Kar" INTRODUCTION. The Society of Antiquaries, in prosecution of their design of publishing vUrate measures of all the principal Ecclesiastical Buildings of England, do now present f the Public the Plans, Elevations, and Sections, of the Cathedral Church of Exeter ; engraved y n measured drawings ynade by their orders by Mr. John Carter, and accompanied by his (}nnt of such things as appeared to him worthy of remark, in the course of his survey of that elft building. As the wish of the Council is to render the information relative to t/wject. as complete as pos¬ sible, they have prefxed to Mr. Carter’s account, a very curious tract bjeir late President, Bishop Lyttelton; who, while Dean of Exeter, extracted from the Rolls of the Ihedral, every circumstance which could tend to f x the dates of the erection of the different parts the. Cathedral. The Council having entrusted to Sir Henry Englefeld, Bart, aijoseph Windham, Esq. the superintendence of this work, and the arrangement of these valualmaterials, some few Obser¬ vations on Bishop Lyttelton’s tract, and on the Architecture of tGathedral, have been added by Sir Henry Englfie Id. SOME REMARKS ORIGINAL FOUNDATION AND CONSTRUCTION OF THE PRESENT FABRIC OF EXETER CATHEDRAL. BY C. LYTTELTON, 1 754. We learn from Bishop Godwin, in his Treatise de Prassulibus,* that King Athelstan, anno Christi 922, founded a Benedictine monastery at Exeter, on the spot which is now the eastern part of the cathedral, to the honour of St. Mary and St. Peter; and that during the Danish invasions all the monks fled, and the monastery lay quite deserted until the reign of King Edgar; but this prince repaired it, and also replenished it with monks, over whom he placed Abbot Tideman, who afterwards became Bishop of Crediton. He farther informs us, that anno 1003, Swein, King of Denmark, having taken this city by siege, burnt it, together with the monastery; both which were soon after rebuilt by King Canute, and the monastery restored to the abbot, with all the lands, &c. with which it had been endowed; and this, he saith, was confirmed by an authentic charter, dated anno 1019.+ That about thirty years after, King Edward the Confessor came to Exeter, and transferred the episcopal chair from Crediton to that city, and made Leofric the first bishop; which Leofric demolished some adjoining con¬ vents, viz. a nunnery, where is now the dean’s house, and another convent, but where situated is unknown; the better to make room for the canons of his new cathedral church. That anno 1112, Bishop Warlewast began to enlarge his cathedral, which at that time consisted only of what is now St. Mary’s chapel, “ qua tunc temporis “ amplior non erat quam capellaB. Maria;” and likewise laid the foundation of the present choir, which when finished became the nave or body of the cathedral, the old church being turned into the choir; “ veteriecclcsia “ in chorum conversa.” That near two hundred years after, Bishop Quivil began the present nave; which Bishop Grandison completed, by adding two arches to the west end, and building the west front; enriching the outside with statues, &c. as they appear at this day; and, lastly, vaulting the whole church with ashler stone. Such is the history of this cathedral as related by Godwin; who having been both sub-dean and canon-resi¬ dentiary thereof, ought to be esteemed a good authority; but upon a strict examination, we shall find that this account of the present fabric is very imperfect, and in some respects not agreeable to truth. First I must observe, that what he affirms of St. Mary’s chapel having been the old Saxon cathedral, would hardly be allowed, did the style in which it is built correspond with that early age, if we consider only the smallness of its dimensions; but when it appears also in eveiy part to be strictly Gothic, which was a very different style of architecture from the Saxon, his opinion in this point deserves no regard; and that such was his opinion I am fully persuaded, though the words above cited, viz. qua time teinporis amplior non crcit quam capclla B. Maria, seem to imply no more, than that the old Saxon church was no bigger, or took up no greater a space of ground than the area of the present St. Mary’s chapel; for in a few lines after he adds, “ Hinc patet ecclesia hujus struc- “ turam ab Athdstano rege cceptam, quingentesimo post anno vix perfectam;” that the present fabric, begun by Athelstan, was scarcely completed in a course of five hundred years. Now, as he expressly says that the choir * Richardson's edit. p. 3 9 6, et seq. + Dugd. Monast. Tom. I. p. 22s. 2 was begun by Bishop Warlewast, (temp. Henry I.) and the nave finished by Bishop Grandison, (temp. Edw. III.) St. Mary's chapel alone must be of King Athelstan’s founding, if any part be so ancient; but, in fact, not a single stone of it was erected either by that prince or King Canute; for the style of the pillars, arches, windows, &c. evidently demonstrates that it is some ages posterior to the Norman conquest; and yet all our writers who describe this church, from Godwin down to Stukeley,* call St. Mary’s chapel the Saxon cathedral, and affirm that the whole church was five hundred years in building, on a supposition that the chapel abovesaid was the work of King Athelstan; Godwin forgetting, when he Jirst broached this error,+ what he had just before men¬ tioned, viz. that the whole fabric was burnt down in the general conflagration of the city, by Swein, King of Denmark, anno 1003. That Bishop Warlewast began the present choir, I much doubt, the arches being all elliptic, the pillars by no means thick and clumsy, nor their capitals hatched dauncette-wise; circumstances which occur in all buildings of that age, as Christ church cathedral in Oxford, Tewkesbury abbey church, &c. The light Gothic, or Saracen style (as the great Sir Christopher Wren terms it, j) not prevailing either here, or in other parts of Europe adjoining to England, till about the time of our King Henry II, and even then we find the old Saxon mode frequently intermingled with the Gothic. Nor can I easily believe that the Saxon cathedral was of such small dimensions as to cover no greater a spot of ground than that on which St. Mary’s chapel now stands, being in length but fifty-eight feet, and in breadth not quite twenty-seven. I rather think that it ex¬ tended to the present towers, and that these flanked the great western door, like those at the Priory church of Worksop in Nottinghamshire, and at Hereford and Chichester cathedrals. What greatly strengthens my con¬ jecture, is the very antique style of architecture which prevails in both these towers; low and squat in their form, very thick and massive in their walls, the windows originally small and round, though all, except one, long ago stopped up, and larger broke out; the outside also of each tower decorated with ornamental round arched work, the arches intersecting each other, much resembling the tower of St. James’s church at the Devizes, and that of Iffley near Oxford, both undoubtedly Saxon buildings. Whoever views this church from the battle¬ ments of either of the towers, will plainly discover that the nave and choir were built up against the sides of the towers; consequently the latter must be of a prior date. The question then is, at what time the present fabric was first begun? I have before remarked, that the style of architecture which prevails throughout the choir, will by no means agree with the age of King Henry I. when Bishop Warlewast is said to have begun it. As we have no authority for this but Godwin’s bare assertion, let us hear what Leland saith on tliis point, who wrote his Itinerary near fourscore years before Godwin flourished, and therefore his testimony ought to carry greater weight with it. Now Leland tells us, “ that this cathedral church remained from the time of Leofric, the first “ bishop of Exeter, after one rate, to the time of Bishop Ouivil, who fust began the cathedral church now stand- “ ing in Exeter, and levied a subsidy on his clergy to the setting forward the work.”$ Here Leland positively ascribes the foundation of the present fabric to Bishop Ouivil, which no doubt he had from the information of some of the members of the chapter, when he surveyed the church in person; nevertheless it appears from the following extracts, out of the original fabric rolls remaining among the dean and chapter’s muniments, that he was not the first founder either of the present choir or nave, though Godwin roundly affirms that this bishop fundamenta jecit navis ecclesia quam ad mm locum protendit ubi nunc est baptisterium.” First, in the roll entitled, “ Rotidus Solucionum, Reddituum, be. de anno 1308, the sum of 16.?. Ad. is charged “ in obitu epi. Petri “ primifundatoris novi opens.” Here Bishop Quivil is styled founder of the new work; which surely does not imply founder of the church, but a part of the fabric. Had he pulled down the old church, and began to erect a new one, he would most certainly have been styled in this record, fimdatoris ecclesia, and not merely novi * Itinerar. Curios, p. 150. Isaac's Memor. ofExon. p, + Since my wiring these sheets, I have met with a ven IT i- .r . !ry scarce printed tract, entitled, a Catalog of the Bishops of Excester, with the Description of the Anriquitie and first FoundauonofdteCathedntl Church of the same. Collected by John Vowell, alias Hooker, Gentleman. Imprinted at London, „ M . By which I End, that Hooker, and not Godwin, was the first who broached this error, and the latter borrowed most of what he relates of the first foundation of this fabric, from the former. • J Widmores History of Westminster Abbey, p. 45. $ Lcl. Itinerar. Vol. III. p. 52. 3 operis. Again, in the fabric roll dated 1284, which was but the fourth year of Bishop Quivil’s pontificate, a sum is charged for the work of two carpenters, “ operantium circa ostium quod ducit versus thesaurarium in “ choro .” If this be the same door which now leads from the north aile behind the choir to the treasurer’s house, and great reason there is to think it is, it may fairly be concluded, that the present choir was not built by Quivil, for it must have taken up a longer space of time than four years to have erected such a building: and, by the way, it should seem that this part of the church being styled the choir, so early as the year 1284, part of the present nave must have been erected earlier than Bishop Quivil’s time; and, consequently, St. Mary’s chapel did not at that time serve for the choir, and the present choir for the nave. If Quivil, therefore, did not build the choir, as Leland asserts, nor William Warlewast, as Godwin relates, to whom are we to ascribe its origin? On this intricate question, I can venture only a conjecture. Hooker, (who was chamberlain of Exeter temp. Eliz. R.) a man well skilled in history and antiquity, informs us that King Stephen, when he besieged this city, spoiled and ransacked the cathedral, and much defaced the fabric. And this is confirmed by a grant of the said king, recited in a vellum ledger, compiled temp. Henry VI. among the dean and chapter’s muniments (at page 34,) whereby the said king grants to the church of St. Peter, in Exon, a yearly rent of seven pounds ten shillings, issuing out of his manor of Colyton, in Devon, together with the profits of the hundred of “ Colyton, pro restauracione clampnorum quefaceram eidem ecclesie in ohsidione." May we not then justly suppose that Bishop Chichester, who died anno 1150, the 15th Steph. and lies buried in the choir on the south side the great altar, began to re-edify the choir, which was carried on by Bishop Robert Warlewast, his immediate successor, who, we are told by Hooker, employed all his wealth, substance, and live¬ lihood therein;* and the same writer celebrates Barthol. Iscanus and John the Chantor, succeeding bishops of this see, as great benefactors to the work; and farther declares, that Bishop Marshal, who became Bishop of Exeter anno 1194, (5th John,) finished the whole. + If this conjecture be allowed, the great objection against the jirst Bishop Warlewast’s being the founder of the choir, arising from the Gothic style in which it is built, totally different from that which universally prevailed in England (temp. Henry I.) when this William Warlewast sat in the see of Exeter, entirely vanishes; for about the close of King Stephen’s reign, and the following one of King Henry II. the Gothic architecture was introduced, in the room of the clumsy Saxon mode of building, + It must indeed be owned, that Hooker, as well as Godwin, ascribe the Jirst enlarging of the cathedral, (to use his own words,) to the aforesaid Bishop William Warlewast; but as these writers were contemporary, they seem plainly to have copied one from the other in this particular, though not in all; for Hooker affirms, that Bishop Chichester was a special benefactor to the fabric of his new-begun church, wherein he bestowed the better part of his livelihood; and adds, “ that he was buried on the south side of the cathedral church, which is now the “ ladies chapel;” whereas Godwin is quite silent about his being a benefactor to the fabric, and rightly fixes his place of sepulture, not in the lady chapel, but on the south side the present altar; “ ubi tumulum videmus “ episcopi cujusdam, et Chichestcri hanc esse inde colligo, quia adjunctum habet monumentum nobilis cujusdam ex “ Chichesterorum familia, prout insignia in clypeo depicta satis demonstrant .” Certainly Godwin was right here; and I verily believe the notion of St. Mary’s chapel being at that time the cathedral, was a mere fancy of Hooker’s, first broached by him, and adopted by Godwin on his bare authority. We find a tomb still remaining on the north side the chancel or presbytery, which both Hooker and Godwin ascribe to Bishop Marshal; and upon a flat stone on the pavement adjoining, is an epitaph on Bishop Brewer; both of whom died before Quivil came to this see. I suspect the latter was placed here long after Bishop Brewer’s decease; but as Bishop Chichester’s and Bishop Marshal’s monuments have the strongest marks of antiquity, $ especially the latter, doubtless these • Account of the Bishops of Exon, by Hooker, MS. penes. N. B. This manuscript account differs in many particulars from Hooker's printed account. + Ibid. | See Widmore's History of Westminster Abbey, ut supra. § Bishop Marshal's monument was, doubtless, placed where it now stands, long since the time of that prelate's decease, and probably when the stone screen was erected; for the tomb, which is in the coffin form, is placed so as to have one side range with the screen; consequently the whole monument stands awry, and not in the form originally intended. On considering and viewing more attentively the tomb which I have assigned to Bishop Chichester, I think verily it is of a much later date. Qua; re, too, if it was not once orna¬ mented with brass on the upper stone? If so, it cannot be so old as Bishop Chichester’s time. 4 were erected soon after their deaths; which is another powerful argument against Leland s assertion, that Bishop Quivil was the first founder of the present choir. That St. Mary’s chapel did not serve for the choir of the church before Bishop Quivil s time, as Hooker and Godwin assert, is evident, from Bishop Branscomb’s grant of Bokerel, to the dean and chapter of Exon, for the maintenance of two chaplains, “ in quadam capella fere de novo constructa juxta capellamB. Maria. Now Brans- comb was Quivil’s immediate predecessor in this see; and if at that time this part of the fabric had been the choir, the words of the grant would most certainly have ru n juxta chorum ecclesia , and not juxta capellam B. Maria. In the same grant the donor adds, “ ubieligimus locum sepultura ex australipartejuxta capellamB. Maria.” Now this bishop’s tomb is still remaining on the south side of a little chapel adjoining to St. Mary’s chapel; it can¬ not therefore be said, that what was called St. Mary’s chapel before Bishop Quivil’s time, was different from that which was so called after the present choir was built. As I cannot, for these reasons, allow Bishop Quivil to have been the founder of the present choir, as Leland suggests; nor agree with Hooker and Godwin, that before Quivil’s time, St. Mary’s chapel served for the choir, and the present choir for the nave; neither can I allow that Bishop Quivil founded the cross ailes with the towers over them, though Godwin expressly saith, “ fundamenta hie (scil. Pet. Quivil) jecit septi transversi ubi ex utraque parte ah austro nimirum, ibidem ab aqui- “ lone campanile surgit speciosum.” I have before observed, that these towers bear evident marks of the Saxon, or early Norman age, and that the other parts of the church appear plainly to have been of later erection. But not to insist farther on this argu¬ ment, drawn from the different styles of architecture which appear in the towers, from the rest of the church, let us see what the fabric rolls discover on this point. In the roll of 1284, one of the oldest remaining in the archives, xiir/. is charged “ pro cementario ad fenestram largiendam in turri ultra scaccarium also the sum of xviiu. iid. pro fenestris fact, in turreS. Pauli." In the roll of 1286 , “ iij. iiid. inmuro prosternendo sub. archam “ * n turre S h fohannis.” Item, “ operano ad magnam fenestram in turre S u Johannis aperiend. et pro fenestra “ vitrea ad idem iu.” Fiom hence it appears, that in the fourth and sixth years of Bishop Quivil’s pontificate, the windows in both the towers were enlarged, or rather an opening made in the wall of each tower for a great window; consequently the towers were not then first built. Indeed both these great windows (as I have before remarked), seem plainly to have been made long after the towers were erected, being of a very different form from the other windows in each tower; those being small and round arched, whereas these have both pointed arches. And if we examine the inside wall of the south tower, and the outside of the north tower, we shall plainly discover two old round arched windows (now stopped up,) in the former, which was probably done when the present great one was made; and one other of the same round form in the latter, now covered by the clock. And farther, one may perceive the top of the great window in the north tower, cutting the ornamental arched work on the outside the wall next the treasury house; which demonstrates that this window was not coeval with the tower. But what puts it out of all doubt, that St.John’s, or the south tower (if not the other too), is much ancienter than Bishop Quivil s time, is the old tomb of Bishop John the Chantor, still remaining against the south wall thereof. I am not ignorant that Mr. Prince, in his Devonshire Worthies,* assigns this monument to Bishop Blondy; but as he cites no authority for this, little regard is due to his bare ipse dixit; especially too, as Leland, who' lived two centuries nearer the time of Bishop Blondy than Mr. Prince, in describing the tombs of several bishops buried in this cathedral, saith expressly, “ in transepto ecclesia Exon ad austrum Joannes Efs. Exon;” which could be no other than John the Chantor, who died anno 1191. Leland gives us, indeed, only the Christian name of this prelate, viz. John; whereas he adds the surname of all the others whose monuments he describes. The truth is, this bishop appears to have had no surname, which was not unusual in those early times, and therefore was called John the Chantor, (the better to distinguish him) probably from his being chantor of this, or some other ;’s Worthies of Devon. cathedral, at the time he was chosen bishop. Browne Willis, in his History of Mitred Abbeys, (quoting Leland) assigns this tomb to Bishop John;* •• though indeed at page 352, he asserts, that Bishop John the Chantor was buried opposite to die door in the south aile which leads to the palace; but as this writer cites no authority, Leland’s opinion ought to carry greater weight with it; which is also confirmed by an ancient manuscript, enti¬ tled, Ordinationes et compositiones inter capitulum et thesaurarium eccles. Exon, circa an. 1409,+ wherein the following passage occurs; “ medietatem oblacionum ad tumbam Johan. Episcopi in turre S‘‘ Johannis.” Here we have the tomb of Bishop John, expressly mentioned as situate under St.John’s tower. Now there was no other bishop named John, from the time of John the Chantor, to the year 1409, when this MS. bears date, except Bishop John Grandison, whose place of sepulture, it is well known, was in a chapel of his own building at the west end of the church: not a doubt, therefore, can remain for whom this antique tomb was erected. But had it been Bishop Blondy’s, which it certainly was not, since he died before Bishop Quivil came to this see, it would prove the tower older than Quivil’s time; unless we suppose, without any room for supposing so, that it was erected by Ouivil, to the memory of his predecessor. But though Quivil did not build the towers, I think verily he altered the windows, and made a large one in each tower, which remain at this day; and it is probable too, he made considerable repairs in both the towers; for in the roll of 1284, and that of 1286, several articles occur under, expense facte area turrim ultra scaccarium, as removing an altar there, dedicated to St. Paul, and much work done about the bells. It is not unlikely but these repairs gave rise to Godwin’s opinion, that Bishop Quivil built the cross ailes and towers; as the addition of an upper battlement to the said north tower, above two hundred years after, made by Bishop Courtney, (the better to receive the great bell, at that time placed here) was, I am convinced, the sole foundation for the same author’s asserting, that Bishop Courtney, at a great expence, finished the north tower: “ campanile quod est ad “ aquilonarem partem Exoniensis ecclesice partem nofidum absolutum, magnis impensis perferit.” No doubt this tower was completed long before Courtney’s time; though, perhaps, not till then carried to the same height with the other. £ It appears by the fabric rolls, to have contained several bells as early as King Edward the Second’s time; for in the roll ofl320, xnd. is charged “ in ferramentispro campanis in turreS li Pauli.” And again in the roll of the 31st. Henry VI. xxd. “ in una banderick p?o maxima campana in campanile boreali.” And in the 2d Henry IV. (which should have been first cited) wages are entered to John Coke carpentario, “ operand circa rotam “ parvi campani in boreali campanili, ire.” If, therefore, the tower was furnished with bells, we may fairly con¬ clude, it was entirely finished long before Bishop Courtney’s time. Godwin tells us further, that Bishop Courtney furnished this tower with the present great bell; nola preegrandi instruxit; and from the Christian name of this prelate, it is generally supposed to have been called the Peter bell: but if the tradition at Landaff may be depended upon, (and how such a tradition could gain footing there without good grounds, I leave eveiy candid man to judge) it was brought from thence to Exeter, in the time of Bishop Courtney, in exchange for five other bells, being styled the Peter bell before its removal to Exeter. $ This bell, which weighs sixty hundred, and is reckoned the third largest in England, was re-cast anno 1676, when these words were inscribed upon it, viz. Ex dono Petri Courtney, Epis. Exon, anno Dni 1484. If it was certain that this inscription was copied from the old bell, Bishop Courtney ought to be reckoned the donor of it; but it is very hard to conceive how such a tradition could obtain at Landaff upon little or no foundation, the two churches lying so remote one from the other, and not the least connection between them; at the same time, it is very easy to conceive that a tradition might arise at Exeter, that Courtney gave this huge bell to his own cathedral, being brought thither in his time from Landaff; and perhaps he was at the charge of transporting it, and of raising the tower a story higher, in order to increase the sound of it. I have dwelt longer on this point than I should otherwise have done, or * Hist, of MitredAbb. Vol.II. p. 354. + Inter archivos penes dec. et capit. | In Hookers account of the city of Exeter, (printed in Hollingshed's Chronicle, at page l ois) he tells us, “ dtat the successor of Bishop Grandison, who was named Thomas •• Brentingham, finished and ended the north tower of the church." In the aforecited account of the Bishops of this see, by the same author, he has these words only; “ Bishop “ Brentingham performed and supplied in buildings, what his predecessors had left undone, and died 3 d. Dec. 1394,” 8 cc. f Willis’s History of Landaff Cath. p. 4. 6 than the importance of it deserves, had not a very extraordinary clamour lately been raised against the present dean and chapter, by the partizans of Sir William Courtney, for presuming (as it was called,) to make an altera¬ tion in the roof which covered this great bell; which, though a work of no small expence, and, to those who can distinguish symmetry from disproportion, of considerable beauty to the fabric, yet has been represented as a scheme of the chapter’s, to put money into their own pockets; a suggestion which they equally contemn with the authors of it; and on an idle supposition, that the bell was purchased, and the whole tower it hangs in was erected by Bishop Courtney, the dean and chapter’s right, to make any alterations about the one or the other, has been seriously called in question. But though Bishop Quivil neither built the towers, choir, or nave, yet it is certain he began some new building in or about the church, for in a fabric roll above cited, dated 1308, the sum of xvij. iiiid. is charged for the expence of an obit; ‘ 1 Epi Petri primifundatoris novi opens;" which was Bishop Peter Quivil. Now, both Godwin and Leland inform us,* that this prelate was interred in the middle of St. Mary’s chapel; and the latter has ^preserved his epitaph; from whence we may conclude, that it remained to Henry VIII.th’s time, when Leland visited Exeter. And from his being here buried, one would be apt to think that this part of the fabric was rebuilt by him; especially too, as the architecture of this chapel corresponds, in all parts, with other buildings of that age. But this certainly was not the novum opus, of which he is said above to be the founder; for in the roll of 1303, twelve years after Quivil’s death, the sum of vii. ii d. is charged for plumbers’ work, “ cooperient. sup. capellam B.Marie, et alibi super novum opus." Here, the novum opus is expressly contra¬ distinguished from St. Mary’s chapel. It does not clearly appear what this new work was; but I am inclined to think it was lengthening the nave, or body, by the addition of more pillars and arches; + which work was car¬ ried on by all the succeeding bishops, down to Bishop Stafford, as will appear hereafter. But it must not be imagined, that the charge of erecting so expensive a fabric lay solely on the bishops, though some of them were indeed noble benefactors; for in Bishop Grandison’s time, who is generally said to have finished the whole church, a petition was preferred by him to the Pope, for the appropriation of St. Marian’s church in Cornwall, to the dean and chapter, in consideration that Imlf the canons’ stipends were annually laid out in the work of the Fabric; jl which, (saith the Bishop) “ though began on a magnificent plan, the greater part still remained “ unfinished.Bishop Stapledon, who sat in this see during the whole reign of King Edward II. was so noble a benefactor, both in building, as well as adorning the fabric, that in an authentic record of the church, he is said to have made the choir. “ Qiiod postmodum per JV Stapyldon, Exon Epm. qui chorum ecclesie et novas ima- “ gines Petri et Paulifieri fecit." But this expression must be taken with some restrictions; for it is very certain he did not build the choir, but vaulted the presbyterie, or chancel part of it, as Leland positively asserts; who adds farther, that this generous Bishop made the rich front of stone work at the high altar, (probably removed anno 1639, when the present painting was given by Archdeacon Hellyar) and likewise the rich silver table in the middle of it.|| The fabric rolls are an undoubted record, to prove what vast sums were expended on the church during all Bishop Stapledon’s time; and for some years before, and many years after. Anno 1299, under Bishop Bytton’s pontificate, (who was Stapledon’s immediate predecessor) summa totius custus novi operis (as expressed on the roll) amounted to 170 1. 6s. 2d. And anno 1306, the last year of the same Bishop, the sum of 156/. 19 j. Id.; but in 1310, the third year of Bishop Stapledon, the whole fabric expence amounts to no less than 383/. 18s. 8 d. ; and in 1318, the sum of 179/. 16s. 5 d. ; of which 86/. 4s. 5d. was expended in tablaturd rruigm altans; which was the rich front of stone work, I suppose, that Leland mentions.** Towards raising the :reascliis church from the chaunccl downwards, (by thechau :an only the t/uctiJians, and not the produce arising from t' * Leland’s itin. Vol. III. p. i3. + Hooker, in lus account of the Bishops of Exeter, says expressly, that Bishop Quivil first began to enlarge and in cel, he means the choir) and laid the foundation thereof. t We are not to understand by this, that half their income was expended on the fabric; for the canons' supends m farms; which in those days were occupied by each canon, and not leased out, as at present. $ Grandison's Register. || Lei. Itin. Vol. III. p. ss. .. *3“‘‘r TTTh " ?' h ° P S “ p1 ;"” *'“ ** *“ " r "* « ‘■■S 1 » S» «MM d_k oFEoeter, „d .... *, “ ° f “■ 1 "“'r *“ “ mrl ”■ ™* konco the in ,k, roll, i M.tM nj.rf,, i, „„„ ~ . '• Si f ° r ** “rf* mk - Tk P"“““ " f K “8 *. C-»-r, Si* Emm,, „„d Bikop Loofrio, of .lid, " .. 'he s °udi side the altar, was, I conceive, part of this painting. be owned the this day the i appears vastly great, v some imperfect remains above the se 7 yearly sum necessary for carrying on the said buildings, the several dignitaries of the church paid eveiy year the following sums, viz. “ 6/. 7s. 4d. de dignitate Decani; 3l. de dignitate Precentoris; 38 sol. de Gancellar.; 64 sol. “ de Thesaurar .” &c. as they are entered on the rolls. All the clergy of the diocese too were taxed by Bishop Stapledon towards this work;* and the several religious houses throughout the diocese granted a participation of their prayers, &c. to all such who would contribute to the fabric of the cathedral. + From the beginning of the fourteenth century to the middle of the fifteenth, 100/. per annum, at an average, was expended in this work; and if we allow the value of money to be as ten to one compared with the present time, and less I think it can¬ not be estimated, the yearly amount will be 1000/. per annum; not to mention, that from the Saxon age down to the reign of King Henry VI. a penny was equal in weight to three-pence; £ consequently, one shilling was three s hilli ngs, and one pound three pounds: in this light, 1000/. from Bishop By tton’s time to Bishop Bothe’s, will appeal - to be equal to 3000/. Though Bishop Stapledon’s death, which happened anno 1326, was a great loss to the work carrying on about this fabric, for being Lord Treasurer of England, as well as Bishop of Exon, his income was very large, and his generosity proportionate to his wealth; yet his successor, Bishop Grandison, did all that was possible to make up the loss which the fabric sustained by Stapledon’s decease; “ sequestering himself (saith Hooker) from “ all idle persons, he kept no more about him than were absolutely necessary, in order to compass the charge of “ such mighty works: likewise assembling his whole clergy, he persuaded them to bequeath all their goods, 8cc. “ to the building the mother church of the diocese; and he also prevailed on sundxy temporal men to give of “ their store; as namely, Hugh Courtney, Earl of Devon, from whom he got two hundred marks. As to the particular parts of the fabric which Grandison built, Leland informs us, “ that he enlarged the west part, mak- “ ing seven arches where before the plott was made but of five; and that he also volted the whole body or nave “ with stone. ”|| This worthy prelate died anno 1369, and was succeeded by Bishop Brentingham; whom Godwin justly cele¬ brates as a considerable benefactor to the fabric of his cathedral. In his time the paving of the body was com¬ pleted, and the cloisters finished, which were begun so early as Bishop Ouivil’s time. Anno 1390, towards the end of Bishop Brentingham’s pontificate, the sum of one hundred marks were given by Henry Blackborne, a canon of this church, for the repair, or rather the entire new-making the great window above the high altar in the choir. “ xx die Apr. anno D~ni m.ccc. nonagesimo. in domo capitid. Exon D'ns Hen. Blackburn, canonic, dicte “ eccles. ad honorem Dei et S. Mart. etApost. Petri et Pauli, promisit centum marcas ex dono suo reparacioni sive “ emendacioni magne fenestre in capite eccles. retro magnum altar e** Memorand. quod die vii. Marcii anno supra- “ dicto facta fuit hec conventio inter canonicos et Rob. Lyen, glasyer civem Exon ( videl .) quod idem Robertus vitriabit “ magnam fenestram in capite ecclesie retro summum altare de novo fact, et percipiet pro quolibet pede novi vitri xxd. “ et pro antiquo vitro dicte fenestre faciend. percipiet qualibet septimana iiii. iiiid. dum occupatur circa idem, et “ similiter famulus suus iij. et idem Robertus omnia necessaria vitriationi pertinentia suis sumptibus et expensis “ inveniet quantum ad novum vitrum et quantum ad antiquum vitrum capitulum . necessaria inveniet."++ By these extracts it should seem, that the great east window was not nozo first made, but repaired or new made ; and this is a proof, by the way, that Quivil, much less Stapledon, was not the founder of the choir; for the window could not be worn out with age in less than a century. Anno 1410, the sixteenth year of Bishop Stafford, (Brentingham’ s immediate successor) letters of indulgence were directed to the four archdeacons of this diocese, for the raising of money to the use of the fabric ; and by an entry on the fabric roll of that year, it should seem that the pavement was not then finished, for the sum of viiij. iii d. is charged “ pro mcxxxii petris pro pavimento ecclesie." Anno 1439, in Bishop Lacy’s time, the * Book of Statutes, penes Dec. et Cap. pag. 3 S , et seq. + Among the D. and Chap. Archives. + See Nicholson's Engl. Histor. Library, p. u, and p. 1 5 i. In this last cited page he says, “ that among the three first Henrys we meet with nothing but thin pieces (scil.) « of silver, of about the weight, breadth, and intrinsic value of Q, Eliz. three-pence, which was their penny." Qirarre, how long the penny continued of this value? f MS. Account of the Bishops of Exon, ut supra. II Lei. Itiner. ut supra. ** Book of Chapter Acts, intided Prim® qine Acta fuere. Fol. Ixii. +t Ibid. fol. Ixxii. nodi,* or finishment of the pillars in the nave or body, were adorned with painting, at the expence of the vicars choral; for in the roll of that year we have the following entry ; “ Solid. Joh. Bculde, peyntor de Exon , pro pictura “ Lvii .nodorum in dustrali ambulatoria eccles. cath. Exon (videl.J lxx sol. de dono vicariorum de choro ibidem “ pro pictura cujuslibet nodi iii sol." In the course of this essay I have ventured to assert, in contradiction to all the writers on this fabric, that St. Mary’s chapel was not the choir of the old Saxon church ; and from Bishop Quivil’s being there buried, have just hinted, that possibly he was the founder of it; but having since met with an entry on the fabric roll, dated 1316, which was but twenty-four years after Bishop Quivil’s decease, wherein the sum of lOj. is charged for a fortnight’s wages to the plumber, “ eradicand. veterem cooperturam super capellam B. Marie" I am convinced it must have been built long before his time; for the roof could not be decayed in so short a period ; especially too a leaden one, which by the plumber being employed, there is reason to suppose it was. Sir Christopher Wren tells us, that in King Henry III.’s time, the custom prevailed of building chapels to the Virgin Mary behind the altar. + If this chapel, therefore, was erected about the beginning of that reign, by Bishop Simon D’Apulia, or Bishop Brewer, a complete century had passed to the year 1316, when the old roof might be decayed. The fabric rolls from the year 1300, are pretty complete for above a century ; and as very little occurs in them re¬ lating to this chapel, we may be very sure that it is older than the fourteenth century ; and we may be equally certain, from the Gothic architecture which prevails in every part of it, that it was erected since King Stephen’s time. As it is not my intention to write a history of this cathedral church, but only to rescue from oblivion the true founders and principal benefactors to the fabric, and to rectify the errors of former writers on this point, so I have nothing to do with the monuments of its Bishops or others, except where the mentioning of them tends to throw any light on my subject: with this view, I must say a few words on Bishop Leofric’s monument, the first Bishop of Exeter. Under the south tower, against the wall which separates the south aile from St.John’s cha¬ pel, is erected a black marble monument to the memory of this prelate, who, Godwin tells us, died anno 1073, (8th William I.) and was interred in the churchyard, and said to have rested under a marble tomb, in the spot where the south tower now stands ; which being reported to the Chapter by old Hooker, they erected the monu¬ ment which we see at this day. “ Leofricus obiit 1073. et in ccemeterio humatus. Saxo dicitur tectus marmoreo in “ l° co V ^ >1 campanile situm est illud quod meridiem special. Qua de re cum canonicos monuisset bonus ille senex “ Hoohrus, monummtum , ibidem concinnarunt quod etiamnum visitur ibidem." We learn from this account of Godwin, who was sub-dean of Exeter temp. Eliz. R. that a very little before that time, the particular spot where Bishop Leofric was buried was unknown to the dean and canons, consequently no monument remaining for him; and that the place of their founder’s interment rested solely on the authority of Hooker, the chamberlain of Exeter, who determined it to have been under the south tower ; which he also affirmed was the cemetery or churchyard at the time the said Bishop was buried there, and that a marble monument lay over his grave. + Now if all this was true, it would prove indisputably that the south tower was erected since the Norman con¬ quest, and consequently overturn my hypothesis, that these towers flanked the west end of the old Saxon church; but Mr. Hooker’s bare affirmation, without his producing any evidence, ought not to be admitted in this ques¬ tion, as it contradicts a very ancient manuscript history of this church, preserved in the Bodleian library, in which it is expressly said, that Bishop Leofric was buried “ incrypta ecclesie ejusdem (scil. Exon)-" in the vault or undercroft of Exeter cathedral. $ I am persuaded that this fancy, (which Hooker first broached and Godwin adopted) of the old cathedral being the same with the present St. Mary’s chapel, was the sole reason for Hooker’s asserting that Leofric was interred in the churchyard. I strongly suspect too that the monument, which he affirmed lay over the said Bishop’s grave, was no other than the carved stone mausoleum on the south side the communion table, whereon was painted in three compartments, King Edward the Confessor, his Queen Eadgitha, ’ Tlle nodi- are rather the key-stones 0 r the tracery in the vault or the church. Three shillings seems a great sun or capitals. Perhaps they were gilt, as well as painted. H. E. + Widmore's History of Westmin I See Hooker’s Account of the Bishops of Excester, under Leophricus. $ Dugd. Mon. Tom. I. i for painting each of diem, whether the word means key-stones, stcr Abbey, p. 45. p. sso et 221. Ex vetusto MS. in Bibl. Bodl. Med. 7 6. 9 and the said Bishop. In Archbishop Laud’s injunctions to the dean and chapter, dated 20th July, 1639, this veiy painting is styled, the ancient monuments of King Edward the Confessor and Egytha his queen, and Leofric the first bishop. “ Whereas (say the injunctions) the ancient monuments of King Edward the Confessor and “ Egytha his queen, and Leofric the first bishop of Exeter, have, by injury of time, been much neglected and “ defaced, it is hereby ordered, that the same shall forthwith be repaired and beautified, and so kept from tyme “ to tyme clean and decent.”* About the year 1535, Leland took an account of all the remarkable monuments, especially those of the bishops, which were then standing in this church ; and all the epitaphs are printed in his Itinerary. He is quite silent about Bishop Leofric’s; and had there been any, though never so mean a one, for this prelate, as he was the founder of the see of Exon, Leland would not have omitted mentioning it. The episcopal chair or throne, one of the finest pieces of Gothic wood work in the kingdom, was erected by Bishop Bothe, in the reign of King Edward IV. The chapter-house, which is not an octagon, as most others are, but an oblong-square room, was erected by Bishop Lacy, about the close of Henry Vth’s reign, or beginning of King Henry Vlth. With regard to the several chapels, and the different altars which were placed in the chapels, and also within the church, together with the several images with which they were adorned, I shall here set down what occurs in the fabric rolls, and other ancient records of the church. In rotulo 1279, vestiaria S u Maria. Anno 1284, the chapel of St. James. Ibid. 1285, the chapel of St. Maiy Magdalen. Ibid. 1310, the chapel of St. Paul, under the north tower. Ibid. 1318, and 1285, the chapel of St.John, under the south tower. N. B. The two last are still remaining, and bear the same names. In the roll of 1308, the image of the Holy Trinity is mentioned; also of St. Peter, at the high altar; and of the Virgin Mary, at the entrance into the choir. Ibid. 1350, the altar of St. Radegund. Ibid. 1397, the image of St. Michael, placed in the wall by the tomb of Sir John Michell, Knt. In an original inventory on parchment, of the books, vestments, plate, & c. belonging to this church, anno 1327, the following altars are mentioned, viz. of St. Thomas; St. Nicholas; St. Stephen. + Also, in an original inventory of Dean Kilkenny’s goods, taken after his death, anno 1302, the chapel and altar of St. Andrew are mentioned; in which chapel he was buried.£ In the roll of 1318,$ occurs the altar of St. Edmund, in the vestry. In the concord, between the dean and chapter and the treasurer, (anno 1409) touching the oblations, &c.|| we meet with the image of the Blessed Virgin in the north porch; St. Michael’s altar and image next to St.John Baptist’s altar, under St.John’s, or the south tower; the old image of St. Peter, removed from the high altar in the choir by Bishop Stapledon, and placed at the entrance into the choir; the image of the Holy Cross, in the north part of the church; and the image of St. Catharine. In another concord or agreement made between the same parties, anno 1425,** mention is made of two secondaiy altars, by the high altar in the choir; the altars of St.John the Evangelist, and Gabriel, next to the St. Mary’s chapel; the altars of St. Andrew and St. Katherine, under the exchequer, on the north side of the choir; two other altars in vestibulo, on the south side of the choir; and St. Mary’s and St. Nicholas’s, near the entrance into the choir. In an inventory of the goods belonging to the church, dated 1506,++ the altar of the Holy Ghost is mentioned in the cloisters, and the chapel of St. Edmund, over the charnel in the churchyard; “ super ossilegium in “ ceineterio ...” In King Henry VUIth’s time there were eleven perpetual chantries subsisting in this church, as they occur in Bishop Voisey’s Register, viz. Cantaria de Stafford. Cantaria de Grandison. Cantaria de Crosswater. Cantaria de Brentingham. Cantaria de Toridge. Cantaria de Penbroke. Cantaria de Courtney. Cantaria de Brutton. Cantaria de Brewer. Cantaria de Kilkenny. Cantaria de Bytton et Bodham. Browne Willis, from the book of Chauntry Pensions in the Augmentation office, dated 1553, (1st Queen Mary) * Register, marked Sainthill, penes Dec. et Capit. Exon. + Among the Dean and Chapter's Archives. % Ibid. f I apprehend that the chapel of St. Andrew was part, or the whole, of the present canons' vestry; the figure of that saint being painted in one of the windows. H Among the Dean and Chapter’s Archives. ** Ibid. +* Ibid. ft Vol. II. fol. 8 6. b. 10 makes the number thirteen, and the names of some of them different; but the bishop’s Register is the best authority. The stone with which the walls of this noble edifice was principally built, came from Bere, near Cullyton, in Devon; the vaulting stone of which the roof is composed, from Silverton, in the same county; the pavement of the choir from Ram, by sea to Toppesham. Quaere, if not Caen, in Normandy? The vestry belonging to St. Mary’s chapel, rebuilt in King Henry Vlth’s time, of Woneford stone: all which appears by the fabric rolls.’' The thin fine pillars which are seen in every part of the church, and idly supposed to be an artificial compo¬ sition, came from the isle of Purbeck, near Corfe, in Dorset. As we meet with this kind of marble in all, or most of our cathedral and collegiate churches; and till Dr. Drake published his noble survey of the minster and city of York, where he proves this to be either Purbeck or Petworth marble, it was universally held to be either factitious, or brought from Caen in Normandy; to put this matter for the future out of dispute, I shall give the following extract from the fabric rolls of 1331 and 1332. “ Memorand. quod die Sabbati prox. post festum S. Vincentii, annoD ni. mcccxxxii. Will. Canon de Corfe, com- “ putavit cum DnisDecano et Capit. Exon de marmore tamper ipsum quamper patrem suum . adfabricam “ navis eccles. B. Petri Exon; videlicet; de xi columpnis et dimid. magnis, precium columpne x lib. xvij. unde “ summa cxxiiii/. iiiij. Item,paria columpnarum pro basibus et capitellis . xvl. precium basis cujuslibet “ cum capitellis et columpnis vs. Item, pro xxix columpnis pro claustro xxis. ixd.; precium columpne ixd.; summa “ cxl/. vs. ixd. tenetur ad reparand. to turn marmor predictum et dejectus ejus supplere tempore collocatioms sue “ in opere per racionabilem monicionem .” In Dugdale’s Warwickshire, + an agreement of the same kind occurs, between Joseph Bourde, of Corfe, marbler, (sixteenth May, 35th Henry VI.) and the executors of the Earl of Warwick, for the erecting a tomb in the chapel adjoining to St. Maiy’s church there, composed of the best marbles which England afforded. This tomb is still remaining, and the principal parts of it are of the very same kind of stone with the columns or small pillars in Exeter cathedral. These quarries have been long since worked out, in the isle of Purbeck; but I lately procured a fragment of the stone from thence, and it agrees exactly with the pillars in the church, which when polished resembles a granite, but is not near so hard. The lead with which the roof of the whole cathe¬ dral is covered, appears by the fabric rolls to have been bought at Lynn mart (or fair), and brought from thence by sea to Topsham; the price of a fodder in King Edward lid’s time being 50j.: thus in the roll of 1318, the sum of lx. is charged “ in una fothere plumbi, in quo continebantur xxxiiii votmelles apud Toppesham empt. pro “ quolibetfothere H. super ecclesiamponend. ’’ The stalls in the choir I find were made of Irish oak; thus in the roll of 1310, a sum is charged pro xiii bord. Hibernens. ad ecclesiam. The church appears to have been new glazed, or at least great part, about the year 1317, (temp. Edward II.) and both the plain and coloured glass brought from Roan in Normandy. Thus in the fabric roll of that year, “ dcxxxix pedis de albo vitro empt. apud Rotomagens. xvl. xiiiir. ixd. Item, ccm peciis de colorato xl. iii. iiiid. “ in batello ad carriandum dictum vitrum de Seaton usque Exon xs." In the roll of 1323, twelve feet of coloured or painted glass, is charged at 8 s. and eight feet of white or plain, at 2 j. 8 d.: by the latter it ap¬ pears then, that painted glass was 8 d. per foot in Edward lid’s time, and plain glass 5 d. N. B. In Dugdale’s account of Beauchamp’s chapel at Warwick (aforecited), the glazier covenants with the Earl of Warwick’s executors, to furnish the windows with the richest foreign painted glass that could be procured at 2s. per foot. Dated 1446. Two ancient customs (one of them peculiar to this church) are mentioned in the fabric rolls, which were constantly kept up till the Reformation, viz. the riding in procession on the vigil of St. Peter, and the electing a bishop of the boys out of the choristers on St. Nicholas day, viz. 6th of December. * The foundation sloncs of the cathedral appear by the fabric rolls to have been brought from Wypeton, in Hevitree parish, and from Berlegh, in the parish orSt. Thomas, on the west side of die river Exe. The outside walls arc built of Salcomb, Branscomb, and Kam stone; the vaulting of the roof was made of Bere stone, and die key-stones of Silverton quarry. The Berlegh stones cost is. 6 d. the hundred leam. + Dugdale’s Wanv. edit, per Thomas. Vol. I. p. 11 “ Comput. clerici operis de anno 31 H. VI. “ In ccv scutellis cum clavibus Petri et gladio Pauli, factis de papiro duplicato, liberatis familiis canonicorum “ ad equitandum in vigiliis S‘‘ Petri, iiiii. iiiic/. pro quolibet scuto id.; in focalibus emptis pro igne S a Petri fact. “ hoc anno iiu. mid.; collect, in choro inter xiii canonicos." In the inventory of the goods, vestments, See. be¬ longing to the church, anno 1327, inter alia, “ unaparva tunica pro Episcopo puerorum The learned John Gregory, in his Posthumous Tracts, (printed anno 1649) has given a very curious account of this latter custom, as it was practised in the church of Sarum; and he is the only author, I think, that treats of it, except Mr. Anstis, in his edition of Ashmole’s Histoiy of the Order of the Garter, who somewhere mentions it as retained in Eton college, where at this time St. Nicholas’ day is esteemed a gaudy in the college." But I have reason to think it was an universal custom in all the cathedrals in England, and in most of the great parish churches; for in a register of the church of Worcester, I meet with a proclamation, dated anno 1541, when Latimer was bishop, against the observing St. Helen’s day; the day of the invention of the cross, 3d May; the exaltation of the cross, 14th September, as feasts; and against the superstitious observation of St. Nicholas, and St. Catharine, St. Clement, and the Holy Innocents; decking and apparelling children like bishops, priests, and women, and leading them with songs and dances from house to house, blessing the people, and gathering money; and boys singing mass, and preaching; usages (says the good bishop) rather to the derision than honour of the saint. Among the archives of this church, I find a commemoration roll in English of its founders and benefactors, wrote some time in the reign of King Edward IV. which was, as I apprehend, the bidding prayer, before the sermon. As I have met with nothing similar to it in print of so old a date, I think an extract from it will not be unacceptable. + “ Ye shal praye for the state of al holy church; for oure holy fader the Pope, with alle his col- “ lege of cardinals; for the Holy Lande, that of his hiegh mercy sende hit sone into Cristenmens honde. Also “ for the Erchebysshoppe of Canterbury, and all other byshoppes of this lande; and in specialle for our reuerent “ fader the byshop of this see. Also for our masters the dean and chapitre of this churche, and for al the “ mynystres and servantes that serveth or have served .... theryune this holy place. Also for the goode state “ and tranquillite of this lande; for our soveragne lord the kynge, the queen, and for all the lordes and nobles “ of this lande, and for all the communes of this lande; in especialle for the maier of this citee, and the com- “ munes thereof; and for alle Cristen puple, that we be dewe and detteurs to pray for. “ Also ye shall praye for the soule of Kynge Athelstan, the ferst founder of this place; for Kynge Edgar; “ King Alffede; j Kynge William Conqueror; Kyng William Ruf.; Kyng Henry; KyngSteph.; Kynge Harry; “Kynge Rychard; Kynge John; Kynge Harry; Kynge Edward; Kynge Edward; Kynge Edward; Kynge “ Richard; Kynge Harry; Kynge Harry; Kynge Harry; Kynge Edward. Also for the soule of Edward, som “ tyme Prince of Wales; for Thomas, some tyme Duke of Excetre; for John, late Duke of Excetre; for Anne, “ late Dutchesse of Excetre; for Hugh Courtenay, some tyme Erie of Devonshire, and Margarette his wyef; “ for William Courtenay, som tyme Erchbysshoppe of Canterbuiy, and for al the bishops that have be in this “ place; for the soule of Leofrike, ferst bysshope of this place; for Bishop Osbert; for Bishop Willyam Warle- “ wast; for Bishop Robert; $ for Bishop Bartholemew; for Bishop John; for Bishop Hariy; for Bishop Symon; “ for Byshop William Brewer; for Byshop Richard; for Byshop Walter the ferst; for Byshop Peter; for Byshop “ Thomas Bytton; for Byshop Walter Stapledon; for By shop Jams Berklegh; for Byshop John Grandison; for “ Byshop Thomas Brentyngham; for Byshop Edmund Stafford; for Byshop John Caterick; for Bishop Edmund * In a MS. preserved in the library of Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, entitled, Status SchoU Elmauis, and compiled at the beginning of Queen Elizabeth's reign, the fol¬ lowing passage occurs relating to this custom. ‘ ■ In die S" Hugmis Panlficis solebat JElone fieri eleclio Efi Nihilensis, sed anuuetudo obsolevit. Olim Efiscofius ille Puerorum /Malar “ mhilis, in cujus clectione et Uterata el laudalissima exercitalio ad ingcniorum vires et molus exiitandos jElotue Celebris eral." By this it seems, that the Efiis. Puerorum was elected at Eton on die feast of St. Hugh, Bishop of Lincoln, viz. 17 th November, and not on St. Nicholas' day; but it was on St. Nicholas' day everywhere else; and the boy bishop's power lasted till the day after the Holy Innocents. + In Mr. Hearn's Glossary to Robert of Glocester’s Chronicle, at p. 6 s < , is the form of bidding prajer, as used in die time of King Edward VI. | The writing here is not very legible: if it be King Alfrede, it is a mistake of the scribe, for King Edward the Confessor; as there was no King Allred after King Athelstan's time; and King Edward was in a manner the founder of the see of Exeter. } There were two Bishop Roberts succeeding each other, viz. Chichester, and Warlewast; one of them is here omitted. 12 “ Lacye; for George Nevyl, late Archbyshoppe of York, som tyme Byshop of this see; for Byshop John Bovvthe “ his soule; for the soule of Andrew Kilkenny, sum tyme dean of this churche; for the soule of Master Hany “ Webber, late dean; for Master Roger Bolter, and Master Peter Keys, sum tyme chantors of this churche; for “ William Wynger Squyer, Thomas Selynge, and for all brothers, susters, and for all the good doers of this “ churche; and for all the soules whose bodies resteth in this churche, or in this churchyerth; and for all the “ soules that abideth the mercy of God in the bitter paynes of purgatorye, that God of his mercy the souner “ delyvere yam through your devote prayers de profundis.” Some short versicles, and two Latin prayers, I have omitted. The ancient inventory of the jewels, plate, vestments, and books, taken in the year 1327, (2d Edward III.) which I have more than once cited, is a very singular curiosity, as the tide, and first words of every book then in the library, is there recorded, with the value of each; and to those which were given or bequeathed to the church, the donor’s name added. The catalogue begins thus, “ Libri Augustini. “ Augustinus super Psalterium tria volumina, que sic incipiunt: Aurelii August. A rc. prec. lxi c/. The number of books is considerable, especially as this was a period when learning was at a very low ebb. Another inventory of the like kind also occurs among the evidences taken in die year 1506, (20th Henry VII.) by which it appears, that the library was then largely furnished with books, and among them five printed tracts upon the Decretals. N. B. The donors’ names and the prices are all omitted. Widi regard to the jewels, plate, vestments, 8cc. in both inventories, they are an indisputable evidence of the ancient magnificence and wealth of this church. As Sir W. Dugdale, and his condnuator Stevens, have printed several of these kinds of invento¬ ries, belonging to other cathedral churches, it is needless to mention the particulars of those belonging to the church of Exeter. 13 OBSERVATIONS BISHOP LYTTELTON’S ACCOUNT OF EXETER CATHEDRAL. BY SIR H. C. ENGLEFIELD, F. S. A. THE foregoing tract, though it contains a mass of valuable materials, seems rather deficient in method and arrangement; and the learned Author, after having laboured to take from Bishop Quivil the honour of being founder of the present elegant building, which all former writers agree in ascribing to him, does not very clearly point out to whom the praise ought to be given. Some inaccuracies in the accounts both of Leland, Hooker, and Godwin, have occasioned the doubts of the Bishop on this subject; and if the words of those authors are to be taken in a literal sense, it is certain that the accounts they give of the building are inconsistent with the internal evidence of the structure; but it must be remembered, that when they writ, the critical knowledge of the ancient architecture of this kingdom, in the middle and lower ages, did not exist; and it was therefore na¬ tural for them to apply to the whole, what was true only of parts, although the information they gathered, either from records now destroyed, or tradition at present obsolete, was in itself accurate. These allowances being made, it seems no very difficult matter to reconcile the account of Godwin in his work de Praesulibus Angliae, with the information drawn by Bishop Lyttelton from the records yet remaining in the cathedral, and that which is to be gained from an examination of the building in its present state. Bishop Lyttelton seems to have thought that when the episcopal see was, by Edward the Confessor, about the year 1049, removed from Crediton to Exeter, a church worthy of the see was either found there, or erected by that mo¬ narch. This does not seem to have been the case. The new chapter took possession of a convent of monks, which does not appear to have been large, as two other adjacent monasteries were taken as additional lodgings for the clergy of the cathedral. The church therefore, it is probable, was proportionably small; and this is the more likely, as the convent had been totally destroyed by fire only thirty years before, and a very extensive edifice could not easily have been built and completed in that period. It seems then not unlikely, that the first cathe¬ dral was not more than about sixty feet in length, and occupied the site of the present chapel of St. Mary. That the chapel in its present state, was the Saxon church, scarce needed disproving. William Warlewast, who succeeded to the see in the year 1107, began to enlarge his church; and to him the towers yet remaining are probably to be ascribed. They are perfectly similar in style to the buildings of Gundulphus, his cotemporaiy; and much more resemble the magnificence of the Norman architects, than the simplicity of the English Saxons. A passage quoted by Godwin, from William of Malmesbury, is a very strong collateral proof of this supposition. Speaking of Osbert, the predecessor of W. Warlewast, he says, “ In vic- “ tualibus et cceteris rebus ad Anglicos mores pronior, parum Kormannorum pompam suspiciebat" -“ ita pro “ more antiquorum prasulum veteribus contentus adificiisf &c. Malmesbury would scarcely have made this rather invidious remark, had not the cathedral been a mean one in Osbert’s time; and had the ancient church, however small, stood on the site of the present choir, Warlewast’s building could not have been suitable to Kormannorum pompam, as the extent of the whole could not have been two hundred feet. But if, according to tradition, the original choir occupied the site of St. Maiy’s chapel, then Warlewast’s addition was nearly two hundred feet, and was really a magnificent structure. 14 But the labours of Warlewast were nearly destroyed during the siege of Exeter by King Stephen. The church having been then plundered and burnt, the choir is mentioned as having particularly suffered; and Bishop Chichester, the successor of Warlewast, is said to have expended much money in the repairs of the fabric. These repairs were continued by Robert Warlewast, Bartholomew of Exeter, and John the Chantor, and were com¬ pleted by Henry Marshall, who became bishop in the year 1194. The church as then completed, certainly did not extend beyond the remaining towers. Whether the ancient choir was rebuilt, or the choir was formed in the remains of Warlewast’s newer work, there are no means of deciding; but it is not improbable that the latter was the case. If this mere conjecture be founded, it will account as well for the rise of the present chapel of St. Mary, as for the singularity of the addition to the length of the church in Quivil’s time, having been made to the westward, instead of to the east, as was generally the custom; but had this been done here, the ancient sanctuary would have been in some degree profaned by its conversion into the body of the church, which seems ever to have been cautiously avoided. Be this as it may, from the time of Bishop Marshall, to the accession of Quivil, a period of above eighty years, there is no account of any change in, or addition to the fabric; though the will of Bishop Branscomb, the immediate predecessor of Quivil, proves, as Bishop Lyttelton very justly observes, that the chapel of St. Maiy did exist in his time. An expression in his epitaph, given by Godwin, seems to indicate that that part of the church was lately erected; and the style of the building will not allow us to suppose it of a much earlier date. The expression alluded to is “ Primus IValterus magno jcicet hie in honored It seems by these words, that Branscomb was the first person here interred. Whatever was the state of the church at the accession of Bishop Quivil, the uniformity of the structure as it at present stands, seems to prove beyond a doubt that the whole, as the uniform tradition of the different writers has deliveied down to us, was the fruit of one great design; and its singular elegance does as much honour to the taste, as its noble size does to the munificence of the founder. Godwin’s assertion, that Quivil founded the transept, which Lyttelton so severely censures, is undoubtedly true; for he joined the two towers by arches on each side of the nave, and cut away the interior walls of each tower, turning great arches in them, as appears by the roll quoted by Lyttelton; besides which, it appeals from the same roll, that he broke out the two great windows which light the transept, in the opposite walls of the towers: he therefore formed the transept, though he did not build all the walls of it from the ground. A building of the dimensions of this cathedral, could scarcely be erected in the life of one bishop; we accordingly find, that during the time of Quivil’s succes¬ sor, By turn, great sums were in different years expended on the work; and the choir does not appear to have been finished till the year 1318, in the episcopate of Stapledon, when 86 /. were expended on the altarpiece. It is probable, that when Quivil thus undertook to rebuild the church, he would as long as possible preserve the old choir for the celebration of divine service; and when the new nave was completed, form that into a tempo¬ rary church while the choir was rebuilding. Hence it appears, that the choir and altar were among the last works of the new church. B 1S hop Grandison appears certainly to have added two arches to the west of the nave, and adorned the great entrance with the rich screen 3 in which he has introduced a small monumental chapel for himself. Leland also ascribes to this munificent prelate, the vaulting of the whole church with stone. This is not impossible- as it appears from several of our cathedrals, that the vaulting was the last part of the work done; and not without reason; as the walls having been long built, and loaded with the weight of the exterior timber roof, would be the less likely to settle and endanger the arch, whose duration must wholly depend on the stability of its sup- ports and abutments. 1 To the church thus closed in, many things both of use and decoration yet remained to be added. The pavement took up some time; and the adorning the windows with painted glass, was probably a business not to be speedily performed. Bishop Lyttelton seems to think, that the entry in the rolls of 100 marks, “ repara. SW ‘ emmdatWm ™gn‘e fenestra,” &c. was for the repair or renewal of the whole work of the window. 15 It rather appears, that the glazing with painted glass was the whole done to the great east window at this time, as no workmen but glaziers are mentioned, and with them a great contract is made. With regard to the smaller works dependent on the cathedral, it will be sufficient just to observe, that the new leading the chapel of St. Mary, mentioned by Lyttelton as having been done in the year 1316, though it affords a presumption that the chapel was not recently built, is by no means a proof of its being of high antiquity. A defect in the timber work, or the destructive worm, might render a repair necessary within a few years after its erection; and if this chapel was built, as has been before suggested, about the year 1250, it had already stood near seventy years, and might easily want repair. The chapter-house is said to have been built by Bishop Lacy, about the year 1430; but the style of the lower part of this elegant room, is so different from that of the superstructure, and so much resembling the architecture of the chinch, that it is highly probable that Bishop Ouivil, who is recorded to have begun the cloisters, did also build, or at least begin, the chapter-house. The upper part is quite in the style of the sera of Bishop Lacy. It is not easy to quit the subject of this most beautiful Cathedral, without noticing the singular felicity which attended its erection. During the long period of fifty years, no tasteless or vain prelate interfered with the regular and elegant plan of the founder. Though the taste in architecture was continually changing, so scru¬ pulous was the adherence to the original design, that the church seems rather to have been created at once in its perfect state, than have slowly grown to its consummate beauty. Even Grandison, who, if we may judge from his screen, had a taste florid in the extreme in architecture, chastized his ideas within the church, and felt the simple grace of Quivil’s design. This regularity of execution in the cathedral, which is almost peculiar to itself amongst all our churches, is strikingly contrasted by the screen; which, though it is said to be the work of one man, and probably finished in the lifetime of the builder, has some most unaccountable irregularities. The northern side door differs extremely from the southern. The former is much plainer than any other part of the screen, and much resem¬ bles in its decorations the north porch. The southern door is much richer than any other part; the arch of entrance is singularly beautiful, and the four niches over it are of the most elegant form possible. May it not be suspected that these lateral parts were erected after the central building; and that Bishop Grandison’s screen was terminated by the two projecting buttresses, which divide the present fabric into three parts? Perhaps a very minute inspection into the masonry of this screen, and of the chapter-house, might confirm the suspicions of their having been built at different times. It may not be improper to recommend to those who survey or describe our cathedrals, great attention to the courses of the stone, where there is reason to suspect a mixture of work, from the discordancy of style or ornament. But perhaps more than enough has already been said. A Chronological Table of the Succession of the Bishops of Exeter, and the Dates of different Circumstances relative to the building of the Cathedral, and its Dependencies; extracted from Godwin, and Bishop Lytteltons Tract. 1049. I. Leofric, first Bishop of Exeter; the see being transferred from Crediton. 1072. II. Osbert. 1107. III. William Warlewast. Begun the present choir, which when finished was the nave, the old church being converted into the choir. 1138. Exeter besieged by King Stephen. During the siege the cathedral, and particularly the choir, suffered much by fire. 1138. IV. Robert Chichester. He begun to re-edify the choir after the fire. 1155. V. Robert Warlewast. 16 1161. VI. Bartholomew Iscanus, or of Exeter. 1186. VII. John the Chantor. These three bishops continued the repairs at great expence. 1194. VIII. Henry Marshall. Completed the church. 1214. IX. Simon de Apulia. 1224. X. William Brewer. 1245. XI. Richard Blondy. 1257. XII. William Bronescomb. Ordered by will that he should be buried near St. Mary’s chapel. His tomb still subsists there. 1280. XIII. Peter Quivil. Styled in 1308, fundator novi operis. Built the transept; founded the cloisters. 1284. A large window made in the northern, or St. Paul’s tower. 1286. An arch opened in the southern, or St.John’s tower, and a large window made in the same. 1292. XIV. Thomas Bytton. 1299. The expence of the new work nearly 170/. 1303. Money expended on the lead to the roof of the chapel of St. Maiy, and on the new work. 1306. The expence of the new work nearly 157/. 1309. XV. Walter Stapledon. Finished the choir of the church, and the altar. 1310. The expence of the fabric nearly 384/. 1316. The roof of St. Mary’s chapel repaired. 1318. The expence of the fabric nearly 180/. of which 86/. on the tablatura ciltaris. 1326. XVI. James Barkley. 1327. XVII. John Grandison. Added two arches to the western part of the church, and vaulted the whole. Built the screen at the western entrance. 1370. XVIII. Thomas Brentingham. Built the college of the vicars choral. 1390. The great east window new glazed with painted glass. 1395. XIX. Edmund Stafford. 1410. Money raised for the fabric, and the pavement worked on. 1419. XX. John Ketterick. 1419. XXI. John Cary. 1420. XXII. Edmund Lacy. Built the chapter-house 1439. The (nodi) keystones of the vault in the southern aile of the cathedral painted. 1458. XXIII. George Nevill. 1466. XXIV. John Boothe. Erected the episcopal throne. 1478. XXV. Peter Courtney. Gave the great bell. PLANS, ELEVATIONS, SECTIONS, AND SPECIMENS, OF THE ARCHITECTURE AND ORNAMENTS, OF EXETER CATHEDRAL. BY J. CARTER, ARCHITECT. PLATE I. Engraved title-page to the Plates. This is a mural monument to the memory of a person un¬ known. It is situated in the Chapel, on the south side of the choir, marked L 4 in the Plan. The monument itself is marked M 4. Its design is elegant; and it was selected to form the title-page, in order that every part of the engraving might have some reference to the building described. PLATE II. Plan of the Cathedral Church at Exeter, and the site of the adjoining buildings. A, part of a building called the Treasury. B, its garden. C, part of a prebendal house. D, site of the bishop’s palace, and part of the gardens. E, inclosures or yards. F, site of the cloisters. G, remaining part of ditto. II, small houses ol a late construction, and which in part fill up the sides of the cloisters. I, walls of an ancient building. J, chapter-house, erected by Bishop Lacy, 1 455. K, grave-stone, unknown. L, stone seats. M, Holy Ghost chapel. N, grand screen, or fagade. 0, the three entrances. P, monumental chapel of Bishop Grandison, who finished the west end of the church, and erected this screen. Q, the altar. R, grave-stone of Bishop Grandison. S, porch. T, common entrances. U, the nave. V, side ailes of ditto. W, spiritual court. X, modern font. Y, these dotted lines shew the form of the minstrels’ gallery, which is over the arches of the nave; and behind the gallery is the registry for wills, &c. Z, tomb of Hugh Courtney, Earl of Devon, and his wife, erected 1372. A 2, grave-stone, with the brass of- Courtney. B 2, mural monument of Thomas Call, Esq. erected 17 88. C 2, mural monument of Benjamin Dollen, sailor, erected 1700. D 2 , transept. E 2, part of a grave-stone, unknown. F 2, monumental chapel of William Sylke, sub-chantor, erected 1 4 85. G 2, these dotted lines shew the situation of the clock given by Bishop Courtney, 1 4 85. H 2, chapel. I 2 , tomb under an arch, unknown. J 2, grave¬ stone, ditto. K 2, place from whence the chimes are played, by means of ropes brought down from the hammers of the several bells in this tower, to a sort of keys as to an organ, and so used. L2, tomb, unknown. M2, monument of Bishop Leofricus, erected 1568. N 2, chapel. 0 2, side ailes of the choir. P 2, mural monument of J. Grant, S.T. P. C^2, mo¬ nument of Bishop Valentine Cary, erected 1 624. R 2 , monu¬ ment of Robert Hall, erected 1667. S 2, steps to the pulpit. T 2 ', revestry, over which is the registry of the chapter. U 2 , monument, unknown. V 2, monument of a skeleton bishop. W 2, monument of Anthony Hardy, Esq. erected 15 84. X 2 , monument of Sir William Stapledon, who was beheaded with his brother the bishop in Cheapside, 1327. Y 2, monumental chapel of Sir Thomas Speke: Z 2, his monument. A 3, aile at the back of the high altar. B 3, monument of Robert Vil- vaine, M. D. C 3, monument ofjames Railard, erected 15 99. D 3, two grave-stones, unknown. E 3, ancient reading desk. F 3, monument of George Baker, Archdeacon of Totuess, erected 1 7 72. G 3, chapel. H 3, the grave-stone and brass of William Langton, 1 400. I 3, monument of Sir Peter Carey. J 3, monument of John Goodwin, musician, 1586. Ks, monu¬ ment of E. Barret. L 3, monument of John Bidgood, M. D. M 3, St. Mary’s chapel. N 3, monument of Bishop Stafford, 14 19. 03, monument of John Doddridge, 1 628 . P 3, monu¬ ment of Dorothea Doddridge, 1614. 0_3, the three altar stalls. R 3, monument, unknown. S 3, monument of Bishop Brones- comb, 1281 . T 3, chapel. U 3, a case with a skeleton. V 3, monument of Edmund Davy, M. D. 1692. W 3, monument of Captain Gilbert, of the sixteenth century. X 3, monument of John Fursman, A. M. 1721. Y 3, monumental chapel of Bishop Oldam, 1523. Z 3, the altar. A 4, Oldam’s monu¬ ment. B 4 , monument of Nicholas Hall, S.T. P. 1 704. C4, monument of-Bohun. D 4, monument of —- Rawleigh, of Chichester. E 4, monument of George Lavington, LL.D. 1762. F 4, mural monument of Ed. Cotton, S.P.T. 1675. G 4, monument of Bishop Cotton. H 4, mural monument of -—Hawtree, M.A. 1 770. I 4 , monument of Bishop Weston. J 4, monument of William Weston, Esq. 1 7 73. K 4, mural monument of Thomas Skinner, LL.D. 1789. The late Bishop of Exeter about this time was buried in this aile. L 4, chapel; over it the consistorial court. M 4, monument, unknown, en¬ graved as the frontispiece. N 4, door leading to an open place belonging to the next article. O 4, which appears to have been a prison to the church, with a grated window towards the bishop’s palace. P 4, private way from the bishop’s palace. /huAt-n'-f 18 Q_4, grave-stone of Bishop Bytton, 1309. This stone was re¬ moved from before the high altar to this situation, about forty years ago. R 4 , screen entering into the choir. S 4, place for altars. T 4, stairs to the rood-loft, now the organ-loft. U 4, the choir. V 4, pews. W 4, stalls. X 4, dean’s stall. Y 4, bishop’s throne. Z 4, brass eagle, or reading desk. As, pulpit. B 5, approach to the altar. C 5, rails before ditto. D 5, tomb of Bishop Marshall. E S, tomb of Bishop Lacy, 1 45 8. F 5, monument of William Bradbridge, 1 57 8. G 5, monument of Bishop Stapledon, 1 327. H 5, tomb, unknown. I 5. monu¬ ment and tomb of Bishop Walton, 15 93 ; and Bishop Bolton, 1593. J 5, the three altar stalls. K 5, site of the altar, now a modern one. L 5, altar screen. M 5, space behind the altar. N 5, altar steps. O 5, stone seats. P 5, screens, with their several doors. Q5, staircases. The parts which are shaded dark, are the oldest walls, and form the north and south towers; the parts of a lighter shade, are the walls of the present struc¬ ture; the parts still fainter, are the erections of recent date. The various dotted lines shew the forms of the groins, and the tracery on the ceilings of the several chapels and the chapter- house. The longitudinal section passes through the central line from east to west ; as does the transverse section through the central line from north to south. PLATE III. Elevation of the west front of the Cathedral Church of Exeter. The object that first strikes the eye is the magnificent screen, or portal, which extends along the whole front. In richness of architectural ornament, and number of statues, it exceeds any thing of the kind in the kingdom. The great entrance is in the centre ; and there are smaller doors on either side, dif¬ fering from each other in form. On the right of the grand entrance, are seen the small windows which light the chapel of Bishop Grandison, the builder of this noble screen. Above the screen is seen the great west window, beautiful in its form and tracery. The painted glass which fills it is modern. Above this window is a cornice and battlements ; behind which is the upper window, giving light to the space under the roof. The front is crowned with a nich, containing the statue of Bishop Grandison. On each side of the great window are flying buttresses: on their fronts are statues. That on the left has a deed in his hand, which a kneeling monk is ready to receive. By the arms at his feet, this appears to represent the founder. The arms at the feet of the other statue, indicate it to be that of Edward the Confessor. On each side of the above buttresses, are seen the heads of the windows of the side ailes of the nave. The wall on each side of the great window is covered with tracery, rising gradually from the small octangular towers on each side (which towers differ in their form.) Stairs rise in the thickness of these walls. The two towers just mentioned, and the two square towers at the corners of the battlements, are crowned with pinnacles, which are of various proportion. On the left of the screen is an embattled wall, inclosing a small space. The window seen over it lights the spiritual court. Beyond the side of the spiritual court is seen part of the side of the north porch ; and above it is the top of one of the but¬ tresses and its pinnacle. The embattled wall on the right side of the screen, forms the side of the first lateral buttress. Above this wall is the buttress and its pinnacle. In the distance are seen the west fronts of the two great towers, part of the ancient fabric, of which they probably formed the west front. They are each divided into four stories, but differ considerably in their en¬ richments. The upper story of the northern tower, and the turrets at the angles of each, are of much later work ; probably of the period of the screen. The ridge of the roof retains its original finish, being open work in lead of the fleur-de-lys pattern. This is perhaps the only building in which it is preserved. On the left of the church is a part of the building called the Treasury. On the right of the southern great tower is the small chapel of the Holy Ghost, in the same style as the towers; and yet more to the right is the chapter-house. In the small square tower are stairs ascending to its leads. PLATE IV. Elevation of the north side of the Cathedral of Exeter. At the east end are seen the two first divisions of St. Mary’s chapel. The octangular tower standing before part of the second window, contains stairs ascending to the leads of the north aile of the choir. The adjoining window is in the cha¬ pel at the east end of the aile. Over its battlements is seen the upper part of the third division of St. Mary’s chapel. The low window adjoining is in Sir Thomas Speke’s chapel, and over it is the window of the aile at the back of the high altar. The three next windows are in the aile. The low window adjoining is in the revestry, and over it is the small window in the registry. The octangular buttress on the right, contains stairs ascending to the registry. The next three windows are in the aile; and the narrow window adjoining lights the cha¬ pel next to Sylke’s monumental chapel. Above all the windows hitherto noticed, rise the windows of the north side of the choir; all of elegant design, though differing in their tracery. At the north-east angle of the building is a small hexangular tower, with stairs to the roof ; and the adjoining window is of narrower dimensions than the rest. We now come to the great tower. The small window next the ground lights the clock-room. Above it is inserted a large window which lights the transept, and which breaks into the first ornamented story of the tower. Above that is a sort of fascia of intersecting arches, rather uncommon. The upper story of the tower is less ancient, though still of early date; and the turrets at the angles still more modern. Returning to the body of the church, the two first windows below light the north aile of the nave. Next to them is the porch, which has a room over it lighted by the two small windows; and to the right is an octangular tower, with stairs to that room. The three next windows are in the aile. The last window is in the spi¬ ritual court. A low heavy wall runs from the porch to this window, inclosing a small space. To the right of the spiritual court, is the door to the small inclosure, noticed in Plate III. Over it is the profile of the screen, and the flying buttress of the front. From the tower westward, the range of upper win¬ dows light the nave of the church; except that over the porch, which is in the registry, at the back of the minstrels’ gallery. Below the three great windows to the west of the registry, is a covered way, with cross loopholes, communicating with the registry. The ground at the east end of the church is level, 19 but rises suddenly and considerably at Speke’s cliapel, and keeps nearly level to the porch, whence it rapidly declines; and at the west front is only six inches above the level of the pavement within the church. The buttresses on this front (excepting those of St. Mary’s chapel,) are similar in design, though of various dimensions. The pinnacles on their tops are different in the choir and nave. The cornices and battlements are nearly uniform, varying only somewhat in their width. Much painted glass remains in the windows. This whole front, excepting the great tower, has a regularity in its construction unusual in our cathedrals, and is at once simple and elegant. PLATE V. Section from east to west of the Cathedral Church of Exeter. This section cuts the building in the centre, and shows the southern side of it. The easternmost building is the chapel of St. Mary, which consists of three arcades, divided by clustered semi-columns, which support groined arches. In the first arcade are the three stalls of the altar; and to the right, a door leading, now into the bishop’s garden, formerly into a vestry. In the second arcade is a monument, unknown, under a large arched recess. Two smaller arches decorate the wall beyond it. The third arcade opens into the chapel at the east end of the southern side aile of the choir. Under it is placed the stately monument of Bishop Bronescomb, nearly perfect; the pinnacles at the top being only wanting. The whole tomb, as well as the bishop’s statue, retain their original gilding and colours. The dress of the bishop is highly elegant, studded with representations of gems, and other rich ornaments. The whole is a precious relic of ancient splendour, and has fortu¬ nately escaped the barbarous hands of the white-washers, who have so often defaced these curious remains of the taste of our ancestors. Above the vaulting of this chapel the section of the roof appears, with the battlements and pinnacles of the wall rising above it. A low arch joins the chapel to the east end of the church. It is thus kept low, that the east window of the choir may receive as much light as possible. Through this arch is seen the screen of Bishop Oldham’s chapel; and behind it, a part of his monument. Over the roof of this low arch is seen an high wall, which quite incloses this space between the cha¬ pel and choir. In it is a door which opens to the stairs in the southern hexangular tower of the choir. In the lower part of the east window the glass opens like a door, so as to give access to the steps, whose section is seen joining the section of the altar screen to the wall of the east end of the church under the window. The use of this communication appears to have been for dressing the altar on great festivals; but the access to this part of the church is singularly secret. In order to arrive here, a person must go from the vestry in the north side aile, ascend the stairs in the tower of the small chapel at the east end of that aile, then pass over the leads of the aile to the hexangular tower at the north-east angle of the choir, cross over the east window by a small passage seen in profile, and concealed by the battlements, then descend by the stairs in the opposite tower, and come out on the leads of the space above described by the door seen in the drawing. This extraordinary caution may lead to a conjecture, that some pageantry may have been by this means exhibited over the altar, of which the detail was wished to be hidden from the knowledge of the spectators. The section of the modern altar is omitted, that the three stalls belonging to the altar may be wholly seen. They are of most beautiful and delicate workmanship, and fill up the first arch of the choir. In the second arch is an open screen, and under it an altar tomb of a person unknown. The third arch is closed also by an open screen, and the tombs of Bishops Walton and Bolton. Through these screens the service at the high altar was seen by such persons as were not admitted into the choir; and behind them the poor of the almshouses of the city still take their places, and attend divine service twice a day through¬ out the year. The screen in the fourth arch opens with fold¬ ing doors, to give admittance into the choir. Before the fifth arch stands the bishop’s throne, rising in airy state nearly to the vault of the choir. The sixth and seventh arches contain the stalls, of modern work; but over them appears the enta¬ blature of the ancient stone screen of the choir. Before the eighth arch, which is of very narrow dimensions, are the stairs leading to the organ-loft and the section of the front screen of the choir. The section of the body of the organ (which as usual stands over the central door of the choir) is omitted, in order to show the cluster of great organ-pipes placed against the last column of the choir. A similar cluster is placed against the column on the north side of the choir. They communicate with the body of the organ by a conduit in the gallery. These pipes are the largest in England, and esteemed of remarkably fine tone. The ninth great arch opens into the south transept under the south tower. In the transept is a tomb unknown. The door to the right opens to the staircase leading to the top of the tower. The seven following arches form the nave of the church. Behind the first of them, or tenth arch of the church, appears the door of entrance from the eastern cloister. Under the eleventh arch is the tomb of Hugh Courtney. Under the fifteenth arch is the modern font; and behind the sixteenth, is the door from the west cloiter, now stopped up. The great west window, its wall, and the door under it, are seen in sec¬ tion. The wall joining the screen to the church is seen in section, of vast thickness. Under it is the door to Bishop Gran- dison s chapel, and over it the south buttress of the screen. The tracery of all the windows in the south side aile cor¬ responds with their opposite windows in the northern aile. They have all their painted glass pretty perfect. Below the windows of the side aile of the nave, a stone seat runs the whole length of the wall, but it is not continued round the transept. Immediately over the great arches of both the nave and choir, there are recesses ornamented in front by very elegant small pillars and arches. Over these is an open parapet; be¬ hind which is a gallery, which extends from the west, quite along each side of the church to the east end, where it stops. Small arched passages, in the piers between the windows, join the open gallery before them. This gallery descends under the great west window, and under the great window in each transept, and is stopped up in the choir at the bishop’s throne, so as to admit of nobody overlooking the altar, or interrupting the celebrants. The access to this gallery is by stairs at the south-west angles of the nave and great south tower, and the north-west angle of the great north tower. The great windows both in the nave and choir correspond in their tracery with their opposites on the north side, and have most of their painted glass remaining. 20 Above the section of the vault the timbers of the roof ap¬ pear in section. Over the transept they are seen in front, and by them the whole system of the carpentry of the roof is dis¬ tinctly seen, and is of very excellent design. Over all, the upper part of the great south tower is seen. Its turrets differ in their finishing, probably in consequence of modern repairs. This section exhibits a regularity of design and variety of decoration not easily to be matched ; and the whole, except the stalls of the choir, is in its original state. PLATE VI. Section from north to south of the Cathedral Church of Exeter. This section shows the eastern side of the building. The low building to the north is part of the Treasury. In the section of the north wall of the tower, the first arch (beginning at the ground) is the way to the clock. Over it is the clock-room, and the clock itself seen in section. Above is the section of the great north window, with the arch of the interior gallery, described in the last Plate ; and the exterior gallery of the same window. Within the church, the first object directly under the clock is the monumental chapel of William Sylke. The arch ad¬ joining, which is closed with a screen, opens into a small chapel, whose window is seen through the arch. It has no painted glass. Just beyond the screen, on the wall, appears some small iron work, with hooks for hanging up the vergers staves. Over the arch appears a projecting gallery supported by flying groins, with the door of entrance to it. This appears to have been built to continue the communication, before de¬ scribed, round the church. The next arch, which in design is similar to that of the nave and choir exhibited in the last Plate, opens into the side aile of the choir, and is closed by a screen ; over which appears the window in the end of the aile. Its painted glass is perfect. The great arch opening to the choir, next appears. The lower part is closed by the screen, or rood loft. This is divi¬ ded into three great parts by flat arches and pillars. Over these is a row of smaller arches filled with ancient paintings, from the Old and New Testament. Above the entablature of these arches are ancient and modern shields of arms. Under each of the lateral arches of the screen were altars ; the steps to them still remain. Under the centre arch is the door of entrance to the choir ; through it the eagle reading-desk is seen; and be¬ yond it the steps to the altar, and the present altar, with its rails, kc. Over the screen appears the top of the ancient altar screen, which some years ago was deprived of its original or¬ naments, and is now painted with the design of the inside of an ancient building, with Moses and Aaron, &c. in the arches. Above the screen are seen the flying steps leading to the east window, more fully described in the preceding Plate, and over them the noble east window, resplendent in its original magnificence, having all its painted glass perfect; consisting of religious and royal personages in rich niches, various shields of arms, and a profusion of ornamental devices. In this, as in the former Plate, the organ is omitted, except the great pipes, which cover the pillars directly over each end of the screen, as was described in the last Plate. The arch to the south of the choir is in every respect similar to that before described on the north; the window of the south aile seen through it has its painted glass. Immediately beyond the great pillar of the south tower is the monument of Bishop Leofric. The arch adjoining, with its screen, and the gallery over it, are similar to those in the north tower. Against the south wall of the tower appears the monument L 2, in the Plan. The clustered columns, vaultings, and windows, in the two towers, are of the same period as the body of the church, and are as far as possible rendered uniform with it, the arches springing at the same height with those of the new work. In the centre of the groin of the north tower is a large octa¬ gonal opening, filled up with wood work of the design of the groin. This opening, which is evidently for the purpose of receiving things from below, was probably made when the great bell given by Bishop Courtney was raised to the top of the tower. This wood work is sustained in its place by a very curious machine, which is seen in the Plate. It is placed on one of the sides of the octagon, and consists of a plinth, from which rises an upright post, bearing on its top an hori¬ zontal beam, one end plain, the other formed into the arch of a circle, over which passes a chain which is fastened to the centre of the wooden work which closes the vault. To the plain end of the beam is hung a chest filled with stones, which counterpoises the weight of the wood work at the other end. If it were necessary to remove the wooden closure of the vault, an additional weight would be placed in the chest, and the wood being hereby raised above the floor on which the ma¬ chine stands, the whole machine would be turned round on the vertical axis till the wood work cleared the opening of the vault. When the vault was to be closed, the machine would be turned back and unloaded, till the wood descended to its proper situation. This contrivance, awkward as it is, must be considered as a curiosity, being perhaps the only specimen remaining of the mechanical powers used by our ancestors. The north tower above the vaulting of the church is divi¬ ded into three stories by two timber floors. The upper one has a frame on it, which just under the roof supports the great bell (seen in section); it is never rung, but the hours are struck on it by an hammer communicating with the clock be¬ low ; and its sound even by this small power, is so loud as to deafen for a time those who are under it. The windows of the upper story of the tower, with their pointed arches, are seen ; and it is singular that above them, and the doors of the staircases in the turrets, which are also pointed, the ornaments on the turrets are of the small round arched work. The roof of the body of the church is seen, as in the pre¬ ceding Plate ; and in the distance, the elegant round window which lights it. In the southern tower there are two floors laid as in the northern, though not exactly at the same height. It seems as if just below the long narrow windows of the lower chamber, a floor had formerly existed, as a door opens from the stairs in the south-east angle of the tower at that height, as well as one on the present floor. In the upper floor hang ten bells; four are visible in this section. These are often rung out; and so great is the concussion, that the joints of the stones open in many places, and shut again when the ringing ceases. On the sides of the turrets are oblique grooves, seemingly cut to receive the work of a wooden spire about fifty-five feet high. The low round arched building south of the southern tower, is the chapel of the Holy Ghost; apparently of the same age 21 as the towers, excepting its east window, which has a pointed arch. Still farther south is the chapter-house. Its large east window is of elegant form, but is divested of its painted glass. The open timber work of the roof is of extremely beautiful design, and retains its ancient painting. The whole proportion of this chapter-house is peculiarly graceful. PLATE VII. The grand screen or fagade at the west front of the Cathe¬ dral of Exeter. It is divided into three parts, separated in some degree by two projecting parts or buttresses; but which both make part of the regular design. In the centre part is the principal en¬ trance into the church ; and on the right of it are the small windows of Bishop Grandison’s chapel: in the two other divisions are the smaller entrances, which differ in their form. The angles on each extremity of the screen are different: the principal parts of it are a plinth with mouldings, on which rises a regular number of divisions, separated by small angular buttresses, enriched. Each division contains two tier of niches: the lower one has a pedestal of three sides, with pannels, and embattled at top ; from which issue angels, either placed against, or embracing small clusters of columns: they display an elegant variety of attitudes, &c. On the pedestals of the small windows there is but one column, though there are three capitals, corresponding with the rest of the several capitals. They support an assemblage of royal personages, who are seat¬ ed, some in their robes, and others in very splendid armour. Those statues on the buttresses which are standing, are reli¬ gious ; the one that is perfect to the right, a bishop. Over the entrance of the left part of the screen are three of the cardinal virtues; the fourth destroyed. The first, from the scales, Justice; the second, from the lance and shield, Fortitude; the third, from the religious dress, and the hart in her hands, Discipline: they each have crowns on their heads, and are trampling under their feet prostrate figures emblematic of their opposite vices. In the spandrels of the arch of the principal entrance are four angels reposing; and in four small niches on the side of the architrave are small statues of royal per¬ sonages seated. Over the entrance of the third part issue from small ornamented brackets two royal personages, and between them a griffon. On the returns or sides of the buttress are four more royal persons. The Canopies to the niches differ on the buttresses, and to the four first divisions on the third part. In the second tier, all the statues are standing, except in the niche joining the centre small angular buttress, in which is a royal figure seated ; in his right hand the remains of a sceptre, and in the other a book; his foot on a globe, which is divided into three parts: below is a shield with the arms of the see, quar¬ tered with the old Saxon kings, supported by two kneeling angels. The corresponding statue is gone, though the shield with the arms of England, and Edward the Confessor, sup¬ ported likewise with angels, remains. The five statues on each side comprehend ten of the Apostles, with their attributes. On the buttresses are the four Evangelists, with their symbols at their feet: the rest of the statues which fill the remaining niches, have no particular badge to distinguish them. There are likewise four more statues in this line, on the returns of the buttresses; but they have no distinguishing marks. The statue on the angle at the extremity to the right in this tier, is St. Michael triumphing over Lucifer. The heads of the niches differ again in the buttresses; but those in the third part alter their design entirely. The line of the entablature continues to the right hand buttress, and then loses part of its width. The battlements on the first and third part are of a most uncommon fancy: angels appear between the openings ; some playing on musical instruments, and others in attitudes of devotion: the battlements of the centre part and buttresses are open, and are much enriched. PLATE VIII. Parts of the Cathedral of Exeter at large. A, the north porch. The architecture of this porch is rather singular, from an air of simplicity, and the low relief of its decorations. The crockets on the three pedimental parts are of oak leaves. On the three brackets formerly were statues. The battlements are of the same design as those of the whole building. Within the porch is seen the door of entrance into the north aile of the nave. B, the internal elevation of a part of the north side of the chapter-house. A low stone seat forms the base or plinth to the clustered columns, which stand in a circular manner completely de¬ tached from each other. A moulding divides the shafts into two equal parts, and is continued along the face of the wall, forming a base to the double arched recesses, which are orna¬ mented with small clustered columns, of a design similar to the large ones. The capitals of all are formed of that elegant plume-like foliage common in the works of this style. On the capitals of the lower order is placed the base of a second cluster of columns, which suddenly changes into a niche of beautiful form. Immediately from the head of the niche rises the arched timber rib of open work supporting the roof, the front view of which is seen in Plate VI. Above the arched recesses a very beautiful fascia, consisting of an hollow moulding filled up with foliage twisted round a rod, forms a base to the windows, whose mullions are formed of clusters of small columns : their tracery is rich, but their painted glass is gone. The spandrels are filled with tracery and shields of arms of the see; and it seems probable that the chapter-house, which is by Godwin said to have been built by Bishop Lacy in the year 1450, was by him only adorned and altered to its present form. He probably took down the walls as low as the bottom of the niches, and perhaps widened the openings of the windows. The style of the lower part of the building is entirely different from that of the upper part, and of much more ancient date; and the very abrupt termi¬ nation of the columns in the niches, seems to mark exactly where the new work began. PLATE IX. Part of the north side of the nave of the Cathedral Church at Exeter. This part has been selected, not only as a specimen of the architecture of the whole building, but to give the opportunity of introducing the only variety in the general design, and to present to view the celebrated gallery for the minstrels. The 22 lower tier of arches are divided by clusters of columns ; their plinths form a seat, their bases have three courses of mould¬ ings, and their capitals are very simple. The architraves of the arches have an infinity of mouldings : on the centre column of the cluster rises another tier of columns, supported by a queen on one side and a king on the other, eacli holding a niche from whence the clusters spring. These upper columns have enriched capitals, from which spring the ribs of the groins. Over the points of the architraves of the arches runs a small cornice, being the base line for the arched recesses over them: next runs the open gallery. The minstrels’ gallery, the centrical and striking object before us, partakes of the same design ; it projects from the wall, and is supported by a cor¬ nice. It is divided into twelve niches in front (there are like¬ wise one at each end) by pilasters, whose pinnacles, and the heads of the niches are sweetly blended with the open work of the gallery. Each niche contains an angel playing on some musical instrument in use at that period. Over this gallery rises a flat arch ; under which is seen part of the window in the registry above the porch, whose outside aspect is seen in Plate IV. Behind the pillars and arches appears the wall of the side aile, with the stone seat ranging along it. The door with steps in the centre, is that of the north porch. The blank tracery above it corresponds with the opposite window in the south aile; as does the blank over the minstrels’ gallery with its opposite window in the nave of the church. PLATE X. Parts of the Cathedral Church of Exeter at large. A, the clock given by Bishop Courtney. This clock is worthy of notice, both for the elegance of its ornaments, and its mechanism, which is uncommon at so early a time. The earth is in the centre. Round it the moon revolves in a month, and changes her aspect according to her age, which is marked on the interior divided circle. Beyond her another ball represents the sun, and points to the twenty- four hours. The circle of hours is numbered from one to twelve twice over. The inscription, pereunt et imputantur, is modern. B, the three stalls at the high altar. The richness and delicacy of ornament in these stalls cannot be exceeded. The recess or back of each seat forms a semi¬ octagon, and is adorned with enriched mosaic work. At the top of the back of the central seat is the bust of a bishop, and in each of the lateral seats is that of a priest. The seats as they rise form the plinths for the columns, which are supported by couchant lions. The columns on each side of the central niche are of gilt brass. From the capitals rise octangular canopies, from which spring a second tier of open niches crowned with clustered pinnacles, enriched with foliage. It is remarkable that the back front of these stalls totally differs in design from that here given. Three pillars, seen in shade, support the ca¬ nopies behind, and give an air of strength to the work; break¬ ing the openings, which would otherwise appear too great. The open niches above also are of a triangular plan; and the pillar behind rises directly from the lower pillar in re¬ gular design. The finialls which crown the lower niches of the back front, appear in shade between the upper niches. By this artifice great richness is united with lightness and strength. C, the bishop’s throne. The whole of this beautiful structure is of wood, and it is of singular lightness. Its general form is square. The lower part is decorated with a row of small niches. At each angle rises a buttress, whence spring rich arches, forming the canopy to the throne. Above each arch is a tall open niche, and from the centre of these rises the light square spire. On the sides of the front niche are branching brackets, which formerly supported statues, or perhaps lights. The acute points of the lower arch are decorated with flying angels, holding the sacred vessels of the altar. PLATE XL Ornaments from different parts of the Cathedral of Exeter at large. The twelve first, are the supports to the second tier of columns in the nave and choir of the church. A and B, are elegant designs of vines. C, St. Catherine: she stands on a bust. D, seems to be our Saviour rising from the grave: his right hand in the act of blessing ; in the left, a banner with the cross. The bust on which he stands wears a crown of a singular form, the cap being acutely pointed. E, is a figure of the Virgin and Child, of a very graceful design. F, has two compartments: in the lower part is the Virgin and Child; above is the Virgin crowned by the Almighty, with angels attending. G and H, are on each side of the minstrels’ gal¬ lery, and have been already noticed. I, is probably St. Cecilia playing on a crewth. Over her head a strangely distorted angel seems descending to listen. The figure of the saint is not void of elegance. J, a bishop with figures attending, now defaced: he stands on a crowned female bust.' K, a man playing on a crewth. Over his head, in a separate compart¬ ment, a king with a book in his hand crowning a queen. L, the Virgin and Child, with angels censing them. The atti¬ tude of the Child, and the bend of the Virgin’s head towards him, are far from despicable. The six angels below are from the arches of the bishop’s throne. Having thus described the Cathedral Church of Exeter, as delineated ip the several Plates, it would be an injustice to the Reverend Guardians of this sacred edifice, to omit the mention of the nice attention paid by them to its repairs; in which workmen are continually employed with the strictest adherence to the original design. By this constant attention to the fabric, no such dilapidations can ever arise as may at length require a great reparation ; which when absolutely necessary, is but too often conducted in such a manner as to destroy the most beautiful parts of our ancient buildings, and substitute to them discordant modern imitations. The solem¬ nity and splendour of the Divine Service is attended to with a care equal to that bestowed on the building, and does equal honour to the Dean and Chapter. 'W A™? -X •