’s Woek. 
 
 Simon Langham elected Abbot in 1349, afterwards Bishop of Ely and Archbishop 
 of Canterbury and Cardinal ; he died in 1376 ; bequeathed a large sum of money to the 
 fabric, 72. — Abbot Litlington’s work not commenced till after the death of Langham, 
 and built -with his money, 72. — Therefore between 1376 and 1386, when Litlington 
 himself died, and his initials are on various parts of the work, 73. — His work not in 
 the Perpendicular style, 73. 
 
 The College Hall, 73 — 79 . 
 
 Timbers of the roof, windows, painted glass, music gallery, carved woodwork, 73. — 
 Ancient kitchen, with its fireplaces, 76. — Archways and cellars, with groined stone 
 vaults, 77. — Architectural character of Litlington’s work quite transitional from the 
 Decorated to the Perpendicular style, 77. — The Litlington tower, 79. 
 
 The Jeextsalem Chambee, by the Eev. T. Hugo, M.A. 
 
 Built by Abbot Litlington, 80. — Sketch of the life of that abbot, 80. — His handsome 
 gifts to the abbey, 80. — Exact situation of this chamber, 82. — Historical notices of it 
 in the chronicles, 82. — Death of Henry IV. in this chamber, 83. — Edward V. said to have 
 been born in it, 83. — Room refitted by Dean Williams in 1624, 83. — A committee on 
 Church matters first met in this chamber in 1640, 83. — Painted glass and tapestry 
 in it, 84. 
 
 The Abbot oe Westminstee’s Hohse, by Geoege Coenee, Esq., 
 E.S.A. ; with Notes by the Rev. Mackenzie Walcott, M.A., E.S.A. 
 
 Royal grant of the abbot’s houses called Cheynygats, to T. Thirleby, Bishop of West- 
 minster, 85. — The house afterwards divided, 85. — Part given to the king’s scholars, 
 and part to the dean, and part for the convocation, 85. — A tower at the entrance, of 
 which the groined vault remains, 85. — Abutting on “the Elms,’’ 85. — The King’s 
 Almshouse, or the almonry, 86. — The Broad Sanctuary, 86. — The Calbege, 86. — The 
 Blackstole Tower, 86. — The Frayter Misericorde, 87. — The great Convent Kitchen, 87. 
 ■ — The Oxehall, 87. — The Milldam, 87. — The Long Granary, 87. — The Brewhouse and 
 the Bakehouse, 87. 
 
 Modeen Buildings, by the Rev. M. Walcott, M.A., E.S.A. 
 
 Ashburnham House ; the Cottonian Library ; the great fire; anecdote of Dr. Bentley ; 
 the Guildhall, 88. 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 xm 
 
 The Jeavel House, by J. H. Paeker, F.S.A. 
 
 Built in’the time of Richard II. ; now the Record Office of the House of Lords; exact 
 situation and present state, 89. — Royal licence for exchange of land to build it upon, 90. 
 
 APPENDIX II. 
 
 Fabric Roll of a.d. J253, with Explanations by Professor Willis. 
 
 This Roll discovered in the Public Record Office by Mr. Burtt, 1. — Contains the 
 building accounts for thirty- two weeks, 1. — The saints’ days or feasts assigned alternately 
 to the king and to the masons, 2. — Accounts for each week divided into wages and pur- 
 chases, 2. — One week complete given as a specimen, 3. — Number of workmen employed, 
 3. — The helfryi ^.-Form-pieces, for window tracery, 4. — Stone brought from Caen and 
 Reigate, 5. — Chalk for the pendentia, or vaults, 5. — Iron from Gloucestershire, 5. — 
 Merenemius, the timber-merchant; Cdfonarius, the lime-burner; Cuparius, the cooper ; 
 Junctor, the joiner, 5. — Asselers, ashlar stones ; Fssicis, stones prepared for courses of 
 masonry ; boseus and claves, bosses ; buscell, bushel, or large round stones shaped by 
 task-work; chamberand\ chamerants, chaumeres, jawmers, stones for the jambs of doors 
 or windows ; cerches, serches, old French words for carved pieces of stone, 6. — Escus, 
 scutis, skew-stones; Folsuris cum filo, voussoirs with a filleted moulding; Forimells, 
 formelUs, form-pieces ; Lothenges, lozenge-shaped pieces ; orbilons, round pieces ; per- 
 pens, parpens, perpent- stones ; scention, or scenhon, scutcheons ; tablements, string- 
 courses, 7. 
 
 Abstract of the Accounts of the Works of the Church and the King’s 
 Houses for 1267-8, from the Pipe Rolls, 52nd, 54th, 55th, and 56th Henry III., 
 
 pp. 21, 22. 
 
 Abstract of the Accounts of the new work of the old Church of West- 
 minster, 15th and 18th Edward III., a.d. 1342, p. 23. 
 
 Abstract of the Accounts of Brother John de Mordone for the work of 
 THE NEW Cloister, 23rd to 39th Edward III., pp. 23—25. 
 
 Abstract of the Accounts of Brother Peter Coumbe, keeper of the new 
 WORK OF THE Church OF WESTMINSTER, 11th to 23rd Richard II., and 1st to 13th 
 Henry IV., and 3rd to 9th Henry V., pp. 26 — 28. 
 
 APPENDIX III. 
 
 The Library of Westminster Abbey, by W. H. Hart, F.S.A., pp. 29 — 34. 
 
 On Ancient Bindings in the Library, by Joseph J. Howard, F.S.A., pp. 
 
 34-37. 
 
 The Organ of Westminster Abbey, by W. II. Hart, F.S.A., p. 38. 
 
XIV : 
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 On Some Discoveries in Connection with the Ancient Treasury at West- 
 minster, BY Joseph Burtt, F.S.A., Assistant Keeper of the Public Records, pp. 
 39—43. 
 
 The Monuments in Westminster Abbey as a Museum of Sculpture, by 
 Henry Mogford, F.S.A., pp. 44 — 47. 
 
 On the Order of the Bath, by Mr. John Hunter, pp. 48-49, 
 
LIST OF ENGRAVINGS. 
 
 •Plan of Westminster Abbey, and adjoining Buildings, shewing the Dates of the 
 
 different Parts ...... facing 1 
 
 Archway in the dark Cloister. [Part of the Substructure of the Dormitory.] . 1 
 
 Early Norman Pillar, [a.d. 1066.] . . . . .4 
 
 Early Norman Capitals, with later Norman Sculpture . . .5 
 
 Chapel of the Pyx in its present state, 1859. [Part of the Substructure of a.d. 1066.] 6 
 
 Window of the Dormitory, [a.d. 1066.] . . . .7 
 
 Doorway in the Vaults under the Dormitory, [a.d. 1066.] . . 8 
 
 Small Window (Exterior and Interior) in the Southern part of the Confessor’s 
 
 Work under the Dormitory . . . . .8 
 
 Part of the Norman Arcade of the Refectory to the Infirmary, [c. 1160.] . 9 
 
 Fragments of late Norman Ornament found under the pavement of the Nave 
 
 in 1848 
 
 . 
 
 • • 
 
 • 
 
 10 
 
 Window at St. Maurice’s, York 
 
 . 
 
 • • 
 
 • 
 
 12 
 
 Plan of Apse, Westminster Abbey 
 
 . 
 
 • • 
 
 • 
 
 16 
 
 Buttress, &c., South side 
 
 . 
 
 • • 
 
 • 
 
 18 
 
 Triforium Arcade . 
 
 . 
 
 • • 
 
 
 21 
 
 Wall Arcade 
 
 . 
 
 • • 
 
 
 21 
 
 Sections of Mouldings . 
 
 . 
 
 • • 
 
 
 22 
 
 •Paving Tiles 
 
 . 
 
 • • 
 
 facing 
 
 22,23 
 
 Restoration of the Rose Window . . 
 
 . 
 
 • • 
 
 • 
 
 23 
 
 Clerestory Window of Choir . 
 
 . 
 
 • • 
 
 • 
 
 25 
 
 Clerestory Window of Nave, shewing the junction of the two Styles . 
 
 • 
 
 25 
 
 Capitals of Wall Arcade 
 
 • 
 
 • • 
 
 • 
 
 26 
 
 Spandrel with Shield . . 
 
 . 
 
 • • 
 
 • 
 
 26 
 
 Spandrel with Figure 
 
 . 
 
 • • 
 
 • 
 
 27 
 
 Capital in the Cloister, shewing the junction of the styles 
 
 • « 
 
 • 
 
 29 
 
 Doorway in the Cloister 
 
 . 
 
 • • 
 
 • 
 
 30 
 
 Window in the East Walk of the Cloister 
 
 • 
 
 • • 
 
 • 
 
 30 
 
 The Chapter-house in its present State . 
 
 . 
 
 • • 
 
 • 
 
 32 
 
 •Restoration of the Chapter-house 
 
 . 
 
 • • 
 
 • 
 
 32 
 
 Foliage ever the entrance to the Chapter-house 
 
 . 
 
 • • 
 
 • 
 
 35 
 
 •Restoration of the Chapter-house; — 1. Entrance from the Cloister ; 2. 
 
 Vestibule 
 
 
 to the Chapter-house; 3. The Inner Entrance; 4. Eastern Stalls 
 Chapel of St. Blasius, or the Old Revestry 
 •Part of the Refectory, shewing the Wall Arcade • 
 
 •Part of the South Walk of the Cloister 
 Initials of Abbot Litlington in the Head of a Window of the Hall, a.d. 1376 — 1386 
 Part of the old carved Woodwork, now built in with Modern Work at the end 
 of the Hall 
 
 Window of the Hall of the Abbot’s House, a.d. 1376—1386, now the Scholars’ Hall 
 
 facing 37 
 39 
 
 facing 71 
 facing 73 
 74 
 
 74 
 
 74 
 
xvi 
 
 LIST OF ENGEAVINGS* 
 
 PAGE 
 
 Part of the Roof of the Hall of Abbot Litlington, a. d. 1376 — 1386 . . 75 
 
 Part of the old Screen of the Hall . . . . .75 
 
 Fireplace in the Kitchen, shewing the Seat in the chimney-corner, and the 
 
 Window over it, still remaining (1861) . . . .76 
 
 Part of the vaulting of the Cellars of Abbot Litlington’s Work under the present 
 Porter’s Lodge, A. D. 1376 — 1386 . . . . . 77 
 
 Archway, now forming the Passage from Little Dean’s Yard to Great Dean’s 
 
 Yard, part of Abbot Litlington’s work, a. d. 1376 — 1386 . . 78 
 
 Part of the Vaulting of the Cloisters over the Lavatory, a. d. 1376 — 1386 . 79 
 
 The Jerusalem Chamber . . . . . .81 
 
 Plan of the Abbot’s House, now the Deanery, the Scholars’ Hall and Kitchen, 
 
 and the Jerusalem Chamber . . . . .81 
 
 Plan of the Precincts of Westminster Abbey, from a Map of London of the 
 time of Queen Elizabeth . . . . . .87 
 
 Plan of the Jewel House, with the groining of the Basement . . 89 
 
 View of the principal Chamber in the Basement of the Jewel House, a.d. 1377-80 90 
 
 Smaller Room in the Basement of the Jewel House . . ,91 
 
GLEANINGS FROM WESTMINSTER ABBEY 
 
 OF THE TIME OF EDWARD THE CONFESSOR. 
 
 A Lecture delivered to the Royal Institute of British Architects, 
 BY George Gilbert Scott. 
 
 Archway in the Dark Cloister. [Part of the Substructure of the Dormitory, a.d. 1060.] 
 
 All we know of the earliest history of the fabric is, that there existed a 
 church here in the days of King Offa, and that this (or a successor of it) 
 was rebuilt, and the Abbey refounded, by Edward the Confessor. One of 
 the first thoughts which occur to us in considering the history of our 
 Abbey is, then, the question as to what kind of church was that which 
 preceded the present structure, and which we know to have been erected 
 by this sainted monarch. As, for example, what was its size and form ? 
 Was it on the small scale which appears to have been common among 
 Saxon buildings, or of the gigantic dimensions adopted by the Normans ? 
 And, again, was its architecture more on the Saxon or on the Norman type ? 
 
 William of Malmesbury, writing in the following century, speaks of it as 
 “ that church which he, the first in England, had erected in that mode of 
 composition which now nearly all emulate in its costly expenditure or, in 
 other words, it was the earliest Norman church. 
 
 Matthew Paris, in the thirteenth century, merely adapts the same state- 
 ment to his own times, saying that the Confessor “ was buried in the church 
 which he had constructed in that mode of composition from which many of 
 those afterwards constructing churches, taking example, had emulated in 
 its costly expenditure evidently considering its style the same as that of 
 the Norman churches with which he was surrounded. 
 
 B 
 
2 
 
 Gleanings from Westminster Abbey 
 
 Sir Christopher Wren gives us, as he says from an ancient manuscript, 
 the following particulars : — 
 
 “ The principal area or nave of the church, being raised high, and vaulted with 
 square and uniform ribs, is turned circular to the east ; this on each side is strongly 
 fortified with a double vaulting of the aisles in two stories, with their pillars and 
 arclu s : the cross building contrived to contain the choir in the middle, and the better 
 to support the lofty tower, rose with a plainer and lower vaulting, which tower, then 
 spreading with artificial winding stairs, was continued wfith plain walls to its timber 
 loof, which w'as well covered with lead®.” 
 
 From the above, one would by no means infer that the church was of 
 small dimensions, and I am very much disposed to think that it may have 
 been nearly, or quite, as large in its elementary scale as the present 
 structure. Edward the Confessor having spent so much of his early life 
 
 ® Since reading my paper my attention has been called to the “ Lives of Edward the 
 Confessor” among the documents published under the direction of the Master of the 
 llolls. In one of these I find the original of the passage referred to by Sir Christopher 
 Wren. It runs thus : — 
 
 “ Principalis arm domus altissimis erecta fornicibus quadrate opere parique commis- 
 sura circumvolvitur ; abitus autem ipsius sedis dupplici lapidum arcu ex utroque latere 
 hinc et inde fortiter solidata operis coinpage clauditur. Porro crux templi quse me- 
 dium canentium Deo chorum ambiret, et sui gemina hinc et inde sustentatione raedim 
 turris celsum apicem fulciret, humili primum et robusta fornice simpliciter surgit, 
 cocleis multipliciter ex arte ascendentibus plurimis tumescit, deiude vero simplici muro 
 usque ad tectum ligneum plumbo diligenter tectum porvenit. Subter vero et supra 
 disposite educuntur domicilia, memoriis apostolorum, martyrium, confessorum, ac vir- 
 ginum consecrauda per sua altaria. Ilmc autem multiplicitas tarn vasti operis tanto 
 spatio ab oriente ordita est veteris templi, ne scilicet interim inibi coinmorantes fratres 
 vacarent a servitio Christi, ut etiam aliqua pars spatiose subiret interjaciendi vestibuli.” 
 
 I may mention that the document in wdiich this occurs was written between the 
 death of the Confessor and of Queen Edith (i.e. between 1065 and 1074). In the same 
 volume occurs a description df the old monastery, written during the reign of Henry 
 III. It is in Norman French verse, and the following is the translation given : — 
 
 “ Now he laid the foundations of the church with large square blocks of grey stone ; 
 its foundations were deep, the front towards the east he makes round, the stones are 
 very strong and hard, in the centre rises a tower, and two at the west front, and fine 
 and large bells he hangs there. The pillars and entablature are rich without and 
 witliin, at the bases and capitals the work rises grand and royal, sculptured are the 
 stones and storied the windows; all are made with skill of a good and loyal workmanship; 
 and when he finished the work, with lead the church completely he covers, he makes 
 there a cloister, a chapter-house in front, towards the east, vaulted and round, .... 
 Refectory and dormitory and the offices in the tower,” (e les officines en tur.) 
 
 From the first extract it is evident that the eastern portions of the Confessor’s 
 church were erected previously to the demolition of the old church, and so far to the 
 eastward of it as to allow of a large portion of the nave being built between them, 
 probably as an abutment to the central tower. From the second it will be seen that, 
 when completed, there were two towers at the west end of the nave, but neither of 
 them afford full evidence of the completion of the nave by the Confessor himself, 
 though the use by the earlier writer of the words medicB turris^’ seems to imply 
 either the existence or the intention of erecting others. — G. G. S. 
 
3 
 
 of the Time of Edivard the Confessor. 
 
 in Normandy, it is unlikely that he should be content with the dimensions 
 of a Saxon church ; indeed, had he been so, he had one to his hand with- 
 out building a new one ; and as he was greatly enlarging the monastic 
 establishment, it seems probable that in rebuilding the Abbey church he 
 would adopt the scale which was becoming common in Normandy. Harold, 
 we have every reason to believe, did the same in building his church at 
 Waltham ; for whatever may be the merits of the disputed question as to 
 whether any part of his work yet remains, there can be no doubt that his 
 choir, at least for a time, there co-existed with the present nave, and 
 agreed with it in elementary scale. Again, we have no reason to believe 
 that the choir of Westminster Abbey was rebuilt between the days of 
 Edward the Confessor and those of Henry HI., which would have been 
 inevitably the case had its scale been diminutive ; and, if it did exist 
 through that interval, we have full proof that it was as long as the present 
 eastern arm of the church ; for the present position of the transept we 
 know to be identical with that of the Confessor’s church, from the fact of 
 the remains of his dormitory abutting against it in the usual manner ; while 
 the eastward extent of the old church is defined almost with certainty by 
 the fact that the Lady-chapel was erected against it in the early days of 
 Henry III., some years before he commenced rebuilding the church itself. 
 The dimensions of the ancient nave are less easy of conjecture. The width, 
 I think it probable, would have agreed with the existing one ; and if the 
 Confessor adopted, as I imagine, the usual scale of the great churches of 
 the Normans, there is no reason to suppose it to have been much shorter 
 than at present, — an opinion which is to a certain extent corroborated by 
 the size of the cloister court, the north and east sides of which would have 
 been defined by the external walls of the nave and the dormitory, and its 
 southern limits by the refectory, in which there exist early remnants suf- 
 ficient to shew that it occupies its original site. The completion of the 
 square thus marked out carries us to within three bays of the western 
 towers ; and as cloisters rarely reached the end of a nave, it leaves it as a 
 probable inference that the old nave did not fall short of the length of that 
 now existing. 
 
 At St. Alban’s and Winchester, which were erected within the same 
 century, the elementary scale, or width from centre to centre of the piers, 
 is about the same, the length of nave considerably in excess, and the 
 original length of the Norman choir also greater. The structural choir, or 
 eastern arm, at Westminster, is in fact so short as to preclude the idea of 
 its having been rebuilt during the later Norman period, being less than 
 that of many early Norman choirs. 
 
 We now come, however, to surer ground : I mean the portions of the 
 Confessor’s work which still exist. These consist of the substructure of 
 the dormitory, forming a long range of building running southwards from, 
 and in a line with, the south transept, and passing under the library and 
 
4 Gleanings from Westminster Abbey 
 
 the great school-room, which now occupy the position of the ancient 
 dormitory. 
 
 The substructure is vaulted in two spans, and is divided longitudinally 
 by a range of massive round columns, the whole being seven and a half 
 bays, or about 110 feet, in length from the vestibule of the chapter-house 
 to the cross passage now leading into the little cloister, and formerly to the 
 infirmary. This range was probably, in the first instance, continuous and 
 open, like that at Fountain’s Abbey but was very early divided into separate 
 compartments, as I shall presently shew. It is so seldom that we find 
 constructive columns remaining in this country ot a date earlier than the 
 Norman Conquest, that it is an object of some interest to see what lorm 
 they exhibit, though I admit that, date alone excepted, this can hardly be 
 called a Saxon work, whilst its unimportant purpose forbids us to take it 
 as a fair example of any style. 
 
 There are only one or two, 1 
 think, of these columns which 
 retain their pristine form, the 
 others having been altered at 
 subsequent periods. 
 
 These consist of a cylindrical 
 shaft, 3 ft. 6 in. in diameter, and 
 3 ft. 4 or 5 in. high. The capi- 
 tals have a vast unmoulded aba- 
 cus, seven or eight inches deep, 
 supported by a moulding, if such 
 it may be called, consisting of 
 nothing but a frustrum of an 
 inverted cone, the most pristine 
 form, almost, to which a capital 
 could be reduced, thoroughly 
 efficient, but with the least pos- 
 sible amount of workmanship, 
 not unlike what we may imagine 
 may have been the first type of 
 the Doric capital, and but one Early Nomwa puiar. [ad. loeo.] 
 
 step removed from its apparent prototype among the tombs at Beni 
 Ilassan. 
 
 We must not, however, for a moment suppose that this rudely pristine 
 
 It is more probable that tlie partitions have been removed at Fountain’s ; these 
 substructures were originally divided by partitions into different small cellars or store- 
 rooms; the partitions have very commonly been removed, and the spa( ethus thrown 
 open is often erroneously called the ambulatory. Such substructures have been pre- 
 served in numerous instances, as at Chester, Llanercost, Sherborne, »&;c., &c. — E d. 
 
5 
 
 of the Time of Edward the Confessor. 
 
 form was that usual at the period, except in rough and unimportant 
 situations. We know that in the contemporary work at AValtham the 
 capitals were enriched with ornaments of brass, and that much earlier 
 Saxon columns had enriched capitals®. AYe must simply view it as a 
 specimen of the honest simplicity with which they treated the less important 
 portions of their structures. It is, in fact, only one step more plain than 
 the capitals in the crypt at Winchester, which was constructed some twenty 
 years later. The bases very closely resembled the capitals, but have, like 
 them, generally been altered from their original form. 
 
 These columns carried plain groining^^, with square transverse ribs, partly 
 constructed of tufa. 
 
 It is somewhat curious and interesting that during the Norman period 
 the majority of the capitals have been altered and enriched in various ways. 
 Being within reach, their massive plainness seems to have tempted the 
 monks to try experiments upon them, and we accordingly find the original 
 block cut into a great variety of forms, some of them of considerable 
 richness. The state of the capitals shews that the building was already 
 subdivided, as the alterations are often totally different on the two sides of 
 the capital, leaving a narrow intervening frustrum of the original, repre- 
 senting the thickness of the partition. Some are roughly chopped into a 
 form, preparatory to the enriching process, which has not been completed. 
 
 Early Normau CapiteJs, with later Norman Sculpture. 
 
 The accompanying woodcuts shew some of the altered forms which the 
 capitals assume. The bases were also altered, and, in some instances at 
 least, the floor so much lowered that the lower part of the columns had to 
 be cased with new stone. 
 
 The first bay of this early work adjoins the outer vestibule of the chapter- 
 
 ® The existence of any Saxon capitals enriched with sculpture in stone remains to be 
 proveil. — E d. 
 
 Transverse rib-arches, hut no groin -ribs ; these were not introduced till a sub- 
 sequent period; a vault groined without ribs is one of the marks of early Norman 
 work. — E d. 
 
6 
 
 Gleanings from Westminster Abbey 
 
 house, and is imperfect, having been shortened by the later buildings which 
 here abut against it. The capital of the column here visible is entirely 
 altered to a round and slightly enriched form. 
 
 Next to this comes the celebrated chapel of the Pyx. This, as is well 
 known, has long been held by the Government. It formerly, I believe, 
 contained the records of the Treasury, but now contains only empty cases 
 and chests, with one exception, in which the paraphernalia for the trial of 
 the Pyx are contained. I have recently, through the kindness of the 
 
 Chapel of the Pyx in its present state 1859. [Pai-t of the Substructure of a.d. 1060.] 
 
 Chancellor of the Exchequer and the Secretary to the Treasury, visited, 
 for the first time, its mysterious recesses : a formidable visit, requiring the 
 presence of representatives of the Treasury and the Exchequer, with their 
 attendants bearing boxes which contain six mighty keys. 
 
 It occupies two bays of the Confessor’s work, a detached column stand- 
 ing in the centre. This column bears marks of a partition having at one 
 time abutted against it, on one side of which the capital has been made 
 round and slightly enriched, while on the other it has undergone no altera- 
 tion but the rough canting off of its angles, as if preparatory to further 
 alteration. The column which is partly built up in the north wall is on 
 this side altered exactly as on the other, where it is seen in the adjoining 
 chamber, shewing that there was no partition against it. That on the 
 south side I w^as not able to examine, owing to the presses by which it is 
 concealed. The portion of it which is visible on the other side of the wall 
 is one of those in which I have found the capital unaltered, and I was 
 
7 
 
 of the Time of Edward the Confessor. 
 
 curious to see if the opposite side was so too; but was disappointed. In 
 one of the eastern bays of the chapel the stone altar remains nearly entire. 
 It is perfectly plain, and has in the middle of its top a large circular 
 sinking, apparently for the reception of a portative altar-stone ; though the 
 form is, I believe, unusual. Adjoining the altar is a detached piscina, in 
 the form of a column : it appears to be of the thirteenth century. The 
 windows, which are very small, and probably of the same date, are doubly 
 and very closely grated, and well they might be so, for we learn that 
 during the reign of Edward I. the king’s treasury here was robbed of 
 £100,000, which he had laid up here for the Scotch wars, for which the 
 abbot and forty monks were sent to the Tower on suspicion. I fancy that 
 the chamber was brought to its present form and its security increased 
 after that event. Of the contents of the Pyx Chapel I will speak presently. 
 
 The bays of the early work 
 beyond the cross passage to 
 the little cloister are simply 
 waggon-vaulted, as is that pas- 
 sage itself, as well as that 
 which is called the dark clois- 
 ter, which I suppose to be of 
 the same age. These waggon- 
 vaults are formed of tufa laid 
 in rubble-work, and still shew- 
 ing the impressions of the 
 boards of the centering on the 
 mortar. Of the walls of the 
 dormitory® itself considerable 
 portions remain. Several of its 
 walled-up windows are visible 
 
 Window of the. Dormitory Ta.d. 1060.1 • .i . i i i 
 
 in the great school, and the 
 exterior of one remains little altered excepting by decay. It has a ^haft 
 in each jamb, and is like early Norman windows. 
 
 [At the extreme south end of the dormitory, towards Little Dean’s 
 Yard, there is an early wall, forming originally one angle of the court, 
 though now hidden in the cellars of the canons’ houses, which join on 
 to the substructure of the dormitory before described. In the transverse 
 wall is a doorway of the time of the Confessor, which, as might be ex- 
 pected, is quite plain, round-headed, and recessed, but square-edged, with- 
 out any chamfer ; this is the inner side ; the outer side is quite plain, not 
 recessed, nor chamfered, but with the jambs, or sides of the opening 
 widely splayed, (see the woodcut in p. 10) : it appears to have been a 
 doorway from one apartment to another, and not an external doorway ; 
 
 The dormitory was partiiilly burnt in 1448. 
 
8 
 
 Gleanings from Westminster Abbey 
 
 this wall, probably, was under the extreme south end of the dormitory of 
 the time of the Confessor. 
 
 The other wall forms an angle with this, w'hich it joins close to the 
 doorway and on the east side of it. In this second wall is a small 
 loop window of very early cha- 
 racter, with long-and- short-work 
 in the jambs, and widely splayed 
 within. The top of this window is 
 cut off by the vault, which is a 
 plain barrel-vault of Norman work ; 
 in the outer wall are the marks of 
 a round-headed Norman window, 
 bricked up. The thick, early wall 
 has evidently been cut away in a 
 semicircular form to receive the vault 
 upon it, and about two feet from it 
 on the inner side is a Norman flat 
 
 arch rib, to carry the vault, [a.i,. iuuj.] 
 
 ing that it was intended originally to remove the old thick wall, but 
 it was afterwards suffered to remain as a partition. This Norman vault 
 added on to the Confessor’s work shews an enlargement of the buildings 
 in the twelfth century. The Norman barrel-shaped vault which runs 
 across the south end of the substructure of the dormitory, extends far 
 beyond it, being not less than fifty feet long by about seventeen wide. 
 
 Small Window (Exterior and Interior) in the Southern part of the Confessor's Work 
 under the Dormitory. 
 
 and divided into two parts by the cloister wall before mentioned. The end 
 next Little Dean’s Yard has evidently been shortened, as the arch is 
 walled up by a comparatively modern wall. There is the springing of a 
 
of the Time of Edward the Confessor. 
 
 9 
 
 second vault still further to the south, cut off by the staircase to the 
 school-room, which now occupies the southern part of the ancient dor- 
 mitory : the northern end is occupied by the chapter library. The 
 earlier wall under this vault, with the window in it, is at present under the 
 vestibule to the school-room and the school library ; it probably formed a 
 part of the offices of the Abbey in the time of the Confessor. — Ed.] 
 
 The only other part which is at all likely to belong* to the Confessor’s 
 buildings is a part of the south wall of the refectory, in which a round- 
 arched wall-arcading is still to be traced. As the Confessor increased the 
 number of monks to seventy, he would want eating as well as sleeping 
 room in due proportion, and in the absence of opposing evidence, it is likely 
 enough that this may be a portion of his refectory. 
 
 The next building which I will notice is the chapel of St. Catherine, a 
 work of the succeeding century. It was the chapel of the infirmary, and 
 occupies a position not dissimilar to the corresponding chapels at Canter- 
 bury, Ely, and Peterborough. 
 
 The usual form of infirmary of a monastery was very similar to that of a 
 church, with this simple difference, that the quasi-nave was very long, and 
 was divided at about one-third of its length from the east by a cross wall 
 perforated only by a central doorway ; the western portion forming the in- 
 firmary proper, the eastern portion being the nave of the chapel, and a 
 chancel extending still to the eastward. 
 
 Part of the Norman Arcade of the Refectory to the Infirmary, [c. 1160.] 
 
 This arrangement allowed the sick monks to hear the services as they lay 
 in their beds, while the convalescent could readily transfer themselves to 
 the chapel. This may still be traced out at Canterbury, Ely, and Peter- 
 borough ; and there is a nearly similar building still in use (though uncon- 
 nected with the cathedral) at Chichester ; as also (with more or less varia- 
 tion) at Bruges, at Lubeck, and, I dare say, many other places®. Now, I 
 imagine it is possible that the Westminster infirmary may originally have 
 been of the same description. The chapel, of which the remains are sufficient 
 to shew its plan, agree with it precisely ; but the infirmary proper is gone, 
 
 As at Sherborne, Dorsetshire, and at Leicester. — En. 
 C 
 
10 
 
 Gleanings from Westminster Abbey. 
 
 and may, I fancy, have been destroyed when the small cloister was built. 
 If so, it no doubt extended westward to the wall in the dormitory. This, 
 however, is a mere suggestion, and would be disproved if the small cloister 
 can be proved to be of earlier date, which I see that Widmore imagines 
 it to be. In that case, I should suppose that the infirmary surrounded it. 
 
 I have recently discovered an old hall of the date of Abbot Litlington, 
 who is known to have built a new house for the infirmarer. It abuts upon 
 the south side of St. Catherine’s Chapel, and has a doorway into the chapel. 
 It was, no doubt, the hall of the infirmarer’s house, and was probably used 
 by the convalescent patients. The garden now called the College Garden 
 was originally the infirmary garden. 
 
 The chapel consisted of a nave and aisles, of five bays long, with a 
 chancel of which I cannot ascertain the length. It is of very good late 
 Norman, and in its details much resembles that at Ely, even to the setting 
 of the octagonal columns angle foremost ; but it is less rich. 
 
 The west doorway is of Abbot Litlington’s time, {temp. Edward III. and 
 Richard II.) The pier of the chancel-arch was discovered last year, while 
 making alterations in an adjoining building, but was unfortunately de- 
 stroyed before I could see it. 
 
 The hall I have mentioned had a gallery extending over the aisle of the 
 chapel, with a fireplace in it. 
 
 I have been able to preserve and expose to view the hall, with the excep- 
 tion of this gallery, which I was unable to save, though its fireplace still 
 exists. The parts of the chapel which were formerly enclosed in the ad- 
 joining building are now exposed to view. 
 
 The only other Norman remains that I am aware of are some rather 
 rich fragments, found under the nave floor, when the new stalls were being 
 erected in 1848. 
 
 Fragments of late Korraan Ornament found under the pavement of the Nave in 1848. 
 
GLEANINGS EEOM WESTMINSTER ABBEY. 
 
 OF THE TIME OF HENRY THE THIRD. 
 
 I NOW come to the existing church, a building which does not owe its 
 claims upon our study to its antiquarian and historical associations, in- 
 tensely interesting though these must be to every man worthy of the name 
 of an Englishman. It lias claims upon us architects, I will not say of a 
 higher but of another character, on the ground of its intrinsic and super- 
 lative merits, as a work of art of the highest and noblest order ; for, 
 though it is by no means pre-eminent in general scale, in height, or in 
 richness of sculpture, there are few churches in this or any other country 
 having the same exquisite charms of proportion and artistic beauty which 
 this church possesses ; a beauty which never tires, and which impresses 
 itself afresh upon the eye and the mind, however frequently you view it, 
 and however glorious the edifices which, during the intervals, you may 
 have seen ; and I may add, which rides so triumjihantly over the dis- 
 honour which, under the name, for the most part falsely assumed, of high 
 art, more modern ages have ruthlessly heaped upon it. 
 
 The period of the erection of Westminster Abbey was one of the greatest 
 transitional epochs of our architecture. During the latter half of the 
 twelfth century the Romanesque, or Round-arch Gothic, had, both in 
 France and England, transformed itself by a thoroughly consecutive and 
 logical series of changes into the Pointed-arch style, and in both countries 
 that style had been worked into a state of perfect consistency, and in each 
 it had assumed its national characteristics, so that the works in the choir 
 at Lincoln, the Lady-chapel at Winchester, and the western portals of St. 
 Alban’s and Ely, all of which date from 1195 to 1215, mark the perfectly- 
 developed Early English style, and are readily distinguishable from the 
 contemporary works in France. 
 
 The English works of this period have, at least to our eye, a more 
 advanced appearance than the French, The round form of the abacus, 
 the greater richness and delicacy of the mouldings, and generally a more 
 decided severance from the massiveness of the Romanesque forms, give to 
 the works I have alluded to a later appearance than what we observe in 
 buildings of the same precise period in France. The leading character- 
 istics were, however, much the same. The windows especially, in both 
 countries, consisted, for the most part, of individual lights placed either 
 singly or in groups. The chief variety from this was when, as was usual 
 in the triforium openings and in belfries, two or more such lights were 
 placed under a comprising arch, the interval below which was very usually 
 pierced with circular or other openings. This was not, chronologically 
 
12 
 
 Gleanings from Westminster Abbey 
 
 speaking, a step in advance of the detached light, but had all along been 
 its contemporary, whether in the Romanesque, the Transitional, or the 
 Early Pointed styles, and both were equally in use in France and England. 
 In domestic work, the last-named type (that with two or more lights under 
 a comprising arch) was always prevalent, on account of the smallness of 
 the intermediate divisions, which, from an early period, it was customary 
 to reduce to a thin shaft of marble or plain stone, as we see in our own 
 country even in Romanesque works, as at the Jews’ House and the build- 
 ing commonly called “John of Gaunt's Stables” at Lincoln, Fountain’s 
 Abbey, Richmond Castle, &c. ^ As a general rule, however, the more 
 detached form was, for a long time, 
 the prevalent form in churches both 
 in France and England. The difference 
 between the course pursued in the two 
 countries was this, that while in Eng- 
 land the special energies of the builders 
 were directed to the perfecting of the 
 more usual type, the French began 
 early in the thirteenth century to shew 
 a preference for the other, and rather 
 to neglect the perfecting of the more 
 typical form. Both forms were fre- 
 quent in each country, but the efforts 
 of the English were rather directed to 
 the one, and of the French to the 
 other. The consequence was that, 
 while in England the grouping of 
 distinct lights was being brought to 
 the utmost perfection, the French were engaged, more especially at least, 
 on a number of tentative steps towards what became afterwards the mul- 
 lioned and traceried window. I will not attempt a history of this in- 
 vention, but will just call attention to one or two of its steps. At Bourges 
 we have the earlier type in its full perfection, the space between the com- 
 prising and comprised arches and the piercings of the head being a flat 
 face. At Le Mans and Tours we find these spaces cut out parallel to the 
 lines of the openings, not, however, moulded into what is called bar 
 tracery, but as if sawn square through, — a very clumsy and crude con- 
 trivance, very inferior to the plate tracery it was intended to improve. At 
 Rheims, so far as I know, is seen the earliest introduction of the perfected 
 principle. We find there, for the first time as I believe, the pierced 
 spandrels and gussets moulded as the openings themselves, and the prin- 
 
 
 St. Maurice, York 
 
 ” And at St. Maurice’s Church, York, is a window which is one step further in ad- 
 vance, having an opening in the head under the arch. — Ed. 
 
of the Time of Henry the Third, 13 
 
 ciple of bar tracery completed, though with some remaining imperfections. 
 It is very difficult to fix dates to these transitions. Rheims Cathedral was 
 commenced in 1212, and it is generally supposed that the first architect, 
 De Coucy, completed the aisles in 1220 or 1225. M. Viollet-le-Duc, 
 naturally enough, seems puzzled at finding perfect traceried windows at so 
 early a period, and suggests it as probable, as the transept of the same 
 work does not exhibit equal advancement, that the aisle windows were 
 altered by him a little later. Certain it is that neither Bourges nor Char- 
 tres, which were built about the same time, give any evidence of a like 
 progression ; while the intermediate step at Le Mans and Tours would 
 appear, from many of its accompanying details, to be of later date than 
 that given to Rheims. Had Wilars de Honecort put a date to his 
 “ Sketch-book,” which gives these very windows at Rheims, the difficulty 
 would perhaps have been solved 
 
 The windows with similar tracery in Notre Dame, at Paris, M. Viollet- 
 le-Duc, from internal evidence, dates from 1235 to 1240. The Cathedral 
 at Amiens presents difficulties as to date almost equal to that at Rheims, 
 but, on the whole, we may fairly suppose this development to have become 
 pretty common in northern Fiance by about 1230 or 1235, though not to 
 the extent of superseding either the detached light or the plate tracery, 
 Pierre de Montereau, the architect to the Sainte Chapelle, in which the 
 perfected tracery prevails, built also the refectory of St. Martin des Champs, 
 in which it does not appear at all. 
 
 During the same period the peculiar, and afterwards stereotyped, French 
 arrangement of the ckevet, or the apse, with its group of radiating chapels, 
 had been brought, by many steps, to its final development. 
 
 Radiating chapels, growing out of the main apse or its aisles, had been 
 early used. In this country we find them at Gloucester and Tewkesbury, 
 and in the foundations recently excavated at Leominster, all of the Roman- 
 esque period ; and later we find them at Pershore. The French character- 
 istic, however, was the arranging of them in polygons fitting to one an- 
 other, and to the sides of the polygonal aisle of the main apse, — a sort of 
 corona of little chapels mathematically fitted together and their axes radiat- 
 ing to the centre of the apse, at or near which the high altar was usually 
 placed. This we find in many tentative forms, but the system appears to 
 have been brought to perfection at Rheims and Amiens ; the latter of 
 which churches seems - to have henceforth been taken as the type on 
 which, in the majority of cases, though subject to some varieties, the 
 grouping of eastern chapels was founded, as at Beauvais, Cologne, Alten- 
 berg, and a host of other instances. The two German apses last named, 
 
 The “ Sketch-book” of Wilars de Honecort shews that the plan was altered after 
 the work was begun ; and these windows belong to the later portion, about 1240. See 
 Wilars de Honecort, by Willis, p. 209. — En. 
 
14 
 
 Gleanings from Westminster Abbey 
 
 I may mention, however, seem to have had Beauvais rather than Amiens 
 for their immediate type. 
 
 There can be little doubt that King Henry III., during his sojourns in 
 France, became enamoured of this arrangement, which in its perfected 
 form he may have seen in course of being carried out at Amiens, Beauvais, 
 Rheims, and elsewhere. It would naturally strike him as well suited to 
 the reconstruction of the eastern portion of a church, already possessing an 
 apse with a continuous surrounding aisle. Whether this project had been 
 formed when the Lady-chapel was built in 1220, it is impossible to ascer- 
 tain. This was begun in the same year with Amiens Cathedral, and eight 
 years later than Rheims ; so that it is not impossible, though the extreme 
 youth of the king would in that case compel us to transfer the originating 
 of the scheme from him to the abbot. However this may be, it is probable 
 that it fell readily into the subsequently adopted plan, as we find no dis- 
 turbance of the regularity of the division which would otherwise have been 
 the case. 
 
 Judging from internal evidence, which is all we have to go upon till the 
 public documents and the archives of the Abbey are more thoroughly 
 searched, I should imagine that an English architect, or master of the 
 works, was commissioned to visit the great cathedrals then in progress of 
 erection in France, with the view of making his design on the general 
 idea suggested by them. Would that, like his contemporary Wilars de 
 Honecort, he had bequeathed to us his sketch-book ! 
 
 The result is precisely what might have been expected from such a 
 course. Had a French architect been sent for, we should have had a 
 plan really like some French cathedral, and it would have been carried out, 
 as was the case with William of Sens’ work at Canterbury, with French 
 details. As it is, however, the plan, though founded on that common in 
 France, differs greatly from any existing church, and it contains no French 
 detail whatever, excepting the work of apparently one carver. I have 
 sometimes fancied that I could detect a French moulding in the water- 
 tabling of the external buttresses, but these are themselves restorations, 
 and are so decayed that I cannot make sure of their section. If it be so, 
 it is just one of those exceptions which prove a rule. 
 
 The architect, however, in imitating the great contemporary churches in 
 France, did not adopt another of their great characteristics, the bar 
 tracery of their windows. I am not aware that it exists in a perfect form 
 in any earlier English work, though often closely approached. It is said 
 that Netley Abbey was erected about 1240, and the eastern part of Old 
 St. Paul’s is said to have been consecrated in that year. And as both of 
 these contained perfected tracery, the substantiation of those dates would 
 establish for us an earlier claim ; but on the whole, I think we may fairly 
 yield this development to our neighbours, and consider this to be about the 
 period at which we borrowed it ; though so perfect is the catena of transi- 
 
15 
 
 of the Time of Henriy the Third. 
 
 tional steps, that we should have had no difficulty in tracing out the history 
 of the development from English examples ; the only step which I miss 
 in them being that which I have given from Le Mans and Tours, on which, 
 however, I have never heard any stress laid. 
 
 This church is, then, remarkable as marking — 1st, the introduction of 
 the French arrangement of chapels, which, however, failed to take root 
 here ; and 2ndly, the completed type of bar tracery, which was no sooner 
 grafted on an English stock than it began to shoot forth in most vigorous 
 and luxuriant growth. 
 
 Though the French type was, as a general form, adopted in planning the 
 chevet with its circlet of chapels, I know of no French church from which 
 the actual plan could have been taken. 
 
 The simplest mode of setting out the chevet with its chapels is that 
 adopted at Rheims, which is effected by simply describing a semicircle 
 upon the transverse line passing through the easternmost of the main range 
 of columns, and of a diameter equal to the width from centre to centre of 
 those columns, and inscribing in it a semi-decagon, whose angles will give 
 the centres of the piers, — the same operation being repeated for those of 
 the aisles. 
 
 At Amiens the system is different ; the two semicircles are described, 
 one for the piers and the other for the aisle, and about each of these it 
 would seem that the normal idea was that a portion of a dodecagon 
 should be circumscribed, but, in fact, the sides are a little less than those 
 of that figure. 
 
 On the outer circuit of the aisle, seven angles of the quasi-dodecagon 
 represent the centres of the piers between the radiating chapels, while on 
 the inner circuit five angles of the smaller quasi-dodecagon represent the 
 centres of five of the piers of the apse, the two remaining piers being placed 
 at the points where the transverse line, which cuts off the seven sides of 
 the outer apse, intersects with the longitudinal lines, which pass through 
 the centres of the main ranges of piers. 
 
 It will be seen that this gives a bay of a width intermediate between 
 those of the apse and those of the main arcade, but in a line with the 
 latter. The chapels are alike in the width of their arches, but differ 
 in the westernmost sides of the western chapels not radiating in a regular 
 manner. 
 
 The chevets at Beauvais and Cologne differ from that at Amiens in this, 
 that the dodecagons are i;?scribed, instead of being circumscYihed. It 
 follows that only five of the angles of each dodecagon represent the angles 
 of the outer or inner apse, the remaining angles of the former are formed 
 by spreading the side of the figure outwards till it intersects with the line 
 of the aisle wall, and those of the latter by drawing a transverse line from 
 these points to its intersection with the longitudinal lines of the main range 
 of columns as before. The consequence is that the first side of the apse 
 
16 Gleanings from Westminster Abbey 
 
 has a slight inclination, instead of being parallel to the axis of the 
 church®. 
 
 The chevet at Westminster differs greatly from any of the above. The 
 sides of the apse are live in number, as at Rheims ; but instead of being 
 five sides of a decagon, the three easternmost are sides of an octagon, and 
 the others incline but slightly from the sides of the church. The great 
 peculiarity, however, is in the chapels, which occupy so much more than 
 the semicircle as to do away with one of the non-radiating chapels, reducing 
 the space it usually occupies to an irregular pier, and introducing opposite 
 to it in the aisles a bay of very irregular form. I had long noticed this 
 peculiarity, though I had thought it an irregular contrivance to give 
 
 greater size to the apsidal chapels ; but from finding the setting out of 
 the work remarkably exact, I was led to think that some mathematical 
 principle must have been acted on, and, having had most careful measure- 
 ments made and tested in every way, I find this to have been the case. 
 
 The system is this : the two semicircles are drawn as before, the dia- 
 meter of the inner one being the width from centre to centre of columns ; 
 a semi-octagon is inscribed in this ; three of its angles give the centres 
 of the piers of the outer and inner apses, the remaining sides of each 
 apse being formed by spreading them till they meet the main longitudinal 
 
 ^ These definitions are open to some modifications for irreguiarities admitted in the 
 setting out. 
 
17 
 
 of the Time of Henry the Third, 
 
 lines. It most resembles the principle followed at Beauvais, but differs 
 from it (besides the smaller number of the sides) in the outer and inner 
 apse being exactly alike in ])rinciple, and all their sides equal, and both 
 set out in regular radiating lines, instead of using the transverse line 
 adopted at Beauvais. This system has great advantages ; it avoids the 
 narrowness of the apsidal bays, so apparent in most of the French ex- 
 amples ; it gives a beautiful gentleness of transition from the main arcades 
 into the apse, and it also gives a great boldness and expanse to the 
 chapels, — advantages purchased cheaply at the expense of one of the 
 square chapels on either side, and a certain degree of picturesque ir- 
 regularity in the aisles. It should be mentioned that the setting out 
 of this church is remarkable for its regularity and exactness, though the 
 drawing of an intricate mathematical figure on the ground, some 120 
 feet wide, necessitated some trifling deviations from absolute precision. 
 
 The section of the church, also, differs much from that of the great con- 
 temporary buildings in France. 
 
 The earlier French Pointed churches had retained the Romanesque 
 system of having not a mere trifoiium, but a distinct upper story over the 
 aisles, often with a second range of vaulting. The same occurs, though 
 not vaulted, in many of our own Early Pointed churches, especially where 
 they resulted from the piecemeal reconstruction of their Norman prede- 
 cessors. At Amiens and Rheims, as at Salisbury, Whitby, Rievaulx, and, 
 indeed, the majority of our churches of the thirteenth century, this second 
 story was represented only by the space intervening between the roof and 
 vaulting of the aisles. At Westminster, however, for some special reasons, 
 the second story which we know to have existed in the Confessor’s church 
 was continued in its successor, probably to admit more numerous spec- 
 tators on grand occasions, such as coronations and royal funerals. It was 
 obtained, not so much by increasing the height of the triforium arcade, as 
 by flattening the aisle roof, so as to allow of a wall of considerable height 
 to the triforium, the story being lighted by short windows of a quasi- 
 triangular form, filled in with cusped circles. 
 
 The spaciousness of this upper story is quite surprising to those who 
 see it for the first time. It is capable of containing thousands of persons, 
 and its architectural and artistic effects, as viewed from different points, 
 are wonderfully varied and beautiful. 
 
 I have sometimes doubted whether, however, this arrangement was con- 
 templated when the building was commenced. There is about the inter- 
 section of the aisle roof with the flying buttresses, a want of system which 
 does not seem of a piece with the studious exactness of other points of 
 the design, but is more like the result of an alteration of the design during 
 its execution. It gives also to the transept elevation a high-shouldered 
 look, which is detrimental to its elegance, and, while it adds to the ex- 
 ternal importance of the aisles, it rather takes from the dignity of the 
 
 D 
 
 f 
 
18 
 
 Gleanings from Westminster Ahhey 
 
 clerestory by concealing its natural spring from behind the abutting roof 
 
 of the aisles. 
 
 I may mention that the very 
 same arrangement was followed 
 in the contemporary work in the 
 north transept at Hereford ; in- 
 deed, the very cusping of the cir- 
 cular windows which I have re- 
 cently discovered there, seems to 
 be exactly copied from those in 
 the same position at Westminster. 
 
 Of the mathematical proportions 
 on which the design of the church 
 has been founded, it is hardly safe 
 to speak : th’s is a subject on 
 which so much uncertainty and 
 consequent difference of opinion 
 exists, that it w'ould he unwise to 
 he dogmatic or to adopt any theory 
 too positively. The proportions 
 are, however, so pre-eminently 
 satisfactory to the eye, that it is 
 not unprofitable to examine into 
 them, for whetlier the result of 
 accident or intention, the lessons 
 to he learned are the same ; in- 
 deed, it is perhaps almost more 
 instructive to find that proportions 
 arrived at by tentative experi- 
 BaTTRES3,&o , WESTMINSTER ABBEY, SOUTH SIDE ments and R corrcct eye coincide 
 a Cloister. b rriforium ol two Stories c Clerestory. with some mathematical principle, 
 
 [The arrangement of the flying 
 buttresses divided into two parts 
 by a second buttress and pinnacle, 
 is more like French work than Eng- 
 lish. The use of the pinnacles in 
 adding by their weight to the re- 
 sistance offered by the buttresses 
 to the side-thrust is very evident 
 in this case, and is in accordance 
 with the principle in Gothic work 
 of making useful things ornamental 
 also. — Ed.] 
 
19 
 
 of the Time of Henry the Third. 
 
 than, after trying many geometrical formulae, to find one which gives a re- 
 sult satisfactory to the eye. That beauty of proportion may be reduced to 
 mathematical principles I have no doubt, but, as mathematical forms are of 
 infinite variety and of very unequal beauty, while the reasons why one is 
 more pleasing to the eye than another are, to say the least, very occult, 
 it seems to follow that the laws of proportion must be investigated by a 
 process partly tentative and partly geometrical ; the proportions dictated 
 by the eye and those resulting from mathematical forms being mutually 
 tested the one by the other, till we are able to determine which set of geo- 
 metrical proportions is most beautiful, and which among the forms which 
 please the eye are capable of being reduced to mathematical proportions. 
 
 As an illustration of this, I remember, many years since, while looking at 
 a plate in “ Britton’s Antiquities,” in which he gives internal arches from a 
 number of our cathedrals, I set myself the task of determining which were 
 the most beautiful in their proportions. To my surprise, I was compelled 
 to choose the two which apparently most differed the one from the other, 
 in fact, the tallest and the shortest of the set. I was perplexed at so 
 contradictory a result, but, as I could not go against the dictates of my 
 eye, I endeavoured to investigate the cause, and had much pleasure in find- 
 ing that both (as shewn in the drawing at least) might be resolved into 
 equilateral triangles, the Westminster arch having three, and that from 
 Wells only two of them in its height. I have somewhere heard that in an 
 old work of the Freemasons it is said that good proportions may be ob- 
 tained from the square, but better from the equilateral triangle ; and I have 
 little doubt that it is true. If the principle of the triangle is applied in the 
 present case, the main section may be said to have a height of three equi- 
 lateral triangles described upon the transverse width of the church from 
 centre to centre of the columns, which dimensions seem in all churches to 
 have been taken as the elementary scale on which the proportions were 
 founded. Another proportion, common in old works, is derived from the 
 diagonal of the square of this measure. Both have been claimed as the 
 system made use of at Westminster, but the more closely one examines 
 into it, the more clear it is that the equilateral triangle is the figure made 
 use of. I have made careful measurements, and find it fully established 
 that this is the case. I find that the elementary width is about five inches 
 greater in the transept than in the choir and nave. Possibly it had been 
 affected in the latter case, as it would appear to have been in the aisles by 
 some accidental cause, for the difference is clearly not accidental, being 
 most systematically carried out and adhered to throughout to a fraction. 
 If we take the larger of these dimensions, it will be found to agree very 
 closely indeed with the different parts of the church. The height of the 
 nave exceeds the three triangles only by about eight inches. The height 
 to the triforium stringcourse exceeds half that dimension, or the three 
 triangles, or the semi-scale, by only four inches, and the height of the tii- 
 
20 
 
 Gleanings from Westminster Abbey 
 
 forium itself is four inches in excess of one of these minor triangles ; differ- 
 ences so small as to be invisible in so great a height. This agrees with 
 the theory laid down by Professor Cockerell, in his excellent paper pub- 
 lished by the Archaeological Institute in their Winchester volume. He 
 defines it in this way, that if you assume double aisles to the nave, (i. e. if 
 you treble the elementary width,) the equilateral triangle described on this 
 width will give the height of the vaulting. In the ichnography, the pi'opor- 
 tions are far less exact. The idea would appear to be that the length of the 
 church should consist of four, and the length of the transept of two, of the 
 heights of the great triangle last named. This is, however, by no means 
 exact, and one cannot lay much stress upon it^. 
 
 I may here mention that the same system holds good in the chapter- 
 house, of which the height agrees with that of an equilateral triangle 
 described on its diagonal ; or, more properly, each of its arches, from the 
 central pillar to the angle shaft, has the height of two triangles, or of 
 a regular vesica piscis. 
 
 The details of the internal design greatly exceed in richness those of 
 French works of the same age, excepting only in the extent to which the 
 capitals are foliated. 
 
 The arch-mouldings are peculiarly beautiful, as will be seen by the ac- 
 companying sections. (See p. 22.) The triforiiim arcade is as beautiful as 
 any which can perhaps be found. That to the eastern part of Lincoln may 
 be almost richer, but its proportions yield in beauty to those of West- 
 minster. The richness of the whole is also vastly increased by the wall 
 surfaces between the arches being enriched with a square diaper. The wall 
 arcading is of exquisite design, (see the engraving opposite,) and the spaces 
 over it were filled with most beautiful foliage, with figures interspersed, 
 while the spandrels of the cusping were filled with ornamental painting. 
 When, to the richness of architectural detail, we add that of material, — the 
 entire columns and all the subordinate shafts being of marble, and the re- 
 mainder of stone of several different shades of colour, — the magnificence of 
 the internal design must have greatly exceeded that of its French proto- 
 types. The only one point which strikes the eye as looking less rich, is 
 the use of merely moulded capitals to the main pillars. This, however, 
 arose from their being of Purbeck marble. It is true that at Ely and else- 
 where, as in our own chapter-house, the carved capitals are of this stubborn 
 material ; but its use may, nevertheless, be accepted as a fair excuse for 
 moderating the workmanship. The internal designs of the transept ends 
 are truly magnificent, indeed I doubt whether their equals can be found 
 
 From further examination since writing the above, I believe th.at both in the 
 aisles of the nave, and in the lengths of the church and of the transept, the proportions 
 reached to the centres of the walls, instead of (as was more usual) their internal face. 
 If so, the last-named proportions would be almost exact. 
 
of the Time of Henry the Third. 
 
 21 
 
 
22 
 
 Gleanings from Westminster Abbey 
 
WESTMINSTER ABBEY. 
 
 PAVING TILES. 
 


 WESTMINSTER ABBEY. 
 
 PAVING TILES, 
 
of the Time of Henry the Third. 23 
 
 elsewhere. The manner in which they continue the lines of the general 
 design, and yet add diversity to the forms, is truly artistic. 
 
 Restoration of the Rose Window. 
 
 It is most unfortunate that the great rose windows have lost their ori- 
 ginal character ; I have, however, a strong impression that the old ones 
 may have, in their leading subdivisions, resembled that now existing in the 
 south transept, and that the design has been simply translated from that of 
 the thirteenth to that of the fifteenth century. I have attempted in the ac- 
 companying drawing (see above) to translate it back again, and you will 
 see that it makes a very fine window, in perfect accordance with the character 
 of the church, and very much like several existing specimens. You may say 
 that this is pure conjecture, and so it is — but it is a conjecture not devoid 
 of some collateral corroboration, for, singularly enough, there exist in the 
 chapter-house some encaustic tiles of a pattern evidently copied from a rose 
 window, and agreeing precisely in its divisions with that under considera- 
 tion, representing even the shafts with their caps and bases. It will be 
 seen that my translation of the existing window into Early English almost 
 precisely resembles the pattern given on those tiles. The square form in 
 
24 
 
 Gleanings from Westminster Abbey 
 
 which the circle is inscribed seems to be original from the systematic way 
 in which the vaulting is accommodated to it, but it must be admitted, on the 
 other hand, that there are in the eastern jamb of the south window some 
 indications of the design having been altered from the original intention ; 
 though, as I think, this was an alteration made during the progress of the 
 work, as neither the opposite jamb of the same window, nor either jamb of 
 the opposite window, shew any such indications. The south window was, 
 I believe, renewed in the fifteenth century, and again in the seventeenth ; 
 Sir Christopher Wren informs us that it had been renewed about forty 
 years before the date of his report. 
 
 The north window received its present form in the eighteenth century, 
 and in no degree resembles its predecessor. Whether that which Sir 
 Christoj)her Wren reports to be in a dangerous state was the original one, 
 we have no means of telling. 
 
 The works undertaken by Henry III., and completed in 1269, termi- 
 nated immediately to the west of the crossing ; the line of junction can be 
 readily traced. 1 think the older work may have included one bay of the 
 great arcade and aisles, or, to say the least, some of its details were con- 
 tinued in that bay ; but in the first clerestory window of the western arm 
 the change is clearly seen in the diversity of its eastern from its western 
 jambs. (See the engraving opposite.) 
 
 The five bays west of the crossing are the work of Edward I. 
 
 They differ chiefly from the work of his father in the plan of the columns, 
 which have four attached and four detached shafts, (the latter in most in- 
 stances secured by fillets of brass,) in the greater number of the ribs of 
 the vaulting, and in the substitution of shields for carved enrichments in 
 the spandrels of the wall-arcading. The rib-moulds of the vaulting are 
 also different, the capitals of the wall-arcading are moulded instead of being 
 carved, and the triforium has no enrichments in its arch-mouldings ; but in 
 the main the design may be considered to be the same. 
 
 In both, the carved foliage is at the point of transition from the con- 
 ventional to the natural. It is not in any degree intermediate between the 
 two, but they stand on equal terms side by side, each in its integrity, and 
 each excellent of its kind. 
 
 Unhappily, however, the sculptors of more recent times, convinced that 
 Gothic architecture is discordant with their own “ high art,” have shewn 
 such praiseworthy determination in destroying, root and branch, the dis- 
 cordant element, and the destructive atmosphere of London has shewn so 
 strong a sympathy with the practitioners in high art, that between the two 
 we have little left of the carving of the lower parts (on which the greatest 
 amount of study had been expended) but a few mutilated and crumbling 
 fragments — “ the gleaning of the grapes when the vintage is done.” 
 
 These melancholy relics are, however, sufficient to shew us the value of 
 what we have lost. 
 
of the Time of Henry the Third, 
 
 25 
 
 Clerestory Vvindow of Na,ve, shew mg the junctioii of the two styles. 
 a Thirteenth century, h Fifteenth century. 
 
 E 
 
26 
 
 Gleanings from Westminster Abbey 
 
 I have before mentioned that the hand of one French carver may be 
 traced in the work. This is the case chiefly among the capitals of the 
 wall-arcading. Many of these are of the English type of the period, but 
 
 Capitals of Wall Arcade 
 
 among them are two kinds, both of which are in their carving distinctly 
 French. The one is the crotchet capital, the stalks of which are termi- 
 nated, not as in English work with conventional, but with exquisite little 
 tufts of natural foliage, such as may be seen in the wall-arcading of the 
 Sainte Chapelle and many other French works of the period. In the other, 
 natural foliage is introduced creeping up the bell, and turning over at the 
 top in symmetrical tufts. In both the foliage is smaller and less bold than 
 in French work, and the architectural form of the capital is English. 
 
 Spaudrel with Shield 
 
 The spandrels over the wall-arcading are exquisitely heautiful. Some are 
 only diapered in square diaper like the spandrels of the triforium, some are 
 ornamented with conventional and some with natural foliage, with or without 
 figures, and some with subjects. Those in the western arm contained shields 
 
27 
 
 of the Time of Henry the Third, 
 
 of a large number of the great men of the day. The great majority have given 
 place to modern monuments, but the few which remain are noblv executed. 
 They are curiously hung by the arm-straps to projecting heads. In those 
 parts of the triforium wliich cross the ends of the transepts there have been 
 figures in all the spandrels. Of these, the two central ones in the north 
 transept are gone, and the corresponding figures in the south transept are 
 much decayed, but those in the 
 angles of both, being executed in a 
 superior material, are more or less 
 perfect. They all represent angels 
 censing, and are exceedingly fine, 
 after making due allowance for the 
 height at which they were in- 
 tended to have been seen. 
 
 Below these, in the north tran- 
 sept, there are figures in the win- 
 dow-jambs, and busts of angels in 
 medallions in the soffits of the win- 
 dow-heads. They are shewn as 
 bearing musical instruments, &c., 
 forming what is called a “ Divine 
 liturgy.*’ They seem to have been 
 well executed, though now much 
 decayed. 
 
 The bosses of the vaulting are 
 generally very nobly executed, par- 
 ticularly those over the choir, (I 
 crossing,) some of which are among the finest I have ever seen. Several 
 bosses in the western aisle of the north transept contain well-executed 
 figures and groups surrounded by foliage. 
 
 Of the original details of the exterior it is nearly impossible to form any- 
 thing like a correct idea. The whole was greatly decayed at the com- 
 mencement of the last century, and was re-cased, almost throughout, with 
 Oxfordshire stone, by Sir Christopher Wren and his successors, the details 
 being altered and pared down in a very merciless manner ; and the work, 
 thus renewed, has again become greatly decayed. There is, in fact, scarcely 
 a trace of any original detail of the eastern portion of the exterior left. 
 The modeller employed by Sir Christopher Wren seems to have had more 
 respect for the details than his master, for, while the latter has destroyed 
 the external shafts of the windows, and represented their capitals by huge 
 ungainly acorns, the modeller has in several instances shewn the originals 
 quite faithfully. 
 
 The exterior is thus described by Keepe in 1683 : — 
 
 “ On the north side you rather behold the skeleton of a church than any 
 
28 
 
 Gleanings from JFestminster Abbey 
 
 great comeliness in her appearance, being so shrivelled and parcht by the 
 continual blasts of the northern winds, to which she stands exposed, as 
 also the continual smoaks of the sea-coal which are of a corroding and 
 fretting quality, which have added more furrows to her declining years, 
 that little of her former beauty now remains. On this side is a most noble 
 door or portal, with a porch thereunto that opens into the cross of the 
 church, and on each side thereof two lesser porticoes, one of which only 
 serves at present for the convenience of entering therein. This porch in 
 former times hath been of great esteem and reputation, assuming to itself 
 no less a name than that of the porch of Solomon. That it hath been a 
 curious, neat, and costly porch in foregoing times, the remains thereof do 
 at this day in some measure declare, for therein were placed the statues of 
 the Twelve Apostles at full proportion, besides a multitude of lesser saints 
 and martyrs to adorn it, with several intaglios, devices, and fretworks that 
 helped to the beauty thereof. But that it came in any proportion to the 
 stately, rich, and noble porch of King Solomon is not to be imagined ; nor 
 can we think that those who christened and gave it that name were so 
 ignorant or so vain as so to believe ; but as a thing excellent in those 
 times, and far surpassing any of the same kind, it was looked upon as a 
 piece of work well deserving no common name, and therefore had the title 
 of Solomon’s porch appropriated thereunto.” 
 
 I should mention that the name of ‘‘ Solomon’s Porch” was, I believe, 
 really applied to a large porch erected against the central portal in the 
 reign of Kichard II. 
 
 Crull, writing in 1711, says : — The very remnants which are obvious 
 to our sight even to this day, may soon convince us of its ancient beauty 
 and magnificence. For this portico still retains entire below two of these 
 admirable statues, besides two others quite defaced, and two more over the 
 eastern part of the portico, and as many over the western door, through 
 which you enter on the north side, pretty entire, being all undeniable wit- 
 nesses of their former excellency.” 
 
 These magnificent portals formed, beyond a doubt, the most sumptuous 
 external features in the church, and should be especially mentioned as 
 another imitation from French cathedrals. It is curious that this is, so far 
 as I am aware, the only instance in which those glorious portals, so common 
 in France, were directly imitated in an English church. From the existing 
 remains, as well as from the above description, the portals must have been 
 gorgeously rich. There are a number of mouldings still existing in the 
 original stone, and which clearly contained rich foliage, like that still re- 
 maining in the doorway to the chapter-house, but now carefully cut out. 
 The places where the figures of the apostles stood are readily to be dis- 
 tinguished, and an old print shews one also on the central pillar of the 
 double doorway, no doubt a figure of our Lord. 
 
 The tympana of the smaller openings retain their original stone, which 
 
29 
 
 of the Time of Henry the Third. 
 
 is decorated with circular panels, no doubt once containing sculpture, but 
 the great tympanum is renewed apparently without any regard to the 
 original form. There were formerly gabled canopies to each portal, but 
 now the central one has an ogee canopy, and the others none. The whole 
 of this once magnificent front has been wretchedly tampered with, and 
 even the design of the rose window was altered (about 1720) from the 
 form shewn in the old prints to one of miserable poverty. 
 
 It is a question on which much difference of opinion exists, whether a 
 central tower was ever contemplated. This feature was nearly universal 
 among the great English churches of the period ; but, as this church was 
 designed on a French type, and as the churches of the period in France very 
 seldom have central towers, it seems most natural to suppose that it was 
 not intended to have erected one here. On the other hand, Sir Christopher 
 Wren distinctly states that the commencement of a tower existed in his 
 time ; indeed, in one of Hollar’s views there are clear indications of it, (and 
 internally it is evident that the centre was not intended to be vaulted at 
 the level of the nave and choir). M. Viollet-le-Duc also seems to think 
 that even in France this feature had often been contemplated; so that it 
 seems that there is as much to be said on one side as on the other. I 
 cannot, however, think that the comparatively slender piers on the crossing 
 (to the extreme beauty of which I should have especially called attention) 
 could have been intended to carry, at the most, more than a very light 
 structure. Even at Salisbury, where the piers are far more massive, the 
 lower story of the tower is very lightly 
 built, and clearly without any intention 
 of supporting the enormous superstruc- 
 ture which has since been added, and 
 under the weight of which it has be- 
 come so terribly crushed. 
 
 The cloisters were carried by Henry 
 HI. and Edward I., in each case as far 
 only as their respective portions of the 
 church extended. The part built by 
 Henry III. occupies, as is so well known, 
 a very singular position, being, in fact, 
 within the walls of the church, and 
 forming a lower story to the western 
 aisle of the transept. This, as I conceive, 
 arose from the position of the cloister 
 being determined by the older works, 
 and from the church of the Confessor 
 having had no western aisle to the tran- 
 sept. King Henry, however, built the 
 bays further than the cloister itself, for the purpose of forming entrances 
 
 Capital iu tLe Cloister, shewing the Junction 
 of the Styles. 
 
 eastern wall of the cloister a few 
 
30 
 
 Gleanings from Westminster Abbey 
 
 
31 
 
 of the Time of Henry the Third, 
 
 to the chapter-house and dormitory. Edward I. afterwards carried on 
 the north walk of the cloister, just as far as he did the church itself. The 
 other bays of that side were built late in the fourteenth century, in imita- 
 tion of the older bays, an almost solitary instance of the style of one 
 period being absolutely copied in a later work. We find here, at the 
 corner where they resumed the style of their own period, the singular 
 anomaly of art — an Early English and a Perpendicular capital cut by 
 them on the same block of stone, and their mouldings intersecting one 
 another. The late imitators seem to have been sorely puzzled with the 
 detached cuspings in the old circles, and to have made some very awkward 
 attempts at reproducing it. 
 
 The doorway from the church next the cloister is a very fine work, but 
 in a lamentable state of decay. The window openings of the early parts 
 of the cloister have been glazed in their traceried heads only, the glazing 
 being stopped upon a horizontal iron bar, grooved at the top to receive it, 
 and running along the springing line of the arch. This system was con- 
 tinued in the later work ; indeed, it was, I find, the customary mode of 
 dealing with cloister openings. Those at Salisbury, Canterbury, and 
 Gloucester, works of very different periods, were, I think, all of them 
 glazed in this manner. 
 
 In the church we have no windows of more than two lights, so that the 
 tracery is in its most normal form. In the cloister, however, the windows 
 are of three lights, and the tracery is not only in circles, but in quatrefoils 
 and trefoils, while in the chapter-house, as we shall presently see, were 
 windows of four and five lights, shewing that the principle of window- 
 tracery had been brought to a considerable pitch of development. 
 
 In all the circles in the tracery, whether in the church, the cloister, and, 
 no doubt, in the chapter-house, the cusping was, according to the custom 
 of the period, worked separately from the tracery, and fitted into grooves 
 in its reveals, while the heads of lights are almost always left uncusped, 
 the chapter-house forming, I think, nearly the sole exception. 
 
 One feature, more French than English, I may mention here : I mean 
 the great width of the window-lights, which are generally between four and 
 five feet wide, and must have afforded a noble scope to the glass painter. 
 
 We now come to the chapter-house. 
 
 Matthew Paris, under the date of 1250, says, after stating that the king 
 had rebuilt the church, “ Dominus Rex oedificavit capitulum incomparabile.” 
 I judge from this that he commenced it during that year. It was, indeed, 
 an incomparable chapter-house ! That at Salisbury was not yet com- 
 menced, and though evidently built in imitation of this, and having some 
 features of greater richness, it still would have yielded the palm to its 
 prototype at Westminster. 
 
 Its beauties, however, are unhappily now for the most part to be judged 
 rather by imagination than by sight, for seldom do we see a noble work of 
 
The Chapter-house in its present scate. 
 
 I believe, however, that I succeeded in getting at nearly every part of 
 the design. The internal view which I exhibit (see the steel plate) was 
 founded on the result of my examinations, and I think you will agree 
 
 32 Gleanings fr'om Westminster Abbey 
 
 art reduced to such a wreck ! It appears that, as early as the days of 
 Edward III. (certainly before 1340), it was made over, I suppose oc- 
 casionally, to the uses of the House of Commons, on condition that it 
 should be kept in repair by the Crown. In or after the reign of Edward 
 VI., however, St. Stephen’s Chapel being given up to the House of Com- 
 mons, the chapter-house was converted into a Public Record Office. In 
 or about 1740, the vaulting was found to be dangerous, and taken down; 
 and before this, in 1703, we find thdt Sir Christopher Wren having refused 
 to put up a gallery in it, it was made over to the tender mercies of some 
 barbarian, who fitted it up for the records, with studious regard to con- 
 cealment or destruction of its architectural beauties. 
 
 I undertook, some years back, the careful investigation of its details, and 
 such was the difficulty presented by the fittings and other impediments, 
 that, though every possible facility was afforded me by the gentlemen in 
 charge of the records, it occupied me (on and ofi*) for several months. 
 
Q ^.RA .ArcA.^ 
 
 A-H L &KeMX10 ■ Scy . 
 
 RESTORATION OF THE CHAPTER HOUSE WESTMINSTER ABBEY. 
 
i 
 
 r) 
 
 A 
 
 i 
 
33 
 
 of the Time of Henry the Third. 
 
 with me that a more elegant interior could scarcely be found. The 
 diameter of the octagon is about 18 feet, and the height to the crown of 
 vaulting about 54 feet. The diameters of those at Salisbury, Lincoln, and 
 York seem all to be nearly the same with this; probably the polygons 
 were in each case inscribed in a circle of about 60 feet diameter, mea- 
 sured, perhaps, in the clear of the vaulting-shafts. 
 
 The central pillar still exists, and is about 35 feet high. It is entirely 
 of Purbeck marble, and consists of a central shaft, surrounded by eight 
 subordinate shafts, attached to it by three moulded bands. The capital, 
 though of marble, is most richly carved. I may mention that on the top 
 of the capital is a systematically constructed set of eight hooks of iron for 
 as many cross-ties. The same was the case at Salisbury, and I have no 
 doubt that the hooks on the columns in the church are many of them 
 original, and were intended for security during the progress of the works. 
 The windows are almost entirely walled up, though a considerable part 
 of the tracery, no doubt, remains imbedded. Their design is, however, 
 readily ascertainable, one of them being a blank, owing to one face of the 
 octagon being in contact with the transept of the church: a nobler four- 
 light window could hardly be found. 
 
 The window over the doorway is most carefully walled up with ashlar, 
 but from the bases visible on its sill, we see that it was of five instead of 
 four lights, — no doubt to avoid the stumped look it might have had from 
 being so much shortened by the height of the doorway and the abutting 
 vestibule. I had often wondered that, while the windows generally are 
 walled up with hrick^ this should be filled with stone ; but on taking out 
 one of the ashlar stones to ascertain the section of the jamb, what was my 
 surprise at finding them to consist entirely of the lengths of the moulded 
 ribs of the lost vaulting, carefully packed, like wine-bottles in a bin, with 
 their moulded sides inwards ! I made a still more interesting discovery in 
 the spandrels of the doorway below. The gallery crosses the head of this 
 doorway, and the presses for records were fitted so closely to the wall that ‘ 
 nothing could be seen. I was one day on the top of one of these presses, 
 and on venturing to pull aw'ay an arris fillet which closed the crevice 
 between it and the wall, I perceived the top of an arched recess in the 
 wall behind the press, and on looking down into it I saw some round 
 object of stone in the recess below. My curiosity being excited, I let 
 down into it by a string a small bull’s-eye lantern, when, to my extreme 
 delight, I saw that the mysterious object was the head of a beautiful full- 
 sized statue in a niche. Permission was speedily obtained for the removal 
 of the press. - The statue proved to be a very fine one of the Virgin, and 
 in the spaces adjoining were angels censing. I afterwards found that it 
 formed part of an Annunciation ; the angel having been on the other side 
 of the door. This last-named figure has, however, been long since re- 
 moved into the vestibule. Its wings are gone ; but the mortices into 
 
 F 
 
34 
 
 Gleanings from Westminster Abbey 
 
 >vliich they were fixed remain. Both are fine works, though not devoid 
 of a remnant of Byzantine stiffness. 
 
 The doorway itself has been a truly noble one. It was double, divided 
 by a single central pillar and a circle in the head ; whether pierced or con- 
 taining sculpture, I have been unable to ascertain, as it is almost entirely 
 destroyed. The jambs and arch are magnificent. The former contain on 
 the outer side four large shafts of Purbeck marble. Their caps are of the 
 same material, and most richly carved, and the si>aces between the shafts 
 beautifully foliated. I exhibit casts of several parts of this doorway. The 
 arch contains two orders of foliated mouldings, one of which, on either 
 side, contains a series of beautiful little figures in the intervals of the en- 
 twined foliage. To get at some of the details of this doorway I had to 
 creep on a mass of parchments and dust ten feet deep, and, after taking 
 out the boarding of the back of the cases, to examine and draw, by the 
 help of the little bull’s-eye lantern before mentioned ; a most laborious 
 operation, and giving one more the look of a master chimney-sweeper than 
 an architect. 
 
 The walls below the windows are occupied by arcaded stalls with tre- 
 foiled heads. The five which occupy the eastern side are of superior rich- 
 ness and more deeply recessed. Their capitals, carved in Purbeck marble, 
 are of exquisite beauty. The spandrels over the arches are diapered, 
 usually with the square diaper so frequent in the church, but, in one in- 
 stance, with a beautifully executed pattern of roses. One of the most 
 remarkable features in the chapter-house is the painting at the back of 
 these stalls. The general idea represented by this painting w’ould ap- 
 pear to be our Lord exhibiting the mysteries of the Eedemption to the 
 heavenly host. In the central compartment, our Lord sits enthroned ; 
 His hands are held up to shew the wounds, and the chest bared for 
 the same purpose ; above are angels holding a curtain, or dossel, behind 
 the throne, and on either side are others bearing the instruments of 
 the Passion. The whole of the remaining spaces are filled by throngs 
 of cherubim and seraphim. The former occupy the most important po- 
 sition and are on the larger scale. In the two niches, to the right and left 
 of the central one, are two cherubim nearly of human size. They occupy 
 the centre of the niches, and with their wings nearly fill them. Their 
 heads are of great beauty, and are very perfect, and apparently painted in 
 oil. They have each six wings, two crossing over their heads, two spread- 
 ing right and left, and two crossing over the knees. The prevailing colour 
 of the wings is blue, the symbolical colour given to cherubim ; and the 
 feathers have eyes like those of the peacock, to carry out the idea, “ they 
 were full of eyes within.” One of these principal angels holds a crown in 
 each hand, and the other a crown in one hand, and something like a gem 
 with two depending strings in the other, symbolising the rewards of 
 heaven purchased by the redemption. On one of them the names of 
 
85 
 
 of the Time of Henrij the Third, 
 
 Christian virtues are written on the feathers of the wings, as, e.g., officii 
 sincera plenitudo; voluntatis discretio ; simplex et pura intentia; mun- 
 ditia carnis ; puritas mentis ; confessio ; satisfactio ; caritas ; eleemosina ; 
 orationis devotio ; simplicitas ; humilitas ; fidelitas, &c. In the outer 
 niches were several cherubic figures of smaller size, their faces strongly 
 expressive of sorrow at seeing the wounds of the Saviour ; and in the 
 background above and the foreground below are throughout a multitude 
 of seraphim, whose prevailing colour is, as usual, red, and the expression 
 of the faces most striking. All the figures have gilt nimbi of rich patterns. 
 The whole is executed in a highly artistic manner, and though the features 
 are in some cases not quite consistent with the ideal of angelic beauty, the 
 expressions are very striking. I imagine the painting to have been ex- 
 ecuted about the middle of the fourteenth century, which is, I find, the 
 same as the opinion arrived at by Sir Charles Eastlake, In some other 
 parts of the arcade are paintings of a very inferior character and of much 
 later date. They represent the earlier scenes in the Apocalypse. I have 
 not noticed any merely decorative painting, excepting in the heads of the 
 five principal stalls, which are coloured and gilt. 
 
 Foliage over the entrance to the Chapter-house. 
 
 The Chapter-house is [approached from the cloister by an outer and an 
 inner vestibule. The former is entered by the magnificent portal, which you 
 must all so well know, in the cloister. It is a double doorway, the outer arch 
 
3G Gleanings fi'om Westminster Abbey 
 
 of wliich is of two foliated orders ; one of them contains in the entwined*' 
 foliag-e a series of figures forming a Radix Jesse. The tympanum is ex- 
 quisitely decorated with scroll-work, and formerly contained a sitting 
 statue (probably of the Virgin and infant Saviour), under a niche, and 
 supported on either side by angels, which yet remain, and the more per- 
 fect of which is very beautiful. 
 
 This doorway was magnificently decorated with colour and gold, traces 
 of which are still clearly visible. 
 
 It is in a most lamentable state of decay, but I have, as I trust, arrested 
 the progress of disintegration, by a process which I am largely making 
 use of throughout the interior of the church, and which has already 
 been applied to the wall-arcading and the triforium almost throughout the 
 church, as well as to the majority of the royal monuments. Its effect is to 
 harden and set the crumbling surface, so as to stereotype the work in the 
 state in which it now is. The surface is so tender, that we cannot venture 
 to touch it before the operation is performed. We therefore merely blow 
 away the dust with a pair of bellows, with a long flexible tube and nozzle, 
 and inject the solution with a syringe perforated with a number of small 
 holes, so as not to disturb the crumbling surface, which, after the operation, 
 becomes quite hard and rigid. 
 
 The outer vestibule is exceedingly low, owing to the necessity for the 
 dormitory to pass over it to effect its communication with the church. It 
 is vaulted in two spans, supported by small Purbeck marble columns. 
 The bosses of the vaulting are of great merit. The vaulting was, till 
 recently, mutilated, to allow of a staircase to the room above, now the 
 library ; but on discovering and restoring the ancient staircase, which I 
 shall presently mention, I was able to complete this vaulting, and to re- 
 move a brick wall which divided the vestibule in its length, and enclosed 
 the marble pillars. On the side which had been enclosed, the ancient 
 paving remains deeply worn by the feet of the monks. 
 
 From the vestibule are doorways on either side, the one into the old 
 revestry of the church, (now walled up,) and the other into a curious 
 chamber, which I shall have to describe. 
 
 At the further end of this vestibule is a second doorway leading into the 
 inner vestibule, which is very different in its design. Being free from the 
 depressing cause before mentioned, it rises to a considerable height, and 
 contains a flight of steps occupying its whole width and leading to the 
 great portal of the chapter-house. It is vaulted in one span, divided into 
 two unequal bays, one of which has contained a remarkable window, now 
 destroyed, but of which, by cutting into the walls, I have been able to gain 
 some clue to the design. On the opposite side are tw'o windows, now 
 walled up, which gave a borrowed light to the altar in the revestry, 
 erroneously known as the Chapel of St. Blaise. 
 
 The floor of the chapter-house is probably the most perfect, and one of 
 
I 
 
 ] 
 
 I 
 
1. ENTRANCE FROM TH E CLOISTER 
 
 2. VESTIBULE TO THE CHAPTER HOUSE 
 
 ^RA 
 
 3. THE INNER ENTRANCE 
 
 4. EASTERN STALLS 
 
 RESTORATION OF THE CHAPTER HOUSE WESTMINSTER ABBEY. 
 
of the Time of Henry the Third, 37 
 
 the finest encaustic tile pavements now remaining. It is, happily, in a 
 nearly perfect state, having been protected by a wood floor. 
 
 I have thoroughly examined it, and find it to be arranged in parallel 
 strips from east to west, the patterns changing in each strip, though re- 
 peated on the corresponding sides. Many of the patterns are most noble 
 in their design, and some of extraordinary delicacy and refinement. The 
 uniformity of the pavement is in one place disturbed by the insertion of a 
 number of tiles containing figures, such as St. John giving the ring to the 
 Confessor, &c. Many of the patterns have been pretty correctly copied by 
 Mr. Minton in the pavement of the Temple Church, and many are given 
 by Mr. Shaw in his recent work on “ Encaustic Pavements.” 
 
 Of the external details of the chapter-house, scarcely a trace remains ; 
 decay and mutilation have brought their work to a final completion. Nor 
 am I aware of any old prints or description which would aid in the re- 
 covery of the design. But I have recently spied out from the window of 
 a neighbouring house a small portion of external tracery, which I had not 
 seen before. 
 
 The records are now in great measure removed, and soon will be entirely 
 so. Let us hope that the Government will recollect the condition of five 
 centuries back, — that they should keep the building in repair, and that 
 they will give it up to the Chapter, with a restoration fund proportioned 
 both to the extent of the dilapidations and the merits of the building. 
 I have omitted to mention that the chapter-house is raised on a crypt, 
 which is vaulted, like the superstructure, on a central pillar. This pillar is 
 round, and, curiously enough, is carefully hollowed out at two stages, as if 
 for the concealment of valuables. The crypt contains a recess for an altar, 
 with piscina locker, and the marks of a screen. The crypt was filled up 
 some feet above its natural level with earth, but I have lowered this to the 
 original level. 
 
 I mentioned just now the two doorways which open (or once opened) 
 from the other vestibule, and the chambers into which they led. Allow 
 me to describe these chambers. 
 
 One is now mistakenly called the Chapel of St. Blaise ; hut in the older 
 accounts is denominated the Old Revestry. It occupies a space which is 
 very frequent in abbeys, intervening between the transept and the entrance 
 to the chapter-house, and often called by the expressive name 'of “ the 
 slype.” It is little known to visitors of the Abbey ; but it is a most pic- 
 turesque, and, as I think, beautiful room, and the skill shewn in rendering 
 so irregular a space sightly, and in vaulting it methodically, is very re- 
 markable. Its main approach (now its only one) is the doorway in the 
 centre of the south transept. This doorway, we are told by Dart, was 
 “ enclosed with three doors, the inner cancellated, the middle, which is 
 very thick, lined with skins like parchment, and driven full of nails. These 
 skins they, by tradition, tell us were some skins of the Danes tanned, and 
 
38 
 
 Gleanings from Westminster Abbey 
 
 Cbapel of St. Blasius, or the Old Reveslry. 
 
 given here as a memorial of our delivery from them. The doors are very 
 strong, but were, notwithstanding, broken open lately, and the place 
 robbed.” 
 
 • Of these doors only one now remains ; but we see the marks of the 
 others. This offensive custom of lining the doors of sacred treasuries with 
 leather, made, not I conceive from the skins of Danes, but from those of 
 persons executed for sacrilege, was, no doubt, intended as a means of 
 terrifying less hardened depredators, but was not always effectual. 
 
 As this chamber is lofty, and intervened between the dormitory and the 
 church, it was necessary to provide means for the monks to cross it, to get 
 to their nocturnal services. This was effected by a kind of bridge at the 
 west end of the chamber, from which the doorways are still visible which 
 led from the dormitory into the church, and from the latter of which there 
 was a detached winding staircase in the corner of the transept, where now 
 Roubiliac’s monument to the Duke of Argyle stands. It is shewn in all 
 the old plans, and was probably removed to make room for that monument. 
 The western division of the chamber was clearly in the vestiaiium. It had 
 
of the Time of Henry the Third. 39 
 
 in Dart’s time “ a set of cranes of wood, swinging as if in a rack, on which 
 formerly the copes and vestments in common use were hung.” 
 
 There remain still, or did lately, in a forsaken vestry at Aylesbury 
 Church, racks of a similar description. In the triforium there is a quad- 
 rant-shaped coke-hox, probably belonging to the revestry. There are 
 several aumbreys in the walls. The eastern portion was, however, clearly 
 a chapel ; indeed, the vestries of our old churches were generally chapels, 
 as is shewn by the piscince, almost always, and the altars occasionally, 
 remaining in them. The altar-step and some traces of the lower course of 
 the altar still remain. The former has a curious semicircular projection 
 in its centre. 
 
 Over the altar still remains a full-length figure painted on the wall. 
 It is a female figure, crowned, holding a book in one hand, and in the other 
 carrying, apparently, a gridiron ; immediately below it is a small painting 
 of the Crucifixion, and on one side is the figure of a monk in the attitude 
 of prayer, from which, in the direction of the principal figure, are painted 
 the following lines : — 
 
 “Me, qucm culpa gravis premit, erigc Virgo suavis j 
 Fac milii plaaitum Christum, deleasquc reatum.” 
 
 Whether the “ culpa gravis” consisted of a disregard of the human 
 hides placed, in terrorem., upon the door, and this painting was the peni- 
 tential offering of a pilfering monk, I leave others to judge. I have never 
 been able to discover what saint this figure represents, nor the meaning of 
 the badge which she wears. It is, on the whole, fairly drawn, though un- 
 duly elongated, and appears to have been painted in oil. 
 
 To the south of this altar are the borrowed liglits from the inner vesti- 
 bule of the chapter-house, already mentioned ; the adaptation of the vault- 
 ing to suit these windows is exceedingly skilful and elegant. 
 
 This most interesting room has, unhappily, been long used for the 
 reception of all sorts of odds and ends, to its great disfigurement and 
 injury. It was there that the iron-work torn down from the royal tombs 
 at the time of the coronation of George IV. was deposited. Of this I 
 have had the happiness of restoring a considerable part (that to the tombs 
 of Queen Eleanor and of Henry V.) to its place, but some yet remains. 
 
 The other chamber I wish to describe is a very different one. It is 
 a low vault, forming an imperfect portion of one of the bays of the Con- 
 fessor’s work, already described, and containing a portion of one of the 
 Saxon columns. Within it, however, is a separate structure of less early 
 date, and long used as a wine-cellar. This inner structure is built up to 
 the old vaulting, but has a low and sloping covering of stone. When 
 I first entered this place I was much perplexed to guess its meaning, 
 but, after somewhat lengthened consideration, it occurred to me that it 
 was the substructure of the original stairs to the monks’ dormitory, which 
 
40 
 
 Gleanings from Westminster Abbey 
 
 idea agreed well with the existence of a walled-up doorway opposite to it 
 in the cloister. I, about the same time, happened to notice in the manu- 
 script Lives of the Abbots, preserved in the library, that one of them 
 (Abbot Byrcheston) was said to be buried opposite the vestibule of the 
 chapter-house, and near the entrance to the dormitory; a definition of 
 their relative positions which at once confirmed my idea, and at the same 
 time pointed out a walled-up doorway, close to the portal of the vestibule, 
 as having been the entrance to the dormitory, 
 
 I obtained leave of Dean Buckland to make an opening in the wall by 
 which the doorway was blocked up, but was at first impeded in my 
 examination by finding that the space within the door was filled completely 
 up with that useful material technically known as “ dry rubbish,’’ which, 
 on the perforation being effected, came down like an avalanche into the 
 cloister. After taking out some cart-loads, we came to the sloping plat- 
 form, from which, however, I was disappointed at finding that the steps had 
 been removed, excepting a portion of the bottom one, which still remained 
 in its place, and was of Purbeck marble. 
 
 The sill of the doorway was worn deeply with the feet of the monks, 
 and more so on one side than on the other, shewing that only one leaf of 
 the folding-doors was generally used. 
 
 In the dry rubbish were many interesting fragments ; among which 
 were some embossed and coloured mouldings, like those in St. Stephen’s 
 Chapel. This now forms, once more, the entrance to what was the dor- 
 mitory, but now the library. 
 
 ' But let us return for a few moments to the chamber below. 
 
 On the inner side of the door I found hanging from beneath the hinges 
 some pieces of white leather. They reminded me of the story of the skins 
 of Danes, and a friend to whom I had shewn them sent a piece to Mr. 
 Quekett, of the College of Surgeons, who, I regret to say, pronounced it 
 to be human. It is clear that the door was entirely covered with them, 
 both within and without. I presume, therefore, that this, too, was a trea- 
 sury ; and I have a strong idea that it then formed a part of, and that its 
 door was the entrance to, the Pyx Chamber, and it is possible that, after 
 the robbery of the chamber before alluded to the King, finding that the 
 terror of human skins offered no security, remodelled the chamber, and 
 intrusted the safety of his treasury to the less offensive, but more prosaic, 
 defence of massive and double doors and multitudinous locks. 
 
 I have one more tale to tell about this chamber of inyster}\ There 
 is between the walls which carries the stairs and the wall of the chamber 
 itself a long and very narrow interval, just wide enough to squeeze through. 
 When I gained access to this chamber, now more than ten years back, on 
 going along this narrow crevice, I found its floor heaped up several feet 
 
 See p. 7. 
 
41 
 
 of the Time of Henry the Third, 
 
 deep apparently with stones and rubbish. While standing on this heap, I 
 was puzzled by finding it spring beneath my feet, and stooping down and 
 clearing away a little rubbish, what was my astonishment at finding that I 
 was standing on a large heap of parchment rolls ! It proved, however, 
 to be less of a find than I at first hoped, for it consisted mainly of packets 
 of ancient writs from the courts of justice, interesting only from their age, 
 which varied, I think, from Edward III. to Henry VII. There were also 
 a number of fragments lying about of little turned boxes of wood* An 
 unhappy accident intervened. I happened suddenly to be called for a few 
 minutes from this newly-discovered record office, and forgetting to lock 
 the door, a party of Westminster school-boys got in, and, unmindful of the 
 human skins, made free with the parchments. A little disturbance ensued, 
 a fresh padlock was shortly afterwards put to the door, and I have been 
 excluded for ten long years from my treasury ; though, as I understood 
 that the parchments had been cleared away, I soon ceased to stand dis- 
 consolate at the gate of this dusty Eden. 
 
 While preparing the present paper, how'ever, I again obtained admis- 
 sion, when, to my surprise, I found my old friend the parchment heap still 
 where I had left it in 1849, I now examined it quietly, and succeeded in 
 turning up a number of the little boxes of which I had before seen the 
 fragments only. They are small turned boxes of poplar, or some other 
 soft wood, not unlike an ordinary tooth-powder box, but a little larger. 
 The covers are sew^ed on with a leather or parchment thong ; and on the 
 underside is usually written a few words describing the contents. On 
 opening them I found that each contained one or more little parchment 
 deeds with seals affixed ; they seem all to relate to the affairs of private 
 individuals ; and their great interest is in the earliness of their dates, which 
 vary, as far as I have ascertained, from the time of Henry III. to that of 
 Edward III. They are, many of them, in a perfect state of preservation, 
 in fact, as fresh almost as when new, and are beautifully written, and the 
 seals are often very good. 
 
 Among the parchments were lying fragments of encaustic tiles of beauti- 
 ful patterns, similar to some of those in the chapter-house, and the glaze so 
 fresh as to lead one to think they had never been trodden upon. 
 
 Since then the whole mass of parchments, &c., has, by the direction of 
 the Dean, been carefully removed into the Abbey library, where they wdll 
 be duly examined and cared for. The lower part of the heap was one mass 
 of decay. I have no doubt that they had in former times been carefully 
 stowed away in the space below the dormitory stairs, but had been turned 
 out when this was converted into a wine-cellar ; which, by the dates of the 
 lots of wine chalked up over the bins, was at least sixty or seventy years 
 back. 
 
 , The next wwk in date to that of Edward I. seems to have been the re- 
 building of the refectory and the completion of the eastern walk of tlie 
 
 a 
 
4 ^ 
 
 Gleanings from Westminster Abbey 
 
 cloister. Of the former I can find no record. The windows and doorways 
 are of good Middle Pointed character ; but of the latter we have a full 
 account in the fabric rolls, shewing that it was erected in and about the 
 year 1345, by Abbot Byrcheston. It comprises the rich vaulting over the 
 outer portion of the chapter-house, with the very remarkable window op- 
 posite to it, and the adjoining bays as far as the end of this side of the 
 cloister. The vaulting of the principal bay was richly decorated with gold 
 and colour, and the central boss retained at the commencement of the pre- 
 sent century the pulley for raising a light in front of the chapter-house door. 
 
 The completion of the cloister was commenced in 1350, by Abbot 
 Langham, (afterwards archbishop and cardinal,) and proceeded slowly but 
 regularly throughout the whole of his abbacy, and was completed by his 
 successor. Abbot Litlington, in 1 366, under whose direction, indeed, while 
 prior, the previous works had been carried on. We have here, again, 
 a period of architectural transition. Byrcheston’s work of 1345 is the 
 purest flowing Decorated ; but the remainder is very early Perpendicular, 
 so far as we can see, for the tracery is gone from the southern or earlier 
 range. This side we know was in hand in 1355, and one of the two door- 
 ways in it (I think the smaller) was inserted in 1358 ; but even taking the 
 year in which it is distinctly stated to have been completed, 1366, we have 
 a remarkably early date for work distinctly Perpendicular in its character, 
 though of a very superior character, and very elegant in its mouldings. 
 
 During the reigns of Edward II. and III. it does not appear that the re- 
 building of the church was proceeded with ; indeed, we find many entries 
 of small sums expended on repairing its windows, &c., and on whitewash- 
 ing the interior of the old Norman nave. 
 
 During the reign of Richard II., however, the rebuilding was proceeded 
 with. We find entries of the cost of breaking down the old walls, and 
 considerable outlay for stone, marble, labour, &c., shewing that the work 
 proceeded vigorously. About the same period — indeed, commencing in 
 the latter part of the previous reign — most extensive works were here 
 carried on in the monastic buildings. These were for the most part paid 
 for out of a bequest, and, perhaps, out of previous gifts, from Cardinal 
 Langham, who, as we have seen, had been abbot here, and made the fabric 
 of the Abbey his residuary legatee. The works in question were carried 
 out by his very active successor. Abbot Litlington, in whose time were 
 erected (besides the south, the west, and the remainder of the north walks 
 of the cloister which had been commenced in Langhara’s time) the abbot’s 
 house, including its hall and great chamber, (the former now used as a 
 dining-hall for the King’s Scholars, the latter w^ell known as the Jerusalem 
 Chamber,) the sacrists’, cellarers’ and infirmarers’ houses, and a number of 
 other buildings. 
 
 From this time the nave slowly progressed till the dissolution of the mo- 
 nastery, the west window being finished by Abbot Esteney in Henry VII. ’s 
 
1 
 
 43 
 
 of the Time of Henry the Third, 
 
 time, and the western towers left unfinished by IsHp, the last abbot 
 worthy of the name. The most remarkable characteristic in these later 
 works is their continuing the general design of the earlier portions, not 
 copying the details, as was done in the cloister, but applying details of 
 their own period to the general forms of the preceding age. So that, to 
 a casual observer, the building presents throughout its interior a homo- 
 geneous appearance. 
 
 There is one part of the interior of the older portion of the fabric which 
 I have not yet more than cursorily alluded to, — I mean the gallery in 
 which the archives of the church are kept. It occupies the space above 
 that portion of the cloister which passes through the aisle of the south 
 transept. 
 
 It is approached by a door opening on to the roof of the cloister to the 
 south of the transept. The first bay you enter has from an early period 
 been inclosed by timber partitions, plastered over to form a room for the 
 more important muniments. On this plastered partition is a large outline 
 painting of the White Hart, the badge of Richard II., shewing the early 
 date of the obstruction ; but the other two bays, to form a gallery or upper 
 aisle, open to the church. The details of the upper portions of the aisles 
 may be advantageously studied from this gallery, and, on its own account, 
 it is worthy of a visit. The shortened columns — that is to say, the parts 
 of them w’hich rise above the gallery — are treated as entire pillars with 
 bases of their own, presenting a singular contrast to the lofty proportions 
 to which the eye has become accustomed. The views into the church from 
 this chamber are picturesque and beautiful in the highest degree. 
 
 The contents of the chamber are highly interesting, consisting of a 
 number of large oaken chests in which the muniments are deposited. 
 Several of these are evidently of the thirteenth century, and are very 
 curious. There is a handsome trunk of later date in the inclosed space, 
 containing the original indentures of Henry VII. ’s Chapel, being agree- 
 ments with, I think, nineteen different parties, (abbots and other autho- 
 rities,) binding them and their successors to see that the rules of his 
 foundation are earned out ; but the long-headed King was not wise enough 
 for his generation, for his own bluff son cut the ground from under him, 
 by abolishing the offices the holders of which he had made responsible for 
 the performance of his injunctions. I have no doubt that the contents of 
 these ancient coffers would throw much light upon the architectural history 
 of the Abbey. The particulars I have given of the works from the time of 
 Edward III. onwards, were, by the permission of the Dean and Chapter, 
 extracted a few years since from the Fabric Rolls by my kind and able friend 
 Mr. Burtt, of the Record Office, and have been communicated to me while 
 this lecture has been in hand. 
 
 I will here mention that several of the chests in the Pyx Chamber closely 
 resemble those in the rauniinent-room • so much so, as to make it evident 
 
44 
 
 Gleanings from Westminster Abbey 
 
 that they also were made in the thirteenth century, and even by the same 
 men. There is, in the Pyx Chamber, another of the same date and higher 
 finish ; it contains dies of medieval coins, and has iron-work of very good 
 character. Others are of different subsequent dates ; one of them, made 
 of oak and covered with leather, is very much like that of Henry VII. just 
 alluded to ; another is made of deal and thickly plated with iron. There 
 is among them a very curious leather case, strapped with iron, and stamped 
 all over with fleur-de-lis, exactly agreeing with descriptions of the cases of 
 ancient documents given by Sir Francis Palgrave. There is also among 
 them another curious leather case, apparently to receive a vessel of some 
 kind. 
 
 Having now gone generally through the fabric, I will next advert briefly 
 to some interesting documentary information from the public records which 
 has quite recently been communicated to me by Mr. Burtt. Of the kind- 
 ness of this gentleman I cannot speak too strongly. He has, while my 
 paper has been in hand, given himself infinite trouble in searching for 
 notices of the works, and with very considerable success, I am aware 
 that the details of antiquarian documents are not well suited to a paper 
 like this, and I will therefore only advert to a few important points. The 
 first of them is this. As Westminster Abbey is about the earliest work of 
 its style in this country, and as the building of the first portion of it by 
 Henry III. extended over a space of twenty-four years, i. e. from 1245 — 
 1269, it becomes important to ascertain how early in this period the style 
 of its architecture can be proved to have been defined. Now, a single 
 entry in the documents in question has for ever settled this point. I have 
 before stated that the most advanced part of the work (as to style) is the 
 chapter-house, as that contained traceried windows of four and five lights 
 in a very developed form, the tracery not confined to circles, but containing 
 great quatrefoils, and the heads of the lights being trefoiled, which is not 
 the case in the church. Now, it would be most useful to know the exact 
 date of these windows, for though Matthew Paris gives 1250 as the year 
 of commencement of the chapter-house, it may have spread over an inde- 
 finite length of time, and the windows have belonged to twenty years after 
 that date. Let us look, then, to“the bills. Here we find in a roll, bearing 
 date 37th Henry HI., or 1253, and expressly called the eighth year from 
 the beginning of the work, an item of “ 300 yards of canvas for the win- 
 dows of the chapter-house,’^ follow'ed immediately by items for the pur- 
 chase of glass, shewing that the windows in question were completed in 
 1253, which I see was the year before the King, in company with St. Louis, 
 visited the Sainte Chapelle at Paris, which was then scarcely completed, 
 and the style of which indicates exactly the same degree of advancement. 
 I find also that during the same year the beautiful entrance or vestibule 
 to the chapter-house was erected. 
 
 The church itself was by this time — indeed, as early as 1249 — in a state 
 
of the Time of Henry the Third, 45 
 
 of rapid progression, so that the architecture must, in the main, have been 
 quite settled from the time of its commencement. 
 
 The entries found by Mr. Burtt are, for the most part, of a somewhat 
 general character ; but it is stated in the Pipe Rolls that further particulars 
 have been sent in to the Treasury. These bills of particulars have, it is 
 feared, been for the most part lost; but Mr. Burtt has succeeded in finding 
 one complete one for about half a-year (probably 1253), which is of so 
 interesting a character that [we hope to publish it, with notes, in continua- 
 tion of this series of papers]. It is a perfect bill of quantities of the work 
 done during twenty-five weeks, giving the names and measurements of 
 every moulding, and every detail of the work, and will form a very curious 
 and interesting illustration of the architectural nomenclature of the period. 
 Attached to it are two amusing little letters from the quarry-master at 
 Purbeck, promising ship-loads of marble, and begging for speedy orders on 
 the ground of other pressing business. 
 
 The notices I have adverted to in the Fabric Rolls of the works from 
 Edward III.’s time onwards are also very detailed, and give curious par- 
 ticulars as to the mode of employing men at that time. They appear to 
 have been fed and clothed by the employer, and the clothing would appear 
 to be by no means to be complained of. In one year we have an entry of 
 15s. (equal to eight or ten pounds) for a fur robe for the chief mason; but 
 another year nothing entered for his robe, because this independent gentle- 
 man ** refused to receive it on account of the delay in its delivery.” 
 
 Going back to the earlier accounts, I may mention that extensive works 
 appear to have been going on at the same time in the palace and its chapel, 
 including a great deal of decorative painting ; also that the belfry of the 
 Abbey was being built, which, I think, stood somewhere westward of the 
 church, and of which, I believe, that some remains existed at a somewhat 
 recent date. 
 
 The outlay upon the Abbey during the first fifteen years of the work, 
 would, if translated into our money value, considerably exceed half-a- 
 million. I must not, however, follow up these details on the present 
 occasion. 
 
 I have dwelt so long upon the fabric that I must content myself with 
 a cursory notice of a few of the internal contents of the church, to which 
 I chance to have paid particular attention. 
 
 That most remarkable work, the Shrine of the Confessor, has been so 
 largely dwelt upon before the Institute, when the subject was brought 
 forward a few years back by Professor Donaldson, that it would be super- 
 fluous to go again into the minutiae of the investigation, to which I devoted 
 a great amount of time, and was ably followed up by my talented friend 
 Mr. Burges. 
 
 I will content myself with a summary of results. 
 
 Shortly after my appointment to the Abbey, in 1849, I was led, owing 
 
46 
 
 Gleanings from Westminster Abbey 
 
 to a visit paid to the church by Le Pere Martin with myself and some 
 members of the Ecclesiological Society, to devote a good deal of attention 
 to ascertaining, so far as possible, the ancient form of the shrine ; the re- 
 sults of which I gave in a correspondence with a leading member of that 
 Society. I removed the brick wall which then blocked up the west end, 
 and exposed the marks shewing where the altar had been fixed, and came 
 to the conclusion that the pillars now at that end were formerly detached, 
 and probably carried lights. Probably they were the ‘ feet’ which King 
 Henry III. is said to have given for certain lamps to be burned before the 
 shrine. 
 
 The retabulum occupies, as I ascertained, its proper position, excepting 
 that it has been lifted three inches above its original level, a fact proved by 
 its intercepting the space required for the completion both of the ancient 
 and the more modern inscriptions, for neither of which there is now 
 sufficient room. 
 
 The front and what is seen of the back of the retabulum, being deco- 
 corated with mosaic, and the edge left plain, it follows that the latter 
 must have been more or less concealed. I judge, therefore, that the 
 detached pillars must have been placed very close to them. 
 
 Extracts have been kindly communicated to me by Mr. John Gough 
 Nichols, from diaries kept during the days of Queen Mary, shewing that 
 the body of the Confessor had been removed, and the shrine wholly 
 or in part taken down at the Dissolution, but restored in Queen Mary’s 
 time, when the present wooden shrine, the cornice, the modern in- 
 scription, and the painted decorations were added. I am inclined to 
 think that the marble substructure was only taken down far enough to 
 allow of the removal of the body, as its parts have been displaced in 
 refixing so far down as that, but no further. The altar either had not been 
 removed, or was probably re-erected at the same time, and was, I think, 
 not removed again till the Great Rebellion, being needed at coronations, on 
 which occasions a table has since been substituted under the old name of 
 
 the altar of St. Edward.” I found at the back of where the altar has 
 stood a slab, apparently taken from some monument of the seventeenth 
 century, which confirms this idea. There is, in Abbot Litlington’s Service- 
 book in the Library, in the initial of the Service for St. Edward’s day, 
 a view of the shrine, though I fear an imaginary one. The substructure is 
 speckled over to represent the mosaic work, but the seven arched recesses 
 for pilgrims to kneel under, which really occupy two sides and an end, are 
 all shewn on one side ! The shrine itself is shewn lower than was usual, 
 and a recumbent figure of the Confessor is shewn on its sloping covering. 
 I will only add that I opened the ground round the half-buried pillars at 
 the west end, and found them to agree in height with those at the east, 
 which they so much exceed in diameter, and that I have been so fortunate 
 as to recover the broken parts of one of the eastern pillars, and to refit and 
 
of the Time of Henry the Third, 47 
 
 refix its numerous fragments with the help of one new piece of only a few 
 inches in length, so that we have now one perfect pillar. 
 
 In connection with the shrine I will allude to a little discovery which I 
 have shewn to many, I dare say, now present. There is a sarcophagus- 
 shaped slab in the floor immediately to the east of the shrine, which is said 
 to commemorate a son of William de Valence who died young. The cross 
 and inscription are nearly obliterated, but its eastern end is covered by the 
 step to the tomb of King Henry V. A very painstaking friend and 
 assistant of mine (Mr. Irvine), in examining the point of junction between 
 the step and the slab, perceived signs of some substance being inlaid into 
 the latter. I obtained permission to remove a portion of the step, when 
 we found that the slab had been inlaid with brass and glass-mosaic, and 
 was, no doubt, executed "when the shrine was in hand. 
 
 A large portion of the pavement before the altar was executed by 
 Roman workmen, and with materials brought from Rome by Abbot Ware, 
 about 1267 or 1268. Of the curious inscription, a part giving the list 
 of those concerned in the work is still legible, being “ Tertius Henricus 
 urbs Odoricus et Abbas.” Odoricus being the artist, and “ urbs’" of course 
 means Rome, as is proved by Ware’s own epitaph, which says, when 
 speaking of these stones, “ quos hue portavit ah urheT 
 
 It is curious that both in the monuments inlaid with glass-mosaic, and in 
 the pavements in which the inlaying material is chiefly porphyry, the 
 artists, as a thing of course, adopted, as the matrix, Purbeck marble in 
 place of the white marble they were accustomed to use in Italy. 
 
 The tomb of King Henry III. is too well known to need description 
 here, but that of some of his children and grandchildren in the south aisle 
 is but little noticed ; indeed, its Italian forms so much resemble those of 
 a modern monument that it usually passes for one. 
 
 Taking the tombs of the Confessor, of Henry III. and his daughter, 
 and of young De Valence, in connexion with the pavement before the 
 high altar, and that of the Confessor’s Chapel, I should doubt whether — I 
 will not say any church north of the Alps — but, I may almost say, whether 
 any country north of the Alps, contains such a mass of early Italian deco- 
 rative art ; indeed, the very artists employed appear to have done their 
 utmost to increase the value of the works they were bequeathing to us by 
 giving to the mosaic work the utmost possible variety of pattern. 
 
 Another object which does not receive the attention it deserves is the 
 retabulum from the high altar, now preserved in a glass case in the south- 
 eastern aisle. 
 
 It is a very wonderful work of art, being most richly decorated with 
 glass, gold, and painting, and probably with precious stones, and even 
 with casts of antique gems. The glass enrichments are of two sorts ; in 
 one the glass is coloured, and is decorated on its face with gold diaper ; in 
 the other it is white, and laid upon a decorated surface. The great charm, 
 
48 
 
 Gleanings from Westminster Abbey 
 
 however, of the work must have been in the paintings. They consist of 
 single figures, in niches, of our Lord and SS. Peter and Paul, and two fe- 
 male saints, and a number of small medallion subjects beautifully painted^. 
 
 Next to the Italian tombs, one of the most interesting is that of William 
 de Valence. I am not aware whether any old account of this monument 
 exists, but I suppose we may fairly set it down as a French work, and 
 probably executed by an artist from Limoges, though the custom of 
 referring all enamel works to that particular seat of the art is not, I think, 
 borne out by facts ; indeed, it would appear from the old accounts that 
 enamels for the shrine of the Confessor were executed here, whether by an 
 artist from Limoges is unknown, though we know that one was employed 
 in England shortly afterwards. 
 
 The execution of these enamels is truly exquisite, so much so that it is 
 only by the closest examination that any idea can be formed of the won- 
 derful delicacy of the workmanship. 
 
 The monument was thus described by Keepe, 1683 : — 
 
 “ A wainscot chest, covered over with plates of brass, richly enamelled, 
 and thereon the image of de Valence, Earl of Pembroke, with a deep shield 
 on his left arm, in a coat of mail with a surcoat, all of the same enamelled 
 brass, gilt with gold, and beset with the arms of Valence, &c. . . . Round 
 about the inner ledge of this tomb is most of the epitaph remaining, in the 
 ancient Saxon letters, and the rest of the chest, covered with brass wrought 
 in the form of lozenges, each lozenge containing either the arms of England 
 or of Valence, alternately placed one after the other, enamelled with their 
 colours. Round this chest have been thirty little brazen images, some of 
 them still remaining, twelve on each side, and three at each end, divided 
 by central arches that serve as niches to enclose them ; and on the outward 
 ledge, at the foot of each of these images, is placed a coat of arms in brass 
 enamelled with the colours.” 
 
 Since this time the greater part of what is above described has dis- 
 appeared, shewing that the spoliation of the Abbey is not generally charge- 
 able against the rebels, but has gone on in modern times during the con- 
 temptuous domination of Classic taste. 
 
 The tomb of Queen Eleanor, with its exquisitely elegant effigy, is too 
 well known to need any description from me. I have had the privilege, 
 since my connection with the Abbey, of promoting the restoration to it of 
 the beautiful piece of ironwork which overhangs it, and which had been 
 removed in 1822. The effigy, with that of Henry III., was executed by 
 an artist named Torrell, supposed by Sir Richard Westmacott, I think, 
 without evidence, to be an Italian. It is one of the finest which remains 
 in any country. 
 
 ^ An excellent description of this work is to be found in Sir Charles Eastlake’s 
 “ Materials for a History of Oil Painting.’* 
 
49 
 
 of the Time of Henry the Third, 
 
 "Were this paper devoted to the monuments alone, I would have at- 
 tempted a description of the tomb of Edmund Earl of Lancaster, brother 
 to Edward I., and of Aveline his wife. These magnificent monuments, 
 viewed as architectural works, seem to be intimately connected with seve- 
 ral cotemporary works, especially the Eleanor crosses, and the tombs of 
 Archbishop Peckham at Canterbury, and of Bishop de Luda at Ely, all 
 executed between 1290 and 1300. One of their special characteristics is 
 the extreme closeness with which nature is followed in their foliated carv- 
 ings, every portion of which is taken directly from some actual plant 
 with no further conventional treatment than was necessary to adapt it to 
 its position. These works occupy the middle position between the con- 
 ventional foliage of the earlier and the almost equally conventional foliage 
 of the later divisions of our architecture. It is, in fact, a mistake to call 
 the foliage, even of the later parts of the Decorated style, natural. The 
 use of really natural foliage is very seldom found after the end of the thir- 
 teenth and the few earliest years of the fourteenth century, and marks, if 
 I may so say, the resting-place between the conventionalism of approach 
 and the conventionalism of departure from nature ; the conventionalism of 
 strength and of weakness — of vigour and of lassitude. 
 
 But the most remarkable characteristics of the two monuments is the 
 splendour of their decorative colouring. The figure sculpture, though 
 possessing considerable merit, is not so fine either as in the nearly coteni- 
 porary monuments of Henry III. and of Eleanor, or in the somewhat later 
 one of Aymer de Valence. The effigy of Edmund is, however, a very noble 
 and dignified work. 
 
 The adjoining tomb of Aymer de Valence is evidently an imitation of 
 those last described, but does not equal them either in its architecture or 
 its decorations, though far exceeding them in the merits of its sculpture. 
 I have seen no old accounts of this tomb, but I fancy that the sculpture is 
 French, both from a decidedly French character in the architectural carv- 
 ing of the niches which contain the statuettes, and from the similarity of 
 the statuettes themselves to some of the same period preserved in the 
 Hotel Gluny at Paris. 
 
 These, and the effigy itself, rank among the finest specimens of medieval 
 sculpture. 
 
 The tomb of Queen Philippa stands, perhaps, next to them in beauty 
 and interest. It is undoubtedly a foreign work, as in the account of its 
 cost, still extant, it is said to have been executed by one “ Hawkin Liege, 
 from France.’' Its character seems to me rather Flemish than French, and 
 very possibly the artist may have been from Valenciennes, the seat of her 
 father’s court. 
 
 The monument, as you will recollect, consists of an altar-tomb of dark 
 marble overlaid with niches of open-work in white alabaster. These niches 
 contained thirty statuettes of different personages, connected by relation- 
 
 H 
 
60 
 
 Gleanings from Westminster Abbey 
 
 sliip or marriage with the Queen. Nearly the whole of the tabernacle- 
 work, though shewn as perfect in the prints of the early part of the last 
 century, has since disappeared. 
 
 The end of the tomb has been immured in the lower part of the chapel 
 of King Henry V., and thinking it probable that the tabernacle-work and 
 statuettes might remain within the enclosing masonry, I obtained permis- 
 sion of Dean Buckland to make an incision into it, which I found could be 
 done without injury to the later monument ; I was so fortunate as to find 
 several niches in a tolerably perfect condition, with two of the statuettes 
 quite perfect, and a number of fragments of others. I found also in the 
 tabernacle-work a most beautiful little figure of an angel with the wings of 
 gilt metal. The figure had lost its head, but I was so fortunate as to dis- 
 cover it enveloped in a lump of mortar. I found also enough of the archi- 
 tectural features to serve as a guide to the recovery of the entire design. 
 Mr. Gundy, the Abbey mason, made from the information thus obtained 
 a restored reproduction of the end of the monument, which he exhibited 
 in 1851. 
 
 One of the niches and several other portions were afterwards found to be 
 deposited in Mr. Cottingham’s Museum, and having been purchased from 
 him, have been refixed in their places. 
 
 One very curious feature in the design is a scroll like the crook of 
 a pastoral staff between the niches at the angles of the monument ; the 
 architectural details had no decorative colouring, but the foliage was gilt. 
 The arms were of course coloured, and the figures had beautiful patterns, 
 chiefly in gold upon the draperies ; the hair was gilt, the pupils of the eyes 
 touched in with blue, and the lips with red. The head-dresses of the female 
 figures are beautifully enriched with gold and colour. One of the heads 
 was unfortunately broken off while opening it out, for I should mention 
 that the figures were enclosed in a solid mass of rubble-work. This head 
 I had a cast made from, and the decoration exactly copied on it. I had also 
 a cast made of the angel before mentioned, and most fortunate it was that 
 I did so. 
 
 I afterwards most carefully replaced them with my own hands, fixing 
 them in their places with shellac ; but, though I told no one I had done 
 so, and though they were quite out of sight, I was disgusted to find, the 
 next time I examined the monument, that both of them had been stolen ! 
 They were so difficult of access that this act of wanton depredation could 
 only have been effected by a person well acquainted with what had been 
 discovered, and that with considerable difficulty. It is most deeply hu- 
 miliating to think that persons capable of appreciating the value and in- 
 terest attached to such objects, should be so utterly lost to all sense of hon- 
 our and decency as to perpetrate such a deliberate robbery. I would not 
 go so far as to flay this wretched being, as would, perhaps, have been done 
 of old, but I should rejoice in the opportunity, according to the figurative 
 
51 
 
 of the Time of Henry the Third, 
 
 expression still extant among our rural population, of witnessing the “ tan- 
 ning of the rascal’s hide.” If, however, what I have said should chance 
 to meet his eye, let him know that there is still for him a locus poenitentice^ 
 and that if he will anonymously restore what he has filched, his baseness 
 shall be forgotten. 
 
 I should mention that the lost head is so like that of the Queen herself, 
 that it is not improbable that it may have been intended for her, though 
 she does not appear in the imperfect list of statuettes given in the old his- 
 tories. The open-work of the niches over the head of the effigy itself has 
 been filled in with blue glass. The magnificence of the entire work may be 
 imagined when it is known that it contained, when perfect, more than 
 seventy statues and statuettes, besides several brass figures on the sur- 
 rounding railing. 
 
 Somewhat parallel to this, both in material and workmanship, was the 
 monument of John of Eltham, brother to Edward III. I shall not enter 
 into any description of this work, however, further than to advert to its 
 beautiful canopy, which is thus described by Keepe : — “ A canopy covering 
 tlie whole with delicate wrought spires and mason’s work, everywhere 
 intermixed and adorned with little images and angels, according to the 
 fashion of those times, supported by eight pillars of white stone, of the 
 same curious wrought-work.” 
 
 This canopy is shewn in Dart’s view of the monument, but it was taken 
 down about eighty years back, on the ground of insecurity. It has often 
 been stated that portions of it were preserved at Strawberry Hill, but I have 
 never been able to ascertain the truth of this. If any one should know of 
 the existence of such fragments, I should be truly obliged by their inform- 
 ing me of them. 
 
 The original stalls of the choir seem to have been retained in a more or 
 less perfect state till late in the last century. They are shew'n in the view 
 given by Dart; and in that given in Sandford’s account of the coronation of 
 James II. the canopies are shewn supported by single shafts. I observed, 
 when the new stallwork was being put up in 1848, that a closet under the 
 organ was lined with old boards which appeared to have formed a part of 
 the back of the ancient stalls, for I could distinguish, by the discoloration 
 of the wood, the form of a trefoiled arch supported by a shaft with a band 
 at half its height. At a later period, on looking into this closet, I was 
 glad to see the boarding still there ; but, on looking into it again while 
 preparing this paper, I found that our careful clerk of the works had 
 caused it to be neatly painted, so that this little memento is lost. 
 
 There remains, however, in Henry VII. ’s Chapel, one of the ancient 
 Early English misereres, and a fragment of another has been preserved. 
 They have both good Early English foliage. 
 
 There is a great fund of minor subjects on which a separate paper could 
 be very advantageously written, but I must leave them unnoticed on the 
 
52 Gleanings from Westminster Abbey. 
 
 present occasion S. I have gone over my ground as rapidly as I was able, 
 but have more than doubled the allotted time, but Westminster Abbey is at 
 least worthy of an extra hour ; and I will only add, that I recommend all 
 students of Gothic architecture residing in London to devote to it every 
 extra hour they have at their command. London has been pretty much 
 denuded of its medieval remains, but like the Sybil’s books, those which 
 remain are worth as much almost as the whole ; and to live in a city which, 
 amidst its gloomy wilderness of brick and compo, contains so glorious and 
 exquisite a work of original art as this, is a privilege which few other cities 
 could offer us. Let us make use of it. 
 
 K Among other things I should have given a description of the Coronation Chair, 
 and of the figures remaining in the panels of the old sedilia, commonly called the tomb 
 of King Sebert. The former is a truly magnificent piece of decoration, but sadly muti- 
 lated. The decorations are somewhat peculiar ; the whole seems to have been gilt on a 
 thick coating of gesso, and while still soft, the foliage, &c., to have been traced upon 
 the gold, and indicated merely by pricking the outline and the intervals between the 
 leaves. Of the eight figures in the sedilia two only remain perfect. They appear to 
 have been slightly touched up, but are mainly original. They represent, I believe. 
 King Henry III. and King Sebert. The figure of King Edward the Confessor, on 
 the back, which is given by Malcolm in his Londinium Redivivurrif can now with 
 great difficulty be distinguished. The painting in the canopy of the tomb of 
 Ilichard II. ought also to have been noticed. The diapered ground is still very 
 perfect, but the painting of the figures has almost entirely perished. 
 
52 * 
 
 THE EEHEDOS. 
 
 The question has sometimes been asked, What was the origin of the 
 present altar-screen, which, though executed in artificial stone, backs up 
 and seems to form a part of the beautiful fifteenth-century screen which 
 faces the chapel of King Edward the Confessor ?’^ 
 
 We learn from Neale that the marble altar-piece erected in the time of 
 Queen Anne was taken down in 1820, during the preparations for the 
 Coronation of King George IV. 
 
 On removing the altar-piece,” he says, “ it was discovered that the west front 
 of the screen, against which it had been built and fastened to with iron cramps, 
 was wrought in a similar style of rich sculpture to the east front ; though, from 
 the dilapidations it had sustained at different periods, its original beauty was 
 altogether deteriorated. The architraves and cavettoes of the doorways still dis- 
 played considerable remains of elegant and deeply-perforated foliage, and many 
 remnants of sculptural ornament, including various pieces of a painted and gilt 
 cornice, fragments of gilt foliage, mouldings, lions’ heads, &c. were found among 
 the rubbish. The whole screen, indeed, had been richly embellished with gild- 
 ing and painting ; the ground was, generally, either of a red or azure colour, 
 but had been covered with whitewash. All the projecting parts of the large 
 niches at the sides had been cut away ; and the central part was formed into 
 a large square recess or panel. Whether there had ever been any historical 
 sculptures on the entablature, to correspond with those on the east front, could 
 not be ascertained, the whole of the frieze having been converted into a deep 
 cove.” 
 
 Mr. Neale also states (writing in 1822 or 23,) that the Dean and Chapter 
 had determined to restore the screen as nearly as possible to its ancient 
 state, and that working drawings for the purpose were then making from 
 actual admeasurements under Mr. Wyatt’s direction. The work was 
 executed in artificial stone by M. Bernasconi ; and Mr. H. A. Smith, 
 a well-known architectural modeller, informed me some time since, that he 
 worked on the restoration when a boy, and he gave me a fragment of the 
 old work which he had then picked up ; it is beautifully executed in 
 fire-stone, and coloured red. Mr. Smith also wrote for me to Mr. Brown, 
 who had acted at the time as foreman to M. Bernasconi, and who has 
 kindly sent me the following information. He says that the cove was 
 left plain, but had been originally filled with subjects in sculpture, as that 
 on the other side, but that they had been so mutilated that it was impos- 
 sible to restore or even to make out the subjects ; the canopies were 
 copied from the old ones, excepting the patterns of their vaultings, which 
 were varied ; but in restoring which, however, they followed one pattern 
 only ; the mouldings were strictly copied from the originals ; there were 
 no remnants of the figures in the niches ; there was a piece of cresting 
 or brattishing found, but they thought it did not seem to be original. 
 
 G. G. S. 
 
.'t 
 
 f 
 
 r ^ r 
 
 --T^l Vi 
 
 »*r..^ 
 
 - 
 
 -.'■ iir *■" 
 
 #* ^r' sW *'<J**' • ‘ '** <?! '*. : 
 
 ^ r«fK|- t-v ^ ';A- 
 
 • • ■' ■ ■ . ■:, -;^ .- --- 
 
 /? 4 , 'i^Z iS 
 
 ^ A - - ‘ ! '■ fv^-i prf^jWi • ♦ ’ 
 
 
 &■ -t ', V .--.j .V - ■-.rr • ' *■ --'* ,’ 
 
 ^v; ■ A.^^/.v-.«- ■“»» v r^'w- . • 
 
 ^ « i.-5- ‘ 0- ^ '• ■-■--cij^. :--,vJ‘':-*^.-^<V;JS^- 
 
 fK . . . :i“i*;«i^. 
 
 £?''>> - *:ii '-i-ifty V : . ' 'i^jfi 
 
 ‘■- S’:. !‘ -^Ci-'i 
 
 ^ -•.»■ ■- A-t^i 'a^' ■' •fTt^-j,- fee* 
 
 V -v' 
 
 h 
 
 '* ^ ^ ,• 1^-av.V-T :4win^/ *:... : n V »>t V 
 
 . :. c-$ -^,^' TV>.^o. -iV4.- .,..^.,j^ ' ^4' 
 
 'C. .^,- ^ .#5* jVI^C 
 
 ;.> . .-Vi ii'jf '-.'tv.’ 
 
APPENDIX I. 
 
 HENKY THE SEVENTH’S CHAPEL. 
 
 Henry the Seventh’s Chapel has been so frequently engraved with all 
 its beautiful details and is so thoroughly well known, that any account of 
 it here may appear superfluous, and yet our Gleanings would be very in- 
 complete if we passed it over entirely, and though w’e cannot expect to 
 discover anything new about it, our readers may be glad to be reminded 
 of some of the leading points relating to it. Any account of the Abbey 
 church would be obviously incomplete without the Lady-chapel belonging 
 to it, and though not commonly so called, this magnificent chapel clearly 
 is the Lady-chapel at the same time that it is the mortuary chapel of tlie 
 monarch whose name it bears. The original Lady-chapel was undoubtedly 
 on the same site, but in all probability it was not so large ^ : in mentioning 
 the original Lady-chapel w’e mean only that belonging to the church of 
 Henry III., for it is certain there was no such appendage to the church of 
 Edw^ard the Confessor ; the fashion did not come in until after his time, 
 nor before the latter part of the twelfth century. 
 
 It is hardly necessary to observe that this chapel is the richest specimen 
 in existence of that peculiarly English style commonly known as the Tudor 
 style, and of that very remarkable and admirable kind of vaulting knowm 
 as fan-tracery vaulting, which is also peculiar to England. It is too much 
 the fashion to depreciate and run down this style because it belongs to the 
 latest period of Gothic art, and naturally, therefore, wants the boldness and 
 vigour of the earlier styles ; but it is far from being devoid of merit, and 
 the strong hold which it has on the popular mind, to wLich it is always 
 more attractive than the more severe early style, is itself a proof of merit. 
 We may consider the elaborate ornament as very much overdone in the 
 eye of a more pure taste, but there is no denying that it has great richness 
 of effect, and for the vaulting, that fan-tracery vaulting is the highest de- 
 velopment of skill in construction, not only in the architect but in the 
 workmen. 
 
 * The best works are “The History of Westminster Abbey,” by E. W. Bradley, 
 with Plates by J. P. Neale, usually called Neale’s Westminster Abbey, 2 vols., 4to., 
 1818, and Cottingham’s “ Henry the Seventh’s Chapel,” imperial folio, 1817, a series 
 of large lithographical plates with all the details. 
 
 ** In addition to the Lady-chapel founded by Henry III. in 1220, an adjoining 
 tavern, called the White Rose, and the small chapel of St. Erasmus, built by Elizabeth 
 Widville, queen of Edward IV., were pulled down to make room for the present 
 chapel. 
 
 53 
 
Henry the Seventh's Chapel, 
 
 This point of the necessity of a gang of skilled workmen accustomed to 
 work together, for the production of the great works of medieval art, has 
 not been sufficiently attended to. The fables of the Freemasons have pro- 
 d iced a natural reaction, and the degree of truth which there is in their 
 traditions has consequently been overlooked. We know that each of our 
 great cathedrals had a gang of workmen attached to it, in regular pay, 
 almost as a part of the foundation, for the fabric fund could not be law- 
 fully diverted to any other purpose, and these workmen became by long 
 practice very skilful, more especially the masons, or workers in and carvers 
 of free stone, as distinct from the labourers, who merely laid the rubble- 
 work for the foundations and rough parts of the fabric. From various 
 indications it would appear that there was also a royal gang of workmen 
 in the king’s pay, by whom the great works ordered, and perhaps de- 
 signed, by the king himself were constructed. The wills of Henry VI. 
 and Henry VII. seem to shew that those monarchs were, at least to some 
 extent, architects themselves ; they give the most minute directions for 
 the works to be done, just as any architect might have done. St. George’s 
 Chapel, Windsor ; King’s College Chapel, Cambridge ; and Henry the 
 Seventh’s Chapel were probably all executed by the royal gang of masons. 
 
 It is on record that the work of the Divinity School in Oxford was 
 suspended for several years in consequence of the skilled workmen beii g 
 sent for to Windsor by a royal writ : the very beautiful and scientific vault 
 of the Divinity School does not receive the attention which it deserves, 
 being so much nearer to the eye than the others, giving it the advantage 
 so far that it can be more easily examined. It seems probable that the 
 office held by William of Wykeham, and at a later time by Sir Reginald 
 Bray, was in fact that of chief of the royal masons, and it may be in this 
 manner that Sir Reginald Bray has long had the credit of giving the 
 designs of Henry the Seventh’s Chapel, although there is no evidence 
 that he even gave the idea of it ; he died soon after the foundations 
 were laid. 
 
 The low estimation in which the style of this chapel is held by our modern 
 dilettanti is really unjust; each style has its own merits ; we may prefer 
 one without depreciating the other. Very different was the estimation in 
 which this Tudor style was held by our ancestors : old Leland called it 
 Orhis Miraculnm^ or “the Miracle of the World,” and so it was long 
 esteemed. Perhaps this exaggeration one way has produced the present 
 reaction to the other extreme. We should bear in mind that the chief 
 architect of France, M. Viollet-le-Duc, warmly and honestly acknowledges 
 his admiration of the English fan-tracery vaulting, which is quite unknown 
 in France, and he points out the reason of this, — that the French vaults 
 are constructed on a different principle, much more simple, and much 
 cheaper, but much less scientific than the English, and that French work- 
 men, accustomed to work in their own way, could not have built a fan- 
 64 
 
^ Henry the Seventh's Chapel, 
 
 tracery vault. The following is the account of the foundation of the 
 chapel given by Holinshed : — 
 
 “ An. Reg. 18 ; 1503. * In this eighteenth year, the twentie fourth daie of 
 
 Januarie, a quarter of an houre afore three of the clocke at after noone of the 
 same daie, the first stone of our ladie chapell, within the monasterie of Westminster 
 was laid, by the hands of John Islip, abbat of the same monasterie. Sir Reginald 
 Rraie knight of the garter, doctor Barnes maister of the rolles, doctor Wall chapleine 
 to the kings maiestie, maister Hugh Oldham chapleine to the countesse of Darbie and 
 Richmond the kings mother, sir Edmund Stanhope knight, and diuerse others. 
 Vpon the same stone was this scripture ingraven : “ lllustrissimus Henricus Septimus 
 rex Anglise & Franciae, & dominus Hiberniae, posuit hanc petram, in honore beatae 
 virginis Mariae, 24 die January ; anno Domini 1502 : Et anno dicti regis Henrici 
 st'ptimi decimo octauo.” The charges whereof amounted (as some report, vpon cre- 
 dible information as they say) to foureteeue thousand pounds.^” — {Neale, vol. i. p. 6.) 
 
 Stow repeats the same account, the only additional information which 
 he gives is that the stone was brought from Huddlestoiie quarries in 
 Yorkshire 
 
 The best history of this chapel is, after all, to be found in the will of 
 the royal founder, which was conscientiously followed by his executors, 
 excepting that the design of the altar was changed according to the 
 new fashion which had come in before it was executed : — 
 
 “ ‘ And forasmoche as we haue receved oure solempe coronacion, and holie Inunccion, 
 within our monastery of Westm’., and that within the same monasterie jjjg Kin«-*s 
 is the com’en sepulture of the Kings of this Reame ; and sp’ially bicause Sepulture.’ 
 tlwt within the same, and among the same Kings, resteth the holie bodie and reliquies 
 of the glorious King and Confessour Sainct Edward, and diuse other of our noble 
 progenitours and blood, and sp’ially the body of our graunt Dame of right noble 
 memorie Quene Kateryne, wif to King henry the V***., and doughter to king Charles 
 of Ifraunce; and that we by the grace of God, p’opose right shortely to translate into 
 the same, the bodie and rel.ques of our Vncle of blissed memorie King Henry the Yl“'. 
 flbr theis, and diuse other causes and consideracions vs sp’ially moevyng in that behalf, 
 we Wol that whensoever it shall please our Salviour J~hu Crist to calle vs oute of this 
 transitorie lif, be it within this our Royme, or in any other Reame or place wdthoute 
 the same, that oure bodie bee buried within the same monastery; That is to saie, 
 in the Chapell where our said graunt Dame laye buried ; the w'hich » xhe King’s 
 Chapell we have begoune to buylde of newe, in the honour of our Chapell.’ 
 blessed Lady. And we wol that our Towmbe bee in the myddes of « The King’s 
 the same Chapell, before the high Aultier, in such distaunce from the Townibe.’ 
 same as it is ordred in the plat made for the same Chapell, and signed with our hande : 
 In which place we Wol, that for the said Sepulture of vs and our derest late wdf the 
 
 It is singular that the stone brought from so great a distance at an enormous 
 expense should have ultimately proved so bad that the whole of the exterior has had 
 to be entirely renewed : but it did last about three hundred years, whereas the stone, 
 also brought from Yorkshire, for the Houses of Parliament, built in imitation of this 
 chapel, seems likely to perish in thirty, and this after the country had been at great 
 expense in making enquiries and experiments by the most scientific men of the day ; 
 and yet there stand the ruins of Roche Abbey, and various other buildings of the 
 once despised Middle Ages, as sharp and as fresh as the day the stone was cut, more 
 than six hundred years ago. 
 
 5o 
 
Henry the Seventh^ s Chapel. 
 
 Quene, whose soule God p’donne, he made a Towmhe of Stone called touche, sufficient 
 « The King’s in largieur for vs booth : And upon the same, oon ymage of our figure, 
 Ymage.* ^nd an other of hers, either of them of copure and gilte, of suche faction, 
 and in suche maner, as shalbe thought moost conuenient by the discrecion of our exe- 
 cutours, yf it be not before doon by our self in our daies. And in the borders of the 
 same towmhe, bee made a conuenient scripture, conteignyng the yeres of our reigne, 
 and the daie and yere of our decesse. And in the sides, and booth ends of our said 
 towmhe, in the said touche vnder the said bordure, wee Wol tabernacles bee graven, 
 and the same to be filled with Ymages, sp’cially of our said avouries, of coper and gilte. 
 Also we Wol that incontinent after our decesse, and after that our hodye he buried 
 wdthin the said towmhe, the bodie of our said late wif the Quene bee translated from 
 the place where it nowe is buried, and brought and laide with oure hodye in our said 
 ‘ The grate for towmbe, yf it be not soo doon by our self in our daies. Also we Wol, 
 the towmhe.’ ^j^^t by a conuenient space and distaunce from the grees of the high 
 Aultier of the said Chapell, there be made in lenght and brede aboute the said tombe, 
 a grate, in maner of a Closure, of coper and gilte, after the faction that we have 
 begoune, whiche w^e Wol be by our said Executours fully accomplisshed and p’fourmed. 
 And within the same grate, at o^vre fete, after a conuenient distaunce from our 
 towmbe, bee maid an Aultier, in the honour of our Salviour Jh'u Crist, streight 
 adioynying to the said grate. At which Aultier we Wol, certaine preists daily saie 
 masses, for the weale of our soule and remission of our synnes, vnder such maner and 
 fourme as is couuenanted and agreed betwext vs, and th’abbot, Priour and Conuent, 
 of our said monasterye of Westm". and as more sp’ially appereth by certaine writings 
 indented, made vpon the same, and passed aggreed and concluded, betwix us and the 
 said Abbot, Priour and Conuent, vnder our grete Seale and signed with our owen 
 hand for our partie, and the conuent Seale of the said Abbot Priour and Conuent for 
 their partie, and remay neng of recorde in the Rolles of our Chauncellary. 
 
 “ ‘ And if our said Chapell and towmbe, and oure said wifs Ymagies, grate and 
 ‘ The finis<hing closure, be not fully accomplisshed and p’fitely finisshed, according to 
 of the Kind’s Cha- the premisses, by vs in our lif-tyme, we then Wol, that not oonly the 
 g^te, and^ cTo- same chapell, tombe, ymagies, grate and closure, and every of theim, 
 and al other thinges to them belonging, with al spede, and assone 
 after our decease as goodly may be doon, bee by our executours hooly and perfitely 
 finisshed in eury behalve, after the maner and fourme before rehersed, and sutingly 
 to that that is begoune and doon of theim : But also that the said Chapell he desked, 
 and the windowes of our said Chapell be glased, wdth stores, ymagies, armes, 
 bagies and cognoisaunts, as is by vs redily diuised, and in picture deliv’ed to the 
 Priour of sainct Bartilmews besids Smythfeld, maister of the works of our said 
 Chapell ; and that the walles, doores, windows, Archies and Vaults, and ymagies of 
 the same our Chapell, within and w‘out, be painted, garnisshed and adorned with our 
 armes, bagies, cognoisaunts, and other conuenient painteng, in as goodly and riche 
 maner as suche a werk requireth, and as to a King’s werk app’teigneth. 
 
 “ ‘ And for the more sure p’fourmance and finisshiiig of the premisses, and for the 
 more redye payment of the money necessary in that behalf, we have deliued in redy 
 money before the hande, the some of vMli, to the Abbot, Priour and Conuent, of our 
 said Monastery of Westm. as by writings indented betwixt vs and theim, testifieng 
 the same payment and receipte, and bering date at Richemount the thretene daie of 
 the moneth of Aprill, the xxiiii yere of our reigne, it dooth more plainlie appiere : 
 the same five thousand pounds and every parcel thereof, to be truly emploied and 
 bestowed by th’ Abbot of our said monastery for the tyme being, about and vpon the 
 finisshing and p’fourmyng of the premisses from time to tyme, as nede shall require, 
 by th’advise, comtroUement and ou’sight, of such p’sones as we in our live, and our 
 executours after our decesse, yf they be not doon in our live, shall depute and assigne, 
 
 56 
 
Henry the Seventh's CJtapel. 
 
 without discontynuing of the said works or any parte of theim, till thei be fully 
 p’formed, finisshed, and accomplisshed. * ” — {Neale y vol. i. pp. 7, 8.) 
 
 A number of indentures are extant between the king and the abbot and 
 convent of Westminster for the more effectual carrying out of the royal 
 intentions for the service of the chapel. Some of these are preserved in 
 the Public Record Office, otliers in the library of the Dean and Chapter. 
 The king took, as he thought, every possible precaution, but he little fore- 
 saw the great change which was to come over his realm in the time of his 
 son, and how futile all his precautions would prove, so far as the letter of 
 them is concerned. Let us hope that the spirit of them is not lost, and as 
 the object of the king was the perpetuation of the true Christian faith in 
 his realm, and in his abbey of Westminster, that this object will never be 
 lost sight of, as it certainly is not by the present Dean and Chapter. The 
 reform of abuses is very far from destroying the main object. 
 
 One of these indentures will suffice to shew the minute care bestowed 
 by the king on his object : — 
 
 ‘ This Indenture made betwene the moost cristen and moste excellent Prince 
 kyng henry the seventh by the grace of god kyng of Englande and of ffrance and 
 lord of Irlande the xvi daye of July the nynetene yere of his moost noble reigne and 
 John Islipp Abbott of the monastery of Seynt Petre of Westm.’ and the Priour and 
 Convent of the “^ame monastery, Witnesseth,^ &c. — 
 
 “ After providing for the saying of certain collects, psalms, and orations, during 
 the King’s life and after his decease, it proceeds thus : ‘ And the said Abbot Prior 
 and Convent covenanten & graunten and theym and thair successours bynden to the 
 said king our Souayn lord and his heires and successours by these presents, that the 
 same Abbot Priour and Convent and their successours from the date of these p’sentes 
 shall provide ordeigne have fynde and kepe ppertually for ever While the world shall 
 endure thre monks of thordre of Saynt Benet in the said monastery ouer and above 
 the noumhre of the monks that ought to be had and susteyned in the same monast’y 
 by reason of the fundacion therof or oderwise. In which mona’sty the said kyng 
 oure sou’ayn lord willeth & determyneth by godds g»ce his body to he buried and 
 enterred : and where it is the very mynde will and entent of the said king our 
 sovereyn lord to have thre chauntery monks Docto’’s or bachelors of Divinite in the 
 same monastery there ppetually whill the world shall endure to say daily masse divine 
 s’vice w* p'‘yers observ’^nce & ceremonies & in such man*’ fourme tymes ordre and 
 places as hereaft’ ensueth in these Indentures, fforasmoch as there be nowe noo such 
 Docto*’rs ne batchelers of the same monast’y mete and hable for the same Chauntries 
 and service ouer and beside the Abbot Priour and Monks daily of the said monastery 
 therfor,’ — the Abbot &c. covenant that ‘ thre monks of the said monks now being 
 or that hereafter shall be Scholers in the vniuersite of Oxenford do take the degree 
 of batchelers of Divinite in as brief and convenient tyme as may be had and done ;’ — 
 the said monks to say daily mass and divine service, whilst the world shall endure, 
 for the King and Realm, ‘ the soul of the Princess Elizabeth the late Quene his wif,’ 
 their children and issue. Prince Edw'ard the King’s father, and Margaret his mother, 
 * and after the decease of the said king oure Sou\Tayn lord, then to pray specially and 
 principally for the soule of the same kyng our sou’rayn lorde and also for the soule of 
 the same quene and the soules aforesaid and all cristen soules With suche observaunce 
 and ceremonies and in suche places tymes man’ fourme and ordre as hereafter ensueth. 
 That is to say, that the said thre chaunt’y monks and ev’y of theim at the Aultier 
 
Henry the Seventh’s Chapel, 
 
 under the lantern place ^ betwene the Quere and the high Aultier in the said monas- 
 tery, till the Chapell of oure lady in the said monastery which oure saide sou’rayn lord 
 the kyng hath nowe begon he fully edified and hilded at the coste and charges of oure 
 said Sov’rayne lord the kyng his heires or executor's, and a tomhe there made for 
 thenterment of the body of our said sou’rayn lord the kyng and a closure of metall in 
 maner of a Chapell made therahoute and an Aultier enclosed within the same at the 
 coste and charge of the said kyng our sou’rayn lord his heires or executor^s, which 
 Aultier vndre the said lanterne place and also an herse with a hundreth Tapers 
 stonding vpon and ahoute the same he nowe p’vided and there made and sett by our 
 said sourayne lord the kyng there to stonde vnto the tyme the said Chapell of our 
 Lady and tomhe w‘ the said closure therahoute, and the Aultier within the same he 
 so made, shall say their masses daily, except the dayes called Shevethursday Good- 
 fryday the Vigill of Ester and the dayes of coronacions of Kynges and Quenes of 
 Englande cristenyng of thair children and enterrement of the body of any King or 
 Quene of Englande or of any of thair children in the same Monastery and the daies 
 necessary for the preparyng of the place vnder the said lanterne place for euery of 
 the same causes, and the dayes necessary for the remou“eng of all such thinges as 
 shalbe brought sette and made in the said place vnder the said lanterne for euery of 
 the said causes only. And that the said Abbot Priour and conuent,’ &c .” — {NeaUt 
 vol. i. pp. 12, 13.) 
 
 It may be inferred from different circumstances, that before the king’s 
 decease in April, 1509, the building was completed to the vaulting; and 
 the monarch, in his will, is particularly urgent that all the works be im- 
 mediately “ accomplished and performed.” For this purpose, only nine 
 days previously to his death, he delivered 5,000Z. in “ redy money, before 
 the honde’’ to Abbot Islip ; and directed, if that sum should be in- 
 sufficient, that his executors should advance to the said abbot as much 
 more as might be requisite for the full completion of the edifice. Henry 
 died on the 22nd of April, and was buried here with vast pomp on the 11th 
 of May following. Between that time and the month of October, 1512, 
 it is highly probable that the whole of the suj^erstructure was finished, 
 as an indenture was then entered into with Torregiano, for the making of 
 the royal tomb ; the ‘ closure’ for which had been commenced before the 
 king’s death. Four years afterwards, in 1516, another indenture was made 
 with Torregiano, for erecting a rich canopy and altar, “ w‘in the new 
 chapell -which the foresaid late King caused to be made at Westm.,” by 
 the 1st of November, 1519. We may therefore assume, with every degree 
 of probability, that the internal arrangements of this magnificent struc- 
 ture were entirely completed at that period. 
 
 The following extracts from Brayley’s History will suffice to record the 
 recent history of the fabric : — 
 
 “ During the three centuries which had elapsed from the foundation of Henry’s 
 Chapel to the year 1803, it had undergone but little repair ; and its external state 
 
 ^ From this passage it is evident that there was at that time an open lantern over 
 the central space “ between the quire and the high aulter,” the quire being then, 
 as now, in tiie eastern part of the nave, immediately to the west of the crossing or 
 transept. !Might not such an open lantern be easily constructed of wood and replaced ; 
 and would not such a restoration be a great improvement to the church ? 
 
 ■ 58 
 
Henry the Seventh's ChapeL 
 
 had become so completely ruinous, that the safety of the whole fabric was endangered. 
 Some years before this, indeed in 1793, it had been necessary to repair the roof; the 
 expense, about 1,900Z., being defrayed from the revenues of the Church. Reparations 
 on a more enlarged scale were projected, and the late James Wyatt, Esq., the 
 surveyor-general, was employed in restoring a part over the eastern window, for 
 the purpose of ascertaining the expense of repairing the whole, when the fire in the 
 roof and lantern of the Abbey Church, which happened from the neglect of the 
 plumbers, occasioned an almost immediate expense to the Dean and Chapter of 
 3,848Z., and thus depriving them of the means of proceeding with the intended repairs 
 of the chapel. 
 
 “ In this state of circumstances, the solicitude of every admirer of the architectural 
 splendour of this edifice was highly excited ; for at the very period when the fire 
 happened, the two western turrets, which had been found to be in a most dangerous 
 condition, were in progress of being taken do\^^l ; the windows were propped with 
 timbers, several of the ‘ flying buttresses,’ or cross-springers, had sunk through the 
 decay of their abutments, and all the exterior ornaments, battlements, pinnacles, &c., 
 were utterly dilapidated ; so that the entire building had assumed the appearance of 
 an almost ‘ shapeless mass of ruin.’ The south and south-east sides were particularly 
 decayed; the weather having made deeper inroads upon those fronts than on the 
 opposite sides. 
 
 “ Whilst it was yet undetermined what measures to pursue, the late Dean of West- 
 minster, Dr. Vincent, through whose indefatigable and most praiseworthy exertions, 
 this chapel is, in a very great degree, indebted for its restoration, was informed that, 
 in a conve' sation on the subject, which had taken place between Lord Grenville, the 
 late Marquis of Buckingham, and other dignified persons, and in which the deficiency 
 of the Dean and Chapter’s pecuniary resources had been noticed. Lord Grenville had 
 used the interrogation. Why don’t they apply to Parliament ? — The advice implied by 
 this question was not lost ; the Dean immediately addressed a Memorial to the Lords 
 of the Treasury, accompanied by a letter, in which he requested to state to their 
 Lordships the different proposals which had been made for repairing the chapel, 
 together with an estimate of the expense, ‘ in order to procure their recommendation 
 of the matter to Parliament.’ The Memorial was dated on the 15th of November, 
 1806 ; and on tlie 5th of December, the Lords of the Treasury referred the considera- 
 tion of the subject to the ‘Committee for the Inspection of the Models for National 
 Monuments,’ &c. (generally called the ‘ Committee of Taste ’) ; in consequence of 
 which, and of further proceedings, a Petition from the Dean and Chapter was pre- 
 sented to the House of Commons, in June, 1807, with the approbation of the late 
 King ; and on the Rex>ort of a Committee appointed to examine into its allegations, 
 the sum of 2,000?. was granted towards the projected repairs. . . . 
 
 “ From which period the repairs were progressively carried on till they were entirely 
 completed by the restoration of the western or stair turrets, and of the small windows 
 of the side aisles, in the last months of the year 1822 ; the whole being finished and 
 the scaffolds struck on Christmas Eve. In the base of the ornamental dome which 
 crowns the south-east turret, the following inscription was cut : — ‘ Restored 1809, 
 Anno Regni 50 Geo. III. William Vincent, Dean; James Wyatt, Architect; Jere- 
 miah Glanville, Clerk of the Works; Thomas Gayfere, Mason.’ — Similar inscriptions 
 were cut on other turrets, only varying in the date of the year in which they were 
 executed, and in substituting the name of ‘John Ireland, Dean,’ for that of Vincent, 
 after the decease of the latter. 
 
 “ The aggregate amount of the Grants made by Parliament for the repairs of this 
 chapel, is somewhat more than 42,000?., which sum has been expended in a manner 
 that confers distinguished honour on all the parties concerned. The renovation of 
 the external architecture has been complete; and, with the exception of the orna- 
 
 59 
 
Henry the Seventh’ a Chapel. 
 
 mental parts of the * upper battlement/ as it is called, though in fact only a pierced 
 parapet, all the ancient work has been correctly imitated ; not alone in its general 
 forms, hut likewise in its exuberant detail of enriched panelling, embossed niches, 
 fretted tracery, and heraldic and decorative sculpture. Were some portion of the 
 national riches more frequently devoted to similar objects of elegant art, and to the 
 general cultivation of the kindred sciences of literature and painting, it would con- 
 duce far more to the permanent renown of the empire, than the expenditure of all 
 its treasures in the heart-sickening calamities of sanguinary warfare, however glo- 
 rious its victories or extensive its dominions. 
 
 “As the judicious advice of the ‘Committee of Taste’ had determined the Dean 
 and Chapter to have every part of this magnificent fabric restored, as nearly as 
 possible, in exact conformity to the original building, there was but very little occa- 
 sion for the interference of the Architect ; all the labour of arranging the work, 
 tracing out the details and ornaments, and supplying defects from corresponding 
 parts, being left to the discretion and industry of the Mason. The task was an im- 
 portant one ; and though it might not demand a genius of the first order, it required 
 })rofessional skill, a practised eye, and a sound judgment : — it is no eulogium to say 
 that the execution of this task could not have been entrusted to a more capable 
 artizan than Mr. Gayfere.” — (Neale, vol. i. pp. 21 — 27.) 
 
 We hope that the advice given by Lord Grenville to Dean Vincent, and 
 so judiciously acted upon by him, will not be lost sight of by the present 
 Dean and Chapter, and that the Parliament of Queen Victoria will treat 
 the Chapter-house with the same good taste and liberality which the Par- 
 liament of George IV. shewed in the case of Henry the Seventh’s Chapel. 
 The claim is a far stronger one, for in place of the decay of time only, as 
 in the instance of the chapel, we have in the case of the chapter-house 
 actual violence committed by Parliament itself, which first took possession 
 of it for its own meetings, and then mutilated it for the purpose of turning 
 it into a public record office, for which it was singularly ill suited. We 
 believe that to this day the remains of this beautiful structure are still the 
 property of the nation, and not of the Dean and Chapter, as it did not 
 form part of the grant of Henry the Eighth. It is obvious that the Dean 
 and Chapter cannot be called upon to repair a building which does not 
 belong to them, and we trust that Parliament will not hesitate to restore 
 to the Dean and Chapter not only the ruins of their beautiful Chapter- 
 house, but will accompany the grant by such a sum as will enable them to 
 put it into a proper state of repair. This appears to be only common 
 justice. We hear that if Parliament will grant the ruins and £20,000 
 towards the dilapidations, the Dean and Chapter are willing to undertake 
 the perfect restoration of this beautiful building, the present state of 
 which is a disgrace to the country. 
 
 We have been favoured by Mr. W. Burges with the following note : — 
 
 Britton in his account of Henry VII.’s Chapel in the “ Architectural Antiquities of 
 Great Britain,” has printed two or three documents which give us very considerable 
 information on the progress of the tomb and other portions of the chapel. 
 
 The first is the will of Henry VII. From it we learn that the original tomb was to 
 CO 
 
Henry the Seventh's Chapel. 
 
 be made of touch-stone, with copper-gilt recumbent eflSgies, while the sides and ends 
 were to be occupied with small images of the King’s patron saints, also in copper-gilt, 
 within tabernacles, equally of touch-stone. The more general practice was to make 
 the sides of the tomb of black marble with the tabernacles in white marble, but the 
 testfctor would appear to have wished the whole to be in black. His tomb was to be con- 
 tained within an enclosure of copper-gilt, which was begun at the time the will was 
 written, and within it at the eastern end was to be erected an altar wdth a wooden 
 dossel covered with plates of gold. Again, the enclosure was to stand in “ the myddes 
 of the same chapell before the high aultier,” a position which is again indicated by the 
 words, “ 'I'hat by a convenient space and distance from the grees of the high awltier of 
 the said chapell there be made a grate.” From this it would appear that the tomb was 
 to be in the middle of the chapel and before the high altar, but this view of the matter 
 is in direct contradistinction to all the old plans of the building, for example, the one in 
 the Thorpe drawings now in the Soane Museum, and what Sandford sa\ s in his Life of 
 Edward VI., all of which indicate the tomb as we see it at the present d;iy. Now this 
 raises the question as to whether the tomb has been removed from its original place, 
 say in the time of Queen Mary. In all probability the high altar was taken down in 
 Edward IV.’s reign, and afterwards re-erected by his sister : perhaps it was then 
 thought that the tomb and its grille was in the way, and it was therefore removed to 
 its present situation, llow'ever, Henry VII.’s will was so much modified that it is 
 very probable that the original arrangement was never carried out. Still it must be 
 confessed that the more usual arrangement was to place the founder’s tomb before the 
 great altar of a chapel rather than behind it. 
 
 The will then goes on to speak of the “high aultre within our said chapell called 
 our Lady aultre,” and every other “ aulter being within our said chapell of our Lady, 
 bee thei of the sides of the same, or in any other place within the compasse of the 
 same.” Mention is also made of the “ aulter of our said uncle of blessed memory 
 King Henry VI.,” and the beginning of the document tells us “That we by the grace 
 of God propose right shortly to translate into the same (chapel) the body and reliques 
 of our uncle of blessed memory King Henry VI.” Now all this gives us the following 
 altars : — 1. the high altar, dedicated to the Blessed Virgin ; 2. the altar wdthin the 
 enclosure of the tomb, dedicated to our Saviour ; 3. the altar of King Henry VI. : and 
 then there are spaces for six more at the ends of the aisles ; and in the side chapels of 
 the apse. Now I conceive the ancient arrangement to have been as follows : — In the 
 middle of the stalls w’as the king’s tomb and altar of our Saviour ; then followed the 
 high altar, somewhere near where the tomb is now ; and at the extreme east end in 
 the bay window the tomb of Henry VI., which, from a drawing in the Cottonian 
 Collection, Aug. 2, Vol. i., would appear to have consisted of the same arrangement as 
 that of Henry V., viz., the tomb below and a chantry chapel above, supported on lour 
 pillars. Doubtless there w^ere figures intended, but the artist has not drawn them. 
 Now we must remember that Henry VI. was never canonized, the scandal being that 
 Henry VII. found it cost too much, and the altar designated in the will as that of 
 Henry VI. would refer to the chantry altar above his tomb. Another curious fact 
 would go somewhat to prove the point, for the sill of the eastern bay window is so 
 low that there would be no place for an attached altar and its dossel. However this 
 may be, we know that the body of Henry VI. still remains at Windsor, and that neither 
 the canonization or removal ever took place. 
 
 There are traces (very distant) of altars at the east ends of the aisles and in the 
 tw'o westernmost chapels of the apse, (not so apparent) ; but in the remaining two 
 chapels of the apse the interruption of the wall panelling is so small and so low down 
 that it is rather doubtful whether the altars were attached or not. 
 
 Another point w’e should renieuiber is that the easternmost bay of the stalls is 
 
 61 
 
Henry the SeventNs Chapel, 
 
 modern, having been erected in the reign of George I. Stone screens doubtless occupied 
 their place, and it is by no means improbable but that the three easternmost chapels 
 of the choir were similarly enclosed, as well as the two westernmost ones, where portions 
 of them actually remain. 
 
 'Ihe next document given by Britton is entitled “An estimate of the charge 
 for making of a tomb for King Henry VII., which plot was afterwards disliked by 
 King Henry VIII. and altered as it now stands.” The original of this document is 
 in the Chapter-house at Westminster, according to Britton. From it we find that 
 the pattern was made by Master Pageny, and that the king’s three master masons 
 were to work the black touch-stone and white marble, the former to be used for 
 the base and ledger and the latter for the sides and ends. Lawrence Imber, carver, 
 was to make the patrones in timber of the various images, which were afterwards to be 
 cast in copper by Nicholas Ewen, coppersmith and gilder. Lastly, a quantity of painting 
 was to be done by four men’s hands within a year. The whole number of figures is 
 stated to be nineteen, of which (most probably, for the account is rather confused) 
 Drawswerd Sherif of York was to execute two recumbent effigies and a kneeling one 
 of the king. The kneeling figure was probably a substitution for the golden one 
 directed in the will to he placed on the shrine of St. Edward the Confessor. 
 
 Now this tomb was probably the identical one to which Henry VII. refers in his 
 will, and which was clearly a Gothic design. 
 
 There is no doubt, however, but that Torrigiano made the tomb as we now see it, for 
 an indenture between him and Henry VIII. relative to the making of a tomb for the 
 latter king is referred to in Neale’s “ Westminster Abbey.” And in this we find casual 
 mention of a tomb that Torrigiano had contracted to make in 1512, and which he 
 had then finished. 
 
 The tomb of the Countess of Richmond (Henry VII.’s mother) is likewise by the 
 same artist, but inasmuch as there are sundry Gothic details in it we may naturally 
 suppose it to be a prior production. 
 
 Another document given by Britton proves that Torrigiano made the high altar. 
 Sandford gives a print of this, p. 496, edition 1707. Here, however, as far as we can 
 judge by the pUte, we see a very difierent and coarser description of art ; so much so, 
 that it is difiicult to conceive the altar and the two above-mentioned tombs to have been 
 the work of the same man. Perhaps he may suppose Torrigiano changed his style 
 after his visit to Italy in 1518, when he tried to induce Benvenuto Cellini to come 
 over here and work with him. At all events, in the chapel of Henry VII. we trace the 
 gradual departure from medieval art. Thus the chapel and the brass screen are purely 
 medieval, and there are also traces of the same style in the Countess of Richmond’s 
 tomb, while the king’s monument is pure Italian renaissance, but still very delicate 
 and beautiful, while in the high altar, which by the indenture was to be finished and 
 erected by Nov. 1519, the details and members are coarse and heavy. This latter 
 altar was decorated with subjects relating to the life of our Lord, and consisted of four 
 pillars supporting a square ceiling, at the four corners of which were angels of terra 
 cotta, so made as to look like marble, supporting the instruments of the passion. 
 The altar proper was placed below this canopy, and presented a slab of touch- stone, 
 supported by sundry bronze balusters, while within was an image of the dead Christ, 
 made of burnt clay and coloured. It will be remembered that a tomb and effigy 
 of burnt clay made by Torrigiano is still to be found in the chapel of the Rolls in 
 Chancery- lane. 
 
 Another curious fact in the history of this chapel is, that some years back, when the 
 pockets of the aisle vaults were cleaned out, a crumpled and very dirty leaf of one 
 of our earlier printers was discovered among the rubbish, which had never been 
 disturbed since the building had been erected. 
 
 This in it.self is not very important, but it is curious in connection with the fact that 
 62 
 
Henry the Seventh's Chapel. 
 
 Caxton is said to have set up his first printing-press in one of the chapels of West- 
 minster Abbey, and it has often struck me whether the very spacious triforium of the 
 church could have been the scene of his labours. Might not a careful search in the 
 floor of this triforium bring to light evidence of this, either in the shape of an old 
 type, or some other relic of early printing. The triforium would be just the place 
 for a workshop, and would be at the same time sufficiently inaccessible to prevent 
 intrusion. 
 
 63 
 
A Chronological Tahle of the Allots, Priors, Pishops, and Deans of 
 Westminster, from the presumed Foundation of the Alley Church 
 in 604, to the year 1861. 
 
 ABBOTS, PRIORS, &c. Elected. 
 
 ABBOT. 
 
 Orthbright 604 
 
 PRIORS \ 
 
 Germanus 
 
 Aldred 
 
 Syward 675 
 
 Osmund 684 
 
 Selred 726 
 
 Organ 744 
 
 BHthstan 765 
 
 ABBOTS. 
 
 Ordbrigbt, or Alubritb .... 
 
 Alfwius 796 
 
 Alfwius II 820 
 
 Algar 846 
 
 Eadmerus 
 
 Alfnod 
 
 Alfric, or Alfwold 940 
 
 Wlsius, or Wulsinus ....(?) 960 
 
 Alfwy, or Aids! us 
 
 Wulnoth 1017 
 
 Edwyn. . * 1049 
 
 Goiffridus, or Geoffry 1068 
 
 Vitalis 1076 
 
 Gislebertus Crispinus, or Gilbert 
 
 Crispin 1082 
 
 Herebert, or Herbert 1121 
 
 Gervaise de Blois 1140 
 
 Laurentius, or Lawrence .... 1159 
 
 Walter 1175 
 
 William Postard (?) 1191 
 
 Kalph Pap^’lion, or de Arundel. . 1200 
 
 William de Humez, or Humeto . 1214 
 
 Eichard de Berkynge 1222 
 
 Richard de Crokesley 1246 
 
 Philip de Levvesham 1258 
 
 Richard de Ware, or Warren . . 1258 
 
 Walter de Wenlock 1284 
 
 Richard de Kedyngton, or de Sud- 
 bury 1308 
 
 William de Curtlyngton, Carthing- 
 
 ton, or Curlington 1315 
 
 Thomas Henley 1333 
 
 • This list of Priors is of doubtful authenticity. 
 
 ABBOTS, PRIORS, &c. Elected. 
 
 Simon de Kyrcheston 1344 
 
 Simon Langham (afterwards Car- 
 dinal) 1349 
 
 Nicholas Litlington 1362 
 
 William de Colchester 1386 
 
 Richard Harweden 1420 
 
 Edmund Kyrton 1440 
 
 George Norwych 1462 
 
 Thomas Millyng 1469 
 
 John Esteney 1474 
 
 George Fascet 1498 
 
 John Islip 1500 
 
 William Boston, or Benson (after- 
 wards Dean) 1533 
 
 BISHOP. 
 
 Thomas Thirleby 1540 
 
 DEANS. 
 
 William Benson 1540 
 
 Richard Cox, or Coxe 1549 
 
 Hugh Weston 1553 
 
 ABBOT. 
 
 John Feckenham 1556 
 
 DEANS. 
 
 William Bill 1560 
 
 Gabriel Goodman 1560 
 
 liuncelot Andrewes 1601 
 
 Richard Neile 1605 
 
 George Montaine, or Mountain . 1610 
 
 Robert Tounson 1617 
 
 John Williams (Lord Keeper) . . 1620 
 
 Richard Steward 1644 
 
 John Earles 1660 
 
 John Dolben 1662 
 
 Thomas Sprat 1683 
 
 Francis Atterbury 1713 
 
 Samuel Bradford 1723 
 
 Joseph Wilcocks 1731 
 
 Zachary Pearce 1756 
 
 John Thomas 1768 
 
 Samuel Horsley 1793 
 
 William Vincent 1802 
 
 John Ireland 1816 
 
 Thomas Turton 1842 
 
 Samuel Wilberforce 1845 
 
 William Buckland 1846 
 
 Richard Chenevix Trench . . . 1856 
 
 64 
 
THE COMMISSION TO RICHARD DE WHITTINGTON, &c., TO 
 REBUILD THE NAVE OF WESTMINSTER ABBEY. 
 
 [It has long been known, both by history and by the architectural 
 details, that the nave of the abbey church was rebuilt in the fifteenth 
 century, although the general style of the choir of the thirteenth has 
 been so well followed that casual observers are quite unconscious of the 
 change of style. There is every reason to believe that the old Norman 
 nave was left standing until that time, and we have seen by the accounts 
 that workmen were employed to remove it, preparatory to the construction 
 of the new nave. It has not been generally known that in 1 Henry Y., 
 A.D. 1413, a royal commission was issued to Richard Whityngton, and 
 Richard Harowden monk of the abbey, for carrying on the work of re- 
 building the nave; which we here reprint from Rymer’s Foddera^ vol. ix., 
 p. 78. The Rev. Samuel Lysons, in his recent life of Sir Richard 
 VVhytington, the celebrated Lord Mayor of London, considers this com- 
 missioner for rebuilding the nave of the abbey church to be no other than 
 the wealthy merchant himself : it will be observed that in the account rolls 
 he is called Richard de Whittington, whilst the other commissioner is 
 called only Richard Harowden a monk of the abbey.] 
 
 A.D. 1413. \ 
 
 Anno 1 lien. V. ( 
 Pat. 1, Hen. V, ( 
 p. 4, m. 5. / 
 
 Pro Ahhate Westmonasterii quo Rex Regalitatis Insignia suscepit. 
 
 A.D. 1413. \ Rex omnibus ad quos &c. Sciatis quod de gratia nostra speciali, 
 
 Et pro salute aniinae nostrae et ob reverentiam Dei et Beati 
 Petri in cujus honore Abbatia Westmonasteriensis dinoscitur dedi- 
 cari ac etiam gloriosi Confessoris Regis Edwardi et diversorum inclitorum Pro- 
 genitorum nostrorum quondam Regum Angliae in Abbatia praedicta quiescentium. 
 
 Necnon pro eo quod in eadem Abbatia prout placuit Altissimo Insignia Re- 
 galitatis nostrae suscepimus. 
 
 Volentes pro constructione et reparatione Navis Abbatiae illius (quae a diu 
 Ruinam passa fuit et infecta remanet) cum bonis nobis a Deo collatis et conferen- 
 dis quam citius commode poterimus providere. 
 
 Concessimus, dilectis nobis in Christo Abbati et conventui Abbatiae praedictae, in 
 auxilium Perfectionis et constructionis Navis praedictae, Mille marcas percipiendas 
 aiinuatim quamdiu nobis placuerit, videlicet ; — 
 
 Quingentas Marcas de Exitibus Hanaperii Cancellariae nostrae per manus custodis 
 ejusdem pro tempore existentis. 
 
 Et Quingentas marcas de custuma Lanarum, Coriorum et pellium lanutarum in 
 Portu Civitatis nostrae Londoniae per manus collectorum ejusdem custumae pro 
 tempore existentium. 
 
 Ad Terminos Paschae, Nativitatis S. Johannis Baptistae, S. Michaelis et Natalis 
 Domini per aequales portiones. 
 
 Et ulterius, pro pleniori et celeriori executione concessionis nostrae praedictae 
 prospicere volentes ac de fidelitate et circumspectione dilectorum nobis Ricardi 
 Whityngton, et Ricardi Harowden Monachi Abbatiae praedictae, plenius confidentes 
 
 K 65 
 
Building Accounts for the Nave. 
 
 assignavimus ipsos Ricardum et Ricardum ad prsedictas mille marcas in locis 
 praedictis annuatim ad terminos prsedictos recipiendum, et ad easdem Mille marcas 
 circa Perfectionem et Constructionem Navis praedictse, per supervisum carissimi 
 consanguinei nostri Edwardi Ducis Eborum et Venerabilis in Christo patris Henrici 
 Episcopi Wyntoniensis Cancellarii nostri Avunculi nostri carissimi lideliter expen- 
 deiidum. Ita quod iidein Ricardus et Ricardus rationabilem compotum de summis 
 per ipsos virtute literarura nostrarum praesentium recipiendis et circa perfectionem 
 et constructionem Navis prsedictae ut praemittitur expendendis eisdem Duci et 
 Cancellario quoties et quando ad hoc fuerint debita requisiti reddant et reddere 
 teueantur. 
 
 In cujus, &c. 
 
 Teste Rege apud Westmonasterium Decimo quarto die Decembris. 
 
 Per ipsum Regem. 
 
 [Some of the accounts of these commissioners have been preserved, and 
 we subjoin extracts from them.J 
 
 Account of Richard de Whittington, and Richard Harowden monk of the Abbey 
 
 of the Blessed Peter of Westminster, of their receipts and expences about the 
 
 construction and repair of the nave of the Abbey, from 7th of July 1 Henry V. 
 
 to Christmas anno 4, being 3 years, 1 quarter, and 83 days. 
 
 Receipts, 1,397^. 6^. in six sums from the Royal Exchequer at various 
 times, and one from the King’s own hands. 
 
 Purchase, carriage, &c., of stone from Reigate, Stapleton, and Bere ; and of rag. 
 
 And for 12 bases, 24 pillars, and 24 capitals of marble, with the freightage 
 thereof, and their making in gross, by John Russe and Richard Knappe, in the 
 3rd year, 16/. ; viz. for 1 base, 2 capitals, and 2 pillars, 2 marks ; and for the above 
 12 bases, 24 pillars, and 24 capitals of marble, 16/. 
 
 200 boards called “ regold,” “ waynyschoote,” and “ estrycheboorde,” bought for 
 making moulds thereof, 4/. 4^. lOt/. 
 
 ^Making of long “ staybarres,” hoops, crocketts, and divers other ironwork for 
 the works aforesaid. 
 
 Lead for one side* of the nave of the said work, 88/. 135. 4</. 
 
 Small nails for the moulds, 8^/. ; 2 dozen of parchment for the same, 65. 8</. 
 
 Repair of two lodges within the church aforesaid, one covered with tile, the 
 other with reeds, 2 65. 8</. 
 
 Wages to 20 regular and 4 casual masons, 2 casual setters'*, 1 regular carpenter 
 working about the scaffold, and newly making the roof of one side of the nave 
 of the said monastery, 4 casual carpenters. Annual fee of William Colchester, 
 head mason, for ordering and surveying the work, 10/. per annum. 
 
 Total, 1,490/. II5. b\d . ; one lot of marble remains. 
 
 ' “costa.” k “positores.” 
 
 66 
 
FURTHEE REMARKS OK THE RUILDIKGS OF EDWARD 
 THE COKEESSOR\ 
 
 It appears from the almost contemporary narrative of the monk Sulcar- 
 dus that, whatever may have been the size of the original Saxon Abbey 
 occupying the site of the present edifice, the whole church and its adjacent 
 outbuildings were reconstructed anew, on a much larger scale, by the 
 pious munificence of Edward the Confessor. Sulcardus was a monk of 
 Westminster, and by the dedication of his account of the lately erected 
 Abbey to the Abbot Vitalis, may be presumed to have written it in the 
 Conqueror’s time — Yitalis dying some years before that prince 
 
 The words of this annalist, and others of later date, are as follows : — 
 Sulcardus says, “ Monasterium est dirutum ut surgeret nobilius.” As to 
 the structure itself, it was ‘‘ Diversis fultum columnis ac multiplicibus 
 volutum bine et inde arcubus.” William of Malmesbury states that the 
 Confessor “ Ecclesiam aedificationis genere novo fecit;” which same church, 
 adds Matthew of Westminster, “ a fundamentis construxerat.” Matthew 
 Paris corroborates this adoption by King Edward of what was then a style 
 unknown in Saxon England ; his words are : “ Sepultus est (Rex Ed- 
 wardus) Londini in Ecclesia quam ipse novo compositionis genere con- 
 struxerat, a qua post multi ecclesias construentes exemplum adepti opus 
 illud emulabantur.” 
 
 AVe may therefore regard these remains of the Alley of Edward 
 the Confessor as the earliest specimen of the Korman style in England, 
 and as the great Exemplar from which the many noble abbeys and 
 cathedrals of the Norman period were subsequently erected; a special 
 interest, therefore, assuredly attaches to these venerable relics, apart from 
 their locality. 
 
 The Abbey of the Confessor must have been very nearly, if not quite, 
 of the same extent as the present Abbey, commenced by Henry III. AVe 
 can still trace no inconsiderable portion, if not of the Confessor’s Alley 
 church, yet of the luildings of the monastery adjacent, as has been shewn 
 by Mr. Scott. (See p. 3.) 
 
 Proceeding southward from the south transept of Henry the Third’s 
 church, the remains of the Norman work of 1060 — 1066 are first detected 
 in the east cloister. The masonry of the chapel of the Pyx exhibits the 
 wide joints, found everywhere in Normandy in buildings of this century, an 
 indication seldom leading to an erroneous conclusion. The quality of the 
 mortar, and the shaping of the stones by the hand-axe, the marks of which 
 
 * By the Rev. T. W. Weare, M.A., Under Master of Westminster School. 
 
 ** Widmore, History of Westminster Abbey. 
 
 67 
 
Further Remarks on the Buildings 
 
 are still visible to the eye, are characteristics which are in distinct contrast 
 to the fine-jointed masonry, and the smoother surface of the stones, imply- 
 ing a better kind of tool, as found in the work of Henry two centuries 
 afterwards. From the chapel of the Pyx, continuing southward, to the 
 archway opening into Little Dean’s Yard, the whole substructure is of the 
 same date and character. The chapel of the Pyx itself has been already 
 described, (see p. 6). Though this chapel itself is not accessible to the 
 ordinary visitor, being in charge of the government officials, yet the 
 same style in all its details is to be seen in the adjacent bays, or com- 
 partments, which have lately been cleared out and are now open to in- 
 spection. The whole range, numbering about seven bays of vaulting, 
 formed the substructure to the dormitory of Edward^ s monastery. But 
 Edward’s work is not only to be seen in the substructure. The east, west, 
 and south walls of Westminster School, which occupies the exact position 
 of this ancient dormitory, — and even in its modern aspect forms one of the 
 noblest rooms in the kingdom, — still exhibit portions of the Confessor's 
 masonry, into which more recent alterations have been engrafted. The 
 same wide-jointed masonry and roughly-hewn stones of considerable di- 
 mensions are to be seen in numerous patches in the w^alls of the school- 
 room ; whilst externally one of the original windows of the period still 
 remains, (see p. 7). Rude as they are, these traces are full of interest. Here 
 we behold the first attempt of Norman-Gothic architecture in England! 
 The seed was here sown. A native impulse to improve upon the humbler 
 works of their Saxon forefathers disdained not, with true wisdom, to look 
 abroad, if perchance from thence might be derived ideas taken from existing 
 models of that grander scale of church building, which the Saxon monarch 
 had seen in Normandy, but of which as yet there was nothing among his 
 own subjects. It was late in life that the project was adopted, and he did 
 not live to see its full completion by the customary ceremony of consecra- 
 tion ; but the work was carried on with diligence and finished within a few 
 years Like many other works undertaken in a good cause, the projector 
 lived not to see it finished ; but it may without hesitation be said, that in 
 the renovated abbey and monastery of 1060 King Edward the Confessor 
 left a work behind him destined to bring about mighty changes in his 
 land. The introduction amongst the Saxon native workmen of a model, 
 struck out by the more original and more influential mind of their Norman 
 neighbours, became a fulcrum, by which in its timew'as effected a complete 
 revolution in the thoughts, the genius, and the skill of the native architects 
 of the island, — architects as yet unborn, but soon to arise to carry the 
 Pointed architecture of the Christian Church to its highest standard of 
 perfection. 
 
 ' “ Festinatur opus ex prajcepto Kegis cceptum, et post paucos annos perfectum.’^ — 
 Sulcorchis. 
 
 08 
 
of Edward the Confessor. 
 
 The substructure of the Confessor's dormitory continues southward 
 beyond the limits of the present school-room, as we have seen, (p. 7) : 
 there seems, however, to be evidence to the eye that some alterations 
 were perhaps here made in the twelfth century. Manifest traces of 
 this latter date are still existing on the eastern side of the Little Cloisters, 
 and here the great advance made wdthin the sixty or seventy years which 
 had elapsed since the Conquest, by the rivalry implanted on English soil 
 with the more finished works in Normandy, is clearly indicated in the 
 diminished^ size and yet greater height of the columns, the character of 
 the capitals, and the mouldings employed in the chapel of St. Xatharine, 
 which stood here, (see p. 9). The exact date of the building of this chapel 
 is not known, but it must have been some time before 1162. In that vear 
 the King commanded a synod to be assembled in this chapel to determine 
 a question of privilege between the convent of St. Alban’s and the Bishop 
 of Lincoln. It may here be mentioned that the same sacred precincts 
 became the scene of a memorable contest at another synod held here in 
 1176, when a dispute for precedency arose between the two archbishops, the 
 pope’s legate occupying the chair. The predecessor of the great Wolsey of 
 an after age considered that the dignity of his see of York would sufier if he 
 took the left side of the papal chairman ; and, forgetful as well of manners as 
 of humility, he proceeded to interpose himself with sufficient violence between 
 the Legate and the Archbishop of Canterbury, who already was seated on 
 the coveted right hand of the pope’s representative. A rude and unseemly 
 contest arose. The retinue of the see of Canterbury sprang upon the rival 
 of their master, — “ they threw him to the ground,” (to use the annalist’s 
 words ®,) “ and beginning to lay on him with bats and fists, the Archbishop 
 of Canterbury, yielding good for evil, sought to save him from their hands.” 
 To return, however, to the architecture : let us retrace our steps from this 
 farthest point where vestiges of the N^orman portion of the abbey buildings 
 still remain, and wend our way again through the dark cloister, and under 
 the barrel-vaulting of the Confessor's age, to the south-eastern angle of 
 the great cloisters. On the eastern wall of this part of the cloisters, it was 
 before observed, the masonry indicates clearly, by the size of the stones 
 employed, and the character of the mortar, and its loide joints, that here 
 a portion of the Norman work was made use of when the eastern cloister 
 was built in Henry the Third’s time. The beautiful Early English finished 
 masonry of the thirteenth century is here dovetailed into the more solid 
 walls of the Confessor’s date, which were cut away, only wdiere necessary, 
 to admit the additions and alterations of the later date. This custom of 
 
 ^ \Miewell, Arch. Notes, 3rd Edition, p. 87. — Tapper, Prov. Philos. on “Beauty — 
 
 “ I judge that beauty and sublimity be but the lesser and the great ; 
 
 “ Sublime, as magnified to giants, and beautiful, as diminished into fairies.” 
 
 • Holinshed. 
 
 69 
 
Further Remarks on the Buildings 
 
 turning to account the masonry of an earlier age, where not interfering 
 with the general character of that subsequently inserted, seems to have 
 been more generally in use than at first sight the eye is prepared to expect. 
 
 On returning now to the south cloister, and passing westward along its 
 entire length, to the casual observer there are no indications that the solid 
 wall on the left hand is of an earlier date than the vaulting overhead and 
 the side-shafts from which the vaulting-ribs spring. Yet late observation 
 has brought to light the fact that the entire extent of this wall is part of 
 the Confessor's work. Abbot Litlington (of \vhom we shall presently 
 speak in connection with his additions and alterations at the end of the 
 fourteenth century) here followed this plan, — he cut away the Norman wall 
 where needed, and let his vaulting-shafts into the solid stone-work ready 
 to his hand. We shall presently see the character of this wall, as evi- 
 denced by an examination of the other side. Here it may be observed 
 that the arrangements as to ground-plan made by Abbot Litlington about 
 1380 were simply commensurate with the Norman work of the eleventh 
 century, which he replaced by his own. The cloisters of the Confessor were 
 of the same size as those now in existence, and this southern wall, with the 
 sure testimony of its peculiar masonry to be seen throughout its whole length, 
 is a proof of the extent of that earlier work which Litlington but partially 
 removed when he built the south and west cloisters as we behold them now. 
 The realization to the mind, then, of the extensive scale of the ground-plan 
 of the Confessor’s abbey, and its appendages, will give some idea of the 
 solemn grandeur and vast proportions of the Norman buildings of that most 
 interesting century, when, escaped from the trammels of their Roman 
 models, and unlike their cousins along the Rhine, the great architects of 
 Rollo’s race conceived and executed designs entirely their own, no longer 
 repeating the idea of the Basilica, a ground-plan incapable of much expan- 
 sion, but adopting the cruciform arrangement of the church itself, and 
 grouping their conventual huildings around^ on a scale of grandeur till 
 now unknown ; a type which, surpassed in beauty and elegance, no doubt, 
 by the daughter style of two centuries after, yet in point of solemn dignity 
 and simple sublimity may challenge comparison with any. 
 
 Such an extensive ground- plan covered with buildings connected with his 
 monastery would seem to prove that the numbers of the fraternity of Bene- 
 dictine monks here assembled under the shade of his great Abbey were 
 considerable. Accordingly we find it stated by William of Malmesbury 
 that the Confessor increased the number, though the exact amount of such 
 increase is not specified. The language employed would, however, imply that 
 sixty or seventy monks must have been then on the establishment. Two cen- 
 
 ^ An error has crept into the translation of the early Life of Edward the Con- 
 fessor, published by the Master of the llolls, which we have inadvertently copied in 
 the note on p. 2; en tur, which is translated ‘in the tower,’ should evidently be one 
 word, equivalent to aiitour, ‘ around.’ 
 
 70 
 
 i 
 
4 ^ 
 
 4 
 
 % 
 
 # 
 
 ’■ n 
 
 
 
 # #- 
 
 ■' % 
 
 -t 
 
 
 I 
 
THE WALL & ARCADE ,C .1066 -THE WINDOWS ,C . 1380 - 
 
of Edward the Confessor. 
 
 turies later there is precise evidence that the number of the brethren was 
 eighty. But taking the lesser number, the refectory to accommodate even 
 sixty or seventy monks must have been of no ordinary dimensions. And 
 such we find to be the case. Until lately but very scant traces were known 
 to be in existence of the great refectory of the Confessor, though its site 
 was not unknown. A late examination of the south wall of the south 
 cloister, (above spoken of,) and of its southern face, has, however, brought 
 to light the full extent of this noble hall, erected by the Confessor for his 
 monks. The garden of “ Ashburnham House,” one of the prebendal resi- 
 dences, is bounded on the north by the south wall of the cloister. The 
 masonry of the lower half of this w^all, on the garden or southern face, 
 is of the same character as its northern face, visible on the other side 
 in the cloister. But to place the evidence of the masonry beyond all 
 doubt, a late inspection (when the absence of the leaves of the creepers 
 with which the wall is covered in summer fortunately permitted a close 
 examination) has led to the detection of an early s Norman arcade running 
 the entire length of the wall. The upper portions, resting on this lower 
 wall of eleventh-century masonry, are of Decorated character, and most 
 probably the work of Abbot Litlington. The windows, with their 
 transoms and brackets for the support of the timber roof, are all in- 
 dicative of the latter half of the fourteenth century. But here we have, 
 in the evidence afforded by this arcade, a proof that the extent of the 
 Confessor's refectory was on the same scale as that which, three cen- 
 turies afterwards, was adopted by the abbot whose alterations in Richard 
 the Second’s time have claimed so much attention in all accounts of the 
 fabric of the Abbey. The extent of the hall, for it measured 130 feet long 
 by 38 in breadth, will give some idea of the scale on which this first genuine 
 Norman vjork erected on English soil was executed, and of the magni- 
 ficence and grandeur which must have characterized this Abbey and its 
 attendant buildings at a period when such a scale would scarcely have been 
 expected^. The general entrance-doorway to this refectory must have been 
 where the present doorway of the later date still remains. There are traces 
 in the south side of this spacious hall which seem to shew that the kitchen, 
 &c., may here, at this south-west angle of the great parallelogram, have 
 been attached to the main apartment. Fragments of Roman tiles, here and 
 
 s The stone of these remains of the eleventh century is still undecayed; that of 
 Abbot Litlington’s time has perished considerably. A geologist should be able to name 
 the locality whence the former was obtained, with a view to its employment in our 
 public edifices. 
 
 ** [We cannot help expressing a wish that the “old Westminsters” who have 
 publicly come forward to express their readiness to contribute to the renovation of 
 the school, would turn their attention to the restoration of this fine old hall, the 
 refectory of the abbey, and make part of it the school -room, restoring the old dormi- 
 tory to its original use. Another part of the great hall might form a place of meeting 
 for the clergy, more fitting than the Jerusalem Chamber. — E d.] 
 
 i 
 
 71 
 
Abbot Litlingtori s Work, 
 
 there worked into the walls, seem to indicate the very early character of the 
 masonry, and to suggest that possibly, in his expansion of the monastery 
 in 1060, the Confessor made use of whatever remains of a still earlier date 
 were capable of being worked up with his own additions. The arcade 
 above spoken of is also here to be traced at the east end, and in the south- 
 west angle, though but for a few yards ; sufficient, however, remains to 
 prove the length and the breadth of the refectory erected by King Ed- 
 ward, as given in the above-named dimensions. 
 
 With these lately-discovered remains of the Confessor’s work the vestiges 
 of the eleventh century cease, the rest of the circumjacent buildings being 
 all of the last quarter of the fourteenth century, and forming part of the 
 great additions or alterations then made by Abbot Litlington, of whom now 
 it is time that we should more particularly speak. 
 
 ABBOT LITLINGTON’S WORK. 
 
 Tn the year 1349 Simon Langham was elected Abbot of Westminster, 
 His name is deserving of special record, not only on account of his subse- 
 quently high positions, as Bishop of Ely, Archbishop of Canterbury, and 
 Cardinal, but also for his munificence to the Abbey. His will is given at 
 length in Widmore’s History : by it he left the residue of his vast property 
 especially to the fabric of the monastery : — “ Residuum vero dictorura 
 fructuum et omnia alia bona mea quaecunque et qualiacunque, ubicunque 
 reperta fuerint, lego fabrica) monasterii Westmonasterii predict! Lang- 
 ham resigned his abbacy in 1362, on his first promotion to Ely. His 
 death took place in 1376, from which date the moneys bequeathed by him 
 by will would become available. He was succeeded as abbot in 1362 by 
 Nicholas Litlington, whom he subsequently appointed executor of his will. 
 It is not likely that the considerable additions to the fabric, commonly 
 assigned to Abbot Litlington, were commenced by him before the death 
 of his friend the Cardinal, whose bequest supplied the money for their 
 erection and construction. Again, there is evidence still remaining in the 
 fact that Litlington’s initials are visible in stone as well as in painted 
 glass, (as will be seen below,) that it was after the Cardinal’s death, and 
 the receipt of the bequest, that he began the work of decoration. He 
 scarcely would have ventured to claim to himself, by the insertion of his 
 own name, the credit of the work due to the munificence of the real donor, 
 his predecessor in the abbatial chair, whilst yet that predecessor was 
 alive. We have, therefore, two limits between which the extensive altera- 
 tions, usually assigned to Abbot Litlington, must have been completed, 
 viz. the death of Cardinal Langham and his own, or, the ten years be- 
 tween 1376 and 1386. These dates are therefore of some importance, as 
 
 ‘ This residue amounted to 10,800/., an immense sum in those da^s; [equal to 
 nearly 200,000/. of our money]. 
 
 72 
 
PART OF THE SOUTH WALK OF THE CLOISTE RS WESTMINSTER ABBEY 
 
 SHEWING PART OF THE MASONRY OF THE rt^" CENTURY.- WITH WALL & DETAI LS OF THE I V" « 
 
• Abbot LitlingtoyHs Work, 
 
 fixing the exact time of the construction of the west and south walks of the 
 cloister, and of the other works, of which we will now take a rapid survey. 
 
 Abbot Litlington appears to have executed the trust committed to him 
 with considerable skill and taste. Great changes had already at this time 
 (1376-86) taken place in the Pointed Architecture of the earlier part of the 
 century. The genius of William of Wykeham had conceived a new arrange- 
 ment for those most important members of a Gothic window of many lights, 
 the mullions and tracery lines ; and in the chapel of New College at Oxford, 
 and perhaps also in some portions of Windsor Castle, (the noblest example 
 of his skill,) was exhibited the model from which the Perpendicular style 
 peculiar to England originated. But Litlington did not follow this new 
 idea, though its merits were many, and its beauties not a few, and peculiar 
 to itself. Such a contrast with the character of the earlier work, as seen in 
 the north and east walks of the cloister, would have been harsh arid inhar- 
 monious. He changed, indeed, with the changes in style then in progress, 
 but he was careful to preserve consistency ; and hence it is that although far 
 inferior in beauty of plan and details to the two walks of the cloister of the 
 earlier date, those of 1380 (the western and southern) are yet in good keeping 
 with them, and apart from their proximity to their more successful rivals, 
 may well claim admiration k Beside these two walks of the cloister, Lit- 
 lington seems to have entirely re-edified the abbot’s residence, and the con- 
 ventual buildings, which now form the eastern side of Great Dean’s Yard. 
 The College Hall of the Queen’s Scholars, of the Elizabethan foundation 
 of an after age, was built by this abbot, for the hall of the abbot’s resi- 
 dence. The timbers to support the leaden roof still remain in part as he left 
 . them; the braces of the principals (1) at the extreme north and south ends 
 displaying some bold and well-executed quatrefoil and other tracery, in- 
 dicative of a style agreeing with this date. [The rest of the roof is of 
 much later date, of Elizabethan character, and was probably a part of 
 the alterations made after the dissolution of the abbey, when the school 
 was founded.] 
 
 The windows of the hall are of two lights, and of simple tracery in the 
 heads (2), [the character of which is of the time of the change from the 
 Decorated to the Perpendicular style]. Portions of the painted glass still 
 remain, and the initials (N. L.) of the Abbot are here also to be seen (3). 
 The hall is still interesting, as a representative of its date of construction, 
 though its fair proportions are somewhat shorn by the addition at its 
 southern end of a music-gallery, of apparently the Elizabethan era. There 
 are still remnants to be found, here and there, of diaper and carved floral 
 woodwork of the fourteenth century (4 and 5), inserted among the panel- 
 ling of the later date. Adjoining the hall is still to be seen the ancient 
 kitchen and other outbuildings of this Litlington restoration. [The old 
 
 ^ On the bosses of the vaulting the initials N. L. arc still to be traced. 
 
 73 
 
 L 
 
Abbot LitlingtovbS Work. 
 
 (3.) Initials of Ab'bot Litlington in the Head ol a Window of the Hall, a.D. 1376—1386. 
 
 74 
 
Abbot Litlington^s Work. 
 
 (1.) Part of the Roof of the Hall of Ahhot Litlington, a.d. 1376— 138G. 
 
 A < < ^ if ± a r» 
 
 Feet c .oewitt . s« 
 
 (6.) Part of the old Screen ol the Hall. 
 
 75 
 
Abbot LUVmgton^s Work. 
 
 fireplaces remain, with their stone arches ; in one is the oven, in the other 
 the chimney-corner, partly protected from the fire by a short piece of wall 
 or solid stone screen, and over the seat in the chimney-corner is a window, 
 modernized indeed, but still evidently in its original place. A window in 
 the chimney is not a very common feature, but it occurs in several instances 
 in the old cottages in Pembrokeshire ; we should hardly expect to find an ex- 
 ample of this old arrangement still remaining in the heart of I^ondon ** (6).] 
 
 (6.)- Fireplace in the Kitchen, shewing the Seat in the chimney-corner and 
 the Window over it, still remaining (1861). 
 
 Tlie substructure of all the canonical residences running southward from 
 the Deanery, (itself the Abbot's house of old,) displays a range of vaulting 
 of simple and elegant character (7), with here and there a window of the 
 period still remaining to testify the character of the whole when complete, 
 before the tasteless alterations of subsequent centuries destroyed the work- 
 manship which they were as unable to appreciate as to imitate. Two arch- 
 ways still remain, in the length of this substructure, connecting Great 
 Dean's Yard with the courts to the eastward of it (8). They are of the style 
 to which their known date would assign them ; though perhaps a close con- 
 sideration of tlieir details (such as the cavetfo and double ogee mouldings) 
 would lead to the conclusion that those characteristics, hitherto assigned to 
 
 [111 some old houses in Ireland, where the chimney-stack and fireplace is in the 
 middle of the house, there is a sort of windosv or opening from the chimney-corner 
 into the jiorch, so that a person sitting by the fireside could see who came in at the 
 outer door before opening the inner one.] 
 
 76 
 
Abbot TAtlington^ s IFork. 
 
 (7.) Part of the Vaulting of the Cellars of Ahhot Litlington’s Work under the 
 present Porter's Lodge, a.d. 1376—1386. 
 
 the fifteenth century, are here found in one of the earliest examples of their 
 application. 
 
 [The whole of Abbot Litlington’s work is in a style of transition 
 between the Decorated and Perpendicular styles ; it is almost impossible 
 to say to which of these received styles the mouldings and details can 
 be referred. As the divisions of the styles of Gothic Architecture are 
 entirely arbitrary, arranged for general convenience, and for the use of 
 beginners in the study, it is perfectly natural that this sort of mixture 
 of the styles should take place for a certain period betw’een each of the 
 great changes. The latter part of the fourteenth century was the period 
 when the Perpendicular style was coming into general use, but was not 
 fully established : as the distinction is less marked than in the similar 
 period between each of the other styles, it has been commonly over- 
 looked, but the same overlapping of styles occurs at this period as in 
 the similar transition between the other styles. This is more marked and 
 prominent between the Norman and the Early English styles, and there- 
 
 77 
 
Abbot Litlingtovb s TForL 
 
 fore that is commonly called the period of transition, but a similar 
 period exists equally between each of the other styles.] 
 
 (8.) Arch-way, now forming the Passage Irom Little Dean’s Yard to Great Dean's 
 Yard, part of Abbot Litlington's work, a.d. 1376 — 1386. 
 
 The ten years above-named seem to have been made the most of, for in 
 addition to the works just spoken of, Abbot Litlington appears to have 
 restored, or extended, the entire circle of conventual outbuildings of less 
 important character than the preceding. According to Widmore, he “ built 
 the kitchen, the Jerusalem chamber, the abbot’s house, now the deanery,” 
 and also the “ houses of several officers, as the bailifT s, the cellarer’s, the 
 infirmarer’s, and the sacrist's; the great malt-house, lately (i.e. in 1751) 
 the dormitory of the King's scholars*, and the tower adjoining, late the 
 
 * An engraving is given in the Alumni Westmonasteriensis, edit. 1852, of this dor- 
 mitory of 1720, and the adjoining tower. Tlie present dormitory on the western side 
 of the college garden is in the Italian style, and was built from the design of the Earl 
 of Burlington about 1722. 
 
 78 
 
Abbot LitlingtorCs Work, 
 
 lodgings of the second master ; the stone wall of the infirmary garden, now 
 the College Garden,” [still remaining,] “the water mill, &c., &c., besides 
 the south and west sides of the Great Cloisters.” (9.) 
 
 (9.) Part of the Vaulting of the Cloisters over the Lavatory, a.d. 1376—1386. 
 
 In the passage leading to the Little Cloisters a turreted dwelling-house 
 still remains in fair preservation, which is called by the name of “ the Lit- 
 lington Tower whilst on the eastern side of the eleventh century sub- 
 structure, in the dark cloister, and of Westminster School above, there 
 are buildings of apparently the end of the fifteenth century, though with 
 so many details of preceding styles, as to lead one to conclude that a 
 work of adaptation was here effected. A small chapel adjoining the resi- 
 dence perhaps would indicate that here the Prior of Westminster had his 
 abode — an officer next in dignity to the abbot. The interest, however, 
 attaching to these later erections is not equal to that called forth by 
 the remains of the earlier ages, to which we have thus endeavoured to 
 draw attention. T. W. W. 
 
 79 
 
THE JERUSALEM CHAMBER^. 
 
 The Jerusalem Chamber now existing was built between 1376 and 
 1386, by Nicholas Litlyngton, abbot of Westminster. Few details of his 
 life and good works have been committed to the press ; but among the 
 Cottonian Manuscripts is a very interesting record, in which many of his 
 benefactions are enumerated, and an opportunity is thereby afforded us of 
 entering in a measure into the peculiarities, and in estimating the excel- 
 lences of his character. A short resume of these will not unfitly introduce 
 the history and description of an edifice with which his honoured name is 
 indissolubly associated. 
 
 Nicholas Litlyngton was Prior of Westminster at the time of Abbot 
 Simon de Langham’s elevation to the see of Ely, and was thereupon 
 elected abbot in April, 1362. He had greatly benefited the house while he 
 was simply one of the brethren, especially by procuring the custody of the 
 temporalities during three vacancies. On his advancement to the chief 
 place of government in his monastery, he shewed himself a most careful 
 and judicious defender of its rights, and an unwearied improver of its pos- 
 sessions. It appears that a great storm of wind had just then made havoc 
 of the manor-houses and other buildings, but within three years he rebuilt 
 them, and left them in better order than they were before. The abbot's 
 house, from the foundation, was among his new buildings, with the west 
 and south sides of the cloister, the houses of the bailiff, infirmarer, sacrist 
 and cellarer, a great malt-house with a tower, a water-mill and the dam,- 
 with stone walls, and a stone enclosure of the garden of the infirmary. In 
 these works he was much assisted by the funds left by his predecessor. 
 He also gave a mitre of the value of a hundred marcs, a pastoral staff of 
 the value of 15/., a great missal for the high altar, and two silver-gilt 
 chalices. Also other books of the Divine Offices to the chapel of the abbot 
 and house of the infirmary ; and to his own chapel, vestments and other 
 sacerdotal ornaments, chalices, censer, incense-pyx, bell, basin, and a pyx 
 of silver gilt. He also gave to the convent for their use in the refectory, 
 there to be enjoyed and nowhere else, 48 dishes and 2 chargers, and 
 24 saltcellars of silver, of the weight of 104 lbs. To the same brethren 
 also, for the misericordia house, and nowhere else, 24 dishes, 12 saltcellars, 
 and 2 chargers of silver of 10 lbs., weighing 40 lbs., and two books of 
 coronations marked N and L. Also to his successors in the abbacy he gave 
 24 dishes, 12 saltcellars, and 4 chargers of silver of the weight of 64 lbs, ; 
 2 silver jars for wine, of the weight of 8 lbs. ; one silver cup with a w’ater- 
 jug of silver gilt, value 100s. ; 12 silver plates, of 12 lbs. weight; 2 basins, 
 
 “ From a paper read in the Jerusalem Chamber, at the Meeting of the London 
 and ^liddlesex Archeological Society, Oct. 25, 1860. By the Kev. Thomas Hugo, 
 M.A., F.S.A., &c. 
 
 80 
 
The Jerusalem Chamber. 
 
 
 Plan of the Ahhot’s House, now the Deanery (D), the Scholars' Hall (A), 
 and Kitchen (C), and the Jerusalem. Chamber (B). 
 
 / 
 
 M 
 
 81 
 
The Jerusalem Chamber » 
 
 with 2 water-jugs of silver, of 10 lbs. weight; and 2 silver basins for 
 lavatories, of 7 lbs. weight. The grant was dated at Westminster, 9th 
 May, 1378. In return for these benefactions it was ordered by the con- 
 vent that after his decease he should daily be remembered by them in their 
 graces after dinner and supper, and at mass, together with the souls of the 
 faithful departed. He died on the vigil of St. Andrew the Apostle, A. d. 
 1386, and was buried within the entrance before the altar of St. Blase, 
 under a marble slab, decently adorned, that bore a long epitaph which is 
 given by Sporley in the MS. from which these details are taken 
 
 Among the rooms of the abbot’s house, already mentioned, was the room 
 called the Jerusalem Chamber. It abuts at a right angle on the southern- 
 most of the two towers which adjoin the great western entrance to the nave 
 of the abbey, and is thirty-six feet long and eighteen wide. It has two 
 modern pointed windows on the west, and on the north a large square win- 
 dow, divided by several mullions, betw’een which are inserted among the white 
 quarries some very interesting specimens of ancient glass. The chamber 
 formed either the withdrawing-room to the abbot’s hall, to which it is con- 
 tiguous, or else was itself a Guesten Hall for the constant influx of strangers 
 who enjoyed the good abbot’s hospitality. Some imagine it to have been 
 the abbot’s chapel, but its position militates against the accuracy of such 
 a supposition. It was not the first time that a chamber of a similar name 
 existed either on the same or a neighbouring spot. 
 
 The earliest historical reference to this chamber is probably in the 
 account of the death of Henry IV., in the Continuatio Histories Croyland- 
 ensis^ where it is said that the King, relying upon a deceptive prophecy, 
 proposed to set out for the Holy City of Jerusalem ; but, falling into mortal 
 sickness, died at Westminster, in a certain chamber called of old time 
 Jerusalem, and so fulfilled the vain prediction®. Fabyan, one of the most 
 valuable of our old English chroniclers, gives us a very curious and minute 
 account of this interesting circumstance. He is recording the events of 
 the fourteenth year of Henry’s reign, and thus describes its sudden 
 termination : — 
 
 “ In this year, and 20th day of the month of November, was a great council holden at 
 the White Friars of London, by the which it was among other things concluded that, for 
 the King’s great journey, that he intended for to take in visiting of the Holy Sepulchre 
 of our Lord, certain galleys of war should be made, and other purveyance concerning 
 the same journey. Whereupon all hasty and possible speed was made; but after the 
 feast of Christenmasse, while he was making his prayers at S. Edward’s shrine, to take 
 there his leave, and so speed him upon his journey, he became so sick that such as 
 were about him feared that he would have died right there. Wherefore they for his 
 comfort bare him into the abbot’s place and lodged him in a chamber, and there upon 
 a pallet laid him before the fire, where he laid in great agony a certain of time. At 
 length, when he was comen to himself, not knowing where he was, he freyned [asked] 
 of such as then were about him, what place that was ; the which showed to him that 
 
 82 
 
 b MS. Cott. Claud. A. viii., ff. 63, 63 b, 64. 
 
 Her. Angl. Scr. Vet., Oxon. 1684, tom. i. p. 499. 
 
The Jerusalem Chamber, 
 
 it belonged unto the Abbot of Westminster, and for he felt himself so sick he com- 
 manded to ask if that chamber had any special name, whereunto it was answered that 
 it was named Jerusalem. Then said the King, ‘Loving be to the Father of Heaven ; 
 for now I know that I shall die in this chamber, according to the prophecy of me 
 before said, that I should die in Jerusalem.* And so after he made himself ready and 
 died shortly after ‘*.** 
 
 The account of what may be considered the most interesting occurrence 
 connected with this chamber would hardly be considered complete without 
 some reference to the scene of our great dramatist, although it varies from 
 the authentic narrative, in his play of “ Henry IV.” The dying King in- 
 quires, as though half-expectant of the answer, — 
 
 “ Doth any name particular belong 
 
 Unto the lodging where I first did swoon ?** 
 
 The Earl of Warwick answers : — 
 
 “’Tis called Jerusalem, my noble lord.” 
 
 And the King replies: — 
 
 “ Laud be to God ! Even there my life must end. 
 
 It hath been prophesied to me many years, 
 
 I should not die but in Jerusalem; 
 
 Which vainly I supposed the Holy Land. 
 
 But bear me to that chamber ; there I’ll lie ; 
 
 In that Jerusalem shall Harry die ®.” 
 
 There is an ancient tradition that Edward V. was born in this room, and 
 baptized here shortly after his birth by the Abbot of Westminster. 
 
 We have no mention of any use made of the chamber for a long time 
 subsequent to this occurrence. In the year 1624, John Williams, Bishop 
 of Lincoln and Dean of Westminster, entertained the Erench ambassador 
 here with great splendour and at considerable cost. And it is probable 
 that the architectural peculiarities of the room, as we now see them, which 
 are of the period of James I., the alterations in the fireplace, before which, 
 according to the chronicler already quoted, the couch of the dying King 
 was laid, the ceiling, and the armorial bearings in the north window, were 
 the work of this dignitary. In March, 1640-1, an assistant or sub-com- 
 mittee of about twenty individuals, partly Episcopal and partly Presby- 
 terian, was appointed to prepare matters for the cognisance of the superior 
 committee, established to examine into “ innovations in matters of religion.” 
 The afore-mentioned Bishop Williams was chosen to preside over both 
 assemblies, and the sub-committee held for awhile its meetings in this 
 chamber. The violent behaviour of the Presbyterian faction in the House 
 of Commons wholly prevented any good that might have resulted from 
 these deliberations, and the sittings were soon and abruptly terminated. 
 In later times the chamber has been used for the custody of the regalia 
 during the night before a coronation. The abbots were the official keepers 
 
 ** Fabyan’s Chronicle, ed. 1559, pp. 388, 389. 
 
 ® Second Part of “ Henry IV,,” Act iv. sc. 4. 
 
 83 
 
The Jerusalem Chamber. 
 
 of these insignia of royalty, a privilege which is thus in some degree ex- 
 ercised by their modern representatives. The room is also used for the 
 sittings of Convocation, and for the meetings of the Dean and Chapter. 
 
 The painted glass in the north window is much more ancient than any 
 portion of the edifice in which it now finds a place. There was probably 
 a Jerusalem Chamber in this church as erected by Henry III., for the 
 “ Continuator” already quoted speaks of one so called “aJ antiqiio f'' and 
 these may have been among its ornamental accessories. The costume of 
 the figures bears out this supposition. The first Jerusalem Chamber was, 
 as I suppose, furnished with decorations from subjects in the Gospel nar- 
 rative painted upon its walls, and hence obtained its characteristic title. 
 And by means of these and other adornments the windows themselves 
 were made to harmonize with the rest of the structure, and to play their 
 part in the general design. The subjects of the painted glass are : — 1. The 
 Slaughter of the Innocents. 2. The Stoning of St. Stephen. 3. The Last 
 Judgment. 4. The Descent of the Holy Ghost. 5. The Ascension. 6. St. 
 Peter Walking on the Sea. 7. The Beheading of St. John the Baptist. 
 8. A mutilated shield of later execution, bearing the arms of Bishop 
 Williams, the arms of the see of Lincoln, and those of the deanery of 
 Westminster. All these are more or less patched, and the heads of the 
 seven Scriptural subjects are filled up with blue glass of the period of 
 James I. Many of the figures have also received sundry renovations 
 within the last few years. The tapestry is of the time of Henry VHL, 
 with the exception of one piece, which is of the period of the first James, 
 and is very similar to the well-known examples in the Great Hall at 
 Hampton Court Palace. The portrait of Richard II., now suspended on 
 the south wall, is one of the most interesting of its class. It was formerly 
 in the choir, where it seems to have been in danger from coming in too 
 close a contiguity with the backs and heads of divers Lord Chancellors and 
 others who occupied the stall behind which it was placed. Dart’s descrip- 
 tion of it in its then condition is valuable, as it was written before the 
 renovations to which it has since been subjected ; — 
 
 “ On the south side of the choir, by the pulpit,” he says, *‘is an ancient painting 
 of that unhappy beautiful prince, ilichard ij., sitting in a chair of gold, dressed in 
 a vest of green flowered with flowers of gold and the initial letters of his name, having 
 on shoes of gold powdered with pearls, the whole robed in crimson lined with ermine, 
 and the shoulders spread with the same, fastened under a collar of gold ; the panel 
 plastered and gilt with several crosses and flowers of gold embossed. The length of 
 the picture is 6 foot and 11 inches, and the breadth 3 foot 7 inchest” 
 
 Such is the famous Jerusalem Chamber, of which it may be said, great 
 as the commendation is, that for historical associations and artistic acces- 
 sories it is second in interest only to the venerable Abbey with which it 
 has been so long and so intimately connected. 
 
 84 
 
 ^ Vol. i. p. 62. 
 
THE ABBOT OE WESTMINSTER’S HOUSE. 
 
 [The following extract from the Patent Rolls, communicated to us by 
 Mr. Corner, although of somewhat later date, forms an appropriate con- 
 clusion to our sketch of the history of the Abbey buildings.] 
 
 By letters patent of Jan. 20, 32 Henry VIII. [a.d. 1541], whereby the King 
 endowed his newly erected see of Westminster with manors, lands, tenements, 
 and advowsons in Essex, Berks., Yorkshire, Bucks., Gloucestershire, Herts., 
 Hunts., Lincolnshire, and Northamptonshire; he also granted to Thomas% 
 Bishop of Westminster, and his successors for ever all the site and circuit 
 of the mansion-house and dwelling commonly called “ Cheynygats 
 wherein William [Boston or Benson], late abbot of the late monastery of 
 Westminster, inhabited, together with all buildings, houses, and ground 
 within the said site, &c., with the gardens and orchards thereto adjoining : in 
 which said site or circuit is a certain tower, situate and being at the entrance 
 of the said dwelling which said tower contains in length, from the east end 
 abutting on the cloister of the said late monastery to the west end abutting 
 upon the “Elmes®,” by estimation 67 feet; and in breadth at the west 
 end, from the north side to the south side, by estimation 24 feet 2 inches : 
 and another building and house, with a garden and ground adjoining, con- 
 taining by estimation, from the aforesaid tower to the church of the said 
 late monastery, in width, at the east end abutting on the cloister of the 
 
 » Thomas Thirleby, the first and only Bishop of Westminster ; consecrated Dec. 19, 
 1540, translated to Norwich 1550, and to Ely 1554. 
 
 ** He had, however, no successors, and after the abolition of the bishopric of West- 
 minster, the bishop’s palace, or abbot’s house, was divided, a part only being assigned 
 to the deanery : this consisted of the eastern wing, with a room over the west vvalk of 
 the cloister. The abbot’s hall and kitchen, which formed the west wing of the house, 
 were assigned to the use of the scholars of the King’s School, founded by Queen Eliza- 
 beth in 1560. 
 
 The building at the north side of the abbot’s court, in which was the solar, upper 
 chamber, or withdrawing-room of the abbot’s house, called the Jerusalem Chamber, 
 (see p. 81,) was assigned to the use of the Convocation of the Clergy, a purpose 
 for which it is very inadequate. 
 
 On April 17, 1640, Convocation met in Henry the VHth’s chapel, {Lathhury^ 
 Hist, of Conv.y p. 221,) and again in 1700, though the Archbishop had fixed the 
 Jerusalem Chamber for the place of meeting, {Ibid., p. 285). 
 
 A similar story to that of the death of Henry IV. in “ Jerusalem,” is related of 
 Pope Sylvester III. in the Eulogium Historiarum, vol. i. pp. 256, 257. 
 
 <= So called from the practice of fixing a chain across the gate which formed the 
 entrance to the cloisters. 
 
 ^ The groined vault of the basement of this tower is still perfect, and has small 
 openings in it, according to the custom in castles of the same period, (the end of 
 the fourteenth century,) for the purpose of pouring boiling water on the heads of 
 assailants; thus shewing that the precincts of the abbey were fortified. 
 
 * “The Elms,” now called Dean’s Yard. 
 
 85 
 
The Abbot of Westminster^ s House. 
 
 said late monastery, 124 feet; and in width, at the west end abutting 
 towards the house of the poor, called “The Kyng’s Almeshouse 170 
 feet ; and in length, on the north side abutting on the church of the said 
 late monastery and upon the King’s street called “The Erode Sentwarye*^," 
 258 feet, and on the south side abutting on “The Elmes,” 239 feet. And 
 also the fourth part of all the great cloister of the said late monastery, with 
 the buildings situate and being above the same, which said fourth part is 
 contiguous and next adjoining to the same mansion-house and dwelling 
 in Westminster aforesaid : and all that building and house called “ The 
 Calbege’*” and “ The Blackestole” there, which contains in length, from 
 the north end abutting on the aforesaid tower, to the south end abutting 
 on the tower called “ The Blackstole Tower V’ by estimation 88 feet : and 
 all buildings, land, and ground being within the aforesaid edifices called 
 “The Calbege” and “The Blackstole” on the north part, and the build- 
 
 ^ “ The Almonry was on the south-east side of the Broad Sanctuary, and was divided 
 into the Great Almonry, which comprised two parts, consisting of two oblong por- 
 tions parallel to the Tothill streets, and connected by a narrow lane, the entrance 
 being from Dean’s Yard; and the Little Almonry, running southwards at the end 
 of the Great Almonry. At the lower end was St. Anne’s Chapel, which in 1576 
 was used as a storehouse by St. Margaret’s Parish ; opposite to it were almshouses 
 founded by the Lady Margaret, mother of King Henry VII., for poor women. To 
 the north of the Almonry, and on the south side of the gate-house, was an almshouse 
 founded by Henry VII., for thirteen poor men.” — {Walcott’s Westminster, pp. 89, 
 273, 278, 280.) Dart, in his “ Westminster Abbey,” p. 66, mentions that the Duke of 
 Somerset pulled up “ the orchard” of the convent ; the site is commemorated in the 
 present Orchard- street. 
 
 & Now called “ The Broad Sanctuary.” 
 
 ^ Calbege? from calle, a ^coif,’ or ‘cowl,’ and hege, ‘big;’ words given by Mr. Halli- 
 well. Ducange says that colohium, (v. Calahum,) from which our word ‘ cowl’ is de- 
 rived, is “ cucullus ille sive superhumerale quo induuntur servientes ad legem in Ang- 
 lia ;” and Honorius defines colohium “ cucullata vestis ;” it was the proper dress of 
 a monk. The suggestion receives some likelihood from the name of the adjacent 
 Black Stole tower. 
 
 Curious or personal names of domestic buildings, &c. — In illustration of the word 
 calbege, may be mentioned the following: — “ Hie (scil. Johannes Ipstoke) dum esset 
 elemosinarius fecit altum sedificium in foro videlicet Gareffes.” — Ahp, de Burton, 
 {Mon. Anglic., p. 274, 2nd Edit.) (Item dedit le Belhouse orchard.) Cir. 1430-2: 
 “ Inceptum fuit opus lapideum fontis in foro juxta le Garretts.” — Ibid., p. 275. 
 
 At St. Edmund’s Bury, Richard of Colchester, sacristan, “ Fecit novam aulam quae 
 dicitur Spane ad recreationem conventus.” — Ibid., p. 301. Dominus de Newport, 
 sacristan of Bury, “ Magnam campenam in majori campanario qua? dicitur Newport 
 fieri fecit.” — Ibid. 
 
 1505. In the inventory of Hales Owen Abbey, we find these entries : — “ In the 
 Calegs, iii. mattrass, &c. ; in the Ostre in the Steward chambre, a fedir hede, &c. ; 
 in Botulph’s chambre, a fedyer hede, &c.” — Nash’s Worcestershire, vol. ii., App. 
 p. xxii. b. There is a Callis Court in the Isle of Thanet, {Hasted’ s Kent, vol. iv. 
 p. 360) ; Caleys Lands, and Callis Court, in Kent {Ibid. 204, 708), and a Caleys at 
 Oakham. York-street, Westminster, was formerly called “ Petit Caleys,” from being 
 the residence of the woolstaplers. A derivation of Callis has been made from calcetum, 
 
 * a causeway.’ — M. W. 
 
 ' There is still a tower over the entrance into Little Dean’s Yard, which may have 
 been the Blackstole tower ; in this case the calbege would have stood between it and 
 the porter’s gateway -tower, at)d the building which occupies that position retains its 
 ancient walls. The king’s wardrobe in the reign of Edward VI. w’as kept in the 
 massive jewel-tower, now at the end of the college mews, having been given to King 
 Edward III. with a small close, by the abbot in 1377. — M. W. 
 
 86 
 
The Abbot of Westminster's House. 
 
 ings and houses called “ The Frayter Misericorde and the great con- 
 ventual kitchen called the great Convent Kitchen on the east part. And 
 also all that other great stone tower in Westminster aforesaid, situate and 
 being in a certain place commonly called The Oxehall™;” and the houses 
 and buildings there being and situate there between the great ditch called 
 the Milldam on the south part, and the aforesaid barn on the north part : 
 and all other buildings, houses, gardens, land, and ground there situate, lying 
 and being between the said barn and between the said houses and buildings 
 on the west part, and the said great tower called “ The Long Granarye 
 on the east part, and between the buildings and houses called “ The Brue- 
 house” and “ The Backehouse” of the said late monastery on the north 
 part, and the aforesaid great ditch called “ The Milldam” on the south part. 
 
 A Ahhey Church. 
 
 B Litlington's Bell Toxoer. 
 
 C Cloister. 
 
 D St. Margaret's Church. 
 
 E Tower, over the entrance to Little 
 Dean's Yard. 
 
 F Granary and Brewhouses. 
 
 G Gatehouse. 
 n Broad Sanctuary. 
 
 I Gate to Palace Yard. 
 
 K Almonry. 
 
 L Orchard. 
 
 M Stream of water. 
 
 PJan of the Precincts of Westminster Ahhey, from a Map of London 
 of the time of Queen Elizabeth. 
 
 ^ The monks’ hall in a monastery, in which the brethren eat and drank the miseri- 
 cord, an indulgence or extra-allowance over and above the regulation-fare, by per- 
 mission of the abbot. It was distinct from the common refectory. 
 
 * This was at the west end of the great hall or refectory, between it and the present 
 porter’s lodge. 
 
 “ “ The oxehall, which is mentioned in connection with the great barn and the mill- 
 dam, was no doubt the stable for stalling the oxen in the outer or base court of the 
 abbey. A parish of the name of Oxenhall (before Domesday Survey, Horsenhall), and 
 another called Oxinton, or Oxendon, ‘ from the number of oxen kept there,’ are men- 
 tioned in Atkyns’ ‘ Gloucestershire,’ pp. 311, 312 : there is another place of the same 
 name in Northamptonshire j and a place called Oxenhall, or Oxneyfield, occurs in 
 Raine’s ‘Durham,’ hi. 397, in which the tenant was bound to carry to the bishop 
 ‘ wine with a wain of four oxen.’ Oxinhale occurs among the estates of the Hospi- 
 tallers.” {Camd. Soc. Publ., p. 30.) — M. W. 
 
 ” In June, 1815, opposite to the house now occupied by Dr. Cureton, considerable 
 portions of the granary, built c. 1380, which had been used as tbe scholars’ dormitory, 
 were discovered ; at right angles ran the brewhouse and the bakehouse. Tbe granary, 
 elevated on a substructure, had a large central tower and a line of fine windows in two 
 stories. A view is given in “ Gent. Mag.,” Sept., 1815, pi. i. p. 201. The foundations 
 of the present dormitory were laid “7. Kal. Maii. mdccxxii.” The large double gate- 
 house which stood at the entrance of Tothill-street is drawn in “ Gent. Mag.,” March, 
 1836. A Cheyney Court is attached to the Close of the Deanery at Winchester, and 
 is said to derive its name from the oak (chSne) under which the Episcopal Court 
 was held. — M. W. 
 
 87 
 
MODERN BUILDINGS. 
 
 Ashbttrnham House was in 1708 the residence of Lord Ashburnham. 
 Considerable portions remain in it which were built by Inigo Jones, and 
 were illustrated by Sir J. Soane. In 1712 the Cottonian Library was re- 
 moved hither to a gallery within the King’s library, and adjoining the 
 south cloister. In the disastrous fire of 1731, a large number of MSS. 
 were removed to “the large boarding-house opposite,’’ and Dr. Eriend 
 used to relate with glee that Dr. Bentley, the King’s librarian, sallied out 
 in his night-shirt and a flowing wig with the Alexandrian MS. under his 
 arm. Camden the Antiquary lodged in “ the Gate-house near the Queen’s 
 Scholars’ chambers.” The “ Terrace” was begun after the year 1815. 
 
 The Sanctuary Church is described in Archceologia^ i. 35, and Entick’s 
 “ Maitland’s London,” ii. 1343. Near its site the present Guildhall was 
 built in 1805, on the foundations of the old belfry-tower. (Widmore, p. 11.) 
 The old Guildhall stood on the west side of King-street, about fifty feet to 
 the south of Great George-street ; an ancient painting representing it, — 
 perhaps the gift of a Duke of Northumberland, — was transferred to the 
 -walls of the present Sessions-house. 
 
 At the entrance of the Little Sanctuary, in the early part of the last 
 century, a groined cellar was discovered near some remains of a stone 
 gateway ; it was probably a portion of the house of the porter. The 
 entrance-gate from the Sanctuary into King-street was removed before the 
 year 1708. The gate-house with its double gates at the west entrance of 
 the Abbey, was built by W. de Warfield, cellarer, in the reign of Edward 
 III. ; on the east side was the Bishop of London’s prison for clerks con- 
 vict ; and over the south gate leading into Dean’s Yard w’^as the prison for 
 debtors and State criminals. Dr. Johnson longed to see its demolition, as 
 it was “ a disgrace to the present magnificence of the capital, and a con- 
 tinual nuisance to neighbours and passengers.” In 1776 it was destroyed. 
 
 The names of Vine-street and Bowling-street recall the vineyard and 
 bowling-alley of the monastery. In the overseers’ books of St. Mar- 
 garet’s for the year 1565, “the Vyne garden” and the “ Myll next to 
 Bowling Alley” are duly rated. The site of Black Dog Alley was Abbot 
 Benson’s garden ; and the Hostelry garden extended over the ground 
 which lay between the bowling-green and the river bank. In the re- 
 gister-book of the treasurer of the Abbey, this entry occurs under the 
 year 1733: — “ Hostry Gardens, with the houses thereupon built. Rent, 
 lOZ. 13s. 4cZ., and four capons or 12 shillings.” Great College-street was 
 long called the “Dead Wall,” owing to the houses fronting the wall of 
 the infirmary garden built by Abbot Litlington. — M. W. 
 
 88 
 
THE JEWEL-HOUSE. 
 
 Plan of the Jewel-house, with the groining of the hasement. 
 
 Few persons are aware that the King’s Jewel-house, built in the time 
 of Richard II., is still standing. The walls are perfect, even to the parapets, 
 and the original doorways remain, their heads being of the form called the 
 shouldered arch, so much used in domestic work throughout the Middle 
 Ages, from the twelfth century to the fifteenth. The interior has been 
 entirely altered to fit it up for a Public Record-office, and it is still the 
 depository of the records of the House of Lords. A modern vault has 
 been introduced oveV the first-floor room, probably as a security against 
 fire, this room having had originally a wooden ceiling ; but fortunately, 
 the ground rooms having long been used for a kitchen and offices, and 
 being below the level of the present street, have been preserved intact, 
 with their original groined vaults, with moulded ribs and carved bosses, 
 evidently a part of the same work as the cloisters and other vaulted sub- 
 structures of Abbot Litlington. 
 
 This tower is situated to the south of the chapter-house, and at the 
 back of the houses in Old Palace Yard : the entrance being through a Go- 
 vernment-office, admittance is commonly refused, but the antiquary who 
 wishes to explore these remains may do so by explaining that the part he 
 wishes to see is the basement or kitchen occupied by Mrs. Vincent, the 
 housekeeper, and that he does not wdsh to go into the Record tow^er itself ; 
 in which there is nothing for him to see, so far as the architecture is con- 
 cerned, all vestiges of antiquity having there been carefully destroyed. 
 
 89 
 
 N 
 
The Jewel-house. 
 
 The following extracts from Widmore give the history of this building, or 
 at least the purchase of the ground, and there is no doubt that it was built 
 or rebuilt immediately. 
 
 From Widmore^ s Enquiry^ &c.^ Ato.^ 1743. 
 
 “In the last year of King Edward III., an exchange was made between that prince 
 and the convent; the King had from them a part, either of a tower which was after- 
 ward the King’s Jewel-house, and is at present the Parliament- office, or else the 
 ground on which this building stands : I have given the authority for this because 
 there may be some doubt as to the meaning of the writer ; but the place is so 
 particularly described, that I think there can be no question concerning that. The 
 church had no lands in return for this, but only, which yet might possibly be as agree- 
 able to them, a licence to purchase in mortmain forty pounds a year.’* 
 
 View of the Principal Chamber in the Basement ol the Jewel-house, a. n. 1377— 80. 
 
 From Niger QuaternuSyfol. 79. 
 
 “Anno regni regis Edwardi tertii quinquagesimo primo, septimo die Junii, idem 
 dominus rex licentiam dedit abbati et conventui Westmonasterie perquirendi terras, 
 tenernenta et redditus ad valorem quadrigenta librarum per annum. Statute, &c., 
 ad manum mortuam, &c., non obstante. . . . Et heec licentia concessa est pro magna 
 90 
 
The Jewel-house. 
 
 parte cujusdam turris in angulo Palatii privati versus austrum una cum qujulam 
 clausura juxta Turriin pra)dictam ex parte occidental! infra clausum abbatia) et solum 
 Sancti Petri domino regi concessum. . . . Erat autem inter Turrim pra3dictam et 
 murum Infirmarii, ubi nunc est clausura prajdicta, via pedestris et carectaria usque ad 
 angulum turris,” &c. 
 
 The title of the writing is, “ Licentia regia data abbati Westm. perquirende terras 
 et tenementa ad valorem 40^. pro parte Turris Vocatae le Jewel-house,” &c. 
 
 Smaller Room in the Basement of the Jewel-house. 
 
 91 
 
APPENDIX II. 
 
 FABRIC ROLL OF 1253. 
 
 “ Compot’ div’sar’ op’acionu, ec’ce, capituli, berefridi 
 r’ R’ Henr’ xxxvij® op’is incepti 
 
 “Emptiones * * ♦ 
 
 “ In cc V** ulnis de canevasio ad fenests capituli iiij” vj* 
 
 Corapotus diversarum operacionum eeclesiie, capituli, berefridi et curiae Westmonasteriensis anno 
 regni Regis Henrici xxvii° et operis incepti viii''°. 
 
 Erapliones 
 
 In ce V** ulnis canevasio ad fenestras capituli iiij*' vj* iiij<* ob’. 
 
 This extract from the smaller roll for the same year, with the more full and 
 larger roll whieh follows, is important, on aecount of the mention of eanvas for 
 the windows of the Chapter-house, which shews that these windows were so far 
 completed in 1253 as to require to be enclosed with eanvas until the glass was 
 ready for them. 
 
 et curie Westm’ anno 
 
 ^ * 
 iiij'» Ob’.” 
 
 92 
 
APPENDIX II. 
 
 FABRIC ROLL OF 1253, 
 
 WITH EXPLAN,\TIONS BY PROFESSOR WILLIS. 
 
 Among the records deposited in the Public Record Office, one has been 
 lately discovered by Mr. Burtt, entitled “A Roll of Payments of Wages, 
 and of Purchases for the Works at Westminster, 37 Henry III.” 
 
 It contains the entire accounts of the building works during thirty-two 
 continuous weeks, beginning with the first week after Easter, which in 
 that year, 1253, fell on April 20; consequently the works in question 
 began on Monday, April 28, and the last week of the roll ended with 
 Saturday, December 6. The account for each week is complete in itself, 
 but no day of the month is mentioned, neither are the weeks numbered 
 continuously, although for convenience I shall designate them as if they 
 had been. 
 
 The first six weeks are indicated as first, second, &c., after Easter (Ebd* 
 prima post Pasch’ . . .) The seventh week was Whitsun week, and 
 
 was evidently kept as a holiday, but is not mentioned in the roll; the 
 week next following the sixth after Easter, being termed the first after 
 Pentecost, is thus actually the eighth week from the beginning of the 
 account roll. This enumeration continues to the fifteenth week, which is 
 termed the eighth after Pentecost. The sixteenth week begins a new 
 series, termed the first, second, &c., “ after the agreement for wages for 
 eight weeks,” (Ebd’ prima post pacacione® stipendior’ pro viib® Ebd’.) 
 This enumeration continues through twelve weeks, and carries us^ to the 
 end of the twenty-seventh week of the roll. The twenty-eighth is termed 
 the first week after the feast of All Saints, and the succeeding the second, 
 third, &c., concluding wuth the ‘^Ebdomada v*“,” or thirty-second week 
 of the whole, which closes the account. 
 
 At the head of each week one or more saints’ days are sometimes men- 
 tioned in a peculiar manner. Thus, to begin, the complete title of the first 
 week is, — 
 
 “Ebd* prima post Pasch’ continente festum Apostol. Philip’ et Jacobi p’ die’ Jov s 
 quod est d’ni llegis et festu’ Inveiitionis Crucis p’ die Sab’ quod est cem’tar’,” 
 
 ‘Eirst week after Easter, containing the feast of the Apostles Philip and 
 James on Thursday, which belongs to the King, and the feast of the Inven- 
 
 “ Pacatio .... pactum, conventio. — Bucaiige. 
 B 
 
 1 
 
Fabric Roll of 1253. I 
 
 lion of the Cross on Saturday, which belongs to the masons.’ The second 
 week is similarly said to “ contain the feast of St. John ante portam La- 
 tinam on Tuesday, which belongs to the King;” and the third week is 
 
 sine festo.” Thus throughout the roll feasts occur, sometimes two in 
 a week, but generally only one. Fourteen of the weeks have none. 
 Whatever feasts are mentioned, however, are assigned alternately to the 
 King and to the masons. The only intermission of this rule is in the 
 twenty-seventh week, where the feast of SS. Simon and Jude ought to 
 have been given to the masons, but is assigned to the King, apparently 
 because of the fact stated in the title of the week, that it is the first day 
 of his regnal year^. 
 
 It may be presumed, therefore, that the feast-days thus assigned to the 
 masons vere kept as a holiday, and that they worked on the feasts assigned 
 to the King, who in this roll is the employer of the masons. 
 
 I am not aware that this curious custom has been noticed by any previous 
 writer. I have set down in the note below the list of the saints’ days 
 selected*^. It is probable that in other years some other principal saints 
 w’ould have been also included which happen in this year to fall on a 
 Sunday. 
 
 Having now discussed the titles to shew the mode of designating the 
 weeks, we may examine the accounts themselves. They are placed, for 
 every week, under two heads, the wages and the purchases, or emptiones. 
 The sum of each of these is separately stated, as well as the total. The 
 nature of these payments will be best understood by giving a translation of 
 one week complete ; for, generally speaking, the workmen, the materials, 
 and other items recur nearly in the same order in every week. There is 
 a great advantage in this ; for as the same terms are repeated, it happens 
 that in some cases they are written more at length than in others, or spelled 
 in a more intelligible manner, and thus the collation of so many examples 
 of the same word greatly assists the interpretation of the unusual or tech- 
 nical expressions. 
 
 “ Second week after Easter, containing on Tuesday the feast of St. John ante portam 
 Latinam, which belongs to the King : — 
 
 “ To wages of 49 cutters of whi<-e stone, 15 marblers, 26 stonelayers, 32 carpenters 
 with John and his partner at St. Albans, two painters with an assistant, 13 polishers. 
 
 ^ This is the title of the twenty -seventh week : — “ Ebd’ xij“ contin’ festu* Apostolor, 
 Sim’ et Jude quod est dni’ Regis anno Regni Regis Hear’ xxxviij’'® incipiente et festu* 
 o’ium S’cor’ p’die Sab’ quod est cem’t. . , 
 
 List of the feast-days assigned alternately to the King and the masons, and marked 
 R and C accordingly: “Philip and James, R; Inven. S. Crucis, Cj John ad port, 
 Lat., R; Ascension, C; John Bapt., R; Thom, Mart., C; Magdalen, R; James, C; 
 Pet. ad vine., R; Assumpt., C; Decollatio, R; Nativ. B.M., C; Michael, R; Trans, 
 b. Edw., C; Luke, R; Sim. and Jude, R; Omn. S’co’m, C ; Martin, R; Edmund, C; 
 Katerina, R; Nicholas, C.” 
 
 2 
 
Fabric Eoll of V2o2>. 
 
 19 smiths, 14 glaziers with four plumbers, 15'‘ 10* 1^. [This will give an average of 
 1 j. lOrf. per week.] 
 
 “To wages of 176 inferior workmen with overseers and clerks, and two two-horse 
 carts daih’, 9* 17® 2^. [About 9d. a week.] 
 
 “Sum of wages, 25* 7® 3**. 
 
 “ Emptions. — T o Master Albericus for arrears of form-pieces .... 66® ; 53 feet of 
 parpentSy 4** per foot; 59 feet of voussoirs icith fillets at 3** per foot; 12214 feet at 3** 
 per foot; .... 50 assises at 5** each assise; 42 chamberands ; 22 feet of maignans ; 
 243 feet cerches ; 9 feet of bosses ; and seven stepsy cut by taskwork, 7* 13® !•*. 
 
 “ Item, for 9 capitalsy 68 feet of escusy 1,591 feet of cerchesy 54® 4^. 
 
 “ Item, for 25 hundred and a-half quartern of chalk for the vaults, 8® 7**.” 
 
 “ Item, for 22 hundred and 3 quarterns of freestone, 6* 16® 6**. To Roger of Rey- 
 gate for 8 hundred and a quartern of freestone, 53® 74**. To Richard the lime- 
 burner for 3 hundred of lime, 15®. To Agnes for two hundred and a half of lime, 
 12® 6**. To Richard of Eastcheap for 2 dozen hurdles or crates ** with poles, 9® 7**. 
 To Richard Oggel for 5 dozen hurdles with poles, 12®. 6‘*. To Henry of the bridge 
 for iron nails and whetstones®, 19® 8**. To Benedict for carriage, porterage, and 
 weighing of 23 cartloads of lead, 9® 4**. To Richard for Utter\ IS**. 
 
 “ Sum total of emptions, 27* 12® 104**. 
 
 “Sum total of the week, 53* and 14^.” 
 
 This week may be taken as a fair specimen of the whole. The first part 
 informs us of the number of workmen of each kind that were employed in 
 daily labour ; the second part gives the materials and their carriage. The 
 number of white stone-cutters was gradually increased from 39 in the 
 first three weeks to 78 in the fifteenth week, and diminished again to thirty- 
 five in the last wrecks. The marblers, about 16 in the first eight weeks, 
 were suddenly increased to 49 in the ninth week, who remained at work 
 till the eighteenth week, and then were suddenly reduced to 31, and went 
 on diminishing to seven. The stone-layers vary from 35 to 4. The 32 
 carpenters working in the first seven weeks are then reduced gradually 
 to nine only. The polishers are about 15, and the smiths 18 throughout; 
 but about fourteen glaziers employed in the first ten weeks are sud- 
 denly reduced to 6 for a month, and then to 2 for the remainder of the 
 time. The inferior workmen vary from 220 to 37. The gross amounts 
 are: Stipends, G96Z. 8^. ld.\ Emptions, 891Z. 9#. 5|J. ; giving a total 
 of 1,587Z. 185. O^iZ. 
 
 ^ In the Westminster Rolls (printed by Smith, Antiq. of Westminster, p. 182, and 
 Brayley and Britton, Hist, of Houses of Parliament, pp. 151, 153), “ Hurdles for the 
 scaffolds of St. Stephen’s Chapel” occur 4 Ed. III., &c., with beams, and pcles, and 
 “ leather thongs to tie the said beams and hurdles together.” The original Latin is not 
 generally given in these publications, but in one case Smith (or rather Hawkins), p. 184, 
 has “twenty-four hurdles viis super dictam scaffottamy* which explains the use of 
 the hurdles to serve in lieu of the planks we now employ. 
 
 ® “ Henr’ de Ponte p’ clavis ferri et gressiis/* xix5. But in the previous week we 
 have “Henr’ de Ponte p’ grese ad Martella acuenda.” Ducange gives “GEESSirs 
 Silex. gall. greSy” (i.e. sandstone or grit). The grese for sharpening the picA's or stone- 
 hammers is therefore, not the English word greasey as it might appear, but a whetstone. 
 
 ^ “Litebia, stramentum.” — Ducange. 
 
 3 
 
Fabric Roll of 1253 . 
 
 From these particulars the nature of the work may be surmised ; but, 
 unfortunately, there are very few exact indications of the actual buildings 
 upon which the workmen were employed. The only evidences of this kind 
 that I have detected are the following, numbered to correspond with the 
 weeks in which they occur: (1), tables or planks for the chambeks of the 
 king and queen; (7), panels for the king’s bed, and for a table in the 
 scaccarium ; (3), 100 tiles provided for the king’s chapel; (15), task- 
 work at entrance of the chaptek-hoese, (It., p’ tasch’ int°it* capituli 1. s.). 
 From the 19th to the 26th and 31st weeks, charges occur in nearly every 
 week for nails for the chxjech and belfhy ; and in the 25th week Roger 
 the Plumber is paid lOZ., and 5/. 135. 4r^. for task-work at the belfry 
 {berefridani) . This was probably the detached belfry of the Abbey church, 
 which is known to have stood on the north side, upon the site of the 
 existing Sessions-house. 
 
 Stukeley gave drawings of it in the Arcliceologia, vol. i. p. 39, under 
 the name of the Sanctuary ^ but states that it was still called the Belfry. 
 Stow relates that Edward III., about 1347, built to the use of St. Stephen’s 
 chapel, in the little sanctuary, a “ chlochard” of stone and timber covered 
 with lead, &c. Widmore (History of Westminster Abbey, p. 11) found it 
 mentioned for the first time in a charter of Edward I. (1290): “It was then 
 called the bellfrey and continued to be used as such, or at least to go by 
 that name till the present towers of the church were built by Abbot Islip.” 
 The roll we are now examining shews that it was in course of construction 
 and apparently covered with lead in 37 Hen. III. The building represented 
 by Stukeley is of stone and in two stories, of a form well adapted to serve 
 as the substructure of a lofty timber-framed tower, similar to that of Salis- 
 bury, destroyed by Wyatt, but preserved to us in the drawings of Price. 
 The wooden tower had disappeared long before the time of Stow, and 
 the stone substructure was pulled down in 1750 to make way for a new 
 market-house. It had been for a long while occupied as a cellar for the 
 Quakers’ Tavern in Thieving-lane. The market-house was in turn pulled 
 down about 1770, and the present Guildhall built as nearly as possible 
 upon the site of the old belfry. 
 
 In the second week Magister Albericus is paid for task-wcrk of the 
 form-pieces, (“pro tascha formarum,”) that is, for ivindoiv tracery, pro- 
 bably of the Abbey church, and also 6Z. 05. lOJ. in the twenty-fifth. On 
 the back of the roll it is recorded that on Tuesday of the fourth week after 
 Pentecosts, on the morrow of the blessed Thomas the Martyr, Master 
 Albericus with three associates began the task-work of three windows. 
 Also that on the Monday after “ ad vincula S‘ Petri,” (that is to say, in 
 the fifteenth week of the roll,) two parcels of coloured glass, valued at 
 125. 2d. a parcel, and two of white glass at 65. each parcel, were delivered 
 
 4 
 
 8 i.e. the eleventh week of the Roll. 
 
Fabric Boll of 1253. 
 
 to Master Henry to be employed in the task-work of the windows, charg- 
 ing per foot wrought of coloured glass 8^7., and of white glass 
 
 Another memorandum records that on Monday, the morrow of St. 
 Bartholomew, (August 25,) the work in the king’s quarry began. 
 
 Attached to the roll in the sixth week is a letter from Robert de 
 Bremele to Master John de Oxonia^, informing him that he has despatched 
 a boat-load of marble by William Justice, to whom five marcs and a-half 
 and ten shillings are to be paid for freight. He also promises to send 
 another boat-load before Pentecost, and a third if he can find a vessel to 
 convey it. Similar letters are attached to the second week and to the 
 twenty-second. 
 
 The JEmptions in each week’s account include, in the first place, pieces of 
 free-stone cut by task-work into various shapes required for doors, windows, 
 arches, vaults, or other portions of the structure, and made ready for setting. 
 These are sometimes separately enumerated by name, as in the second week 
 above, and furnish very curious illustrations of mediasval nomenclature. 
 But in the latter part of the roll such pieces are all entered in the general 
 form, In diversis modis franco petre ad tascham cisse,” ^ to various shapes 
 of free-stone cut by task-work,’ and similarly for marble. Next occur 
 stones from the quarries, probably in a rough state, or at least only fit for 
 plain walling. These are “ Came stone” (Caen stone) ; “ Reygate stone,” 
 generally from Roger de Reygate, and sometimes described as free-stone, 
 “ franca petra,” e.g. (8), “ Rogo de Reygate p’ and di Pnce pet®, xxxv5. 
 ix J. Grey stone, “petra grisea,” (6), “ pro ii. navatis grise pet,” and 
 chalk for the pendentia, — “ creta ad pendentia,” the latter being the term 
 universally employed in medieval documents for the vaults that rest upon 
 the ribs. In (24) we have “p’ marmore apud Cerne xviij‘‘ xix®.” Beside 
 these, other materials for building occur, as (1), “ mmcccc. ferri tenacis de 
 glovernia, iiii” xiij%” iron from Glocestershire, and as in the specimen week 
 inserted above. In some of these entries we obtain names of trades which 
 are of unusual occurrence. Thus (6), (21), and (12), “ Ade pro 
 
 bordis et lateis,” i.e. Merenemius, a timber merchant, from Meremium. 
 Ricardus Calfonarius the lime-burner (from Calcifurnium or the French 
 Chaufournier) occurs throughout. In (4), (13), (25), Ricardus Guparius'\ 
 or CuvariuSf the cooper, from Cupa and Cum; in (1), Jacob Junctor, the 
 joiner, for tables; and in (7), “ Jocobo Junur p’ panell’ ad lectu d“‘ Regis 
 jungendis,” &c. 
 
 The masons’ terms for shaped stones are for the most part the same that 
 I have discussed in my “Architectural Nomenclature^,” in the fifth edition 
 of the “Oxford Glossary,” 1850, and elsewhere, but they furnish a variety 
 
 ** John of Oxford occurs in the Westminster Rolls published by Smith, p. 184, 
 5 Edw. III. 
 
 * This is given by Ducange, 
 
 Vide “ Publications of the Cambridge Antiquarian Society, vol. i., 1844.” 
 
 7 { 2 
 
 5 
 
Fabric Foil of 1253 . 
 
 of spellings which are often instructive. I subjoin a list of those which 
 appear to require explanation. They are arranged in alphabetical order, 
 and the numbers in brackets prefixed to each word indicate the weeks of 
 the roll in which it occurs ; — 
 
 (1,3, &c., &c.) Asselers, or ashlar stones. 
 
 (3) (2). “ 1. assists p’ assise v.d.” . . . (5). xxi. Fssicis , — stones prepared 
 for coursed masonry, from the French assise. 
 
 (2) (3) (5). “ ix. ped de hosseus . . . xxxiiij. ped de hoseusf — the carved 
 stones placed at the intersection of the ribs of vaults, which are still called 
 bosses, (vide Arch. Nom.,” p. 43, and “ Glossary”). They were some- 
 times termed keys, or claves, of which the 'present roll has an example in 
 (6), “ii. Clavibus et viij. Capitrel.’* 
 
 (4) . “. . . xli. buscelV, p’ buscell iij^” (7). ^*p* xi. ^buscli, xix«. 
 Will. Jacobo p’ cc and q‘rt®n '’hmcJi', v®. vij**. ob.” (16). “. . . q®rtn 
 husch\ ix**.’* The first entry is in a list of stones shaped by task-work, 
 and I know no other instance of this use of the word. 
 
 But in another list of stones (3) we find “ xvi. ped et di et di’ q^rFn. de 
 grossis rotundis,^^ which seem, for vrant of technical name, to be simply 
 called great round stones; and in (2) “xxij. ped maignanz,'^ which ap- 
 pear to be merely large stones {magnums'), from the old French maigne. 
 It may be supposed in the same way that the “ bushel stones” above were 
 round stones, suitable for a column, which were so distinguished for the 
 moment because they happened to be about the size and shape of a bushel 
 measure, (about eighteen inches across and eight inches thick). 
 
 The other two examples of the word bushel are at the end of the Emp- 
 tions, amongst hurdles, “bokettes,” &c., and are probably bushel baskets, 
 or bushel measures of some article not mentioned. 
 
 (3) . “xi. ped de Ghapem't bowe^^ occurs but once, with nothing to indi- 
 cate its meaning. 
 
 (2). “xlij. cliamberand' F (3). “cxvj. cham'and',' also (4) (5). I have 
 found this word repeatedly in the accounts of King’s Ilall, Cambridge. Thus 
 in 6 Edward IV. in the form chamberh'nt, and in 6 Henry VI. as “xix. 
 ped de chamerants pro magna porta F' and soon after, “xxiiij. ped de 
 jambes." In 4 Henry V., “iapid’ vocat cliampys,'' and in 5 Henry V. 
 
 . .jambys.'' I have also found it in other account rolls, and in my 
 “Nomenclature,” art. 81, have given another form apparently of the same 
 word, namely chaumeres, which I supposed to be jammers, or stones for 
 i\\Q jambs of doors or windows. The spelling of the above examples ap- 
 pears to shew that this word is the same as the French chambranle, the 
 ornamental border or set of moldings about a door, window, or chimney, 
 and in these early examples was used for the molded stones of the jambs, 
 if not also for the arch-molds, or at least for the hood-molds. 
 
 (2). “ccxliij. ped cerches'’ (9). “cclxviij. ped de serclies.''* Clicrche 
 and serche are old French words for circular arcs, and are used by woik- 
 G 
 
Fabric Boll of 1253. 
 
 men for convex or curved pieces. In this place they may mean convex 
 stones, such as would be employed in building cylindrical piers. 
 
 (2). “Ixviij. ped de escus'' (3) also (9). “iiij”^ et x. et di ped’ de 
 scutis.” (5) “xvij. ped de escum’t.” These Sire skew-stones, i.e. stones 
 cut with a bevel edge. Similar terms occur frequently in masons’ accounts. 
 (Vide Skew, Skew-table, &c. in “Arch. Nom.” and “Glossary.”) 
 
 (2) (3) (9). “Folsuris cum filo.” (4). Botundis, folsuris cimjilletr 
 i.e. voussoirs with a filleted molding. 
 
 (4) (5) (3). “ Rotundis folsuris/’ i.e. voussoirs with round moldings. 
 
 (9). “iiii“^. V. folsurse chanferete,” i.e. chamfered voussoirs. Ghanfram 
 
 means also channeled or furrowed, and therefore we may include voussoirs 
 with moldings under this expression. All these are voussoirs for molded 
 arches or ribs, and as they occur in company with “ chalk for the vaults 
 and bosses,” {creta ad pendentia,) are intended for their ribs. 
 
 (5) . Forimells. (3). Formellis. The same as “ form-pieces,” namely, 
 the stones cut for tracery. (“ Arch. Nom.,” p. 48, and “ Glossary.”) 
 
 (6) . LotJienges, stones cut into the form of the heraldic lozenge, perhaps 
 for paving. 
 
 (6). “It’ Rog°. de T^’ri pro iiij. orbilons xxxiij. sol.” This word only 
 occurs in this example, and here in small number. We may guess the 
 thing to be a carved boss or bracket of a globular form ; or, as orhile is 
 the rim of a wheel, they may be stones in a ring form for tracery. 
 
 (2) (3). . . . perpens, parpens, or through stones. — (Vide Berpent-stone 
 in “Glossary.”) 
 
 (4). Scention,^ or scenhon^ This is a word which frequently occurs, 
 with varied spelling, in masonic documents. (Vide Scutcheon in “Arch. 
 Nom.,” p. 37, and “Glossary.”) It is always used for stones with an ob- 
 tuse external angle. 
 
 (3) . “c. et iiij^^ ped. de tablements^' — stringcourses. (“Arch. Nom.,” 
 p. 25, and “ Glossary,” art. Table.) 
 
 7 
 
FABHIC ROLL OF 1253. 
 
 Ebd’ prima post Pasch’ Continente festu Apostolor’ Philip’ et lacobi p’ die 
 lovis quod est dn’i Regis et festu Inventio’is See Crucis p’ die Sab’ quod est 
 cem’tar’. 
 
 In stipendiis xxxix. albor’ ciss’ xiiij. marmor’ xx. cubitor’ xxxij. carpent’ cu 
 loh’ ap’d Sera’ Alban’ iij. Pietor’ xiij. Poll’is xix“. fabor’ xiiij. vit'ar’ eu iiij°'. 
 plubator’, xiiij xij®. 
 
 In stipend’ c.l. minutor’ op’ar’ eu ousted’ eler’ et duab^ bigis diurnis, vj‘* 
 et xvj®. 
 
 S* stipen’, xxj^‘ viij®. 
 
 Emptiones Henr' Fab\ Bernard’ de Sea Osida p’ iiij** et viij. ped’ de 
 Asselers ciss’ ad tasch’, xiiij® viij**. It’ Henr’ de Chersaulton’ p’ vj*= et d’i Crete 
 ad pend’ ciss’ ad tasch’, xxvj**. It’ Nich’ Scot et sociis suis p’ portagio pet% 
 vj® vij**. It’ p’ mmra. vj*^ f*nce pet% x*‘ xvj®. Rog’ de Reygate p’ m. Pnee pet®, 
 Ixv®, p’ ij. navat’ grise pet®, xiij® iij**. It’ p’ v® calcis, xxv®. Ade Meren’ p’ 
 mereraio bordis et latis xxxiij® x^. It’ Jacobo Junctor’ p’ Tabul’ ad cam’as d’ni 
 Regis et Rigine et p’ pamestrs ad lectu dn’i Regis, Ixiiij® ij**. It’ Ric’ de Estchepe 
 p’ virgis et craticul’, iiij® vj^. It’ Ric’ Ogul’ p’ craticul’, v®. Ric’ Crucar’ p’ 
 bochetis, iij® vj**. Walt’ Box p’ cordis, viij® vj**. Henr’ de Ponte p’ Grese ad 
 Martella acuenda, iiij®. It’ eide H. p’ clavis f’i, xiij®. Ric’ de Celer’ p’ mra. cccc. 
 ferri tenacis de Glov’nia, iiij** xvj®. It’ p’ cariagio dci’ f’ri, iij® iiij**. It’ JMich’ 
 Tony p’ xxiij. chareis plubi, 1‘*. It’ Pain p’ cyn’es plubi fundend’, xl*. It’ Job’ 
 Sige p’ xiij. m. et d’i tegul’ cu portagio et cavill’, xxviij® xj**. 
 
 Sra* empeionu, xxvij** xij® iiij**. 
 
 Sm“ total’ Ebd’, xlix** iiij**. 
 
 Ebd’ ij® post Pasch’ contin’ festu hi’ Joh’is an’ Porta Latina p’ die martis quod 
 est d’ni Regis. In stipend’ xxxix. albor’ ciss’ xv. marra’ xxvi. cubitor’ xxxij. 
 carpent’ cu I. et socio suo ap’d Sc’m Alban’ Duobz Pietor’ cu s’viente xiij. poll’ 
 xix. fab*’*’, xiiij. vit*ar’ cu iiij*’*’ pliibator’, xv** x® d’. In stipend’ clxxvi. op’ar’ cu 
 custodib^ clericis cu ij. big’ diurnis, ix** xvij® ij**. 
 
 Sm“ stipend’, xxv** vij® iij**. 
 
 Emptiones. Mag’ro Alb*co p’ arreagiis forraar’ et . . . . Ixvj®, p’ Iiij. ped’ de 
 p’pen’ p’ ped’ iiij^, lix. ped’ de folsur’ cu fil’ p’ ped’ iij**, m* cc. et xxj. ped’ et d’i 
 p’ ped’ iij** . . 1. assisis p’ assise v**, xiij. charaberand’, xxij. ped’ maignariz, eexliij. 
 ped’ cerches, ix. ped’ de bosseus, et vij. passib? cissis ad tasch’, vij** xiij® j**. It’ 
 p’ ix. capiteir, Ixviij. ped’ de escus, m. v® iiij” xj. ped’ de cerch’, liiij® et iiij**. 
 It’ p’ mra. V® d’m q®rt’ pendent’ Crete, viij® vij**. It’ p’ mm. cc. et iij. q“r frarice 
 petre, vj** xvj® vj**. Rogero de Reygate p’ viij® q®rt franc’ petre, Iiij* vij** ob’. 
 Ricard’ Cal’fon p’ ccc. calc’, xv®. Agnes p’ cc. d’m calc’, xij® vj**. It’ Ricard’ de 
 Estchep p’ ij. duoden’ craticl’ar’ cu virgis, ix® vij**. Ricard’ Oggel p’ v. duoden’ 
 craticl’ar’ cii virg’, xij® vj^. Henr’ de Ponte p’ clavis ferri et gressiis, xix* viij**. 
 Bened’eo p’, veePa, portag’, et pesg’, xxiij. charr’ plumb’, ix® iiij**. Richo’ p’ 
 litia, xviij^. 
 
 Sm“ total’ emp’conu’, xxvij** xij® x** ob’. 
 
 Sm“ total’ Ebd’, Iiij** et d’ ob’. 
 
 8 
 
Fabric Roll o/1253. 
 
 Upon a Schedule attached to the Roll. 
 
 Magr’ Joh’ de Oxonia suus R. de Bremel’. Salute. Mitto vob’ ima navatfi 
 marmoris p’ Osmundfi Latorc p’senciii cui h’re faciatis q“tuor lib’r et iij. sol’ efc 
 dimid’ ma^ca . . q’*^ m‘ acomodavit ad navim hon’andfi .... ima .... marenarios 
 ut alias ad s’viciu n’r’m fiant p’meiores et q’* cici’ pot’itis m* den’ h’re faciatis. 
 
 Ebd’ iij* sine festo. In stipend’ xxxix. albor’ ciss’ xv. marmor’ xxvj. cubitor’ 
 xxxij. carpent’ cii I. et sociis ap’d S’c’m Alban’ Pet’ Pictor’ xv"’ Poll’ xvij. fab'''' 
 xiiij. vit^ar’ cu vj. plubat’, xvij*' xj^ It’ in stipend’ cc. minuter’ op’ar’ cu custod’ 
 cler’ et duab? bigis diurnis xiij*' iy** x**. Sum* stipend’, xxx*‘ xiiij® x**. 
 
 Empeiones. ix. ciss’ p’ xxxvj. assisis et d’i ciss’ ad tasch’. It’ p’ Ixvj. ped’ de 
 p’arpens. It’ p’ xiiij. ped’ et d’i de folsuris cu file. It’ p’ xxix. ped’ et d’i de 
 Rotundis folsuris. It’ p’ cxvj. ped’ de Cham’and’. It’ p’ xij. ped’ de formell. 
 It’ p’ xxxiiij. ped’ de boseus. It’ p’ xj. ped’ de Chapemet bowe. It’ p’ iiij''* et 
 X. et d’i ped’ de scutis. It’ p’ c. et iiij** ped’ de tablem’to. It’ xxxij. ciss’ p’ 
 m. cc. et j. ped’ de asselers, vj*‘ xij® vij** ob’. 
 
 S* tasch’, xvj** X® iiij'*. 
 
 It’ in cxlvj. ped’ et d’i de g°ssis columis marmoris. In cxlj. ped’ et d’i de 
 g*cilibz col’m marmor’, ix. ped’ de bos’ vj. ped’ et d’i de tabul’m et vj. basis et vj. 
 chepit*s et xvj. ped’ et d’i et d’i q*rt’ii de g"ssis rotund’, ix** xvij® viij** ob’, p’ 
 mm. viij" f*nce pet®, viij*' viij®. Rog’ de Reyg’ p’ vj® pet®, xxxix®. Ric’ Cast p’ 
 ij® calcis, x®. Agn’ p’ cccc. et iij q*rt’ii calcis, xxiij® ix**. It’ p’ cccc. et xl. 
 caretatis sabul’ fodend’ et cariend’, viij* x^. It’ Ric’ Estchepe p’ iiij. duod’ 
 craticul’, xij® vj**. Ric’ Ogul’ p’ vj. duod’ craticul’ cu virgis, xv®. Ilenr’ de 
 Ponte p’ xj. garbis asseri clavis f’ri cu dimidia duodena cenevect, xxv® vj**. It’ 
 in c. tegul’ cavatis ad capella, Regis, xviij'*. 
 
 Sum* emptionu, xxxj** xiiij® v'*. 
 
 Sum* total Ebd’, Ixij** ix® iij**. 
 
 Ebd’ iiij‘* sine festo. In stipend’ xij. albor’ ciss’ xvj. marmor’ xxxj. cubit’ 
 xxxij. carpent’ cu I. et sociis ap’d S’c’m Alban’. Pet’ pictoris xv. poll’ xvij. fab®" 
 xiij. vit*ar’ cii vj. plubator’, xviij** iiij®. It’ in stipend’ ccxiij. op’ar’ cu custod’ 
 cler’ et ij. bigis diurnis, xiiij** d’. 
 
 Sum* total’ stipend’, xxxij** iiij® i**. 
 
 Emptiones p’ xl. assisis p’ ass’, v'*. It’ p’ viij. ped’ Scenhon’ p’ ped’, ij**. It’ p’ 
 1. ped’ et d’i de formell’ p’ ped’ ij**, pro xij. buscell’ p’ buscell’ iij**, pro clxxiiij. 
 ped’ et di Cham’and p’ ped’ ij** ob’. Pro Iviij. ped’ et d’i de parpen p’ ped’ iiij** 
 p’ viij. ped’ de folsur’ rotund’ p’ ped’, iij**. It’ p’ xij. ped’ de rotund’ folsuris cu 
 fillet p’ ped’, iij^ ob’ p’ Ixvj. ped’ de Scenh’ p’ ped’ iij. q*r, iiij** xviij® x**. It’ p’ 
 ij. navat’ pet® de Came, xij** pac’. It’ p’ mmm. c. et iij. q*rt’ij Pnee pet®, ix** x® vj**. 
 It’ Rog’ de Reygate p’ vj® et d’i pet®, xlij® iij^, p’ ij navat’ grisepet®, xiij® iij**. It’ 
 Ric’ Calf p’ cccc. et d’i calcis, xxij® vj**. Agn’ p’ cc. et q*rt’ij calcis, xi® iij**. It’ 
 Ric’ Estchepe p’ virgis, iiij® iiij'*. It’ Ric’ Ogul’ p’ craticul’, xv®. Ric’ Gunar ’ 
 p’ utensil’ em’d, xviij'*. Henr’ de Ponte p’ clavis f’ri, xvj® x^ ob’. 
 
 S* empeionu, xx** xvj® iij'* ob’. 
 
 Sum* total ebd’, Iiij** iiij'* ob’. 
 
 Ebd’ V* contin’ festu assentio’is quod cem’t. In stipend’ xij. albor’ ciss’ xvj. 
 marmor’ xxxj. cubitor’ xxxij. carpent’ cu I. et sociis ap’d S’c’m Albanu Pet® Pictor’ 
 XV. poll’ xvij. fab®" xiij. vit*ar’ cu vj. plubator’, xviij** ct x®. 
 
 9 
 
Fabric Roll of 1253. 
 
 In stipend’ cc. et xiij. op’ar’ cu custod’ et cler’ et ij. bigis diurnis, xij^‘ xix^. 
 
 Sm“ stipedior’, xxx^‘ xj® vij'*. 
 
 Emptiones p’ xxj. Essicis vj, ped’ et d’i parpen lx. xiij. ped’ de folsur’ cii filo 
 viij. ped’ de rotud’ folsur’ xxxviij. bosseus et xlv. ped’ de cham’and’ cxxxiij. 
 ped’ de forimell’ cxviij. lothenges xvij. ped’ de esscum’t mmra. ix'^ xxxvj. ped’ de 
 asselers, ix^* iiij® ij**. It’ Ade de Aldewyche cu sociis p’ v*” pendctis Crete cissis 
 ad tasch’, xiiij® viij**. It’ p’ mmm. france pet*^, ix**. Hog’ de Reygate p’ viij*^ 
 pet®, lij®. It’ Ric’ Calf’ p’ v*^ et iij. q^rt’ calcis, xxviij® ix**. Agn’ calf p’ cc. et 
 d’i calcis, xij® vj**. It’ Ric’ de Estchepe p’ v*‘gis et bacul’, v® vij**. Ric’ Ogul p’ 
 V. duoden’ craticular’, xij® vj**. Henr’ de Ponte p’ clavis f’ri et cera cu pice, 
 xiiij® p’ ceruris curie, xx**. Laur’ vit'ar’ p’ ij. sura’ vit* color’ iiij. sura’ albi vit* et 
 viij. pisis vit* albi, lij®. Richer de C“ce xxx. fescell’ lit’i ad fab*cas, iij® iiij**. 
 
 Sra^ total’ erap’conura, xxviij** xiiij**. 
 
 Sra’^ total’ Ebd’, Iviij** xij® et ix**. 
 
 Ebd’ vj. sine festo. In stipend’ xij. albor’ cissor’ xvj. raarraor’ xxxv. cubit’ 
 xxxiij. carpent’ Pet*^. Pictor’ xv. poll’ xviij. fabror’ xiij. vit'ar cu vj. plumb’ xix**, 
 et xix^. In stip’ cc. et xiij. minutor’ op'ar’ cu custod’ et cl’icis et ij. bigis diurn’, 
 xiiij** et j**. 
 
 Sm** total’ stipend’, xxiij’* et xx. den’. 
 
 Upon a Schedule attached to the Moll. 
 
 Magr’ Joh’i de Oxonia suus Rob’ de Bremele eando q“ s* salute et se totii. 
 hlitto vob’ una raarmoris navata p’ Will’m Justise cui li're faciatis p’ frecto q'n ; 
 marcas et dimid’ et deco solid’ et mittam vob’ Deo favente una navata ante 
 Pentecost’ et t’ciam si navim possim ad d’cam pefm deduceiidfi invenire 
 Sciatis adventu meu in Sept’ Pentecost’ et no’ ante qr tcpp’ n’c instat in q*» ip’e 
 absente uegocia n’ra n’o b’n possunt expediri. 
 
 Sm“ total’ debit! a Pasch’ usq’ vigil’ Pentecost’ p’ vj. ebd’, ccc. Ixj** xiiij® viij** ob. 
 
 Emptiones xij. ciss’ p’ diversis tasch’ france pet® ad taschia cisse, iiij*' xvj® 
 vj^. It’ Rog’ de T*'ri p’ iiij. orbilons’ xxxiiij. sol’. It’ p’ ij. clavib^ et viij. 
 capitrel’ cu mm. c. Ixvj. ped’ de asselers ad tasch’, iiij** ij® vij** ob’. It’ p’ 
 tasch’ xxxiij. raarraor’ p’ iij. Ebd’ ad tasch’ c’’ca raarraor, xj** xvij^. 
 
 It’ debenf Agn’ calf, xl®. 
 
 It p’ mmmm. v® pond’ Crete cissis ad tasch’, xij®. If p’ mmmm. vj® france 
 pet®, xiij** xvj*. If Rog’ do Reygate p’ ix® et d’i france pet®, Ixj® ix**. If p’ ij. 
 navatis grise pet®, xiij® iij**. Ric’ Calfon’ p’ vij® calcis, xxxv®. Agn’ Calf’ p’ 
 cc. calcis, x®. If Will’ Porcar’ p’ vj® et lx. caretatis sabuP, xiij® ij** ob’. Ric’ de’ 
 Estchepe p’ ij. duoden’ craticul’, vj®. Ric’ Ogul p’ vij‘« duoden’ craticul’ cu 
 vurgis, xvij® vj**. Ade M’in’ p’ bordis et lateis, xv® vij**. Jacobo Junur p’ panell’ 
 ad lectu d’ni Regis jungendis et p’ tabul’ ad Scacariu et aliis tabul’ de Sape, 
 Ixvj® vj**. Henf Net p’ xj®. busch’, xix®. Will’ Jacol)o p’ cc. et qWn busch’, 
 V® vij** ob’. Ric’ Cop’ p’ bokettes, iij®. Bened’ I\Ieren’ p’ vecfa raeremij, v®. 
 Henr’ de Ponte p’ q^rfn de gatis, iij® v**. It eidc p’ xxxij. garbis asseri cii 
 clavis f’ri, xliiij® v**. Henr’ Fab** p’ incude et coreo ad Folios cop’iendos, x® ij**. 
 Joh’ Sige p’ mm. tegul’ cu’ cavills, iiij® iij**. 
 
 Sura® empcionu, lij*' x® ij** ob’. 
 
 Sum® total’ Ebd’, iiij** et v** xj* x** ob’. 
 
 Seventh week holiday. 
 
 Ebd’ prima post Pentecosf sine festo. In stipendiis xiij. albor’ ciss’ xviij. 
 raarraor’ xxviij. cubitor xxxiij. carpenf Pet’ Pictor’ xv. poll’ xvij. fabror’ xiiij. 
 
 10 
 
Fabric Boll o/1253. 
 
 vit*ar’ iiij. plubat’ cu j. s’viente, xix” xiiij® x**. In stipend’ cc. et xx. minuter’ 
 op’ar’ cu custodibz cler’ et duab^ bigis diurnis, xiiij'* viij® vij**. 
 
 Sum® stipendior’, xxxiiij^* iij® v*^. 
 
 Emptiones. Pro arreagiis marmor’, xv^‘ xvj® vij^. In mm. ccc. et d’i Pnce 
 pet®, vij*‘ xij*^. Pog’o de Reygate p’ v® et d’i Pnce pet®, xxxv® ix'^. It’ Ricard’ 
 Calfonar’ p’ v® et iij. q®rt’ calc’, xxviij® ix*^. Agnes p’ ccc. calc’ xv. sol’ It’ 
 Ricard’ de Estchep’, vj® et ij**. Ricard Oggel p’ craticl’is, x®. Ricard’ Cunar 
 p’ X. bokettis et emendac’o’e utens’, iij® et vj^. Ilenr’ de Ponte pro clavis ferri, 
 ix® d’ ob’. Nich’ Scot’ p’ portag’ franc’ pet® infra Pent’, xiij'*. 
 
 Sm® Empc’on’m, xxviij^* vj® xj'* ob’. 
 
 Sm® total’ Ebd’, Ixij** x® iiij** ob’. 
 
 Ebd’ ij. Qtinent’ festu Sci’ Joh’is Bap’e p’ diem Mart’ qd’ est d’ni Reg’. In 
 stip’ liij. Albor’ cissor’ xlix. marmor’ xxviij. cubitor’ xxviij. carpet’ Pet’ Piet’ or 
 XV. poll’ xvij. fab®*" xiiij. vit'ar’ iiij. plubat’ cu s’viente, xx*‘ xv** ob’. It’ in stip’ 
 cc. et XX. minuter’ op’ar’ cu custod’ et cl’icis et ij. big’ diurn’ xij*‘ viij‘*. 
 
 Sm® total’ stip’, xxxij** xxiij** et ob’. 
 
 Empeiones p’ vij®. Ivj. lothenges Iviij. assis’ xx. ped’ et d’i de p’pen iiij’**. iiij. 
 ped’ et d’ de folsur’ cu filo xxxix. ped’ de formell’ cclxviij. ped’ de Serches c. et 
 vij. ped’ de scutis iiij** v. folsur’ chanferite. It’ p’ V” ix® iiij** asselers ciss’ 
 ad tasch’ xvj** xj® ij**. p’ mmm. vij® pendentis crete ciss’ ad tasch’ ix® xj** p’ 
 iiavata f®nce pet® de Came, vij**. It’ p’ mm. vj® et iij. q®rt®n france pet®, 
 viij*‘ vj^. Rog’ Reygate p’ vj® et d’i pet®, xlij® iij**. Ric’ Calf’ p’ v® calcis, 
 XXV®. Agn’ Calf’ p’ cc. d’i calcis, xij® vj** q®. Mulierc de Ey p’ sabul’, vj®. 
 Alan’ de Ey p’ sabul’, vj® viij**. Ric’ Ogul’ p’ v^’gis, x®. Henr’ de Ponte p’ 
 clavis f’ri, xvj® iiij** ob. Peki’ p’ ceruris, xxiij**. Sum® Empeionu, xxxviij** 
 iij® vj** ob’. 
 
 Sum® total’ Ebd’, Ixx** v® x^. 
 
 Ebd’ iij® sine festo. In stipend’ Ivj. albor’ cissor’ xlix. marmor’ xxviij. cubitor’ 
 xxiij. carpent’ j. Pictor’ Ade Dealbartor cu s’vient’ xv. poll’ xvij. fab’ror’ xiiij. 
 vit*ar’ iiij. plubar’ cu s’vient’ xix** iij®. It’ in stipend’ cc. et xx. minutor’ cu 
 custod’ et cler’ et ij. bigis durnis, xiij** viij®. 
 
 Sum® stipend’, xxxj** xj®. 
 
 Emptiones p’ stipend’ plubator’ p’ vj. ebd’, Ixxj®. In mm. et iij. q®rt®n f®nce 
 pet®, vj** iiij® vj**. Rog’ Reygate, p’ vj® pet®, xxxix®. p’ mmmm. et ix® crete ad 
 pendentia, xxix® iiij** ob’. p’ ij. navat’ grise pet®, xij® vj**. Ric’ Calf’ p’ cccc. et 
 d’i calcis xxij® vj**. Agn’ Calf’ p’ ccc. et d’i calcis, xvij® vj**. Ric’ Estchepe p’ 
 v’'gis et craticul’, vij®. Ric’ Ogul p’ craticul’ et virgis, xiiij®. vj**. Carbonar’ 
 p’ carbone, xij® iiij**. Ilenr’ de Ponte p’ clavis f’ri, vj® iiijd. Laur’ Vit’ar’ p’ ij. 
 sum’ vit* color’ et j. sum® albi, xxx®. Rog’ Borser p’ vij sum’ vit’ color’ Ixxvij®. 
 Richer’ de C®ce p’ ij. pet*s de marmor’ pol . . . , vj®. Magro’ Odon’ p’ lit’io ad 
 logos, ij® viij**. 
 
 Sum® Empeionu, xxiij** vij® ij^ ob’. 
 
 S® total’ ebd’, liiij** xviij® ij** ob’. 
 
 Ebd’ iiij® cbtin’ festu bi’ Thom’ JMartiris p’ die Lime quod est cerat’. In 
 stipend’ lx. albor’ ciss’ xlix. marmor’ xiiij. cubitor’ xxj. carpent’ Job’ cu carpent’ 
 et s’viente ap’d S’c’m Alban’ Pet’ Pictor’ xv. poll’ xvij. fab*' xiij. vit*ar’ iiij. plubat’ 
 cu vij. s’vient’, xxj** v®. iij** ob’. In stipend’ cc. et xv. minutor’ op’ar’ cii custod’ 
 cler’ et ij. big’ diurnis, xj** xvij® x** ob’. 
 
 Sum® stipendior’, xxxiij** iij® ij**. 
 
 11 
 
Fabric Roll of 1253. 
 
 Emptiones p’ diversis modis france pet® ad tasch’ ciss’, viij’* xj® x**. It’ p’ 
 div’sis modis marmoris ad tasch’ ciss’, xxiiij* It’ p’ mm. vij® et iij. qV 
 
 f'‘nce pet®, vj® vj*^. It’ Rog’ Reygate p’ m. c. et iij. q"rt’ france pet®, 
 
 Ixxvj* iiij‘^ ob’. Ric’ Calf’ p’ v® et d’i calcis, xxvij* vj*^. It’ Agn’ Cafon’ p’ c. 
 calcis, V®. Ric’ Estchepe p’ v’^gis, iij®. Ric’ Ogul p’ craticul’ et v’’gis, vij* vj**. 
 Ham’ v’^gator p’ carbon’, xx*^. It’ Henr’ de Ponte p’ c. ferri, xv® j^*. It’ eidc p’ 
 clavis f’ri, x®. 
 
 Sum® Emptionfi, xxv^‘ ix. sol’ ob’. 
 
 Sum® total’ Ebd’, lviij*‘ xij® ij** ob’. 
 
 Ebd’ V® sine festo. In stipend’ lx. albor’ ciss’ xlix. manner’ xiiij. cubitor’ xvj. 
 carpent’ Job’ cii carpent’ et s’vente ap’d S’c’m Alban’ Pet’ Pictor’ xv. poll’ xvij. 
 fab®”" vj. vitW’ iiij. plubator’ cu vij. s’vient xxj‘‘ v® iy** ob’. In stipend’ cc. et 
 XV. minuter’ op’ar’ cu custod’ cler’ ij. bigis diurnis, xiij‘‘ xix® vj** ob’. 
 
 Sum® stipend’, xxxv** iiij® et x**. 
 
 Empeiones. Job’ Benet p’ iij. capit®ll’, iij®. It’ p’ mmmm. v® et xxviij. ped’ 
 de Asselers ciss’ ad tascb’, cxiij® ij** ob’. It’ p’ mmm. cccc. et iij. q®rt®n f®nce 
 pet®, x“ viij® vj^. Rog’ Reygate p’ vij® et iij. q®rt®n pet®, 1® iiij** ob’. Ric’ Calf’ 
 
 p’ V® et d’i calcis xxvij® vj**. Agn’ p’ d’i c. calcis, ij® vj^. Ric’ de Estebep’ p’ 
 
 v^'gis et craticul’, v® x**. Ric’ Ogul p’ v. duodenis craticul’, xij® vj**. Ade 
 
 Merenemio p’ v“ liteis, 1®. It’ Rog’ de Berkfg’ p’ ij. caretatis carbonis, iiij® 
 
 iiij**. David clerico p’ v. caret’ carbon’, x®. It’ Ilenr’ de Ponte p’ clavis f’ri 
 ad plubii, xij® ix^. It’ eide p’ cera et pice ad cem’t, xv**. Job’ Sige p’ xvij“ 
 tegular’ cu cariagio, xxxix® iiij**. 
 
 Sum® emptionu, xxvj** xv® d’. 
 
 S® total’ ebd’, Ixij**. 
 
 Ebd’ vj® cent’ festu Magdalene p’ die M*rtis quod esP d’ni Regis, et festu b’i 
 Jacobi p’ die Ven’is quod est cemt’. 
 
 In stipend’ Ixvj. albor’ ciss’ xlix. marmor’ xiiij. cubitor’ xvj. carpent’ Job’ cu 
 carpent’ et s’viente ap’d S’c’m Alban’ Pet’ Pictor’ xv. poll’ xvij. fab*”" vj. vii*ar’ 
 iiij. plubat’ cu vij. s’vient’, xxij**. In stipend’ c. et xl. minutor’ op’ar’ cu j. biga 
 diurna custod’ cler’, vij** ix®. 
 
 S® stipend’, xxix** ix®. 
 
 Emptiones. In div’sis modis france pet® ad tascb’ cisse, cxix® iij** ob’. It’ in 
 div’sis modis marmor’ ad tascb’ cissi, xxij® ix**. mmm. et c. france pet®, vj** vj*. 
 It’ Rog’ Reygate p’ ccc, et d’i pet®, xxij® ix**. Agn’ p’ c. calc’, v®. Ricard’ 
 Calfon’ p’ iiij®, xx®. Rad’ Bleur p’ iij. caret’ carbon’, vj® vj^. Ricard’ Cupar’ 
 p’ utens’ emend’, xiij**. Ricard’ de Celar’ p’ v"* iiij® iiij. ebarg’ ferri de Glov’nia, 
 x** xvj®. It’ p’ cariag’ d’c’i ferri, vj® iiij**. Ilenr’ de Ponte p’ clavis ad Ecc’am et 
 Berefridu, x® x** ob’. 
 
 Sm® Emp’conu, xxviij** vj® d’. 
 
 Sm® total’ ebd’, Ivij** xv* j**. 
 
 Ebd’ vij® 9tin’ festu b’i Pet* Advincula p’ die Ven’is quod est d’ni Regis. In 
 stipend’ Ixviij. albor’ ciss’, xlix. marmor’ xiiij, cubitor’ xvj. carpent’ Job’ ap’d 
 S’c’m Alban’ e’ea lect®n cu carpent’ et s’viente Pet’ Pictor’ xv. poll’ xvj. fab®' vj. 
 vit*ar’ iiij. plubator’ cu vij. s’vient’ cu custod’ et cler’, xviij** xj® v**. In stipend 
 vj** et xiij. op’ar’ cu biga, vij** ij** ob’. 
 
 Sum® stipend’, xxv** xj® vij** ob’. 
 
 Emptiones m’. dc xij** ij® et xj** debit’ p’ marmor’. In iij. naval’ marmor’ 
 12 
 
Fabric Boll of 1253. 
 
 xxvij” iij® vlj'*. In mtn. ix*^ et iij. q»rt®n f'ncc pet% viij*' xviij* vj‘'. ]lo"’ T^ey- 
 
 gate p’ viij‘= pet®, lij®. Ric’ Calf’ p’ cccc. et d’i calcis xxij* vj*^. Agn’ p’ c. ct 
 d’i calcis, vij® vj**. Ric’ Estchepe p’ virgis, vj* viij'*. Rob’ Cofere p’ ceruris, ix''. 
 Ilenr’ de Ponte p’ clavis f’ri ad nundin’ Westm’, xxxiiij* xj**. 
 
 S® Erapcion*, xlij‘* v* 7]*^. 
 
 S“ total’ ebd’, Ixvij** xvij* d’ ob’. 
 
 Ebd’ viij® sine festo. In stipend’ Ixxviij. albor’ ciss’ xlix. marmor’ xiiij'* 
 cubitor’ xvj. carpent’ cu I. ap’d S’c’m Alban’ cu s’viente Pet‘ Pictoris xv. pollisor’ 
 xvj. fab®*" vj. vit*ar’ iiij®' Plubator’ cu vij. s’vient’ et cu custod’ et cler’, 
 xix*‘ xix® vij*’. In stipend’ xv. op’ar’ cu biga diurna, viij*' x® ix**. 
 
 S* total’ stipend’, xxviij** x* iiij**. 
 
 Emptiones p’ diversis modis Pnce pet® ad tascb’ cisse, viij** xiiij* iiij**. It’ p’ 
 tasch’ int®it’ capituli, 1®. It’ p’ div’sis modis marmor’ ad tascb’ ciss’, xl® ij**. 
 It’ p’ iiij®’’ pis’ .... iiij®. It’ p’ navat’ pet® de Came, xiij** vj*. It’ p’ mm. ccc. 
 et j. q“rt’ france pet®, vj** x® vj'*. Rog’o Reygate p’ vj® et iij. q®rt®n pet®, xliij® 
 X** ob’. Ric’ Calf’ p’ cccc. et q*‘rt®n calcis, xxj® iij**. Ledulfo p’ m. bord’ c®. 
 Walt’o Box p’ xij®* chareis plubi cu portagio vecPa et pesagio, xxvj** xij®. Ilenr’ 
 de Ponte p’ assero clavis cera et pice, xlix® ij** p’ mmmm. cavillar’, vj^. 
 
 Sum* emptionu, Ixx*' xij® ij** ob’. 
 
 Sum* total’ Ebd’, iiij"xix** xviij® vj** ob’. 
 
 Ebd’ prima post Pacacione stipendior’ p’ viij*® Ebd’ contin’ festu Assuptio’is 
 b’e Marie p’ die Ven’is quod est cem’t’. In stipend’ Ixviij. albor’ ciss’ xlix. 
 marmor’ xilij^"* cubitor’ xvj. carpent’ cu I. ap’d S’c’m Alban’ cu s’viente Pet* 
 Pictor’ Ade Dealbator’ cu s’viente xv®‘, poll’ xvj®' fab®' duo vit'arior’ cu cler’ et 
 virgatoP, xiij** xij® vj**. In stipend’ vj**xviij. minutor’ op’ar’ cu biga diuma, 
 viij** xviij®. 
 
 Sum* stipendior’, xxvij** x® vj**. 
 
 Emptiones p’ race, et iij. q“rt®n f*nce pet®, Ixxvj® vj**. It’ Png’ Reygate p’ 
 vj® et d’i pet®, xlij* iij^. Ric’ Calf’ p’ cccc. et d’i calcis, xxij® vj**. Will’ Porcario 
 p’ m. caretatis sabul’ sedend’ et cariand’ ad tasch’, xxj® vij**. Ric’ Eschepe p’ 
 craticul’, iij® vij**. Will’ Jacob’ p’ q*rt®n busch’, ix**, p’ ij. caretatis carbon’, 
 iij* ij**. Henr’ de Ponte p’ clavis ferri, vij® vij^ ob’. 
 
 S* empeion’, viij** xviij*. 
 
 Sm* Ebd’, xxxvj** viij® v** ob’. 
 
 Ebd’ ij* sine festo. In stipend’ Ixviij. albor* cissor’ xlix. marm’ xiiij. cubitor’ 
 xvj. carpentar’ cu Joh’e ap’d S’c’m Albanu cu serviente Petro Pictore Ada De- 
 albatore cu s’viente xv. poll’ xvj. fabror’ ij. vit*ar’ cu cl’icis et virgator’, xviij** 
 xij® et vj**. In stip’ vj**xviij. minutor’ op’ar’ cu biga diurna, viij** vij® viij**. 
 
 Sm* total’ stip’, xxvij** iij® viij^. 
 
 Empe^ones. In div’sis tasch’ france petre et marmoris, xiij** xj® ix** ob’. ' In 
 m. ix® et dim’ france petre, cxvij. sol. In v® france pet® de Reygate, xxxij® vj**. 
 Ricard’ Calfonar’ p’ v® calc’, xxv*. Agn’ p’ c. et dim’ calc’, vij® vj**. Ricard’ de 
 Estchep’ p’ craticl’is, xxvij**. Ricard’ Oggel p’ c*ticl’is, iij*. Nicol’ Duket p’ 
 nav’ carbon’ xv. sol’ Ilenr’ de Ponte p’ clavis ferri, xx® iiij** ob’, 
 
 Sm* empcon’um, xxiiij** xiiij® v**. 
 
 Sm* total’ Ebd’, Ij** xviij® j**. 
 
 Ebd’ iij. continent’ Festu Decollaco’is S’ci Job’ Bape’ p’ d’ie Ven’is q’d est d’ni 
 Reg’. In stipend’ xlix. albor’ cissor’ xxxj. marm’ xiij. cubitor’ xiij. carpentar’ 
 
 C 13 
 
Fabric Roll 0 / 1253. 
 
 mag’ I. cu s’vient’ mag’ Pet’ j. Dealbator’ cu s’vient’ xv. 'poll’is xviij. fab®"^ ij. 
 vit'arior’, xiij^’ xv* viij^ ob’. It’ in stip’ iiij" et xj. minutor’ op’ar’ cu custod’ ct 
 cl’icis et j. biga diurna c. et vj* viij'* ob’. 
 
 Sm“ total’ stipend’, xix‘* ij® et v‘*. 
 
 Emptiones. In m. et dim’ franc’ pet®, iiij'‘ xiij*. Roger’ de Reygate p* 
 ij‘‘ et dim’ franc’ pet®, xvj® vj‘*. Ricard’ Calfonar’ p’ iiij® et dim’ calc’, xxij® vj*^. 
 
 Sum* emptionu, vj*‘ xij®. 
 
 S“ ebd’, xxv‘‘ xiiij® v**. 
 
 Ebd’ iiij* sine festo. In stipend’ xlix. albor’ ciss’ xxxj. marmor’ xiij. cubitor’ xiij. 
 carpent’ magr’ I. cu s’viente ap’d S’c’m Alban’ P. Pictor’ A. de albator’ cu s’viente 
 XV. poll’ xviij. fab®’' ij. vit'ar’ custod’ cu cler’ xv^‘ vj® ij*^. In stipend’ iiij"xj. 
 minutor’ op’ar’ cu biga diurna c. et xv® ix*’. 
 
 S* stipend’, xxj'* xxiij*^. 
 
 Emptiones. In div’sis modis france pet® ad tasch’ cisse, vj*‘ xv^ ob’. In div’sis 
 modis marmoris ad tasch’ cissi, Ixv® ix** ob’. It’ p’ ix® et iij. q*rt®n france pet®, 
 Iviij® vj*^. It’ Rog’ Reygate p’ v® et q*rt®n, xxxiiij® d’ ob’. Ric’ Calfon’ p’ cc. et 
 d’i calcis, xij® vj'*. Ric’ Estchepe p’ c*ticul’, iij® iij'*. Ilenr’ de Ponte p’ clavis 
 f’ri ad ecc’am et beref’, xiiij® iiij'*. 
 
 S* tasch’, ix*‘ vij® ob’. 
 
 S* emptionu, vj** iij® viij'* ob’. 
 
 S“ Ebd’, xxxvj** xj® vij'* ob’. 
 
 Ebd’ V* 9tin’ festu Nativitatis b’e Marie p’ die Lune quod est cem’t’. In 
 stipend’ xlix. albor’ ciss’ xv. marmor’ xiij. cubitor’ xiij. carpent’ magr’ I. cu 
 s’viente Pet’ PictoP A. Dealb’ cu s’viente xv. poll’ xviij. fabror’ ij. vit*ar’ cu 
 custod’ et cler’, xv**. In stipend’ iiij“xj. minutor’ op’ar’ cu biga diurna 
 iiij** xiij* ix**. 
 
 S* stipend’, xix** xiij® ix**. 
 
 tlmptiones p’ vij® et d’i f*nce pet®, xlv®. Rog’o Reygat’ p’ c. et iij. q*rt®n pet®, 
 xj® iiij'* ob’. Will’ de Came p’ v® esselers, xj® xj'*. Ric’ Calf p’ iiij® calcis, xx®. 
 Ric’ Estchep’ p’ virgis, ij® viij^ ob’. Ham’ p’ ij. carecatis carbon’, v® vj'*. Ilenr’ 
 de Ponte p’ clavis f’ri ad ecc’am et berefrida, ix® viij'*. 
 
 S“ emptionu, v** xvj'*. 
 
 Sum* Ebd’ xxv** iiij'*. 
 
 Ebd’ vj* sine festo. In stipend’ Ivj. albor’ ciss’ xv. marmor’ xxiij. cubitor 
 xiij. carpent’ I. ap’d S’c’m Alban’ cu serviente Pet’ Pictor’ A. Dealbator’ cu 
 s’viente xv. poll’ xviij. fab®" ij. vit*ar’ cu custod’ et cler’, xvij**. In stipend’ 
 cviij. minutor’ op’ar’ cu biga diurna, vj** xvij®. 
 
 Sum* stipend’, xxiij** xvij®. 
 
 Empciones, In div’sis modis f*nce pet® ad tasch’ cisse, vj** v® x'*. In div’sis 
 modis marmoris ad tasch’ ciss’, iiij** vij* x'* ob’. p’ f®cto navatis marmor’, Ixvj* 
 viij'*. It’ in m. vj® Pnce pet®, iiij** xvj®. Rog’ Reygat’ p’ ccc. france pet®, xix* 
 vj**. It R. p’ cccc. et d’i calcis, xxij* vj'*. It’ Ade Meren’ p’ bordis et lateis, 
 xxiij® vj'*. P’ portagio busch’, ij® vj'* pac’. Ric’ Estchepe p’ v®gis, vij* ij'*. Ric’ 
 Cuncr’ p’ bokettis, iij® ij^. It’ p’ v. caretatis carbon’, xij® viij^. It’ Job’ de 
 Gisors p’ xxviij. chareis et xv** plubi cu portagio pcsagio, Ixiij** x® vj'*. It’ p’ 
 vccPa et portagio ap’d Westm’, vij® ij'*. Ilenr’ de Ponte p’ clavis Ecc’e et beref’, 
 xix® ix^ ob’. Will’ de Aq* p’ tasso st*minis, viij®. 
 
 Sum* emptionu sin’ freto marmor’, iiij** et v** iij® viij'*. 
 
 Sum* total’ Ebd’, cix’* viij**. 
 
 14 
 
Fabric Roll o/1253. 
 
 In a Schedule attached to the 'Roll. 
 
 Magr’ I. de Ox’ H. de Bremel’.’’ Salut’ et amoris dulcedinem. vob’. una’ 
 
 marmoris navata p’ Will’ de la Lake latore p’senc’ cui h’re faciatis p’ frecto vij. 
 m® et dimid’ p’ . . . . Sciatis ip’m p’mptu ee et paratu ad obsequiu. dn’i Reg’ uu’ 
 si plac^ q* scici’ pot’itis .... frect’ pagat’ Valt’ sp’ in D’no — Dist'ngatis illu fide 
 mediante it’u redeundi. 
 
 Ebd’ vij* sine festo. In stipend’ Iviij. albor’ ciss’ xiiij. marmor’ xxvj. cubitor’ 
 xiij. carpent’ I. ap’d S’c’u Alban’ cu s’viente Pet‘ Pictor’ A. Dealbat’ cu s’vient’ 
 XV. poll’ xviij. fab"*" iij. vit'ar’ cii custod’ et cler’, xvij^‘ vij®. In stipend’ vj** 
 minutor’ op’ar’ cu biga diurna, vij'^ xij® d’. 
 
 Sum* stipend’, xxiiij*' xix® d’. 
 
 Emptiones p’ m. viij'^ et q*rt®n f*nce pet® c. et ix® vj'^. It’ Rog’ de Reygate p’ 
 vij® et d’i f“nce pet®, xlv® vj*^ p’ ij. navat’ marmor’ It’ Ric’ Calf p’ 
 
 cccc. et iij. q*rt°n calcis, xxiij® ix**. It’ Ric’ Ogul p’ craticul’ et virgis, xx®. Ric’ 
 miner’ p’ utensilib?, ij®. Henr’ de Ponte p’ clavis ecc’e et boref’ cu cera et pice, 
 xij® ij*^ ob’. 
 
 S* empeionu, x“ xij® xj** ob’. 
 
 S* Ebd’ xxxv'* xij® ob*. 
 
 Ebd’ viij* 9tin’ festu b’i Mich’ p’ die Lune quod est d’ni Regis. In stip’ lx 
 albor’ cissor’ xiiij. marm’ xxxj. cubit’ xiiij. carpent’ I. ap’d S’c’m Albanii Pet* 
 Pictor’ Ade Dealbator’ cu s’vienf xv. poll’is xviij. fab’or iij. vit’*ar’ cu custod’ et 
 cl’icis, xv“ XV® ix** ob’ In stipend’ vij** xv. minutor’ op’ar’ cu ij. bigis diurn’, 
 viij*' iiij® ix** ob’. 
 
 Sm* total’ stipend’, xxiiij** vij*^. 
 
 Emptiones. In div’sis modis france pet® ad tasch’ cisse, xj^‘ xvij*^ ob’. It’m in 
 div’sis modis marmoris ad tasch’ cissi, Ixxv® iiij**. It’ p’ m. ccc. et d’i fnce pet®, 
 Ixxix® vj*^. Rog’ de Reygate p’ ccc. et d’i, xxij® ix**. It’ Ric’ Calf p’ ix® et 
 q*rt®n calcis, xxxj® et iij'*. Agn’ Calf p’ c. et d’i calcis, vij® vj**. If Ric’ de 
 Estchep’ p’ v'gis, v® viij**. If Henr’ de Ponte p’ clavis ferri, xviij* j**. 
 
 S* empeion’, xxiij** xvj® vj**. 
 
 S* Ebd’, xlvij** xvij® d’ ob’. 
 
 ^ Ebd’ ix* sine festo. In stipend’ xlij. albor’ cissor’ xiiij. marmor’ xxxj. cubitor’ 
 xiiij. carpent’ I. cu s’viente ap’d S’c’m Alban’ Pef Pictor’ Ada Dealbator’ cu 
 s’viente xv. poll’ xviij. fab®® iij. vifar’ cu custod’ et clef, xviij*' iij® x**. In stip’ 
 vij** et XV. minutor’ op’ar’ cu vj. bigis diurnis, x*‘ v® ix'*. 
 
 S* stipend’, xxviij** ix® vij^. 
 
 Empciones. In div’sis modis f*nce pet® ad tasch’ ciss’, vj** iiij® viij'*. If p’ 
 m. c. et q*rt'’n f*nce pet®, Ixxiij® d’ ob’. Rog’ de Reygate cc. et q*rt®n pet®, 
 xiiij® vij'* ob’. It’ p’ navaf france pet® de Came If p’ marmore ap’d 
 
 Cerne, xviij** xix® ob’. If p’ navaf Grise pet®, v® ix'*. If mag’ro Will’ de Waz 
 p’ p’stito, XV® vj'*. If Ric’ Calf p’ viij® calcis, xxx®. If Agn’ Calf, p’ cc. calcis, 
 X®. If Will’ Porcaf p’ m. vj® et d’i c. sabulonis, xxxv® viij'*. If Mauric’ de 
 Aq* p’ meremio, iiij** xiij® iiij'*. Ric’ Eschepe p’ v'gis, iij® d’. Ric’ Ogul p’ v. 
 duod’ craticul’, xij® vj'*. If Pekin p’ em’d de ceruris, xx**. Henf de Ponte p’ 
 clavis, iiij® vj^ ob’. 
 
 Sum® empeionu, xij** xv® vj**. 
 
 Sum* total Ebd’, Ixix** xv® d’. 
 
 Ebd’ X* contin’ festu T*nslationis b’i Edward’ p’ die Lune quod cem’t .... 
 
 ^ 15 
 
Fabric Boll of 1253. 
 
 b’i Luce Evangeliste p’ die ^ab* quod est d’ni Regis. In stipend’ Iviij. albor’ 
 ciss’ xxvj. marmor’ xxxiij. cubitor’ xv. carpent’ I. cu s’viente ap’d S’c’m Alban’ 
 P. Pictor’ Ade Dealbat’ cu s’viente xvj. poll’ xviij. fab”’’ iij. vit'ar’ j. plubat’ cu 
 custod’ et cler’, xvj” v*. In stipend’ vij” et xviij. minutor’ op’ar’ cu vj. big’ 
 diurn’ vij”. 
 
 stipend’ xxiij” v*. 
 
 Emptiones. Mag’ro Alb’co p’ tascb’ form’, vj” x^. In div’sis modis Pnce pet® 
 ciss’ ad tascb’, Ixxj® iy**. It’ in div’sis modis marmor’ ad tascb’ ciss’ iiij” xiij® d’. 
 It’ p’ m. cc. et q®rt®n Pnce pet®, Ixxix® vij** ob’. Rog’ de Reygate p’ ccc. pet®, 
 xix® vj*^. It’ p’ pet® de q®r Regis p’ c. et q®r, viij® ix**. Ric’ Calf p’ vj® et d’i 
 calcis, xxij® vj*^. Agn’ Calf’ p’ ccc. calcis, xv®. Ric’ Estcbepe p’ virgis, v* vij*^. 
 Ric’ Ogul p’ duoden’ et d’i craticul’, iij® ix**. Ric’ Cunar’ p’ d’i duod’ boketis, 
 xxv^ p’ V. caret’ carbon’, xiij® viij**. It’ Will’ Pliibar’ p’ tascb’ beref’, x”. Rog’ 
 Plubai’ p’ tascb’ beref’, c. et xiij® iiij'^. Ilenr’ de Ponte p’ clavis ad ecc’am et 
 beref’, xij® ij**. 
 
 Sum® emptionu, xxxiij” x'^ ob’. 
 
 S® ebd’, Ixij” XV® x** ob’. 
 
 Ebd’ xj® sine festo. In stipend’ Iviij. albor’ ciss’ xv" marmor’ xxxiiij. cubitor’ 
 xiiij. carpent’ cu I. et s’vn’t ap’d S’c’m Alban’ P. Pictor’ dealbatoP cu s’vientc 
 XV. poll’ xviij. fab®' ij. vit*ar’ j. plubar’ cu s’viente cu v'gator’ et cler’, xix” iiij'*. 
 It’ in stipend’ vij** et xvij. op’ar’ cu vj. bigis diurn’, x** viij® iiij'*. 
 
 S® stip’, xxix” viij® viij^. 
 
 Empciones. In div’sis modis f®nce pet® ad tascb’ ciss’, Ixxiij® v^ ob’. It’ p’ 
 viij® iij. q®rt®n f®nce pet®, Ivj® iiij'* ob’ de q®r’ d’ni Regis iij. q®rt”n, v® iij**. Rog’ 
 Reygate p’ cc. pet®, xiij®. Ric’ Calf’ p’ v® et q®rt®n calcis, xxvj® iij'*. Agnes 
 Calf’ p. ccc. calcis, xv*. Ric’ Estcbepe p’ v'gis, vj® x'*. Ilenr’ de Ponte p’ clavis 
 Ecc’e et beref’, xx® d’ ob’. 
 
 Sum® emptionii, x** x® iij** ob’. 
 
 Sum® total’ Ebd’, xxxix” xix®. 
 
 Ebd’ xij® contin’ festu Apostolor’ Sim’ et Jude quod est d’ni Regis anno Regni 
 Regis Henr’ xxxviij''® Incipiente et festu O’ium Scor’ p’ die Sab’ quod est cem’t. 
 In stipend’ Iviij. alboP ciss’ xv« marmor’ xxxiiij. cubitor’ xiiij. carpent’ cu I. et 
 s’viente suo ap’d S’c’m Alban’ P. Pictor’ dealbator’ cu s’viente xv. poll’ xviij. 
 fab®' ij. vit'ar’ plubator’ cu s’viente iiij. v'gator’ cu cler’, xviij** x®. In stipend’ 
 vij*’^ op’ar’ cii vj. bigis diurnis, ix*‘ viij®. 
 
 S® stipend’, xxvij” xviij®. 
 
 Emptiones. In div’sis modis f®nce pet® ad tascb’ cisse cu creta ad pendencia, 
 iiij** xvj® iiij^. In div’sis modis marmoris ad tascb’ ciss’, Ixix® ob’. It’ de q®reria 
 d’ni Regis c. et q®rt®n france pet®, viij® ix**. It’ Rog’ Reygate p’ cc. et q®rt"n 
 pet®, xiiij® vij^ ob’. It’ p’ vij® france pet®, xlv® vj'*. It’ Ric’ Calf’ p’ cccc. 
 calcis, XX®. Agn’ Calf’ p’ d’i c. calcis, ij® vj'*. Ric’ Estcbepe p’ craticul’, vij® 
 viij'*. Ric’ Ogul p’ vj. duoden’ craticul’, xvij® vj'* p’ vect'ra meremii, x®. Ham’ 
 p’ carbon’, iij® iiij'*. Henr’ de Ponte p’ clavis f’li, iiij® iiij'*. 
 
 S® empcion’, xiiij** ix® vij'*. 
 
 S® Ebd’, xiij** vij® vij'*. 
 
 Ebd’ prima post festu Om’n’m Scor’ sine festo grossa stipendia albor’ cissor’ 
 solet dccrescere. In stipend’ Iviij. albor’ ciss’ xj. marmor’ xj. cubitor’ xiiij^ 
 carpent’ I. ap’d S’c’m Alban’ cu s’viente P. Pictor’ A. Dealbatior’ cu s’ xvj. poll’ 
 16 
 
Fabric Roll of 1253. 
 
 xviij. fab®' diior’ vltUr’ cii cler’ et custod’, xviij*^ In stipend’ vij” minitor’ 
 op’ar’ cu iij. bigis diurnis, vij^‘ xij*. 
 
 Sum^ stipend’ xxv'* xij®. 
 
 Einpciones. In div’sis modis f*nce pet® et marmor’ ad tasch’ cissi, xiiij® 
 iij'*. It’ in ccc. et d’i de q^reria d’ni Regis, xxiiij® vj**. It’ Rog’ de Reygate p’ 
 cccc. et d’i f'nce pet®, xxix® iij'*. It’ p’ m. ccc. pet®, iiij** iiij* vj'*. It’ Ric’ Calf’ 
 p’ c. et d’i calcis, vij® vj'*. Ric’ Estchepe p’ v'gis, ix® vj**. Ric’ Ogul p’ iiij. 
 duoden’ craticul’, x®. Henr’ de Ponte p’ cepo et uncto, ij® iiij'*. 
 
 S* eraptionu, xiij** xxij^. 
 
 S® ebd’, xxxviij** xiij® x**. 
 
 Ebd’ ij® contin’ festu b’i Martini p’ die Martis quod est d’ni Regis. In stipend’ 
 xxxiiij. albor’ ciss’ vij. marmor’ v. asseditor’ ix. carpent’ I. cu s’viente ap’d S’c’in 
 Alban’ P. Pictor’ xiij. fab®' ij. vit'ar’ iij. v'gator’ cu iij. cler’, viij** iij® iiij'* ob’. 
 
 It’ in stipend’ xxx. minutor’ op’ar’ cu duab^ bigis diurnis, xxxv®. 
 
 Sum® stipend’, ix** xviij® iiij'* ob’. 
 
 Empciones. Rog’ Plubario p’ charea plubi ult® portion Ecc’e ad tasch’ op’ati, 
 xj® x**. It’ p’ ix® et d’i f®nce pet®, Ixj® ix'* p’ d’i c. pet® d’ni Regis, iij® vj**. Rog’ 
 Reygate p’ cccc. et q®rt®n pet®, xxvij® vij'* ob’. Ric’ Estchepe p’ v'gis, iiij*. 
 Ilenr’ de Ponte p’ Oleo et venis, ij® iij'* ob’. Ilam’ p’ carbone, iiij®. 
 
 Sum® emption’ c. et xv®. 
 
 Sum® Ebd’, xv** xiij® iiij'* ob’. 
 
 Ebd’ iij® 9tin’ festu b’i Eadm’ p’ die lovis quod est Cem’t. In stipend’ xxxv. 
 albor’ ciss’ vij. marmor’ v. cubitor’ ix^^ carpent’ loh’ de S’co Albano cu s’viente 
 mag’ri Pet* pictoris xiij. fab®' ij. vit*ar’ cu custod’ et cler’, ix** xviij® ob. In 
 stipend’ xxxv. op’ar’ cu duab? bigis diurnis, xl®. 
 
 •Sum® stipend’ior’, xj** xviij® ob’. 
 
 Emptiones xxvj. tasch’ p’ div’so modo f®nce pet® ad tasch’ cisse, cij* v^. It’ 
 vj. marmor’ p’ div’se modo marmor’ ad tasch’ ciss’, xxxj® x**. It’ de q®reria 
 Regis p’ d’i c. pet®, iij* vj'*. Roger’ Reygate p’ ccc. pet®, xix® vj'*. It’ p’ vj® et 
 iij. q®rt®n pet®, xliij® x'* ob’. It’ Ric’ Ogul p’ ij. duoden’ craticul’, v®. Ilenr’ de 
 Ponte p’ cera pice et carbone marine, v® j^. 
 
 S® emption’, x** xj* ij^ ob. ' 
 
 S® total’ Ebd’, xxij** ix* iij'*. 
 
 Ebd’ iiij® 9tin’ festii S’ce Katerine p’ die M®rtis quod est d’ni Regis. In 
 stipend’ xxxv. albor’ cissor’ vij. marmor’ iiij. cubitor’ ix''‘= carpent’ I. ap’d S’c’m 
 Alban’ cu s’viente mag’ri Pet* Pictoris xiij. fab®' ij. vit*ar’ ij. plub’ cii s’vientib^ 
 cu cler’ et iij. custod’, viij** xj®. In stipend’ xxxvij. op’ar’ cu ij. bigis diurnis, 
 xlj® x^ ob’. 
 
 Sm® total stipend’, x** xij® x'* ob’. 
 
 Empciones. In mcc. Crete ad tasch’ cisse, ij® vj'*. It’ de q®reria Regis p’ 
 q®rt®n, xxj^. Rog’ de Reygate p’ cccc. et q®rt®n pet®, xxvij* vij** ob’. It’ p’ m. c. 
 et q®rt®n pet®, Ixxiij® d’ ob’. Ric’ Estchepe p’ v'gis, iij® x**. It’ Ilenr’ de Ponte 
 p’ assero et clavis f’ri ad beref’, vj® vij^ ob’. 
 
 S® empcionu, cxv® v'* ob’. 
 
 S® total’ ebd’, xvj** viij® iiij'*. 
 
 Ebvd’ v‘® contin’ festu b’i Nich’ p’ die Sab’ quod est cem’t. In stipend’ xxxv. 
 albor’ cissor’ vij. marm’ iiij. cub’ ix. carp’ Job’ ap’d S’c’m Albanu cu s’vicnte 
 
 17 
 
Fabric Roll of 1253. 
 
 magri Pet* xiij. fab°r’ ij. vil'ar’ ij. plumb’ cu s’vient’ custod’ et cl’ic’, xviij*. 
 In stip’ xxxvij. minuter’ op’ar’ cu ij. big’, xlj* x^ ob’. 
 
 Sm® stipend’, x'* xix® x*^ ob. 
 
 Emptiones. De quarr’ d’ni Reg’ p’ iij. q**rt’ franc’ pet®, iiij* x*^ ob’. Roger’ 
 de Reygate p’ ccc. et dim’ franc’ pet®, xxij* ix**. It’ p’ ix® et q’*rf franc’ pet®, 
 lx® d’ ob’. It’ Henr’ de Ponte p’ carbon’ marin’, x®. 
 
 {In dorso) m^ q’d die lovis an’ festu decollaco’is b’i Joh’is de Mag’ro Job’ le 
 ScuF xxxiij® f’ri. It’ d’cs Job’ le Somnt’ recepit eode d’ de ballivis d’ni Regis 
 mmmmcc. metalli. It’ restat in deposit© cc. et fere d’i cupri. 
 
 {In dorso) m** q’d Ebd’ iiij*® Die m“rtis in c^stino b’i Thom’ martiris mag’r 
 Alb'cus cu iij. sociis incepit tasch iij. fovar’. 
 
 {In dorso) m*^ q’d die Lune in c^stino b’i Barth’ inceperut op’ari in q’*rreria 
 d’ni Regis. 
 
 {In dorso.) Ilec est lib’atio vit* f’ca Mag’ro Henr’ die Lune post. Ad vincula 
 b’i Pet* a r’ R’ H. xxxvij® videlic^ ij. Sum® vitri colorati preciu summe xij® et ij. 
 Sum® vitri albi preciu summe, vj®. Sum® den’ xxxvj® de quibz tenet*” respondere. 
 In taschia fenestraru sic taxata p’ pede op’ato vit* colorati viij** p’ pede op’ato 
 vit* albi iiij**. 
 
 It’ d’ m®rtis in c®stino Nat’ b’e Mar’ eide Henr’ vj. pile vit* color’ p’ciu, iiij®. 
 It’ eide ij. sum’ vit* albi xij® d’i sum’ vit* color’ p’ vj®. 
 
SUMMARY. 
 
 Week. 
 
 Stipend. 
 
 Emptiones. 
 
 Total. 
 
 
 £ 
 
 s. 
 
 d. 
 
 £ 
 
 s. 
 
 d. 
 
 1 ^ 
 
 s. 
 
 d. 
 
 1 
 
 21 
 
 8 
 
 0 
 
 27 
 
 12 
 
 4 
 
 I -49 
 
 0 
 
 4 
 
 2 
 
 25 
 
 7 
 
 3 
 
 27 
 
 12 
 
 10^ 
 
 1 53 
 
 0 
 
 11 
 
 3 
 
 30 
 
 14 
 
 10 
 
 31 
 
 14 
 
 5 
 
 i 62 
 
 9 
 
 3 
 
 4 
 
 32 
 
 4 
 
 1 
 
 20 
 
 16 
 
 3^ 
 
 53 
 
 0 
 
 41 
 
 5 
 
 30 
 
 11 
 
 7 
 
 27 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 58 12 
 
 9 
 
 6 
 
 33 
 
 1 
 
 8 
 
 52 
 
 10 
 
 
 85 11 101 
 S"“®total.Pascli.usq" 
 vigil Pent, p’ 6 Eb- 
 dom. 36 1^. 145.8a* 
 
 8 
 
 34 
 
 3 
 
 5 
 
 28 
 
 6 
 
 lU 
 
 62 
 
 10 
 
 41 
 
 9 
 
 32 
 
 1 
 
 lU 
 
 38 
 
 3 
 
 6^ 
 
 70 
 
 5 
 
 10 
 
 10 
 
 31 
 
 11 
 
 0 
 
 23 
 
 7 
 
 2| 
 
 54 
 
 18 
 
 21 
 
 11 
 
 33 
 
 3 
 
 2 
 
 25 
 
 9 
 
 0^ 
 
 58 
 
 12 
 
 21 
 
 12 
 
 35 
 
 4 
 
 10 
 
 26 
 
 15 
 
 1 
 
 62 
 
 0 
 
 0 
 
 13 
 
 29 
 
 9 
 
 0 
 
 28 
 
 6 
 
 1 
 
 57 
 
 15 
 
 1 
 
 14 
 
 25 
 
 11 
 
 7^ 
 
 42 
 
 5 
 
 6 
 
 67 
 
 17 
 
 11 
 
 15 
 
 28 
 
 10 
 
 4 
 
 70 
 
 12 
 
 
 99 
 
 18 
 
 61 
 
 16 
 
 27 
 
 10 
 
 6 
 
 8 
 
 18 
 
 0 
 
 36 
 
 8 
 
 51 
 
 17 
 
 27 
 
 3 
 
 8 
 
 24 
 
 14 
 
 5 
 
 51 
 
 18 
 
 1 
 
 18 
 
 19 
 
 2 
 
 5 
 
 6 
 
 12 
 
 0 
 
 25 
 
 14 
 
 5 
 
 19 
 
 21 
 
 1 
 
 11 
 
 */9 
 
 \6 
 
 7 
 
 3 
 
 oa 
 
 36 
 
 11 
 
 71 
 
 20 
 
 19 
 
 13 
 
 9 
 
 5 
 
 1 
 
 4 
 
 25 
 
 0 
 
 4 
 
 21 
 
 23 
 
 17 
 
 0 
 
 85 
 
 3 
 
 8 
 
 1 109 
 
 0 
 
 8 
 
 22 
 
 24 
 
 19 
 
 1 
 
 10 
 
 12 
 
 lU 
 
 35 
 
 12 
 
 01 
 
 23 
 
 24 
 
 0 
 
 7 
 
 23 
 
 16 
 
 6 
 
 ' 47 
 
 17 
 
 11 
 
 24 
 
 28 
 
 9 
 
 7 
 
 41 
 
 15 
 
 6 
 
 69 
 
 15 
 
 1 
 
 25 
 
 23 
 
 5 
 
 0 
 
 33 
 
 0 
 
 lOi 
 
 62 
 
 15 101 
 
 26 
 
 29 
 
 8 
 
 8 
 
 10 
 
 10 
 
 3^ 
 
 39 
 
 19 
 
 0 
 
 27 
 
 27 
 
 18 
 
 0 
 
 14 
 
 9 
 
 7 
 
 42 
 
 7 
 
 7 
 
 28 
 
 25 
 
 12 
 
 0 
 
 13 
 
 22 
 
 0 
 
 1 38 
 
 13 10 
 
 29 
 
 9 
 
 18 
 
 4^ 
 
 5 
 
 15 
 
 0 
 
 i 15 
 
 13 
 
 41 
 
 30 
 
 11 
 
 18 
 
 0^ 
 
 10 
 
 11 
 
 2i 
 
 i 22 
 
 9 
 
 3 
 
 31 
 
 10 
 
 12 
 
 10^ 
 
 5 
 
 15 
 
 5^ 
 
 16 
 
 8 
 
 4 
 
 32 
 
 10 
 
 19 
 
 lOi 
 
 (f4 
 
 1 
 
 17 
 
 0) 
 
 1 (tl5 
 — 
 
 16 
 
 101) 
 
 696 8 7 i 891 9 5| >1 587 18 0^ 
 
 Tasch Empt. + (Not inserted in roll.) 
 
> ‘\. '- ^ X •'*'^ ' ip'’V5- ■ ’ i: *■ , 
 
FABRIC ROLLS OF WESTILIXSTER. 
 
 £In addition to the foregoing Fabric Roll of 1253, so admirably explained 
 by Professor Willis in a manner which no one else could have done, several 
 other Rolls, or portions of Rolls, relating to this building are extant ; but 
 they do not appear to contain any additional information until we come to 
 the following, from the Pipe Roll of the 52nd Henry III. and three 
 following years, which are sufficiently important to be worthy of a place 
 here ; and for the convenience of our readers we give abstracts of them in 
 English. It will be observed that the accounts for .the church, and those 
 for the Xing’s chambers in his palace adjoining, are so much mixed up 
 together that they cannot now be separated ; and that the expenditure 
 going on at Westminster during this period was from £20,000 to £40,000 
 a-year of our money, — so that the public buildings at Westminster were as 
 expensive then as they are now.] 
 
 PIPE ROLL 52 HENRY III. a.d. 1267-68. 
 
 Account of the wokks of the church; of Westminster and the King’s 
 HOUSES THERE, from the feast of the Nativity of our Lord in the fifty-first year 
 to the feast of St. Michael in the fifty-second year, by Master Robert de Beverley, 
 mason, and brother Ralph, the convert of the Abbey of Cumbermere, put in 
 the place of Alexander the carpenter and John de Spalding, by the King’s writ 
 directed to Adam de Stratton, clerk, warden of the same works, by the view and 
 testimony of the same Adam. 
 
 The same renders account of 140/. received of the King’s Treasury, and of 
 435/. 135. 4(7. received of the issues of the King’s seal, and other receipts, making 
 in the whole 1,303/. 65. M. 
 
 Works in the great and little hall, and King’s chamber. 
 
 Paid for free stone as well from Caen as Reigate, flints, chalk, plaster, lime, 
 windage, buckets, and the carriage of the aforesaid to the works aforesaid, as con- 
 tained in the particulars delivered into the Treasury, 283/. 145. 10|^/. And in 
 great timber, boards, rafters, as well of oak as of alder, hurdles, laths, rods, grease, 
 glue, and certain other small things used at the said works, with the carriage 
 thereof, 77/. 95. 4c/. And in lead, iron, steel, coal, brushwood for making the 
 ironwork, locks, cords, glass, wax, pitch, and otlier necessaries for the glass 
 windows, as well at Havering as at Westminster, and for making cement, and the 
 carriage thereof, 160/. 5s. 9d. And in hollowed^ (or fluted ?) tiles, litter, reeds 
 bought for covering the walls of the works aforesaid, and divers of the King’s 
 houses, with their carriage, 11/. 95. 9|c?. And for the wages of certain masons 
 (or plasterers) paving‘s before the shrine of Saint Edward ; carpenters, painters, 
 plumbers, glaziers, inferior workmen and masons’ workmen, carpenters, painters 
 by task work, and expenses of persons sent to divers places on account of the 
 said works, 614/. IO 5 . 
 
 PIPE ROLL 53 HENRY III. No Entry. 
 
 * “ canillis.” ^ “ cementariorum pavatorum.” 
 
 D 
 
 21 
 
Fabric Rolls of Westminster, 
 
 PIPE ROLL 54 HENRY III. a.d. 1269-70. 
 
 Account of works at the church of Westminster and tue King’s houses 
 THERE, from Christmas in this year to the feast of the Purification of the Virgin 
 in the fifty-fifth year. 
 
 He renders account of 487/. 2s. 2>\d. received from the King’s Treasury, and 
 other sums, making a total of 1,361/. 3s. \\d. 
 
 And in marble, free-stone as well from Caen as from Reigate, flints, plaster, 
 chalk, carriage of the aforesaid, windage, and other necessaries for the same works, 
 as is contained in the particulars delivered into the Treasury, 458/. I2s. ^d. And 
 in great timber, boards, rafters, as well of oak as of alder, laths, hurdles, rods, 
 grease, glue, and other small necessary things for the said works, as in the said 
 particulars, 53/. 155. \\\d. And in lead, iron, steel, coal, brushwood for making 
 the ironwork, locks, cords, glass, wax, pitch, and other necessaries for the glass 
 windows, and for making cement, canvas for closing the windows of the aforesaid 
 church, with the carriage thereof, 140/. 145. And in hollowed (?) tiles, litter, stubble 
 for covering the walls of the same church, 4/. II5. ^\d. And in gold in leaf and 
 enameP, divers colors, and other necessaries for the pictures of the tomb** in 
 which reposes the body of the blessed Edward, and for the painting of the 
 figures in the said church®, and in the great chamber of the King, 32/. I65. l^d. 
 Wages of masons and other workers, 670/. 5s. I0|c/. 
 
 PIPE ROLL 55 HENRY III. a.d. 1270-71. 
 
 Account of works at the church of Westminster, &c., from the feast of the 
 Purification of the Blessed Virgin to the same feast in the fifty-sixth year. 
 Receipts, 1,196/. 195. 5^d. 
 
 Marble, free-stone, &c., (as before,) 348/. 145. 6d. Timber, &c., (as before,) 
 25/. Il5. 3|c/. Leai &c., (as before,) 197/. IO5. 4|</. Tiles, &c., (as before,) 
 7/. 155. 4|c/. Gold, in leaf, and divers colours, and other smaller necessaries for 
 the painting of the images in the said church and the King’s great chamber, 
 17/. 17^. 3|f/. Wages of workmen, 698/. Os. lO^c/. 
 
 PIPE ROLL 56 HENRY III. a.d. 1271-72. 
 
 Account of the works of the church at Westminster and the King’s 
 HOUSES THERE, from the feast of the Purilication of the Virgin in this year 
 to the feast of St. Edmund the King and Martyr (November 20) next following, 
 before the King was buried ; by Master Robert de Beverley, mason, and by 
 the view of Adam de Stratton, clerk of the Exchequer. 
 
 Receipts 1,212/. I5. 0|o?., (from various sources, as before). 
 
 And in marble, free-stone as well from Caen as Reigate, flints, &c., (as before,) 
 205/. 65. \0\d. Timber, &c., (as before,) 13/. 145. 7d. Lead, &c., (as before,) 
 including glass and other necessaries for the glass windows, as well for the houses 
 as for the church aforesaid, 20/. 135. 2>\d. Tiles, &c., (as before,) 81. 5s. And 
 for three wooden angels made by task-work and placed in the aforesaid church, 205. 
 And for wages of certain pavior masons making the pavements before various 
 altars in the said church, carpenters, painters, and other workmen, ‘‘and of a 
 certain workman making a clock by task workV’ 648/. 125. 8c/. 
 
 PIPE ROLL 1 EDWARD I. No Entry. 
 
 *= ‘‘aclujallis.” ** “c’apse.” ^ “ ad picturas imaginum.” 
 
 ^ cuj’da op’arii fac orlogiu ad tascha.” 
 
 22 
 
Fabric Rolls of Westminster, 
 
 [The next accounts which appear to be important for the illustration of 
 the architectural history of the building are those of the middle of the 
 fourteenth century, 15 Edward III., 1342, and subsequent years, which fix 
 the date of one side of the cloisters. Like most of the building accounts of 
 that period, they contain a great deal of incidental information, often of an 
 amusing character also. The walls of the old Norman nave were not taken 
 down until 1388, as appears from a payment to “three labourers for taking 
 down the walls of the old church” in that year.] 
 
 Account of “the new woek of the old church” of Westminstee, 15 Ed- 
 ward III. (1342). 
 
 Four stones bought for making capitals, 2s. 
 
 301 quarters of iron bought at London for making the windows of the 
 church, 11s. 4cZ. 
 
 Wages of a mason for repairing bays of windows for one week, 2s. 6d. 
 
 Making 4 stone capitals, 2s. 8d., each 8c?. 
 
 Hire of a mason for a day for placing said capitals and repairing 
 
 columns, 7^d. 
 
 3| cwt. (300|) of slacked lime for whitening the walls and making mortar, 11s. 8d. 
 
 To plasterers for plastering and whitening the moiety of the said church by 
 special agreement, 40s. 
 
 One carter hired for a day to carry sand for them, 6d. 
 
 Wages of a smith making the ironwork for four windows, 8s. 6c?. 
 
 4 barrels bought for making laths for staying the rafters, 4s. 4c?. 
 
 11 corbels of stone bought, 5s. 4c?. 
 
 Wages of 2 masons clearing drains, and making and placing the said corbels, 
 21 days, 10s. Qd. 
 
 Paid to Walter le Bole, mason, for the repair and making of four windows and 
 one great pillar, by special agreement, 20?. 
 
 His wages for making parapets, 60s. 
 
 Dress, boots, gloves, and food found. 
 
 Account 18 Edward III. (1345). Beceipts, 301. 10s. 8^c?. 
 
 20 marks received from the Abbot for making a cloister. 
 
 Payments to masons, and to two other marble masons, 2s. 10c?., (carpenters and 
 tilers in the cloister). 
 
 Wages of two bedders of stone, also bread and ale given to the masons; Abbot’s 
 men and many others working on Monday that they might better expedite the 
 work on account of water in the foundation, 7|c?. 
 
 Purchase of stones “ de Caen,” “ de coyn,” “ de gobet.” 
 
 Account of Brother John de Mordone for the work of the new cloister, 
 
 23 TO 26 Edward III. (1350 — 1353). Receipts, 71?. 6s. 5c?. 
 
 Wages of two masons from feast of St. Michael to Feb. 23 (21 weeks), 70s., 
 when a new agreement was made with them, on account of flesh time, whereby 
 each had 4c?. a week more, viz. 2s. a week from Feb. 23 to Michaelmas. To one 
 of them, as master of the work, 26s. 8c?. over his wages, and for his dress, 13s. 4c?., 
 for two pair of shoes, 3s., and to their boy, 12c?. 
 
 _ Wages of Adam de Wytteneye, a bedder of stone, for 34 weeks, from the feast 
 of the Purification, 66s. 8c?. ; his servant, 48s. 
 
 23 
 
Fabric Rolls of Westminster, 
 
 Wages of a quarrier for same time, 72>s. 8c?. ; also of boys. 
 
 63 cart-loads of stone from the quarry to Battersea, 4/. 14^. 6c?. ; carriage of 
 same from Battersea to Westminster by water, 7s. 10|c?. ; carriage of same from 
 the water to the church, nothing, because in the sacrist’s carts, but in expences of 
 those helping to load the carts, 25. 
 
 5 cwt. (500) of slacked lime, 335. 4c?. 
 
 2 boat-loads of lime for “ waites,” 245. 
 
 Sawing boards for making girths'^, 35. ; wages, nails, &c. 
 
 200 spike-nails for the scaffold, 14c?. ; 25 others, 55. 2^c?. 
 
 Cement for joining the stones, 6c?., besides wax from the sacrist. 
 
 Making mason’s tools for the year, 45. 8d . ; two bundles of steel for tools for 
 the quarry, 20c?. ; putting on the steel and sharpening the tools, 65. 
 
 2 boat-loads of rag (stone), 225. 
 
 Twenty-fifth tear. 
 
 60 feet of “ logemetz,” of rag (stone) bought for the work of the Prior in the 
 cloister, 175. 3 c?. 
 
 3 sarcophaguses bought of the parish of St. Margaret, 65. 8c?. 
 
 One bag of lead bought for strengthening the joints of the vaulting, 7s. 
 
 Total, 21?. 185. 10^?. 
 
 Twenty-sixth tear. 
 
 A third mason at work from Nov. 19 to May 28. 
 
 Wages of a fourth mason from Nov. 24 to Michaelmas, 44 weeks, at 35. 2c?. 
 per week, 6?. 195. 4c?. ; tunics for same. 
 
 Three carts hired for two days to carry lime from the chapel of Tothill to 
 Westminster, 7c?. each per day. 
 
 Various necessaries for the work, — cement, iron, digging sand in the cloister, — 
 1 man, l^c?. a day, making a cincture. 
 
 1 bedder of stone hired for a week for the expedition of the vaulting work on 
 account of the danger of frost, 2s. 6<?. 
 
 Total, 61?. IO5. 7d. 
 
 Account of Brother John de Moudon for the work of the new cloister, 
 from Michaelmas in the twenty-sixth Edward III., to same feast in twenty- 
 seventh. 
 
 Payments to 4 masons, 2 being occasional, provided with winter dresses beside 
 their own. Head mason’s fee 265. 8^?. ; nothing for his dress this year because he 
 refused to receive it on account of the delay in its delivery. 
 
 Total, 64?. 195. 1^?. 
 
 Account Michaelmas 27 to 28 Edward HI. Receipts, 34?. 65. 8c?. Expended, 
 63?. 85. 5c?., in excess. 
 
 Wages of one bedder of stone for 40 weeks, making the foundation of the work 
 on the side of the refectory, 705. ; to a boy helping him, 405. 
 
 One mason hired for four weeks to make keys to the vaultings, 135. 4c?. 
 
 Account Michaelmas 28 to 29 Edward III., for the work of the said 
 
 CLOISTER. 
 
 Wages of two regular masons, two casual, one bedder and helper. 
 
 i “cinctures.’’ 
 
 24 
 
Fabric Rolls of Westminster, 
 
 One hundred feet of eut rag-stone bought for the lodgment of the founda- 
 tion, 58s. \d. 
 
 Given to one marble mason for 2 weeks, shaping and polishing the said stones 
 and others. 
 
 Twelve eartloads of stone for making “Ijstes” in the vaulting, bought on 
 aecount of the default of stone in the quarry, 18s. 
 
 Receipts, 41^. Is. %d. Excess of expenditure remains, 63/. 4s. 
 
 Account Michaelmas 29 to 30 Edwakd III. 
 
 Among receipts are 20s. from the Cellarer of Westminster for stone sold to him 
 for making a new furnace for lead; and 40s. for stone sold and taken for the 
 King’s work at Windsor. 
 
 Wages of masons as before; and for supply of stone, &c. 
 
 Receipts, 69/. Excess of expenditure, 46/. 14s. 10|c?. 
 
 Account 30 to 31 Edwaed III. As before. 
 
 One bedder of stone hired, for accelerating the vaulting, for three weeks, 9s. 
 Newly making iron-work for two windows, 21 s. 
 
 Making a pit in the quarry for getting stone, by a certain agreement, 6/. 
 Making a door in the south part of the cloister, with ironwork bought for the 
 same, 40s. 
 
 Receipts, 28/. 13s. 4c/. Excess, 81/. 14s. \\d. 
 
 Account 31 to 32 Edward III. 
 
 Precept of the Abbot [Langham] for the acceleration of the said work. 
 
 Wages of 6 masons — some casual, — one bedder of stone, 78s. the year, and one 
 servitor, 18s., by agreement, besides his table with the sick to save expence. 
 
 Expences of 2 masons at the quarry for 2 weeks, shaping and sculpturing stone 
 for the windows and other necessaries, 6s. 
 
 Receipts, 78/. 16s. Excess, 77/. 19s. %\d. 
 
 Account 33 to 34 Edward III. As before. 
 
 Wages of J. Langelod sculpturing stones for 8 weeks, 6s. 
 
 Ironwork for three windows in the cloister, raised this year, weighing 
 200 lb., 37s. ^d. 
 
 lleceipts, 45/. 5s. 4c?. Excess, 90/. 6s. 2^c?. 
 
 Account 35 to 36 Edward III. Much as before. 
 
 Metal bought for making a new “ cimbal” in the cloister, and for twice melting 
 the same, 50s, 
 
 Receipts, 73/. 17s. ^d. Plus, 6/. 4s. U^d. 
 
 Account 36 to 37 Edward III. As before. 
 
 To another labourer for digging the foundation for four weeks, 8s. 
 
 For ironwork of a window in the new locutory, 13s. 4c?. 
 
 Excess, 10/. 12s. lO^d. 
 
 Account 38 to 39 Edward III. Receipts, 45/. 4s, 10c?. 
 
 3 masons at 2s. per week, and their livery of bread aud ale. 
 
 Sum of all expences, 45/. 4s. 10^/. And so they are equal, the cloister being 
 finished. 
 
 ^ “ scapulandis.” 
 
 25 
 
Fabric Rolls of Westminster. 
 
 Account of Brother Peter CouiiBE, reefer of the new work of the 
 CHURCH OF Westminster, of all receipts and expeuces from the Vigil of 
 St. Michael, 11 Richard II. (1388), to same feast in next year. 
 
 Receipts, 180/. 3^. 4c/., of which, surplus of last account, 28/. 15s. 4^c/. 
 
 Fee of Master Yevelee, chief mason, 100s. per annum, and for his dress and 
 furs, 15s. ; do. of Robert Kentbury, 13s. 4</. ; tunic of Thomas Padington, 10s. 
 
 Five masons for 17 weeks (15/. 11s. 8c/.), one for five weeks, 6 labourers for 
 17 weeks at 20c/. each, four bedders of stone for three weeks, three others for 
 four weeks, two others for ten weeks. 
 
 4,400 sacks of slacked lime, 52 carts of sand, luncheons for the masons, bedders 
 and labourers, 23s. 
 
 Wages of three labourers breaking down the walls of the old church and doing 
 other things. 
 
 Expences at quarry, garden at Battersea hired for putting the stone in, farm of 
 the quarry at Chalfdon, 66s. 8c/. ; 440 loads of stone from the quarry to Batter- 
 sea, 44/. — 2s. a load. 
 
 Paid to a mason of Couf, in part payment of 40/. for a marble pillar, 10/. 
 Receipts, 4/. 3s. ll^c/. in excess. 
 
 Account 17 to 18 Richard II. 
 
 Arrears, 33/. Receipts, 476/. 16s., — of which 60/. from the King, 66/. 13s. 4c/. 
 from the Duke of Lancaster, 66/. 13s. 4c/. from the sale of gold cloths offered at 
 the burial of Queen Ann, 66/. 13s. 4c/. from the herce of the said Queen. 
 
 Wages, 86/. 11s. (Sd. Henry Zyevely, chief mason, 6 regular and named masons, 
 3 casual, 3 casual setters. 
 
 Emptions and expences, 159/. Os. 9^c/. ; for North stone bought, 34/. 7s. 10c/. ; 
 for mafble this year, 80/. ; 50s. for 10,000 tiles for the stone house at Bridge- 
 court ; 61/. Os. 2d. for luncheons of the workmen. 
 
 Account 12 to 13 Richard II. 
 
 Receipts, 109/. 6s. 
 
 Four regular masons, casual bedders and masons, two regular labourers, four 
 casual ditto. 
 
 Conveyance of stone ; paid for one marble column this year, 30/. ; carriage of 
 ditto from the Thames, 5s. 2d. ; for the ironwork of two windows, weighing 
 1,0001b., at 13s. 4c/., 8/. 3s. 4c/.; for three windows weighing 9001b., 7/. 7s. 
 
 Account 14 to 15 Richard II. 
 
 A chief and 6 regular masons, two casual ditto, one casual bedder, three 
 labourers and quarry men. 
 
 Garden at Battersea for stone, 3s. 4c/. ; paid for a marble column, 70/. ; carriage 
 of same from the Thames, 10s. ; paid for tables for moulds, 21s. 6c/. 
 
 Account 18 to 19 Richard II. 
 
 Receipts, 443/. lls. 4c/., including 106/. 13s. 4c/. from the King at divers times, 
 111/. 13s. 4c/. from sale of gold cloths; also other cloths. 
 
 Wages, &c. : one chief, ten regular and 6 casual masons, the “ table” expences 
 of one mason’s apprentice Is. per week, two casual setters, two carpenters work- 
 ing upon the new house for the masons, and another house in Tothill-strcct for 
 22 weeks, at 2s. ^d. each. 
 
 26 
 
Fabric Rolls of ffesiminster. 
 
 Carriage of stone from Keigate; 62 tons of stone from Caen, at 65. ; 64| tons 
 from the North parts, at 7s. Od. per ton; for marble this year, 40^. 
 
 Foreign expences : for black cloth bought for the burial of Queen Anne, 20/. ; 
 for making 100 dresses, 335. 4d . ; paid to the dauber for the lodge for the masons 
 and the house in Tothill-street, 155. 6^/. ; 18/. for 200 pieces of great timber; for 
 the ironwork of one window, w^eighing 401 qrs. 3 lbs., 705. ; for pavement without 
 the gate towards the King’s palace, 245. 
 
 Account 19 to 20 Richard II. 
 
 Receipts, 253/. 35. : from the King nothing this year ; from gold cloths 
 
 offered on the anniversary of Queen Anne, 735. 4^/. 
 
 Stone and carriage, 152/. II5. Qd.; for ironwork of windows, weighing in the 
 whole 1,871 lbs., price the 100, I65. 4c?. ; expences of the sacrist to Purbek, 
 455. 2^d . ; another going to the North parts to purchase stone, 7s. 10c/. 
 
 Account 20 to 21 Richard II. 
 
 Receipts, 377/. 35. Sd. ; including 100/. from the King, and 42/. 135. 4c?. from 
 gold cloths sold. 
 
 Wages, 187/. 7s. 3d. 
 
 For marble this year, 40/.; for North stone, due for the preceding year, 20/. 65. 8</. 
 Paid for the ironwork of one window of the chancel, 71. 135. 11^. 
 
 Expences about the repair of houses in Westminster, 7s. Id. 
 
 Account 22 to 23 Richard II. 
 
 Receipts, 79/. 65. id., and 144/. 13s. 4c?. 
 
 Items as before ; paid for marble, 60/. 
 
 Account 23 Richard II., 1 Henry IV. 
 
 Payments to Thomas Lippynham and two others, at 35. id. per week each. 
 A mason and another man, 3 labourers and 2 apprentices. 
 
 Account 1 to 2 Henry IV. 
 
 Receipts, 87/. 85. 
 
 Wages, &c., 62/. 55. 10c?.; fee of Master William Colchester, chief mason, IOO5. 
 the year, and for his dress and furs ; two workers, four masons, 2 setters, 
 3 labourers. 
 
 One pillar of marble bought, 40/. ; 50 loads of Reigate aud 117 tons of North 
 stone. 
 
 Account 2 to 3 Henry IV. 
 
 i Pillar of marble, 40/.; to the smith for making ironwork for the church, 375. 4c?. 
 
 Account 4 to 5 Henry IV. 
 
 Paid for marble, 80/. 
 
 Account 9 to 10 Henry IV. 
 
 Ro wages ; under “ foreign payments” are entered purchases of 300 sacks of 
 lime, 5 loads sand, 4 ditto loam, 3,000 plain tiles, 1 bushel tile-pins, (a tiler and 
 his labourer for 10 days,) 2,000 roof-nails, 3,000 trauiisons, 3,000 spriggs, 600 
 spikings, 300 feet of table oak, hooks and hinges weighing 421bs., 4 locks aud keys. 
 
 27 
 
Fabric Rolls of Westminster. 
 
 Account 11 to 12 Henry IV. 
 
 No wages, &c. ; “ foreign payments” include materials for roofing, and tiler and 
 man for 18 days. 
 
 Account 12 to 13 Henry IY. 
 
 No expences ; but claim for 154?. 9^. 10<;?. as owing to the “ new work.” 
 Account 13 Henry IV. to 3 Henry V. only refers to tbe houses. 
 
 Account 3 to 4 Henry V. 
 
 30?. expended in the “new work of the church.” — Mem.; this set of accounts 
 confined to the management of property assigned to the “new work” of the church, 
 not to the progress of that work. 
 
 Ditto to 8 Henry V. 
 
 Account 8 to 9 Henry V. 
 
 Among expences is payment for making (by a carpenter) of “ a new palace at 
 the Bell.” At the end the balance said to be handed over to “the Lord the 
 Abbot, the Surveyor of the nave of the church of Westminster made by the Lord 
 the King.” 
 
 28 
 
APPENDIX III. 
 
 THE LIBRARY OF WESTMINSTER ABBEY“. 
 
 The library was founded by Lord Keeper Williams (whose 
 portrait is there) during the time he was Dean of Westminster, 
 about 1620. The hooks were originally kept in one of the 
 chapels in the Abbey, but were afterwards removed to their pre- 
 sent quarters. 
 
 In 1644 the books are stated to have suffered from a conflagra- 
 tion, but whether this catastrophe took place before they were 
 removed hither or no, cannot be ascertained. The printed books 
 number about eleven thousand volumes, and include many valuable 
 works. Among them are the Complutensian Polyglott, 1515, in 
 sixvols. folio; Walton’s Polyglott, dated in 1657 ; several valuable 
 Hebrew Bibles, ranging in date from 1596 ; various Greek and Latin 
 Bibles, and several English ones, including Cranmer’s of 1540, and 
 the first and second editions of Parker’s, or the Bishop’s Bible, 
 in 1568 and 1572. Rituals and Prayer-books, the works of the 
 ancient Fathers, the Schoolmen, and the Reformers, are in great 
 plenty. English theologians and English historians also abound, 
 including the Legenda Nova Angli< 2 , London, 1516 ; and Parker, 
 De Antiquitate Ecclesice Britannicde, London, 1562. 
 
 In classical literature there are ample materials both for the 
 industrious student and the curious bibliographer. Again, here is 
 the first edition of the works of Plato, printed at Venice, in 1513 ; 
 this is on vellum. A valuable book is here preserved, — it is one of 
 those printed at Oxford during the fifteenth century, — Johannes 
 Latteburius in threnos Jeremie, Capitulis CXV.j folio, Oxonii, Anno 
 dni 1482, ultima die mensis Julii, From a memorandum on the 
 first leaf of this book it appears that in 1563 it belonged to Thomas 
 Sackomb, who purchased it of John Avyngton, a monk, also Scholar 
 and Bachelor of the Cathedral Church of Winchester, and afterwards 
 Professor of Theology. Several of the books here bear the signature 
 of William Camden, in small and neat characters ; they were doubt- 
 less gifts from him. 
 
 On one of the leaves of a copy of an early printed English book, 
 
 The Dialogue of Dives and Pauper,” printed by Richard Pynson 
 in 1493, in excellent condition, is this inscription, partially defaced : 
 ‘‘Iste liber constat . . . Banbury . . . Osneye.” Under this are 
 three shields, the centre one containing these arms. Argent, two 
 
 • From a paper read in the Library, at the Meeting of the London and Middlesex 
 Society, Oct. 25, 1860. By W. H. Hart, F.S.A. 
 
 E 
 
 29 
 
The Library of Westminster Abbey, 
 
 bends, azure ; the two others are alike, each one containing a device 
 like a merchant's mark. 
 
 The signature of John Fox the martyrologist occurs on the title- 
 page of a book entitled Gasparis Megandri Figurini in Epistolam 
 Fauli ad Ephesios CommentariuSy Basil, 1534. Two others are 
 on a copy of Melancthon’s Loci Communes Theologici, 1548. 
 
 A book here preserved, entitled Descriptio Britannice ScoticBj 
 IlybernicBy et Orchadum, ex libro Pauli Jovii Episcopi Nucery was 
 once the property of Robert Glover, Portcullis Pursuivant at Arms, 
 but afterwards passed into the possession of another proprietor, as 
 appears by an inscription on the fly-leaf ; and the second possessor 
 has added this somewhat sarcastic remark, ‘‘ Sic transit rerum 
 proprietas.^^ 
 
 In a copy of Ben Jonson’s works, 1640, these verses are on a 
 fly-leaf ; — 
 
 “ Tho’ cruel Death has this great Conquest made 
 And learned Johnson in his urn is lay’d 
 Nere shall his fame be in y® tyrants pow’r 
 For y‘ shall live when Death shall be no more.” 
 
 In another part of the same book : — 
 
 “ Lord give me wisdom to direct my ways 
 I beg not Kiches nor yet Length of Days. 
 
 FarewelL” 
 
 In a Daily Office for the Sick,^^ &c., 1699, is this note : — 
 
 “ If this be lost and you do find, I pray you to here so good an mind as to restore un 
 to the seme that here below heth set her name. H. G.” 
 
 In Lombardica Hystoriay 1490, is this amusing note : — 
 
 “ Thomas Tyllie ys my name 
 And with my hand I cannot mend this same 
 He that dothe reade and not understande 
 Ys lyke to a blinde man led by y® hande 
 Who, yf the guide be not suer and sounde 
 Ys lyke often tymes to ly one the grounde 
 Therefore good reader let theise be thy staye 
 And be not unmyndfull of them every daye. 
 
 For feare of fallinge as ofte doth the blinde. 
 
 And so by false guiders the truth shall not finde, 
 
 'Vych greatly doth greve the blind for the tyme. 
 
 And thus craving pardone I make up my ryme. 
 
 “John Lee. Thomas Ttllte. 
 
 “ An® Dni 1586.” 
 
 On the fly-leaf of Heylyn^s Help to English History,^’ (Lon- 
 don, 1670,) is this short but very expressive admonition; — 
 
 “ Exodus 20th c. 
 
 * Thou shalt not steal.* ** 
 
 In a book entitled Homeliarius Doctorum, 1494, are two inter- 
 esting documents, nearly perfect, only just so much having been 
 cut off from the edge as to destroy perhaps the last two words in 
 each line. They are on parchment, and were pasted inside the 
 covers, but are now disengaged from their fellows by the joint 
 action of time and damp. 
 
 The first consists of the will of Robert Atte Wod, Alderman of 
 30 
 
The Library of Westminster Abbey, 
 
 Oxford, dated the 28th day of May, 1461, just thirty-three years 
 prior to the date of the book itself. By it he bequeaths his soul 
 to Almighty God and all the saints, and his body to be buried in 
 the church of the Blessed Mary of Oseney, near the grave of his 
 father ; and after making gifts to various churches, he provides for 
 a chaplain to offer up the Mass for his soul, and the soul of Cicely 
 Herberfeld, for whom he was bound, (i. e., he was under obliga- 
 tion,) in the church of St. Martin at Oxford for four years. He also 
 gave to Joan his wife, for her life, a tenement in the parish of St. 
 Thomas, called Bokebynders Place ; and after her death, then ac- 
 cording to the form and effect of certain indentures between the 
 abbot of the Blessed Mary the Virgin of Osseneya, and himself. 
 This will was proved in the Ecclesiastical Court at Oxford. 
 
 The other document is undated, but is probably of the same 
 period as the will. It is a petition, in English, and is remarkable 
 for the title it assigns to the magnates of the city of London, 
 namely, that of ‘‘ sovereigns.’’ It runs thus : — 
 
 “ To the Ryght honourable and gracyous lorde end vvorshypfull souveraignes the Mayre 
 and Aldremen of yis noble Citie of London. 
 
 Besechith full humblely your poore and perpetuell oratrice Johan Pentrith, widowe, 
 late th . . . John Pentrith, youre trewe Servaunt and OtRcere, that it may please 
 
 you and goode graces in . . . deracion of the longe daies of theire continuaunce 
 
 in youre service withinne this Citee of L. . . of the gret and importable penury e 
 
 that youre saydr poore oratrice seth tyme of hir sed h . . . decesse hath longe tyme 
 continued and abyden unto the gret peine and hevynesse of your . . . suppliant, 
 
 the which she cannot well long tyme endure without youre goode and gracious . . , 
 relief. To yeve and graunt unto youre saide poore oratrice some annuell refresshament 
 . . . gracyous ahnesse and goodnesse in relevynge and refrcsshing of hir said poverte 
 and heu .... for the tendre love that ye have hadde unto hir said housbond, atte 
 reverence of almyght .... and in wey of charite, and youre saide poor wydowe and 
 perpetuell oratrice shall pra .... for you hir lyf durynge,” &c. 
 
 In another book, Homiliarum Opus, F. Adami Sasbout, Delphii 
 Lovanii, 1556, are two parchment deeds, which have been made 
 use of for binding purposes. They are not so perfect as the previ- 
 ous specimens, but they yield some little information as to property 
 and persons in the city of London. 
 
 By the first one John Brother, son and heir of Adam de Brother, 
 grants to Adam de Brauncestre and another, goldsmiths, of Lon- 
 don, and their heirs or assigns, two marks annual rent, which the 
 same Adam and Thomas purchased of Adam Brother his (grantor’s) 
 father, issuing out of the principal messuage, and the tenement 
 adjoining, in the parish of Saint Mary Magdalen, in Old Fish- 
 street, near the said church. This deed is of the reign of Henry 
 III. or Edward I. The other deed is very fragmentary. By it 
 John de . . . rd, citizen and vintner of London, gives to Edward de 
 Westsmethefield, London, and Roger de Creton, certain lands, the 
 locality of wdiich does not appear. It is dated at ‘‘ Iseldon,” 
 (Islington) 8 Edward III. 
 
 Another series of books which have not only a local, but also 
 a great historical interest, are the books used at the coronations 
 of the sovereigns of this realm. 
 
 31 
 
The Library of Westminster Abbey. 
 
 The first two are histories of the solemnity; one entitled, — 
 
 “The entertAinineiit of His Most Excellent Majestie Charles II., on his passaere 
 through the City of London to his Coronation, containing an exact accompt of the 
 whole solemnity : The Trinmphall arches, and Cavalcade delineated in Sculpture ; the 
 Speeches and Impresses illustrated from antiquity. To these is added a brief narrative 
 of His Majestie ’s Solemn Coronation: with his magnificent proceeding, and Royal 
 Feast in Westminster HalL By John Ogilby. London. Printed by Tho. Roycroft, 
 and are to be had at the Author’s house in King's Head Court within Shoe Lane. 
 M DC Lxn.” 
 
 The other entitled, — 
 
 “ The History of the Coronation of the most High, most mighty, and most excellent 
 Monarch. James II. by the Grace of God King of England, Swtland, France and 
 Ireland, Defender of the Faith, kc., and of his Royal Consort, Queen Mary: solemnized 
 in the Collegiate Church of St. Peter, in the C.ty of Westminster, on TTiursday the 
 23 of April, being the Festival of St. George, in the year of our Lord 16S5. With 
 an exact account of the several preparations in order thereunto, their Majesties’ most 
 splendid processions, and their Royal and Magnificent Feast in Westminster Hall. 
 The whole work illxistrated with Sculptures. By his Majestie’s especial command. By 
 Francis Sandford, Esqre., Lancaster Herald of Arms. In the Savoy : Printed by 
 Thomas Xewcomb, one of His Majesties Printers, 16S7.” 
 
 ^^e then come to George the Third’s reign. Here is a book 
 handsomely bound in red morocco, and gilt, and the inner sides of 
 the covers ornamented with gold and flowers. It is entitled, — 
 
 “ The Form and order of the sei^dce that is to be performed, and of the ceremonies 
 that are to be observed in the Coronation of their Majesties King George III. and 
 Queen Charlotte in the Abbey Church of St. Peter, Westminster, on Tuesday the 22nd 
 of September, 1761. London : Printed by Mark Baskett, Printer to the ling’s most 
 Excellent Majesty, and by the assigns of Robert Baskett, 1761.” 
 
 And then in their order are the books of George the Fourth, 
 'William the Fourth, and our present sovereign, the Lady Victoria; 
 but in this series the gradual falling oflf of external ornament can- 
 not but be noticed, the last book being merely stitched in black 
 paper covers, without any attempt at dignity. 
 
 It is stated that in the library founded by Dr. Williams in Red- 
 cross-street, Cripplegate, were many manuscripts, which were burnt, 
 and among them the pompous and curious book of the ceremonies 
 of the coronation of the kings of England. 
 
 M-OTTSCRIPTS. 
 
 The greater part of the manuscripts perished in the fire before 
 spoken of, but there are a few left, and among them are some 
 valuable specimens. 
 
 In the Harleian MS., Xo. 694, is contained a number of cata- 
 logues of various libraries, and among them a list of the manu- 
 scripts here, compiled apparently in the year 1672. It is entitled, 
 
 Catalogus Codd. MSS. in Bibliotheca Westmonast. An® 1672.^’ 
 This contains above three hundred volumes, all of which are briefly 
 specified. There is a good sprinkling of classical authors, the an- 
 cient Fathers of the Church, and several books which, if now in 
 existence, would have been well worthy our attention. Among 
 these are — 
 
 “An English new Testament with a Calender of the Epistles and Ghospells. 
 
 “An old Missall with the Roman Calender before it. 
 
 32 
 
The Library of Westminster Abbey. 
 
 “ Two other Missalls. 
 
 “ A treatise how to live godlyly, Beginneth, a Treatize y* sufficeth to each man and 
 woman to live after if they wolen bee saved. 
 
 “A book of prayers to certaine Saints with the pictures. 
 
 “ The Summary of the whole Bible collected by Wicklitfe.” 
 
 Next come several books on legal subjects, gavelkind, pleadings, 
 statutes, and forms of writs ; then a curious book entitled, — 
 
 “ The method of preparing food, or concerning the ancient culinary art, in which are 
 elucidated the names of the dishes had at the dinners of Coronations and Installations.’^ 
 
 The magnificently illuminated missal or service-book, prepared 
 in the year 1373 under the care of Nicholas Litlington, at that 
 time abbot of this church, is in most excellent preservation, with 
 scarcely a blemish throughout, except those owing to design. 
 
 The first volume commences with the consecration of salt for the 
 holy water. It contains offices for the Sundays of the whole year, 
 from Advent to the twenty-fifth after Trinity ; likewise several of 
 the principal festivals. 
 
 The second volume contains the Mass and the service for Passion- 
 week, at great length ; the office for the coronation of the king and 
 queen, and that for the queen only when not crowned with the 
 king ; the office for the royal funerals ; several offices for inferior 
 or national saints, as Edward the Confessor, Edmund, Dunstan, 
 Laurence, Catherine, &c. 
 
 By a proclamation in Henry the Eighth’s time, renewed under 
 Edward the Sixth, all services, litanies, and books of prayer were 
 ordered to be purified from all the remains of popery ; and in con- 
 sequence of this, the very name of the Pope has been erased from 
 many Missals, and in this of Litlington’s the name of St. Thomas 
 a Becket is erased from the calendar, as also the office for his 
 festival. 
 
 There is a very curious piece of History respecting a manu- 
 script still preserved in the library, entitled Flores Histori- 
 aruniy or the Chronicle of Matthew of Mestminster.” In some 
 rhymes written by a monk of Westminster on the life of Henry the 
 Fifth, (contained in Cotton MSS. Brit. Mus., Cleopatra B., and lately 
 edited by Mr. Charles Augustus Cole in the series of Chronicles now 
 being published under the direction of the Master of the Rolls,) 
 the author, after describing the bounteous gifts made by the King to 
 the church of Westminster, mentions in particular two precious 
 books and a sceptre which he restored to the same church : — 
 
 “ Psalterium carura, sic Flores Historiarum 
 Eestituit gratis ad Westmynstre vir pietatis.” 
 
 There can be but little doubt that the Flores Historiarum spoken 
 of by the chronicler is the identical volume still in the library, 
 while there is every reason to believe that the “ precious Psalter” is 
 none other than Litlington’s Missal. 
 
 We have here the ancient Chronicle of England commonly called 
 the “Brute;” which is a compilation from the history of Geoffrey 
 of Monmouth. There is an abundant supply of copies of this 
 
 33 
 
The Library of Westminster Abbey, 
 
 Chronicle throughout the manuscript repositories of this country, 
 especially at the British Museum. 
 
 Here also is a curious manuscript on subjects of natural his- 
 tory, with coloured representations of various animals, preceded 
 drawings of human monstrosities, and a view of Adam’s 
 naming the animals. 
 
 A book, which though not in the library, is yet connected 
 with the Abbey, demands a few passing words. In the Public 
 Record Office in this metropolis is preserved a book contain- 
 ing the various indentures between King Henry VII. and the 
 abbot and convent of Westminster concerning the prayers to be 
 said for himself and family during his life, and the performance of 
 services for their souls after their decease. These indentures are 
 dated July 16, 1504, and they enumerate with great precision all 
 the services which were to be held, and the various collects and 
 psalms to be used from and after the execution of the deed. Special 
 prayers were to be said daily in the regular services of the Abbey 
 for the prosperity of the King and his family ; there was to be 
 a “ herse” set round with 100 tapers, which the King provided till 
 the chapel was erected in which his tomb was to be placed, and 
 an Anniversary” was to be performed upon February 11. At 
 certain of the Masses said by the chantry-monk appointed for that 
 purpose, he was to turn his face “ at the firste lavatory” to the 
 people, and bid them pray for the King thus 
 
 “ Sirs, — I exhorte and desire you specially and devoutly of your charitie to praye for 
 the good and prosperous estate of the Kyng oure Souverayne Lorde Kyng Henry the 
 vij‘^, founder of thre masses perpetually to be sayd in this monastery, and for the pros- 
 peritie of this his reame, and for the soule of the moost excellent Princesse Elizabeth 
 late Queue of Englande, his wif, and for the soules of their children and issue, and for 
 the soule of the right noble Prince Edmund late Erie of Richemont, fader to oure snid 
 souverayne lorde the Kyng, and for the soules of all his other progenitours and aun- 
 cestres, and all cristen soules.” 
 
 This book is illuminated, and is superbly bound in velvet, and 
 the seals of the contracting parties are enclosed in small silver 
 skippets. 
 
 ON ANCIENT BINDINGS IN THE LIBRARY ^ 
 
 The examples of fifteenth and sixteenth century impressed 
 leather bindings in this library are numerous, and many of them 
 are of very rare occurrence in other collections. 
 
 The first I would describe is the cover of a book printed at Basle 
 in the year 1502. On one side of this volume is the representa- 
 tion of St. John the Baptist preaching. He is clad in raiment of 
 camel’s hair,” and is standing on a mount, behind three branches 
 of trees tied together, resembling in shape the letter 11. The peo- 
 ple surrounding him have their hands clasped in prayer. 
 
 ^ Read in the Library, Oct. 25, 1860. By Joseph J. Howard, F.R.S. 
 34 
 
On Ancient Bindings in the Library. 
 
 On the reverse side of the volume is impressed the figure of 
 St. James holding in the left hand a staff and wallet, and support- 
 ing with his right a youth who is suspended from a gibbet. 
 
 The legend is thus narrated by Pope Calixtus II. : — 
 
 “ A certain German, who with his wife and son went on a pilgrimage to St. James 
 of Compostella, having travelled as far as Torlosa, lodged at an inn there ; and the 
 host had a fair daughter, who looking on the son of the pilgrim (a handsome and 
 graceful youth), became deeply enamoured j he being virtuous, and, moreover, on his 
 way to a holy shrine, refused to listen to her allurements. Then she thought how she 
 might be avenged for this slight put upon her charms, and hid in his wallet her father’s 
 drinking cup. The next morning, no sooner were they departed than the host disco- 
 vering his loss, pursued them, accused them before the judge, and the cup being found 
 in the young man’s wallet, he was condemned to be hung, and all they possessed was 
 confiscated to the host. 
 
 “ Then the afflicted parents pursued their way lamenting, and made their prayers 
 and complaint before the altar of the blessed St. Jago; and thirty-six days afterwards, 
 as they returned by the spot where their son hung on the gibbet, they stood beneath it 
 weeping and lamenting. 
 
 “ Then the son spoke, * O my mother ! O my father ! do not lament for me, for I 
 have never been in better cheer ; the blessed Apostle James is at my side sustaining 
 me, and filling me with celestial comfort and joy.’ The parents being astonished, 
 hastened to the judge, who at that moment was seated at table, and the mother called 
 out, ‘ Our son lives.’ The judge mocked at them. ‘ What sayest thou, good woman ? 
 Thou art beside thyself. If thy son lives, so do those fowds in my dish.’ And, lo ! 
 scarcely luid he uttered the words when the fowls [being a cock and a hen] rose up 
 full feathered in the dish, and the cock began to crow, to the great admiration of the 
 judge and his attendants. 
 
 “ Then the judge rose up from table hastily, and called together the priests, and the 
 lawyers, and they went in procession to the gibbet, took down the young man and 
 restored him to his parents, and the miraculous cock and hen were placed under the 
 protection of the Church, where they and their posterity long fiourished in testimony 
 of this stupendous miracle.” — Mrs. Jameson's Sacred and Legendary Arty ed. 1850, 
 p. 140. 
 
 In the chapel of St. James, four miles from Spoleto, are frescoes 
 representing the miracles of this saint. In one compartment St. 
 James is represented sustaining a youth who is suspended from 
 a gibbet'^. The example before you is the only instance I have seen 
 of this saint being so represented on early bindings. 
 
 The next binding is a very beautiful example of early art, and 
 appears to be of the same date as the volume, which was printed 
 by Wynkin de Worde in 1511. On one side is represented, under 
 a canopy, the figure of St. Barbara, surrounded by a floriated 
 border, in which are introduced lions, birds, &c., and on a scroll 
 the legend sancta Barbara ora [pro nobis]. She is holding 
 in her right hand a palm-branch, (the emblem of martyrdom,) and 
 in her left the Bible. By her side is a tower, and the ground is 
 powdered with fleur-de-lis. 
 
 The legend as given by Mrs. Jameson‘S is as follows : — 
 
 “ Dioscorus, w'ho dwelt in Heliopolis, had an only daughter named Barbara, whom 
 he exceedingly loved. Fearful lest from her singular beauty she should be demanded 
 in marriage and taken from him, he shut her up in a tower, and kept her secluded 
 from the eyes of men. The virtuous Barbara in her solitude gave herself up to study 
 and meditation ; and the result of her reflection was that idols of wood and stone wor- 
 
 ^ Mrs. Jameson’s Sacred and Legendary Art, ed. 1850, p. 144. 
 
 ' Ibid. 
 35 
 
On Ancient Bindings in the Library, 
 
 shipped by her parents could not have created the stars of heaven on which she so often 
 gazed. So she contemned these false gods, hut did not as yet know the true faith. 
 
 “ Xow in the loneliness of her tower the fame reached her of the famous doctor and 
 teacher Origen, who dwelt in Alexandria. She longed to know of his teaching, and 
 ^Tote to him secretly. On Origen reading the letter he rejoiced, and sent to her one 
 of his disciples, disguised as a physician, who perfected her conversion, and she re- 
 ceived baptism from him. 
 
 “ Her father, who was violently opposed to the Christians, was at this time absent; 
 hut previous to his departure he had sent skilful architects to construct a bath chamber 
 of wonderful splendour. One day St. Barbara descended to view the progress of the 
 workmen, and seeing that they had constructed two windows commanded them to 
 insert a third. When her father returned he was much displeased, and said to his 
 daughter, * \Miy hast thou done this?’ and she answered, ‘Know, my father, that 
 through three windows doth the soul receive light, — the Father, the Son, and the Holy 
 Ghost, and the three are one.’ 
 
 “ Then her father being enraged, drew his sword to kill her, but she fled to the 
 summit of the tower, and he pursued her; but by angels she was wrapped from his 
 view and carried to a distance. A shepherd betraying her place of concealment, her 
 father dragged her thence by the hair, and beat her, and confined her in a dungeon, 
 denouncing her to the Proconsul Marcian. Her father, seeing no hope of her re- 
 nouncing Christianity, carried her to a certain mountain near the city, drew his sword 
 and cut off her head ; but as he descended the mountain there came a most fearful 
 tempest, and fire fell upon this cruel father and consumed him.” 
 
 On the reverse side is a representation of the mass of St. Gregory, 
 tvho is seen officiating at the altar, surrounded by his attendant 
 clergy ; immediately over the altar is the Saviour, supported by 
 two angels, His feet resting on a chalice. 
 
 The legend is as follows : — 
 
 “ On a certain occasion when St. Gregory was ofliciating at the mass, one was near 
 him who doubted the real presence ; thereupon, at the prayer of the saint, a vision is 
 suddenly revealed of the crucified Saviour Himself, who descends upon the altar, sur- 
 rounded by the implements of the Passion.” 
 
 Another representation of St. Barbara is impressed on the cover 
 of Gregory's ^'Decretals,’’ printed by Regnault in 1519. The 
 figure of the saint is similarly treated to the example last described. 
 
 On the cover of a small book entitled Apparatus Latince Locu- 
 tiones is impressed the representation of the wise men^s offering. 
 The Virgin is seated with the Saviour on her knee ; behind her is 
 Joseph; in front, the wise men with crowns on their heads are 
 offering cups of various shapes. The binder’s device, or merchant’s 
 mark, (with the initials B. I.,) is in the foreground. 
 
 Many of the bindings are impressed with the royal arms, badges, 
 &c., and I have placed on the table several of the more remarkable 
 specimens. 
 
 The impressed cover of a volume entitled Annotationes in Pro- 
 verhia Salomonis, printed by Froben, is deserving of notice. On 
 one side is represented the Tudor rose, surrounded by the legend, — 
 
 “ Hec rosa virtutis de celo missa sereno 
 Eternu florens Regia sceptra feret.” 
 
 On either side are two angels ; above the legend are two es- 
 cutcheons, the dexter charged with the arms of St. George, and the 
 sinister with those of the City of London ; on another shield at the 
 base are the initials and merchant’s mark of the binder; and on 
 36 
 
On Ancient Bindings in the Library, 
 
 the reverse side of the cover are the arms of France and England, 
 quarterly, surmounted by a royal crown, and supported by two 
 angels. The initials of AVilliam Bill, D.D., Master of Trinity Col- 
 lege, Cambridge, and Dean of Westminster, who died in 1561, and 
 was buried in Westminster Abbey, (where there is a brass to his 
 memory,) are stamped on the covers of this volume. 
 
 On the cover of a work printed by Jehan Petit early in the six- 
 teenth century, entitled Sermones de AdventUj are represented on 
 one side the arms of Henry VIII. (France and England quarterly), 
 impaling 1 and 4, quarterly, Castile and Leon : 2 and 3, Aragon 
 and Sicily ; and on a point in base a pomegranate erect, slipped, 
 proper, for Granada. The arms are supported by two angels, and 
 surmounted by an imperial crown. On the reverse side are the 
 royal arms (France and England only) supported by the dragon 
 and greyhound ; above the shield, which is surmounted by the im- 
 perial crown, is a rose, on either side of which are two ansrels with 
 scrolls. Immediately under the arms is the portcullis, allusive to 
 the descent of the house of Tudor from the Beaufort family. 
 
 The Tudor rose, fleur-de-lis, castle, pomegranate, and other royal 
 badges, frequently occur on impressed bindings temp, sixteenth 
 century. In the example on the table the bindePs device and 
 initials, as well as the badges above mentioned, are represented. 
 
 On the cover of a small volume printed in the year 1542, is im- 
 pressed the portraiture of (Charles V., Emperor of Germany. He 
 is represented in armour, holdiug in his right hand the orb, and in 
 his left the sceptre, surrounded by the legend, — 
 
 “CABOLVS V. BOMA IMP. 5EMPEB 
 AVGVST. iTAT aVE XUI.” 
 
 Above is a shield charged with the imperial arms, (a double- 
 headed eagle displaced,) and beneath are the two columns of 
 Hercules, with the motto plus oultre. 
 
 The bindePs name in full is seldom found impressed in bind- 
 ings. There is, however, a very interesting example in this library, 
 stamped on the cover of a small volume printed by Regnault in the 
 year 1555. The following legend, viz., Johannes de wovdix 
 ANTWERP iE ME FECIT, surrounds a square-shaped compartment, 
 within which is represented a lion rampant, ensigned with an im- 
 perial crown, probably intended for the amis of Flanders. 
 
 The arms of Edward IV. are impressed on the covers of a manu- 
 script Book of Prayers. The arms, supported by two lions, are 
 surrounded by fleurs-de-lis and hearts, and round the extreme verge 
 is the representation of a hand, the first finger extended. It is not 
 in the form for the act of blessing. It may have had reference to 
 the hand on one of the sceptres of France, seeing it is associated 
 with the fleur-de-lis. 
 
 F 
 
 37 
 
THE ORGAN OF WESTMINSTER ABBEYS 
 
 AVith reference to the old organ, Mr. Hart observed that he could 
 give no particulars of any instrument previous to the great Rebel- 
 lion, for on that event nearly all the organs in England were broken 
 up and destroyed by the Parliamentary troops ; but on the restora- 
 tion of Charles IL, and the return of affairs to their old channel, 
 there was naturally a great demand for organs, or rather for organ- 
 builders. Among these was the great Bernard Smith, many of 
 whose works now remain, such as the organ at the Temple Church, 
 St. Paul’s Cathedral, and elsewhere. He was organ-builder to the 
 Royal Chapels, and was succeeded in his business by his pupil, 
 Schreider, who, from being his apprentice, became, by a not unusual 
 course, his son-in-law, and constructed the organ now in this Abbey. 
 It originally stood in the first bay from the transept, on the north 
 side of the choir, to accompany the chants, services, and anthems 
 of the daily matins and evensong. The situation was exactly over 
 the monuments of Blow, Purcell, and Croft, who were buried under 
 the organ which in their lifetime they had performed upon. From 
 a memorandum in a MS. book in the custody of the Precentor, the 
 organ seems to have been placed at the west end of the choir in 
 1730; — ‘‘The new organ built by Mr. Schreider and Mr. Jordan 
 was opened on the 1st of August, 1730, by Mr. Robinson ; the an- 
 them, Purcell’s, O give thanks” 
 
 The instrument was divided into two cases, one containing the 
 great organ and swell, the other the choir organ, and was placed 
 over the screen, as most of you may recollect. It had three rows 
 of keys, and twenty- three stops; the total number of pipes being 
 1,348. 
 
 It remained thus till 1846, when great alterations were made in 
 the arrangements of the abbey itself, including the remodelling and 
 alteration of the instrument. It was thought desirable, among other 
 improvements, to obtain, if possible, a complete view inside the 
 Abbey from end to end ; and to effect this the organ was divided, as 
 you may now see it, into three cases : one, placed on the north side 
 of the church, in the fourth arch from the opening of the transept, 
 contains the great organ ; another exactly similar is placed fronting 
 it in the corresponding arch, on the south side of the church, and 
 contains the swell; and a third, placed over the arch in the screen, 
 contains the choir organ. 
 
 At the time of this alteration several new stops w'ere added, and 
 it is now an instrument worthy of the cathedral it stands in ; the 
 richness and fulness of tone given by the diapasons of Schreider, 
 and the brilliancy of the full organ, will not easily be forgotten by 
 those who enjoy a musical taste. 
 
 By W. II. Hart, F.S.A. 
 
ON SOME DISCOVERIES IN CONNECTION WITH THE 
 ANCIENT TREASURY AT WESTMINSTER ^ 
 
 This discovery was made by Mr. Scott when prosecuting his ex- 
 amination of the remains of the Confessor^s building. It was first 
 brought to my notice upwards of eleven years ago, when I was 
 desired by that gentleman to assist him in examining what seemed 
 a heap of rubbish, but which, when trodden on, was more “springy” 
 than its external appearance justified. It was in a kind of cellar 
 close to the cloister door of the Chapter-house underneath this 
 chamber^, into which no daylight could enter, and in a part of the 
 chamber which consisted only of a narrow walled-up passage. Our 
 examination w^as then only a slight one ; but I saw enough to 
 enable me to see that the bulk of this mass of “ rubbish^^ appeared 
 to consist of documents of a public nature that had probably by 
 some accident been separated from the contents of the ancient 
 treasury, which once occupied the adjoining chamber. 
 
 I have said that the mass to which my attention was drawn by 
 Mr. Scott was at once seen to contain public documents. The 
 requisite steps were taken in the matter, and I have made an 
 official report upon the collection, of which a specimen is be- 
 fore }’OU. 
 
 In continuing his description of this portion of the building, 
 Mr. Scott says ; — 
 
 “ I presume, therefore, that this, too, was a treasury ; and T have a strong idea that 
 it then formed a part of, and that its door was the entrance to, the pyx chamber ; and it 
 is possible that, after the robbery of the chamber before alluded to, the king, finding 
 the terror of human skins offered no security, remodelled the chamber.” 
 
 It is with reference to this great robbery of the royal treasury 
 that I have to present to you a few particulars, which will, I trust, 
 be of some interest. I cannot claim for them any great novelty, 
 as they are nearly all in print, but in such print that their read- 
 ability (to the uninitiated) is not much improved. The detailed 
 account of the judicial investigations into this most daring and 
 important robbery, (a robbery of two millions of money,) which 
 has been printed in one of the Record publications, has not, 
 I believe, been turned to any further account. It will be found, 
 however, to be full of illustrations of the manners and state of 
 society of the times; and considering that w’e are now over the 
 very chamber from wdiich the treasure was taken, and that the 
 whole of the immediate locality was the scene of the various cir- 
 
 * Read in the Library of Westminster Abbey, Oct. 25, 1860. By Joseph Burtt, 
 Assistant Keeper of the Public Records. 
 
 See Mr. Scott’s paper, “Gleanings from Westminster Abbey,” printed in Gext. 
 Mag., Feb. — June, 1860, for the precise locality. 
 
 39 
 
The Ancient Treasury at Westminster, 
 
 ciimstances which are most distinctly and minutely referred to in 
 the account, I thought some of those details might be acceptable 
 to yon, as they bear closely upon the subject in hand, and the 
 event itself perhaps accounts completely for the discovery now 
 brought to your notice. 
 
 I shall make no attempt to trace the history of the ancient 
 treasury. From the earliest times, and in many countries, the 
 royal treasury has been associated with a place of worship. The 
 exchequer was held in a portion of the royal palace ; the king and 
 the abbot were generally much associated together; the palace and 
 the monastery were contiguous; a strongly built vault was at the 
 king^s service as a store-room for his jewels not in general use, his 
 plate and the cash that might not be wanted but for some great 
 occasion. At later periods we have complete inventories of every 
 article in the treasury, and most interesting they are, but there is 
 none at this date. Such was the state of things in the year 1303, 
 when Edward I. was preparing to take summary vengeance upon 
 the Scotch for their so-called rebellion against his power. He 
 probably anticipated a stubborn resistance, for he had consigned 
 to the safe keeping of his treasury a large sum of money for the 
 purpose of this war, and yet no subsidy had been granted since 
 that two years previously. On the I4th of March he left West- 
 minster ; he lingered about the neighbourhood of London for 
 a short time, and then advanced slowly northwards, reaching New- 
 castle on the 6th of May. 
 
 About the first of that month, or late in the preceding, for the 
 accounts vary a little, the treasury w^as broken into, and the trea- 
 sure carried off. From Linlithgow, on the 10th of June, the King 
 issued his first writ directing the investigations into the matter. 
 There is little reason to doubt that a large quantity of the treasure 
 — that consisting of the plate and jewels — was recovered. One 
 of the principal thieves, Richard de Podelicote, was found wdth 
 £2,200 worth in his possession. This man himself subsequently 
 confessed the whole matter, as did another. Their accounts are not 
 quite consistent, which is usually the case. Podelicote is always 
 spoken of as the great culprit, and in his confession he takes the 
 whole blame of the matter, as well as of a previous robbery of the 
 conventual plate from the refectory. I wdll read a small portion 
 of his story : — 
 
 “ He was a travelling merchant for wool, cheese, and butter, and was arrested in 
 Flanders for the King’s debts in Bruges, and there were taken from him £14 17s., for 
 w'hich he sued in the King’s Court at Westminster at the beginning of August in the 
 thirty-first year, and then he saw the condition of the refectory of the Abbey, and saw 
 the servants bringing in and out silver cups and spoons, and mazers. So he thought 
 how he might obtain some of those goods, as he was so poor on account of his loss in 
 Flanders, and so he spied about all the parts of the Abbey. And on the day when the 
 King left the place for Barnes, on the following night, as he had spied out, he found 
 a ladder at a house which was near the gate of the Palace towards the Abbey, and put 
 that ladder to a window of the chapter-house, which he opened and closed by a cord; 
 and he entered by this cord, and thence he went to the door of the refectory, and found 
 it closed with a lock, and he opened it with his knife and entered, and there he found 
 
 40 
 
The Ancient Treasury at Westminster. 
 
 six silver haiiaps in an ambry behind the door, and more than thirty silver spoons in 
 another ambry, and the mazer hanaps under a bench near together ; and he carried 
 them all away, and closed the door after him without shutting the lock. And having 
 spent the proceeds by Christmas he thought how he could rob the King’s treasury. 
 And as he knew the ways of the Abbey, and where the treasury was, and how he could 
 get there, he began to set about the robbery eight days before Christmas with the 
 tools which be provided for it, viz., two ‘ tarrers,’ great and small knives and other 
 small ‘ engines’ of iron, and so was about the breaking open during the night hours 
 of eight days before Christmas to the quiuzain of Easter, when he first had entry 
 on the night of a Wednesday, the eve of St. Mark (April 24) ; and all the day of 
 St. Mark he stayed in there and arranged what he would carry away, which he did 
 the night after, and the night after that, and the remainder he carried away with 
 him out of the gate behind the church of St. Margaret, and put it at the foot of the 
 wall beyond the gate, covering it with earth, and there were there pitchers, cups with 
 feet and covers. And also he put a great pitcher with stones and a cup in a certain 
 tomb. Besides he put three pouches full of jewels and vessels, of which one w’as 
 * hanaps’ entire and in pieces. In another a great crucifix and jew^els, a case of silver 
 with gold spoons. In the third, ‘ hanaps,’ nine dishes and saucers, and an image of 
 our Lady in silver-gilt, and two little pitchers of silver. Besides he took to the ditch 
 by the mews a pot and a cup of silver. Also he took with him spoons, saucers, spice 
 dishes of silver, a cup, rings, brooches, stones, crowns, girdles, and other jewels wdiich 
 were afterwards found with him. And he says that what he took out of the treasury 
 he took at once out of the gate near St. Margaret’s Church, and left nothing behind 
 within it.” 
 
 The other robber who confessed speaks of a number of persons 
 — two monks, two foresters, two knights, and about eight others 
 — being present at the ‘‘ debrusure.^^ His account, too, makes it 
 a week later than the other. 
 
 The affair was evidently got up between the sacrist of West- 
 minster, Richard de Podelicote, and the keeper of the Palace, with 
 the aid of their immediate servants and friends. Doubtless they 
 speculated upon comparative impunity, while the King was so far 
 away and occupied on such important matters, and they arranged 
 accordingly. An extraordinary instance of the amount of cunning 
 and foresight exercised by the robbers is shewn by the circum- 
 stance of the cemetery — the green plot enclosed by the cloisters — 
 being sown with hemp early in the spring, so that the said hemp 
 should grow high enough by the time of the robbery that they 
 might hide the treasure there, and the misdeed be unknown.^^ 
 This, if true, shews that the plot w^as deeply laid and the crime 
 long prepared for. 
 
 But the King acted with his usual vigour in the matter. Writ 
 after writ was addressed to the magistrates of London, Middlesex, 
 and Surrey ; they knew him too well not to act vigorously upon 
 them, and terror was struck into the hearts of the robbers. Jurors 
 were summoned from every district in which any portion of the 
 crime appeared to have been perpetrated, and we have (as I have 
 already said) a tolerably complete account of all that took place. 
 It must be borne in mind that the office of jurors was then to col- 
 lect evidence, and give it and support it in every way. They 
 were summoned, not as now from their ignorance, but for their 
 knowledge, of the facts. In every ward in the city, in numerous 
 hundred courts of the contiguous counties, evidence was given 
 upon the subject. Many persons, especially goldsmiths and dealers, 
 
 41 
 
The Ancient Treasury at Westminster. 
 
 appear to have been implicated through the agency of the three 
 persons named. Just before the robbery some friends of William 
 de Palais “ met in a certain house within the close of the prison of 
 the Fleet, together with a knight and four ribald persons unknown, 
 and there staid two nights eating and drinking, and in the middle 
 of the third night they went armed towards Westminster and 
 returned in the morning. This they did for two nights, and then 
 came no more. And as the treasury was broken into about that 
 time — say the jurors — they were suspected of the felony.” Much 
 of the treasure seems to have been hid in the immediate neigh- 
 bourhood of the Abbey, to be carried off at the convenience of the 
 thieves. A linen-draper at St. Giles had a large pannier full of 
 broken vessels of gold and silver sent to him, about which he 
 became so alarmed when the royal proclamation was published, 
 that he gave it to a shepherd-boy to hide in Kentish-town, where 
 it was found. Some of the treasure found its \vay across the water, 
 but was not traced, although the boatmen of the river from Lam- 
 beth to Kingston were examined. The case against the sacrist 
 and the monks appears to be that the robbery could not have 
 occurred without their knowledge, the gates of the Close must have 
 been opened to admit some of the thieves, and they had the keys 
 of them, while they refused admittance to a man who had bought 
 the herbage of the cemetery, as they knew what was hid there, and 
 that afterwards much treasure was known to have been taken to 
 the sacrisPs house, and claimed by him. I am sorry to say, too, 
 that even their antecedents were brought forward to strengthen 
 the case against them, for it is said there was ‘‘ a great suspicion 
 against the monks because four years ago an attempt was made to 
 break open the treasury in the cloister, which was enquired into, 
 and the abbot made peace with the King respecting it.” 
 
 Doubtless the criminals had their deserts, though the record does 
 not give the sentences passed upon them. 
 
 But it is high time that we returned to the collection before us, 
 and I will now attempt to shew how it is connected with the tale 
 we have heard. 
 
 In some further portions of his lecture Mr. Scott describes the 
 low vault which is outside the pyx chamber, and how by scientific 
 induction he had arrived at the conclusion that this exceedingly 
 enigmatical portion of the structure had once been a part of the 
 treasury, and had been perhaps separated from it in consequence 
 of the great robbery. I think this conclusion, arrived at induc- 
 tivel}", is fully borne out by the documentary evidence. 
 
 In a part of the records of the proceedings on account of the 
 robbery is a notice of an indenture, shewing that the keeper of the 
 royal wardrobe in the Tower had all the recovered treasure and 
 jewels handed over to him to be there kept. It was doubtless then 
 decided to make alterations in the chamber for the purpose of 
 ensuring the safety of its future contents, as the structure itself had 
 42 
 
The Ancient Treasury at Westminster. 
 
 been attacked by the robbers, and injured. When it was first re- 
 occupied does not appear, but there is evidence that it was so in 
 the year 1327, as there is an indenture in existence specifying the 
 delivery of the contents of that treasury from an outgoing treasurer. 
 The alterations made consist of the building of the wall across the 
 northern side from east to west, at the intersection of one of the 
 central columns, shutting out a window in the east wall, the door- 
 way in the Chapter-house vestibule, and the steps which gave 
 access to the dormitory. It was the southern portion only (now the 
 pyx chamber) which was subsequently used as the treasury, though 
 probably the occupation of both continued in the royal officers. 
 The collection, then, was found in what was the northern portion of 
 the ancient treasury chamber. 
 
 In conclusion, I would wish to draw attention to a few of the 
 pieces of iron-work now exhibited, which appear to me to have 
 belonged to some large leather bag, or “ forcer’’ as it was called. 
 One of these bags, characteristically ornamented, is still in the pyx 
 chamber. There are notices of their being used for the convey- 
 ance of the stolen treasure, and they are referred to as regular 
 places of deposit in Bishop Stapleton’s Calendar. 
 
 43 
 
THE MONUMENTS IX WESTMINSTER ABBEY AS 
 A MUSEUM OF SCULPTURE ^ 
 
 Westminster Abbey may justly be appreciated as a museum of 
 British sculpture, offering the earliest examples of the sculptor’s 
 art, from its erection in the thirteenth century, and continued to 
 the present day. 
 
 Although it contains some works by the hands of foreigners, yet, 
 as their skill was emphn’ed in commemoration of British sovereigns 
 and British worthies, the designation that it is a national collection, 
 or museum of national sculpture, may fairly be accepted, because, 
 although they are the productions of foreign artists, they were un- 
 cpiestionably executed in the British dominions. 
 
 In the reign of Henry III. the present edifice was begun on the 
 ruins of a former erection ; every monument it now contains com- 
 mences from this epoch. 
 
 The first statue which demands attention is that of Henry III., 
 in the chapel of Edward the Confessor, a recumbent figure cast 
 in brass, and the earliest known to have been cast in England. 
 On the adjoining tomb to this is placed the recumbent figure of 
 Queen Eleanor, wife of Edward I. Both these statues have been 
 reputed to be the works of Pietro Cavaliui, who was supposed to 
 have come here from Italy for the purpose. [But from the “Ac- 
 counts of the Executors of Queen Eleanor,” printed for the Rox- 
 burgh Club by Beriah Botfield, Esq., in 1811 , we find that the 
 statues were executed by Master William Torel, w'ho probably 
 gave the design for the whole tomb ; the marble work was ex- 
 ecuted by “ Richard de Crundale.” Mr. Hudson Turner, who 
 edited these Accounts for Mr. Botfield, conjectured that Master 
 William Torel was the same as Master William the Florentine 
 painter, employed by Henry III. Among the sculptors of the 
 Eleanor crosses were “William of Ireland” and “Alexander of 
 Abingdon.” Torel, or Tyrrell, was a common English name at that 
 period, and the sculptor of these figures* may therefore have been 
 an Englishman. Other figures nearly equally fine at Wells and 
 Lincoln, are of about the same period.] 
 
 Considering the extraordinary beauty of this statue of Queen 
 Eleanor, it would be gratifying to our natural feeling, or pride, if 
 it were authenticated to be the work of a native artist. 
 
 It merits in the highest degree every praise; the beauty of the 
 features and the elegance of the hands are not surpassed, if equalled 
 
 “ Read in the Abbey Church, Oct. 25, 1860. I>y Henry Mogford, F.S.A. 
 d4 
 
The Monuments in Westminster Abbey ^ ^c, 
 
 even, by any similar work in the Abbey. The small heads of two- 
 angels on the canopy at the head of the figure are replete with the 
 most charming sweetness and innocence of expression. 
 
 The effigies of Edmund Crouchback and of Aymer de Valence 
 follow the series in order of date. No record exists of the authors 
 of these remarkable monuments, which is to be regretted, as the 
 mutilated remains of the small . statuettes, called pleureurs, (or 
 weepers,) in the niches beneath, indicate a grand dignity and 
 breadth of treatment. 
 
 Hitherto no record or tradition naming the authors of the nume- 
 rous fine recumbent figures of our sovereigns or others has been 
 discovered, some of them wondrously enamelled, until the name of 
 Torregiano appears. He erected the magnificent tomb in the 
 chapel of Henry VII., and is the sculptor of the effigies of that 
 sovereign and his wife, and of the figures of cherubim at the 
 angles. Another of Torregiano’s works is that of Margaret, 
 Countess of Richmond, mother of Henry VII. These productions 
 of Torregiano^s skill are not of a very high order of art com- 
 paratively. The tradition that he broke the nose of Michael 
 Angelo in a fit of jealousy at the transcendent talents of the 
 greatest of modern sculptors, has certainly foundation for the 
 motive by comparison of their respective abilities. 
 
 Passing o/er the intermediate period of time until the reign of 
 James I., the first authenticated works of sculpture in the Abbey 
 appear to be those of Nathaniel Stone, a native of Exeter. Accord- 
 ing to Walpole, he was paid 4s. lOd. daily while in the King's 
 employ. The recumbent statues of Queen Elizabeth and of IMary 
 Queen of Scots are attributed to him ; it is certain that he made 
 the monuments of Spenser, Frances Hollis, and the Countess of 
 Buckingham. 
 
 Of the famous sculptors of a later date, the most important in 
 the series are Roubiliac and Rysbrach. Scheemacker is also of 
 the epoch, although inferior to the two preceding artists. 
 
 Roubiliac's grandest works are in the Abbey. The monuments 
 of his skill here are those of Handel, his last work, and of the 
 Duke of Argyle in Poets' Corner, that of Sir Peter Warren in the 
 north transept, and the celebrated one in St. John's Chapel to Mr. 
 and Mrs. Nightingale. 
 
 All the statues to these monuments are worthy of being rigidly 
 studied, and the result will surely tend to a very high estimation of 
 this artist's merits. 
 
 The Nightingale monument, as it is usually called, demands an 
 inquiry of another nature. Does not the embodying or manifesta- 
 tion of the awfulness of death in the form of a human skeleton 
 enveloped in drapery, border on absurdity, or even profaneness? 
 It is both an aesthetic question and one of higher feeling, of reli- 
 gious awe. 
 
 Rysbrach may be well studied in the two monuments in the 
 
 45 
 
 G 
 
The Monuments in Westminster Abbey 
 
 nave, at the entrance of the choir, of Sir Isaac Newton and of the 
 second Earl of Stanhope. 
 
 The statue of Shakespeare, in Poets^ Corner, is a fatourable 
 specimen by Scheemacker. 
 
 The names of other sculptors here comprise a series of great ex- 
 tent, mostly native. A work by Grinling Gibbons, in the north 
 aisle of the nave, is not worthy of his reputation. Quellinus and 
 Coysevox indicate a foreign origin, and Hubert le Sceur, who made 
 the equestrian statue at Charing-cross of Charles I., has also a spe- 
 cimen of his art in the Abbey. 
 
 To come down to our own time, there are fine works by the- 
 familiar names of Bacon, Flaxman, Chantrey, Nollekens, Westma- 
 cott. Banks, and others. Of living sculptors of distinguished merit 
 may be cited Baily, Gibson, Calder Marshall, and several more. 
 
 The portrait statues are doubly interesting, first, because they 
 represent the features of the individuals, and secondly, the accu- 
 racy of the costume of the times. The features are mostly well 
 preserved, excepting those only of the Crusaders and of the Countess 
 of Lancaster, in the choir, which have much suffered. Some few 
 of the portrait statues are habited in the Roman costume of former 
 times. In future ages, nevertheless, antiquaries will be sorely 
 puzzled at the fanciful envelopes given by the sculptors of our 
 days, as exemplified in the statue of the late Sir Robert Peel, by 
 Gibson of Rome. 
 
 Among the sculptured statues forming the decoration or exem- 
 plification of the virtues of the several individuals, there will be 
 seen an abundance of angels and cherubs ; every virtue is personi- 
 fied in marble to excess. Figures of Fame are blowing trumpets. 
 In this Christian church there are statues of Minerva, Neptune, 
 Hercules, with other pagan deities ; charity children are not 
 omitted ; and to complete the variety, there are not wanting Ne- 
 groes and Red Indians. There are here also a great number of 
 statues and statuettes, either of attendants, children of the deceased, 
 saints or other, as weepers over the deceased. 
 
 Nor are animals forgotten ; a couple of lions by Wilton are on 
 the monument of General Wolfe. Two magnificent specimens of 
 this king of animals by Flaxman, on the monument to the memory 
 of Captain Montague, deserve the highest encomium ; it is at the . 
 west end of the north aisle. 
 
 The sculptures which may be considered as adjuncts to the archi- - 
 tecture are very numerous, and consist of a considerable number of. 
 saints in niches or on brackets. Of these, worthy of special notice, 
 are two statues now existing in the chapter-house, representing the ‘ 
 Annunciation ; they are of a very simple and of archaic character, 
 — probably their execution dates from the erection of this part of 
 the Abbey. There are equally in the upper spandrils of the north 
 transept angels of grand charaeter, nearly life size. Casts have 
 been lately taken of these, which may be seen to advantage where ^ 
 4fi 
 
as a JIuseu?n of Sculpture, 
 
 they are for the present placed, in the triforium, by those who are 
 disposed to perambulate this part of the sacred edifice. Here will 
 be found many singular and interesting sculptured corbels. 
 
 The chapel of Henry VII. alone contains more than one hundred 
 statues of saints in niches, and busts of angels on the cornice that 
 runs round the chapel and part of the side aisles ; the carvings to 
 the seats are of great variety and excellence in execution. Some 
 of these carvings represent sacred subjects, whilst others are of 
 a profane character. 
 
 The chantry enclosing the tomb of Henry V. is also profusely 
 decorated with statues and statuettes in niches, as well as with 
 bassi relievi. One is said to represent the coronation of the sove- 
 reign. The whole are deeply imbued with a good feeling for 
 fine art. 
 
 [Of about the same date are the sculptures in the frieze of the 
 screen that separates the chapel of St. Edward from the choir, and 
 which represent in fourteen compartments the principal occurrences 
 of the Confessor^s life. The figures of this composition are of small 
 size, very simple in execution.] 
 
 To resume, and give some idea of the immense amount of the 
 wealth of sculptural art herein contained, it may be briefly stated 
 that the Abbey possesses sixty-two recumbent statues of life size ; 
 several of these are of bronze, and have been highly gilt or richly 
 enamelled, the remains of this decoration being still visible. There 
 are forty-six portrait statues, life size or colossal, six sitting and 
 six kneeling portrait statues, and ninety-three busts or medallion 
 portraits. 
 
 Of allegorical statues, already alluded to, there are 204, and 
 beyond this vast amount an almost unlimited number of bassi and 
 alti-relievi corbels and spandrils richly sculptured of all. epochs, 
 besides the multitude of heraldic representations of lions, dogs, 
 griffins, and other animals, either natural or imaginative. 
 
 I trust it will be admitted that we possess in this magnificent 
 Abbey a museum of sculpture eminently national, unequalled in 
 extent in any other place or country, of surpassing beauty, and of 
 the highest artistic excellence. 
 
 The study of this immense collection will afford intense gratifi- 
 cation to the historian, the antiquary, the archseologist, and the 
 lover of fine art. The public feeling is becoming daily more 
 awakened to the treasures we possess, and to the determination to 
 preserve them to our posterity. 
 
 47 
 
ON THE ORDER OF THE BATH^ 
 
 Mr. Hunter remarked that the history of the institution of the 
 Order of the Bath may be divided into three periods : the first 
 endinpj with the coronation of King Charles II., when for the last 
 time Knights of the Bath were made according to the ancient 
 forms ; the second commencing from the revival of the Order by 
 His Majesty King George L, on the 18th of May, 1725; and the 
 third, on its re-organization and enlargement by His Royal High- 
 ness the Prince Regent, on the 2nd of January, 1815, in the reign 
 of His Majesty, George III. In the first period it was only cus- 
 tomary to make Knights of the Bath at the coronations of sove- 
 reigns or their queens-consort, or on the creation of the Prince of 
 Wales or the Duke of York. There was a creation of knights on 
 the marriage of the Duke of York in 1477 ; and again in 1501, on 
 the marriage of the Prince of Wales. 
 
 The earliest mention since the Conquest of the ceremony of 
 bathing at the creation of a knight appears to be that of Geoffrey, 
 son of Fulk, Count of Anjou, who on being contracted to marry 
 the daughter of King Henry I., was knighted by that monarch at 
 Rouen ; and it is evident by the language of the chronicler that 
 the solemnities then observed were usual in all similar cases. 
 
 The first name on the list having pretensions to being a chrono- 
 logical one, is Sir Thomas Esturmy, who was created on the 17th 
 of July, 1204; after which, at different periods, sometimes upwards 
 of twenty, at others more than fifty or sixty, were summoned to 
 receive the honour. The ceremony at that time was no small un- 
 dertaking. It is fully described by Anstis ; and in Bysshe's edition 
 of Upton there is a series of engravings of the ceremony copied 
 from original drawings, which Anstis conjectured to have been 
 made in the reign of King Edward IV. or King Henry VII. 
 
 Upon the accession of Queen Mary a new form was observed, 
 and Letters Patent were issued on the 17th of October, 1553, ap- 
 pointing Henry Earl of Arundel to exercise everything on behalf 
 of Her Majesty, to make such persons knights as shall be named 
 by her, so as not to exceed the number of threescore. 
 
 Queen Elizabeth followed the example of her predecessor, and 
 deputed the Earl of Arundel, then Lord Steward of the Household, 
 to confer knighthood upon so many as she should name, so as not 
 to exceed thirty. King James appointed the large number of 
 sixty-two to be made knights at his coronation. Fifty-nine were 
 appointed at the coronation of Charles I. ; and on the return of 
 Charles II., in May, 1660, he was attended by Knights of the 
 Bath and their Esquires. At his coronation he appointed sixty- 
 
 “ Read in King Henry the Seventh’s Chapel, Oct. 25, 1860. By Mr. John Hunter# 
 48 
 
f 
 
 On the Order of the Bath, 
 
 eight persons to be created. This creation was the last until the 
 ! Order was newly arranged by George I. in 1725. 
 
 The first notice of any insignia or badge being worn round the 
 neck of a Knight of the Bath is in 1614. John Lord Harrington 
 of Exton, who received that dignity at the coronation of James I., 
 died in 1613 ; and in the following year the sermon preached at 
 his funeral was published, illustrated by an engraving of the jewel 
 worn by the deceased nobleman as a Knight of the Bath. 
 
 One of the knights made at the coronation of Charles II. was Sir 
 Edward Walpole, (grandfather of Sir Robert Walpole, first Earl of 
 Orford,) on whose badge the present motto occurs. 
 
 Although the badge was directed to be worn from the neck, it 
 would appear that the Knights of the Bath imitated the Knights 
 of the Garter by wearing it under the arm, as they are represented 
 in some portraits of the time with the riband over the right 
 shoulder, such persons having been made knights at the coronation 
 of King Charles I. in 1625, or King Charles II. in 1661. 
 
 The second period of the Order was when, by the advice of Sir 
 Robert Walpole, it was appointed there should be a Great-Master 
 and thirty-six Knights, the first Great-Master being John Duke of 
 Montague; and. 
 
 The third period of the Order was from its extension to three 
 classes, on the 2nd of January, 1815, which was rendered necessary 
 in consequence of the conclusion of the protracted but glorious war 
 in 1814. 
 
 On the 14th of April, 1847, Her Majesty was pleased to enlarge 
 the Order, and to direct that it should consist of the Sovereign and 
 a Great-Master, and of 952 Companions or Members, to be divided 
 . into three classes. The Order was again enlarged on the 31st of 
 
 January, 1859, it being then ordained that the total number of 
 
 Companions should be 985. The first class to consist of seventy- 
 j five members, to be designated Knights Grand Cross ; the second 
 
 i class to consist of 160, styled Knights Commanders; and the third 
 
 class of 750, to be designated Companions of the Order. 
 
 49 
 
 I 
 
WORKS ON 
 
 Sl^pbiiFtial ^rrl^ifprfuFP enb 
 ^pr|ffo(ogg, 
 
 PUBLISHED BY , 
 
 JOHN HENRY and JAMES PARKER, 
 
 OXFORD; AND 3TT, STRAXD, LONDON. 
 
 ARCHITECTURAL MANUAL. 
 
 AN INTRODIJCTION TO THE STUDY OE 
 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE. 
 
 By John Henry Parker, F.S.A. Second Edition, Revised and 
 
 Enlarged, with 170 Illustrations, and a Glossarial Index. 
 
 Ecap. 8vo., cloth lettered, price 5s. 
 
 “ The attention which of late years has been given to Gothic Architecture, 
 especially by men who are not professional architects, renders necessary 
 some sure and safe guide to the study of the art. Such a hook is that by 
 Mr. Parker, a second edition of which has just made its appearance. The 
 new matter and illustrations, incorporated with the old, combine to make 
 it the most comprehensive and practically useful treatise upon the subject 
 which can be placed in the hands of any one desirous of being taught the 
 principles of Gothic structure. It was written, as the author says, not so 
 much ‘for architects as for their employers, the gentry and clergy of 
 England.’ '*—Art Journal. 
 
 THE GLOSSARY OF ARCHITECTURE. 
 
 A Glossary of Terms used in GRECIAN, ROMAN, ITALIAN, 
 and GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE. Exemplified by upwards 
 of Eighteen Hundred Illustrations, drawn from the best ex- 
 amples. Fifth edition, 3 vols. 8vo., cloth, gilt tops, H. 10s. 
 
 A VOCABULARY OF GOTHIC ARCHITECTURAL 
 TERMS, in French and English, and English and French, 
 with references to the Engravings in the English Glossary. 
 8vo., Is. 
 
 ■ ■■■ - in German and English, and English and German. 
 
 8vo., is. 
 
 961-5 
 
4 
 
 DOMESTIC ARCHITECTURE. 
 
 iBomesStic 3lic!)ttfct«ie 
 
 OF THE 
 
 iMttJlilf 
 
 VoL. I. — FROM WILLIAM I. TO EDWARD I. (or the 
 Norman and Early English Styles). 8vo., 21^. 
 
 VoL. II.— FROM EDWARD I. TO RICHARD II. (the Ed- 
 wardian Period, or the Decorated Style). 8vo., 21s. 
 
 VoL. III.— FROM RICHARD II. TO HENRY VIIL, in Two 
 Part& 8 VO., 1/. lOs. 
 
 With numerous Illustrations of Existing Remmns 
 from Original Drawings. 
 
 The Work complete, with 4(X) Engravings and a General Index, 
 4 voU. 8i’0., 3/. 12^. 
 
 “ Nothing could be more opportune than its completion while the question 
 of ‘ Classic’ and ‘ Gothic’ is still pending with regard to the Foreign Office. 
 What is the true national architecture of England, and of what is it capable ! 
 These volumes contain e'^idence which might open the eyes of Lord Pal- 
 merston himself. They might even do something to relieve that lower 
 depth of denseness, which is represented by Mr. Tite and Mr. Coningham. 
 
 “ The whole history, as trac»'d out by Mr. Parker, shews the absurdity of 
 the vulgar notion that Gothic is in some special way an ecclesiastical style. 
 The truth is that the mediaeval architects, like the architects of every other 
 good period, Christian or heathen, built their religious buildings in exactly 
 the same st5’le as their secular ones. They built both in the only style they 
 knew of, at least the only one they could work in— namely, the style of 
 their own day. A church, a house, a castle, of the same date, are very 
 different things in outline and proportion— that is the natural result of 
 their several purposes ; but in mere style, in mere architectural forms, 
 they are exactly the same. No point can be more important to insist on 
 just now than this, and Mr. Parker’s book comes very opportunely to set 
 it forth at length. 
 
 “It is a work of thorough research and first-rate authority on a deeply 
 interesting and important subject.”— Review, Nov. 26, 1859. 
 
ARCHITECTURAL TOPOGRAPHY. 
 
 5 
 
 APPENDIX TO RICKMAN’S GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE, 
 
 OR, AX ARCHITECTURAL ACCOUXT 
 OE EVERY CHURCH IX 
 
 Bedfordshire, 2s. Qd. 
 Berkshire, 2s. Qd. 
 Buckinghamshire, 2s. Qd. 
 
 Cambridgeshire, 4s. 
 Huntingdonshire, 2s. 6d. 
 Oxfordshire, 2s. Gd. 
 
 Suffolk, with Engravings^ 7s. Qd. 
 
 Its Dedication, — Supposed date of Erection or Alteration, — Ob- 
 jects of Interest in or near, — Notices of Fonts, — Glass, Furniture, 
 — and other details. — Also Lists of Dated Examples, Works re- 
 lating to the County, &c. 
 
 N.B. Each Church has been personally surveyed for the occasion 
 by some competent antiquary. 
 
 THE MEDIEVAL ARCHITECTURE OF CHESTER. 
 
 By John Heney Paekee, F.S.A. With an Historical Intro- 
 • duction by the Rev. Feancis Geosvenoe. Illustrated by 
 Eugraviiigs by J. H. Le Keux, O. Jewitt, &c. 8vo., cloth, 5s. 
 
 ARCHITECTURAL XOTICES of the CHURCHES 
 
 in the ARCHDEACONRY of NORTHAMPTON. With 
 numerous Illustrations on Wood and Steel. Royal 8vo., cloth, 
 ll. Is. 
 
 DESCRIPTIVE XOTICES OF SOME OF THE 
 ANCIENT PAROCHIAL & COLLEGIATE CHURCHES 
 of SCOTLAND, with Woodcuts by O. Jewitt. 8vo., os. 
 
 THE ARCHITECTURAL HISTORY OF 
 
 CANTERBURY CATHEDRAL. By Professor Willis, 
 M.A., F.R.S., &c. 8vo., 52 Woodcuts, many of them coloured, 65. 
 
 By the same Author. 
 
 THE ARCHITECTURAL HISTORY OF 
 
 WINCHESTER CATHEDRAL. 8vo., with W'oodcuts and 
 Plan, 5s. 
 
 THE ARCHITECTURAL HISTORY OF 
 
 YORK CATHEDRAL. With Woodcuts and Plan, 26-. Qd. 
 
 THE SCULPTURES OF WELLS CATHEDRAL. 
 
 With an Appendix on the Sculptures of other Mediaeval 
 Churches in England. By C. R. Cockerell, Esq., Pro- 
 fessor, R.A. 4to., with numerous Illustrations, 21s. 
 
6 
 
 WORKING DRAWINGS. 
 
 WORKING DRAWINGS OF CHURCHES, WITH VIEWS, 
 ELEVATIONS, SECTIONS. AND DETAILS. 
 
 Wakmixgton CnuRcn. Royal folio, cloth, IO5. ^ d . 
 
 A ftne thirteenth century Church. About 115 feet by 47. 
 
 Saint Leonard’s, Kirkstead. Small folio, bs. 
 
 A small Church in the Early English style. 42 feet by 19. 
 
 Minster Lovell CnuRcn. Folio, 5s. 
 
 A very elegant specimen of the Perpendicular style. To hold 350 persons. 
 
 Littlemore Church. Second EditioUy with the designs 
 of the painted Glass Windows. Folio, 5s. 
 
 A small modern Church, in the Early English style. Size, 60 feet by 65, and 
 40 feet high. Cost 8007. Holds 210 persons. 
 
 SnoTTESBROKE Church. Folio, 3s. bd. 
 
 A good and pure specimen of the Decorated style. 
 
 WiLCOTE Church. Folio, 3s. 6d. 
 
 a small Church in the Decorated style. Size, 50 feet by 20. 
 Estimated cost, 3647. Holds 160 persons. 
 
 St. Bartholomew’s Chapel, Oxford. Folio, 3s. 6d. 
 
 A small Chapel in the Early Perpendicular style. Size, 24 feet by 16. 
 Estimated cost, 2287. Holds 90 persons. 
 
 Strixton Church. Folio, 5s. 
 
 A small Church in the Early English style. Calculated for 200 persons ; 
 to cost about 8007. 
 
 Oxford Burial-Ground Chapels. Folio, 10s. 6d. 
 
 1. Norman. 2. Early English. 3. Decorated. 
 
 Separately, each 5s. 
 
 PUBLISHED BY THE OXFORD ARCHITECTURAL SOCIETY. 
 
 Sixpence per Sheet. 
 
 Open Seats. 
 
 1. Headington. 
 
 2. Haseley. 
 
 3. Steeple Aston. 
 
 4. Stanton Harcourt, Ensham, 
 
 &c. 
 
 5. Littlemore. 
 
 Patterns of Bench Ends. 
 
 6. Steeple Aston. Sheet 1. 
 
 7. Ditto. Sheet 2. 
 
 Oak Stalls. 
 
 8. Beauchamp Chapel. 
 
 9. Talland, Beverley, &c. 
 
 Fonts. 
 
 10. Heckington, {Decorated). 
 
 11. Hevienden, {Normaii). 
 
 Reredos. 
 
 12. St. Michael’s, Oxford. 
 
 Window Tracery. 
 
 13. Rickman’s Specimens. 
 
 Sheet 1. 
 
 14. Ditto. Sheet 2. 
 
 Pulpits. 
 
 15. Wolvercot, {Perpendicular). 
 
 16. Beaulieu, {Decorated). 
 
 17. St. Giles’, Oxford, {Deco- 
 rated) ; with Coombe, 
 {Perpendicular). 
 
 Screens. 
 
 18. Dorchester and Stanton 
 Harcourt. 
 
AECHjEOLOQICAL works. 
 
 1 
 
 THE TllACT HE INYE^^TIONE SAHCTHi 
 CRUCIS NOSTRiE IN MONTE ACUTO ; ET DE 
 DUCTIONE EJUSDEM APUD WALTHAM,” now first 
 printed from the Manuscript in the British Museum, with In- 
 troduction and Notes by William Stubbs, M.A., Vicar of 
 Navestock, late Fellow of Trinity College, Oxford. Royal 8vo., 
 (only 100 copies printed), price 5s. \ Demy 8vo., 3s. Qd. 
 
 ARCHEOLOGICAL JOURNAL. With numerous 
 
 Illustrations. 5 vols. 8vo., with General Index. Cloth, 
 
 Nos. 1 — 20, each 2s. Qd, 
 
 PROCEEDINGS OE THE ARCHEOLOGICAL 
 
 INSTITUTE AT WINCHESTER, 1815. With numerous 
 illustrations. 10s. 6d. 
 
 PROCEEDINGS AT NORAYICH. 1847. 8vo. 
 
 cloth, 10s. 6d. 
 
 A BOOK of OENAMENTAL GLAZINO QUAE- 
 
 RIES, collected and arranged from Ancient Examples. By 
 Augustus Wollaston Franks, B.A. With 112 Coloured 
 Examples. 8vo., 16s. 
 
 SPECIMENS OF CHURCH PLATE, SEPUL- 
 
 CHRAL CROSSES, &c. 4to., cloth lettered, 1/. Is. 
 
 FAIRFORD GRAVES. A Record of Researches 
 
 in an Anglo-Saxon Burial-place in Gloucestershire. By W. 
 M. Wylie, F.S.A. 4to., 10s. 6d. 
 
 A MANUAL for the STUDY of SEPULCHRAL 
 
 SLABS and CROSSES of the MIDDLE AGES. By the 
 Rev. Edward L. Cutts, B.A. 8vo., illustrated by upwards 
 of 300 Engravings. 6s. 
 
 AN ESSAY ON THE ORIGIN AND 
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF WINDOW TRACERY IN ENG- 
 LAND. Illustrated by nearly 400 Examples. By Edward A. 
 Freeman, M.A., late Fellow of Tnnity College, Oxford. 8vo. 
 cloth, 12s. 
 
 THE PRIMEVAL ANTIQUITIES of ENGLAND 
 
 AND DENMARK COMPARED. By J. J. A. Worsaae. 
 Translated and applied to the illustration of similar remains in 
 England, by W. J. Thoms, F.S. A., &c. With numerous illus- 
 trations. 8vo. 5s. 
 
ebc 6cnt(cmau’s Hlacia^inc. 
 
 Senes — i>ublished monthlyj price 2s. 6d. 
 
 With the year of our Lord lSo9, Sylranns Urban closed his 207th i 
 volume, and the 12Sth year of his literary existence. This is a length of 
 days that, so far as he knows, has never before been attained by a Jour- 
 nalist ; but he ventures to affirm, with thankfulness as well as some degree 
 of self-complacency, that he is still in a green old age, and that to his 
 thinking the time is yet very distant when, to borrow the words of one of 
 his earliest and most valued friends, it may be said of him — “ Superfluous 
 lags the veteran on the stage.” 
 
 The times, it is readily allowed, have greatly changed since Sylvanus 
 Urban first solicited public attention, but it may be fairly doubted whether 
 the tastes and habits of thought of the educated classes to whom he ad- 
 dresses himself have changed in a like d^ree. Hence he does not fear 
 that History and Antiquities, in their widest sense, can ever become un- | 
 palatable to them, but, on the contrary, he is glad to mark an increased 
 avidity in pursuing such studies. This is a state of things that he thinks he 
 may claim a considerable share in bringing about, and the steady progress 
 of which he is desirous of forwarding by all available means. He alludes to 
 the growing appreciation of the Past, as the key to the understanding of 
 the Present, and (in a sense) of the Future, as testified by the formation of 
 Archjeolc^cal and Literary Societies, which have already achieved much 
 good, and may do still more ; and as a means to that end, he devotes a 
 portion of his pages every month, tmder the title of “ Antiquarian and 
 Literary Intellugencer,” to a record of their progress. 
 
 Sylranus Urban therefore ventures to surest to the Coimcils of such 
 Societies, that if brief reports of their proceedings and publications are 
 systematically supplied to the Gentleman’s Magazine, where they will be 
 always highly acceptable, an interchange of knowledge and good offices 
 may thus be established between learned bodies in the most distant parts 
 of the Empire — an interchange that does not now exist, but the want of 
 which few will be found to deny. 
 
 It has ever been the desire of Sylranus Urban to see his Correspond- 
 ence a leading feature in his pages, and he has had the gratification of 
 reckoning many of the most erudite men of the time as his fellow- workers, 
 who have, through him, conveyed an invaluable amount of knowledge to 
 the world. He invites those of the present day to imitate them. Another 
 important feature has been, and will be, the Obituary, to the completeness 
 of which he requests friends or relatives to contribute by communicating 
 fitting notices of eminent persons daily removed by the hand of death from 
 among us. He believes that he shall not be disappointed in the extent of 
 this friendly co-operation, but that, on the contrary, the increasing number 
 of his contributors will render the motto that he has so long borne more 
 than ever applicable : — E pluribus Unutju” 
 
 All Communications to be addressed to MR. UrbaX, 
 377, StraXD, LoXDOXy W.C, 
 

 
GETTY RESEARCH INSTITUTE 
 
 3 3125 01454 6655