\Cllofc Z cc l 
 Ilisjo/Kjb 
 
Ml i 
 
 Jf a " t'dS *■' 
 

ST. GILES’ CHURCH, 
 
 OXFORD. 
 
 This ancient Church, dedicated to the glory of God in honour of St. Giles, is especially 
 interesting and valuable, as illustrating the rise and progress of the Early English style of 
 Gothic Architecture. 
 
 “The earliest account of the Church is by Rouse, or Ross of Warwick, who tells us that 
 one Alwin, who had the surname of Godegose, and possessed some property in the manor, 
 erected the original fabric about the time of the Conquest; though it does not appear to 
 have been dedicated to St. Giles till the year 1120.” 
 
 ********** 
 
 “ Its revenues,” says Peshall, “ at first arose from the offerings of pious persons, to which 
 a great addition was afterwards made by the inhabitants of Walton, who gave all their 
 tithes, belonging to the said village, to remain for ever to the said Church. The Founder 
 is said to have appointed a clerk to perform divine service here; but some difficulties 
 having arisen, the right was confirmed by King Henry I., and the Bishop of Lincoln; 
 who issued a mandate to the Archdeacon, empowering and commanding him to induct 
 Edwin, the son of Alwin before mentioned, into the possession of the benefice.” 
 
 . “ The same pious Founder, to whom the undoubted patronage of the Church belonged, 
 about eighteen years afterwards; 1138, when the dedication of the Nunnery of Godstow 
 took place, bestowed the advowson with all its appurtenances for ever upon that religious 
 house. This grant was confirmed by the charters of the Empress Matilda and her son, 
 Henry II.” 
 
 “St. Hugh of Grenoble, Bishop of Lincoln, about the year 1200, instituted a Vicar 
 in this Church, who was to receive by endowment the whole tithes of the gardens in the 
 parish, &c.; the nuns of Godstow agreeing to sustain all ordinary burdens, except 
 synodals; which the Vicar according to custom was obliged to pay.” 
 
 After the dissolution of religious houses it passed through various hands until settled on 
 St. John’s College. 
 
 “ The Church is in that interesting style of Architecture generally, which marks the 
 transition from the Circular arch to the Pointed. The oldest portions of the fabric have 
 all the characteristics of the former style, though most of the arches are pointed. We 
 frequently find circular and pointed arches used in different parts of the same building 
 at this period, without any reason to suppose that they are therefore of a different date. 
 
 B 
 
ST. GILES’ CHURCH. 
 
 2 
 
 But there is so striking a difference between the circular and pointed arches of this struc¬ 
 ture, that there is reason to believe, from this and other circumstances, that certain portions 
 of the tower are considerably older than the nave and side aisles.” 
 
 ********** 
 
 “ The tower is evidently the oldest part of the present fabric. It is built of rubble and 
 small stones united by a strong cement, and tied by quoins of masonry in a very sub¬ 
 stantial and durable manner. The whole is massive, particularly the lower part. On the 
 north and south are two plain and acutely pointed arches, supported on square piers: 
 on the west is a window of the lancet form: and on the east a lofty pointed arch, 
 opening into the nave, supported on two massive circular columns, the capitals and 
 bases of which closely resemble the earliest of those in the Cathedral of Christ Church.” 
 
 In the middle story, under the belfry, are four circular-headed windows of very rough 
 workmanship, though filled on the outside with cut stone of much later date, and made to 
 appear like mere eyelets, square at the top; one of these windows looking towards the 
 nave, but now closed, is on a higher level and shorter than the other three. This circum¬ 
 stance has evidently arisen from the roof of the nave originally reaching only up to this 
 point; (which is shewn to be the case by the weather-stone still remaining on the west 
 side.) “ In the upper story of the tower are four larger windows, each of two lights, 
 divided by a mullion, under a pointed arch; but instead of the usual trefoil or quatrefoil 
 in the head, there is a mere eyelet, as before. This upper part of the tower is clearly 
 therefore of later date than the lower part.” 
 
 “ The chancel is of early character, corresponding with the tower. On the south side 
 is a large arch of a circular form, but of remarkably large span in proportion to its 
 height; and in the wall of the south and north aisles are small arches of a similar form : 
 the square piers and plain mouldings of which correspond, and indicate an early date a .” 
 
 The foregoing passages are part of a very interesting account of St. Giles’ Church in the 
 “ Memorials of Oxford,” from which much larger extracts might have been taken had not 
 the Plates of this work required a different and more minute sort of description. This it 
 is intended to proceed with shortly in the order in which they come. 
 
 But first it would be well to state what additional facts and arguments can be adduced 
 in support of the opinions respecting the age of the Church, which have been adopted in 
 the quotations given above. 
 
 Judging simply from the form and character of their capitals b and arches, it would seem 
 highly probable that the belfry windows and the tower-arch were insertions of the same 
 period. But this probability becomes much stronger when we find the very same forms c , 
 amongst many others of a similar character, and work of a like transitionary sort, in the 
 arcade of pointed arches round the circular part of the Temple Church, which was 
 
 “ Ingram’s Memorials of Oxford, " St. Giles’ Church,” pp. 2—6. 
 
 h Compare Plates XII., XIY. 
 
 c See Billing’s Illustrations of the Temple Church. Plates XXII., XXIII., XXIY.; figs. 4, 9, 23, 31, 44, &c. 
 
ST. GILES’ CHURCH. 
 
 3 
 
 dedicated A.D. 1185 d . Now as regards the date, it is not at all likely that they are 
 earlier than these. I may take it for granted that the Knights Templars (themselves 
 Freemasons) designed their Church in the most perfect and advanced style of art that 
 their skill could devise. And as we may well imagine, and indeed know to have been 
 the case on the completion of any great work, as occasions served, the new forms were 
 multiplied and others of a like character devised. 
 
 Supposing, then, the belfry windows and the arch below to date after the year 1185, the 
 next question is, on what occasion these alterations were made, and by whom ? 
 
 Now, as there is every reason to believe that the belfry-story, or at any rate the windows, 
 are of later date than the rest of the tower, and that “ a considerable difference is ob¬ 
 servable between the rude arches in the interior of the tower and that which opens 
 into the nave 6 if, as we shall presently see, the oldest work in the remaining part 
 of the Church can hardly be of earlier date than the above-mentioned insertions, and 
 if to this be added the facts that the tower is as much as ten inches in sixteen feet 
 (the length of one of its sides) out of the line of the present Church, and that the 
 weather-stone, which it still retains, if produced, would cut through the heads of the 
 arches on either side, while at the same time it is below the line of the original 
 chancel-roof, it becomes a very doubtful matter whether there is any other part left 
 of the original Church erected by Godegose; a doubt the more likely to be just, be¬ 
 cause in all probability it was an edifice of but small pretensions, whether as regards 
 size or design. 
 
 The oldest portions, after the tower, are the windows in the north wall of the 
 chancel; the arch opening into the south chapel; a tall round-headed door in its south 
 wall, (as far as its form can be guessed at under the plaster,) and the low round 
 arches in the north and south aisles. These windows are mullioned f , with a third light 
 in their head, the combination being not less rude than that of the belfry windows. 
 The label over the wide semi-circular arch is a round in all respects similar to the 
 lower string-course in the aisles immediately over the arcades of arches, only thicker. 
 The pointed arch into the south chapel shews a soffit quite square and plain; and its 
 pier wall and abacus are square, the latter with a simple chamfer. Square abaci are 
 also found on the small pillars of the arcade of the low round arches, with work of a 
 transitionary character, but, like the belfry windows, with much more of an Early 
 English than a Norman air. 
 
 For the reasons given above, these can hardly be portions of the first Church, still 
 
 d The capitals of the tower-arch, as has been before remarked, resemble those in Christ Church Cathedral, prin¬ 
 cipally in their shape, but there the arches are semicircular, and so the pointed windows and arch of St. Giles’ 
 tower must be of later date. The Cathedral was consecrated A.D. 1180. 
 e Memorials of Oxford, “ St. Giles’ Church,” p. 2. 
 
 f 'The mullions, through an oversight in correcting the proofs, are omitted. The jambs and mullions on the 
 exterior have mouldings something similar to those of the east windows of the chancel and the south chapel. 
 Whether the work is original or not is therefore very doubtful; the inside work would seem to be original. 
 
 B 2 
 
4 
 
 ST. GILES’ CHURCH. 
 
 less can they date with the greater part of the superstructure of the nave and aisles, 
 although it is very possible they formed part of one uniform plan, the execution of which, 
 for some reason® or other, was delayed, or not completely earned out for several years; 
 and during this interval great and rapid improvements were suggesting themselves. 
 
 Now, that it was a very usual course to finish off the chancel, in the first instance, 
 and sometimes the tower, in order that the people might as soon as possible have 
 opportunity of attending the holy offices of the Church, and that there might be 
 bells to summon them, it is only necessary to adduce the great instance of Cologne 
 
 Cathedral. And if this was really the case with St. Giles’, the use of that wide arch, 
 
 and, for its situation, lofty door, may receive a somewhat probable explanation; for 
 all communication being cut off westward, and the arches blocked up, the people 
 
 may have been admitted by this door into the antechapel h , which thus served for 
 
 the time as a temporary nave. 
 
 Having given some sort of answer to the first question—on what occasion the new 
 work was introduced into the tower walls—it remains only to discover, if possible, 
 under whose direction the work was done. Now it seems to be a tradition, that 
 St. Hugh of Lincoln rebuilt, or added to the Church; and it has been suggested that 
 the tower is his work 1 . The evidence in support of this is simply presumptive; for 
 the only historical notice bearing upon the point is, that about A.D. 1200, Hugh, 
 Bishop of Lincoln, instituted a Vicar here, and granted him additional tithes. Such 
 notices as this, however, often mark the date of some considerable enlargement or 
 improvement in a Church, such as that we are supposing. Now there is a corbel-head 
 of a Bishop, supporting the roof of the nave, (Plate XIV.), of which the mitre exactly 
 resembles those of the latter part of the twelfth century. This, then, may very well 
 represent St. Hugh, particularly as we read he was considered so great a benefactor 
 to this Church and parish, that the bells were rung on his festival, even as late as 
 the reign of Queen Elizabeth 14 . And the likelihood of St. Hugh being the second 
 Founder of this Church, derives weight from the great name he has left as a Church- 
 builder and architect. 
 
 He was a native of Burgundy, but was sent for into England by King Henry II., 
 for his great learning and sanctity, to preside over a Carthusian monastery at Witham, 
 in Somersetshire. Immediately on his arrival he set himself to complete the build¬ 
 ings, working with his own hands, and carrying the stones and mortar on his shoulders. 
 In 1186, he was consecrated Bishop of Lincoln, having been elected to that See by 
 the free choice of the Chapter; and even there, such was his exceeding meekness and 
 humility, and love for Church-building, that, as it is related of him, he carried many 
 of the stones and the mortar to his workmen engaged upon the Cathedral 1 . 
 
 B See p. 5. h The east wall of this chapel originally did not stand much beyond the arch. 
 
 1 Companion to Glossary of Architecture, p. 29. k Memorials of Oxford, ff St. Giles’ Church/’ p. 3. 
 
 1 Dr. Milner’s Hist. Gothic Architecture. 
 
ST. GILES’ CHURCH. 
 
 5 
 
 Oxford was at this time in the diocese of Lincoln, but the style of the work there 
 is so far in advance of what has been attributed to St. Hugh in this account of 
 St. Giles’, that it would seem, at first sight, impossible that he could have designed 
 them both. But it must be remembered, that he was consecrated only the year after 
 the dedication of the Temple Church, and also that he died (A.D. 1210) a good while 
 before the completion of his own Cathedral; and so it is no improbable conjecture to 
 suppose the nave and aisles of St. Giles’ were left to be finished at some future day, 
 at the time this more magnificent undertaking was commenced. 
 
 When it was the works of St. Giles’ were resumed there is no evidence to offer. 
 It would seem they were carried on gradually, and, as far as conjecture goes, pretty 
 much after St. Hugh’s own designs, though most of the details are of a later 
 period. Thus in the north aisle there is nothing very different in the idea of the 
 second and fourth windows" 1 (counting from the east) and the belfry windows; and 
 if, as has been thought, the arcade in the north aisle is of later date than the cor¬ 
 responding arches in the opposite wall, this would be another point in favour of such 
 a supposition. The forms and arrangement are the same. 
 
 With regard to the date of this later work, some of it is very similar to that in 
 the chapter-house in Christ Church and other buildings of the earlier part of the 
 reign of Henry III.; and there is a corbel head of a King" supporting the roof of the 
 clerestory in St. Giles’, which, from the form of the crown, and the fashion of the 
 hair &c., is certainly of the age of this King. 
 
 “ Plate III. n See Plate XIV. 
 
 c 
 
DESCRIPTION OF THE PLATES. 
 
 PLATE I. 
 
 GROUND PLAN. 
 
 The unusual width of the aisles of St. Giles’ Church forms, with the nave and south chapel, so 
 spacious an area, that, if the present roomy pews were removed, and open benches substituted, it 
 would afford accommodation for all, perhaps, who as parishioners, have a right to demand it. And 
 so, instead of disfiguring the Church with a gallery, and spoiling the beautiful Early English windows, 
 (as has been threatened,) a new arrangement of the seats, and the additional number they would 
 accommodate, would be a very great improvement indeed. 
 
 The walls of the tower are seen to be very much out of the line of the rest of the Church, which 
 makes it likely 0 that the first Church was built more to the north, although (from not being able 
 to explain it in any other way) one would be glad to account for the diverging line of pillars on the 
 south side, and some other irregularities, by supposing that part of the present more costly and 
 spacious Church was built upon the ancient foundation. It will be observed that the average span 
 of the arches on the north side of the nave is greater than on the opposite side, and that the span 
 of no two arches on either side is exactly similar. This may have been intentional; for the widest on 
 the north side is fifteen feet, and it is opposite to a three-light window which nearly faces you on 
 entering. It will be noticed by and by (p. 9, on Plate VII.) that the other three-light window p on 
 the same side was not designed for a front view, hut to he seen obliquely through the second arch, or 
 from the aisle: and so the span of its opposite arch is but thirteen feet. 
 
 PLATE II. 
 
 LONGITUDINAL SECTION LOOKING SOUTH. 
 
 The parts of most interest in this Plate have been already described. It remains only to direct 
 attention to the noble nave arches, and the situation of the various details given at large and more 
 fully described a little farther on. These are the belfry window (Plate XII.), the south capital of the 
 tower arch, and the corbel head of the Bishop (Plate XIV.), immediately opposite to which is the head 
 of the King (see p. 11.) ; the south doorway, with its mouldings and details (Plate X.), a section of 
 one of the nave arches, a base, and the second and third capitals from the east (Plate XI.), and the 
 piscina in the south aisle, (Plate XIII.) 
 
 PLATE III. 
 
 LONGITUDINAL SECTION OF NORTH AISLE. 
 
 This aisle is divided into four compartments, or chapels, by transverse arches, of which there are now 
 three remaining, a beam having been substituted for a fourth, which, it seems, was spreading, and so 
 
 0 See page 3. 
 
 p The mullions are wanting in the sections of three of the windows on this plan: for their description see page 3, 
 note f. 
 
8 
 
 DESCRIPTION OF THE PLATES. 
 
 thrusting in the pillar from which it sprung. Besides their architectural beauty and the idea of space 
 and infinity which they help to produce, these arches support the rafters of the several roofs. In 
 the absence of vaulting, the horizontal line of the cornice or parapet over a gothic window, when 
 there is no perpendicular line to cross it, is a defect which often strikes the eye. By adopting the 
 plan under notice, the architect of St. Giles’ not only avoided this evil on the inside and gained a great 
 additional height for his windows, but also on the outside produced a most beautiful line of gables. 
 The framing of the roofs is doubtless Early English, although straight pieces have here and there been 
 substituted for the original curved braces' 1 . 
 
 Two of the windows are given at large in another plate, namely the triple-light window with shafts, 
 and the one with the quatrefoil in its head. The two-light window with the single shaft, is an inter¬ 
 mediate step between the belfry window and the early description of mullion windows which held the 
 shafts engaged, “but so as to leave them apparently free 1 .” (Of this, the east window in the south 
 chapel is a somewhat late example.) The two-light window is, in fact, much as the belfry window 
 would be with glass introduced behind the shaft, so as to leave it disengaged and in bold relief. But 
 although this arrangement (which is seen in greater perfection in the three-light window next to it) 
 produced a most beautiful effect on the inside, the exterior was in general extremely plain, unless shafts 
 were engaged as in the Temple Church, but this required immense thickness of walls, and, after all, the 
 effect is not nearly so good as on the inside. The detached shaft at length gave way to the moulded 
 mullion, which was equally beautiful both on the inside and the out. 
 
 I can offer no suggestion as to the use of the semicircular arches in this aisle, unless they were seats 
 reserved for the Lord of the Manor, or for Founders, or persons holding high office, to whom the 
 Church allowed this distinction. They would seem too small for sepulchral recesses. 
 
 PLATE IV. 
 
 TRANSVERSE SECTION LOOKING EAST. 
 
 The east window of the chancel is modern, copied from the original chancel-window of St. Mary 
 Magdalene Church, now destroyed. The rere-dos is modern. The Altar-table is supported on three 
 arches. The tracery on the pulpit is copied exactly from some original work. (See Plate XIII.) 
 
 The east window of the north aisle is a restoration; the shaft being new. 
 
 The beautiful window in the south chapel is given at large in Plate IX. The roof of this chapel 
 is original, but as the timbers are merely chamfered and not moulded, there is not much to guide us 
 to the date; it may he Early English or Decorated. There were tie-beams, but these have been cut 
 away, probably to shew the east window to greater advantage. At present the truss is formed of a 
 collar, with curved braces, which stop upon a solid cornice, but spring below it. 
 
 PLATE V. 
 
 TRANSVERSE SECTION LOOKING WEST. 
 
 This section cuts through the north and south doors of the Church and the second arch from 
 the west on either side. The chief points of interest in it are the porch, the tower arch, and 
 the transverse arch in the north aisle. 
 
 i There is a roof of similar form over the cloisters at Chichester (in the East Ambulatory), of which the 
 mouldings of the cornice and ridge are decidedly Early English. The cloisters themselves were much altered in 
 Perpendicular times. 
 
 r See Froude’s Remains, vol. ii. p. 362. 
 
DESCRIPTION OF THE PLATES. 
 
 9 
 
 The porch will be described presently. The tower arch is composed of two square members, 
 surmounted with a heavy label in character. The capitals have been described. The bases are 
 concealed, but would probably be moulded much like those in the nave, (Plate XI.) The transverse 
 arch is supported by corbels, one of which is given at large, (Plate XIV.) 
 
 The roof of the nave of St. Giles’ must have been twice altered, once when the Church built by 
 Godegose was rebuilt and enlarged, and afterwards when the present clerestory and its flat roof were 
 constructed. The lines of the weather-stone of the original Church, (which are seen six or seven feet 
 above the tower arch,) if continued down through the nave walls, would cut off' a considerable part of 
 the present nave arches. There is no weather-stone to shew the pitch of the second roof; but 
 at the south-east corner of the nave wall there is a corbel projecting from the wall, (see Frontis¬ 
 piece,) of which it would be hard to tell the use, unless it once supported the coping of the gable. 
 And if this gable ran up as high as the ridge of the present roof, and there are indications on 
 the outside that it did, it would form a good Early English pitch, and rise the usual height above 
 the line of the chancel roof. The corbel heads which support the present roof of the nave (see Plate 
 XIV.) must therefore have been raised from a lower position, which would explain how St. Hugh 
 of Lincoln and King Henry III. came to be opposite each other as supporters of a Tudor roof. 
 
 PLATE VI. 
 
 THE SOUTH ELEVATION. 
 
 The most striking object on this side of the Church is the Early English porch. At first it was 
 intended to give its details at large, but so much of the stone-work was found to have been renewed, 
 (accurately, I believe, and well,) that it was thought better to confine the illustrations to really old 
 portions. 
 
 The Decorated window, at best poor and modern looking, is not so clumsy as it is here represented. 
 The Early English windows are excellent examples. On the exterior their jambs are moulded with a 
 chamfer and a hollow square: the heads of the lights are rather obtuse than lancet. On the inside 
 they are splayed to about three times the width of the lights; and the arch over the splay is not 
 concentric with the arch of the light, but far more obtuse: it is so formed as to hold a shadow, 
 which is a great beauty in windows of this sort. 
 
 The parapet on the aisle is modern; until lately the feet of the rafters were seen, and earlier 
 still I think there was a high pitched roof. 
 
 Excepting the marks of a round or obtusely pointed arch over the present door, the south 
 chapel retains no vestige of its original features. 
 
 PLATE VII. 
 
 THE TRIPLE-LIGHT WINDOW. 
 
 It has been already pointed out that this window was not designed for a direct view. This is 
 evident from the side lights not being in the centre of their arches, and the section of the clustered 
 shafts shews that they were designed to obstruct the light or the view of the stained glass as little as 
 possible from persons viewing it in an oblique direction, the side rounds not projecting so far as the front, 
 and the back one less than either: but this would not be noticed except on very close examination. 
 
 In the Churches built by our ancestors, after good care taken that all was substantial and real 
 and beautiful, much was done simply to touch and enlist the affections of the beholder. But the 
 
10 
 
 DESCRIPTION OF THE PLATES. 
 
 ancient mode of creating “ effect” was far different from ours, and in the matter of construction 
 was founded upon an intimate knowledge of perspective appearance: and, so in other things, while 
 we use paint to conceal the worthlessness of our materials, then it was the practice to cover 
 “ cedar with gold,” and oak with the richest colours. 
 
 The subject of perspective effect has been but briefly touched upon, but might be exemplified 
 in many ways. 
 
 I will just direct attention to the forms of the heads of Early English lights, which are now 
 usually made very acute, and which in perspective become painfully so, whilst in St. Giles’ 
 Church, and most other old examples, the arch is not even equilateral. They seem to have been 
 made more acute when at a height from the eye. The date of this window may be about 1225. 
 
 PLATE VIII. 
 
 WINDOW IN NORTH AISLE. 
 
 This window is like one of a much earlier date in the spire of Christ Church Cathedral. It has an 
 expression which many a richer window lacks. This is owing in great part to its hood, or hollowed 
 head. The thickness of the wall on the plan is incorrect, it should be 2ft. 6in. 
 
 PLATE IX. 
 
 THE EAST WINDOW IN SOUTH CHAPEL. 
 
 This is a most beautiful window of late Early English work. It had been left unfinished, but on 
 removing the plaster, some of the mouldings, &c. were found worked. It has lately been completed 
 by Mr. Grimsley, of Oxford, under Mr. Derick’s directions, exactly after the original design thus 
 discovered. 
 
 PLATE X. 
 
 SOUTH DOOR AND DETAILS. 
 
 The ornaments at the spring of the label, forming a sort of label terminations, have been restored or 
 copied in cement. The arch-moulding shews much the same section as that of the triple-light window 
 in the north aisle, described above. 
 
 PLATE XI. 
 
 DETAILS OF THE PILLARS AND ARCHES IN NAVE. 
 
 Half elevations only of these are given, to save room; and a half section is given of one of the nave 
 arches, to shew the size and direction of the chamfers, &c. which are seldom right in modern work. 
 The capitals on the north side of the nave are more ornamented than those on the opposite side. This 
 is sometimes found to be the case; and the same remark applies to the windows in the north 
 aisle; although in the case of St. Giles’, the south aisle may perhaps have been built first. 
 
 It will be observed, that very few of the curves on the sections of the capitals are geometrically true. 
 
 PLATE XII. 
 
 BELFRY WINDOW (EAST) AND DETAILS. 
 
 This is one of four windows, all of very similar character, of which one (on the south side) has been 
 recently restored, under the direction of Mr. Derick. The capitals are like some in the Temple 
 
DESCRIPTION OF THE PLATES. 
 
 11 
 
 Church. This window presents nearly the earliest specimen of anything like tracery 3 . The two-light 
 window in the north aisle is another example of early tracery, but of a different sort. The lower part 
 of the belfry windows has been blocked up with masonry. 
 
 PLATE XIII. 
 
 DETAILS AT LARGE — PRINCIPALLY FROM THE AISLES. 
 
 The piscina in the south aisle has two drains. The basin of the piscina in the south chapel once 
 projected beyond the face of the wall: it is now a good deal mutilated. It dates with the beautiful 
 window above described (Plate IX.) 
 
 The label termination is taken from the eastern compartment of the north aisle. 
 
 The form of the string-course and label here given is found in two compartments only of this aisle. 
 In the two easternmost there is merely a round. 
 
 The strings on the chancel and south chapel would seem to be pretty nearly of the same date; the 
 label, &c. of the east windows in both being of a very similar character. The strings have very 
 recently been filled up and coated with Roman cement, only a very short time after they had been 
 drawn. 
 
 Some panels of the original pulpit were discovered a few months since under a casing of pseudo- 
 Grecian work, which, although quite innocent of the intent, did good service in preserving them to us 
 in the state in which they were found. In the panel before us there is a singular departure from 
 regularity in the upper members of the tracery, the head of one of the ogees being split and the other 
 closed, which is not the case in the other panels, where both ogees are open or split. These panels 
 have been carefully copied in the new pulpit lately erected. 
 
 The wood cornices are original and of the same date as the aisle. The simple roll-moulding may 
 perhaps be the oldest, it is quite in character with the solid round string-courses below. The roofs of 
 this aisle have already been described (page 8.) These cornices are in the easternmost compartment 
 of the aisle. There is another moulded cornice in the next compartment, of a somewhat different section, 
 but apparently of the same date. 
 
 PLATE XIV. 
 
 CORBELS IN THE NAVE AND NORTH AISLE, AND CAPITALS OF THE TOWER ARCH. 
 
 The value of heads of Bishops and Kings, &c., in helping to ascertain dates, was never better proved 
 than in the case of St. Giles’ Church. The change in the form of mitres was not so rapid, indeed, as 
 we know to have taken place in crowns ; but still, with other evidence, they are very useful. But every 
 King seems to have altered the form or ornaments of the crown of his predecessor; so even if the 
 fashion of the hair had been less like Henry the Third’s* than it really is, there would have been 
 but little difficulty in determining the date of the crown. The corbel bears marks of having been 
 removed from some other situation, which, indeed, must have been the case. In its workmanship it is 
 far superior to the corbel head of the Bishop; but from its great length it would seem to have been 
 designed to be seen foreshortened by perspective effect. 
 
 The corbel heads 3 and 4 support the last transverse arch at the west end of the north aisle; who 
 they represent it is difficult to guess even. The capitals of the tower arch are similar to some in the 
 Temple Church. (See page 2.) 
 
 d 2 
 
 * See Froude’s Kemains, vol. ii. p. 371. 
 
 1 See Effigy in Westminster Abbey. 
 
12 
 
 DESCRIPTION OF THE PLATES. 
 
 These Plates, though in the form of working drawings, are principally intended to shew the con¬ 
 struction, proportions, and general arrangement of the various parts of an old Church. For unless 
 nearly every measurement be given in figures, lithography is hardly fit for architectural subjects, 
 especially where they are drawn to a small scale. The thickness of the ink will sometimes make a 
 difference of three or four inches in a measurement, and an inch either way may materially alter the 
 effect of a moulding, &c. 
 
 I should mention that the frontispiece and the font were drawn by Mr. Fisher; and the piscina, the 
 label termination in the north aisle, and the wood panel, in Plate XVIII., and the corbel heads of 
 the King and the Bishop in Plate XIV., were also carefully reduced by him, the two latter from plaster 
 casts in the Museum of the Society. 
 
■ 
 
 1 
 
PLATE 2 . 
 
 LOOKING SOUTH, 
 
 C H U R.C H. 
 
PLATE 
 
 LONGITUDINAL SECTION NORTH AISLE. 
 

PLATE 
 
PLATE 0 . 
 
fact fltUe y. 
 
 "WINDOW IN NORTH AISLE 
 
 SAINT CILESS CHUR.CH 
 
PLATE 10. 
 
aprg nqnog 
 

 BELFRY WINDOW 
 
 SAINT CILES’S CHURCH 
 
PIATE XIII. 
 
 Piscina South Aisle 
 
 LabeL termination. N. Aisle 
 
 Piscina South. Cha-pel. 
 
 String course and Label 
 North Aisle 
 
 
 String- outside Chancel, 
 and Label Altar Windo-w 
 
 String exterior- of South Chapel. 
 
 "Wood Panel o£ Pulpit 
 
 Wood Cornices North Aisle 
 
 DETAILS, 
 
 SAINT 
 
 G ILES'S 
 
 CHURCH. 
 
/ 2 CORBEL HEADS ia Nave. 
 
USSSS)