Ef 
 
 
 jy • Jte. ■/■ 
 
 p--? 
 
 
 
 f ASJJjuL'l 
 
 ir> jta .ayfflryi 
 
 
 
 '■ ' V. •. >' 
 
 / 4 /^ 
 
 y "A| 
 
 ■ : V jP 
 
 Bfc^ < 
 
 'VnffiSr ‘ 1 
 
 ijRr v - 
 
 
 /' j^^^TgpUl 
 
 Hm^Sb v . ■" 
 
 Mfflggf .. .^r* 
 
 ^Kp-,. •' J 
 
 K • M, Jf 
 
 B3& «* • 
 
 fci , ■ 
 
 ■L 
 
 ■By 
 
 - SBHsay* 
 
 «*&€* .t9kJS 
 
 
 
 Pfl9&' 
 
 jK'., ;\ 
 
 
 H| ..^ir '' 
 
 
 ■n'^BE » * '? ■ J. 
 
 WWr'.';'. . .,. ' ' 
 
 1 'fflwfif ^ 
 
 i. jflrJgffral5ir ,f ‘rf'ir? 
 
 
 tie, - 
 
 v 
 
 Ft .': '-it':'. • 
 
 ■ :i Jk 
 
 Wf ' iiiirf-' ^ 
 
 .‘•-* 4 'X,., J 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 L >* jS 
 
 [TMiltffitfiyf 
 
 * jMCMBW^Sayr/ 
 
 4'X 
 
 ■ ' ® 
 
 ■'*“*. 'M 
 
 Hp<S N. .'• I 
 
 K ■ 
 
 
 PCTffgrff 
 
 : sm 
 
 
 
 ft*-. •JMnfT'r^ 
 
 
 
 ^ •*» , -. | l tii SjS 
 
 
 
 r ^4 
 
 , •: .' jj.; j V 
 
 
 ?!P 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ,jg| 
 
 M 
 
 
 
 
 
th* (IIlTHilmtira/ 
 
 PRINCETON. N. J 
 
 Purchased by the Mary Cheves Dulles Fund 
 
 ——Folio 
 
 Division 
 
 Section 
 
/L- JM i 
 
 r^TWgj 
 
 
 V / 
 
 r\ /tsStir /A 
 
 
 
 hfr- J J , / 1i5es ; 
 
 
 
 
 
 w 
 
 x ^pr . 
 
 
 ix|$pp f«fe- ft .^--" • 
 
 
 a 
 
 
 & jP A 4 H)%" W" 
 
 
 # 
 
 Wy ‘ • : CTj 
 
 i f; 
 
 ""^5rrS 
 
 
 
 « i \ ?v , ^ ^ 
 

 •* 
 
 
 

 
 
 
 
 

 . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ' 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ■ 
 
 
 
 
 
 ■ 
 
 4 _ 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 
 
 / 
 

 - 
 
 CATHEDRAL ANTIQUITIES. 
 
 HISTORICAL AND DESCRIPTIVE ACCOUNTS, 
 
 WITH 
 
 311 ILLUSTRATIONS, 
 
 OF THE FOLLOWING 
 
 ENGLISH CATHEDRALS. 
 
 CANTERBURY, 
 
 YORK, 
 
 SALISBURY, 
 
 NORWICH, 
 
 OXFORD, 
 
 viz. 
 
 WINCHESTER 
 LICHFIELD, 
 HEREFORD, 
 WELLS, 
 EXETER, 
 
 WORCESTER, 
 
 PETERBOROUGH 
 
 GLOUCESTER, 
 
 AND 
 
 BRISTOL. 
 
 THE ENGRAVINGS 
 
 MOSTLY BY 
 
 J. Le Keux, Esq. from Drawings by E. Blore, Esq. Architect ; — E. Mackenzie, Esq. ;—G. Cattermole, Esq. 
 G. L. Taylor, Esq. ArchitectEdw. Cresey, Esq. ArchitectJos. Gandy, Esq. Architect;— 
 
 W. H. Bartlett, Esq. etc. etc. 
 
 consist of 
 
 GROUND PLANS, SECTIONS, ELEVATIONS. DETAILS, VIEWS, AND MONUMENTS OF 
 
 EMINENT PERSONAGES. 
 
 1 / 
 
 BY JOHN BRITTON, F.S.A. 
 
 IN FIVE VOLUMES. 
 
 LONDON: 
 
 M. A. NATTALI, 19, SOUTHAMPTON-STREET, COVENT-GARDEN. 
 
 MDCCCXXX VI. 
 
M A r.CIl ANT ; PRINTER, I NC RAM-COURT, FENCI1URCII-STREET. 
 
HISTORICAL AND DESCRIPTIVE ACCOUNT 
 
 OF 
 
 THE CATHEDRALS 
 
 WINCHESTER, LICHFIELD, AND HEREFORD 
 
 WITH NUMEROUS ENGRAVINGS: 
 
 FORMING 
 
 VOLUME III. 
 
 OF 
 
 THE CATHEDRAL ANTIQUITIES. 
 
 BY JOHN BRITTON, F.S.A. 
 
 ETC. 
 
 IV. H. Bartlett, del. THE BROOKS: WINCHESTER. 5. Williams, sc. 
 
 LONDON: 
 
 M. A. N ATT A LI, 19, SOUTHAMPTON-STREET, COVENT-GARDEN. 
 
 MDCCCXXXVI 
 
] 
 
 
 
 Digitized by the Internet Archive 
 in 2018 with funding from 
 Princeton Theological Seminary Library 
 
 
 https://archive.org/details/cathedralantiqui03brit_0 
 

 Engraved tv ILZe JSeux, -from a ttr.nvini? tv EtbwElere, -for Brittons TEsiviy ti'< t 7f~WFnc/iesrcr untie dral. 
 
 WENCMIESTIEIR cDATTMISIOIEJJL CIHUUTCIEI» 
 
 1PI.. XTV. 
 
 CATMEERiX ANTIQTPTTIE S. 
 
 Part of the Stalls of the Choir. 
 
 ZimdiMIPid'lis/icdDcc’.'i.-Liiijti.h teneman fcCfPittemorftrllew. 
 
THE 
 
 HISTORY AND ANTIQUITIES 
 
 OF THE 
 
 SEE AND CATHEDRAL CHURCH 
 
 OF 
 
 WINCHESTER; 
 
 ILLUSTRATED WITH 
 
 A SERIES OF ENGRAVINGS 
 
 OF 
 
 VIEWS, ELEVATIONS, PLANS, AND DETAILS 
 
 OF THE 
 
 ARCHITECTURE OF THAT EDIFICE: 
 
 INCLUDING 
 
 BIOGRAPHICAL ANECDOTES OF THE BISHOPS, 
 
 AND OF 
 
 OTHER EMINENT PERSONS CONNECTED WITH THE CHURCH. 
 
 BY JOHN BRITTON, F.S.A. 
 
 ETC. 
 
 LONDON: 
 
 M. A. NATTALI, 19, SOUTHAMPTON-STREET, COVENT-GARDEN. 
 
 1836. 
 
MARCI1ANT, PRINTER, INGRAM-COURT, FENCIIURCII-STREET 
 
TO 
 
 HER ROYAL HIGHNESS 
 
 THE PRINCESS CHARLOTTE OF WALES. 
 
 Intimately connected as the Ecclesiastical Antiquities are with 
 the history of our native country, they cannot fail to be objects of 
 curiosity and inquiry to your Royal Highness. It is therefore 
 with no small degree of pleasure that the Author addresses the 
 present Volume to one who is likely to be deeply interested in the 
 mutual obligations and dependancies of church and state. The 
 historical annals of the one are materially interwoven with, and 
 elucidatory of the other. Whilst the page of the historian records 
 the actions of the higher classes of mankind in past ages, that of 
 the antiquary displays the arts, customs, and pursuits of our 
 ancestors in every sphere and station of life. Hence antiquity 
 has been denominated the eye of history; and hence it becomes, 
 not merely an useful, but almost essential branch of polite and 
 dignified education. 
 
 Assured that your Royal Highness has long been familiar with 
 the antiquarian publications of the author of this address, he 
 eagerly embraces the present occasion of expressing his obligations 
 and thanks for such distinguished honour. Should any of his 
 humble works conduce to the rational amusement of your Royal 
 Highness, or tend to excite that inquiry which leads to science 
 
 b 
 
IV 
 
 DEDICATION. 
 
 and truth, he will have cause to be delighted. He is induced to 
 inscribe this Volume to your Royal Highness, because the City 
 and Cathedral of Winchester are intimately associated with many 
 distinguished historical events and eminent characters. Here the 
 justly revered Alfred was educated, crowned, lived, and died. 
 Canute also resided in this city, and gave liberally to the church. 
 Egbert constituted Winchester the metropolis of the kingdom ; and 
 was crowned, died, and interred in the cathedral. The fabulous 
 story of Queen Emma's walking barefooted and unhurt over red- 
 hot ploughshares belongs to this cathedral. The first Norman 
 monarch built a palace, or rather a castle here; and his son, William 
 Rufus, was enshrined in this church. Philip and Mary were 
 married at Winchester j whilst Charles the Second was so much 
 prepossessed in favour of the city, that he built a noble and 
 spacious palace on the site of the old castle. 
 
 Constans, a monk of Winton, was made Emperor of Rome ; and 
 no less than ten of its prelates are recorded among the saints of the 
 Roman Catholic Calendar. Indeed Winchester may properly be 
 called an historical and royal city; and therefore it is hoped that the 
 present Volume, illustrative of the Antiquity and Architecture of its 
 venerable Cathedral, may be found worthy of the notice, and deserving 
 the patronage, of your Royal Highness. 
 
 I am, with profound respect, 
 
 Your Royal Highness's 
 
 Obedient humble Servant, 
 
 Tavistock Place, London, 
 April 23, 1817. 
 
 JOHN BRITTON. 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 Since the preceding dedication was published, the whole English nation has 
 had to deplore and lament the sudden and melancholy death of the amiable 
 Princess to whom it was addressed. Never, perhaps, was there a more 
 general and unanimous sympathy excited : never were all parties and all 
 classes of people more agreed as to the eligibility of a future sovereign,— 
 as to the domestic virtues of the wife, and as to the incalculable influence 
 of such qualities on the fashion and manners of a country. Let us 
 cherish, however, an ardent hope, that the esteem she excited will act 
 as a stimulus to other heirs to the crown;—for the greatest treasure a 
 monarch can obtain is a nation’s love. Splendid and costly monuments may 
 be raised—churches may be founded—and poets may eulogise the wealthy 
 and the great—but neither of those will secure the impartial approbation 
 of the honest historian, if not accompanied by real worth, or talents. In 
 examining the monuments of our Cathedrals, we are often disgusted with the 
 fulsome flattery and falsehood of many inscriptions;—we often see the 
 short-sighted policy of those who seek to obtain posthumous fame by testa¬ 
 mentary legacies and foundations : and have frequent occasion to deplore that 
 the names, characters, and worldly situations of real benefactors to mankind, 
 are often unnoticed by marble tablets and sepulchral eulogia. In the present 
 age, however, real merit is very generally understood and appreciated ; and 
 great talents, if united with integrity, will certainly be honoured and perpe¬ 
 tuated. It is a noble and proud characteristic of the English, to cherish and 
 respect connubial happiness; to admire domestic virtues ; and wherever these 
 are rendered apparent, they immediately secure the sincerest and warmest 
 sympathy. A people so constituted must be dignified in the scale of nations; 
 and Englishmen, whilst they are proud of their country, should exert their 
 talents to exalt it, and guard its honour with the most watchful jealousy. 
 
 Intimately connected as. the diocess of Winchester has been with the 
 history and progress of Christianity in England;—with the contentions 
 between the episcopal and monarchial supremacy, I have been seduced 
 into a more extended review of those subjects than will, perhaps, be 
 agreeable to the general reader: but I could not with propriety neglect 
 to notice them, nor yet contract my comments within a smaller compass. 
 On these points I have most scrupulously endeavoured to be candid and 
 strictly impartial ; detailing the opinions of those writers who appear to be 
 most deserving of credit, and occasionally, but rarely, submitting my own. 
 Aware that the civil and ecclesiastical history of Winchester has been 
 amply and learnedly developed by its local historian, and that, from the 
 religious opinions entertained by the writer, much warm, and rather acrimo¬ 
 nious, controversy has been produced; my endeavour has been to avoid 
 the intemperate zeal of both parties.* History, antiquity, art, and matter 
 
 * See Preface to “ The History, fyc. of Norwich Cathedral,” for my opinions on this point. 
 
VI 
 
 PREFACE. 
 
 of fact, are the objects of the present work; not theory, opinion, or romance:— 
 these are fleeting and transitory; may be esteemed to-day, but despised to¬ 
 morrow: whilst those are lasting: at once affording a gratifying reward to 
 investigation, and permanent satisfaction to the mind. 
 
 With the same feelings and principles I have eagerly endeavoured to 
 elucidate the styles and dates of the different parts of Winchester Cathedral. 
 If I have erred in opinion, in statement, or inference, I shall feel thankful for 
 better information, or for friendly correction. Many points, I am willing to 
 admit, are unsettled, and therefore liable to varied interpretations: but I 
 suspect that many persons, with the best intentions, and with well informed 
 minds, are too prone to yield to the seductions of theory and prepossession. 
 Though much has been written and published on this subject, I am persuaded 
 that much more remains to be done; and that we shall never elicit the whole 
 truth, nor come to the arcana of antiquarian science, but by diligent and 
 fastidious investigation. To elucidate all the nice varieties and gradations of 
 architecture, we must be furnished with the most accurate elevations, sections, 
 and details of ancient buildings; and at length we have a few artists capable 
 of rendering us this invaluable science. 
 
 It is the duty of a writer not only to avail himself of all the labours of his 
 predecessors, but to correct their errors and supply their deficiencies. In 
 doing this, however, he should be governed by rigid impartiality, and a manly 
 courage to point out, without exulting at their defects. Knowing the difficulty 
 of attaining truth, he should be lenient and liberal, and his grand rule of 
 action is to be just to himself and to his reader. With these sentiments 
 impressed on the heart, I have penned the following pages; and though they 
 may not comprise all the information that may be required by the critical 
 reader; and though not so full of comments on the errors and mis-statements 
 of preceding writers as some may wish, yet I hope the impartial antiquary 
 will forgive me for the latter omission, and excuse me for the former. 
 
 It is now my pleasing task to thank the following correspondents for much 
 useful communication and kindnesses—the Dean of Winchester; the 
 Rev. E. Poulter; the Rev. H. Lee; the Rev. F. Iremonger; B. Winter, 
 Esq.; the Rev. R. Yates ; Wm. Garbett, Esq.; and Wm. Hamper, Esq. 
 
 Having completed the history and illustration of Winchester Cathedral, 
 being the third of this series, I shall next proceed to illustrate and elucidate 
 that of York, for which nearly the whole of the drawings are completed by 
 Messrs. Blore and Mackenzie. From the progress made, I have reason to 
 believe that the whole work will be completed in the course of twelve months; 
 and I cannot doubt but that the historical and architectural materials, 
 relating to this metropolitical church, will abound with curious and interesting 
 facts. The architecture is replete with beautiful forms and features, and the 
 whole will be amply and accurately displayed by the faithful pencils of 
 the artists above-named. 
 
HISTORY AND ANTIQUITIES 
 
 OF 
 
 WINCHESTER CATHEDRAL CHURCH. 
 
 CHAP. I. 
 
 FIRST ESTABLISHMENT OF CHRISTIANITY IN BRITAIN:-INQUIRY INTO 
 
 THE REALITY AND SOVEREIGNTY OF LUCIUS : - ESTABLISHMENT OF A 
 
 SEE AT WINCHESTER : - THE EXTENT AND INFLUENCE OF ITS DOMI¬ 
 NION :-HISTORY OF THE FOUNDATION AND SUCCESSIVE ALTERATIONS 
 
 OF THE CATHEDRAL, THROUGH THE DYNASTY OF THE KINGS OF THE 
 WEST SAXONS TO THE PERIOD OF THE NORMAN CONQUEST. 
 
 It is not easy, nor would it be desirable, to examine the Cathedral of 
 Winchester without connecting 1 it with eminent men and memorable 
 events of former ages. Its history, indeed, is intimately blended with 
 that of the nation; and its annals embrace many facts and relations 
 which cannot fail to interest the feelings of the philosopher, the Christian, 
 the historian, and the antiquary. As connected with the disputable and 
 uncertain primary establishment of Christianity in Britain — as the temple 
 wherein its benign doctrines were promulgated to Britons and Romans— 
 and as the place of coronation and sepulture of Anglo-Saxon and Anglo- 
 Norman monarchs, the Cathedral of Winchester is eminently important. 
 In reviewing its early history we are, however, constantly perplexed in 
 
 B 
 
]0 
 
 WINCHESTER CATHEDRAL. 
 
 the mazes of fable, tradition, and probable narrative; and feel extreme diffi¬ 
 culty in discriminating- the one from the other, and rendering our account 
 rational, satisfactory, and authentic. From the earliest period to the dissolu¬ 
 tion of the monastic institutions in Great Britain, Winchester appears to have 
 been a place of local and national consequence. Under the Celtic or Belgic 
 Britons, here was certainly a town called Caer-Gwent , or the White City : 
 this was subsequently occupied, fortified, and rendered a permanent station 
 by the Romans, and denominated by them Vcnta-Belgarum. By the West 
 Saxons it was made their chief seat, and it afterwards became the metropolis 
 of all England. The Norman monarchs and some subsequent kings either 
 resided at, or conferred certain marks of distinction on the city. Hence we 
 shall find that, in its political and ecclesiastical history, there are abundant 
 subjects for interesting inquiry and for extended disquisition. On the present 
 occasion, however, it will be necessary to confine our attention to the latter 
 subject. 
 
 The early history of Winchester Cathedral has been connected, by 
 the almost general assent of topographical writers, with the very intro¬ 
 duction of Christianity itself into this island; yet so few and meagre are 
 the notices which the records of antiquity furnish on the subject, and so 
 much are they intermingled with fiction and improbabilities, that the impar¬ 
 tial inquirer must still remain in a state of dubiety as to the real facts. The 
 most effective research cannot now supply enough evidence to determine the 
 true origin of this Church; and however gratifying to curiosity it would be 
 to discover the dates of its foundation and successive enlargements, it has 
 become impossible to do so from the want of authentic documents. The 
 traditionary legends of monkish writers are utterly insufficient to satisfy 
 the judgment of any historian, in whose breast the love of truth is more 
 powerful than a slavish attachment to hypothesis ; yet we have scarcely any 
 other data on which to ground the annals of the first ages of this See and 
 Cathedral. 
 
 The first conversion of the Britons to Christianity, though in its conse¬ 
 quences of such vast and incalculable importance, is involved in the 
 greatest obscurity ; as well in regard to the exact time at which it took 
 
FIRST ESTABLISHMENT OF CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 11 
 
 place, as to the real persons by whom, or under whose auspices, that 
 conversion was effected. Ireneus, 1 Eusebius, 2 and Theodoret, 3 have been 
 considered as furnishing 1 competent testimony, “ that some of the Apostles 
 visited the British Isles, and that the Britons were among the nations 
 which were converted by the Apostles.” The particular persons to whom 
 this honour is generally given, are St. Peter and St. Paul; but, without 
 entering into the questionable testimony by which this opinion has been 
 supported, it will be sufficient in this place to remark, generally, that 
 Cardinal Baronius and other Roman Catholic writers ascribe the promul¬ 
 gation of Christianity in this island to St. Peter ; whilst, on the contrary, 
 many Protestant writers maintain that the Gospel was first preached here 
 by St. Paul: of this latter opinion is the learned Dr. Burgess, Bishop of 
 St. David’s, who, in a Sermon, intituled “ The first Seven Epochs of 
 the ancient British Church,” 4 asserts the probability of St. Paul having- 
 accompanied the family of Caractacus from Rome, about the year 58 ; and 
 this conjecture (founded on different passages in the ancient historians and 
 fathers of the Church), the worthy prelate considers to be substantiated 
 by a record in the British Triads, 5 where it is said “ that the father of 
 Caractacus went to Rome as an hostage for his son, and others of his 
 family ; that he staid there seven years; and that on his return he brought 
 the knowledge of Christianity to his countrymen from Rome.”—“ It is a 
 remarkable and very interesting fact,” continues the bishop, “ that the 
 detention of the British hostages should have been coincident with St. 
 Paul’s residence there as a prisoner; and it was a not less favourable 
 coincidence, that they should be released from confinement in the same 
 year in which St. Paul was set at liberty. Nothing could be more 
 convenient for St. Paul’s mission to the Gentiles, than the opportunity 
 which their return must have afforded him of introducing the gospel into 
 
 1 Iren. lib. i. cap. 2, 3. 2 Euseb. lib. iii. cap. 7. p. 113. 
 
 3 Theod. tom. iv. serm. 9, p. 611. 4 Printed in 1813, 8vo. 
 
 5 Some of these ancient documents are published in the Myvyrian Archaeology , and are partly 
 translated in Williams’s Dissertation on the Pelagian Heresy , p. 14; and by Mr. Roberts, in the 
 Appendix to his Collectanea Cambrica, p. 293. 
 
 B 2 
 
12 
 
 WINCHESTER CATHEDRAL. 
 
 Britain ; and nothing* more probable than that he should readily embrace such 
 an opportunity.” 
 
 Notwithstanding the plausibility of this argument, it seems evident that, 
 had St. Paul really visited Britain, a more direct testimony of the fact 
 would have been found than a few obscure passages in the ancient fathers; 
 and though in his Epistle to the Romans, (chap. 15.) St. Paul twice men¬ 
 tions his intention of going into Spain, yet it is very problematical whether 
 that purpose was ever carried into effect. The total silence also of the 
 Roman historians, as to any Christian hierarchy being established in this 
 island, during the three first centuries of the Roman dominion here (since 
 it appears from Ignatius that there could have been no church without a 
 succession of bishops), 6 affords a strong presumption that, during the above 
 period, the diffusion of Christianity in Britain was extremely limited ; and 
 that it arose more from accidental circumstances than from a settled plan of 
 conversion. 
 
 The gradual spread of the gospel in Italy and Gaul, and the intercourse 
 maintained between the imperial seat of Rome and its dependencies, were 
 unquestionably the leading causes of the introduction of Christianity into 
 Britain ; yet the attributing of that event, personally, either to St. Paul or to 
 Lucius, a British king, who is said to have been seated at Venta, or 
 Winchester, and to have reigned between the years 164 and 190, appears 
 neither to be warranted by historical records nor probability. 
 
 That there were certain individuals among the Britons who, in the 
 first century after Christ, embraced the pure doctrines which he taught 
 is evident, both from Tacitus and Martial. The former states, in his 
 Annals, 7 that a distinguished British lady, named Pomponia Graecina, 
 a Christian, and the wife of Aulus Plautius (who had been pro-praetor 
 of the Roman province in this island), was prosecuted (A.D. 57), and 
 in danger of losing her life for her religion; and the latter, in two 
 Epigrams, 8 brings us acquainted with the virtues and beauty of Claudia 
 Rufina, another Christian female of noble birth, who was also a native 
 
 6 Igna. Epist, ad Trail. § 3. 7 Lib. x iii. cap. 32. 
 
 8 Lib. iv. Ep. 13 ; and lib. xi. Ep. 54. 
 
FIRST ESTABLISHMENT OF CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 13 
 
 of this island, and who was married to a senator of Rome, named Rufus 
 Pudens. This lady and her husband are generally admitted to have been 
 the persons of whom St. Paul speaks as Christians, and whose greetings 
 he sends to Timothy, in that epistle 9 which he wrote when going to appear 
 a second time before Nero, previously to his martyrdom in June, A.D. 66. 
 The influence of these ladies would most probably be exerted to extend 
 the knowledge of the Christian dispensation in their own country; yet 
 we have the positive evidence of Pliny, as to the fact of the Druidical 
 superstitions of Britain being extremely prevalent, even so late as fifty 
 years after the death of Claudius, and although several edicts had been 
 issued against Druidism by the Roman emperors : his words are “ Britannia 
 hodieque earn attonite celebrat, tantis ceremoniis, ut dedisse Persis 
 videri possitthat is, ‘the Britons of this day are accustomed to use and 
 follow it, with such admiration and as many ceremonies, as though they 
 had first taught it unto the Persians.’ 10 
 
 The most respectable of our ancient writers who mentions the conversion 
 of Lucius and the Britons under his dominion, is Venerable Bede, whom 
 Godwin presumes to have “ obtained his information out of the old 
 Martyrologies.” 11 He says, that “ In the year of Christ’s Incarnation, 156, 
 Marcus Antoninus Verus, the fourteenth emperor from Augustus, began 
 his government with Aurelius Commodus, his brother; in whose time 
 Eleutherius, a holy man, sitting Bishop of the Roman Church, Lucius, a 
 king of the Britons, writ unto him his letters, praying that by his appoint¬ 
 ment and direction he might be made a Christian ; and presently he 
 obtained the effect of his godly desire : from which period until the reign 
 of Dioclesian, the Britons inviolably held the true faith, uncorrupted, in 
 peace and quietness.” 12 
 
 Such is the simple ground-work of the story of Lucius ; but the legends 
 of the monkish annalists of later days have rendered the whole incredible, 
 
 9 2 Tim. chap. iv. v. 21. 
 
 10 In Vita Claud, cap. xxv.—Vide Godwin de Praesul. cap. iii. 11 Godwin, ib. 
 
 12 Bede’s “ Hist. Eccles. Gent. Ang. Lib Quin. Edit.” by Smith, p. 44. 
 
14 
 
 WINCHESTER CATHEDRAL. 
 
 by the absurd and even impossible circumstances which they have thought 
 proper to attach to it. The “ true Roman Martyrology,” as Baronius calls 
 it (although a prior Martyrology, written by Usuardus, at the command of 
 Carolus Magnus , about the year 800, mentions nothing concerning Lucius), 
 states that Eleutherius sent the two prelates, Fugatius and Damianus or 
 Duvianus, into Britain, and that they baptized Lucius and his queen, “ and, 
 in a manner, all the people of the land.” 13 But the extensive nature of 
 this conversion (as told us by the monks), will be better understood from 
 the following succinct statement, which Bishop Godwin has inserted in the 
 ‘ Discourse,’ prefixed to his £ Catalogue of the Bishops of England.’ 14 
 
 “ Whensoever it was that this good Prince received the faith of Christ; 
 so it fell out (our historians say), that not only his wife and family 
 accompanied him in that happy course, but nobles also and commons, 
 priests and people, high and low, even all the people of this land which 
 we now call England : and that generally all their idols were then defaced, 
 the temples of them being converted into churches for the service of God ; 
 the livings of the idolatrous priests appointed for the maintenance of the 
 priests of the gospel, and that, instead of the twenty-five flamines or 
 high-priests of their idols, there were ordained twenty-five bishops ; as 
 also for three arch-flamines, three archbishops ; whereof one was seated at 
 London, another at Yorke, and a third at Carbon in Monmouthshire.”— 
 In a subsequent page the bishop says, “ It is recorded by most of our 
 writers (in a manner all), that King Lucius, having founded many churches, 
 and afforded unto them many possessions with great privileges, he at last 
 departed this life in peace, and was buried at Gloucester, the fourteenth 
 yeare after his baptism, as some say; the tenth, as other; and againe (as 
 some other will have it), the fourth.” 
 
 Such is the substance of the traditions which an inquirer into the 
 
 13 -ac totum fere populum.” In 7 Kal. Jun. The old History of Llandaff, commonly 
 
 called the Book of St. Teilo, says, that the names of the messengers sent by Lucius to Eleutherius, 
 were Elvanus and Medu nus, and that the former was constituted a bishop by Eleutherius, and 
 the latter a doctor or teacher, in respect of their eloquence and knowledge in the Scriptures. 
 
 14 Chap. iii. p. 22. and p. 35. Edit. 1615. 
 
INQUIRY INTO THE REALITY AND SOVEREIGNTY OF LUCIUS. 15 
 
 church antiquities of Winchester has to examine, before he can obtain 
 any foundation for the erection of genuine history. As the stream of time 
 has rolled on, it is curious to observe how greatly the minute rill of 
 information, given us by Bede, has been amplified in succeeding ages ; not, 
 however, from springs “ pure and undefiled,” but from sources which 
 obscure and blacken the original current. Rudborne, a monk of Win¬ 
 chester, who lived about the middle of the fifteenth century, and whose 
 history, or annals, of this cathedral has been published by Wharton in his 
 “ Anglia Sacra,” affords a very curious illustration of the above remark ; 
 for he has not only strung together the various legendary accounts of 
 former writers, but has added particulars that are not to be found in any 
 preceding historian. The very singular phraseology in which he has 
 enveloped his narrative, may be judged of from the following translation of 
 the first chapter of his History, as published by Wharton. 
 
 “ Lucius, the glorious Prince of Britain, being invested with power and 
 the regal diadem, hearing the report of Christianity, far transcending every 
 mode of human estimation, with much charitable zeal, desired that himself 
 and his kingdom, and every people subjected to him, should be instructed 
 in that soul-saving doctrine. In the first year of his reign he sent certain 
 legates and learned nuncios to the Pope, seeking peace and perpetual 
 health, and also that he would shed a beam of the freely-granted river 
 from the celestial fountain of Christ, the Eternal Sun, to their Prince, 
 sighing for eternal life. At that time the blessed Father Eleutherius was 
 presiding in all the world, who, from the blessed St. Peter, the prince of 
 the Apostles, was the twelfth in succession to the Apostolical chair. The 
 most serene Prince Lucius followed up the effect of his most desired 
 proposition. Now the above mentioned was Eleutherius, the Holy, 
 
 “ Who held the Key of Heaven from pole to pole, 
 
 Who, by God’s permission, loosened the fetters of the world, 
 
 And unlocked the celestial regions to the pious. 
 
 “ About the year of the Dominical Incarnation 164, as writeth the Venerable 
 Bede in his * De Gestis Anglorum ,’ lib. i. cap. 4. and Martin in his Chronicles, 
 
16 
 
 WINCHESTER CATHEDRAL. 
 
 and Gildas the Historian (the Ancient British writer), lib. i. cap. 7. two 
 learned priests, religious men and monks, named Faganus and Duvianus, 
 with many of their associate monks, were presented to the king; and this 
 prince and all his people were baptized.” 15 
 
 Although Rudborne has cited Gildas as one of his authorities for referring 
 the conversion of Lucius to the year 164, yet the short work, “ De Excidio 
 Britannice ,” which we have in print of that writer, makes not the least 
 mention of that prince ; nor is there any writing of his, now known to be 
 extant, which refers to him. The date too, as given by Rudborne, is 
 manifestly wrong, since Eleutherius did not succeed to the pontificate till 
 after the death of Soter, in 177; but in this the Winchester historian does 
 not stand single; for the learned Usher, as stated by Carte, has collected 
 upwards of twenty different opinions, 16 as to the time when Lucius was 
 converted, and held his alleged correspondence with Eleutherius. 
 
 Among the arguments employed by Carte, in his extended examination 
 of this question, 17 to show that the events, attributed to Lucius, cannot be 
 true, are instanced the very slow progress made by Christianity on this 
 side the Alps, and the non-existence of every kind of credible record 
 relating to a succession of bishops in this island, at any time before the 
 middle of the third century. “ No man of learning,” says this historian, 
 “ however versed in the study of antiquity, or how indefatigable soever in 
 his searches upon this subject, hath ever yet been able to find out so much 
 as the name of any one bishop in Britain, except what are founded upon the 
 legend of Lucius, till after the year 250 ; the highest point of time to which 
 their succession of bishops ascends in all the sees of Gaul, except Lyons 
 and Vienne;—and the true reason why there was no persecution in this 
 island (as there was in other parts of the Roman empire), till the time of 
 Dioclesian, appears plainly to have been, because till then there were no 
 Christians here considerable enough to be remarked.” 
 
 Nennius, speaking of Lucius, informs us that after his conversion he 
 
 15 Rudborne Hist. Mag*, lib. i. cap. 1. 
 37 Hist, of Eng. vol. i. p. 132 — 140. 
 
 16 Antiq. Brit. cap. iii. p. 20. 
 
INQUIRY INTO THE REALITY AND SOVEREIGNTY OF LUCIUS. 17 
 
 was called, in allusion to his name, Lever Maur , or the Great Light , or 
 Splendour ; 18 and the British Triads 19 are supposed to record the same person 
 by the appellative Lleirwg, or Lies (whence the Latin name, Lucius), who is 
 stated in those documents to have established the first church in Britain, 
 although just before that event is attributed to Bran. 
 
 After his conversion, Lucius is said to have made request to Eleutherius 
 for some particulars of the Roman Laws, that he might make them a 
 foundation for a settled order of government throughout his own dominions. 
 The answer returned by Eleutherius is supposed, by Bishop Godwin, to 
 have been first recorded “ in an old chronicle, entituled Brutus, amongst cer- 
 taine lawes or statutes of the Saxons.’' There is however much diversity 
 in the copies of this epistle, and some of them have additional sentences. 
 In that published by Usher, 20 the date is 169 ; and the following are the most 
 particular passages, as translated from the Latin, by Godwin:—“Ye require 
 of us the Roman laws and the Emperors to be sent over to you, which you 
 would practise and put in use within your realm. The Roman laws and 
 the Emperors we may ever reprove ; but the law of God we may not. Ye 
 have received of late, through God’s mercy, in the kingdom of Britain, the 
 law and faith of Christ; ye have with you within the realm both parts of 
 the Scriptures. Out of them, by God’s grace, with the council of your 
 realm take ye a law ; and by that law, through God's sufferance, rule your 
 kingdom of Britain : for you be God’s vicar in your kingdom.—The people 
 and folk of the realm of Britain be yours ; whom, if they be divided, ye 
 ought to gather in concord and peace, to call them to the faith and law of 
 Christ, to cherish and to maintain them, to rule and govern them, so as you 
 may keep everlastingly with him whose vicar ye are.” 
 
 Whatever might be the extent of credulity in prejudiced minds, it is clear to 
 the impartial historian, that the above epistle could never be a genuine one; for 
 the dominion of the Romans had been so extensively spread over this country 
 long prior to the time at which Lucius is said to have swayed the sceptre, 
 that by no possible means could he have been in possession of the enlarged 
 
 18 Hist. Brit. c. xviii. 19 See Myvyrian Archaeology. 20 Antiq. Brit. 
 
 C 
 
18 
 
 WINCHESTER CATHEDRAL. 
 
 sovereignty that is thus attributed to him. It is admitted that the Romans 
 grounding their policy on the acknowledged prejudices of human nature, 
 frequently governed their newly-conquered countries by the agency of 
 native kings and princes, and willingly bestowed some portion of regal 
 authority on those who were disposed to sacrifice their independence to 
 ambition. The dominion, however, that was thus delegated by the Romans 
 was always resumed as their conquests became consolidated, and their 
 empire secured. In regard to Britain, wholly subjugated as it was long 
 before the days of Lucius, it would have been utterly inconsistent with 
 every principle of Roman domination to have permitted a native prince to 
 have borne such an extended sway over a country which they had 
 divided into provinces, and placed under the rule of their own prefects. 
 The “ realm of Britain!' could never have been subjected to Lucius ; nor 
 does it appear from any Roman author that ever a prince so named was at 
 any time in alliance with them, or was suffered to govern a subordinate 
 kingdom, though even of inferior extent. Still less can we give credence to 
 the legends which attribute the creation of so many archiepiscopal and other 
 Sees to a British king ; so long after his country had been subjugated by a 
 foreign power, and upwards of a century before Christianity was protected by 
 the Roman emperors. 
 
 From the preceding brief review of the evidence which has been adduced 
 on this controverted subject, it must be clear to the impartial reader, that 
 the story of Lucius is either altogether fabulous, or that Lucius himself 
 was a person whose situation and circumstances in life have been greatly 
 misrepresented. The two coins, mentioned by Archbishop Usher , 21 (the 
 one silver, and the other gold, having the figure of a king on them with a 
 cross, and the letters L. V. C.) which have been so frequently referred to in 
 proof that Lucius was both a King and a Christian , are not so explicitly 
 described as to warrant a belief of the affirmative. The very words, 
 indeed, which the archbishop has employed, says Whitaker, “ renders the 
 fact infinitely precarious .” 22 He had seen, he affirms, two coins, which 
 
 21 Vide Usher De Prim. p. 39, 40. 
 
 22 Hist, of Manchester, vol. i. p. 405. 
 
INQUIRY INTO THE REALITY AND SOVEREIGNTY OF LUCIUS. 19 
 
 were marked with the sign of the cross, “ et Literis obscariaribusquce LVC. 
 denotare videbentur a sentence which throws a strong doubt on the presump¬ 
 tion of their having been minted by Lucius. It appears from Gildas, also, 
 as quoted by the same historian, that no British king was allowed to coin 
 money after the Roman conquest. 23 
 
 The account given by Rudborne, from Moracius, respecting the dimensions 
 of the Cathedral which Lucius is stated to have erected at Winchester, has 
 an equally suspicious air with many of the other circumstances attributed 
 to that personage. It informs us, that “ Lucius built a Christian church from 
 the ground,” upon a scale of grandeur and magnificence which has never 
 since been equalled; — “ its length being 209 paces [about 600 feet], its 
 breadth 80 paces, its height 92 paces, and its width, from one horn [ corner ] 
 across the church to the other, 180 paces;” and that this edifice, when 
 finished, was dedicated in honour of the Holy Saviour by Fugatius and 
 Duvianus, who had been sent to Britain from Rome by Pope Eleutherius ; 
 and who, likewise, constituted abbot of this place, a monk formerly called 
 Devotus. 2i 
 
 According to the same authority, Lucius bestowed on his new church 
 the privileges of sanctuary, (agreeably to the laws of Dunwallo Malmutius, 
 a reputed British king, said to have lived 500 years before Christ) ; and also 
 
 23 Hist, of Manchester, vol. i. p. 405. 
 
 24 Rudb. lib. i. Rudborne’s words are these :—“ Abbatemque loci constituerunt Monachum 
 quendam vocabulo Devotum." Milner, in his History of Winchester, vol. i. p. 42, has strangely 
 denominated Devotus, “ a religious bishop.” An anonymous writer on Winchester cathedral justly 
 remarks on this subject that, “ In attributing the consecration of this cathedral to Romish missionaries, 
 it has been wished to infer that the see of Rome had always spiritual authority over Britain ; and that 
 Eleutherius, by this act, obtained the same power over Winchester, which his successors claimed 
 a thousand years after. The very contrary, however, is the fact; and whatever might be the state 
 of religious knowledge in this country during the life of Lucius, even bishop Milner is constrained 
 to admit, that, “ it seemed best to him and his prelates [without any reference to the bishop of 
 Rome] that the same hierarchy should be observed which had before obtained among the Flamines, 
 or heathen priests. According to this, London, York, and Caerleon, became metropolitan sees; 
 and hence, Venta, although the favourite of Lucius, and probably the capital of his dominions, was 
 left destitute of that pre-eminence to which, as the chief city of the west, it was otherwise entitled.” 
 
 c 2 
 
20 
 
 WINCHESTER CATHEDRAL. 
 
 annexed to it a monastery, whose inmates were of the order of those 
 instituted by St. Mark, at Alexandria. 25 The dimensions of the monastery 
 are stated to have been as follows : “ in length, from the eastern part of the 
 church towards the old Temple of Concord, 100 paces ; in breadth, towards 
 the new Temple of Apollo, 80 paces : from the north-east part, in length 160 
 paces, in breadth 98 : from the western ground (plagd) of the church, in 
 length 190 paces, in breadth 100 : from the southern ground, in length 45 
 paces, in breadth 58 paces.” 
 
 The striking absurdity of Rudborne, or rather of Moracius, whom he fol¬ 
 lows, in carrying up the privilege of sanctuary to such an early period, 26 
 could be equalled only by his error in assigning the antiquity of the monastic 
 profession to an era so remote from the true one. Even Milner himself (though 
 sufficiently credulous on many things advanced by this writer) withholds his 
 assent to the latter statement, and declares it to be “ not warranted by ecclesi¬ 
 astical monuments.” 27 
 
 Rudborne says, that the new church was dedicated in the fifth year of the 
 conversion of the kingdom ; or as he afterwards more particularly records it, 
 on the 4th of the kalends of November, in the year of grace 169. His chro¬ 
 nology, however, is extremely defective ; and by no means to be depended on, 
 unless corroborated by other authorities. The possessions and treasures of the 
 Flamines, he tells us, of this city, were given by Lucius to the bishops and 
 monks of the new foundation. 28 
 
 The ambiguity which attends the period of the decease of Lucius, and 
 
 25 Philo, the Jew, calls them Therapeutes : i. e. a Jewish order of monks devoted to contemplation. 
 
 26 Bingham, in his Orig. Eccles. vol. iii. p. 291, says, that “ the right of sanctuary began to be 
 a privilege of churches from the time of Constantine , though there are no laws about it older than 
 Theodosius, either in the Justinian or the Theodosian Code.” There were no monks till after the 
 middle of the third century. 
 
 27 Hist, of Winchester, vol. i. p. 42, n. In another part he says, that although Rudborne “ takes 
 great pains to persuade us that the Winchester monks were of an order anterior to the ages both 
 of St. Benedict and St. Antony, it would be loss of time to confute an account so glaringly impro¬ 
 bable.” Ib. vol. ii. p. 3, n. 
 
 28 Rudb. lib. i. c. 3. 
 
INQUIRY INTO THE REALITY AND SOVEREIGNTY OF LUCIUS. 21 
 
 the uncertainty of the place of his burial, have been often adduced as argu¬ 
 ments against the credibility of his reputed sway; and it is certain that the 
 darkness in which those circumstances are involved, is calculated to excite 
 considerable suspicion. Were the accounts true, that Lucius had possessed 
 such extended sovereignty as to occasion the general establishment of 
 Christianity in this island, it is scarcely possible to believe that he could 
 have descended so obscurely to the grave, as to leave the time of his death 
 unascertained, and the place of his interment undecided. Winchester, York, 
 and Gloucester, have all been assigned as the scene of the latter ; yet the 
 German writers report, “ that a little before his decease, either resigning his 
 crown, or being dispossessed of it by the Romans, he went abroad, and 
 preached the gospel in Bavaria, and in the country of the Grisons.” 29 Bishop 
 Godwin refers to R. Vitus, as saying, that “ King Lucius, after a certain 
 space forsaking his kingdom, became a clergyman; and preaching the gospel 
 in divers countries of France and Germany, suffered martyrdom, at last, at a 
 place called Curiae.” 30 
 
 The dynasty of Lucius is stated to have terminated with his own life, as 
 the Romans afterwards governed directly by their own officers, and not by 
 native tributary princes. The religious establishment, however, which he 
 had fixed at Winchester, is said by Rudborne to have retained its privileges 
 and continued in repose, till the great persecution carried on against the 
 Christians by the Emperors Dioclesian and Maximian, was extended into 
 Britain, (about the end of the third or beginning of the fourth century,) 
 at which period the church and monastery, attributed to Lucius, were 
 levelled with the ground, and all the ecclesiastics either slaughtered or 
 dispersed. 31 
 
 The glory of quelling the persecution in this island is ascribed to 
 Constantius Chlorus; whose son and successor, Constantine the Great, by 
 his famous edict in the year 312, restored the Christians to the rights 
 of humanity and civil justice. The church of Venta was then rebuilt, 
 
 2 9 Milner’s Hist, of Winchester, vol. i. p. 43. 
 31 Rudb. lib. i c. 4. 
 
 30 Cat. of Eng. Bishops, p. 35. 
 
22 
 
 WINCHESTER CATHEDRAL. 
 
 according to Rudborne, upon the same site, and in a similar form (that of a 
 cross) to the former one ; but on a much smaller scale, the expenses being 
 defrayed by the offerings of the faithful in Christ.. 32 When finished it was 
 dedicated, at the request of the Abbot Deodatus , by Constans, the then 
 bishop, in honour of St. Amphibalus, 33 whom the monkish writers record to 
 have suffered martyrdom at Verulam, whither he had sought refuge in the 
 abode of St. Alban, during the Dioclesian persecution ; but having been 
 discovered, he was put to death, as was also his kind host for affording him 
 shelter and entertainment. 
 
 After the withdrawing of the Roman troops from Britain, on account of 
 the increasing calamities of the Roman Empire, Venta obtained the rank 
 of a metropolis; for here the British King, Vortigern, or Gortheryn, and 
 his successors Ambrosius and Uther Pendragon, fixed their principal 
 residence : yet no particulars are extant of its ecclesiastical history, 
 during this period, than what are afforded by Rudborne, who barely states, 
 that the monks continued to enjoy their privileges in security and peace, 
 “ devoutly engaged in singing hymns and holy songs,” till the coming of 
 Cerdic, the Saxon chief, and founder of the West-Saxon kingdom. This 
 prince (after defeating the united army of the Britons, under Natanleod, 
 in the New Forest,) besieged and obtained possession of Venta, about the 
 year 516, at which time all the monks were slain, and the Cathedral was 
 converted into a heathen temple, 34 and “ made subservient to the gloomy 
 
 33 “ Reedilicata est Ecclesia Wyntoniensis secundo ab Christi fidelium oblationibus.” Rudb. 
 lib. i. c. 6. 
 
 33 Ibid. Rudborne describes St. Amphibalus as “ one of the brotherhood” of this church. The 
 Bishop Constans, mentioned in the text, who is said to have been the son of the Emperor Con¬ 
 stantine ; and who, after the successful usurpation of his father, about the year 407, having been 
 “ tempted, or compelled, sacrilegiously to desert the peaceful obscurity of the monastic life,” was 
 himself invested with the imperial purple, and left to command in Spain ; where, on the revolt of 
 Gerontius, his bravest general, he was made prisoner, and put to death. Vide Gibbon’s Decline, 
 &c. of the Roman Empire, vol. v. p. 342. 
 
 34 Rudb. Hist. lib. ii. c. 1.—“ In loco quem de Christi Ecclesia, i. e. Wyntoniensi, Monachis 
 interfectis, Pagani templum fecerant Dagon.” 
 
ESTABLISHMENT OF A SEE AT WINCHESTER. 
 
 23 
 
 and impure rites of Thor, Woden, Frea, and Tuisco.” 35 The name of the 
 city itself was also changed, and from Caer-Gwent, and Venta-Belgarum, it 
 became Winton-ceaster; and hence Winchester by an easy corruption. 
 
 In the year 519, as most of our historians agree, the victorious Cerdic was 
 crowned king of the West Saxons (in conjunction with Kynric, his son,) in the 
 church, or temple at Winchester; wherein also, having greatly extended his 
 kingdom by new conquests, and increased his subjects by fresh colonies of 
 Jutes and Saxons, he was again crowned about twelve years afterwards : here, 
 likewise, he was buried, on his decease in 534. 
 
 Though the immediate successors of Cerdic considerably extended their 
 dominions, yet they continued to make Winchester their principal seat. 
 No event of particular importance, however, is recorded concerning the 
 Cathedral Church, till after the year 635, when the arrival of the missionary, 
 Birin us, whom Pope Honorius had deputed to preach the gospel in those 
 parts of Britain that were still involved in Pagan darkness, entirely changed 
 the state of affairs. This prelate, whose country and origin are dubious, is 
 said to have been a monk at Rome; but, for the purposes of his mission, 
 he was ordained a bishop at Genoa, and thence, proceeding through 
 France, he took shipping for Britain. The sceptre of the West-Saxon 
 kingdom was, at that period, swayed by Kinegils and his son Quilchelm; 
 and Birinus, having obtained a favourable reception at the court of those 
 Princes, (through the opportune presence of the religious Oswald, King of 
 the Northumbrians, who was then soliciting the daughter of Kinegils in 
 marriage) commenced his labours in this city. His pious endeavours were 
 quickly rewarded by the conversion of Kinegils and many of his people ; 36 
 
 35 From these deities of the Jutes and Saxons, the names are derived of four of our week days. 
 See Verstegan. The Jutes, called also Giotti and Gevissi, formed the principal tribe that established 
 the West Saxon kingdom. 
 
 36 The sudden influence which Birinus obtained over the minds of the Saxons, is, agreeably to the 
 monkish legends of that age, attributed to the fame of a miracle, which attended his embarkation 
 for this island, and is thus described by Dr. Milner: — 
 
 “ Proceeding from Genoa, through France, our apostle came to the sea-port on the channel, 
 from which he was to embark for our island. Here, having performed the sacred mysteries, he left 
 behind him what is called a corporal [in allusion to the body of Christ] containing the blessed 
 
24 
 
 WINCHESTER CATHEDRAL. 
 
 and it appears from the respective histories of Bede and Malmsbury, that 
 King Oswald acted in the character of godfather to Kinegils when the latter 
 was baptized. 
 
 Before Birinus quitted Rome, he pledged his word to the Pope that he 
 would promulgate Christianity in those parts of Britain where the light of 
 the gospel had never yet been spread ; with this intent, and with the consent 
 of Kinegils and Oswald, he removed to Dorchester, in Oxfordshire, which 
 was then a considerable town, and apparently the place were Quilchelm 
 kept his court, 37 as that monarch received baptism there in the following 
 
 sacrament, which he did not recollect until the vessel, in which he sailed, was some way out at sea. 
 It was in vain to argue the case with the Pagan sailors who steered the ship, and it was impossible 
 for him to leave his treasure behind him. In this extremity, supported by a strong faith, he stepped 
 out of the ship upon the waters, which became firm under his feet, and walked in this manner to 
 the land. Having secured what he was anxious about, he returned in the same manner on board the 
 vessel, which had remained stationary in the place where he had left it. The ship’s crew were of 
 the nation to wdiich he was sent, and being struck with the miracle they had witnessed, lent a docile 
 ear to his instructions: thus our apostle began the conversion of the West-Saxons before he landed 
 upon their territory.” Hist, of Win. vol. i. p. 89. 
 
 This legend is recorded by several ancient writers, and Dr. Milner regards it as a prodigy so well 
 attested , that those, he says, “ who have had the greatest interest to deny it, have not dared openly 
 to do so.” The following remark on this passage is extracted from a recent description of the 
 Cathedral:—“Milner’s concluding assertion is singularly bold and fanatical. The persons alluded 
 to as not daring to deny it, are Bishop Godwin and the truth-telling Fox: the former takes no notice 
 whatever of this compound miracle, wisely judging it beneath contempt; and the latter bestows on 
 it the only correct appellation in our language, that of a lie.” 
 
 37 The town of Dorchester is situated near the river Thames, about ten miles south of Oxford. 
 It was anciently occupied by the Romans, many of whose coins, urns, &c. have been found there, 
 and considerable entrenchments still remain in the vicinity. The church is a very large and 
 curious building, and affords numerous vestiges of its former splendour. In the windows are some 
 remains of ancient painted glass, which some years ago were collected from different parts of 
 the edifice, and put up in the chancel: among the subjects that continue whole is a full length 
 figure of St. Birinus, as well as several small compartments relating to his history. The windows 
 in the chancel are very curious and singular : that on the north side is large and lofty, divided into 
 four bays by three mullions, which internally assume the form of branches of trees. This is 
 intended to represent the genealogical tree of Jesse, whose figure is prostrate at the bottom, and 
 several smaller statues are displayed in other parts of the tree. Among the tombs is a fine 
 effigy of a Crusader, in mail armour; and also the figure of another armed knight, well executed, 
 
ESTABLISHMENT OF A SEE AT WINCHESTER.—A. D. 636-643. 
 
 25 
 
 year (anno 636) : three years afterwards Cuthred, his son, was baptized in 
 the same city, Birinus himself being his sponsor. 
 
 From this era the ecclesiastical history of Winchester becomes more certain, 
 as the concurring testimony of different historians substantiates the leading 
 facts; for whatever has been affirmed on the authority of Rudborne, as to 
 the existence of a Bishopric in this city, prior to the Saxon times, is extremely 
 doubtful; the historians most to be depended on being unanimous in ascribing 
 the foundation both of the See and the Cathedral to Kenewalsh, the son and 
 successor of Kinegils. 
 
 Though Birinus had established his episcopal seat at Dorchester, (which 
 had been given to him by Kinegils,) yet that appears to have been done 
 provisionally, only “ till a church were built in the royal city, worthy of 
 such a priest.” 38 For this purpose Kinegils collected a great quantity of 
 materials; and he intended, according to the Winchester Annalist, to 
 bestow on the new foundation all the land round this city, to the extent of 
 seven leagues. 39 Being seized, however, with a mortal illness before he 
 had completed his design, he caused his son Kenewalsh to swear, in the 
 presence of Birinus, “ that he would punctually fulfil these his pious 
 intentions.” This was in the year 643 ; when dying, his remains were interred 
 within the pale of the new church, of which he had begun the foundation. 40 
 
 bat much broken. There is, likewise, the effigy of a bishop, in pontijicalibus , and two stone 
 coffins; the latter were dug up, the one about seven, the other about twelve years ago, in the south 
 aile, within eighteen inches of the surface ; each of these is formed out of a single stone. Several 
 other churches are said to have formerly stood in this town; and many human bones and vestiges 
 of ancient sepulture are occasionally met with in digging in various part3 of the neighbourhood. 
 The site of the ancient Episcopal Palace is still pointed out in the appurtenances to a farm-house 
 closely adjacent in the town. 
 
 38 “ Iste dedit S. Birino Civitatem Dorcaeestram; ut sederet interim in ea, donee conderet 
 Ecclesiam tanto sacerdote dignam in regia civitate.’’—Ann. Eccl. Winton. in Ang. Sacra, vol. 1, 128. 
 
 39 “ In votis enim ejus [Kinegils] erat in Wintonia aedificare templum praecipuum; et collectis 
 jam plurimis ad opus aedificii, terram totam ambientem Wintoniam a centro Wintoniae usque ad 
 circumferentiam ab omni parte linea exeunte septem leucas habentem anlificandae Ecclesiae in dotem 
 dare disposuit.”—Ann. Eccl. Winton. Ibid. 
 
 40 “ —et in Wyntonia, quam fundare incoeperat, honorifice sepelitur.”—Rudb. lib. ii. c. 1. ibid. 189. 
 
 D 
 

 26 WINCHESTER CATHEDRAL. 
 
 Kenewalsh was a Pagan, and during several years he neglected the 
 execution of his oath; but having been dispossessed of his throne by Penda, 
 King of Mercia, (whose daughter he had married and afterwards repu¬ 
 diated,) he became a convert to Christianity, at the court of Anna, the 
 pious King of the East Angles, to which he had fled for an asylum. Being 
 afterwards restored to his kingdom, through the interposition of his friends, 
 and particularly of his kinsman, Cuthred, he proceeded with the building 
 of the Cathedral, and completed it about the year 648, in a style of 
 considerable splendour for that age. 41 It was then dedicated by St. 
 Birinus, as he is styled in the Roman Calendar, in honour of the Holy 
 Trinity, and of St. Peter and St. Paul; and the conventual buildings, 
 which had been also restored by Kenewalsh, were replenished either with 
 secular or regular canons, but most probably the former; as the unnatural 
 celibacy of the Romish clergy had not, at that period, obtained such a pre¬ 
 dominance in this country, as it subsequently did under the tyrannic sway 
 of the famous St. Dunstan. Birinus afterwards returned to Dorchester, 
 where he died, and was buried, in the year 640; but his remains were 
 translated to Winchester by Bishop Hedda, on the final removal of the see 
 to the latter city. 
 
 Agilbert, or Angilbert, a native of France, who had long studied in 
 Ireland, (which at that period seems to have been eminently distinguished 
 for its schools and literature,) was prevailed on by Kenewalsh to succeed 
 Birinus, with whom he had been previously associated in promulgating the 
 gospel. The foreign accents of this prelate, however, proved disagreeable 
 to the Saxon King; and the latter, about the year 660, divided the diocess 
 into two portions; assigning to the see of Dorchester the jurisdiction over 
 the northern part of Wessex, and establishing Winchester as the see of the 
 southern part. This era, therefore, strictly speaking, must be considered as 
 that of the foundation of the Bishopric of Winchester. 
 
 41 <« —Templum Deo, per id temporis, pulcherrimum, construeret,”—are the words of William 
 of Malmsbury. “ De Gest. Reg.” 1. 1, c. 2. Rudborne says, “ Ecclesiam pulcherrimam construxit 
 in Wyntonis*..” “ Ann. Eccl. Winton.” p. 288. 
 
DORCHESTER AND WINCHESTER UNITED. — A. D. 643 - 676 . 
 
 27 
 
 Agilbert, says Bishop Godwin, “ taking this matter very grievously (the 
 rather because it was done altogether without either his consent or know¬ 
 ledge) returned in a great chafe into his own country, where soon after he 
 was made bishop of Paris.” 42 Through this abandonment of his duties, the 
 direction of both sees became vested in Wina, an Englishman of great 
 talents, whom Kenewalsh had raised to the episcopal seat at Winchester, 
 but who, three years afterwards, was again expelled by that King; though 
 from what cause historians have neglected to record. 43 Both sees were now 
 kept vacant four years ; when Kenewalsh, becoming alarmed by some defeats 
 in battle and other adversities, (which he attributed to his late neglect of 
 religion,) dispatched an embassy to request Agilbert to return to his former 
 diocess. This Agilbert declined, but recommended his nephew Eleuthe- 
 rius as a fit person to be appointed in his stead. He was accordingly 
 received with much welcome both by the prince and people, and in the 
 year 670 was consecrated bishop over the entire diocess, by Theodore, 
 Archbishop of Canterbury. He chiefly resided in Winchester, and is 
 recorded to have been very sedulous in the discharge of his duties. 
 Amongst other pious works, he assisted St. Aldhelm in raising the 
 hermitage of Maidulph, an Irish nobleman, into the famous Abbey of 
 Malmsbury; which afterwards became so deservedly celebrated as the 
 principal school and seat of learning in the west of England. He died in 674, 
 and was buried in this Church; in which, also about the same period, King 
 Kenewalsh himself was interred; he having previously endowed the new 
 establishment with all the lands designed by his father for that purpose, 
 together with the manors of Downton, Alresford, and Worthy. 44 His 
 kinsman, Escuin, or Escwine, who had been raised to the throne on the 
 expulsion of Sexburga (Kenewalsh’s widow), died about the year 676, and 
 
 42 Cat. of Eng. Bishops, p. 210. 
 
 43 Wina, after his expulsion, took refuge in Mercia; of whose sovereign, Wulfhere, or Wulphere, 
 he is said to have purchased the bishopric of London, about the year 666 ; he “ being the first 
 Simonist,” says Godwin, that is mentioned in our country. 
 
 44 Ann. Winton. anno 639. 
 
 D 2 . 
 
28 
 
 WINCHESTER CATHEDRAL. 
 
 was deposited here with his predecessors; as was likewise his successor, 
 Kentwin, (a son to Kinegils,) who died in 685. 
 
 After the death of Bishop Eleutherius, the vacant see was bestowed on 
 Hedda, Abbot of Streneschal, or Whitby, in Yorkshire; whom Bede testifies 
 to have been rather a good and just man than profoundly learned. By 
 him the seat of the diocess was formally translated from Dorchester, about 
 the year 676, and settled at Winchester; whither also he removed the 
 sainted remains of Birinus. Hedda, dying about the year 705, was interred 
 in this Cathedral: Bede reports that many miracles were wrought at his 
 tomb, the fame of which appears to have led to his canonization by the 
 Romish Church. 
 
 At the period of Hedda’s decease, the West Saxon kingdom had been 
 greatly enlarged by new conquests; and the knowledge of Christianity 
 having, in consequence, been more extensively promulgated, it became 
 necessary again to divide the diocess into two distinct sees. This act of 
 jurisdiction, according to Godwin, 45 was executed by the sole authority of 
 the famous King Ina ; yet William of Malmsbury states it to have been 
 done by an Episcopal Synod. 46 The new See was fixed at Sherborne, in 
 Dorsetshire, and had assigned to it the counties of Berks, Dorset, Somerset, 
 Wilts, Devon, and Cornwall. The See of Winchester retained the counties 
 of Hants, Surrey, Sussex, and the Isle of Wight. The learned St. Aldhelm, 
 Abbot of Malmsbury, was then made Bishop of Sherborne; and Daniel, 
 a monk of the same foundation, and also a renowned scholar, was raised 
 to the Bishopric of Winchester. In his time (anno 711) another division 
 of this diocess was effected by the erection of Sussex into an Episcopal 
 province, and fixing its See at the monastery of Selsea, or Seolsey; which 
 seat was subsequently removed to Chichester. A few years afterwards 
 King Ina, influenced by religious zeal, resigned his crown, and with his 
 pious Queen, Ethelburga, proceeded to Rome in disguise, having previously 
 
 45 De Prsesul. p. 205. 
 
 46 “ Synodali ergo concilio diocesis, ultra inodum protensa, in duas sedes divisa.” Malm, in Vit. 
 St. Aldhelm, Ang. Sac. vol. ii. p. 20. 
 
CORONATION OF KING EGBERT.-A. D. 741-800. 
 
 29 
 
 refounded the Abbey of Glastonbury, and given eighty hides of land, in 
 the Isle of Wight, to this church. 47 Athelard, Ina’s nephew and successor, 
 died in 741, and was interred at Winchester, together with his sister, 
 Frideswitha. 
 
 In the year 744, Bishop Daniel, who had presided over this see during 
 upwards of forty years, relinquished his charge through the infirmities of 
 age; and re-assuming the habit of a monk, retired to his original solitude at 
 Malmsbury, where he ended his days. Venerable Bede, in the Preface to his 
 Ecclesiastical History, has acknowledged his literary obligations to this pre¬ 
 late ; who, besides some other works, was the writer of a life of St. Chad, 
 and of Histories of the South Saxons and the Isle of Wight, 
 
 During the supremacy of the eight succeeding bishops, namely, Humfred, 
 Kinebard, Athelard (who had been Abbot of Malmsbury, and was 
 translated from Winchester to Canterbury in 793), Egbald, Dudda, or 
 Dudd, Kinebert, or Cinebord, Almund, and Wighten, no event of 
 particular importance occurred relating to this church, with the exception 
 of the burials here of the West Saxon Kings, Cuthred, Sigebert, and 
 Kynewulph ; and the memorable coronation of King Egbert, in the year 
 827. This prince, who in the early part of his life had been banished by 
 King Brithric, had so diligently studied the example of the great Charle¬ 
 magne, as to become his rival on this side of the water, when called to the 
 West Saxon throne, on the death of Brithric, in 800. After many severe 
 battles, he obtained the ascendancy over all the other Saxon states, and, 
 uniting the whole into one Monarchy, caused himself to be solemnly 
 crowned King of all Britain in Winchester Cathedral, and in presence of 
 the assembled nobles from every part of the country. On this occasion, by 
 an edict dated from this city, he formally abolished all distinctions of Saxons, 
 Jutes, and English; commanding that all his subjects should in future be 
 called by the latter name only, and the country be called England. 
 
 Ina died at Rome, in the year 728, according to the Saxon Chronicle; but his Queen, 
 having returned to England, retired to the Abbey of Barking 1 , in Essex, (of which her sister 
 was abbess,) and died there in 741. 
 

 30 WINCHESTER CATHEDRAL. 
 
 Bishop Wighten, who is supposed to have had the honour of crowning 
 Egbert, died within two or three years after that event, and was succeeded 
 by Herefrith ; of whom nothing more is recorded than the circumstance 
 of his being slain in the year 833, together with Wigforth, Bishop of 
 Sherborne, in the disastrous battle of Charmouth, in Dorsetshire, whither 
 these prelates had attended the King to oppose the Danes, who had landed 
 on that coast in great force. Eadmund, or Edmund , the next bishop, 
 governed the diocess only a few months; when, dying, he was succeeded by 
 the venerable Helmstan, or Helinstan , (as he is styled by Rudborne,) who 
 was a canon of this church, and had been entrusted with the education of 
 Egbert’s son, Ethelwulph. This young Prince is thought to have been 
 intended for a religious life, and it is certain that both his inclinations and 
 his talents were far better adapted for the direction of a church than the 
 government of a kingdom. His more immediate tutor was the famous 
 S withun, or Swithin , (as the name has been spelt in modern times ;) “ the 
 opinion of whose holiness,” says Godwin, “hath procured him the reputation 
 of a Saint.’’ Under this preceptor he became, first, a canon, and afterwards 
 sub-dean of this Cathedral; and he seems to have held the latter situation 
 when advanced to the throne on the decease of King Egbert, in 837. 48 
 Several ancient writers state, that the demise of Bishop Helmstan occurred 
 about the same period, and that Ethelwulph was himself raised to the 
 vacant see; yet the probability is, that he was never actually consecrated, 
 though he might have been elected to the episcopal dignity. However this 
 may be, it appears that the prince, being in holy orders in this monastery, 
 had a dispensation from Pope Leo the Third to enable him to assume the 
 crown. 
 
 Rudborne says, that Helmstan being dead, Ethelwulph, in the fifteenth 
 year of his reign, and in the year 852, ordered the most pious Swithun to be 
 preferred to this see; 49 yet it would seem from other historians, that 
 
 48 —patre defuncto, quia alius legitimus haeres non extaret, ex gradu Subdiaconi Wintoniensis in 
 Regem translates est, concedente Leone illius nominis Papa tertio. Will. Malm. De Pontif. 1. ii. in 
 Rer. Ang. Scrip, p. 242. Vide also, Joan. Wallingford, in Chron. Ranulph. Higden. ad An s 
 836. Rudb. Hist. Maj. 1. iii, c. 2. *9 Vide Hist. Maj. 1. iii. c. 2. 
 
 
ST. SWITHUN.-ESTABLISHMENT OF TYTHES. — A.D. 852 - 857 . 
 
 31 
 
 Swithun must have been appointed bishop here many years before. This 
 famed prelate was a native either of the city or suburbs of Winchester; 
 and, early in life, he became a canon of this Church. He was highly 
 distinguished for his piety and knowledge of sacred literature; and William 
 of Malmsbury styles him a “ treasury of virtues,” the most conspicuous 
 of which were his meekness and humility. The influence which he had 
 obtained over the youthful mind of Ethelwulph, he continued to possess in 
 the maturer age of that prince ; and it is recorded to have been by his advice, 
 that Ethelwulph, in a “ Mycel Synod,” granted his famous charter for the 
 general establishment of tythes, in the year 854 or 855. 50 This important 
 deed was executed at Winchester, as appears from the charter itself, as 
 copied in the histories of Matthew of Westminster, Ingalphus, Rudborne, 
 and other writers. “ The instrument testifies, that it was subscribed by 
 Ethelwulph himself, and by his two vassals, Burred, King of Mercia, and 
 Edmund, King of the East Angles ; as also by a great number of nobles, 
 prelates, &c. in the Cathedral Church at Winchester, before the high altar; 
 and that, being thus signed, it was, by way of greater solemnity, placed by 
 the King upon the altar.” 51 Ethelwulph died in 857, and was buried near 
 Egbert, his father, in this Church ; the possessions of which had been much 
 augmented by these princes. 
 
 Through the counsels of Swithun, King Ethelbald (Ethelwulph’s 
 successor) raised fortifications round the Cathedral and cloisters, in order 
 to protect them from the destructive fury of the Danes, who had now 
 begun to make frequent incursions into different parts of the kingdom, with 
 large armies. The good effects of this measure were soon experienced, for 
 in the next reign, that of Ethelbert, the Danes landed a considerable force 
 at Southampton, and advancing to Winchester, made themselves masters 
 of the city, wherein they committed the most barbarous and lamentable 
 
 50 Malm. De Gest. Reg. Butler’s “ Lives of the Fathers,” &c. vol. iv. p. 196. 
 
 51 Miln. Hist, of Win. vol. i. p. 120, 121. Besides the charter mentioned above, there is another 
 -extant to the same effect, which Ethelwulph is said to have granted in the year 854, at the feast of 
 Easter, and is dated at the Palace of Wilton. The latter charter is given in Dugdale’s Monasticon, 
 hut it is generally considered to be spurious. 
 
32 
 
 WINCHESTER CATHEDRAL, 
 
 excesses; but the Cathedral, with its adjoining offices, appears to have 
 escaped their rage, a circumstance only to be accounted for by supposing 
 the whole to have been completely secured from their depredations. The 
 Danes, on retreating to their ships, were routed with great slaughter, by the 
 Earls of Hampshire and Berkshire ; and the immense spoils which they had 
 made in this city were recovered. These events appear to have taken 
 place about 860; two or three years after which St. Swithun died, and 
 agreeably to his own desire, was interred here, in the church-yard. He is 
 said to have been an especial benefactor to Winchester, and to have either 
 originally constructed, or rebuilt, the principal city-bridge. 52 He has the 
 praise likewise of building a number of churches in those parishes where 
 none had before existed: the monkish annalists, however, not being 
 content with the renown really due to his sanctity and merits, have 
 attributed to him various miracles. Godwin says, that “ his learning 
 questionless was great 53 and Rudborne affirms, that Ethelwulph’s 
 youngest son, Alfred, whose immortal actions have procured him the 
 surname of Great , was in his very infancy committed to the care and 
 tuition of this prelate. 54 
 
 Alfrith, or Adferth , the next bishop, a man of great learning, 
 governed this see “ discreetly and wisely” about eleven years, after which 
 he appears to have been translated to Canterbury and is distinguished in 
 the annals of that city by the name of Athelred. His successor was 
 
 52 Warton, in his History of English Poetry, vol. i. p. 15, has quoted the following passage from a 
 very ancient versification of the Lives of the Saints :— 
 
 Sbegnt Sbfoythan fjts hushoprtcfce to al goohnesse trough : 
 
 ®he tofone also of (SBynchestre he amenheh mough. 
 
 Jpfor he Iette the stronge hruge, foithout the toune arere, 
 
 &nh forth thereto lyrtt anh ston atth the foorfmten that ther foere. 
 
 53 Cat. of Eng. Bish. p. 213. “ How miraculously he made whole a basket of egges that were all 
 
 broken, and some other thinges accounted miracles in our histories, who so list may reade in 
 Matthew Westminster, in his report of the yeere 862, at w'hat time, July 2, this bishop died.” Ib. 
 William of Malmsbury states that he died in 863. 
 
 54 Hist. Maj. 1. 3, c. vi. 
 
BATTLE OF ETHANDUNE. — 879 , &C. 
 
 33 
 
 Dunbert, who is recorded to have settled certain lands upon this Cathedral, 
 for its repairs, which measure had become necessary through the devasta¬ 
 tions committed here by the Danes; who, after several desperate battles 
 w r ith the Princes Ethelred and Alfred, had penetrated to Winchester, 
 where, obtaining possession of the Church, they massacred every individual 
 belonging to it that fell into their power. 05 
 
 On the death of Ethelred, who had been mortally wounded in battle, 
 in the year 872, his brother Alfred was crowned king, in Winchester 
 Cathedral: but after a perturbed sway of several years, he was at length 
 forced by the Danes to seek an asylum in the abode of a swine-herd, or 
 neat-heard, in the Isle of Athelney, in Somersetshire; amidst the almost 
 impassable marshes formed by the conflux of the Perrot and the Thone. 
 After an inglorious obscurity of some months, he suddenly emerged from 
 this retreat, and with a united band of faithful partizans (which had been 
 privately assembled on the eastern borders of Selwood Forest) he surprised 
 and defeated the Danish army at Ethandune , or Heddington, in Wiltshire. 56 
 This victory led the way to new achievements, and Alfred's subsequent 
 successes restored to him his capital and kingdom. Hence Winchester again 
 became the seat of government, and its Cathedral establishment was once 
 more replenished with secular canons. 
 
 Bishop Dunbert died in the year 879, and was succeeded by Denewulf, 
 or Denulf; of whom ancient writers report, that he was the very herdsman 
 in whose cottage and service Alfred had been concealed at Athelney. 
 Godwin says, that the king “ having recovered the peaceable possession 
 of his crown, was not unmindful of his old master, in whom perceiving an 
 excellent sharpness of wit, he caused him (though it were now late, he 
 being a man growne) to study, and having obtained some competency in 
 learning, he preferred him to the bishopricke of Winchester.” 57 He proved 
 
 55 Rudborne places this event in 866; but the more probable date is the year 871, as assigned by 
 Wharton, in Ang. Sac. vol. i. p. 206, n. 
 
 56 Heddington is about six miles south of Chippenham. See an account of this battle, with 
 
 observations on its supposed site, in my account of Wiltshire: Beauties of England, vol. xv., also 
 Whitaker’s “ Life of St. Neot.” ^ Cat. of Eng. Bish. p. 215. 
 
 E 
 
34 
 
 WINCHESTER CATHEDRAL. 
 
 an active and able prelate; and, as appears from the researches of the 
 learned Spelman, was one of the king’s chief counsellors. 08 
 
 The Great Alfred, in his latter years, began the foundation of a magnifi¬ 
 cent abbey in the Cathedral Cemetery at Winchester, for the purpose of 
 retaining in England his friend and chaplain, Grimbald; who had been 
 originally a monk at St. Bertin’s monastery, in Artois, and had been invited 
 into England by the king, to assist in establishing an University. Whitaker, 
 in his 1 Life of St. Neot,’ contends that the first English University, or 
 public school, was founded at Winchester, and not at Oxford, as generally 
 asserted and believed. Alfred also intended the new abbey as a burial place 
 for himself and his family ; but dying before its completion (in 900 or 901), 
 he was provisionally interred in the Cathedral, under a monument of 
 porphyry marble, from which his remains were afterwards translated to the 
 Newoi-Myjistre, as his foundation was then termed. 
 
 Denewulf, according to Matthew of Westminster, was succeeded by 
 Bishop Athelm; who, in the year 888, travelled to Rome with the alms 
 collected by King Alfred and Archbishop Plegmund. His successor, as 
 appears from the same writer, was Bertulf ; whom Alfred, in the year 897, 
 appointed one of the guardians of the realm, to defend it against the 
 Danes. 59 Neither of these prelates is named by Rudborne ; who, on the 
 contrary, states, that Denewulf held this see twenty-four years; and that 
 Edward the Elder exchanged with him a certain quantity of land, for that 
 of the cemetery and other ground belonging to the Cathedral, on which the 
 new monastery w 7 as built. 60 If this account be true, there is evidently no 
 time for the succession of Athelm and Bertulf ; as Denewulf’s decease 
 (when calculated from the date of that of Dunbert his predecessor) could 
 not have happened till the year 903. 
 
 The chronological difficulties which attend the ecclesiastical history of 
 Winchester about this era, are probably inexplicable; 61 and they have been 
 the more involved through the endeavours of the Roman Catholic writers 
 to trace the direct supremacy of the Papal See over the English Church to 
 
 ° 8 In Vit. Alfr. p. 102. 5g Vid e Godwin De PiresuL under Winchester. 
 
 ou Rudb. Hist. Maj. 1. iii. c. 7. 61 Vide Wharton’s Angl. Sac. vol. i. p. 209, n. 
 
CONSECRATION OF SEVEN BISHOPS.— 905 . 
 
 35 
 
 the period now mentioned. It is stated by Malmsbury, 62 under the date 904, 
 that Pope Formosus having been informed that the West Saxon sees had 
 remained vacant during the space of seven years, sent a Bull into England, 
 excommunicating the King and all his subjects, on account of this irregula¬ 
 rity ; and that, in consequence, the King (who must have been Edward the 
 Elder) caused Plegmund, Archbishop of Canterbury, to assemble, at Win¬ 
 chester, a general Council, or Synod, (of bishops, abbots, and other dignified 
 persons,) in which it was determined that the vacancies should not only be 
 filled, but that three new Sees should be established in the West Saxon 
 states. The archbishop, who had presided at the meeting, is then said to have 
 proceeded to Rome, to get the censure taken off, and on his return home, to 
 have consecrated seven new bishops in one day. The year generally assigned 
 for this remarkable consecration is 905 ; but Sir H. Spelman and Johnson refer 
 it to 908. 
 
 Against the presumed authenticity of the above Bull, it has been fatally 
 objected that Pope Formosus died in 895, or 896 ; and therefore could never 
 have signed such an instrument in 904. To solve this difficulty, Baronius 
 conceives that Malmsbury’s date is wrong, and should have been 894 ; yet 
 if this were the fact, the sovereign excommunicated must have been Alfred ; 
 yet no historian has ever glanced at such an event in respect to that 
 monarch. Other difficulties, equally insuperable, attend this conjecture. 
 Johnson, in “ Ecclesiastical Laws,” &c. refers this Bull to Pope Sergius, 
 by which means, he says, “ all runs clear.” “We cannot wonder,” he 
 says, “ if the monks chose to report this papal act as done by Formosus, who 
 was a popular Pope, and made more popular by the barbarous treatment of 
 his dead corpse and memory, than by such a monster of a man and Pope, as 
 Sergius.” 
 
 That the West Saxon demesne was divided into several distinct Sees about 
 this time, and that seven Bishops were actually consecrated on one day by 
 Plegmund, are circumstances so positively affirmed by various historians, that 
 their validity cannot consistently be questioned. Three of the new Sees 
 were taken from the diocess of Sherborne, and were fixed at Wells, for Somer¬ 
 setshire ; at Crediton, or Kyrton, for Devonshire ; and at Petrock’s-Stow, for 
 
 62 Malm. De Gest. Reg. 1. ii. 
 
 E 2 
 
36 
 
 WINCHESTER CATHEDRAL. 
 
 Cornwall : by this arrangement Dorsetshire, Wiltshire, and Berkshire, were 
 the only counties that remained subordinate to Sherborne. The diocess of 
 Winchester was left to its former limits; but among the seven Bishops 
 (all of whom were consecrated at Canterbury,) we find that one, named 
 Kenulf, or Ceolwulph, was appointed for the ancient See of Dorchester, to 
 O xfordshire. 63 
 
 The prelate now chosen to preside over this diocess, was Frithstan, 
 who had been a scholar of St. Grimbald, and a canon in the New Minster in 
 this city. He was much renowned for his piety and learning, and having 
 governed this See, in an exemplary manner, about twent} r -two years, he 
 resigned his bishopric to Brinstan, or Birnstcin, (whom he had previously 
 consecrated,) and after passing the remainder of his days in devotional exer¬ 
 cises, died in 932. Brinstan was originally one of the secular clergy belonging 
 to the Cathedral, but he afterwards assumed the cowl in St. Grimbald’s new 
 abbey : his most prominent virtues were charity and humility ; and he was 
 accustomed to walk round the church-yards by night, praying for the dead : 64 
 he died on the feast of All Souls, 934, whilst in the act of prayer, in his 
 oratory. In the following year he was succeeded by Elphege the First, 
 surnamed the Bald, who had been a monk of Glastonbury, and was uncle 
 to the famous St. Dunstan, whom he raised to the order of priesthood in this 
 Cathedral. He is said to have excelled in all the Christian virtues, and to 
 have bequeathed his lands to certain churches and monasteries in Winchester; 
 subject, however, to the payment of some annuities to relations: he died in the 
 year 951. “Of these three bishops,” says Godwin, “ divers miracles are 
 reported in histories, which need not be here rehearsed.” They were 
 all buried in this Church, and are all ranked as saints in the Roman 
 Calendar. 
 
 Els in, or Aljiti , the next bishop, was a man of royal blood, and of 
 extraordinary learning ; but he has had the misfortune to be greatly calum- 
 
 03 Will. Malm. Rudb. Matt. West. Rapin says, that “ though Malmsbury and Higden 
 affirm the new-erected Bishopricks had the Pope’s confirmation, it is certain at that time, and for 
 more than 200 years after, there was no such thing required.” Hist of Eng. vol. i. p. 113. 
 
 04 One night, on finishing his devotions among the tombs, (in the cemetery of St. Anastatius,) 
 his ‘ Requiescant in pace ’ is recorded to have been loudly answered by an infinite multitude of 
 voices from the sepulchre, ejaculating « Amen.' Vide Rudb. Hist. Maj. 1. iii. c. 8. 
 
OPPOSITION OF EDWY AND DUNSTAN. 
 
 37 
 
 mated through aiding King Edwy to repress the tyranny and insolence of the 
 monks. 63 In his time, anno 955, the remains of Edvvy’s predecessor, Edgar, 
 were interred in Winchester Cathedral, with great solemnity, by Dunstan ; who, 
 having been sent for to administer the sacrament to the expiring King, 
 came not till too late : yet he had the hardihood to testify, that, on his journey, 
 he had been assured by a celestial voice of the happiness of the deceased 
 sovereign ! 6b 
 
 On the decease of Archbishop Odo, in 958, Elsin was translated to the 
 See of Canterbury, to which he appears to have been nominated by the 
 
 King, from his affinity to the blood-royal; though his enemies state that he 
 
 obtained his election by bribery and corrupt intrigues. The manner of his 
 
 65 The coronation of Edwy (a youth of fourteen) at Winchester, was attended by some remarkable 
 
 events, which in their consequences are thought to have had great influence over the affairs of this 
 church. The generality of the monkish historians concur in representing that Edwy had been 
 corrupted by atascivious female of high birth and great beauty, named Algiva, who had a daughter 
 equally shameless ; and that he withdrew from the company of his nobles, at the coronation feast, in 
 order to solace himself in their lewd society. The guests, indignant at this treatment, ordered his 
 tutor, Dunstan (who was then Abbot of Glastonbury), and Kinse}’’, Bishop of Lichfield, to conduct 
 the youth back to the assembly ; and Dunstan had the boldness to reprimand him for thus 
 inconsiderately giving way to his passions. Edwy was highly exasperated at being thus reproved, 
 
 and, being yet more irritated by Dunstan’s general arrogance, he deprived that ambitious prelate of 
 
 all his preferments, and forced him into exile. Still further to divest him of his influence, he 
 expelled all the monks of his order from their several monasteries, and replaced them by secular 
 clergy. This procedure, however, proved the ruin of Edwy ; for the clamours of the monks were so 
 great, that a successful rebellion was excited against him, and more than half his kingdom submitted 
 to the sway of Edgar, his brother; who immediately recalled Dunstan from banishment, and made 
 him Bishop of Worcester. Edwy died in 959 ; and Edgar having succeeded to the entire possession 
 of the monarchy, promoted Dunstan to the Archiepiscopal See of Canterbury. The historian of 
 Ramsey Abbey mentions nothing of the coronation feast, but traces Edwy’s aversion to the monks to 
 his having been offended by St. Dunstan, and Archbishop Odo ; who had obliged him “ to repudiate 
 a certain young and beauteous kinswoman of his, with whom he had contracted an illicit marriage.” 
 Hist. Ramesiensis, l. i. c. 7. 
 
 66 This tale is related by most of the monkish writers; yet they add also, as if to make it the 
 more ludicrously absurd, that Dunstan’s horse , “ trembling at the thunder of the angelic voice,” fell 
 dead under him, “ astounded at the prodigious noise.” Vide Rudb. Hist. Maj. 1. iii. c. 10. Will. 
 Malm. Rog. Hoveden. Mat. West. Osborn. Hist. Ram. /. i. c. 7. 
 
38 
 
 WINCHESTER CATHEDRAL. 
 
 death was remarkable, for. “being impatient to procure the papal confir¬ 
 mation and pall, he hastened to Rome in the most unseasonable weather; 
 when, in crossing the Alps, he experienced such intense cold, as induced 
 him to cause the bodies of the horses, on which he and his companions 
 rode, to be cut open, in order to preserve his own vital heat, by plunging 
 his feet into them ; but this expedient failing, he died amidst the snow.” 07 
 His body was brought to England and deposited in this Church; in the 
 government of which he had been succeeded by Brithelm, of whom 
 nothing more is recorded, than that he held the See about five years, and died 
 in 963. 
 
 The next bishop was the famous St. Etiielwold, a native of Winchester, 
 and of respectable parentage. He commenced his studies, and entered 
 into holy orders, in this city, ; but afterwards became a monk and dean of 
 Glastonbury, under Dunstan, by whose influence with King Edred he was 
 made Abbot of the newly-restored monastery of Abingdon, in Berkshire. 
 Hence, according to Milner, “ he was forcibly withdrawn, for the purpose 
 of undertaking the pastoral government of this, his native citybut the 
 rather, as appeared by his actions, with the view of aiding Dunstan (who 
 was now seated in the archiepiscopal chair at Canterbury) in the accom¬ 
 plishment of his long-cherished design of establishing a general celibacy 
 of the clergy. To effect this, all the secular canons, who refused to 
 repudiate their wives, and conform to the observances of the Benedictine 
 Order, were expelled from the Cathedrals and larger Monasteries, under a 
 commission granted by King Edgar. In the very year of his consecration, 
 Ethelwold forcibly ejected the secular clergy of this Church, who, among 
 other vices of which they were accused, are represented as gluttons, 
 drunkards, and adulterers. 68 This expulsion was effected with all the 
 
 67 Milner’s Winchester, vol. i. p. 139, from William of Malmsbury. Rudborne, &c. These 
 writers state, that some such fearful vengeance had been foretold to him, in a vision, by Odo; in 
 consequence of his having despitefully spurned at the tomb of that prelate in Canterbury Cathedral. 
 
 68 This alleged depravity is said to have been a consequence, partly, of the early licentiousness and 
 irreligion of King Edwy, (as alluded to in note 65), and partly, of there having been such a prelate 
 as Elsin seated in the episcopal chair. Vide Miln. Hist. vol. i. p. 165. 
 
SECULAR CLERGY:-MIRACLES. 
 
 39 
 
 promptitude of determined authority. “ He ordered,” says Milner, from 
 the old historians, “ a proper number of cowls to be brought into the choir 
 in the midst of the canons; and after a pathetic discourse on the sanctity 
 of their state of life, he left it to their choice, either to put on those 
 religious habits, and embrace the monastic state, or quit the service of the 
 Cathedral. Three of the number were content to enter on this strict 
 course of life ; the rest gave up their stalls in the choir, which were soon 
 after filled by a colony of [Benedictine] monks from Abingdon.” fi9 In the 
 following year he also expelled the canons of the New Minster, who are 
 said to have, been even more hardened in wickedness than those of the 
 Cathedral. 70 
 
 On the accession of Edward, surnamed the Martyr, (anno 975,) Elfrida, 
 his step-mother, attempted to counteract Dunstan’s influence, and is said 
 to have caused three abbeys, which Ethelwold had founded, to be 
 suppressed, and their possessions to be given to married clergymen. 71 
 This, and other opposition to his grand designs, occasioned Dunstan to 
 assemble a Synod in the refectory of the Cathedral monastery in this city, 
 in which it was debated whether the regular, or the secular, foundations, 
 
 History of Winchester, vol. i. p. 166. 
 
 70 The monks aver that some of the displaced canons, not brooking the disgrace they had 
 sustained, carried their resentment so far as to attempt to poison St. Ethelwold; but that the 
 saint, though suffering excruciating torment in consequence of swallowing the potion they had 
 prepared for him, was suddenly restored to health, through his prayers to God, and confidence in 
 Christ’s promises. 
 
 71 Elfrida’s conduct, in this instance, is stated to have arisen from being defeated in her design of 
 raising her own son, Ethelbert, to the throne (in place of Edward) by the firmness of the Saints 
 Dunstan, Oswald, and Ethelwold. How highly those personages were estimated by the monks, 
 may be seen from the following passage : — 
 
 ‘ These three brilliant lights, namely, Dunstan, Oswald, and ^Ethelwold, by the three candlesticks 
 placed at Canterbury, Worcester, and Winchester, (the Lord so disposing it) irradiated the three 
 parts of the English world with such a brightness, shining from the true Light, that they seemed to 
 contend with even the very stars of the firmament; and were deservedly (by some men living) 
 accounted to be formed by a miracle, through the unusual pre-eminence of so great a sanctity.’ 
 Hist. Ram. c. xiii. In Decern Scrip. 
 

 40 WINCHESTER CATHEDRAL. 
 
 should be dissolved. From the opinions of the majority, it seemed probable 
 that the question would have been decided against the monks; but a 
 voice, said to be supernatural, issuing from a crucifix, which hung aloft in 
 the room, is recorded to have determined it in their favour ! 72 In that age, 
 indeed, miracles abounded, particularly in respect to Dunstan ; whom the 
 monkish writers represent as being so peculiarly favoured by heaven, that 
 
 there was scarcely an event of his life, of any importance, but what was 
 
 accompanied by some prodigy. 
 
 Ethelwold, leaving his conduct to the secular clergy out of consideration, 
 appears to have been a munificent and charitable prelate. He either 
 founded or rebuilt the several churches and monasteries of Ely, Peter¬ 
 borough, and Thorney ; besides assisting in other monastic establishments. 
 His grand undertaking, however, was the rebuilding of his own Cathedral 
 Church, (which was now, for the first time, furnished with a crypt, or 
 crypts , under the east end, 73 ) and on its completion in 980, he re-consecrated 
 it with great solemnity, in the presence of King Ethelred, Archbishop 
 Dunstan, and eight bishops, besides a numerous assemblage of nobles and 
 
 gentry. On this occasion, to its former patrons St. Peter and St. Paul, was 
 
 added the name of St. Swithun, whose remains had been previously 
 removed from the church-yard, and re-interred under a magnificent shrine 
 that had been provided for the purpose by King Edgar. The fame of the 
 many miracles wrought by St. Swithun’s intercession, was the cause of his 
 relics being thus honoured; 74 and henceforward, till the period of the 
 Dissolution, this establishment was distinguished by the name of St. 
 Swithun’s Church and Priory. 
 
 Among Ethelwold’s public charities, it is recorded, to his immortal honour^ 
 that in the time of a great famine, he brake all the plate of his Church, and 
 gave it to the poor; saying, that “ the Church might be again provided with 
 necessary ornaments, but that if the poor were starved, they could not be 
 
 72 Vide Will. Malm. 1 . ii. c. 9. Osborn. Rudb. &c. 
 
 73 “ In super occultis studuisti et addere cryptas.” Wolstan, Ep. ad S. Elph. 
 
 74 Will. Malm. De Pontif. 
 
 . 
 
BISHOPS ELPIIEGE AND KENULPH. — A. D. 984 - 1006 . 
 
 41 
 
 recovered/’ This prelate died in 984, and was interred in the southern crypt of 
 his own Church. 75 
 
 St. Elphege the Second, surnamed the Martyr, was in the same year 
 consecrated to this See, by Dunstan; his austerities and extraordinary 
 abstinence, which, in those days, were considered as proofs of superior 
 sanctity, having recommended him to the Archbishop as a fit person to 
 succeed Ethelwold. He was born of a noble family, and in early youth 
 became a monk at Deerhurst, in Gloucestershire. He was afterwards Prior 
 of Glastonbury, “ which place, after a season,” says Godwin, “ he left, 
 and gave himself to a very strait kind of life at Bath, for which he was 
 so much admired, (the rather because he was a gentleman of great lineage) 
 that many went about to imitate him, and joining themselves to him, made 
 him their governor by the name of an Abbot.” 76 He was thence promoted to 
 this See, which he governed in an exemplary manner during twenty-two 
 years: he was particularly attentive to the poor, and is recorded to have 
 first introduced the use of Organs into his Cathedral. In the year 1006, he 
 was raised to the Archbishopric of Canterbury, which he continued to 
 possess till 1013, when he was barbarously massacred by the Danes, at 
 Greenwich, in Kent, after a captivity of seven months. Hence, and from 
 his devotional exercises, and extraordinary and unnatural abstemiousness, 
 (which Osbern says had reduced his body to a seeming skeleton, 77 ) he is 
 ranked, in the Roman Calendar, both as a saint and a martyr. 
 
 Kenulpii, or Elsius , Abbot of Peterborough, was made Bishop of Win¬ 
 chester on the translation of Elphege to Canterbury. Godwin says he was 
 
 75 Capgrave states, that the episcopal Chair of St. Ethelwold long remained an object of popular 
 veneration; it being believed, that if those who sat in it gave way to sloth and drowsiness, they were 
 punished by terrific visions and painful sensations! 
 
 76 Cat. of English Bishops, p. 66. Elphege’s place of retirement at Bath had been previously 
 a monastery founded by King Offa, about 775, but afterwards destroyed by the Danes. John de 
 Villule, a French physician, who had been made Bishop of Wells, purchased Bath of William Rufus, 
 for 500 marks, and subsequently transferred thither his Episcopal See ; for the reception of which 
 he rebuilt the Abbey which Elphege had founded, and which, with great part of the city, had been 
 destroyed by fire. Ib. p. 362. 
 
 77 In Vit. Will. Malm. 
 
 F 
 
42 
 
 WINCHESTER CATHEDRAL. 
 
 “ a man infamous for simony and aspiring by corrupt means to this place; ” 
 which he enjoyed but little more than one year, being “ called by death from 
 his dear-bought preferment.’' 78 He was interred in this Church; as was 
 likewise his successor Brithwold, or Ethelwold , who governed this See till 
 his decease in 1015. 79 He was succeeded by Elsin, or Alsin ; whom Godwin 
 has erroneously stated to have been exalted to Canterbury in 1038, but 
 whom most of the ancient historians affirm to have died in 1032 : 80 he also 
 was buried in this Cathedral. 
 
 Alwyn, a Norman by birth, and kinsman to Queen Emma, was next 
 raised to this bishopric, through the Queen’s influence with Canute, her 
 second husband; who, on the decease of Edmund Ironside, about two years 
 before, had obtained the entire sovereignty of the kingdom, and fixed his 
 capital in this city. Emma, “ the pearl of Normandy,” was daughter to 
 Duke Richard, who appointed Alwyn to accompany her to England in 
 quality of counsellor, or guardian; previously to her first marriage with 
 Ethelred-the-Unready. Alwyn continued at the English court, and whilst 
 yet a layman, was made Earl of Southampton, and invested with a command 
 against the Danes; but after the peace between Edmund and Canute 
 had left him at liberty to pursue his own inclinations for a religious life, he 
 became a monk of Winchester about the year 1016. He was soon after¬ 
 wards raised to the office of sacristan; a circumstance that has been 
 supposed to account for the profusion of rich gifts bestowed on this 
 Cathedral by King Canute. Besides a large and costly shrine for con¬ 
 taining the remains of St. Birnius, that sovereign presented the church 
 with a prodigious chandelier, of solid silver, various ensigns, and other 
 costly ornaments of plate and jewels ; but the most extraordinary of all his 
 gifts was that of his royal crown, (which he ordered to be placed over the 
 crucifix of the high altar,) having vowed never more to wear such an 
 emblem of authority, from the time that, when seated on the beach, near 
 Southampton, he proved to his attendants, by commanding in vain the 
 
 78 Cat. of English Bishops, p. 217. 
 
 79 Vide Wharton’s Notes on Rudb. Ang. Sacra, vol. i. p. 227. 80 lb. 
 
FIERY ORDEAL OF QUEEN EMMA.-A. D. 1047 . 
 
 43 
 
 flowing tide not to approach his feet , the extravagance and impiety of their 
 flattery, in extolling his power as equal to that of the almighty Lord of the 
 Ocean. Canute died in the year 1036, and was deposited before the high 
 altar in this Church; five years afterwards the body of his cruel and glutton¬ 
 ous son, Hardicanute, was buried near the same spot. 
 
 Edward, surnamed the Confessor, from his presumed sanctity, was next 
 exalted to the throne by the general voice of the people; and his coronation 
 was conducted with great splendour in this Cathedral. 81 During his reign 
 a remarkable trial of that mode of judgment practised by the Saxons, 
 called the fery Ordeal , is recorded to have been made on the person of 
 Queen Emma, who, among other calumnies, had been falsely accused of 
 a criminal intercourse with Bishop Alwyn. This story coming, at length, 
 to the knowledge of the Queen, (who had been treated with much rigour 
 by her son, and obliged to retire to the Abbey of Wherwell, near this city,) 
 she insisted on undergoing the proof of her guilt or innocence by the fiery 
 ordeal; and Winchester Cathedral was appointed as the place of trial. 
 Here, in presence of the King, and a crowded assembly of all ranks, she 
 is stated to have walked unhurt, though bare-footed, over nine red hot 
 plough-shares; and in memory of her extraordinary deliverance to have 
 given nine manors to this Church : a similar number is said to have been 
 bestowed by Bishop Alwyn; and three others (those of Portland, Wey¬ 
 mouth, and Wyke) by Edward himself, whose indignation against his 
 mother, for marrying Canute, is affirmed to have been removed by this 
 event. 83 Alwyn died in the year 1047, and Queen Emma in 1052 : they 
 
 81 On this occasion Edward granted a Charter to the Cathedral, ordering the donation of half a 
 mark to the Precentor, or Master of the Choir; and a cask of wine, and a hundred cakes of white 
 bread to the Convent, as often as a King of England should wear his crown within the city of 
 Winchester. The privileges of this grant were subsequently extended to the monasteries of 
 Westminster and Worcester. 
 
 82 The whole story of Queen Emma and the plough-shares (which, to give apparent credibility to 
 the tale, are said to have been buried in the west cloister of the Cathedral,) can be regarded only as 
 a romantic fiction. So far, indeed, as it is now possible to trace its origin, it seems to have first 
 appeared in the guise of poetry; and was sung, with the popular ballads relating to Winchester, in 
 
 F 2 
 
44 
 
 WINCHESTER CATHEDRAL. 
 
 were both interred in the Cathedral, and are recorded as its special friends 
 and benefactors. 
 
 The last Bishop of Winchester, prior to the Norman invasion, was 
 Stigand, who had been chaplain to Edward the Confessor, and was 
 translated hither, on the death of Alwyn, from Elmham, in Norfolk, a see 
 that was subsequently removed to Norwich. 83 Five years afterwards, on 
 the banishment of Robert Gemeticensis for seditious practices, he was 
 raised to the archbishopric of Canterbury, which he continued to hold in 
 conjunction with Winchester, till the year 1070, (at which time he was 
 formally deposed, with many other prelates,) in a great Council or Convo¬ 
 cation of the Clergy, held in this city, under Hermenfride, Bishop of Sion, 
 the Pope’s Legate. Stigand is reputed to have been a very subtle and 
 covetous man, and withal rich and powerful, but very unlearned. His 
 principal misfortunes arose from his having had the boldness to appear at 
 the head of the Kentish men, when they assembled in arms at Swanscombe, 
 in Kent, to demand from William the Norman a full confirmation of their 
 ancient liberties; and although that chieftain, in acceding to their request, 
 had engaged never to suffer it to become a ground of offence, yet the 
 displeasure which he hence conceived against Stigand was immoveable. 
 For awhile, however, he concealed his dislike under a specious, yet 
 
 hypocritical respect; but almost immediately after the Council had 
 deprived the archbishop of his dignities, he committed him to close 
 
 imprisonment in Winchester Castle; where, says Godwin, he was “very 
 
 hardly used, being scarcely allowed meat enough to hold life and soul 
 
 together.” This harsh treatment, (which is thought to have been design¬ 
 edly inflicted, to force him to disclose where his treasures were concealed) 
 is said to have affected his mind; and he died with chagrin, or voluntary 
 
 the Priory Hall, on the translation of Bishop Orleton to this See, in the year 1338. (Vide Warton’s 
 History of English Poetry, vol. i. p. 89.) Higden, who wrote about the middle of the same century, 
 relates it at length in his Poly-Chronicon; but the more ancient historians, as Ailred Rievallensis, 
 Malmsbury, Dunelmensis, Huntingdon, and Horeden, are entirely silent on the subject: the principal 
 later writers who mention it are, Brompton, Knighton, Rudborne, and Harpsfield. 
 
 83 See History of Norwich Cathedral, p. 12, w'herein is some account of Stigand. 
 
BISHOP STIGAND.—A. D. 1070 . 
 
 45 
 
 famine, 84 within a few months after his deprivation. “ After his death a 
 little key was found about his necke, the locke whereof being carefully 
 sought out, shewed a note or direction of infinite treasures hid under 
 ground in divers places: all that the king pursed in his owne coffers.” 85 
 He was buried in this Cathedral; to which, according to the Winchester 
 Annalist, 86 he gave a “ prodigious large ” and costly crucifix, with its 
 attendant images (St.John and the Virgin); but Rudborne 87 says, that the 
 said crucifix was given to the Church by the King, who had found it in 
 Stigand’s treasury. It was afterwards placed over the screen at the entrance 
 into the choir. 
 
 841 Cat. of Eng. Bishops, p. 72. The grand charges against Stigand were, that he had presumed 
 to wear the pall of his predecessor Gemeticensis, in the See of Canterbury, without having been duly 
 inducted by the Pope; and had also kept possession of the Sees both of Winchester and Canterbury 
 at the same time. The latter crime, however, if such it were, had never been objected against the 
 famous Saints Dunstan and Oswald; the former of whom held Worcester and London together, and 
 the latter Worcester and York. The fact is, that the great Council at Winchester was purposely 
 assembled to deprive the English clergy of their preferments, in order that the same might be 
 bestowed on foreigners. William was the first sovereign who completely subjected the independence 
 of the English church to papal authority. 
 
 85 Cat. of Eng. Bish. p. 73. 
 
 8(5 Angl. Sac. vol. i. p. 294. 
 
 Ibid. p. 251. 
 
46 
 
 WINCHESTER CATHEDRAL. 
 
 CHAP. II. 
 
 HISTORICAL NOTICES OF THE MUNICIPAL STATE, SEE, AND BISHOPS OF WIN¬ 
 CHESTER, UNDER THE ANGLO-NORMAN DYNASTY :-ORIGIN AND BUILDING 
 
 OF THE PRESENT CATHEDRAL!-DATES AND STYLES OF THE DIFFERENT 
 
 PARTS OF THAT EDIFICE. 
 
 A new and important era in ecclesiastical history was formed under the 
 Anglo-Norman dynasty, and Winchester was chosen, soon after the con¬ 
 quest, as the place for the assembly of prelates, monks, &c. in different 
 Synods. These were formed to give some semblance of justice or can¬ 
 dour to the arbitrary proceedings of the Norman bishops. Lanfranc, late 
 Abbot of Bee in Normandy, was first advanced to the chair of Canterbury, 
 from which Stigand had been recently expelled; Walkelyn, a chaplain and 
 relation to the late Duke of Normandy, was promoted to Winchester, and 
 other priests from the Continent were advanced to other English sees and 
 monasteries. The politic monarch knew the influence of the clergy over 
 the people, and therefore prudently and cunningly assigned all or most of 
 the chief offices to his dependants, relatives, and ostensible friends. Thus 
 he very soon obtained an uncontrolled right, or power over “ the established 
 clergy, and treated them as his captives : he destroyed many of their 
 churches, he stript most, if not all of them, of their rich furniture; he laid 
 a taxation of men and arms to serve him in his expeditions, upon the lands 
 of the bishops and prelates, and obliged them to secular services unknown 
 to their predecessors; he caused many churches, with their tithes, to be 
 converted into lay-fees for the maintaining his military officers and men of 
 arms ; the tithes of other churches, which were mostly served by English 
 priests, he caused to be appropriated to abbeys, which were governed, if not 
 filled by Normans.” 1 These acts may be regarded as productive of a bold and 
 
 1 Johnson’s “ Ecclesiastical Laws,” &c. vol. ii. Preface to Lanfranc’s Canons. 
 
CANONS AT WINCHESTER. — A. D. 1070 , &C. 
 
 47 
 
 daring reformation, or revolution, in the ecclesiastical government; and, 
 according to Dr. Milner, it was the third of the kind that had occurred in 
 England. Walkelyn, on taking possession of his See, at first proposed to 
 expel all the monks, but Lanfranc urged him rather to continue and govern 
 them strictly by St. Benedict’s rule ; Simeon, a brother of the bishop, was 
 appointed Prior. In the councils held at Winchester in 1070, 1071, and 
 1076, the clergy, with Lanfranc at their head, formed a series of Canons, 2 or 
 laws, levelled at the Saxons, and framed to justify and protect themselves. 
 Among the alterations now effected, was the new modelling of the laws, 
 language, and customs of the kingdom. Every thing was to be Norman, 
 and even the English or Saxon language was to be abolished : Winchester 
 was the residence of the court, and we may safely infer, was fully occupied 
 by the officers, priests, and followers of the king. A new royal castle 
 was commenced here : the curfew, or eight o’clock-bell, was first rung at 
 Winton, to warn all persons to retire to bed, or to extinguish fire at that 
 hour: and a command is said to have been issued hence to depopulate 
 the entire tract or district which now forms the New-Forest : 3 that in- 
 
 2 The heads of a few of the Canons will serve to characterise the monastic manners of the times, 
 and the spirit of the legislators:—1. Of Bishops and Abbots coming in by Simoniacal heresy: — 
 2. Of ordaining men promiscuously, from bribery : —3. Of the life and conversation of such men: — 
 4. Bishops to celebrate councils twice a year; and, 5, have free power over the clergy and laity of 
 their diocesses:—6. Laymen to pay tithes as it is written:—7. That none invade the goods of the 
 church:—8. That clerks and monks be duly reverenced, or offenders to be anathematised:—9. No 
 Bishop to hold two Sees:—10. Corpses not to be buried in churches: —11. Bishops only to give 
 penance for gross crimes. The penances required from soldiers are absurd, cruel, and impolitic; 
 and are irreconcileable to the military character of the monarch, who had obtained his post and 
 power by arms. The soldier who killed a man in battle, to do penance for one year; and a year 
 more for every person he knew he had killed. 
 
 3 The extent of the royal command, as to the formation of the forest and sweeping away 22 — 
 36—52, or even 60 parish churches, as variously represented, is a subject of dispute with different 
 writers. The old chroniclers assert it, and also represent that the death of the Conqueror’s sons, 
 Richard, and William Rufus, and his grandson, Henry, in the New Forest, were all marks of the 
 offended Deity’s vengeance for such an impious offence. Some modern authors disbelieve the rela¬ 
 tion, and show it to be founded in the misrepresentation and exaggeration of those cloistered annalists 
 who hated the monarch, and sought every opportunity to traduce his character. See this subject 
 
48 
 
 WINCHESTER CATHEDRAL. 
 
 quisitorial edict of ascertaining and registering the whole landed property 
 of the realm in the ‘ Domesday Book,’’ or ‘ Roll of Winchester ,’ was issued 
 from this city, A. D. 1083, and here that important record was kept: 
 but another more material event, as relating to our present subject, and 
 the stability of the See, was the commencement of a large and magnificent 
 Cathedral, by the Norman bishop, in 1079. The old historians clearly 
 intimate, that he began the church from its foundation , and raised it at his 
 own expense, although the same writers admit, that the former edifice, by 
 Ethelwold, had not been erected more than a century. Some of these 
 also relate that the bishop employed a little finesse at the very beginning of 
 his work, but which, according to Dr. Milner, “ proved the greatness of the 
 undertaking, and generosity of the Conqueror.” The prelate, wanting timber 
 for his new fabric, solicited some from the monarch, who granted him as 
 much from his wood of Hanepinges, or Hampege, near Winchester, as he 
 could cut down and carry away in four days and four 7iights, as stated by 
 Rudborne, Annales, p. 295. Taking advantage of this unqualifying grant, he 
 employed all the men, horses, carts, &c. he could obtain, and levelled and 
 carried away the whole of the said wood, or “ forest,” within the prescribed 
 time. This act, Dr. Milner says, so “prodigiously incensed” the monarch, 
 that he refused to see the bishop ; but the latter, in disguise, contrived to 
 obtain an interview, and explained that he had not exceeded the monarch’s 
 prescribed time, when the king mildly remarked, ‘ Most assuredly, Wal- 
 kelyn, I was too liberal in my grant, and you too exacting in the use 
 made of it.' 4 It appears that this event occurred in the last year of the 
 Conqueror’s life; and it is said that the bishop continued the building for 
 seven years after that event, when, 1093, the Church and conventual offices 
 were so near completion, that “ almost all the bishops and abbots of England 
 assembled in this city to honour the solemn dedication of them, which took 
 
 fully investigated and developed in “ Beauties of England,” vol. vi. Hampshire. Gilpin’s 
 “ Remarks on Forest Scenery,”—and Lewis’s “ Historical Inquiries concerning Forests and Forest 
 Laws,” 4to. 1811. 
 
 4 Annales Wint. an. 1086. 
 
OPPRESSION OF WILLIAM RUFUS. - A.D. 1098. 
 
 49 
 
 place July 15, being the festival of St. Swithun, the patron saint of the place.” 5 
 The Annalist strangely and mysteriously asserts that on the very next day, the 
 workmen began to demolish the ancient fabric, which was completely cleared 
 away within a year, excepting the great altar and one “ portico.” Thus it is 
 plainly implied, that Ethelwold’s church was on a different site to that of 
 Walkelyn’s; and if the language of Rudborne is to be understood and believed, 
 the whole edifice was new built from the foundation. Walkelyn did not long 
 survive the finishing of his church, but according to the monkish annalist, fell 
 a sacrifice to his devotion to that beloved pile. The second Norman monarch, 
 William Rufus, sent a peremptory order from Normandy, in 1098, to the 
 bishop, requiring an immediate remittance of “ C. C. libras ,” an “ enormous 
 sum,” says Milner, “ according to the value of money in those days.” 
 This sum could not be readily raised, without sacrificing the treasures of 
 the church, or withholding the accustomed support of the poor. In this 
 predicament the prelate prayed to be released from the miseries of such a 
 life, and accordingly he died within ten days after the summons had been 
 delivered. Rufus therefore seized the revenues of this See as he had 
 previously those of others; 6 but this sacrilegious invasion of ecclesiastical 
 property, according to the same writer, was visited by “ divine wrath,” and 
 punished by an untimely death. He was killed by an arrow from the bow of 
 one of his associates in the chase, and his body was conveyed in a cart to our 
 Cathedral, the blood dripping from it all the way,” says Malmsbury. It 
 was interred under the tower, “ attended by many of the nobility, though 
 lamented by fewwhich tower, according to the same author, fell the 
 next year, i. e. 1101 ; but Annals of Wilton say 1107. “ Though I forbear to 
 mention the different opinions on this subject, least I should seem to assent 
 too readily to unsupported trifles; more especially as the building might 
 have fallen, through imperfect construction, even though he had never been 
 buried there.” 7 Considering the time this was written, and the education 
 
 5 Milner, “ History, &c. of Winchester,” vol. Ip. 195, from Ann. Win. an. 1093. 
 
 6 At the day of his death, says Malmsbury, he held three bishoprics and twelve vacant abbeys. 
 
 7 Malmsbury, “ History of the Kings of England,” by Sharpe, 4to. 1815. 
 
 G 
 
50 
 
 WINCHESTER CATHEDRAL. 
 
 and situation of the writer, this may be regarded as extraordinary language, 
 and expressive of extraordinary sentiments. Had Rudborne been influenced 
 by similar feelings, we should have pursued our narrative with more satis¬ 
 faction and probability. Immediately on the decease of Rufus, Henry, his 
 younger brother, seized the treasury of the palace, &c. and was readily 
 elected to the vacant throne. Soon afterwards he married Matilda, a de¬ 
 scendant of the West Saxon Kings, and promoted William Giffard, 
 his Chancellor, to this See; but he was not consecrated, nor did he even 
 receive episcopal jurisdiction, till seven years afterwards. This delay arose 
 from the disputes, then existing, “ concerning the receiving ecclesiastical 
 investitures from lay persons, by the pastoral staff and ring.” 8 Henry I. and 
 Anselm, Archbishop of Canterbury, had long contested this point: but the 
 dispute was settled by a synod in London, which declared that no king, nor 
 lay-hand, should be qualified to invest any bishop or abbot with a pastoral 
 staff or a ring : and Anselm consents “ that none elected to any prelacy shall 
 be denyed consecration upon account of the homage which he does to the 
 king.” 9 Thus adjusted, our bishop, who had been banished, was recalled and 
 formally instituted and consecrated in 1107. Though he does not appear to 
 have done much for his own church or society, he is complimented for found¬ 
 ing the college and church of St. Mary Overy, Southwark, London; a convent 
 of Cistercian 10 monks at Waverley, near Farnham, Surrey; and also another 
 for Nuns, at Taunton. In 1110 he removed the monks, &c. of the New 
 Minster from the north side of the Cathedral, to a place called Hyde-Meadow, 
 at the northern extremity of the city. 
 
 It may not be amiss to notice the state of Winchester about this time. 
 As the residence of the monarch, it was also chosen by many of his chief 
 dependant nobles : here was also the royal treasury, royal mint, repository 
 of public records, episcopal palace and cathedral; three royal monasteries, 
 
 8 Miln. Win. i. 203. 
 
 9 See Malmsbury’s History, &c. and Sharpe’s translation, for copies of the supplicatory, persua¬ 
 sive, and argumentative letters written by Pope Pascal to the king and to Anselm, on this subject. 
 
 10 This order is particularly and very liberally commended by William of Malmsbury. See De 
 Regis, lib. v. and Sharpe’s translation. 
 
BISHOP DE BLOIS, AND KING STEPHEN. 
 
 51 
 
 besides other inferior religious houses; and, according to Dr. Milner, “ an 
 incredible number of parish churches and chapels.” The same author, 
 from Trussel, goes on to represent the extent of the city as “ incredible” 
 as its number of churches, by saying that its buildings extended “ a mile 
 in every direction further than they do at present; on the north to 
 Worthy; on the west to Week; on the south to St. Cross; and on the east 
 to St. Magdalen’s Hill.” Although this representation appears a little 
 hyperbolical, yet we can readily believe that Winchester, at its zenith of 
 prosperity, was more populous than at present: in those insecure and 
 warring times, few persons however would raise permanent buildings 
 beyond the protection of the fortified walls and bastion towers. 11 It was 
 about this time that our bishop built his castle at Wolvesey, at the south¬ 
 east angle of this city, also other castles at his manors of Farnham, Taunton, 
 Merden, Waltham, and Downton. 
 
 The civil wars between Stephen and Matilda occasioned new commotions 
 in, and destruction to, Winchester. The usurping monarch, on the death 
 of his uncle, hastened from Boulogne to this city, where his brother, Henry 
 de Blois, was bishop and Pope’s legate ; and through the influence of that 
 prelate he seized the treasures of the royal palace, amounting, according 
 to Malmsbury, to 100,000/. in money, besides plate, jewels, &c. He soon 
 afterwards seized the castles of the bishops, 12 and committed other violences 
 
 11 The Roman boundary walls of this city must have been strong and lofty at that time. In the 
 year 1125, several persons were summoned from different parts of the realm to assemble at Win¬ 
 chester, to answer certain charges for debasing the current coin; and all were convicted, and 
 sentenced to lose their right hands. Three mint-masters of this city were however found inno¬ 
 cent, and acquitted. A standard yard measure was settled by the king at this time, and deposited, 
 with other standards of weight and measure, in this city. Among these was the famed W inchester- 
 bushel. See Whitaker’s “ History of St. Germans.” 
 
 12 In spite of a solemn oath before a council of the nobility at Oxford, swearing “ he would not 
 retain vacant prelacies, but fill them with persons canonically elected; that he would not disturb 
 either clergy or laity in the enjoyment of their woods, as the late King Henry had done; nor sue 
 any body for hunting or taking venison ; that he would remit the tax of Danegeld,'' &c. These 
 and many other indulgences and immunities were promised to the people, and ratified by solemn 
 obligations : but the political oaths of this ruler, like those of many others, seem only to have been 
 made for expediency and state policy. 
 
 G 2 
 
52 
 
 WINCHESTER CATHEDRAL. 
 
 against the clergy, which occasioned the latter to assemble a synod in this 
 city, August 30, 1139, and remonstrate against such oppressive proceed- 
 ino’s. Our present bishop employed his influence to preserve allegiance to 
 the monarch, but the latter, disregarding the clergy and citizens, hastened 
 from them to London, which confirmed the indignation of both classes against 
 him. The castle of Winchester was soon seized for the Empress, and after 
 some struggle with the bishop and his party, the Empress herself was 
 admitted into the city. This was only a prelude to civil hostilities; for the 
 bishop, though at first apparently friendly to the new female monarch, soon 
 thought it proper to strengthen and fortify his castle of Wolvesey. 
 This was invested by the Empress’s troops, under the command of her 
 natural brother, the Earl of Gloucester, and her uncle, David, King of 
 Scotland. Stephen’s military partizans were immediately rallied to 
 relieve the bishop, and a long protracted scene of warfare ensued. The 
 whole city, and all its approaches, were occupied by soldiers. To repel 
 his assailants, and punish the citizens, the bishop “ caused wild-fire and 
 combustible matter to be thrown out of his fortified palace, upon the 
 houses of the townsmen, and reduced a great part of them to ashes. In 
 this fire were burnt above twenty churches, besides the nunnery within the 
 walls, and the abbey of Hyde, without ; the bishop laying hold of the 
 opportunity to seize, for his own use, a golden cross, given to the last of 
 these convents, by King Canute, set with precious stones, (of which he 
 made 30 marks of gold and 500 of silver), and three royal diadems, with as 
 many stands of the purest Arabian gold, adorned with jewels and wrought 
 in the most curious manner.” 13 In this state of civil discord and slaughter 
 Winchester continued for seven weeks, during which time the Empress and 
 her adherents were shut up within the walls of the castle. On the evening of 
 
 13 Carte’s History of England, vol.i.p. 546, from Flor. Wig. Cont . Stow quotes- an authority 
 which states that forty churches were burnt. Milner thus enumerates the ravages committed at 
 this time, “ they destroyed, first the adjoining Abbey of St. Mary, then the whole north, which 
 was infinitely the most populous part of the city ; together with twenty churches, the royal palace, 
 which had been lately built in that quarter, the suburb of Hyde, with the magnificent monastery of 
 St. Grimbald, erected there in the preceding reign.” 
 
ROYAL AND CLERICAL WARS; TEMP. BP. DE BLOTS. 53 
 
 Holy-rood day, the bishop devised a plan to deceive and conquer his 
 opponents. He issued a proclamation that peace should prevail on that 
 sacred festival, and that the gates of the city should be opened. The 
 Empress, with some of her friends, and an escort of forces, escaped early in 
 the morning, but not without a conflict, and some of her best officers were 
 taken prisoners. Dr. Milner, on the authority of “ Brompton, Knighton, 
 Trussel, and others,” says that the Empress devised the following stratagem 
 to effect her escape from Winchester. After representing herself as dan¬ 
 gerously ill for some days, it was proclaimed that she was dead: and 
 that her corpse was to be conveyed, on a horse litter, through the army of 
 the besiegers for interment. She thus escaped the outposts, and then mount¬ 
 ing her horse, proceeded with her small retinue to Ludgershall, Devizes, and 
 thence on to Gloucester. The intrigues and duplicity of the bishop at length 
 met with a check by an order from the Pope to relinquish his legatine 
 power, with all its authority and influence. This was a severe blow to his 
 ambition, as he had frequently contested the authority even of the Arch¬ 
 bishop of Canterbury. Indeed at one time he petitioned Pope Lucius II. to 
 raise the See of Winchester into an archbishopric, 14 and to subject the six 
 Sees of Salisbury, Exeter, Wells, Chichester, Hereford, and Worcester to it, 
 and to make a seventh See of Hyde-Abbey. 
 
 From the devastations and disasters which Winchester experienced 
 during these royal and clerical wars, it never recovered ; and from this 
 period it loses the principal part of that interest which arises from exciting 
 the hopes and fears of the reader. In the reign of Henry the Second, it 
 appears that the bishop had fled, with his treasures to the Continent, which 
 provoked the monarch to seize on and dismantle his three castles of Wol- 
 vesey, Waltham, and Merden ; 15 the ruins of Winchester were, however, 
 partly restored, a mayor was appointed to govern its internal police, and 
 
 14 Carte, Hist. Engl, from Mat. Paris and Rudborne. This prelate is said to have been the first 
 to have introduced the practice of appealing to Rome; “and, on this account, as well as others, 
 deserved very ill of this church and nation.” Johnson, Eccles. Laws. 
 
 15 Dr. Milner, i. 219, observes, “ this can only be understood of the ditches, barbacan, and other 
 •outworks.—Rad. Diceto, in his Ymagines, Hist says the king destroyed all the bishop’s six castles.” 
 
54 
 
 WINCHESTER CATHEDRAL. 
 
 fhis was the first town in England thus governed: in the next reign it 
 was invested with the privilege of a corporation, by which it formed “ an 
 independent state in the heart of the kingdom.” The Abbot of Hyde- 
 Abbey instituted a suit against the bishop to make him account for the 
 grand crucifix, and other valuables^ which he had pilfered from that house. 
 The royal treasury was still kept at Winchester, and to that city Richard 
 Cceur-de-Lion hastened after the death of his father, and took possession of 
 valuables to the amount of 900,0001. In this Cathedral he was also solemnly 
 crowned, a second time, on the 17th of April, 1194. This second coronation 
 he demanded, on returning to his kingdom after having suffered imprisonment 
 in the dungeon of Trivallis. 16 On first coming to this city he dispossessed 
 the Cathedral “ of its two manors, and the bishop of the royal castle and 
 county of Winchester.” 17 The reign of John is distinguished in the Annals 
 of Winchester for some important grants to the city, and by its immediate 
 participation in a violent quarrel, which lasted six years, between the King 
 and the Pope, about the election of Stephen Langton. This person was 
 forced on the clergy and nation by the Roman Pontiff, who through the 
 medium of Pandulph, the legate, also compelled the king to submit to 
 a mortifying and degraded humiliation to the papal throne. He was next 
 excommunicated; assumed contrition, but only to act with treachery and 
 tyranny ; which caused the barons, at the instigation of the Winchester 
 prelate, to confederate against him, and compel him to sign Magna Charta. 
 Winchester was afterwards conquered and occupied by French troops, who 
 committed great devastation on the castles of the king and Bishop. Under 
 the next reign and next prelacy, our city was again restored ; but towards 
 the end of the reign, much opposition arose between the monarch and 
 monks about the election of a bishop. 
 
 Having now furnished'a general view of the progressive history of Win¬ 
 chester and its See, up to the beginning of the thirteenth century, we shall 
 direct our whole attention to the Cathedral, its offices and officers. By 
 what has been already stated, it appears that the present church was built 
 
 16 Milner, “ from an ancient historian of great credit,” gives a particular account of this corona¬ 
 tion. Hist. Winchester, i. 240. Milner, from Rog. Hovedon. 
 
LETTER FROM MR. GARBETT TO THE AUTHOR. 
 
 55 
 
 by Walkelyn, “from the foundation;” but many antiquaries contest this 
 point, and assign parts of it to a much earlier date. On this subject I am 
 willing to attend to the opinions and reasonings of all; and therefore 
 willingly give publicity to the following letter, from the gentleman appointed 
 by the Dean and Chapter to superintend the architectural repairs, &c. of 
 the Church. 
 
 “ Dear Sir, 
 
 “ I have at length undertaken to arrange, upon paper, the ideas that have 
 from time to time arisen in my mind, relative to the styles and dates of the 
 several parts of that interesting and venerable fabric, the Cathedral Church 
 of this city. 
 
 “ It is not without much diffidence, that I undertake to express my opinion 
 upon a subject, which has engaged the attention of antiquaries of eminent 
 yearning and ingenuity. I shall, however, find some apology in the con¬ 
 sideration that different conclusions have been drawn from the historical 
 information they have collected; a circumstance which shows that such 
 information, though very essential to our inquiry, cannot be entirely 
 depended upon, without a patient and scrupulous survey of the existing 
 parts of the fabric, which, I believe, it may with confidence be said, will 
 afford ample evidence to warrant us in premising generally, that the ancient 
 historians of the Cathedral, either from misconception of the authorities from 
 which their information was derived, or from their zeal to extol the munificence 
 of the several benefactors to the fabric, must have greatly exaggerated the 
 description of the works performed at different periods. 
 
 “ Having thus prepared a foundation, we shall be able to trace without great 
 difficulty the works of the illustrious sovereigns and prelates who have 
 been most eminently distinguished by their zeal and munificence, as founders 
 or improvers of this ancient structure, from the commencement of the fourth 
 century down to the period of the Reformation. 
 
 “ One of the latest historians of this edifice, Dr. Milner, and the au¬ 
 thorities he cites, inform us that a basilic of vast extent and magnificence 
 
56 
 
 WINCHESTER CATHEDRAL. 
 
 was erected for the purpose of Christian worship so early as the second 
 century, upon the site which the Cathedral now occupies : of such an edifice 
 it cannot be pretended that any part can now remain to be identified, for 
 we are told by the same authority, that after it 1 had subsisted about 120 
 years it was levelled with the ground.’ It is, however, probable, as will 
 hereafter be shown, that some part of the foundation of such a structure 
 may be still existing. 
 
 “ After the destruction of the first edifice, it is said to have been rebuilt, 
 from the foundation, no less than four times in the short space of 780 
 years. The improbability of this seems to have staggered the belief of Dr. 
 Milner, who relates it; for he tells us it is probable that Ethelwold ‘ not only 
 made use of the loose materials of the ancient building, but also incorpo¬ 
 rated such parts of it as he found of sufficient strength to be left standing; ' 
 and the same author, when he speaks of the rebuilding of this vast structure 
 by Walkelyn, says, ‘ It was not then from any real necessity of such a 
 work, that our first Norman bishop rebuilt the Cathedral; but the fact is, 
 the Normans in general, being a high spirited people, held the Saxons, 
 with all their arts, learning, and whatever belonged to them, in the most 
 sovereign contempt.’ 
 
 “ From the histjrical notices we meet with, we shall find no difficulty in 
 admitting, that great improvements were made in the fabric of the 
 Cathedral at, or about, the following stated periods : viz. in the year 313, 
 ‘ by the contributions of private Christians,’ when Constans was bishop of 
 the See; about the year 584, by the Saxon King, Kenewalch ; about the 
 year 980, by Bishop Ethelwold; and again, in the year 1079, by Bishop 
 Walkelyn, of whom it is particularly recorded, that he built the tower, 
 which was at that time considered a stupendous work; and that he cut 
 down the whole of an extensive wood to supply the timber necessary for 
 the completion of the edifice. This we may readily admit; but when we 
 attentively compare the architecture, and the workmanship of the tower, 
 with that of the greater part of the adjoining transept, we shall not hesitate 
 to ascribe to the latter a much earlier date; for it is not difficult to trace 
 
LETTER FROM MR. GARBETT : WALKELYN’s WORK. 
 
 57 
 
 distinctly, the junction of the Norman with the Saxon work, not only by 
 the superiority of the masonry, 18 but by the shape of the arches. The two 
 arches of every story, on each side of the transept next to the tower, and 
 the respective piers between them, were evidently rebuilt with the tower; 
 and this may be considered the extent of Walkelyn’s work in masonry, as 
 far as respects the Cathedral. In addition to this, which was certainly a 
 work of considerable magnitude, it may with great reason be admitted, that 
 he entirely new roofed the whole of the transept and nave in a manner that 
 might well entitle it to be termed, new and magnificent; and when we view 
 the greater part of the roof that now remains, we shall not be surprised at 
 what is related of a whole wood being cleared to furnish the timber necessary 
 for the purpose. 
 
 “ The Norman roof now remaining, is that of the whole of the transept 
 south of the tower, and that of the whole nave west of the tower, with the 
 exception of about fifty feet in length from the west end, which was 
 evidently destroyed by fire, though it is not known at what period, or by 
 what accident the conflagration was occasioned : there is, however, reason 
 to suppose, from the appearance of the timber, as well as from the mode of 
 construction, that this new part of the roof cannot be of higher antiquity than 
 the seventeenth century. 
 
 “ The roof of the transept, northward of the tower, being of a construction 
 very different from that of the nave, and southern part of the transept, we 
 must conclude that the decay of the Norman roof in that situation was more 
 rapid, and that it required renewal before the other parts; for we cannot 
 suppose that Walkelyn would have left this part incomplete. 
 
 u It is presumed that what has been said of the architecture and work¬ 
 manship of the tower and transept, will prove that some portions of the 
 latter existed previous to the time when Walkelyn is said to have rebuilt it 
 from the ground. It now remains to show, that in the ancient parts there 
 now exists the clearest evidence of additions to the fabric, at a period still 
 
 18 The improved workmanship of the Norman builders may be most clearly seen in the facing of 
 the stone, and also in the joints, where the mortar is not equal to a fourth part of that used in the 
 Saxon work. 
 
 H 
 
58 
 
 WINCHESTER CATHEDRAL. 
 
 more remote; this is to be seen in the design, rather than in the execution 
 of the work. The alteration now speaking of, was probably the work of 
 Ethelwold, and consisted of an increase of the substance, and alteration of 
 the shape, of four principal pillars of the transept, unquestionably for the 
 purpose of supporting a tower at the extremity of each of the side ailes. 
 It may be objected, that there is no historical notice or tradition of the 
 existence of such towers, but the evidence of the present state of the structure 
 is of the most decisive nature; for the imposts of the arches which supported 
 the flanks of such towers, are now to be seen distinctly in the spaces between 
 the roof and vaulting of the ailes ; and whoever examines with due attention 
 the side arches of the third story of the transept, will perceive that those 
 nearest the extremities, (into which windows have been introduced) were not 
 originally windows, but open arches of communication within the edifice, 
 similar to those between the body and ailes. 
 
 “We now come to the investigation of the work of a period still more 
 remote, which is the Crypt , under the part of the church between the high 
 altar and the Virgin Chapel. The workmanship in this crypt, though plain 
 and simple in its design, is far superior to any that is to be seen in the 
 whole edifice, excepting those parts which will be hereafter spoken of 
 as the works of de Lucy and Fox. This work is as much superior to 
 that of the greater crypt, to which it adjoins, as the Norman is to the 
 Saxon work in the transept; but its inferior dimensions seem to indicate 
 that it is not the work of the high-spirited Walkelyn, and the circular 
 termination shows it is not the work of a much later period; we may there¬ 
 fore conclude that this is a remnant of the work of our pious British or 
 Roman ancestors, in the early part of the fourth century: and in con¬ 
 formity with the observations before made upon the existing appearances 
 of the fabric, as well as with the historical notices mentioned by Milner, 
 and his authorities, we may proceed to define the works of the various 
 builders from that period down to the eleventh century in the following 
 portions. 
 
 “ The work of King Kenewalch, now remaining, may be supposed to 
 include the first story of the transept, with the exception of the part before 
 
LETTER FROM MR. GARBETT : SAXON CRYPTS, &C. 
 
 59 
 
 described as being rebuilt by the Norman bishop, and some other innovations 
 in the windows : we may also conclude, that much of the work of that sove¬ 
 reign remains in the pillars of the nave, though they have since been re¬ 
 moulded, and probably much repaired, in prosecuting the works of the 
 munificent prelate, Wykeham. 
 
 “ It may be observed, that in the transept a new set off appears at the 
 base of the second tier of Saxon arches, to which it is presumed the work 
 of Kenewalch was taken down by Bishop Ethelwold, and that the work 
 of the latter was continued from thence upwards, to the height of the present 
 parapet, including the towers before spoken of, as well as an increase in the 
 length of the nave; the whole length of which is evidently of Saxon work¬ 
 manship, as appears by the columns that continue above the vaulting, where 
 the masonry is of the same coarse kind as that before described, in contradis¬ 
 tinction to the Norman work. The further work of Ethelwold may be seen in 
 the greater Crypt, upon which he of course added a superstructure, though 
 the work now standing over that foundation is of a much later date, which will 
 be spoken of in its place. With respect to timber roofing, we must suppose 
 that Ethelwold made use of such as he found upon the old building, for 
 when we admit so great a part to have been renewed by Walkelyn, we 
 cannot suppose that he rejected what had been new within the short space of 
 one hundred years, when we find that which he used has endured more than 
 seven hundred years. Milner tells us positively, that Ethelwold first enriched 
 the Cathedral £ with its subterraneous crypts which it before had wanted 
 this is certainly at variance with what I have suggested relative to the lesser 
 Crypt; to reconcile which it may be presumed that Milner’s authority (which 
 in that instance is not cited) may have meant that the Cathedral was deficient 
 in that respect, or that it wanted crypts proportionate to the general scale 
 of the edifice, and not that it had no crypt. We now come to the 
 work of Walkelyn, which, it is presumed, has been sufficiently proved to be 
 confined to the building of the central Tower and such parts of the edifice 
 as immediately abutted upon it, and to the new roofing of the transept and 
 nave. 
 
 “ I agree with Dr. Milner in the supposition that Walkelyn’s work did 
 
 h 2 
 
60 
 
 WINCHESTER CATHEDRAL. 
 
 not extend eastward of the present tower, but a considerable part of the 
 Saxon edifice remained standing in that situation, including the smaller 
 Tower which Rudborne informs us fell upon Rufus's tomb. The tower thus 
 mentioned I conceive to have been one of those which stood at the eastern 
 extremity of each of the side ailes of the choir, similar to those I have 
 before described as once terminating the side ailes of the transept. An 
 examination of the crypt will show that additions had been made to the 
 walls of the substructure, at a period subsequent to their first erection, which 
 cannot easily be accounted for, otherwise than for the support of the towers 
 thus assigned to that situation ; and the fall of one of them towards Rufus’s 
 tomb may be reasonably accounted for from the evident circumstance of the 
 foundation in that direction being less substantial than that of the opposite 
 side. 
 
 “ Before we come to an examination of the works of Bishop de Lucy, it 
 
 may be observed, that an architectural innovation, probably one of the first 
 
 specimens of the pointed arch in this country, as an integral ornament, is 
 to be seen in the wall inclosing a part of the south-west aile of the transept. 
 This work may be reasonably attributed to Bishop de Blois: it seems to appear 
 as an experiment to try the effect of the pointed arch, compared with the semi¬ 
 circular one, and it is curious to observe the predilection that seems to have 
 prevailed in favour of the former, as that is placed in a situation to be 
 viewed with greater advantage than the other, and is also more prominently 
 ornamented. 
 
 “ We now come to the work of de Lucy , in the consideration of which 
 we are again interrupted by a tower of the old Saxon church, that was 
 
 left standing in the part eastward of the choir by Walkelyn; and this 
 
 occasions some difficulty in understanding what was the state of that part 
 of the fabric when de Lucy began his work ; for we are to recollect, that 
 the weather-cock falling from the tower in the year 1214, broke the shrine 
 of St. Swithun, which, Dr. Milner justly observes, must have stood near 
 the high altar, and was not likely to have been struck by a heavy body 
 falling from the present tower. We may therefore attribute this accident 
 to the failure of one of the old towers, before described as having stood at 
 
LETTER FROM MR. GARBETT : DE LUCY’S WORKS. 
 
 61 
 
 the extremities of the side ailes of the choir, in which situation the high 
 altar must have been placed nearly between them. The difficulty which 
 next occurs is to find the situation of the tower so particularly stated to 
 have been begun and finished in the year 1200. The works of this munifi¬ 
 cent prelate, now remaining, will, I conceive, justify a conclusion that a 
 tower built under his direction would have been of sufficient strength to have 
 continued to the present time ; nor have we any reason to believe him so 
 deficient in judgment as to have placed it in a situation to interfere with 
 any future improvement of the part containing the high altar, which must 
 at that time have been the most ancient part of the whole fabric : by these 
 considerations we shall be induced to look for de Lucy’s tower at the 
 eastern part of his work, and we may therefore accordingly recognize a 
 portion of it in the western part of the present Lady Chapel, which has 
 evidently been of greater height at some former period than it is at present; 
 as part of the staircases that led to another story are now to be traced, 
 though they are nearly filled up by rough masonry in effecting subsequent 
 alterations. 
 
 “ With respect to the other works executed by de Lucy, there is some 
 reason to suspect, however extraordinary it may appear, that he did not 
 absolutely take down the whole walls of that part of the Church situated 
 between the old high altar and his new tower, but that the upper part of the 
 ancient walls were by some means supported while the arches and pillars were 
 inserted under them ; for there are indications of those walls having been orna¬ 
 mented, above the present vaulting, with sculpture of a very singular pattern, 
 which is so situated that it can hardly be considered as the accidental applica¬ 
 tion of old materials re-used; it may, however, be observed, that in all (even 
 the most ancient) parts of the fabric old materials, exhibiting mutilated mould¬ 
 ings, and other ornaments, are to be seen indiscriminately used in the suc¬ 
 cessive repairs and alterations, from the time of the Saxons down to a very late 
 period. 
 
 “ In returning to the work of de Lucy, we may see cause to believe that 
 a considerable alteration was made in his plan after his decease, at which 
 
62 
 
 WINCHESTER CATHEDRAL. 
 
 time the work had not probably proceeded further than the vaulting of the 
 central aile, or nave of that part of the Church, and the walls of the small 
 chapels north and south of the then new tower, or Lady Chapel : the width 
 of these small chapels I conceive to be the width intended by de Lucy 
 for his whole work, as by adhering to this he would have preserved the 
 ancient proportions, which were evidently violated by increasing that width to 
 meet the extreme width of the second Saxon edifice. The ill effect of this 
 innovation is to be seen in various ways; first, in the disproportionate appear¬ 
 ance of the side ailes, compared with the centre, or nave ; secondly, in the 
 defective state of the walls, which are forced much out of their perpendicular 
 by the pressure of the vaulting of the side ailes of such extraordinary width : 
 this failure, however, may be partly attributed to the circumstance of the 
 outer walls being built upon new ground, while the opposite pillars stood 
 upon the solid foundation of the ancient crypt ; and thirdly, in the unequal 
 and unfinished appearance of the east ends of the ailes ; but although these 
 defects occurred in the design, it must be observed that the workmanship of 
 this period far surpassed any thing that preceded it: the face of the work as 
 well as the mouldings are wrought with care and accuracy, and the foliage of 
 the capitals is sculptured with boldness and elegance. The staircases contained 
 in the two turrets of the eastern ends of these ailes are, I believe, unique : 
 they certainly exceed every thing I have seen or heard of in that way. One 
 hardly knows which to admire most, the elegance of the design or the accuracy 
 of the execution : I imagine those staircases must have led to some offices fre¬ 
 quented by superiors of the establishment. 
 
 “ It does not appear from any historical notice that I have met with, that 
 any considerable repair or improvement was made in the Cathedral after 
 the completion of Bishop de Lucy’s undertaking till the time of William 
 de Edington ; a prelate who, Dr. Milner says, was ‘ in his virtues and 
 talents only inferior to Wykeham himself,’ and ‘that justice has never 
 been done to the memory of this benefactor of our Cathedral.’ This 
 passage seems to insinuate that Edington must have executed other works 
 than those described by Bishop Lowth in his Life of Wykeham ; and here 
 
LETTER FROM MR. GARRETT: BISHOP EDINGTON’s WORK. 63 
 
 it may be observed, that another writer upon ecclesiastical architecture, the 
 Rev. J. Dallaway, in one of the tables at the end of his work, purporting to 
 exhibit the dates, dimensions, and names of the founders of the various 
 parts of the English Cathedrals, mentions the building of the choir of our 
 Cathedral, 138 feet in length and 86 in width ; and also the Lady Chapel, 
 54 feet in length, as the works of Edington in the year 1350. The same 
 table mentions the tower, 133 feet high, as the work of Godfrey de Lucy, in 
 the year 1190; and the presbytery, 93 feet long, and 86 wide, as the work 
 of T. Langton, in the year 1493. Here we find the dates correspond with 
 other accounts of the times when the respective prelates held the see. The 
 part of this statement, relative to the work of de Lucy, certainly appears to 
 be at variance with other accounts, which seem to be admitted as authentic, 
 and are corroborated by the style of the architecture ; but that part which 
 relates to Edington, though no authority is cited, appears worthy of con¬ 
 sideration, as I am not aware of any authentic account relative to that part 
 of the fabric. For though Dr. Milner, speaking of the part of the 
 Cathedral 4 between the tower and the low ailes of de Lucy,’ says, 1 that 
 great and good prelate, Fox, undertook to rebuild it;’ yet I cannot suppose 
 that a person so well acquainted with the various styles of ancient architec¬ 
 ture could mean, that the pillars and arches of the presbytery, with the 
 windows over them, could have been executed by the same persons, or in 
 the same age, as those of the side ailes adjoining; those works are in 
 reality very different, both in design and in execution, and I am therefore 
 inclined to believe that Mr. Dallaway has obtained some information upon 
 the point that escaped the industrious researches of Dr. Milner. From 
 these circumstances, and from the appearance of the work itself, it seems 
 highly probable that the part between the tower and the altar-screen was 
 built by Edington, and that the Stalls in the choir were also the work of 
 the same prelate, or of his executors; for upon minute inspection it may 
 be found that there are many similarities in the execution of these works, 
 and those about his tomb and its inclosure. I pass by, at present, the part 
 between the altar-screen and the work of de Lucy, considering that to be 
 
64 
 
 WINCHESTER CATHEDRAL. 
 
 the work of another benefactor, and proceed to the west end of the fabric, 
 where I agree with Dr. Milner, that Edington, or his executors, completed 
 ‘ the two first windows from the great west window, with the correspond¬ 
 ing buttresses, and one pinnacle on the north side of the church ; as like¬ 
 wise the first window towards the west, with the buttress and pinnacle on 
 the south side.’ I am further of opinion, that the two west windows of the 
 side ailes were executed at the same time, and probably the two hexagonal 
 turrets; these certainly appear to have been carried as high as the present 
 parapet before any alteration was made in the design in consequence of 
 Wykeham’s undertaking, as it may be seen that a cornice, evidently 
 intended to have been continued from the turrets along the outer wall of the 
 nave, is suddenly broken off, and another cornice begun, at some height 
 above it. It is also evident that the sloping parapets, running from the 
 hexagonal turrets, over the windows of the west end of the ailes, are carried 
 several feet higher than they were designed to be by Edington; as part of 
 the coarse of stone, intended to project over the junction of the lead 
 covering of the roof, with the inside of the wall, is now to be seen; by 
 which we discover that the small moulding upon the second ornamented 
 space over the window was intended as the extreme height of that part. 
 The nature of the ornaments in the parts now under consideration was 
 certainly calculated to justify the observations of Bishop Lowth, that ‘ in 
 the year 1371 some work of this kind was carrying on at a great expense 
 but whether it included the great western window or not, is doubtful. I 
 am of opinion that the sum provided by Bishop Edington was expended 
 before the intended work was completed, for whatever was done at that 
 time must have fallen far short of what was really necessary ; since we are 
 informed by Bishop Lowth, that upon Wykeham’s visitation of the Cathe¬ 
 dral in 1393, 19 1 the fabric of the Church was greatly out of repair, and 
 the estates allotted to that use were very insufficient for it. The bishop 
 ordered, that the Prior for the time being, should pay 100/. a year for seven 
 years ensuing, and the Sub-prior and Convent 100 marks in like manner, for 
 
 19 Lowth’s Life of Wykeham, third edit. p. 193. 
 
LETTER FROM MR. GARBETT : WYKEHAM’s WORK. 65 
 
 this service ; over and above the profits' of all estates so allotted, and all 
 gifts and legacies.’ Now it is difficult to conceive, that the nave or ailes 
 could, at that time, have been so much dilapidated as to call for this extra¬ 
 ordinary injunction, when we see the transept at this time so nearly in its 
 original state ; we must therefore attribute the defect to the unfinished state 
 of the work begun by Edington. 
 
 “ We now come to an investigation of the improvements made in this 
 venerable structure by a prelate justly celebrated for the profound skill and 
 taste displayed in the various works executed under his auspices, and 
 through his boundless munificence. In the subject before us we view the 
 last work of William of Wykeham, commenced in the 70th year of his 
 age, and prosecuted with diligence throughout the remaining ten years of 
 his life ; though it is to be regretted that we cannot with certainty deter¬ 
 mine the extent of the work executed during that time. Dr. Milner has 
 discovered that Wykeham did not absolutely take down so much of the 
 ancient fabric as his learned biographer supposed he did, and this we may 
 readily admit; but it is to be observed, that Bishop Lowth quotes Rud- 
 borne as his authority, and if Dr. Milner has himself been mistaken 
 respecting what he represents as the work of Bishop Fox, we shall not feel 
 much difficulty in supposing that similar mistakes have arisen respecting 
 the extent of the works executed at more distant periods by Ethelwold 
 and Walkelyn, as previously assumed. In proceeding to trace the works of 
 Wykeham, w r e have an unerring guide in the Bishop’s own Will, as far as it 
 is applicable to this purpose. By it we find, that' within fifteen months 
 previous to his decease, so much of his undertaking remained unfinished 
 that he directed 3000 marks to be applied for its completion (a sum far 
 exceeding what he had formerly directed the prior and convent to expend 
 in seven years) : and we find by his directing the walls, the windows, and 
 the vault to be finished throughout according to the new mode in which he 
 had already completed some parts on the south side, that a considerable 
 part on the north side still remained unfinished : but as we find no mention 
 of the great west window, we may conclude that he commenced his work 
 in that part. I have before expressed some doubt whether this window 
 
 I 
 
66 
 
 WINCHESTER CATHEDRAL. 
 
 was the work of Edington, or Wykeham; but when it is considered that 
 there is a peculiarity in the upper compartment very unlike any part of 
 Edington’s, and invariably followed through the whole of Wykeham’s 
 windows; and when we see the outer face of the wall over the window, and 
 the face of the wall making the gable end of the roof, ornamented with 
 mouldings and compartments accordant with the known taste of Wyke¬ 
 ham, we can hardly hesitate to pronounce it his work : we may also with 
 confidence attribute to him the judicious and elegant alteration of the Saxon 
 pillars, the whole of the windows of the nave and of the ailes, (excepting 
 those before attributed to Edington,) and the vaulting of the ailes with 
 which the flying buttresses are so ingeniously combined for resisting the 
 pressure of the greater vault. But when we compare the vaulting of the 
 ailes with that of the nave, stupendous as we must acknowledge the latter 
 to be, we cannot but feel that the former presents a much more finished 
 appearance, and that the genius of Wykeham had ceased to direct the 
 operation. The vault of the nave may therefore be considered as the work 
 of Wykeham’s executors, probably assisted by his successor, Cardinal 
 Beaufort , who is described by Dr. Milner as a great benefactor to the 
 Cathedral, though he does not particularize his works. I think it highly 
 probable, that in addition to a share in the vaulting of the nave, the 
 Cardinal erected the Portals which make so fine a feature in the western 
 facade ; and that he also added the two side windows, eastward of the altar 
 screen, as well as the Screen itself, and the beautiful row of canopies facing 
 eastward, in Bishop de Lucy’s part of the Church, as I conceive those to 
 be works of an earlier date than Bishop Fox, to whom Dr. Milner ascribes 
 them ; besides the works of Fox are always to be known by his arms and 
 devices, of which these inimitable specimens of art are quite destitute. 
 
 “ When William of Waynjlete succeeded Beaufort in the See, we may 
 presume that the Cathedral was in the most satisfactory state of repair; as 
 we do not find by his biographer, Dr. Chandler, that he undertook any 
 repair or embellishment of the fabric, except his own sepulchral Chantry. 
 We may, however, be assured, that a prelate possessing in so eminent a 
 degree the liberality as well as the talents of his great predecessor, 
 
LETTER FROM MR. GARRETT: LADY CHAPEL. 
 
 67 
 
 Wykeham, would not have withheld his assistance, if any part of the fabric 
 had remained in an unfinished state. It cannot be necessary for me to say 
 any thing of a monument so well known as the chantry of this prelate, 
 further than to express my opinion that as it would not be desirable to see 
 in that situation an exact copy of its opposite neighbour, the stately and 
 well executed sepulchral chantry of Beaufort, so it would be extremely 
 difficult, if not impossible, to devise a more elegant and fit companion 
 for it. 
 
 “ The next work in chronological order is the alteration and addition to the 
 Lady Chapel , which Dr. Milner sufficiently proves to have been executed 
 by the Priors , Hunton and Silkstede, though the latter may probably have 
 been assisted by Bishop Courteney. The old part of the Lady Chapel 
 must have been previously vaulted, as appears by the disposition of the 
 ornaments on the east and west sides : we cannot say much in praise 
 of this work of good Prior Silkstede, as far as respects the vaulting, the 
 columns, and the windows, though the ornaments below the windows, both 
 outside and within, are entitled not only to notice but to admiration, as 
 well for the design as for the execution ; and of the linings and fittings of 
 this chapel, in carved oak, it is impossible to speak in terms that can do 
 justice to the subject. The chasteness of the design will, I believe, be 
 generally considered to have a more pleasing effect than the profusion of 
 ornaments spread over the neighbouring Chapel, which was fitted up by 
 Bishop Langton about the same time, for his sepulchral chantry, and 
 exhibits many beautiful specimens of carved oak, though they are rather 
 too much crowded to be seen with advantage. This chapel, however, as 
 well as the opposite one on the north side, appears to have been previously 
 occupied as private oratories; as there are ranges of niches in the eastern 
 walls, of a style at least as early as the time of Bishop Edington. 
 
 “ It now remains to point out the works of Bishop Fox, the last who 
 has been distinguished by any extensive repair or improvement of the fabric 
 of the Cathedral; and though we may not ascribe to this prelate the whole 
 of the works supposed by some to have been executed by him, yet it must be 
 acknowledged, that in taste, in skill, and in munificence, he is entitled to be 
 
 i 2 
 
68 
 
 WINCHESTER CATHEDRAL. 
 
 considered as the worthy successor of Wykeham and of Waynflete. His 
 works in the Cathedral I conceive to be the two turrets at the eastern ex¬ 
 tremity of the presbytery, with the magnificent window between them, and 
 the whole of the ornamented wall over it, terminating with an elegant 
 tabernacle ornamented by the pelican, his favourite emblem, and containing 
 his statue, in stone. It ought not to escape observation, that the outside 
 label of this window springs from two corbel busts, representing a king 
 and a bishop, both finely sculptured, and in the highest state of preservation : 
 and when it is considered that the art of sculpture was at that time in a 
 flourishing state, it is probable that these busts may be true portraits of 
 King Henry the Seventh and of Bishop Fox. The timber-framed Vaulting 
 of the presbytery is also the undoubted work of Fox, and in this, as well as 
 in the east window, he has shown great taste and judgment, by consulting 
 the models before him, in the western window and in the vaulting of the 
 nave, upon both of which he has improved. It is also unquestionable 
 that this prelate rebuilt, from the foundation, (that is from the walls of 
 the crypt,) the whole of the Ailes, north and south of the presbytery, 
 including their windows, roofing, and stone vaulting, with the flying- 
 buttresses and pinnacles, the whole of which was executed in the most 
 perfect style of workmanship. The open Screens between the presbytery 
 and ailes may be considered as the completion of this prelate’s work, 
 excepting his own Chantry, which is certainly a master piece of its kind, 
 equally calculated to display an elegance of taste in design, and the per¬ 
 fection of art in its execution. The successive prelates from Edington to 
 Langton (with the exception of Courteney, who presided but a short time 
 in this lucrative See,) had erected or adorned sumptuous chantries in the 
 varied styles of the times in which they respectively flourished, and Fox 
 seems to have determined not to make a chasm in the series of works that 
 are at once calculated to delight the admirers and instruct the practitioners 
 in art. This accomplished prelate, as was before observed, had succeeded 
 in improving upon models presented to his contemplation in his own 
 Cathedral, but in this instance he seems to have despaired of doing so, 
 and therefore to have studied the work of his contemporary, Bishop 
 
LETTER FROM MR. GARBETT : GARDINER’S WORK. 
 
 69 
 
 Audley, in the Cathedral of Salisbury ; and in this it will, I believe, be 
 admitted, that he has also improved upon his model : and this is the last 
 work executed in our Cathedral in the fascinating style called Gothic. 
 
 “ The opposite Chapel, erected by Bishop Gardiner , has only the merit of 
 occupying a space nearly similar to that of Fox’s, but its architecture clearly 
 discovers that the revolution in religion was accompanied by as sudden a 
 revolution in art. It is really astonishing, in viewing this chapel, to 
 observe, that although some part of it was intended to imitate the work of 
 Fox, yet the execution of that part is incredibly mean. 
 
 “ There appears to have been an attempt to return to the former style in 
 the time of Charles the First, when the ceiling was made in that part of 
 the choir under the tower, and the canopy placed over the communion 
 table ; but those attempts were not more successful than that to complete 
 the tower over the entrance to Christ-Church tower at Oxford. 
 
 “ Of Inigo Jones’s justly celebrated Screen, I can only say, that I should 
 admire it in another situation ; and wishing that before you have completed 
 your series of Cathedrals, you may see something more appropriate in its 
 place, I remain, dear Sir, 
 
 Yours, &c. 
 
 “ Winchester, Dec. 29, 1817. W. Garbett. 1 ' 
 
 I have given publicity to the preceding ingenious and original remarks 
 by my intelligent correspondent, respecting the ages of different parts of 
 the building, because the whole evidently emanates from a mind intimately 
 acquainted with the subject; and because I am aware that many persons, 
 as well as Mr. Garbett, are of opinion that parts of the present fabric of 
 Winchester Cathedral, are true specimens of Saxon architecture, and raised 
 by the Saxons before the Norman conquest. Some of these persons, 
 however, very unlike my correspondent, are influenced more by wayward 
 fancy than judgment,—are impelled to believe and assert whatever their 
 prepossessions and prejudices incline them to—and are always endeavour¬ 
 ing to reduce the styles and ages of buildings to favourite theories, instead 
 of seeking for ample evidence to authenticate dates. It is also a favourite 
 
70 
 
 WINCHESTER CATHEDRAL. 
 
 maxim with some of these gentlemen to carry back the date of every 
 church as far as possible, as if they thereby derived a peculiar pleasure, 
 or advantage ; and like the late Mr. King and Mr. Carter, they do not 
 hesitate to assert, peremptorily, that the oldest part must be of the age of 
 its first foundation. To such persons, who prefer fiction to fact, and 
 romance to history, it is useless to argue, and impertinent to urge the 
 claims of rationality and common sense. Still, however, as the impartial 
 student seeks for faithful information in such a work as the present, and is 
 entitled to expect the candid opinions of - the author on a controverted 
 subject, I feel it my duty to explain my own opinion, and the reasons on 
 which that is founded. 
 
 Respecting the origin of the present fabric, the statement of Rudborne 
 is as conclusive as language can render it. He asserts—and we must 
 suppose from documents belonging to the church—that Walkelyn began 
 to rebuild , or re-edify it from the foundation, in 1079: 20 and on the 6th 
 ides of April, anno 1093, he says that the new fabric was completed and 
 re-dedicated. He proceeds to say, that on the day following the feast of 
 St. Swithun, the bishop’s men began to break down the old monastery, and 
 which was demolished within the year , excepting one porch, or portico, and 
 the great altar. 21 If this evidence be not sufficiently conclusive, we shall 
 derive much collateral proof from comparing the style and character of the 
 arches, columns, capitals, and bases; the windows, buttresses, mouldings, 
 and piers of this Church, with such buildings as are admitted to have been 
 raised by the Normans. Of these many remain so precisely similar to the 
 crypts, transepts, and remaining part of the chapter-house at Winchester, 
 that we must conclude they were erected at the same time, and by contem¬ 
 porary builders. Besides, we are repeatedly told that the Normans were 
 a proud, aspiring, pompous people ; eager to make every thing new in their 
 
 20 “ Anno MLXXIX. Walkelinus Episcopus a fundamentis Wintoniensem coepit resedificare 
 ecclesiam.” Ang\ Sac. i. 294. 
 
 21 “ Sequenti vero die Domini Walkelini Episcopi coeperunt homines primum vetus frangere 
 Monasterium ; et fractum est totum in illo anno, excepto portico uno, et magno altari.” Ang. 
 Sac. i. 295. 
 
DOUBTS RESPECTING SAXON ARCHITECTURE. 
 
 71 
 
 newly acquired territory, and to impress all their works with their own 
 national marks; they were also equally prompt to sweep away all traces of 
 the arts and customs of the people they subjugated. These considerations, 
 and others which might be adduced, make me conclude that no architectural 
 part of the present church is strictly Saxon. Some of the foundation walls 
 are probably, and merely probably, anterior to the Norman conquest: but as 
 expense and labour were secondary objects with such men as Walkelyn and 
 Gundulph of Rochester ; and as their edifices were intended to be much larger 
 than those of their predecessors, we can scarcely believe that they would 
 make use of even their foundations. It is true there are some variations in 
 the masonry, i. e. in the joints and courses of the stones in the extreme 
 ends, and the more central parts of the transepts ; but this might have arisen 
 from different workmen, who were employed even at the same time, and still 
 more from those who were engaged on the Church at different periods of its 
 erection ; for it cannot be doubted that an edifice of this size must have been 
 some years in progress, and that many masons were unquestionably employed 
 in its construction. 
 
 The dates assigned by Mr. Garbett to the other parts of the Church are 
 mostly in unison with my own opinions; on two or three points we are, 
 however, at issue, and in describing those members of the building, on which 
 we differ, I shall make free to offer a few remarks. 
 
 Still, although I cannot satisfy my own mind, or persuade myself that 
 Winchester Church contains any decided specimens of early Anglo-Saxon 
 architecture, I am aware that many other persons may feel perfectly convinced, 
 and may perceive clear proof of remote antiquity in the styles of arches, and 
 in the masonry. On such obscure subjects there will be difference of opinion, 
 and this difference will most probably lead to truth. My mind, I own, is ex¬ 
 tremely scrupulous, and requires something bordering on palpable demon¬ 
 stration. Knowing that many persons have deceived themselves, and then im¬ 
 posed on the world, by precipitancy and credulity ; I have persuaded myself 
 that caution, and rational scepticism, on historical subjects, are necessary to 
 constitute the impartial antiquary. 
 
72 
 
 WINCHESTER CATHEDRAL. 
 
 CHAP. III. 
 
 DESCRIPTION OF THE FORM, ARRANGEMENT, AND CONSTRUCTION OF THE 
 CHURCH :-ALSO OF ITS EXTERIOR AND INTERIOR BEAUTIES AND DE¬ 
 
 FECTS, WITH REMARKS ON ITS STYLES OF ARCHITECTURE :—AND ON THE 
 VARIOUS PORTIONS OF THE EDIFICE, WITH REFERENCE TO THE ACCOM¬ 
 PANYING PLATES. 
 
 The Cathedral Church of Winchester has been called l a school of eccle¬ 
 siastical architecture ,’ and with some degree of propriety: for as a school is 
 intended to instruct novices in any branch of art or science, so this edifice 
 is calculated to display to the student an interesting and varied series of 
 examples of the ancient architecture of England, from an early age up to 
 a recent period. Here therefore he may study styles, dates, and those 
 varieties which peculiarly belong to the sacred buildings of the middle ages. 
 He will also find, in this edifice, some very interesting examples of con¬ 
 struction, in the walls, vaulting, and other parts of the masonry and 
 carpentry: all of which are as essential to the scientific architect as the 
 art of designing and planning a building. If we fail to satisfy ourselves 
 as to Roman remains, or genuine Saxon work—if, after a careful 
 examination, we retire either doubtful, or persuaded there is no such 
 architecture, still we shall have ample evidence and examples of Norman 
 works. The plans and magnificent designs of those proud invaders, and 
 innovators, are amply set forth in this fabric. We see that they built for 
 themselves and for posterity; that their edifices were solid and substantial; 
 simple in their forms, and large in their parts:—that as their religion was 
 intended to awe, terrify, and soothe the mind, so its primary temple was 
 calculated most essentially to promote these ends. Vieing with Gundulph 
 and other Norman prelates, Walkelyn seems to have designed his Cathedral 
 on a scale of grandeur to equal, or surpass, all the others in the island; 
 and although we are not informed by what means he carried his designs 
 
PARTS OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 73 
 
 into effect, we are assured that he raised nearly the whole of the Church in 
 his life-time. A large portion of his work is now standing; but much of it 
 has been altered, and more is obscured. 
 
 From what has been already related, it appears that not only a Church, 
 but the necessary offices for a prior and monks, were erected by the first 
 Norman bishop. Nearly every architectural member of the latter has been 
 swept away, as well as the cloisters, chapter-house, and other appendages. 1 
 The Church, however, remains for our admiration and enquiry; and at 
 present consists of the following members:—a nave, with two ades, a tran¬ 
 sept to the north and another to the south of a central tower, each having ailes 
 at the sides and extreme ends;—a choir, and a presbytery with side ailes;—a 
 space, east of the altar, consisting of three ailes, all of nearly equal width and 
 height;--a lady chapel, east of the latter;—two chantry chapels to the north 
 and south of the lady chapel;—three distinct crypts beneath the east end of 
 the Church, and five other chantries. 
 
 The Exterior of Winchester Cathedral presents few beauties, or attractive 
 features. Its length of nave, plainness of masonry, shortness and solidity 
 of tower, width of east end, and boldness, of transepts, present so many 
 peculiar and specific characteristics. Although the architectural antiquary 
 seeks in vain for that picturesque arrangement of parts, and successive 
 variety which belong to the Cathedrals of Salisbury, Lincoln, Wells, Sic. 
 yet he soon discovers a peculiar grandeur from its extent and quantity; 
 and also many specific features of design, which tend to rouse and gratify 
 inquiry. As a distant object the Church presents a large and long mass 
 of building. Its nave, particularly as seen from the south, is distinguished 
 by its length of roof and extent of unbroken lines; and the low, stunted 
 tower, as Gilpin remarks, “ gives the whole building an air of heaviness 2 
 
 1 In the Deanery House, and in one of the Prebendal Houses, south of the Church, are some 
 columns, arches, and vaulted roofs to certain rooms on the ground floor. 
 
 2 The same author, who is generally judicious, and often elegantly apposite in his comments, 
 uses some strange and absurd language in speaking of this Church. He eays, “ I doubt whether a 
 spire was ever intended,” when there was no reason either to doubt, or to question the subject; as 
 spires were not known when this tower was built. Again, he asks, “ Why the tower, in the hands 
 of so elegant an architect, [Wykeham] was left so ill-proportioned, is a question of surprise.” Now 
 the tower was never in the hands , nor subjected to the improvements, of this clerical architect. 
 
 K 
 
74 
 
 WINCHESTER CATHEDRAL. 
 
 The whole Church is seated in a valley, and on three of the approaches to 
 the city is seen from high ground. On the east and west the hills are much 
 higher than the top of the tower, and consequently the building is viewed to 
 great disadvantage. The eastern end, however, with its pinnacles, turrets, 
 flying buttresses, and tower, form a fine and pleasing group. From the 
 Portsmouth and Alton roads, i. e. approaching it from the S E. and N. E. 
 the Church is seen to rise above the contiguous houses and trees in massive, 
 bold, and picturesque features. 
 
 The Interior , however, will amply compensate for any defects or 
 deficiencies of the outside. This presents several architectural and 
 sculptural excellences : this displays a variety of truly interesting and 
 important subjects, for professional and critical examinaton. Whilst the 
 fine and sublime architecture of Wykeham, in the nave and ailes, produces 
 the most impressive effect, and claims general admiration; the substantial, 
 plain, and large works of Walkelyn, in the tower aud transepts, are 
 imposing and simply grand. In the north Transept, lately cleaned and 
 restored, we see the effect and character of this style, in nearly its pristine 
 state. Every member is in unison with the rest: each is large, bold, and 
 unadorned. The bases, capitals, clustered columns, or piers, and the single 
 shafts, are devoid of all ornament, and appear to be entirely designed for 
 their proper places and necessary uses. The arches, likewise plain, are 
 composed of squared stones, and formed wholly for strength and utility, with¬ 
 out any pretension to beauty. On the contrary, in the carving of the Stalls, 
 and the wood-work of the Lady Chapel and Langton’s Chapel, we see u 
 redundancy of ornament prevail. The designers seem to have wantoned in a 
 licentiousness of fancy, and thought they could not surcharge their works 
 with too much variety, or introduce an excess of decoration. Still these 
 parts of the edifice afford us much delight, even from this very caprice. 
 The eye wanders from one form and object to another, in search of novelty, 
 and the mind is kept in constant and pleasing exertion by analyzing and 
 appropriating the whole. The elaborate and sumptuous Altar-Screen is 
 full of architectural members, and is certainly very beautiful. It is covered 
 with niches, canopies, buttresses, pinnacles, crockets, pediments, &c. and 
 when in its original colour and condition, with statues and costly orna- 
 
ARCHITECTURAL BEAUTIES OF THE INTERIOR. 
 
 75 
 
 merits, must have been surprisingly splendid. The monumental Chantries 
 for Fox, Beaufort, Waynflete, Wykeham, and Edington, have all their 
 peculiar beauties, and each presents a specific style in design and detail: 
 that of Edington has, perhaps, the least interest as a whole; but its statue 
 is the most elegant of any in the Church. Wykeham’s altar-tomb, and 
 some of its interior parts, are fine specimens of the age; Fox’s chantry is a 
 superb example of monumental architecture; gorgeous in its design, and 
 exquisite in execution. Those for Beaufort and Waynflete seem placed 
 in opposition to each other, like rival beauties, to court admiration: each 
 consists of a pyramidical series of canopies, crocheted pinnacles, niches, 
 tracery, buttress piers, See. raised on, and supported by, open arches, 
 piers, and panelled screens. Each also occupies a corresponding arch, 
 and each is formed to enshrine and surmount the altar tombs and statues 
 of the deceased prelates. It may be confidently asserted, that the com¬ 
 bined group of chantries, screens, and clustered columns, in this part of 
 Winchester Church, is not equalled by any spot in England, or in Europe. 
 Its full effect, as first discovered to the stranger, is represented in Plate 
 xvn. and comprehends the chantries of Fox, a; Beaufort, c; and Wayn¬ 
 flete, b ; with the chapels of Langton, e ; and the Lady Chapel, d. Every 
 remove of the spectator, as he wanders round this part of the building, 
 presents these objects differently grouped, differently combined, and with 
 varied effects of light and shade. With such a splendid feast before him, 
 it is not to be wondered if the architectural enthusiast indulges himself to 
 excess, and almost satiates his senses. 
 
 The foregoing subjects may be regarded as the pre-eminent beauties of 
 the Church; but still there are many others to claim the attention of 
 different persons, accordingly as they are influenced by particular studies or 
 partialities. Most of these will come under notice in the following descrip¬ 
 tion of the principal divisions and parts of the fabric. 
 
 The Nave and its ailes are distinguished by the uniform style of the 
 whole ; in solid and elegant piers, arches, windows, sculptured bosses, &c. 
 “This,” says Gilpin, “is perhaps the most magnificent nave in England.” 
 The Transepts and Tower next claim attention, as unrivalled specimens of 
 
 k 2 
 
76 
 
 WINCHESTER CATHEDRAL. 
 
 Norman architecture. Solid masses of masonry, vast spaces in height and 
 width, with very little ornament, are the distinguishing features of those 
 portions of the edifice. The transepts are open to the timber roof, and 
 thus appear very lofty : but the effect of the rafters, and ragged timbers, is 
 offensive. It prevents the idea of neglect and ruin, and thus, when con¬ 
 trasted with the solidity and uniform beauty of the nave, makes a very 
 unfavourable impression on the mind. In the southern transept, the aile 
 to the west and south is entirely excluded by a wall, which fills up the 
 whole of the arches ; and the eastern aile is divided into three different 
 chapels, or chantries, by screens, between each, and also between them 
 and the centre of the transept. The northern Transept is less encum¬ 
 bered and less obscured : its centre, east and north ailes, the triforium, 
 and clerestory, are all clear and open to inspection; but the western aile is 
 a place of lumber, and its arches are walled up. [See Plate xn.] The 
 Choir and eastern end are elevated above the nave and ailes by an ascent of 
 several steps ; and in this portion of the building the stranger will perceive 
 several different styles of architecture, and several different subjects to 
 arrest his attention, and demand his admiration. The choir occupies a 
 space mostly beneath the Norman tower, and is fitted up with a series of 
 elaborately carved stalls on the west, north, and south sides. In the 
 carvings of basso-relievo, finials, crockets, and misereres, there are many 
 grotesque designs, as well as many specimens of very fine workmanship. At 
 the north-eastern extremity of the choir is the Pulpit , a very curious piece of 
 carved work, and evidently executed for Prior Silkstede, whose name is 
 twice repeated on it. On the same side of the choir, beneath one of the lofty 
 arches of the tower, is the Organ, which thus occupies an unusual place. 
 Nearly facing the pulpit is the Bishop’s Stall, or throne, a very incongruous 
 and absurd piece of workmanship, presented by Bishop Trelawny, and 
 intended as an ornamental appendage: but, like the screen between the 
 nave and choir, it is formed in the Roman or classical style, as com¬ 
 monly termed, and therefore becomes an unsightly object. Between the 
 choir and altar is a large open space, called the Presbytery , which is 
 separated from the ailes by stone screens, and from the altar by a 
 
CHANTRIES, CHAPELS, AND CRYPTS. 77 
 
 carved railing. Immediately behind the altar-screen is an open space, 
 formerly a chapel, and inclosed by the splendid chantry of Fox, on the 
 south, that of Gardiner, to the north, the altar-screen on the west, and 
 another screen to the east. All these objects are highly interesting to the 
 architectural antiquary, and will be hereafter described. East of these 
 is a large open space, consisting of three ailes of nearly equal width and 
 height, and inclosing the very elaborate and elegant chantry chapels, raised 
 over the bodies of Cardinal Beaufort, and Bishop Waynflete, In this part 
 are also several other monuments, slabs, &c. some of which have recently 
 been removed to this from other parts of the Church. The eastern end 
 of the building consists of three distinct Chapels, of which the central, or 
 Virgin Mary Chapel, extends further, and is much larger than the other 
 two : these are small square spaces, separated from the ailes by carved 
 wooden screens, as is also the lady chapel. That on the south has a 
 large altar tomb in the centre, some finely carved wainscotting, with a seat 
 on two sides, and remains of an altar-table, &c. at the east end. The wood 
 work of this, as well as of the lady chapel, is elaborately carved, and 
 charged with shields of arms, mottoes, figures, foliage, &c. At the eastern 
 extremities of the ailes are the two Stair-Cases , surmounted by octangular 
 turrets, which have been already justly praised by Mr. Garbett. Beneath 
 the presbytery, ailes, lady chapel, &c. is a series of Crypts , consisting of 
 three distinct and varied apartments, two of which are certainly ancient, 
 but the other is of comparatively modern formation. In the more ancient 
 one will be found a corresponding style of design to the transepts, in 
 its columns and arches, but varied in proportions, as better adapted to 
 their peculiarity of situation and object. Here the architect formed his 
 plans for posterity: he laid his foundations broad and solid; and directed 
 his works to be plain and firm. The columns, piers, and walls are 
 composed of solid masonry, without the least ornamental sculpture, or 
 moulding. 
 
 Having thus briefly pointed out the chief beauties and features of the 
 Church, it is a duty I owe the reader, conformably to the plan adopted in 
 the histories of the other Cathedrals, to notice some of the prominent 
 
78 
 
 WINCHESTER CATHEDRAL. 
 
 deficiencies and blemishes of the present fabric. I regret to say, that these 
 are numerous, although much has been recently done to remove them : and 
 it is hoped, that the same spirit, which impelled the late improvements, 
 may influence the guardians of the Church to prosecute their laudable 
 work with zeal and with judgment. 3 
 
 Externally , the whole Church may be completely insulated and easily 
 laid open to public view: the ground on the west and north sides has 
 accumulated four or five feet, and this should be removed: a lofty wall, at 
 the north-east end, might also be taken away; other walls on the south side, 
 with a sloping roof, and some extraneous building against the transept, 
 likewise detract from the effect and beauty of that side of the edifice. 
 The whole of this transept requires some essential repairs and restorations, 
 in the masonry and the windows ; and the trifling bell turret, at the angle, 
 should be immediately taken down. The Tower has generally been cen¬ 
 sured as low, flat, and mean, and with much truth: but it must be 
 
 3 Within the last eight years the present Dean and Chapter have made the following repairs and 
 improvements to the Church: —new roofed the ailes, north and south of the presbytery, and of the 
 Lady Chapel; repaired and new leaded some other parts of the roof; renewed the mullions of the 
 four windows on the south side of the presbytery, and two of those in the south aile ; the great east 
 window, and several windows of the nave, have been carefully repaired; the finial tabernacles and 
 statues at the east and west ends, and two of the flying buttresses at the south side, have been 
 restored. The north transept has been recently cleaned, pointed, and repaired; some tombs from the 
 floor of the nave and transepts have been removed to the east end; the galleries have been cleared, 
 and much white-washing, &c. has been cleaned away. Most of these repairs and alterations are truly 
 judicious and praise-worthy: but some of them, I am sorry to remark, will not justify approbation. 
 The members of the chapter will act wisely to bear in mind, that an English Cathedral may be 
 regarded as national property,—as a public edifice confided to their guardianship, in trust for the 
 whole kingdom. Its founders and successive benefactors thus considered it, and endowed it with 
 repairing funds, to uphold its walls, and support its integral features. Hence it is as much the 
 bounden duty of every succeeding Chapter to guard the fabric from decay, and every species of 
 injury, as it is to attend to the prescribed routine of clerical discipline. Every neglect on their part, 
 and every careless or intentional innovation on the genuine character of the building, is both a 
 dereliction of duty and an offence to the public. The apathy or wantonness of former officers will 
 not justify the smallest neglect from those of the present age; for now the architecture, and each 
 part of these edifices, are regarded with admiration by men of taste; and the enlightened part of the 
 public, as they must view them with increasing interest, will also watch them with jealousy. 
 
DEFECTS OF THE INTERIOR. 
 
 79 
 
 recollected, that this is in unison with the Norman part of the Church, and 
 that we examine and admire it more as an architectural specimen of ancient 
 art, than for its beauty of form, or picturesque features. The long and flat 
 extent of the nave and aile, on the south side, presents a dull, monotonous 
 aspect, but this part was formerly provided with an extensive range of 
 cloisters, and some monastic buildings. 
 
 Internally , we shall perceive several objects to offend the eye of taste, 
 and many things out of place and out of harmony. Commencing with 
 the nave and its ailes, there are several marble slabs and monuments 
 inserted in and attached to the wall; and which are not only injurious 
 to the effect of the whole, but some are destructive of the architec¬ 
 ture. 4 In this part we are really surprised to find that the distinguished 
 architectonic prelate, who built the nave, &c., should have placed his own 
 monumental chantry in a spot to injure the beauty and symmetry of his 
 design. Its screen, instead of harmonizing with the style of the bold 
 clustered columns, to which it is attached, presents a series of tall, meagre 
 mullions, without beauty, and devoid of meaning. Besides, the whole 
 breaks in on the line and massiveness of the nave, interrupts the eye, 
 and attracts the attention to small, and not elegant parts, when it should 
 be fully and wholly occupied by the whole. The architect’s best monument 
 
 4 It is much to he regretted that our venerable and noble Cathedrals should, for so many ages, 
 have been disgraced and disfigured by petty and pretty monumental tablets. The white, black, 
 and variegated colours, of which they are formed, are not only inimical to all harmony and 
 beauty, but the manner in which they are usually inserted in the walls and columns is ruinous to 
 the stability of buildings. If the proper officers of the church are regardless of such shameless 
 proceedings, there should be committees of taste, or a general public surveyor appointed, to watch 
 over and direct all the monumental erections, as well as the reparations of each edifice. It is a 
 lamentable fact, that we scarcely ever see a new monument raised with any analogy, or regard to 
 the building in which it is placed. The sculptor and director seem only ostentatious of themselves. 
 To render it showy, imposing, and even obtrusive, is their chief solicitude; and the trustees of a 
 Cathedral are too generally regardless of every thing but handsome fees. Hence Westminster Abbey 
 Church, and Bath Abbey Church, are become mere show rooms of sculpture, and warehouses of 
 marble. A monument recently raised in Salisbury Cathedral, from a design by the Rev. Hugh Owen, 
 is a most praise-worthy exception to this practice. It is also a fine precedent, and amply justifies my 
 anticipation in the history of that Cathedral, p. 101. 
 
80 
 
 WINCHESTER CATHEDRAL. 
 
 is his own works, and if these are not calculated to perpetuate and dignify 
 his name, it will never he done by a solitary and more perishable tomb. 
 Wykeham’s chantry and tomb are, however, full of beauty and propriety, 
 when compared with some other objects, which we proceed to notice. 
 The screen, between the nave and choir, said to have been designed by 
 Inigo Jones, is a bad and an unsightly object. It may be said to be in the 
 Grecian, or Roman, style : indeed it may be pronounced any thing but in 
 place and in harmony. It is discordant, and highly displeasing, and betrays 
 a deplorable want of feeling in the person, or persons, who designed it for the 
 station, and in those who have sanctioned its continuance for so many years. 
 In niches are two bronze figures, of kings in armour, which do not improve 
 the effect, or appropriation of this offensive screen. Attached to two piers 
 of the nave, on the steps to the choir, are marble monuments to Bishop 
 Hoadley, and to Dr. Joseph Warton: these are most injudiciously placed, 
 are glaringly white, and in their designs present a compound of English, 
 Grecian, and emblematic parts, which must detract from the national and 
 simple beauty of a monument. In the north transept we find the pure Norman 
 windows, enlarged and altered, their sills lowered, and their openings filled 
 with mullions and tracery:—the west aile is inclosed by a wall, which reaches 
 to the top of the arches:—the timber roof is exposed, and some curious old 
 paintings on the walls are covered with white wash. The south transept is 
 also open to the roof, which, with parts of the walls, appears much decayed 
 and dilapidated : and the whole aile is shut out by walls and screens. On 
 entering the choir the stranger finds some very fine parts, but also some 
 things at war with propriety. The Organ is raised in a gallery beneath the 
 northern arch of the tower, and is thus out of place; its form and fitting 
 up are not calculated to adorn it: and the filling in of the two lofty arches 
 of the tower is injudicious. A wooden ceiling, painted and carved, is 
 thrown across, between the four arches of the tower, whereby the lanthorn, or 
 first story of that part of the edifice, is shut out from the floor. This absurd 
 innovation was made in the time of King Charles I. and probably executed 
 chiefly at his expense, as well as the fitting up of the organ. The 
 romanized Bishop’s throne ; and the canopy, and sham urns, affixed to the 
 
FITTING UP OF THE ALTAR. 
 
 81 
 
 altar-screen, are all of the same tasteless character and times. They are 
 anomalies to the place, and when it is known that they are painted, gilt, 
 varnished, &c. and that the exquisite altar-screen is surcharged with repeat¬ 
 ed coats of white-wash, we are astonished that such barbarous disfigurements 
 should have remained for nearly two centuries, and that they are still 
 tolerated. Gilpin calls the modern canopy “ a sort of penthouse hanging 
 over the table and adorned with festoons of flowers. This is daubed all 
 over with brown paint, totally at variance with every thing around, and as 
 if that was not enough, it is also adorned with profuse gilding. Enshrined 
 amidst all this absurdity, hangs West’s Picture of the Resurrection of 
 Lazarus.” This painting is censured by the same writer, as to composition, 
 colouring, and management ; and Dr. Milner reprobates it on other, but very 
 frivolous grounds. He says, “ the apostles here are mere ordinary men, or 
 at most thoughtful philosophers, or elegant courtiers, studious of their 
 attitudes ; the devout sisters, in the presence of their beloved master, are re¬ 
 markable for nothing but their beauty and their sorrow.” The height of the 
 altar-screen has been remarked on, as a defect; and with strict propriety : 
 for had it been lower, it would have afforded a pleasing view from the choir 
 into the eastern end of the Church, and of the whole of Fox’s east window. 
 The effigy of Beaufort is a vulgar, clumsy piece of workmanship, even 
 worse than its near neighbour, that of Sir John Clobery. We cannot 
 otherwise account for the extreme badness of this statue, than by suppos¬ 
 ing that it was placed there at a time much later than the building of the 
 chantry; indeed since the Reformation. It seems rather the workmanship 
 of a stone-mason than of a sculptor. The effigies of Wykeham, Waynflete, 
 Edington, de Foix, &c. have all been much mutilated and injured, and we 
 seek in vain among them for either good expression or perfect faces. 
 
 Plate i. —Ground Plan of the whole Church : the darkest shade shows 
 the form and extent of the walls of the present edifice, the lighter colour, on 
 the south side, denotes the direction of the destroyed walls of the chapter- 
 house and cloister, and the other light tints, within the Church, point out 
 the sites of tombs, stalls, and screens; whilst the plans of some windows, 
 and piers, are shown, to a larger scale, on the sides. A. the chief, or central 
 
 L 
 
82 
 
 WINCHESTER CATHEDRAL. 
 
 western porch and door-way : B. B. smaller porches of entrance to the 
 north and south ailes of the nave : C. the nave, extending from the western 
 door to the screen of the choir, 6 : D the south aile, and E the north aile : 
 F. choir, fitted up with stalls : G. presbytery : H. space named the sanctuary, 
 inclosed for the altar, or communion table : J. north transept, with an aile 
 on three sides, but that on the west is inclosed by a wall : K. south transept, 
 also with a similar aile, all of which is inclosed by a wall and by screens : L. 
 south aile of the presbytery : M. north aile : N. N. N. three ailes, of de Lucy's 
 architecture, the appropriation of which seems unknown, but may now be 
 properly called the chantry ailes : O. a space named the capitular chapel 
 by Dr. Milner, who says, “ the magnificent shrine of St. Swithuu, of solid 
 silver, gilt, and garnished with precious stones, the gift of King Edgar, used 
 to be kept here; except on the festivals of the saint, when it was exposed to 
 view upon the altar, or before it. It is not unlikely that other shrines were 
 kept in the same place, ranged against the eastern wall, on which may still 
 be seen some painted figures of saints. This chapel is directly behind 
 the high altar, and formerly communicated with the sanctuary by two 
 doors, which are there still seen : it is, notwithstanding, a two-fold error in 
 our domestic writers to term this place the Sanctum Sanctorum, and to 
 describe it as the place from which the priest was accustomed to approach 
 the high altar, 5 which is to confound it with the sacristy, or vestry. It was 
 certainly furnished with an altar, the back screen of which, consisting pro¬ 
 bably of ornamented wood work, seems to have been fastened by certain 
 staples, which still remain. We are assured of this fact, from the circum¬ 
 stance of the early conventual mass, immediately after the holding of a 
 chapter, being celebrated here every morning; from which circumstance it 
 may be called the capitular chapel. 5 ' 6 P. the Lady, or Virgin Mary 
 Chapel, consisting of two divisions, of two styles of architecture, [see PI. 
 xx.] with fine carved seats, a rood-loft screen, &c.: Q. altar end of the 
 
 ° “ Warton’s description, p. 75, Anonymous History, vol. i. p. 41. The Greeks indeed, as we 
 have seen, called the altar by the name of dyiov Uyiav ; but there is no such name as Sanctum Sanc¬ 
 torum in the whole Latin Liturgy/’ 
 
 6 Milner’s His. Win. ii. 58. Hist. Maj. 1. iii. ch. vi. 
 
CHAPELS OF THE GUARDIAN ANGELS, AND SILKSTEDE. 83 
 
 same, raised on steps : R. Bishop Langton’s monumental chapel, having a 
 large altar tomb in the centre, with seats and highly ornamented screens on 
 the north and south, an open screen with folding doors on the west, and 
 
 niches, with parts of an altar, to the east: S. a chapel, corresponding in 
 
 size, and situation, to the former, called the Guardian Angels, or Portland 
 Chapel. This is much altered from its original fitting up, being now 
 
 occupied by a strange and incongruous medley of tombs, slabs, &c. It is 
 supposed to have acquired its appellation of Guardian Angels, from figures 
 of angels, or cherubs, painted on the ceiling; and latterly the name of 
 Portland, from a stately monument erected against its southern wall to the 
 memory of Richard Weston , Earl of Portland , who was Lord Treasurer 
 to King Charles the First. His statue, in bronze, reclines on the tomb, 
 which is further adorned with busts, &c. Against the north wall is a 
 
 marble slab commemorative of Bishop Mews , who, with the above-named 
 nobleman, lies interred in a vault beneath. This chantry is supposed to 
 have been first occupied by the remains of Bishop Orlton, who died in 
 1333, and according to Richardson, in his Notes to Godwin, was interred 
 “ in capella propria.” In the north wall of this chantry is a large ambre, 
 and in the eastern wall is inserted, but very injudiciously, the side stone of 
 the tomb represented in Plate xxvi. c, whilst the effigy belonging to the 
 same tomb is stationed in another place: T. an arched passage called the 
 slype , which formerly communicated from the cloister to the eastern end of 
 the Church; having the Chapter-house, U, on the south. The form, extent, 
 and architecture of this apartment are clearly to be ascertained, by the 
 arches and columns on the north and west sides, and by the remains of 
 foundations on the other sides : V. a portion of the east aile of the south 
 transept, called Prior Silkstede’s Chapel. The letters t. ii.o.M. a.s. and S. 
 are curiously carved on the frieze of the screen ; and as the letters M. A. 
 are distinguished from the others, and inclosed within a skein of silk, Dr. 
 Milner says, that they form “ a monogram of his patroness, the Blessed 
 VirginW. the treasury, &c. : X. vestry, or modern chapter-room, lately 
 cleansed of white-wash, and newly fitted up : Y. part of the choir, immediately 
 
 l 2 
 
84 
 
 WINCHESTER CATHEDRAL. 
 
 under the central tower or lanthorn: Z. an inclosed chapel, called the 
 Venerable Chapel, and supposed by Dr. Milner to have been the place of 
 interment of Bishop Courteney. It is divided from the central aile by an 
 handsome open screen, the upper part of which is adorned with canopies, 
 crocketed pinnacles, &c. From being “ highly ornamented and well 
 secured,” Dr. Milner believes that “ the blessed sacrament used to be kept 
 there, for the benefit of the sick and for private communion.” In this chapel 
 are several flat monumental stones and tablets to the Eyre’s, Dingley’s, 
 Mompesson’s, and other families. 
 
 The small figures, or Arabic numerals, refer to monuments and to different 
 members of the church:—1. Wykeham’s chantry and tomb: 2. Font: 3. 
 Edington’s chantry and tomb : 4. a large altar tomb for Bishop Morley : 5. 
 door-way, from the south side, or eastern walk of the old cloister : 6. entrance 
 door to the choir through a modern screen : 7. old Norman door-way to the 
 west aile of the north transept: 8. a curious piscina, near which some of the 
 capitals of the small columns are sculptured to represent busts of kings and 
 bishops : 9. niche in the wall, for a coffin tomb, probably that of de Foix : 
 10. the intersecting groin here rests on four sculptured capitals, representing 
 human figures, one of which holds something resembling a common chess¬ 
 board ; in the east wall is a very beautiful niche, resting on a sculptured 
 bracket: 11. an opening has lately been made through the wall at this 
 place to the crypts : 12. brass-eagle reading desk : 13. pulpit: 14. bishop’s 
 throne, or stall: 15. a coffin tomb, said to cover the remains of King Wil¬ 
 liam Rufus : 16. screens inclosing the presbytery and communion table, See. 
 On the frieze of the screens are the letters W. H. and R. W. and H. B. 
 with the date 1525, and the mottoes sit laus deo, also in domino conjido , 
 and est deo gracia: 17. altar tomb, supposed to cover the remains of Bishop 
 Pontissara : 18. altar screen and altar table: 19. Bishop Fox’s chantry: 
 20. the chantry of Bishop Gardiner: 21. coffin tomb of Wm. de Basynge, 
 lately removed from the south transept: 22. a large flat stone, measuring 
 about twelve feet by five feet, and which formerly was inlaid with brasses 
 of a figure, also “ a scripture,” or inscription. “ This,” observes Dr. Milner, 
 
VARIOUS TOMBS. 
 
 85 
 
 “ is celebrated, not only by the vulgar, but also by learned authors, 7 as the 
 monument which covers the remains of the great patron saint of our 
 Cathedral and city, St. Swithun. The improbability, however, of this 
 opinion is great and obviousfor this saint was first interred in the church¬ 
 yard, and his remains afterwards transferred, by St. Ethelwold, into the 
 Cathedral, where they were deposited in a shrine, or chest of silver, (adorned 
 with precious stones,) which was given by King Edgar for this express 
 purpose. 8 Besides, in the year 1797, Henry Howard, Esq. and some other 
 gentlemen, obtained permission to open this grave, as well as others in the 
 Cathedral; and in this was found an oak coffin, containing a complete 
 skeleton, enclosed in black serge, “ probably a monk’s cowl,” with leather 
 boots, or gaiters, sewed on the legs. Milner thinks this must have been 
 the grave, and these the remains, of Prior Silkstede : but when it is 
 remembered that he appears to have fitted up a chapel in the south transept, 
 and assisted so much in finishing the lady chapel, we are more inclined to 
 look for his place of sepulture in either of those parts of the fabric : 23. lid 
 and parts of a coffin tomb, removed from the north and south transepts : 
 24. a coffin lid, on a raised slab, from the south transept: 25. entrance to 
 the holy-hole, beneath a very fine screen: 26. chantry, inclosing an altar 
 tomb, for Cardinal Beaufort: 27. ditto of Bishop Waynflete: 28. effigy of a 
 Bishop, removed from another part of the church, and raised on modern 
 masonry : 29. a large monument to some persons of the Mason family : 30. a 
 raised coffin tomb, supposed to enshrine the remains of Bishop de Lucy: 
 31. altar tomb to the memory of Bishop Langton : 32. monument, with 
 
 effigy, sculpture, to R. Weston, Earl of Portland : 33. stair-case at the north¬ 
 east angle of the north aile : 34. a large marble monument, adorned with 
 military and naval trophies, to the memory of Sir Isaac Townsend, knight 
 of the garter, and one of the Lords of the Admiralty, who died in 1731 : 
 36. effigy of a knight in chain-armour, on a piece of masonry, and brought 
 
 7 “ Clarendon and Gale’s Antiquities, p. 30. Warton’s Description,/). 83. A. Wood also seems 
 to countenance this opinion. Athen. Oxon. Alban Butler also in Lives of Saints, July 13.” 
 
 8 See Rudborne, His. Maj. lib. ii. c. 12, and Will, of Malmsbury. 
 
86 
 
 WINCHESTER CATHEDRAL. 
 
 from another part of the church : 36. wall, with blank arches: and 37. ditto, 
 both represented in Plate xxix. A. and B. 
 
 The Roman figures refer to certain parts of the building, drawn by C. F. 
 Forden, to a larger scale than shown in the general plan : these parts are 
 thus delineated to afford the critical antiquary and architect correct repre¬ 
 sentations of the mullions and mouldings of the windows, &c. It is from 
 such delineations only that we can attain certain knowledge of styles and 
 dates, and discriminate the progressive and almost imperceptible gradations 
 from one form to another. In the four windows, here laid down, and in the 
 three mullions, there will be seen considerable variation in the mouldings, 
 which would not be so readily perceived in viewing the respective windows. 
 It is from the want of correct plans, elevations, and sections of our ecclesias¬ 
 tical edifices, and from an ignorance of their meaning, that so many irrele¬ 
 vant and conjectural essays have been written on the subject: and until 
 all the minute peculiarities of those buildings are faithfully engraved and 
 published, we shall never have a satisfactory knowledge of ancient 
 architecture. Fig. i. a double window of de Lucy’s works, with a pier, 
 or large mullion, between the glazing, clustered, slender columns, and 
 half columns on the outside, a passage, or gallery within, arched over, and 
 shafts of clustered columns on the inside. Beneath the sill of the window is 
 an arcade of trefoil headed arches, ii. springing from single purbeck 
 columns. An interior elevation of one compartment of this style is given 
 in PI. xx. A. Fig. hi. plan, or horizontal section, of one of Fox’s windows 
 in the aile of the presbytery, showing three mullions; (one of which is still 
 further enlarged, Fig. vm.) also the forms of the mouldings, on the sides 
 of the window, &c. : Fig. iv. plan of the eastern window of the lady chapel, 
 having six mullions, (one of which is seen at Fig. vn.) and deep hollow 
 mouldings on each side. One window on the north side, and the other to 
 the south, correspond in form, size, &c. to the eastern. A view of the first 
 is given in Plate vm. and an elevation of that on the north side in Plate 
 xx. C. : Fig. v. mullion of Edington’s window : vi. column at the north end 
 of the north transept; that at the opposite extremity of the south tran¬ 
 sept corresponds: vn. and vm. have been already noticed : ix. plan of one 
 
CRYPTS. 
 
 87 
 
 of Wykeham’s windows in the aile of the nave: x. plan of one of Fox’s 
 windows in the clerestory of the presbytery: xi. plan of the north-east great 
 pier, under the tower. 
 
 Plate ii. Plan and Section of the Crypts , tyc. It is hoped that this 
 plate will prove very interesting to the architectural antiquary ; as the very 
 curious and early part of Winchester Church, laid down in this plan, No. 2. 
 has never before been represented by engraving; and consequently could 
 not have been fully known to the public. As here defined, its forms, 
 dimensions, and style may be easily understood. It consists of three 
 portions, or distinct parts:—first, the large, or chief crypt, formed of a 
 central apartment, A, having two ailes, with a row of columns : B. B, its 
 ailes, continued round the semi-circular end, C : a second, or smaller crypt, 
 D, with semi-circular end, and divided into two parts by a row of four 
 columns, and a fifth, which is placed in the centre of the entrance, 1. From 
 the windows, through the walls of this apartment, it seems very evident 
 that the whole was formed anterior to the substructure of de Lucy’s work, 
 marked by the buttresses p. p. p.; and from the style of the columns and 
 arches, I cannot persuade myself to believe that it is anterior to the larger 
 crypt, the chapter-house, or the transepts. At m. n. the wall is broken away 
 to open a communication with the third crypt, E, the vaulting of which rests 
 on two columns : one of these is represented, 5 : on the south side are two 
 windows, two others at the east end, and one on the north side, where there 
 is also a door-way. The smaller letters refer to different parts of those 
 crypts ; a. and b. stair-cases from the ailes of the church : c. door-way from 
 the outside: d. a well: e. door-way from the north side : f. f. f. arched 
 openings from the aile to the centre : g. g. g. small apertures, or windows : 
 h. wall of the transept: i. i. i. buttresses : k. two larger buttresses : 1. m. n. 
 already noticed : o. ground beneath the floor of de Lucy’s ailes : p. p. p. 
 buttresses to the same : q. vault under the Guardian angels chapel, with 
 two coffins, supposed of Bishop Mews and the Earl of Portland : r. a 
 corresponding space to the former, beneath Langton’s chapel, but there is no 
 exterior indication of a vault: s. door-way.—No. 1. shows the section of the 
 three crypts with the floor above: 1. steps to the altar: 2. steps immediately 
 
88 
 
 WINCHESTER CATHEDRAL, 
 
 behind the altar screen : and 3. steps to St. Swithun’s altar : 4. holy-hole : 
 5. floor of de Lucy’s work : 6. floor of the lady chapel; and 7. altar end of 
 ditto : 3. column, and 4. pier of the large crypt : 5. column of the eastern 
 crypt; and 6. capital and base of the central crypt. 
 
 Plate hi. Capitals and Bases. B. C. of the nave: D. E. of the transept: 
 F. G. of de Lucy's work : and H. I. of the presbytery : K. plan of a pier of the 
 nave, the dark line of which shows the additional casing and forms of the 
 mouldings made by Wykeham : L. plan of one of the clustered columns in 
 the presbytery, with bases, &c. 
 
 Plate iv. View of the West Front, the age and architecture of which 
 have been already noticed by Mr. Garbett, p. 64. This is evidently the 
 workmanship of three different eras: 1st. the original walls, with hexangular 
 stair-case turrets, which appear to have been of a very early date, if not really 
 of the age of Walkelyn: 2d. the central large and two lateral windows, with 
 the panelling and tracery on the walls, most likely of Edington’s age : and 
 3d. the three porches with the open parapets, which Mr. Garbett assigns, for 
 the first time, to Cardinal Beaufort. 
 
 Plate v. By the section and plan of the west front, the interior eleva¬ 
 tion of the windows, door-ways, pinnacles, See. is correctly displayed ; as 
 well as sections of the archivolt mouldings of the windows and arches on 
 the north side : a. elevation of the pier of clustered columns and hollow 
 mouldings : b. section of the opposite pier : c. section of the wall, between 
 the windows, of the arch of the aile, and of the concealed flying buttress 
 from the wall of the nave to that of the aile : d. section of the wall, beneath 
 the window of the north aile: e. western door-way to the north aile: 
 f. window of the clerestory, to the nave, over which is a section of its 
 mouldings and of the parapet: g. section of the window of the north aile^ 
 beyond which is shown the profile of the large buttress on the north side, 
 surmounted by a crocketed pinnacle, having a finial: h. a gallery, or floor, 
 raised over the western end of the north aile, now used as the ecclesiastical 
 court, and containing’ documents belonging to the church, but formerly 
 employed as a tribune, according to Dr. Milner, “ to contain the extra¬ 
 ordinary minstrels, who performed on grand occasions, when some prelate, 
 
WEST END. 
 
 89 
 
 legate, or king, was received at the Cathedral in solemn state, by a procession 
 of the whole convent. At such times the cross-bearers, alcolyths, and thu- 
 rifers, led the way, and the bishop, prior, and other dignified clergy, in their 
 proper insignia and richest vestments, closed the ranks. In the mean time 
 the Church was hung from one end to the other with gorgeous tapestry, 
 representing religious subjects, the large hooks for supporting which still 
 remain fixed to the great columns ; the altars dazzled the beholders with a 
 profusion of gold, silver, and precious stones, the lustre of which was 
 heightened by the blaze of a thousand wax lights, whilst the well-tuned 
 voices of a numerous choir, in chosen psalms and anthems, gave life and 
 meaning to the various minstrelsy that was performed in this tribune.” Such 
 was the religious pomp and gorgeous parade of the possessors of these Cathe¬ 
 drals in former times, as described by one who has been initiated in the 
 mysteries of monachism, and who partially thinks the revival of it would be 
 conducive to the happiness of the human race : i. door-way from the turret 
 stairs to the parapet. 
 
 Plan of the West Enel. A. recessed porch of entrance to the nave, in which 
 the forms of the groining to the roof are defined, as well as the panelling of 
 the sides, and the mullion, or clustered column in the centre of the door-way : 
 B. southern, and C. northern porches : D. mullions and mouldings to the 
 western window of the south aile, beneath which was formerly a door: E. 
 corresponding window on the north side: F. one compartment of the north 
 aile, showing the number and disposition of the ribs, at the intersection of 
 each of which is a shield, or large boss : H. south aile ditto. [The form of 
 the rib here laid down as an octagon, should have been drawn in a lozenge or 
 diamond shape, as marked in the centre of the nave, and as indicated in the 
 general plan.] G. groining of the nave, the lines on the sides of which in¬ 
 dicate the mouldings of the arches. The darkest tint, at the west end, shows 
 the masonry of the three porches, which have evidently been raised between 
 the turrets and buttresses, and which are denoted, as well as the mullions of 
 the windows, by a lighter colour. [For extreme width of west front read 
 118 feet, instead of 128 feet.] 
 
 M 
 
90 
 
 WINCHESTER CATHEDRAL. 
 
 Plate vi. View of the North Transept , &c. Although much of the 
 original work of this elevation remains, we cannot contemplate without regret 
 that so much alteration and innovation has been adopted. Each of the four 
 bottom windows, as well as those of the second and third stories, have been 
 fitted up with mullions, tracery, and masonry : the two windows over the ailes 
 are wholly closed up; some masonry, blank arches, &c. have been evidently 
 taken away from the north-eastern angle, as may be inferred from the fragment 
 of an arch seen against the buttress. In the gable is a circular window, with 
 mullions of rather unusual form and character. 
 
 Plate vii. View of the North Side , from a place called Paradise, displays 
 several very interesting and varied features and parts of the church : first, on 
 the left hand, are the window and blank arches, belonging to the guardian 
 angels’ chapel: second, the turret stair-case at the north-east end of de Lucy’s 
 work, also the exterior of the windows, buttresses, and parapet of the north 
 aile of the same : third, the enriched eastern gable and window, octangular 
 turrets, flying-buttresses, pinnacles, &c. of Fox’s architecture: fourth, the 
 central tower: and fifth, the north transept, with its windows and but¬ 
 tresses. [The foreground of this print does not pretend to represent the 
 local appropriation of the place, which is a kitchen garden belonging to 
 the deanery.] 
 
 Plate viii. View of the East End of the Church , which shows the great 
 eastern window, the panelling beneath, the parapet, corbel table, &c. all 
 supposed to have been built by Silkstede, Hunton, and Courteney: the 
 window with two mullions and tracery, belongs to Langton’s chapel. 
 
 Plate ix. South Transept , fyc. [Here also the artist has very properly 
 omitted the local, but irrelevant objects of culinary plants and garden walls: 
 he has also omitted a tall pan-tile roof, which obscures the four bottom 
 windows of the transept, and has represented the three arches, at the west 
 end of the chapter-house, as open.] This view displays the arcade on the 
 north side of the chapter-house: the whole face of the southern transept, with 
 the peculiar panelling of the gable: also a long extent of the south side of 
 the nave, and its aile: the tower, part of the upper story of the presbytery, 
 and its south aile. 
 
nave: north transept: choir. 
 
 91 
 
 Plate x. View of the Nave, from the west end, looking east, displays 
 the clustered columns of the piers, the soffites of the arches, the parapet 
 screen, between the arches and clerestory, also the latter and the bold rib- 
 work of the roof. In this view the screen between the nave and the choir 
 is seen to separate the building in two, and appears as an ugly piece of 
 patchwork in a fine dress. 
 
 Plate xi. View from the North Aile of the Nave, looking across the 
 latter, showing part of the south side of the nave, the screen of Edington’s 
 chantry, &c. In the pier, on which the light falls, is displayed part of the 
 capitals of the Norman nave, from which sprung the semi-circular arches. 
 At the base of this pier is seen a piece of sculpture, representing a half 
 length figure of a bishop, beneath a trefoil canopy, with his hands clasped in 
 front, and with a shield resting against his knees. Lord Clarendon considers 
 this to represent Bishop Ethelmar, whilst Warton thinks it is meant for Prior 
 Hugh le Brun. The style of the arch and sculpture justifies the former 
 opinion, for Ethelmar lived in the time of Henry the Third ; and though his 
 body was buried at Paris, in 1261, yet it appears that his heart was brought 
 to, and enshrined in, this Church. 
 
 Plate xii. View of the interior of the North Transept, looking N. E. 
 This transept has been already fully noticed. It may, however, be re¬ 
 marked, that the height and form of the column or pier, with the capitals, 
 and arches, correspond with those in the original nave. In one of the piers 
 is represented a canopied niche, and from other ornaments of this compartment 
 of the aile, we may infer that it was formerly fitted up as a private oratory, 
 or chantry chapel. 
 
 Plate xiii. View of the Choir, looking west, displays the series of fine 
 stalls, the pulpit, the eagle reading desk, a coffin-tomb, said to cover the 
 remains of King William Rufus, the whole vaulting of the nave, two 
 arches, with piers, under the tower, also the first story of the latter, &c. 
 [At present a floor shuts out the first story of the lanthorn from the choir, 
 but as the object of these illustrations and this history, is to represent more 
 the permanent than the changeable features of the church, and as the said 
 floor is not only a temporary and extraneous, but even trumpery erection, 
 
 m 2 
 
92 
 
 WINCHESTER CATHEDRAL. 
 
 and may be soon removed, it was deemed advisable to omit it in the view. 
 From the same feelings, the draftsman has left out the Bishop’s stall, which is 
 attached to the left hand pier, and also a boarded partition, which fills up the 
 whole of the southern arch under the tower.] 
 
 Plate xiv. Part of the Stalls of the Choir. The design and carving of 
 these seats present abundant studies for the professional and amateur artists. 
 The compartments here represented are the central entrance door-way to the 
 choir, and three stalls on each side, with their respective moveable seats, or 
 misereres . 9 At the back of the seats is a series of arcades, highly ornamented 
 with tracery and carvings, and each seat is surmounted by a tall, narrow 
 canopy, splendidly enriched with crockets, finials, cusps, and other orna¬ 
 ments. From the style of the arches and decorations of these stalls, they 
 have been generally attributed to Edington’s prelacy and munificence. In the 
 inner mouldings of the three western door-ways, we recognise the same style 
 and similar cusps. 
 
 Plate xv. View of the Altar Screen. Among the architectural beauties 
 of this, and of any other cathedral, there will not perhaps be found one to 
 excel that represented in the annexed print. Niches of various sizes and 
 situations, pedestals, canopies, and pilaster-buttresses, cover nearly the whole 
 face of this sumptuous design; whilst its upper division and summit is 
 crowded to excess with pierced work, crocketed pinnacles, and perforated 
 canopies. In the centre is a projecting canopy, most elaborately executed; 
 but its appropriate pedestal is lost: as are also several other parts be¬ 
 longing to the middle and lower part of the screen. The accompanying 
 print shows it as it would appear if divested of the tasteless urns, in the 
 niches, and of the carved wood work, now before it. The screen is exe¬ 
 cuted in a fine white, soft stone, but is thickly covered and obscured by 
 
 9 Dr. Milner’s account of these seats, if not improbable, is calculated to render some of the 
 monastic discipline very ridiculous. He states, that the misereres were formed to expose and punish 
 sleepy monks: “ on these,” he relates, “the monks and canons of ancient times, with the assist¬ 
 ance of their elbows, on the upper part of their stalls, half supported themselves during certain 
 parts of their long offices, not to be obliged always to stand or kneel. This stool, however, was so 
 contrived, that if the body became supine by sleep, it naturally fell down, and the person who 
 rested upon it was thrown forward into the middle of the choir.” 
 
ALTAR SCREEN : WYKEHAlYl’s CHANTRY. 
 
 93 
 
 white-wash. In the spandrils of the two side-doors are sculptured repre¬ 
 sentations, in basso-relievo, of the Annunciation and Visitation, but executed 
 in a very bad style. With its original altar, and Catholic embellishments, 
 this screen must have been magnificently rich and splendid. Its furniture, 
 &c. are thus described by Dr. Milner, from an inventory printed in the 
 Monasticon, from the report of the commissioners in the time of Henry the 
 Eighth : “ The nether part, or antependium of the high altar, consisted of 
 plated gold, garnished with precious stones. Upon it stood the tabernacle 
 and steps, of embroidered work, ornamented with pearls, as also six silver 
 candlesticks, gilt, intermixed with reliquaries, wrought in gold and jewels. 
 Behind these was a table of small images, standing in their respective niches, 
 made of silver, adorned with gold and precious stones. Still higher was 
 seen a large crucifix with its attendant images, viz. those of the Blessed 
 Virgin and St. John, composed of the purest gold, garnished with jewels, 
 the gift of Bishop Henry de Blois, King Stephen’s brother. Over this ap¬ 
 pears to have been suspended from the exquisite stone canopy, the crown of 
 King Canute, which he placed there, in homage to the Lord of the Universe, 
 after his famous scene of his commanding the sea to retire from his feet, 
 which took place at Southampton.” 10 Mr. Garbett, in p. 66, ascribes the 
 erection of the altar-screen to Cardinal Beaufort, but I am rather inclined to 
 attribute it to Bishop Waynflete, who had, previous to his death, constructed 
 his own monumental chantry; and to the workmanship and materials of which 
 it so nearly corresponds. 
 
 Plate xvi. View of Wykehanis Chantry , from the nave, shows the 
 northern entrance door-way, with two niches, canopies, and pedestals over 
 it, the whole of the screen towards the nave, the enriched niches at the 
 east end, with parts of the architecture of the nave. Within the screen is 
 an altar tomb, in the centre, sustaining the effigy of the prelate, repre- 
 
 10 The altar-screen, in St. Alban’s Abbey Church, has generally been compared to this at Win¬ 
 chester; but although its general form, and some of its niches, are similar, the whole is very different, 
 and much less elaborate in detail. It was built by Abbot Wallingford, about 1482, and cost 1100 
 marks. See Clutterbuck’s History of Hertfordshire, vol. i. p. 35, in which work is a finely engraved 
 view of the screen by Mr. H, Le Keux. 
 
94 
 
 WINCHESTER CATHEDRAL. 
 
 sented in pontificalibus, with small statues of three monks kneeling at his 
 feet. [See Plate xxv. B.] The altar tomb is of white marble, with canopied 
 niches at the sides and ends; and at present is disfigured, as well as the 
 statue, by crude colours and gilding. 11 At the head of the monument, 
 attached to the pier of the nave, are five tabernacles, or niches: at the east 
 end are marks of the altar, with the credence table at the right hand, and 
 a piscina. 
 
 Plate xvii. View of the Chantries of Beaufort , Waynjiete , 8$c. The 
 combination of objects, represented in this plate, has been already noticed, 
 p. 75, and their names and situations, in p. 85. The first object on the left 
 hand is part of Fox s Chantry , a. which consists of a screen, the lower 
 portion of which is inclosed, filled up within, and ornamented on the out¬ 
 side with a series of niches, with pedestals and canopies, also with octan¬ 
 gular panelled buttresses at the angles, and panels between each niche. 
 Its southern side, or principal front, may be described to be composed of 
 three divisions, in height, and four in length. Each of the latter displays 
 an ornamented, perforated parapet and frieze, with a small pedestal rising 
 in the centre, supporting the figure of a pelican, Fox’s crest. Beneath the 
 frieze is a double window, with mullions and tracery, ornamented with 
 crockets, finials, and embattled mouldings. Under this window is a double 
 line, or facia, of sculpture, beneath which is the series of niches, &c. already 
 described. In the second compartment, from the east, is a recess, con¬ 
 taining the effigy of an emaciated human figure, with the feet resting against 
 a skull, and the head on a mitre. Thus, instead of representing his own 
 person, and features, the prelate thought it more consistent with Christian 
 humility to exhibit this mortifying lesson to man; to show the nothingness of 
 his body when deprived of the animating spirit; and intimating that pride and 
 arrogance are petty vanities, unworthy of man and degrading to his nature. 
 
 11 The College of Winchester, and that of New College, Oxford, have latterly contributed to 
 preserve and embellish this tomb and chantry. According to Dr. Milner, it was first “ repaired and 
 ornamented soon after the Restoration, viz. in 1664, and again in 1741, but with very little judg¬ 
 ment, as to the distinguishing and colouring of the several ornaments.” It was again painted, gilt, 
 &c. by Mr. Cave, of Winchester, in 1797, 
 
fox’s and beaufoy’s chantries. 
 
 95 
 
 It is rather curious that there is neither tomb, statue, nor inscription to com¬ 
 memorate the founder of this sumptuous chantry. In the western com¬ 
 partment is a finely carved door. [See Plate xxi.] The interior is 
 “ luxuriantly,” as Milner says, ornamented with tabernacles, sculpture, and 
 architectural enrichments. It is divided into three parts, by a raised floor, 
 and by a screen with a door-way. East of the latter is a little vestry, 
 which still contains the ambries. The wall over the altar is decorated with 
 three large, and sixteen small niches; also a facia of demi-angels, shields, 
 &c. The ceiling is adorned with tracery and shields of the royal arms of 
 the house of Tudor, emblazoned with colours and gilding. In the vestry, 
 over the ambries, is a niche, corresponding with those over the holy-hole; 
 and implying that the screen was formerly adorned with two rows of those 
 enriched niches. The windows of this chantry appear to have been 
 formerly glazed with painted glass. 12 Waynflete’s chantry, b. will be 
 noticed in the next plate. Beaufort’s Chantry , c. consists of clustered 
 piers, with a panelled screen at the base, an open screen at the head, or 
 west end, and a closed screen at the east end. There are doors on the 
 north and south sides, and the whole is surmounted by a mass of canopies, 
 niches, and pinnacles, which bewilder the sight and senses, by their num¬ 
 ber and complexity. Beneath this gorgeous canopy is an altar tomb, in 
 the centre of the inclosure, with the statue, already noticed and criticised. 
 Milner says, “ that the figure represents Beaufort in the proper dress of a 
 Cardinal: viz. the scarlet coat and hat, with long depending cords, ending 
 in tassels of ten knots each. The low balustrade and tomb, the latter of 
 which is lined with copper, and was formerly adorned on the outside with 
 the arms of the deceased, enchased on shields, are of grey marble. The 
 pious tenor of his will, which was signed two days before his death, and 
 the placid frame of his features, in the figure before us, which is probably a 
 portrait, leads us to discredit the fictions of poets and painters, who describe 
 
 12 A long dissertation by Mr. Gough, with very inaccurate plates of this chantry, from drawings 
 by J. Schnebbelie, have been published in the'second volume of the “ Vetusta Monuments.” 
 
 
 
96 
 
 WINCHESTER CATHEDRAL. 
 
 him as dying in despair.” 13 After what has been said, p. 81, of this statue, 
 it will be unnecessary to offer another remark. 
 
 Langtoris Chantry, e. has been already noticed, p. 77 and 83. Its elabo¬ 
 rately carved screen, with folding doors, and open gallery, or rood-loft, are 
 shown in this print: also a view into the lady chapel under, d. One compart¬ 
 ment of the carved wainscoting round this chapel is delineated in PI. xxi. 
 
 Plate xviii. View of the Chantries of Waynfiete , Beaufort, and Gardiner, 
 with parts of de Lucy’s, Fox’s, and Walkelyn’s architecture. The principal 
 chantry in this view presents a gorgeous mass of architectural and sculp¬ 
 tural ornaments: in which the designer appears to have exerted his fancy 
 to combine, in one object, and in a small compass, an almost countless 
 assemblage of pinnacles, canopies, niches, and sculptured details. The 
 interior, as well as the exterior, is covered with decorative work: its two 
 ends are filled with tabernacles, and its inner roof covered with a profusion 
 of tracery, arranged in various elegant forms. [See Plate xix.] From the 
 multiplicity of parts in this single chantry, it would be tedious to describe 
 the whole. Aided by the view, plan, and statue, the stranger may form a 
 tolerably accurate opinion of its style, form, and decoration. Chandler, in 
 his Life of Waynfiete, says he could not find any “ particular information’* 
 concerning this “ chapel of St. Mary Magdalenwhence he infers, that it 
 was executed during the life-time of the prelate, and was also “ furnished 
 with missals, copes, and other requisites.” The material of Waynflete’s 
 chantry is a fine, soft, white stone; easily worked by the mason’s and 
 sculptor’s tools: and its chief parts and ornaments are still in good pre¬ 
 servation. The Chantry to Bishop Gardiner, seen beyond that of Wayn¬ 
 fiete, forms a curious contrast to the latter, and also to its corresponding 
 chantry, that for Fox. As the vast power and tyranny of the Catholic 
 
 13 “ Shakespeare and Sir Joshua Reynolds; the former in his Henry VI. — the latter in a celebrated 
 picture.” The former, most probably, derived his opinions of the prelate from the English Chroni¬ 
 cles, (See Holinshed’s, iii. 212, 4to. 1808.) his chief sources for historical character; and the latter 
 merely illustrated, by a painting, a passage of the poet. The language of the bard, in portraying 
 the haughty Cardinal, is pointedly strong and descriptive. 
 
LADY CHAPEL. 
 
 97 
 
 church, had experienced a severe shock, in the life-time of Gardiner, so the 
 ecclesiastical architecture of the country was also revolutionized. Its 
 decline is strikingly marked in this Bishop’s chantry, where we see a com¬ 
 pound mixture of bad Italian and bad English; the lower part represent¬ 
 ing the former, and the upper part the latter. 
 
 Plate xix. Groined Roof to Waynfiete's Chantry. This print displays 
 not only the forms and ornaments of the ceiling of this splendid chantry, 
 but likewise the horizontal sections of the screens, buttresses, and mullions ; 
 also the clustered columns of de Lucy’s architecture: A. A. door-ways: 
 B. B. clustered columns, with detached shafts of purbeck marble : a. seat, 
 or plinth, round the screen : b. b. buttresses : c. c. mullions : d. d. niches, 
 or tabernacles. 
 
 Plate xx. Elevation of Three Compartments; two on the north side of the 
 Lady Chapel , B. C. and one of de Lucy’s architecture, A. In the spandrils 
 of the door-way of the eastern compartment, is some sculpture of foliage, 
 entwining an ornamental T. on one side, and the letter N. in a tun or barrel, 
 on the other side, being the initial letter for Thomas, and the rebus for Hun- 
 ton, Henton, or N-ton, one of the priors. This door-way is supposed to have 
 opened to a sextry, on the north side. In this part is still kept the remnant 
 of a Chair, which was handsomely ornamented with velvet, enamelling, &c. 
 Gale says, that it was used at, if not made for, the royal marriage between 
 Queen Mary and Philip of Spain. The lower walls of this chapel were 
 formerly covered with a series of fresco paintings, which from neglect and 
 wanton mischievousness are nearly obliterated. Carter, in his “ Specimens 
 of Ancient Sculpture and Painting,” has published four etchings of the 
 different subjects, and Dr. Milner has endeavoured to elucidate them by a 
 long dissertation. The whole vaulting of this chapel appears to have been 
 executed by Priors Hunton and Silkstede, whose names are painted on 
 the roof ; the latter connected with a figure of a horse, or steed. The 
 groins, or ribs, rest on very elegant capitals. The stalls and wainscoting, 
 as well as the rood-screen of this chapel, are highly charged with rich 
 carving; one compartment of which is delineated in PI. xxi. 
 
98 
 
 WINCHESTER CATHEDRAL. 
 
 Plate xxt. Specimens of Carved Wood-work , from the Lady Chapel, 
 Langton’s chapel, Fox’s chantry, and the pulpit; all of which are so finely 
 executed, that it is hoped the Dean and Chapter will not suffer any 
 further dilapidation or destruction in these interesting' remains of former 
 times. 
 
 Plate xxii. Part of the Altar Screen , being the east side of one of the 
 door-ways, with canopies over it. In the spandrils are two slips of foliage 
 very finely executed, which, with the canopies, have a close resemblance to 
 the style of Waynflete’s chantry.—The central niche of an old screen behind 
 the altar, facing the east, which I am inclined to think was executed at the 
 latter end of Edward the First’s, or beginning of the Second Edward’s 
 reign. This screen presents nine of these niches, besides one which is 
 inclosed in Fox’s chantry. From the unusual situation of the screen, I am 
 induced to think, that it was originally placed on the opposite side of the 
 wall, with its niches facing the west, and forming the altar screen. The 
 crockets, finials, and various foliage of the pediments and pinnacles of these 
 niches, are elaborately wrought; as well as a sculptured frieze beneath 
 the pedestals. Every niche appears to have contained two pedestals, under 
 each of which is still one of the following names : — Dominvs Jesvs : — S CE 
 Maria:—Kyngilsus rex: — S ES Birinus Epc. : —Kynwaldus rex:— 
 Egbertus rex.—Adulfus rex fili ej :—Egbertus rex :—Elured rex 
 fili ej :—Edward, rex senior:—Atiielstan. rex fili ej : — Edradus 
 rex :—Edgar rex :—Emma: regina :—Alwinus epis :—Ethelred. rex : 
 S ES Edward, rex fili ej :— Cnutus rex :— Hardicnut. rex filius ejus. 
 Most of the above personages were interred in Winchester, and all but two 
 were benefactors to the Cathedral. — A small part of Fox’s Chantry displays 
 the style of the turrets, the elegant parapet, the frieze, two canopies, and 
 part of the tracery of one window. 
 
 Plate xxiii. Section of de Lucy's Three Ailes, east of the altar, &c. 
 Among the architectural plates that have been engraved for the publications 
 of the Society of Antiquaries, and for other works, I believe it may be con¬ 
 fidently stated that no one presents such a combination and variety of parts, 
 
SECTION EAST OF THE ALTAR. 
 
 99 
 
 styles, and objects, as that now under consideration. Here we are pre¬ 
 sented with elevations of arches, columns, windows, &c. of distinct and 
 distant ages; from the middle of the eleventh century to the middle of the 
 sixteenth : the crypt, transepts, and tower display the former, whilst the 
 latter is contained in the chantry of Gardiner, i. The small letters refer to 
 the principal objects :—a. a. outer aile of the crypt, showing the bases of 
 the columns and piers : b. b. two inner ailes, divided by columns, d : c. sec¬ 
 tion of piers : e. elevation of one of the openings, with section of the arch 
 above : f. section through one of the windows : g. holy-hole, beneath the old 
 altar screen : h. east end of Fox’s chantry : i. ditto of Gardiner’s : k. section 
 of the south wall of de Lucy’s work, representing the gallery, or passage 
 through the wall ; on the inside is an insulated purbeck column, support¬ 
 ing the rib of the vault: 1. clustered columns of detached shafts of purbeck 
 marble : m. section of the opposite cluster, with the wall above : n. two 
 arches, springing from clustered columns, having their bases on a high wall, 
 and which, as already remarked, I conjecture was the former place of the 
 altar-screen, before the present lofty one was erected, the back of which is 
 seen through the two arches : o. section of the timber work of the roof: the 
 latter is singularly wide and flat: p. profile elevation of one of the large 
 buttresses, which receives the flying abutment from the S. E. angle, u : 
 q. upper division of the east aile of the south transept, showing one of the 
 small windows to the triforium : r. filled arch in the wall over the aile, 
 above which, at s. are the clerestory windows of the transept: t. corbel 
 table, which extends all round the transepts. The central acute gable, 
 with crockets, panelling, octangular turrets, window, &c. display the florid 
 style and workmanship of Fox’s architecture. The narrow, tall openings, 
 with horse-shoe arches, are the most eastern remnants of Walkelyn’s works ; 
 and the parts of windows and doors seen through them are those at the 
 western end, which do not range in straight lines with the ailes of the pres¬ 
 bytery. 
 
 Plate xxrv. Half Elevation and Half Section of the Church , from north 
 to south. As the latter plate was particularly curious and interesting from 
 its variety, so this, from its simple and almost uniform character, cannot 
 
 n 2 
 
100 
 
 WINCHESTER CATHEDRAL. 
 
 fail of gratifying the architectural antiquary. The left hand side displays 
 the elevation of the west side of the transept; half of the tower, and a 
 section through the first window and arch of Wykeham’s work, in the north 
 aile of the nave ; also the form of the arch of that aile, with the clustered 
 pier between it and the nave, the wall and clerestory window above, with 
 the slope of the roofs of the nave and the aile. Beneath the arch of the 
 nave is seen part of the screen to the choir, the altar screen beyond, and 
 the eastern window. The right hand half, or section of the south tran¬ 
 sept, &c. displays the interior of two floors of the tower, the timber work 
 of the roof, and the whole interior elevation of the east side of the said 
 transept: a. elevation of part of the outside of the tower : b. elevation of 
 two floors of ditto : c. section of the south wall and its window, with the 
 arched gallery, or passage : d. timber work of the roof : [since this plate 
 has been engraved, the draftsman informs me, that the rafters here repre¬ 
 sented belong to the north transept, and that the timber work of this is a 
 little varied:] e. small bell turret: f. section of the gable: g. of one of the 
 windows, with a passage, or gallery beneath : h. triforium, over the aile • 
 [the draftsman has here again made some mistakes ; the upper right hand 
 arch represented flat, should be semi-circular ; and its impost moulding 
 lowered : the upper string moulding does not continue through the tall 
 attached columns :] i. screen before the venerable chapel: k. ditto to Silk- 
 stede’s: 1. chapel called by Dr. Milner the calefactory , a place “ necessary for 
 preserving fire for the thuribles and censers, that were used in the ancient 
 service, as likewise for the monks to warm themselves in cold weather;” 
 over this aile is a vaulted roof, which the same author says communicated 
 between the dormitories and choir, through which the monks were to pass 
 to perform their midnight service : m. section of window over the aile, and 
 n. ditto from the aile, which plainly shows that it was originally intended to 
 cover the slype or passage, o. with a sloping roof, now raised over p. which 
 is the present library: q. steps from transept to the south aile : r. section 
 of stalls : s. section of arch under the tower : t. screen to the choir: u. altar 
 screen : w. section of a window of the clerestory of the nave : x. steps to 
 the north aile: y. section of window of the aile and profile of the buttress : 
 
EFFIGIES OF EDINGTON, WYKEHAM AND WAYNFLETE. 
 
 101 
 
 z. door-way to the north transept: jigure 1. Norman window, filled with 
 mullion and tracery, and the sill lowered : 2. an original window : 3. ditto : 
 4. a series of four windows to the upper story of the transept : these appear 
 to have been inserted by Prior Silkstede, as his initials T. S. appear on one 
 of the bosses to the cornice, 5. under the parapet: 6. flat buttresses at the 
 angle. 
 
 Plate xxv. Front views of the Monumental Effigies of Edington , Wyke- 
 ham , and Waynjiete. That of Bishop Edington , A. lays on an altar tomb, 
 within a stone open screen. The statue is fine in proportion, and has been 
 carefully finished. Its mitre, and episcopal costume, are ornamented with 
 much taste and elegance. Its head rests on two pillows, which were supported 
 by two angels, having censers. The figure appears to have been painted. 
 Round the ledge of the tomb is a perfect inscription, with gilt letters on a blue 
 enamelled ground. Here is no appearance of a crosier.—B. effigy of Bishop 
 Wykeham on an altar tomb of white marble; at the feet of the statue are 
 three small figures of priests in the attitude of prayer. Dr. Milner states 
 that these are three monks “ of the Cathedral, who, accordingly as they 
 were appointed to this office every week, were each of them to say mass in 
 this chapel, for the repose of the souls of Wykeham himself, and of his 
 father, mother, and benefactors, particularly of Edward III. the Black 
 Prince, and Richard II. in conformity with the covenant made for that 
 purpose with the prior and community of the cathedral monastery.’’ The 
 effigy is represented in the “ mitre, cope, tunic, dalmatic, alb, sandals,” &c. 
 and rings on the fingers. All of these are painted and gilt. His head rests on 
 two pillows, which are supported by angels, and beneath his left arm is a 
 representation of his celebrated crosier, which is preserved in the chapel of 
 New College, Oxford, and of which Carter, in his “Ancient Sculpture,” has 
 given an etching. Dr. Milner describes the face as placid and intelligent, and 
 the hands as covered with gloves; but I sought in vain for either. Round 
 the ledge of the tomb is a perfect inscription. C. Effigy of Bishop Wayn¬ 
 jiete , resting on an altar tomb, in his “ full pontificals of mitre, crosier, casula, 
 stole, maniple, tunicle, rocket, alb, amice, sandals, and gloves the latter are 
 adorned with rosets, but have no rings. Between his uplifted hands is the 
 
102 
 
 WINCHESTER CATHEDRAL. 
 
 figure of a heart. The mitre is richly ornamented, and rests on two pillows, 
 but here are no supporters, nor is there any inscription, or brass to the 
 tomb. The face of this effigy, as well as that of Wykeham, has been mutilated 
 and repaired : the portrait, very beautifully engraved, for Chandler's Life 
 of Waynflete, and said to be copied from this statue, is very unlike the 
 original. 
 
 Plate xxvi. Part of a Tomb and fragments of two Effigies. A. a muti¬ 
 lated effigy of a bishop, commonly attributed, and with much probability, to 
 Peter de Rupibus, who, according to Matthew Paris, “ sepultus est autem 
 in ecclesia sua Wintoniensi, ubi etiam clum viverit humilem elegit sepultu- 
 ram.” The style of the mitre, drapery, canopy over head, and ornaments 
 down the sides, are all indicative of the age of Rupibus, who died 1238. 
 B. a broken effigy of a knight, in chain armour, with surcoat, shield with 
 quarterings, on his left arm, and the right arm directed towards his 
 sword. The head rests on two small cushions, on each side of which is a 
 broken figure of a small angel. At the feet is a large figure of a lion. It 
 will be observed, that the space for the lost legs is very short; but it is so 
 in the statue, which has been finely executed, and is said to repre¬ 
 sent William de Foiv, of the princely family of that name, who resided on an 
 estate called Vana, or Wineall, near Winchester. The side of the tomb, A. 
 certainly belonged to the statue, as clearly intimated by the first shield and 
 arms, as well as by the style of the arches, and their crockets and finials. The 
 four other shields are charged with the arms of Leon, England, France, 
 and Castile ; to all of which royal families he thus appears to have been 
 allied. 
 
 Pl ate xxvii. Elevation of one Compartment of the IVave, internally and 
 externally. These delineations represent the true forms and proportions of 
 the arches, windows, panelling, columns, &c. and the critical antiquary, 
 who wishes to attain accurate information about the styles and dates of our 
 architecture, will find that it can only be accomplished by means of correct 
 geometrical prints: A. elevation, externally: a. clerestory window, with a 
 label, or weather moulding, terminated with corbel heads : b. pinnacle with 
 panelling, an embattled moulding, crockets, and finial : c. string cornice, 
 
NAVE AND PRESBYTERY. 
 
 103 
 
 with bold roses and figures. [There should be only three instead of five 
 in this division between the buttresses :] e. window of the aile.—B. eleva¬ 
 tion, internally : a. groining of the roof, springing from a single shaft, which 
 rises from the floor. Its base is octangular, and the capital is adorned with 
 sculpture of busts, foliage, See. : c. frieze, charged with large and very finely 
 sculptured bosses of various subjects ; among which are the couchant 
 hart or deer, a man on horseback, the cardinal’s hat, busts, the lily, 
 &c. all of which imply that the vaulting and sculpture were raised by 
 different benefactors : d. an open parapet before the old triforium. In the 
 wall beneath the window is concealed the old Norman semi-circular arch of 
 the triforium, which corresponds in style and height with the same divi¬ 
 sions in the transepts : e. panelling under the aile window : f. base of one 
 of the shafts. 
 
 Plate xxviii. Elevation of one Compartment of the Presbytery , externally 
 and internally. A. the exterior, surmounted by an open parapet, c. : a. a. 
 large buttresses, with four breaks, crowned with panelled pinnacles, and 
 ogee, crocheted canopies, or domes, b. The clerestory window, d. as well 
 as that of the aile, e. has three mullions, with a transverse one, and some 
 rich tracery.—B. elevation of one arch, Sec. of the interior of the presbytery 
 close to the communion rails : a. upper window, with a gallery, or passage 
 beneath, guarded by a perforated parapet: b. bracket to support the groins of 
 the vaulting, which is of timber: c. arch, with its numerous mouldings, rising 
 on clustered columns of three quarter shafts. From the style of the arch, 
 and its columns, I cannot hesitate in referring the erection of this part of the 
 Church, to the end of Henry the Third’s, or beginning of Edward the First s 
 reign : d. grotesque animals at the union of the mouldings : e. steps to the 
 communion table ; also the altar tomb, said to belong to Bishop Pontissara, but 
 if so it has been materially altered at the time of putting up the screens. On 
 the top of these screens are six wooden chests, containing some memorials and 
 relics of Saxon monarchs, princes, and other illustrious personages, former 
 patrons of the Cathedral, The names are, Kynegils, Ethelwulf, Esenin , 
 Kentwin , Elmstan , Kenulf Egbert , Adulfus, Canute , and Emma his queen, 
 Alwyn , Wina, Stigand, Rufus , Edmund , eldest son of Alfred, Edred , &c. 
 It may be remarked, that although these names appear on the chests, and 
 
104 
 
 WINCHESTER CATHEDRAL. 
 
 we have pretty good authority that the persons they allude to were buried in 
 the Cathedral ; yet from the various changes and revolutions that have 
 occurred in this Church, we can scarcely suppose that any remains of them can 
 be identified. 
 
 Plate xxix. Arches , cmd part of the Tower . A. elevation of two 
 arches, with the capitals and bases of pilaster columns to the same, placed 
 in a wall under one of the arches of the south transept: B. two other semicir¬ 
 cular arches, ornamented with pilasters and mouldings, like the former, and 
 like those inserted in a wall beneath one of the arches in the west aile of the 
 south transept. Mr. Garbett (p. 60) conjectures that the former were erected 
 by Bishop de Blois, to exhibit as specimens of the newly invented pointed 
 arch ; but with deference to that intelligent architect, I must contend that the 
 arches, and their members, have been trsnsplanted from some other place, 
 and that in the removal they may have been greatly changed. The 
 pilasters do not appear to belong to the capitals, or to the arches ; and 
 certainly the fragment of a pilaster, above the arch-mouldings, B. cannot be 
 regarded as useful, ornamental, or analogous. Besides, if I recollect rightly, 
 there is a finely sculptured bracket of a chained deer, or white hart, the cogni¬ 
 zance of John of Gaunt, father of Cardinal Beaufort, inserted in another wall, 
 inclosing the same part of the aile. We may as well attribute this figure to 
 the middle of the twelfth century, as make any inference from the shape 
 of these arches, or their appendages. The arch mouldings are probably of the 
 age of de Blois : but, circumstanced as these fragments are, it would be 
 useless and absurd to deduce from them any criterion as to age and style. 
 Carter, in his “ Ancient Architecture,” Plate xxxvur. has given an etching 
 of one of the pointed arches, but so unlike the form, that it appears to be 
 drawn from memory, rather than from the object, or from measurements. 
 He represents each side of the arched line as a true quarter of a circle, and 
 the arch as forming nearly an equilateral triangle with a line from the capitals. 
 C. elevation of one side of the upper story of the tower, with sections of two 
 of its walls: D. plans of ditto, 1. of the gallery story; and 2. of the story 
 beneath. 
 
 Plate xxx. Two Views of the Font, which has been called “ the 
 Crux Antiquariorumf or the puzzle of antiquaries. Its age, and the mean- 
 
FONT. 
 
 105 
 
 ing of its rude un-artist-like sculpture, have afforded themes for literary 
 speculation, and will probably long continue enveloped in doubt and obscu - 
 rity. On such a subject conjecture is likely to play truant: but in the ab¬ 
 sence of satisfactory history, conjecture must be sometimes allowed, as it 
 leads to investigation, if not immediate^ to demonstration. The Font is a 
 large square block of black marble, having its four sides charged with sculp¬ 
 ture, the angles at the top also ornamented with doves, and cups, and zigzag, 
 and supported by four small columns at the corners, and one larger one in 
 the centre. 14 On two sides are groups of figures, in low, flat relief, with a rude 
 representation in one compartment of a side of a church, and a view of a 
 ship, or boat, in another. Although, as subjects of art, these tablets are 
 beneath criticism, yet as delineations of costume, manners, and implements, 
 they are entitled to special notice and attention. Mr. Gough contends 
 that the sculptures relate to the story of Birinus, and his introduction of 
 Christianity into this province, the death of Kinegils, &c. ; but Dr. Milner 
 contends, that they allude to, and are illustrative of, some incidents in the 
 life of “ St. Nicholas, Bishop [Archbishop] of Myra, in Lycia, who flourished 
 in the fourth century, and was celebrated as the patron saint of children.'’ 
 As allusive to the figures on one side of the font, it is related that the first act 
 of the saint, who was rich, (a rather un-saintlike circumstance,) was to con¬ 
 vey, secretly, sums of gold into the chamber of an impoverished nobleman, 
 who from distress had been tempted to traffic with the chastity of his three 
 daughters, but who, thus enriched, was enabled to apportion each and procure 
 husbands for all. The legend, however, tells us, that “ the unostentatious 
 saint” did not perform all his benevolence at once, or in secret, but at three 
 different times, and in the silence of three different nights. On the third 
 occasion, the once poor, but now rich nobleman, watched for and discovered 
 “ his unknown benefactor,” when falling at his feet—for it seems that he 
 
 14 Fonts partly resembling that at Winchester, in size, shape, and material, are still remaining 
 at East-Meon, and at Southampton in Hampshire ; and in Lincoln Cathedral. The first is represented 
 and described in the tenth volume of the Archaeologia, and the second in Sir Henry Englefield’s 
 interesting and erudite little volume, called “ a Walk through Southampton.” 
 
 See also Vetusta Monumenta, vol. ii. and Archaeologia, vol. x. p. 184. 
 
 O 
 
106 
 
 WINCHESTER CATHEDRAL. 
 
 stole secretly into the chamber—he “ called him the saviour of his own and 
 of his daughters’ souls.” This account is not very closely adhered to by 
 the sculptor, for the scene appears to be on the outside of a church, which 
 Dr. Milner identifies as the Cathedral of Myra, and in addition to the saint, 
 the father, and three daughters, here is the figure of a man, with a hawk on 
 his hand. Let us see if the second side is better elucidated by the legend. 
 It seems to represent three groups of figures and three incidents : 1st. Four 
 standing figures, and the heads of three others prostrate, one of which is 
 dressed as a bishop, whilst another has an uplifted axe, apparently raised 
 to strike at the three heads : 2d, a group, of the said bishop and three other 
 figures, with a fourth laid on his back ; the latter has a cup in his hand, 
 as has also one in the former group : the 3d subject displays a boat, or 
 ship, with a rudder, mast, and three figures in it. This, Dr. Milner says, 
 represents the saint, on board a vessel bound to Alexandria, and overtaken 
 by a storm, as evinced by the masts being without sails, but which was 
 appeased by the supernatural powers of the saint. In this voyage one of 
 the mariners fell from the mast and was killed, but was soon restored to 
 life by the miraculous intervention of the Archbishop. These prodigious 
 works naturally excited much curiosity; and consequently, on landing, the 
 prelate was visited by great crowds of persons, afflicted with diseases and 
 misery. The next group therefore shows him in the act of healing the 
 sick ; i. e. of raising two persons, from prostrate attitudes, and astonishing 
 the third person who appears with uplifted hands. The figure lying on his 
 back, according to Dr. Milner, belongs to a distinct incident and story, but 
 anomalously brought here by the artist. According to the legendary history 
 of the saint (as written by Jacobus de Voragine,) he appeared, after death, 
 at the bottom of the sea, to a nobleman’s son, who was drowned for the sins 
 of his father, and whom the Saint conveyed “ not only safe to shore, but also 
 to the city of Myra.” In the next compartment the child is led by the Arch¬ 
 bishop, who is also engaged in the performance of another celebrated act ; i. e. 
 rescuing three young men from the impending axe of the public executioner. 
 These three persons had been condemned by the Prefect of the city; but as 
 St. Nicholas conceived that the sentence was unjust and cruel, he “fled” 
 
FONT. 
 
 107 
 
 from Phrygia to Myra, and arrived just at the very critical instant to check 
 the murdering instrument. That such improbable, unnatural, and even im¬ 
 possible stories should have been formerly invented for certain purposes, 
 credited by certain persons, and rendered the themes of literary narrative and 
 disquisition, is most true ; that they should be believed by any person who can 
 read and think, in the present age, excites astonishment. For myself, I must 
 candidly acknowledge, that I cannot peruse them without feeling the mingled 
 emotions of pity, regret, and surprise ; and cannot write about them without 
 thinking I am trifling with the time and patience of the reader. As forming 
 the subjects of ancient paintings and sculpture, it seems requisite to notice 
 them ; and in doing this, I take some pains to be brief. I hope therefore to 
 be pardoned for occupying so much space with the above subject. 
 
 Respecting the age of this Font, and its station in a Cathedral Church, I 
 am inclined to think it was the workmanship of Walkelyn’s time; when also 
 the font at East-Meon was executed. The style of dress, mitre and crozier, 
 indicates that age. As Cathedrals were not usually furnished with fonts, or 
 their prelates and officers accustomed to perform the sacrament of baptism, 
 Mr. Denne (in Archaeologia, vol. xi.) thinks that as Winchester and Lincoln 
 Cathedrals were provided with fonts they had parochial altars, or chapels. 
 
 Some few other objects remain to be noticed. In the south aile of the 
 nave are mural monuments to Dean Cheney , and to Bishop Willis, the latter 
 of which has a marble effigy of the prelate, reclining on a sarcophagus. 15 In 
 the same aile is a tablet to the memory of Dr. Thomas Balguy , formerly 
 an archdeacon of this Cathedral, and distinguished as much for his talents 
 as for his moderation and humility. At one time he was offered the bishopric 
 of Gloucester, but refused the temptation, on account of advanced age and 
 infirmities. His literary works are wholly in the shape of sermons and 
 charges, which were collectively published in 1785. At the advanced age 
 
 15 This monument, by R. Cheere, has been praised as a work of art, but the judicious artist and 
 critic will seek in vain for beauty in the execution, or the display of taste in the sculptor. The 
 head is good, but all the rest of the statue is bad. Dr. Milner tells us that the sculptor was silly 
 enough to fret himself to death for having placed the face of the statue towards the west, instead of 
 the east; but this foolish story requires better proof than the gossip of a Cathedral cicerone. 
 
 O 2 
 
108 
 
 WINCHESTER CATHEDRAL. 
 
 of 74, this very worthy man died, January 12, 1795. [See Nichols’s Literary 
 Anecdotes, vol. iii. p. 220.] In the nave, near the eighth pillar from the 
 west end, is a grave stone covering the remains of Bishop Horne , who, 
 according to Dr. Milner, was “ the destroyer of the antiquities of his 
 Cathedral, and the dilapidator of the property of his bishopric.” 16 Near 
 his place of sepulture is that of William Kingsmill, the first dean of this 
 church, who died in 1548. On the north side of the nave reposes Bishop 
 Watson, M. D. who died January 1583-4. Bishops Walkeyln and Giffard 
 are said to have been interred in the nave, but there is no memorial to either. 
 At the west end of the south aile is a small marble slab, to the memory of 
 James Huntingford, who died September 30, 1772, aged 48. Bishop 
 Trimnel, who died in 1723, is praised in a prolix inscription, as is also his 
 brother, Dean Trimnel , who died in 1729. Attached to the piers near 
 Wykeham’s chantry are marble tablets to commemorate two prebendaries 
 of this church, and masters of the college, Dr. William Harris, who died 
 in 1700, and Christopher Eyre, LL. D. who was interred here in 1743. 
 Near Bishop Willis’s monument is a tablet to record the name and inter¬ 
 ment of Dean Naylor, who died 1739. Another mural monument com¬ 
 memorates Dr. Edmund Pyle, prebendary of this Cathedral, who died in 
 1776. A funeral tablet records some particulars of the family, descent, 
 public and private virtues of the late Earl of Banbury, who died 1793, 
 and of his Countess, who died 1798. Close to Edington’s chantry is a 
 flat stone, covering the grave of Bishop Thomas, with an inscription detailing 
 his successive preferments ; and stating, that he was tutor to that afflicted 
 and estimable monarch, George III. 
 
 In the north aile of the nave are interred the mortal remains of a lady, 
 whose ample benevolence and literary talents must awaken the warmest 
 emotions of admiration and esteem in the philanthropist and lover of 
 letters. This was Mrs. Elizabeth Montagu, author of an interesting, 
 eloquent, and discriminating “ Essay on the Writings and Genius of 
 Shakspeare,” which attained a sixth edition in 1810 ; and which displays 
 the palpable folly and envy of Voltaire’s criticisms on our national bard. 
 
 16 History, &c. of Winchester, i. 370. 
 
VARIOUS TOMBS. 
 
 109 
 
 During her life she manifested particular solicitude and generosity towards 
 the poor and unfortunate chimney-sweeping boys; and was the founder of 
 a literary society, called “ the Blue Stocking Club.” Since her decease, 
 which occurred in August, 1800, aged 80, four volumes of her letters have 
 been published by her nephew, Matthew Montagu, Esq. which for vivacity, 
 playfulness, ingenious criticism, and versatility of subjects and treatment, 
 are not surpassed by any epistolary writing in the English language. Near 
 Mrs. Montagu repose the relics of Dr. Joseph War ton, whose monument, 
 near the entrance to the choir, has been already noticed. This monument 
 was erected by Flaxman, and its expenses defrayed by a subscription among 
 the pupils of Winchester College School, to which Dr. Warton had been 
 many years head master. He died Feb. 23, 1800, in the seventy-eighth 
 year of his age. “ Biographical Memoirs of Dr. Warton,” have been pub¬ 
 lished by the Rev. J. Wooll. 
 
 On a flat stone in the north aile is an inscription to Sir Nathaniel Holland, 
 Bart, who died, October 15, 1811, aged 76. Among the interments in this 
 pile, is one of a lady whose virtues, talents, and accomplishments entitle her 
 not only to distinguished notice, but to the admiration of every person who 
 has a heart to feel and a mind to appreciate female worth and merit. The 
 lady alluded to, Miss Jane Austen, who was buried here, July 1817, was 
 author of four novels of considerable interest and value. In the last, a 
 posthumous publication, entitled “ Northanger Abbey,” is a sketch of a 
 memoir of the amiable author. 
 
 In the south transept are several monuments. One is inscribed with the 
 name of Colonel Davies, who met his death at the famous siege of Namur, 
 under King William. Another records the decease of Mr. Isaac Walton, the 
 15th of December, 1683. Few literary works have attracted more publicity 
 than the “ Complete Angler,” by honest and happy Isaac. His lives of 
 Wotton, Donne, Herbert, See. are also replete with anecdote and amusement. 
 A full memoir of his life is given in a new edition of “ Walton’s Lives,” by 
 Dr. Zouch, 1807. 
 
 At the east end of the south aile is a monument, with a statue, standing, 
 for Sir John Clobery, knight, who died in 1687, and who is praised in a long 
 
110 
 
 WINCHESTER CATHEDRAL. 
 
 Latin epitaph, for having been instrumental, with his friend General Monk, 
 in restoring Charles the Second to the Throne, and peace to his country. 17 
 Near this tomb are several flag stones with inscriptions: one records the name 
 of “ the Right Honourable James Touchet, Baron Audley and Earl of 
 Castlehavenf who died August 12, 1700; another for the Countess of Exeter, 
 who was interred here in 1663 : a third for Lord Henry Paulet, deceased 
 1672: a fourth to Elizabeth Shirley, daughter of Earl Ferrers, who died in 
 1740 : a fifth commemorates the Countess of Essex , who died August 20, 
 1659, who had married for a second husband Sir Thomas Higgons, knight, 
 who pronounced a funeral oration over her grave, in the ancient manner. He 
 died in 1692, and lies near his countess. Another stone covers the grave of 
 Baptist Levinz, a prebendary of this church, and Bishop of the Isle of Man, 
 who died in 1692, and is praised in a long Latin epitaph, for abstemiousness, 
 frequent fasting, and “ other episcopal virtues.” In the north transept are 
 some inscribed slabs; and beneath the organ loft, under the north arch of the 
 tower, is a small inclosed Chapel, or chantry, the walls of which are covered 
 with ancient paintings. 
 
 17 This monument was erected in 1691, and cost £130. It was executed by Sir Wm. Wilson, 
 Knt. the same artist who executed a statue of King Charles II. in the west front of Lichfield 
 Cathedral. The funeral expenses were £125. 5s. lOd.; thus—chanter for office of burial and for 
 the choir, £5. 9s. Ad. ; several dues to the church, £8; hanging house and coach with mourning, 
 and the servants to attend, £32. 8s.; torches, bell ringers, &c. £3. 8s.; for rings, £23. 17s. 6d.; 
 for gloves, £16. 15s.; a coffin, £3. 10s.; escutcheons, £12; a gravestone, £20. [Communicated 
 by Wm. Hamper, Esq. of Birmingham, from a paper written by Lady Holte, of Aston-juxta-Bir- 
 mingham, the daughter of Sir John Clobery.] 
 
Ill 
 
 CHAP. IV. 
 
 BIOGRAPHICAL ANECDOTES OF THE BISHOPS OF WINCHESTER. 
 
 The Anglo-Saxon Bishops of Winchester have already been noticed, and 
 some particulars of a few of the earliest of the Norman prelates of that See, 
 have also been mentioned. I now proceed, in conformity with the plan 
 adopted in my History of Norwich Cathedral, to state some anecdotes and 
 characteristic traits of such others of the Bishops of Winchester as have 
 been distinguished by any literary or public works. Of Walkelyn, the 
 first Norman Prelate, some particulars have already been stated. It was the 
 policy, and not without good reason, of the Conqueror to substitute his 
 countrymen and dependents of Normandy, in the room of prelates and other 
 leading churchmen of the old English stock. Walkelyn was his relation and 
 his chaplain; and although inferior in learning to the new archbishop of 
 Canterbury, Lanfranc, (an Italian, but an abbot in Normandy,) he was not 
 without his merits. In 1079, Walkelyn undertook the great work of rebuild¬ 
 ing his Cathedral and the adjoining monastery, in a style of architecture till 
 then unparalleled in England; and in 1093, in the reign of William Rufus, 
 the Church was solemnly dedicated. On Walkelyn’s death, in 1098, Rufus 
 seized on the bishopric of Winchester, in addition to the other sees he had 
 invaded, and kept possession of it until his untimely end in the New Forest 
 in 1100. 
 
 The first act of King Henry the First was to appoint his chancellor, 
 William Giffard, to the See; but an interval of seven years elapsed 
 before he was consecrated. The cause of this delay was the celebrated 
 controversy which long agitated the church and the state, concerning the 
 conveyance of ecclesiastical investitures from lay persons, by the pastoral staff 
 and the ring; a practice which had been recently condemned by the head of 
 the church. At last, after some years, the contest between the Pope and the 
 King was terminated by a compromise, in which each party retained pos- 
 
112 
 
 WINCHESTER CATHEDRAL. 
 
 session of his respective rights. Bishop Giffard founded the Cistercian 
 Convent of Waverley, near Farnham, and erected a palace in Southwark, 
 afterwards called the Bishop of Winchester's, and also contributed largely 
 to the establishment of the adjoining monastery of regular canons of St. 
 Mary Overy. 
 
 On the death of Bishop Giffard, in 1128-9, the king found means to prefer 
 to the See Henry de Blois, the son of his sister, Adela, by the Earl of 
 Blois, and who at that time was abbot of Glastonbury. Deeply involved by 
 family connection, as well as by personal character, in the unhappy conten¬ 
 tions for the English crown, which ensued on the death of Henry the First; 
 the life of Bishop de Blois is much more noticeable in a temporal and 
 political than in an ecclesiastical point of view. At last his long and restless 
 occupation of the See of Winchester was terminated by his death in 1171. 
 The strong fortresses, or castles, erected by him in this city, and at Farnham, 
 Merden, Waltham, &c. were at once evidences of his wealth and authority, 
 and of the unhappy spirit and state of the times in which he lived. Those 
 strong holds have long ceased to be of importance; but one monument of this 
 prelates munificence still exists, more congenial with his spiritual functions, 
 and with the destination of the ample funds entrusted to his care. To Henry 
 de Blois is this vicinity indebted for one of its principal ornaments, the 
 Hospital of St. Cross, founded by him in 1136; an institution, which, in 
 
 internal administration, as in structure and appearance, including the addi¬ 
 
 tions and improvements introduced by the Cardinal-bishop Beaufort, has 
 undergone less alteration from its original establishment than any other of a 
 similar nature in the kingdom. 1 
 
 According to Rudborne this prelate left certain writings, one concerning 
 the monument of the renowned British prince, Arthur, discovered at Glas¬ 
 tonbury, while Henry was at the head of that abbey : the other related to 
 
 1 The church of St. Cross has been frequently referred to as containing some curious examples 
 of ecclesiastical architecture. It is indeed in the whole, and in detail, replete with interest; but 
 its peculiarities have been either misunderstood or misrepresented. In my Chronological Illustra¬ 
 tion of Ancient Architecture, it is my intention to represent the peculiarities of this building, as 
 well as those of the Church of Romsey, in this vicinity. 
 
BISHOPS TOCLIVE AND DE LUCY. 
 
 113 
 
 the state of his Cathedral Church, and appears to have been extant in the 
 time of the ecclesiastical historian Harpsfield, towards the close of the six¬ 
 teenth century. 
 
 The vacancy occasioned by the death of Bishop de Blois was not sup¬ 
 plied until the end of 1174, by the installation of Richard Toclive, alias 
 More. In opposition to his repeated engagements, but in conformity with 
 his general practice, the King, Henry the Second, kept the See so long void, 
 in order probably to profit by its revenues ; and it was only by the inter¬ 
 ference of some Cardinals that he granted license for the election of a bishop 
 to Winchester, and to many other churches which had remained void for 
 some years. 
 
 Bishop Toclive was succeeded in 1189 by Godfrey de Lucy, who not 
 only re-annexed, by purchase from Richard the First, sundry manors formerly 
 belonging to the see, but also restored the navigation of the river Itchen, 
 between Winchester and the Southampton river, and adopted other measures 
 for the general benefit of the city. In the year 1202, this prelate formed a 
 confraternity, or society of masons, and contracted with them for five years, 
 during which time they were to complete certain additions and repairs to the 
 Church. The work then carried on must have been the east end, in which 
 the Bishop was interred in the year 1204, only two years after he had begun 
 his new style of architecture. 2 
 
 During the episcopacy of de Lucy occurred the singular re-instalment of 
 Richard the First, Ccew'-c/e-lion, in his regal office. Returning home, less 
 elated with the victories he had achieved in the Holy Land, than depressed 
 
 by the lawless captivity he had endured under the Duke of Austria, he 
 
 hardly conceived himself to be a sovereign unless he were again publicly 
 
 * “ Anno 1202. D.Wintoniensis Godfridus de Lucy constituit confratriam pro reparatione ecclesiae 
 Wintoniensis, duraturam ad quinque annos completes.” Annales Wint. Was not this confraternity 
 a club of free-masons ? 
 
 It must surprise the architectural antiquary to be told, that T. Warton, the historian of English 
 poetry, and the commentator on English Architecture, in his notes to Spenser’s “ Fairy Queen,” 
 
 refers this very architecture by de Lucy to the time of “ the Saxoa kings,” before the Norman 
 
 Conquest. See his “ Description, See. of Winchester,” p. 63. 
 
 P 
 
114 WINCHESTER CATHEDRAL. 
 
 crowned and recognised. The ceremony was performed with great splendour 
 in the Cathedral of Winchester, in the presence of the prelates and nobles 
 of the kingdom. But Bishop de Lucy was absent: for Richard had, on his 
 arrival, resumed the manors he had sold and the castle, on the plea that the 
 royal demesnes were inalienable. We are not, however, informed that the 
 purchase-money was refunded to the bishop. 
 
 Towards the end of 1204, Sir Peter de Rupibus, or de Rochys, was 
 appointed bishop. He had been knighted for his military services under 
 Richard, and hence was generally thought, from his education and habits, 
 better qualified to command an army than to preside over a diocess. His 
 military and political talents were peculiarly serviceable to the Christian 
 warriors under the Emperor Frederic in the Holy Land, whither our 
 bishop repaired in 1226. By him King John was animated to withstand 
 the Pope’s excommunication, and he was afterwards created chief justice 
 of the kingdom. On the death of John, from whose vices and mismanage¬ 
 ment the nation derived greater and more lasting advantages than from the 
 virtues and good conduct of many other princes, and on the accession 
 of his son, Henry the Third, or Henry of Winchester, a child of nine years 
 of age, the administration of public affairs became almost entirely vested in 
 de Rupibus. He succeeded the Earl of Pembroke in the protectorate of the 
 kingdom ; and even after the young king came of age, his chief reliance for 
 counsel was on the bishop. By Matthew of Westminster, however, we 
 are told that, in 1234, Henry requiring an account of the royal treasures, 
 the Bishop of Winchester and the treasurer Peter de Rivallis, took refuge 
 at the altar, and concealed themselves for some time in the Cathedral. 
 All this notwithstanding, says Matthew of Paris, by his death in 1238, 
 the whole counsel of England, regal and ecclesiastical, sustained an 
 irreparable loss. This bishop’s munificence was not confined to the 
 religious establishments of England : the church of St. Thomas and the 
 fortifications of Joppa, now Jaffa, in Palestine, were greatly improved at 
 his expense. 
 
 The death of de Rupibus occasioned a violent contest between the king 
 and the monks of the Cathedral. Henry was bent on the election of his 
 
BISHOPS DE RALEY AND ETHELMAR. 
 
 115 
 
 queen’s uncle, William, chosen bishop of Valence, in France. The monks, 
 on the other hand, having received an unfavourable report of William, 
 persisted in refusing him, and chose William de Raley, or Radley, then 
 bishop of Norwich. “ When the king heard of their intent,” says Godwin, 
 “ he was exceeding angry, and made great havoek of the bishop’s tem¬ 
 poralities ; swearing he would have his will at last, or they should never have 
 a bishop.” Thinking therefore to satisfy the king, the monks next elected 
 his chancellor, Ralph Nevil, bishop of Chichester: but this election only 
 the more incensed Henry against them. This indecent contention lasted 
 for five years, although William of Valence, who had occasioned it, had 
 died within a year after it began. William de Raley withdrew to France, 
 where it became a saying, as Matthew of Westminster reports, that 
 “ Henry of England was a coward towards his enemies, and only brave 
 against his bishops.” Being at last reconciled with Henry, the bishop 
 returned to England, and in 1246 performed in his presence the dedi¬ 
 cation of the royal abbey of Beau-lieu (de bello loco) in the neighbouring 
 forest. 
 
 The See, vacated by the death of Raley in 1250, was filled by the election 
 of Ethelmar, or Audomar, the king’s half-brother by the marriage of the 
 queen-dowager with Hugh, Earl of March. Ethelmar had neither morals 
 nor learning, nor the requisite age, nor previous orders in the church, to 
 recommend him for the episcopate ; but the monks had suffered too severely 
 in the preceding contest, and were besides convinced that they should not be 
 supported by the Pope against the King; they therefore acquiesced in Henry’s 
 proposal. The presages of Ethelmar’s administration were not erroneous, for 
 he conducted himself with so much injustice and tyranny, that he, with his 
 brothers, whose oppressions were felt in other parts of the kingdom, was 
 driven into banishment. His consecration was deferred for several years; and 
 the monks proceeded, by a new election, to nominate the King’s Chancellor, 
 Henry de Wengham, who declined the charge. At last Ethelmar died at Paris 
 in 1260, on his way to England, having, as some say, succeeded in obtaining 
 consecration at Rome. 
 
 p 2 
 
116 
 
 WINCHESTER CATHEDRAL. 
 
 The vacant See now became a subject of contention, not between the monks 
 and the King, but among the monks themselves. The Pope, however, set 
 aside the contending candidates, and, by way of provision , as it was called, 
 consecrated John of Exon, or Oxon, or Gernsey , or Gerways , (for so va¬ 
 riously is the name written,) who had been Chancellor of York. Taking part 
 with the barons against the king, and being suspended by the legate, he 
 repaired to Rome, where he died in 1268 ; enjoying but a short time the 
 episcopacy, for which he is said to have paid into the court of Rome the vast 
 sum of twelve thousand marks, equal, in effective value, to one hundred thou¬ 
 sand pounds of our present money. 
 
 John dying in curia , or at the court of Rome, the appointment of a suc¬ 
 cessor fell, by the ancient canon law, to the Pope, who translated hither from 
 Worcester Nicholas of Ely, who rebuilt, and in 1268 dedicated the church 
 of the original Cistercian abbey of Waverley, near Farnham, previously 
 founded by Bishop Giffard. 
 
 “ About this time," says Godwin, “ the Pope began to take upon him the 
 bestowing of bishoprics for the most part every where. John de Pon- 
 tissara, or of Pountoise, in France, was placed by him, upon his absolute 
 authority. He was a great enemy of the monks of his church, whose living 
 he much diminished to increase his own.’’ The most important act of this 
 prelate was the establishment of the college of St. Elizabeth of Hungary, in 
 Winchester, and which was completed in 1301. “ The statutes of this 
 
 college,” says Dr. Milner, “ prove his zeal for the advancement of piety, 
 morality, learning, and clerical discipline; but they are such as would be 
 thought grievous and impracticable in the present day.” [Hist. Win. vol. i. 
 274, from Monast. Ang.] 
 
 On the death of John, in 1304, the See was filled by Henry Woodloke, 
 alias de Merewell, in whose time, in 1307, took place the suppression of 
 the celebrated order of the Knights Templars, who had property, and most 
 probably a preceptory, (as their houses were termed,) in Winchester. 
 
 The succeeding prelates were John de Sandale, Reginald de Asser, 
 John de Stratford, and Adam de Orleton, the latter of whom was 
 
BISHOPS ORLETON AND ED1NGTON. 
 
 117 
 
 translated from Worcester at the end of 1333. He had been one of the most 
 zealous agents of the barons in the first war against Edward the Second. His 
 trial on this account was the first instance in England of a bishop being 
 brought before the ordinary secular tribunal of the country, and this notwith¬ 
 standing the opposition of the other prelates. The common charge of his 
 being concerned in plotting the death of the unhappy Edward, seems, however, 
 rather doubtful ; particularly as Edward the Third, in his complaint to Rome 
 against Orleton, takes no notice of the charge. Whilst he presided at Win¬ 
 chester the monarch removed the woolstaplers from this city to Calais ; an 
 event that proved very injurious to our city. Milner calls him “ an artful and 
 unprincipled churchman.” 
 
 William of Edington, appointed to this See in 1345, was the first pre¬ 
 late of the Order of the Garter, which was instituted five years afterwards. In 
 his capacity of treasurer to the king, he is accused of lowering the intrinsic 
 value of the coin: but the principles on which such an operation of finance 
 must be founded seem to have been very imperfectly understood on both sides 
 of the question. His declining the nomination to the metropolitan throne of 
 Canterbury, is variously explained ; although he be reported to have observed, 
 that “ Canterbury was the higher rack, but that Winchester was the richer 
 manger.” Be this as it may, it appears from Walsingham, copied, though 
 not quoted, by Godwin, that Bishop Edington’s executors were sued by his 
 successor, Wykeham, for dilapidations to a great amount. The demands 
 made were for sixteen hundred and sixty-two pounds ten shillings in money, 
 fifteen hundred and fifty head of neat, three thousand eight hundred and 
 seventy-six wethers, four thousand seven hundred and seventy-seven ewes, 
 three thousand five hundred and twenty-one lambs, and one hundred and 
 twenty-seven swine; 3 all which stock, &c. it seems belonged, at that time, to 
 the bishopric of Winchester. 
 
 3 Dr. Lowth, who examined the original register, places this number of beasts at the head of 
 the list, and calls them draught-horses instead of swine. The bishop’s stock contained doubtless a 
 number of both. 
 
118 
 
 WINCHESTER CATHEDRAL. 
 
 Besides his liberalities to other religious establishments, it appears incon¬ 
 testably from his Will, executed in 1366, the year of his death, that Bishop 
 Edington actually began the great work of rebuilding the nave of his cathedral, 
 and that he allotted a considerable sum of money to carry it on after his death, 
 which happened in October. 4 
 
 Of the illustrious successor of Edington, William of Wykeham, some 
 notice has already been taken, in reviewing his great works in the Cathedral. 
 It would certainly constitute an interesting theme for biographical disqui¬ 
 sition to enter pretty fully into the memoirs of this eminent prelate, 
 architect, and founder: but this pleasure I must deny myself at present, 
 and refer to the ample life of him already written by Dr. Lowth. Intimately 
 connected as he was with this Cathedral and city, endeared as his memory 
 must be to thousands of persons now living, who have profited by his 
 liberal and laudable foundations ; he becomes an important and imposing 
 subject. His name is encircled with a halo of merits and virtues; and 
 nothing but praise has been poured forth to embalm his memory. It 
 should, however, be remembered, that panegyric is not history, and that a 
 perfect human being is a lusus natures. The man who, like Wykeham, 
 amasses an ample fortune, from high political offices, is suspected to want 
 both honesty and integrity : it is generally supposed that he aggrandizes him¬ 
 self at the expense of the country, and that he is influenced more by a lust 
 of power than by the amor patriae. But if, like Wykeham, he bequeaths the 
 whole of his wealth to promote public good and to benefit mankind, he will 
 secure the applause of posterity. Wykeham lived at an important era; 
 was fortunately advanced from poverty to affluence, and from his connec¬ 
 tion with, and power over the English monarch, was enabled to produce 
 very great effects on the country. His origin was obscure, and his only 
 school education appears to have been derived from the charitable patron- 
 
 4 “ In this year, 1366, on the 11th day of September, having made his will, Bishop Edingdon 
 directed that out of his estate and goods money should be expended for completing the nave of the 
 cathedral church of Winchester, which he had begun,” Cont. Hist. Wint. ex registro Langham, 
 cited by Milner. 
 
BISHOP WYKEHAM. 
 
 119 
 
 age of Uvedale, lord of the manor of Wickham, or Wykeham, a village in 
 Hampshire, the birth-place of our prelate. This gentleman was governor 
 of the castle of Winchester, and placed William at a school in that city; 
 from which he was advanced to be his secretary. At this time Edington 
 was bishop, who introduced Wykeham to Edward III. This splendid 
 monarch soon appreciated and employed the talents of Wykeham. He was 
 first made one of the king’s chaplains; and in 1356 was appointed clerk of 
 the king’s works in his manors of Hendle and Yestampsted. In the year 
 1359, he was also nominated surveyor of the works at Windsor, where he 
 appears to have continued engaged till 1373. By his letters patent he was 
 allowed one shilling per day, and two shillings when travelling on business, 
 with an allowance of three shillings a week for a clerk. Soon afterwards 
 he was paid an additional shilling a day. The latter end of the year 1359, 
 the architect’s powers were further enlarged, and he was appointed keeper 
 of the manors of Old and New Windsor. “The next year 360 workmen 
 were impressed to be employed on the buildings at the king’s wages, some 
 of whom having clandestinely left Windsor, and engaged in other employ¬ 
 ments for greater wages, writs were issued to prohibit all persons from 
 employing them, on pain of forfeiting all their goods and chattels ; and to 
 commit such of the workmen as should be apprehended to Newgate.” In 
 1362, writs were issued to the sheriffs of different counties to impress 302 
 masons and diggers of stone, for the same works, and in 1363, many glaziers 
 were impressed, and the works at Windsor were carried on till 1373. 5 
 Wykeham was also engaged in building another royal residence for his 
 monarch and master at Queenborough, in Kent. He was not, however, merely 
 an architect, but was a man of the world and a man of business, and as such 
 was frequently employed by Edward III. 
 
 To take holy orders seems always to have been his design; for in all the 
 patents, and even as early as in 1352, he is styled clericus (clerk), although 
 he had only received the tonsure, and was not ordained a priest until June 
 
 5 Lysons’s Berkshire,/). 419. 
 
120 
 
 WINCHESTER CATHEDRAL. 
 
 1362, nor even admitted to the low order of alcolyths until the December 
 preceding. His first ecclesiastical preferment was to the rectory of Pulham 
 in Norfolk, to which he received the royal presentation in the end of 1357. 
 Ecclesiastical benefices now flowed in upon him in such profusion, that, as 
 Dr. Milner observes, “ we should condemn any other clergyman, except 
 Wykeham, for accepting them; and we are only induced to excuse him, in 
 consequence of the proofs we have still remaining, that he only received the 
 revenues of the church with one hand to expend them in her service with 
 the other.’' The yearly value of his benefices amounted to no less a sum 
 than £873. 6s. 8 d. money of those days, equal to about £13,100 of present 
 money. So numerous were the offices he held in the church, that it required 
 no small ingenuity to combine them in such a manner that the possession of 
 one should not be incompatible with that of one or all of the others. The 
 advancement of Wykeham in the State kept pace with his preferment in 
 the church. In 1363 he was warden and justiciary of the king’s forests 
 south of Trent; in 1364, keeper of the privy seal, and two years afterwards 
 the king’s secretary. He is next styled chief of the privy council, and 
 governor of the great council. Froissart, his contemporary, says, “ there 
 was at that time a priest in England of the name of William of Wykeham : 
 this William was so high in the king’s grace, that nothing was done in any 
 respect whatever without his advice. The king, who loved Wykeham very 
 much, did whatever he desired ; and Sir 6 William Wykeham was made Bishop 
 of Winchester and Chancellor of England.” 7 
 
 While Edward retained the full possession of his faculties, Wykeham 
 continued to enjoy his confidence, but in the close of his reign the jea¬ 
 lousy and intrigues of John of Gaunt, Duke of Lancaster, Edward’s only 
 surviving son, suspected to entertain some views of ascending the throne in 
 the place of his young nephew, afterwards Richard the Second, succeeded 
 
 6 The prefix of Sir to the Christian name of a clergyman was usual at this time, and implied that 
 he was not graduated in the University; being in orders, but not in degrees; whilst others, entitled 
 masters, had commenced in the arts. 
 
 7 Chronicles of England, &c. vol. viii. p. 385, octavo, 1806. 
 
BISHOP WYKEHAM. 
 
 121 
 
 in undermining the credit of our eminent prelate. By specious pretences he 
 was removed from his office, his episcopal revenues were sequestrated, and 
 he himself forbidden to approach the court, or the capital. Previously, 
 however, to the death of Edward, in June 1377, the bishop had in some 
 measure the satisfaction to be restored to the King’s wonted favours ; and 
 early after the accession of Richard the Second, all difficulties respecting his 
 affairs were completely removed. Disengaged, as far as his station would 
 permit, from his usual attendance on public business, Wykeham prepared 
 the plans for his two celebrated Colleges, at Winchester and at Oxford. In 
 1373 he had opened a school at Winchester; and the society intended for 
 Oxford was formed several years before the collegiate buildings were com¬ 
 menced. But these were not the only measures by which his government was 
 distinguished ; for among many others, he sedulously exerted himself to restore 
 the hospital of St. Cross to its original charitable purpose. 
 
 To appreciate the character of Wykeham, we must divest ourselves 
 of many notions (prejudices indeed they may justly be termed), resulting 
 from the state of things in our days, compared with that exhibited 
 in England four centuries ago. Many acts and measures then considered 
 to be beneficial, judicious, and meritorious, may now be regarded in a very 
 different light. Of the value of the religious, scientific, and eleemosynary 
 institutions of former times, we cannot properly form an adequate estimate ; 
 we may, therefore, imagine that much of Wykeham’s munificence might 
 perhaps have been better employed. It must not, however, be forgotten, 
 that monastic institutions, (besides contributing their proportion to the 
 exigences of the state,) supported the whole body of the poor ; exercising 
 hospitality to all, furnishing schools for the gratuitous education of youth, 
 and hospitals for the reception of the sick and infirm. To the industry of the 
 monks, prior to the discovery of printing, we are indebted for multiplied copies 
 of the scriptures, and of the ancient classic and ecclesiastic writings; and also 
 for the histories and records of past times in general. It has been unfortunate 
 for Wykeham that he was, more on account of his place and influence than 
 from his personal character, peculiarly obnoxious to a person so powerful 
 as John of Gaunt ; but Edward held him in singular favour : for, as Godwin 
 observes, “ in the greatness of his authority the king found two notable 
 
 Q 
 
122 
 
 WINCHESTER CATHEDRAL. 
 
 commodities, one, that without his care all things were ordered so well as 
 by a wise and trusty servant they might; the other, that if any thing fell 
 out amiss, wheresoever the fault were, he had opportunity to cast all the 
 blame upon the Bishop of Winchester.” His Will, made fifteen months 
 before his death, extends to all orders and degrees of men, and answers 
 every demand of piety, gratitude, affection, and charity. Dying in Septem¬ 
 ber 1404, he was interred in the chantry he had erected in this Cathedral. 
 
 The successor of Wykeham was a prelate of a different description; 
 whose character, through the powerful representations of Shakspeare, 
 seems consigned to perpetual ignominy. 8 This was Henry Beaufort, son 
 of John of Gaunt, Duke of Lancaster, by his third wife, Catharine Swin- 
 ford. Educated abroad as well as at Oxford, he particularly applied 
 himself to the civil and canon law; studies indispensable for one who, for 
 various reasons, looked forward to a high station in the state as well as in 
 the church. Translated from the See of Lincoln to Winchester, and soon 
 afterwards distinguished by the hat of a cardinal, and involved in the vortex 
 of worldly politics, he at first allowed himself too little time to attend to 
 the spiritual concerns of his diocess. His conduct, however, in his latter 
 days, was very different. He lent to Henry the Fifth, whose treasury was 
 exhausted by his brilliant but destructive successes beyond sea, the pro¬ 
 digious sum of twenty thousand pounds, to ward off a suspected design of 
 appropriating the revenues of the church. Besides the money he expended 
 on his Cathedral, and on various other religious and charitable establishments, 
 he greatly enlarged the usefulness of the hospital of St. Cross, and erected 
 the principal part of the domestic buildings now existing. 
 
 Having filled the See of Winchester forty-three years, Beaufort gave 
 place to William of Waynflete, so named from his birth-place in Lin¬ 
 colnshire. To Wykeham’s colleges at Winchester and Oxford, he was 
 indebted for his education. Become master of the former, he was engaged 
 by Henry the Sixth to take the same charge of the new institution at Eton. 
 The revenues of Winchester enabling him to carry into effect the project 
 he had for some time contemplated, he commenced his noble institution of 
 
 R Our bard appears to be supported by the accounts of Hall, Holinshed, and other old English 
 Chroniclers. 
 
BISHOPS WAYNFLETE AND COURTENEY. 
 
 123 
 
 the College of St. Mary Magdalen, in Oxford. Attentive to whatever 
 could promote the views of his new establishment, Waynflete, preparatory 
 to a visit to it in 1481, sent thither a very large number of volumes; eight 
 hundred as some say, which had issued from presses already established 
 in England, as well as on the Continent, or works still in manuscript. Be¬ 
 sides the college at Oxford, Waynflete founded a free-school in his native 
 town, and was a benefactor to Eton College, and to his Cathedral of Win¬ 
 chester. Respecting the general character of Waynflete, his biographer, 
 Dr. Chandler, observes, that in the course of his researches, he had met 
 with no accusation of, or reflection on him. Humane and benevolent in 
 an uncommon degree, he appeared to have no enemies but from party, and 
 even those he disarmed of their malice. The prudence, fidelity, and inno¬ 
 cence which preserved him in the waves of inconstant fortune are justly the 
 subject of admiration. 
 
 Waynflete lived to behold the restoration of the house of Lancaster, in the 
 person of Henry the Seventh ; when dying in the year 1486, the king had 
 an opportunity of promoting to Winchester a prelate possessing his high 
 regard. This was Peter Courteney, of the family of that name established 
 in Devonshire; a prelate of respectable character, but still more distin¬ 
 guished by his descent from the house of Courteney in France, which sprung 
 from two kings of that country ; Robert, who died in 1031, and Lewis Le 
 Gros, or the Sixth, who reigned till 1137. Of this family one branch en¬ 
 gaged in the Crusades and became Counts of Edissa, in the east ; another, 
 established in France, furnished three Emperors to Constantinople, and 
 continued to be ranked among the Princes of the blood royal, until it was 
 resolved, in late times, to limit that distinction to the descendants of St. 
 Lewis, or the Ninth. The third branch passed into England in the beginning 
 of the reign of Henry the Second, and soon rose to rank and opulence by 
 inter-marrying, at different periods, with the royal family. 
 
 The next bishop of Winchester was Thomas Langton, removed hither 
 from Salisbury, a prelate described by Anthony Wood as a second Mecsenas, 
 on account of the protection he afforded to literature and learned men. 
 On the death of Morton, Archbishop of Canterbury, he was actually 
 
 Q 2 
 
124 
 
 WINCHESTER CATHEDRAL. 
 
 elected to succeed him, but a few days afterwards was carried off by the plague, 
 and was buried in the curious chapel already described. 
 
 His successor, Richard Fox, had long been the confidential friend and 
 minister of Henry the Seventh, who successfully employed his talents 
 in sundry negotiations with foreign princes. In recompense he was 
 appointed Bishop of Exeter, retaining still his other offices of privy seal 
 and secretary of state. From Exeter he passed first to Bath and Wells, 
 and thence to Durham, where he displayed his munificence and architec¬ 
 tural taste. But in order to have him nearer the court, Henry removed 
 him to Winchester, and even selected him to be sponsor at the baptism of 
 the young Prince, afterwards Henry the Eighth ; to whom he subsequently 
 acted as one of the leading counsellors, with equal zeal as when he served 
 his father. Of his retirement from court, in the young king’s time, various 
 causes are assigned. It was after this event that he planned the munificent 
 foundation of Corpus Christi College in Oxford. The original purpose of this 
 college was to provide monks for the service of his Cathedral ; but, dissuaded 
 from this purpose by a friend, who, notwithstanding the bishop’s long and 
 intimate acquaintance with the court, had penetrated deeper than himself 
 into Henry's schemes respecting monastic institutions, he founded the 
 college for the education of secular clergymen. He also provided it with 
 some of the most celebrated scholars of the age, among whom may be named 
 John Lewis Vives, and Reginald Pole, afterwards the celebrated cardinal. 
 Dying in 1528, the bishop was buried in the exquisite chantry he had erected 
 in his Cathedral. 
 
 On the death of Bishop Fox, the See of Winchester devolved to the 
 mighty cardinal, Thomas Wolsey, who had now engrossed the favour of 
 Henry the Eighth, and obtained some of the richest benefices of the 
 church. At first introduced to the tyrant by Fox, to counterbalance the 
 influence of the Earl of Surrey, afterwards Duke of Norfolk, he soon rose 
 superior to his opponent and to his patron himself. The history of Wolsey, 
 independently of the part he took in public affairs, is little more than a 
 list of promotions, following one another with a rapidity equally alarming 
 to the courtiers, and invidious in the eyes of the people. Of this distin- 
 
BISHOPS WOLSEY, GARDINER, AND POYNET. 
 
 125 
 
 guished prelate and politician, we are furnished with ample memoirs in a large 
 folio volume, by Fiddes; and recently in a new life of him, by Mr. Galt. In 
 my account of York Cathedral, I shall have occasion to make a few remarks 
 on his character. 
 
 From the death of Wolsey, Winchester was without a bishop for nearly four 
 years, when the vacancy was filled by Stephen Gardiner, who was brought 
 into notice by Wolsey, but who owed his preferment to his readiness to pro¬ 
 mote and justify every project of the king. Being appointed at the moment 
 when the dispute concerning the ecclesiastical supremacy of the crown was 
 at its utmost height, Gardiner joined the two metropolitans, and some other 
 prelates, in acknowledging Henry to be the supreme head of the church of 
 England. This measure was soon followed by the suppression of the re¬ 
 ligious houses throughout the kingdom, by which Winchester suffered greatly, 
 both in condition and outward appearance. Notwithstanding his submis¬ 
 sive conduct, during the life of Henry, and his taking out a new license 
 to govern his See on the accession of Edward the Sixth, Gardiner resisted 
 all further changes in religion until the young king should be of age, and 
 was therefore by the protector, Seymour, committed to the tower. At last 
 he was declared to be no longer prelate of Winchester, and Dr. John Poynet 
 was appointed in his place ; who was the first bishop consecrated according to 
 the new ordinal. On the accession of Mary to the throne, Gardiner was 
 reinstated to his See, and, Archbishop Cranmer being a prisoner on a charge 
 of high treason, he officiated at the Queen’s Coronation, and at her subsequent 
 nuptials with Philip of Spain. Of the conduct of Gardiner as a bishop and a 
 statesman, the accounts of writers are contradictory and irreconcileable. 
 Whilst the Catholic justifies and applauds him for courage, consistency, and 
 religious integrity, the Protestant represents and censures him for cruelty and 
 unmerciful tyranny. 
 
 Of Bishop Poynet, who, on the deprivation of Gardiner in the reign of 
 Edward the Sixth, was translated from Rochester to Winchester, little more is 
 known than that he was an early and a strenuous champion for the reformed 
 doctrines. He was also well skilled in various languages, ancient and modern, 
 well read in the fathers of the church, an able mathematician and a mechanist. 
 On the accession of Mary, he, with many other Protestants, withdrew to the 
 
126 
 
 WINCHESTER CATHEDRAL. 
 
 continent, not only on account of religion, but, as it is said, because he was 
 suspected of abetting the insurrectionary movements under Sir Thomas Wyatt. 
 He died at Strasburgh in 1556. 
 
 Bishop Gardiner was succeeded by Dr. John White, on the condition that 
 he should pay one thousand pounds annually to Cardinal Pole, who com¬ 
 plained that his See of Canterbury had been greatly impoverished in the time 
 of his predecessor, Cranmer. He pronounced the funeral discourse on Queen 
 Mary, whom he extolled with great ardour, while he spoke of her suc¬ 
 cessor, Elizabeth, with extreme coldness. Refusing to take the new oath 
 of supremacy, he was of course, in June 1559, declared to have forfeited 
 his bishopric. 
 
 The See of Winchester again remained vacant for some time, until the ap¬ 
 pointment of Bishop Robert Horne, a Protestant divine of great talents, 
 distinguished by his controversial writings, and by the voluntary exile he 
 underwent in the reign of Mary. While Bishop of Durham, he was noted, 
 according to Anthony Wood, as “ a man that could never abide any ancient 
 monument, acts, or deeds that gave any light of or to godly religion.” To 
 the injudicious zeal therefore of this prelate may be ascribed the havoc made 
 at that period in the Cathedral and in other edifices of Winchester. 
 
 The See was next successively occupied by Drs. John Watson and 
 Thomas Cooper, both of whom had studied and taken their degrees in 
 medicine. After the latter, Winchester possessed a second William Wick¬ 
 ham, who died in less than ten weeks after his translation from Lincoln. 
 The next Bishop, William Day, dying in the ninth month of his epis¬ 
 copate, was followed by Thomas BiLSON,a native of Winchester and a 
 Wykehamist, there and at Oxford, of whom Elizabeth had a very high 
 opinion. She appointed him of the privy council; and he employed his pen 
 in justification of her interference in the affairs of Scotland, France, and the 
 Low Countries, yet so as to furnish no pretext for resistance, in any case, 
 on the part of her own subjects against himself. “ It was written,” says 
 Collier, “ to put the best colour on the Dutch revolt.” Bishop Bilson con¬ 
 tinued in Winchester for several years after the accession of James the 
 First; but without supporting the character he attained under Elizabeth. 
 His successor, James Montague, so much esteemed by James as to be 
 
BISHOPS WATSON, COOPER, WICKHAM, DAY, ANDREWS, AND NEILE. 127 
 
 chosen the editor of his writings, sat only about eighteen months, and was ‘ 
 buried in the Abbey Church of Bath, which he had repaired at a great 
 expense. 
 
 By the death of Montague an opening was made for Lancelot Andrews, 
 who had been in succession, Bishop of Chichester and of Ely. The inscription 
 on his monument in the church of St. Mary Overy, in Southwark, notices with 
 peculiar emphasis the distinctions awaiting him in another world, on account 
 of the celibacy he had observed in this. 
 
 Dr. Richard Neile succeeded Andrews by his fifth translation, and 
 notwithstanding the course adopted by King James in favour of the rigid 
 Calvinists at the synod of Dort, afterwards united with him in embracing the 
 modified system of Arminius. So far did Neile push his animosity against the 
 Calvinists, whom he had deserted, as absolutely, while Bishop of Lichfield 
 and Coventry, to consign one of them to the stake. He perfectly agreed with 
 Archbishop Laud in forwarding King Charles’s views of restoring to divine 
 service, and to the churches themselves, some portion at least of their former 
 splendour and majesty; but being again removed to York, the execution of 
 the scheme was left to his successor in Winchester, Walter Curle, who 
 made many alterations in his Cathedral. 
 
 On the restoration of Charles the Second, Winchester recovered its bishop, 
 after an interval of ten years from the death of Curie, in the person of 
 Brian Duppa, who had been the king’s tutor. It was not, however, until 
 nearly two years afterwards that the church of England and its services were 
 properly re-established ; an event which the bishop did not live to witness. 
 By his death the See came to George Morley, Bishop of Worcester, 
 
 “ a man,” says Wood, “ of tried loyalty, and no temporiser, who had 
 learned to shift his principles to be ready for any turn of affairs that 
 might happen, and always to stand fair for promotion.” He built the epis¬ 
 copal palace at Winton, in place of the ruined castle of Wolvesey, also 
 repaired the castle of Farnham, and purchased Chelsea-house as a London 
 residence for the bishops of Winchester. 
 
 Dr. Peter Mews, the succeessor of Morley, had served in the royal 
 army during the rebellion, and, retiring into Holland on the king’s death, 
 returned with Charles the Second, who advanced him to the See of Bath 
 
128 
 
 WINCHESTER CATHEDRAL. 
 
 and Wells, and afterwards to Winchester. He signalized himself at the 
 battle of Sedgemoor, where he commanded the artillery : nor was he less 
 valued for his integrity and hospitality than for his loyalty and prowess. 
 
 The succeeding prelate, Sir Jonathan Trelawney, had been raised to 
 the See of Bristol by James the Second; but in 1688, opposing the king’s 
 declaration of liberty of conscience, he was, with his metropolitan and five 
 other prelates, 9 committed to the Tower; from which, however, they were, 
 by the sentence of a jury, soon after liberated. Joining heartily in the 
 revolution, he was, by William and Mary, made Bishop of Exeter, and in 
 1706 was promoted to Winchester. 
 
 ?. The successors of Bishop Trelawney were Drs. Charles Trimnell and 
 Richard Willis, the former translated from Norwich, the latter from 
 Salisbury. In room of the latter was appointed Dr. Benjamin Hoadly, 
 who had previously occupied the Sees of Bang'or, Hereford, and Salisbury. 
 This prelate will long be remembered in the church of England from en¬ 
 gaging warmly in the celebrated Bangorian controversy. In consequence 
 of the notions maintained by Bishop Hoadly, the government, it is be¬ 
 lieved, resolved to dissolve the convocation of the clergy; and since that 
 time, although regularly assembled on the opening of a new parliament, it 
 has never transacted any business. 
 
 On the death of Bishop Hoadly, Dr. John Thomas, who had been pre¬ 
 ceptor to George III. was translated from Salisbury to Winchester, and, 
 dying in 1781, was succeeded by the Hon. Brownlow North, then 
 Bishop of Worcester, and brother of the late Lord North, afterwards Earl 
 of Guilford. 
 
 9 These were, Sandcroft, Archbishop of Canterbury; Kenn, Bishop of Bath and Wells ; Turner, 
 of Ely; White, of Peterborough; Lloyd, of Norwich; and Frampton, of Gloucester. 
 
No. 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 4 
 
 5 
 
 6 
 
 7 
 
 8 
 
 9 
 
 10 
 
 11 
 
 12 
 
 13 
 
 14 
 
 15 
 
 16 
 
 17 
 
 18 
 
 19 
 
 20 
 
 21 
 
 22 
 
 23 
 
 24 
 
 A CHRONOLOGICAL LIST OF THE BISHOPS OF WINCHESTER, 
 
 WITH 
 
 THE CONTEMPORARY KINGS OF ENGLAND AND POPES. 
 
 BISHOPS. 
 
 DORCHESTER. 
 
 Birinus . 
 
 Agilbert. 
 
 WINCHESTER. 
 
 Wina 
 
 Eleutherius 
 Hedda. 
 
 SEE DIVIDED. 
 
 Daniel. See again divided. 
 
 Hundred. 
 
 Kinebard .. 
 
 Athelard. 
 
 Egbald . 
 
 Dudda . 
 
 Kinebert . 
 
 Almund . 
 
 Wighten. 
 
 Herefrith . 
 
 Edmund. 
 
 Helmstan .. 
 
 St. Swithun ..... 
 Alfrith, or Adferth 
 Dunbert. 
 
 Denewulf, or Denulf 
 
 Athelm . 
 
 Bertulf .. 
 
 Frithstan . 
 
 Brinstan. 
 
 Elphege, the Bald. 
 Alfin, or Elsin ... 
 
 Consecrated or Installed. 
 
 Died or Translated. 
 
 Buried at 
 
 ANGLO-SAXON DYNASTY. 
 
 From 
 
 635 
 
 650 
 
 660 
 
 670 
 
 676 
 
 706 
 
 745 
 
 755 
 
 780 
 
 793 
 
 795 
 
 797 
 
 808 
 
 814 
 
 827 
 
 834 
 
 835 
 83S 
 863 
 871 
 879 
 887 
 892 
 
 905 
 
 931 
 
 934 
 
 951 
 
 To . 
 
 . 650 
 
 See divided.660 
 
 S Expelled.666 
 
 l Died .675 
 
 .674 
 
 .July 7, 705 
 
 { Resigned.744 
 
 l Died . 745 
 
 . 754 
 
 . 780 
 
 Canterbury.793 
 
 .795 
 
 . 797 
 
 .834 
 
 . 837 
 
 . 862 
 
 Canterbury.871 
 
 . 879 
 
 . 899 
 
 i Resigned .... 931 ^ 
 
 £ Died . 932 $ 
 
 . 934 
 
 .. . 951 
 
 Canterbury.958 
 
 Dorchester 
 
 Winchester 
 
 Winchester 
 
 Winchester 
 
 Winchester. 
 Winchester. 
 Winchester. 
 Winchester. 
 Winchester. 
 Winchester. 
 Winchester. 
 Winchester. 
 Winchester. 
 Canterbury. 
 
 Kenewalsh. 
 
 Kenewalsh. 
 Ina. 
 
 Winchester 
 
 Winchester 
 
 Winchester 
 
 Kings. 
 
 WEST SAXONS. 
 
 ( Kinegils .., 
 l Kenewalsh, 
 Kenewalsh.., 
 
 Athelard 
 
 Cuthred ... 
 
 Cuthred ... 
 
 Sigebert ... 
 
 Kenewulph 
 
 Kenewulph 
 
 Kenewulph 
 
 Kenewulph 
 
 Egbert. 
 
 Egbert. 
 
 Egbert. 
 
 Egbert. 
 
 Egbert. 
 
 Ethelred... 
 
 Alfred. 
 
 Alfred. 
 
 Alfred. 
 
 Alfred. 
 
 Edward ... 
 
 Athelstan . 
 Edmund ... 
 Edgar. 
 
 Popes. 
 
 Honorius I. 
 St. Martin I. 
 
 Vitalian. 
 
 Adeodatus. 
 
 Domnus. 
 
 John VII. 
 
 St. Zachary. 
 Stephen III. 
 Adrian. 
 Adrian. 
 
 Leo III. 
 
 Leo III. 
 
 Leo III. 
 Stephen V. 
 Valentine. 
 Gregory IV. 
 Gregory IV. 
 Gregory IV. 
 Nicholas I. 
 Adrian II. 
 John VIII. 
 Stephen VI. 
 Formosus. 
 
 Sergius III. 
 
 John XI. 
 John XI. 
 Agapetus II. 
 
 R 
 
No. 
 
 26 
 
 27 
 
 28 
 
 29 
 
 30 
 
 31 
 
 32 
 
 33 
 
 34 
 
 35 
 
 36 
 
 37 
 
 38 
 
 39 
 
 40 
 
 41 
 
 42 
 
 43 
 
 44 
 
 45 
 
 46 
 
 47 
 
 48 
 
 49 
 
 50 
 
 51 
 
 52 
 
 53 
 
 54 
 
 55 
 
 56 
 
 A CHRONOLOGICAL LIST OF BISHOPS, ETC 
 
 Consecrated or Installed. 
 
 From 
 
 . 958 
 . 963 
 . 984 
 .1006 
 .1008 
 .1015 
 
 .1038 
 
 Died or Translated. 
 
 To 
 
 Elmham.1047 
 
 .963 
 
 . Aug. 1, 984 
 
 Canterbury.1006 
 
 .1008 
 
 .1015 
 
 Canterbury.1038 
 
 .1047 
 
 Canter’ cum 
 Died . 
 
 .1052 
 
 .1069 
 
 Buried at 
 
 Winchester. 
 
 Canterbury. 
 
 Winchester. 
 
 Winchester. 
 
 .1070 
 
 Appointed ....1100) 
 Consecrated ..1107 $ 
 
 ..Nov. 17, 1129 
 
 NORMAN DYNASTY. 
 
 . Jan. 3, 1097-8 
 
 . Jan.25,1128 9 
 
 .Aug. 6, 1171 
 
 Winchester. 
 
 Winchester. 
 
 SAXON LINE RESTORED. 
 
 .. Oct. 6, 1174 
 
 .Nov. 1, 1189 
 
 .Sept. 25, 1205 
 
 Norwich.1243 
 
 Elected .1250 } 
 
 Never Consecrated \ 
 .1261 
 
 .May 27, 1268 
 
 .June, 1282 
 
 .May 30, 1305 
 
 Elected... .Aug. 5, 1316 
 
 .Nov. 16, 1320 
 
 .June 26, 1323 
 
 VYorcester, Dec. 1, 1333 
 .1345 
 
 ..1189 
 
 : nee” : \ ,2m 
 ... June 9, 1238 
 .Sept. 1250 
 
 .1261 
 
 . Jan 20, 1267-8 
 
 .Feb. 12,1279-80 
 
 ... Dec 4, 1304 
 
 .. .June 29,1316 
 
 Nov. 1319 
 
 .Apr. 12,1323 
 
 Canterbury, Nov. 3, 1333 
 
 .July 18, 1345 
 
 . Oct. 7,1366 
 
 Winchester. 
 
 Winchester. 
 
 Winchester. 
 
 Turon . 
 
 < Paris : Heart in ) 
 l Winchester.... \ 
 Viterbium, Italy .... 
 S Waverley: Heart) 
 l in Winchester.. $ 
 Winchester. 
 
 Winchester. 
 
 $ St. Saviour’s, ^ 
 \ Southwark.... $ 
 Avignon. 
 
 LANCASTRIAN LINE. 
 
 .1367 
 
 Lincoln,Marchl4,1405-6 
 
 Sept. 27,1404 
 April 11, 1447 
 
 Winchester. 
 
 Winchester. 
 
 YORK LINE. 
 
 .July 30, 1447|.Aug. 1486|Winchester. 
 
 UNION OF YORK AND LANCASTRIAN FAMILIES. 
 
 Exeter.. Jan. 29, 1486-7 
 
 Sarum.June, 1490 
 
 Durham.. Oct. 17, 1509 
 With York, Apr. 11, 1529 
 
 Sept. 22, 1492 
 .Jan.27,1500 
 .Sept. 14,1528 
 .Nov. 29, 1530 
 
 Winchester. 
 Winchester. 
 Winchester. 
 Leicester... 
 
 Kings. 
 
 Edward Mart. 
 Ethelred II. . 
 Ethelred II. . 
 Ethelred II. . 
 
 Canute . 
 
 < Harold I. ) 
 
 l Hardicanute .. $ 
 { Edward Conf. ) 
 * Harold II. ] 
 
 William I. II. 
 Henry I. 
 
 t Henry I. 
 
 I Step. Hen. II. 
 
 Henry II. 
 
 Richard I., John .. 
 
 John, Henry III. .. 
 Henry III. 
 
 Henry III. 
 
 Henry III. 
 
 Henry III. Edw. I. 
 
 Edward I. 
 
 Edward I. II. 
 
 Edward II. . 
 
 Edward II. 
 
 Edward II. III. .. 
 
 Edward III. 
 
 Edward III. 
 
 $ Edw. III. Rich. ) 
 l II. Hen. IV. .. $ 
 Henry IV. V. VI... 
 
 Henry VI. Ed. 
 IV. V. Ric. III. 
 
 Henry VII. ... 
 Henrv VII. ... 
 Henry VII. VIII 
 Henry VIII. ... 
 
 Popes. 
 
 John XII. 
 Benedict V. 
 John XIV. 
 John XVIII. 
 Sergius IV. 
 Benedict VIII. 
 
 Benedict IX. 
 Damasus II. 
 
 Alexander II. 
 Paschal II. 
 
 Innocent II. 
 
 Alexander IN. 
 
 Clement III. 
 
 Innocent III. 
 Innocent IV. 
 
 Innocent IV. 
 
 Urban IV. 
 
 Gregory X. 
 
 Martin IV. 
 
 Boniface VIII. 
 
 John XXII. 
 
 John XXII. 
 John XXII. 
 Benedict XII. 
 Clement VI. 
 
 Urban V. 
 Gregory XII. 
 
 Nicholas V. 
 
 Innocent VIII. 
 Alexander VI. 
 Alexander VI. 
 Clement VII. 
 
No. 
 
 58 
 
 59 
 
 60 
 
 61 
 
 62 
 
 63 
 
 64 
 
 65 
 
 66 
 
 67 
 
 68 
 
 69 
 
 A CHRONOLOGICAL LIST OF BISHOPS, ETC 
 
 131 
 
 Consecrated or Installed. 
 
 From 
 
 Died or Translated. 
 
 To 
 
 Buried at 
 
 Dec. 5, 1531 
 
 Rochester,Mar.23,1551-2 
 Lincoln.. May 31, 1557 
 Feb. 16, 1560-1 
 Sept. 18,1580 
 
 Lincoln . Mar. 23, 1583-4 
 
 Lincoln.. Feb. 22, 1594-5 
 
 .Jan. 25, 1595-6 
 
 Worcester, May 13, 1597 
 
 REFORMATION. 
 
 C Deprived .... 1550 A 
 
 < Restored.1553 > 
 
 t Died..Nov. 12,1555 } 
 
 . April 11, 1556 
 
 Deprived ..1560 
 
 .June 1, 1580 
 
 .Jan. 23, 1583-4 
 
 . April 29, 1594 
 
 . June 12, 1595 
 
 . Sept. 20, 1596 
 
 .June 18,1616 
 
 Winchester. 
 Strasbourg . 
 
 Winchester... 
 
 Winchester. 
 
 Winchester. 
 
 S St. Saviour’s, ^ 
 l Southwark.. $ 
 
 Westminster 
 
 UNION OF ENGLISH AND SCOTCH CROWNS. 
 
 Bath & Wells,Oct.4,16l6 
 
 Ely.... Feb. 25, 1618-9 
 
 Durham..Feb. 7, 1627-8 
 t Bath and Wells, ) 
 I Nov. 16, 1632 5 
 
 Sarum.... Oct. 4, 1660 
 Worcester, May 14, 1662 
 
 Bath and Wells, > 
 Nov. 22, 1684 $ 
 
 Exeter .. June 21, 1707 
 Norwich. .Aug. 19, 1721 
 Sarum....Sept. 21, 1723 
 Sarum.... Sept. 26,1734 
 
 Sarum.1761 
 
 Worcester. 1781 
 
 .July 20, 
 
 . Sept. 21, 
 
 York.Oct. 
 
 March 26, 
 ..Oct. 29, 
 
 . Nov. 9, 
 July 19, 
 ... Aug. 
 
 1618 
 
 1626 
 
 1632 
 
 .1647 
 
 1662 
 
 1684 
 
 1706 
 
 1721 
 
 1723 
 
 1734 
 
 1761 
 
 1781 
 
 Bath . 
 
 f St. Saviour’s, ) 
 £ Southwark . $ 
 York . 
 
 Subberton, Hants.. 
 
 Westminster. 
 
 Winchester.... 
 
 Winchester. 
 
 In Cornwall 
 Winchester.. 
 Winchester.. 
 Winchester.. 
 Winchester.. 
 
 Kings. 
 
 ( Henry VIII. ) 
 * Edw. VI. ] 
 
 Edward VI. Mary 
 
 Mary . 
 
 Elizabeth . 
 
 Elizabeth . 
 
 Elizabeth . 
 
 Elizabeth . 
 
 Elizabeth . 
 
 Eliz. James I. 
 
 James I. 
 
 James I. Charles I 
 
 Charles I. 
 
 Charles I. 
 
 Charles II. 
 
 Charles II. 
 
 f James II. 
 
 Will. Mary 
 
 Anne . j 
 
 Anne, George I. 
 George I. 
 
 George I. II. 
 
 George II. 
 
 George III. ...... 
 
 George III. 
 
 Popes. 
 
 Clement VII. 
 
CHRONOLOGICAL LIST OF PRIORS AND DEANS OF WINCHESTER 
 
 No. 
 
 PRIORS. 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 4 
 
 5 
 
 6 
 
 7 
 
 8 
 9 
 
 10 
 
 11 
 
 12 
 
 13 
 
 14 
 
 15 
 
 16 
 
 17 
 
 18 
 
 19 
 
 20 
 21 
 22 
 
 23 
 
 24 
 
 Devotus, or Denotus.... 
 
 Brithnoth 1 .. • 
 
 Brithwold, or Ethelwold 
 Elfric, or Alfric. 
 
 2d Cent. Abbot 
 or Prior .. 
 
 .963 
 
 . 970 
 
 .1006 
 
 Wulfsig 2 . 
 
 Simon, or Simeon. 
 
 Godfrey . 
 
 Geffry, or Geoffry I.... 
 
 Geffry II. 
 
 Eustace, or Eustachius. 
 
 Hugh . 
 
 Geffry III. 
 
 Ingulphus . 
 
 Robert I. 
 
 Robert II. 3 . 
 
 Walter . 
 
 John . 
 
 Robert III. surnamed 
 
 Fitzhenry . 
 
 Roger . 
 
 Walter II. 
 
 Andrew. 
 
 Walter III. 4 . 
 
 John de Cauz, or Chauce. 
 
 William Tanton. 
 
 Appointed. 
 
 Died or removed. 
 
 ,1065 
 
 .1080 
 
 .1107 
 
 .1111 
 
 .1114 
 
 .1120 
 
 .1126 
 
 .1130 
 
 .1171 
 
 Ely.970 
 
 Bishop .1006 
 
 Archbishop of York 1023 
 
 . Died 1065 
 
 Ely.1080 
 
 .. Died 1107 
 
 .Deposed 1111 
 
 Abbot of Burton ..1114 
 . Died 1120 
 
 .1126 
 
 Abbot of Abingdon 1130 
 $ Bishop of Bath and 
 £ Wells ....1135 or 6 
 Abb. of Glastonbury 1171 
 Do.Westminsterll75 or 6 
 . Died 1187 
 
 .1187 
 
 .1214 
 
 .1239 
 
 .1247 
 
 .1249 
 
 Abbot of Burton.. 1214 
 
 Died 1239 
 
 . Resigned 1247 
 
 S Abbot of Peterbo- 
 
 i rough .1249 
 
 i Abbot of Middle- 
 l ton, Dorset, ..1256 
 
 No. 
 
 25 
 
 26 
 
 27 
 
 28 
 
 29 
 
 30 
 
 31 
 
 32 
 
 33 
 
 34 
 
 35 
 
 36 
 
 37 
 
 38 
 
 39 
 
 40 
 
 41 
 
 42 
 
 43 
 
 44 
 
 45 
 
 46 
 
 47 
 
 48 
 
 PRIORS. 
 
 Andrew of London 
 Ralph Russel. 
 
 Valentin. 
 
 John de Dureville. 
 
 Adam de Farnham .... 
 William II. de Basynge 
 William III.de Basynge 
 Henry Woodelock, or 
 
 Merewell. 
 
 Nicholas de Tarente.... 
 Richard de Enford .... 
 Alexander Heriard .... 
 John III., or de Merlow 
 William IV. Thudden .. 
 Hugh II., or de Basyng 
 Robert IV., or de Rudborne 
 Thomas Nevil, or Nevyle 
 Thomas Shyrebourne .. 
 
 William Aulton. 
 
 Richard Marl burg. 
 
 Robert Westgate 
 Thomas III., or Hunton . 
 Thomas IV., or Silkested. 
 Henry Brook. 
 
 William V. de Basynge, 
 or Kingsmill. 
 
 Appointed. 
 
 .1256 
 
 .1265 
 
 .1276 
 
 .1278 or 9 
 
 .1284 
 
 .1284 
 
 .1295 
 
 .1305 
 
 .1309 
 
 .1349 
 
 .1361 
 
 .1361 
 
 .1384 
 
 .1394 
 
 .1450 
 
 .1457 
 
 .1470 
 
 .1498 
 
 .1524 
 
 Died or removed. 
 
 .. Deposed 1261 or 2 
 
 .Died 1265 
 
 I Resigned 1267,Re- 
 
 £ stored.1276 
 
 .Died Dec. 1278 
 
 . Died 1284 
 
 . Resigned 1284 
 
 . Died 1295 
 
 . Bishop 1305 
 
 ... Died 1309 
 
 Died 1349 
 
 .1361 
 
 Laid aside 
 Died 1384 
 Died 1394 
 
 Died 1450 
 Died 1457 
 
 .1470 
 
 .1498 
 
 Died 1524 
 
 C Gave up his Mo- 
 ? . nastery to King 
 L Henry VIII. . .1539 
 
 DISSOLUTION OF PRIORY—ESTABLISHMENT OF DEANERY. 
 
 No. 
 
 DEANS. 
 
 Appointed. 
 
 Died or removed. 
 
 No. 
 
 DEANS. 
 
 Appointed. 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 
 March 28, 1540 
 
 _Oct. 9,1549 
 
 
 12 
 
 Alexander Hyde, LL. D. n 
 William Clark, D.D. 
 
 ..Aug. 8, 1660 
 ..Feb. 11, 1665 
 
 Sir John Mason, Kt. M.D. } 
 
 
 13 
 
 3 
 
 Layman 6 .$ 
 
 Edmund Steward, LL. D. 
 
 March 22, 1553 
 
 
 14 
 
 15 
 
 Richard Meggot, D. D. .. 
 John Wickart, D. D. 
 
 _Oct. 9, 1679 
 
 ..Jan.14, 1692 
 ..Feb. 16 1721 
 
 4 
 
 John Warner, M. D. 
 
 . .Oct. 15' 1559 
 
 ... .Died March 21,1564 
 
 16 
 
 W illiam Trimnell, D.D... 
 
 5 
 
 Franr.is Newton } D.D. 7 .. 
 
 March 21, 1565 
 
 . Died 1572 
 
 17 
 
 Charles Naylor, LL. D. .. 
 Zachary Pearce, D.D. .. 
 Thomas Cheney, D. D. .. 
 Jonathan Shipley, D. D. .. 
 
 .. ..May7,1729 
 .. Aug. 4, 1739 
 March 25, 1748 
 
 6 
 
 7 
 
 John Wat.snn ? M. D. 
 
 . .Feb. 14, 1572 
 
 
 18 
 
 Lawrence Humphrey, D.D. 
 Martin Heton, D. D. 8 .... 
 
 ..Oct. 24,' 1580 
 March 20, 1588 
 
 . Feb. 1. 1589 
 
 19 
 
 20 
 
 8 
 
 Bishop of Ely,Feb.3,1599 
 $ Bishop of Lich. 
 
 ( and Cov.Dec.3,1609 
 Bishop of Chester. .1616 
 
 George Abbot, D. D. 9 .... 
 
 . .March 6,1599 
 
 21 
 
 Newton Ogle, D. D. 
 
 ^.Oct. 21, 1769 
 
 9 
 
 22 
 
 Robert Holmes 12 . 
 
 
 10 
 
 Thomas Morton, D. D.. 
 
 
 23 
 
 Thomas Rennel, D. D. 13 .. 
 
 ..Dec. 9, 1805 
 
 11 
 
 John Young, D. D. 10 . 
 
 .. July 8,' 1616 
 
 Died or removed. 
 
 Bish. of Sal. Dec. 3, 1665 
 
 . Died 1679 
 
 . Died 1692 
 
 . Died 1721 
 
 .Died 1729 
 
 .... Died June 28, 1739 
 Bishop of Bangor 1748 
 ... .Died Dec. 27, 1768 
 Bishop of Landaffl769 
 
 . Died 1804 
 
 . Died 1805 
 
 1 See a particular account of him in Bentham’s History, 
 &c. of Ely. 
 
 2 It is supposed there were one or two Priors between him 
 and Elfric, whose names are lost. 
 
 3 Rudborne, Hist. Maj. 
 
 4 Milner says he was deposed by bishop William de Raley'. 
 Hist. Winchester, 126. 
 
 5 Surrendered Nov. 15, 1539, was installed, according to 
 charter, May 22, 1544, and henceforth called William Kings¬ 
 mill, D.D. 
 
 6 He was bred a layman. 
 
 7 Storer’s list says 1570. 
 
 8 See Bentham’s History of Ely. 
 
 9 Afterwards promoted toLondon and thence toCanteibury. 
 
 10 Afterwards promoted to Lichfield and Coventry, and 
 thence to Durham. 
 
 11 See History, &e. of Salisbury Cathedral. 
 
 12 Gents. Mag. 1805, Part ii. p. 1086. 
 
 13 This list furnished by the present learned Dean, who is 
 also Master of the Temple in London. 
 
LIST OF BOOKS, ESSAYS, AND PRINTS, 
 
 WHICH HAVE BEEN PUBLISHED RELATING TO 
 
 WINCHESTER CATHEDRAL; 
 
 ALSO, A LIST OF ENGRAVED PORTRAITS OF ITS BISHOPS. 
 
 THIS LIST IS SUBJOINED TO GRATIFY THE BIBLIOGRAPHER, THE CRITICAL ANTIQUARY, AND 
 THE ILLUSTRATOR; AS WELL AS TO SHEW, ATONE VIEW, THE SOURCES WHENCE THE 
 CONTENTS OF THE PRECEDING PAGES HAVE BEEN DERIVED, AND THE FULL TITLES OF THE 
 WORKS REFERRED TO IN THE NOTES. 
 
 DIOCESS, SEE, AND CHURCH, &c. 
 
 Before we can write a new book, with any pretensions to novelty, it is necessary to ascertain the 
 contents and character of all preceding publications on the same subject. On many occasions 
 indeed this is not a very easy or pleasant task : some are rare, some are dogmatical, some are 
 confused and contradictory, some are replete with recondite and abstruse learning, others with fancy, 
 and few or none can be safely relied on for fidelity, and discrimination. Thus the cautious and 
 sceptical writer is compelled to labour through an intricate and thankless labyrinth; and required 
 to analyze, collate, and scrutinize the improbable and contradictory statements that come before 
 him. On no former occasion have I felt this exemplified more forcibly than in respect to the 
 Cathedral now under consideration. The early writers were credulous, and partial, whilst some of 
 those of modern date have come to the task with strong prejudices and predilections ; and from 
 neither of these are we likely to obtain the whole truth. What was formerly written as the history 
 of the church, is only the exaggerated and wondrous account of saints and their miracles, super¬ 
 natural agency, martyrs, and visions. From such romances it is not easy to extract much authentic 
 history, or probable narration. Most of the oldest chroniclers were bred up and naturalised in 
 monasteries. Hence every thing they relate, as matters of dispute between the clergy and laity, is 
 given with partiality. The first account we find of Winchester Church, is from the pen of Thomas 
 Rudborne, a monk of the said church, who is said to have lived in the fifteenth century. He 
 appears to have written a “ History of the Foundation and Succession of the Church of Winches¬ 
 ter also “ Annals ” of the same, from A.D. 633 to 1277. From the latter date to the Reforma¬ 
 tion, the succession of Bishops was furnished by another person. These memoirs were given to the 
 public by Mr. Wharton, in “ Anglia Sacra,” vol. i. in which are the following papers: “ A Letter 
 from the Monks of Winchester, to Pope Alexander II. imploring a restitution of the privileges of 
 which they had been deprived; with the Pope’s answer, granting their request.”—“ Lantfred’s 
 Prologue to the History of the Miracles of St. Swithun,” and “ The Succession of the Priors of 
 the said Church .” “ It is unnecessary to observe,” writes Dr. Milner, and very truly, “ to persons 
 
 who are accustomed to the perusal of Monkish Chronicles, that the above-mentioned works can only 
 serve as memoirs for a history, not as histories themselves of the times to which they relate, being 
 upon the whole, vague, jejune, and unconnected, redundant in many particulars, and deficient in 
 others.” 
 
 The “ Concilia Magnce Britanniee” of Wilkins, folio, 1737, contains the following documents re¬ 
 lating toWinchester Cathedral, &c.:—Vol. I. p. 224. Charter of King Edgar to the Monks of the New 
 Monastery, A. 667. Spelman: —p. 240. Laws of the Monastery, given by Edgar, A. 666. ib.— 
 p. 418. Pope Innocent’s Letter to Bishop Henry, Legate and Brother to King Stephen, empowering 
 him to hear the complaints of the Monks of Westminster, 1138 : —p. 420, 421. Councils held 
 before the said Bishop. Malmes.—Vol. II. p. 62. Acts against the Confirmation of the Bishop elect. 
 Ex. reg. Peckham: Archbishop’s Letter thereon. A. 1281:—ib. p.88. Archbishop’s proceeding against 
 the Bishop [Pontisara]. A. 1282.—ib. p. 16, 275, 6. Letters from the Archbishop, on his privilege in 
 the election of a Bishop. A. 1303. Ex. reg. Winchelsey, fo. 339, 40:—p. 293. Synodal Constitutions 
 by Bishop Henry Woodloke. A. 1308. Ex. MS. Cotton. Otho. A. 15, fol. 141. a.:—p. 454, Edward 
 
134 
 
 WINCHESTER CATHEDRAL:—LIST OF BOOKS, ESSAYS, &C. 
 
 II’s Letter to Bishop Henry on Tithes : Answer to the King’s Letter. A. 1315. Ex. reg. Woodcock. 
 Winton. Vol. III. p. 26. Archbishop’s Mandate to the Bishop to raise a Subsidy. A. 1352. Ex. 
 reg. Islip. 59:—p. 89, Bishop Wykeham’s Mandate, ditto. A. 1370. Ex. reg. Wynton. Wykeham. 
 3, 44:—p. 708, Bishop Fox’s Letter to Cardinal Wolsey, on the Reformation of the Clergy of 
 England. A. 1527. Ex. Autog. in MS. Cott. Faust, c. vii.—p. 752, Bishop Gardiner’s Letter to the 
 King - , on his Opinion as to Doctrine. A. 1532. Ex. regis. convoc.—p. 780, The same Bishop’s Oath 
 to the King, 1534. Fox’s Martyrs, ii. 337. 
 
 The new edition of Dugdale’s “ Monaslicon Anglicanum, ,” contains notices respecting the See, 
 and Church, from Stevens and Gale;—Short accounts of the Bishops, from Milner, Rudborne, 
 Godwin, &c. up to the time of Bishop Gardiner; also a list of forty-seven Priors; “ An Inven¬ 
 tory of the Cathedral Church,” as furnished to Cromwell, temp. Henry VIII. from Strype’s “ Me¬ 
 morials of Cranmer;” An Account of the Sale of Church Lands, belonging to this See, during the 
 time of the Civil Wars, Sept. 27, 1646. This work also embraces copies of the following documents :— 
 “ No. I. Ex Annalibus Wintoniensis ecclesice: MS. in Bibliotheca Cottoniana sub effigie Domitiani, 
 
 A. 13.” These annals extend only to 1079, when Bishop Walkelyn re-edified the church from its 
 foundation.—“ No. II. Autographum penes Decanum et capiiulum IVintonice, 1640,” being a 
 charter from King Edward, to guarantee the possessions of the church. Dated A.D. 908.—“ No. 
 IV. Ex vetusto exemplari penes Thomam dominion Brudwell. An. 1652.” A similar grant to the 
 former, dated 975.—“ No. V. Sanctus Edelwoldus factus est episcopus abEdgaro rege. Ex his- 
 toria de primis fundatoribus Abandoniensis Cenobii in Biblotheca Cottoniana, sub effigie Claudii, 
 
 B. vi. fol. 85. a.” An account of the translation of Ethelwold, from the abbacy of Abingdon, to the 
 See of Winton, with the appointment of Osgar to the former,, in 963.—“ No. VI. Fundatores prin¬ 
 cipalis Cathedralis ecclesice sancti Swithuni Winton. Lei. Col. vol. i. p. 613” [428], with lists of 
 Kings, Bishops, and Saints buried in the church.—“ No. VII. Innocentii Charta. Ex. Chron. S. 
 Swithini Winton, p. 8:” being grants of lands, and churches, to the Prior, and Monks.—“ No. VIII. 
 Alia ejusdem Papce Innocentii bulla, ibid.” On the same subject.—“ No. IX. Charta Edgari 
 Regis pacifci, pro renovatione terrce de Chiltecumbe, et pro introductione Monachorum, ib. p. 10.” 
 —“ No. X. Carta de Hursbourne Edwardi Senioris .”—“ No. XI. King John's Charter, allow¬ 
 ing certain Duties to be collected on the River Itchin, by the Bishop of Winchester. Appendix 
 to Milner’s History of Winchester, from Trussel’s MSS ”—“ No. XII. Charta Edgari regis, qua 
 nullos unquam fuisse perhibet in Wintoniensi hoc ccenobio Monachos ante hos quos ipse jam intro- 
 duxit a Monasterio Abingfoniensi. Wilkinsii Concilia, vol. i. p. 244.”—“ No. XIII. Acta contra 
 Confrmationem electi Winton. Episcopi [1281.] Ibid. vol. ii. p. 62. Ex. reg. Peckham, fol. 13, 
 b.”—“ No. XIV. Archiepiscopi Cantuar. literee de eodem. Ibid, ibid.”—“ No. XV. Archiepiscopi 
 Cantuar. processus contra episcopum Winton. Ibid. vol. ii. p. 88. Ex. reg. Peck. fol. 16. a.” The 
 three last documents refer to the election of Richard More, Archdeacon of Winton, who was 
 chosen Bishop by the Monks, and approved by the King ; but was strongly opposed by Peckham, 
 Archbishop of Canterbury, on account of his having held a plurality of benefices : he was finally 
 rejected by the Pope.—“ No. XVI. Episcopi Winton. mandatum pro subsidio regio colligendo et 
 solvendo. Ibid. vol. iii. p. 89. Ex. reg. Winton. Wykeham. 3 part, fol. 44.”—“ No. XVII. Bulla 
 UrbaniPapee Quinti super administrationem ecclesiceWinton. E.Registro Wykeham. Parti, fol.i.” 
 This instrument is directed to William of Wykeham, Archdeacon of Lincoln, administrator of the 
 spiritual and temporal concerns of the church of Winton, requiring him to provide pastors for the 
 vacant churches, and to supply all deficiencies in the administration of the See.—“ No. XVIII. Bulla 
 domini Papce directa domino episcopo Wintonien. E. Registro Wykeham, pars tert. a fol. 135.” 
 Pope Gregory here announces, that he has received ambassadors from the Kings of England, and 
 France, for concluding a peace between them ; and calls upon the clergy of England, for a subsidy 
 to defray the expenses which the holy see had sustained in the war.—“ No. XIX. De Cantaria 
 Wilhelmi Wykeham Episcopi Wynton. Ex Libro evidentiarum ecclesiae cathedralis Winton, No. 
 I. fol. 18.’ Specifying the several masses and services to be performed in St. Mary’s College of 
 Winchester. “ No. XX. [Bibl. Cotton. Cleop. E. iv. 8 pag. 258. a.] Com. South. Valor omnium 
 et singulorum, castrorum, honorurn, maneriovum, terrarum et tenementorum ac aliarum possessio- 
 num quarumcunque; necnon omnium et singulorum prof cuum p. roven. de spiritual, et jurisdic- 
 tionibus spiritual, pertinen. sive spectan. tarn episcopatui Winton. et monaster, sancti Swithini, 
 Winton,predict, quam omnibus et singulis aliis monaster, priorat. archidiaconat. colleg. rector . 
 vicar, cantar. ac liberis capellis, necnon omnibus aliis promotionibus spiritual, in com. predict . 
 prout valent communibus annis.” 
 
WINCHESTER CATHEDRAL:-LIST OF BOOKS, ESSAYS, &C. 
 
 135 
 
 “ The History and Antiquities of the Cathedral Church of Winchester : containing all the 
 Inscriptions upon the Tombs, and Monuments: with an Account of the Bishops, Priors, Deans, and 
 Prebendaries ; also the History of Hyde Abbey. Begun by the Right Honourable Henry, late Earl 
 of Clarendon, and continued to this time, by Samuel Gale, Geiit. Adorned with Sculptures. 
 London, printed for E. Curll, at the Dial and Bible, against St. Dunstan’s Church, in Fleet-street, 
 M.DCC.XV.” Octavo. Some on large paper. Some copies have a reprinted title-page, with the 
 following imprint:—“ London, printed for W. Mears, at the Lamb, without Temple Bar, and J. 
 Hooke, at the Fleur-de-luce, against St. Dunstan’s Church, in Fleet-street, MDCCXXIII.”— Upcott. 
 
 List of Plates, by V. dr. Gucht, except 13, 15, 16, and 17. — 1. View of the Cathedral, folded, 
 2, 3, 4, 5, 6. Five Plates of the Font.—7. The Entrance to the Choir, the work of Inigo Jones, 
 folded.—8. The Chests of the West Saxon Kings, &c. on the North Wall of the Presbytery, and the 
 Tomb of William Rufus, before the Altar, folded.—9. No title; but showing the south side of 
 Fox’s Chantry.—10. “ Tomb of Bishop Wainfleet.”—11. “ Tomb of Richard, son of William the 
 Conqueror.”—12. “ Monument of Richard, Earl of Portland,” folded.—13. “ Tomb of William 
 Wyckham, Bishop, Founder of Winchester College,” Hulsbergh, sc.—14. Slab, with Arms for 
 Baptista Levinz, Bishop of Sodor and Man. —15. “ Monument and Statue of Sir John Clobery.”— 
 16. “ Monument of John Nicholas, S. T. P.” Prebendary of Winton. —17. “ Monument of William 
 Harris, S.T.P.” Prebendary of Winton. —18. Seals of the Cathedral, and of Stephen Gardiner, 
 Bishop. These plates are not only bad specimens of art, but extremely inaccurate and unsatisfactory. 
 The most useful part of this volume, is the list of charters in the Tower relating to the churches, &c. 
 of Winchester ; and the collection of monumental inscriptions contains some that have been since 
 destroyed. 
 
 “ A Description of the City, College, and Cathedral of Winchester. Exhibiting a complete 
 and comprehensive Detail of their Antiquities and Present State. The whole illustrated with several 
 curious and authentic Particulars, collected from a Manuscript of Anthony Wood, preserved in the 
 Ashmolean Museum at Oxford; the College and Cathedral Registers, and other Original Authorities, 
 never before published.” 12mo. pp. 108. London, no date. [“ Price one shilling.”] 18 pages 
 are appropriated to the city; from 22, to 68, to the College; thence to 108, to the Cathedral. 
 There is no name or date to this vade mecum, but the Rev. R. Mant, in his Memoirs of T. Warton, 
 ascribes it to that learned historian of English poetry, and supposes it was published in two small 
 tracts, about 1754. “ A surreptitious and imperfect edition of it,” says Mr. Mant, “ was soon 
 
 afterwards printed by W. Greenville, Winchester.” 1 
 
 “ The History and Antiquities of Winchester, setting forth its Original Constitution, Govern¬ 
 ment, Manufactories, Trade, Commerce, and Navigation ; its several Wards, Parishes, Precincts, 
 Districts, Churches, Religious and Charitable Foundations, and other Public Edifices: together 
 with the Charters, Laws, Customs, Rights, Liberties, and Privileges of that ancient City. Illustrated 
 with a variety of Plates.” In two volumes 12mo.—vol. i. pp. 237 ; exclusive of preface, title, and 
 dedication, vol. ii. pp. 299. Winton, 1773. These volumes contain twelve “ cuts,” and, besides 
 accounts of the city, cathedral, &c. comprehend histories of the College, and of St. Cross. They 
 are evidently compiled by a person, or by persons, who were little versed in topographical and 
 antiquarian literature. Formerly they were said to have been written, or arranged, by the Rev. 
 Wm. Wavel, but some descendants of that gentleman have disavowed his connection with the 
 work. Dr. Milner, in his preface, show's that the work is replete w'ith “ flagrant errors,” enough 
 “ to require a whole volume to detect them all.” 
 
 “ The History, Civil and Ecclesiastical, and Survey of the Antiquities of Winchester. By 
 the Rev. John Milner, M.A. F.S.A.” In two volumes, 4to. Winchester, 1798. “ Vol. I. being 
 
 the Historical Part, Vol. II. the Survey of the Antiquities.” With plates, and a plan of the city. 
 
 A second edition was published in 1809, with considerable additions, and a copious postscript, in 
 which the several strictures contained in the review's, &c. that had been published on the work, are 
 detailed and discussed. 12 copies printed on large paper of the first edition, and some large paper of 
 the second. The following extract from the advertisement will explain the difference between the two 
 editions:—“ A copious postscript is annexed to the present edition, in which the several strictures 
 contained in the reviews and other w'orks that have been published on the subject of the history, are 
 detailed and discussed. Several considerable additions are interspersed throughout the work, and 
 
 1 This work, says Dr. Milmer, “ is exceedingly defective and erroneous some instances of which the Doctor 
 points out in the tenth page of his preface. 
 
136 
 
 WINCHESTER CATHEDRAL:-LIST OF BOOKS, ESSAYS, &C. 
 
 particularly amongst the notes; one of these contains observations upon a work lately published, in 
 two octavo volumes, called British Monachism. Another addition consists of a whole new chapter, 
 being a survey of the most remarkable modern monuments in Winchester Cathedral. 
 
 “ Certain notes, which seemed to be of little importance, are abridged or omitted in this edition, 
 and the whole preface to the second volume is left out, as the substance of it is contained in the 
 postscript. 
 
 “ The style of the whole work has been carefully revised, and (it is hoped) considerably 
 improved. 
 
 “ Lastly, the plates have not only been re-touched, but also corrected and improved. Three new 
 plates are also given in this edition.” 
 
 This work, from the principles and opinions of the author, occasioned a warmly contested con¬ 
 troversy, between himself, Dr. Sturges, Dr. Hoadley Ashe, and several anonymous writers in the 
 Antijacobin Review, British Critic, Hampshire Repository, and other critical journals. These 
 disputes were chiefly on matters of opinion,—on subjects that always have been, and ever will be 
 unsettled and uncertain; and therefore liable to sectarian interpretation. “ Zealous bigots” have 
 always injured the cause of truth and history, by partial and intemperate representations. On Dr. 
 Milner's work, the following comments have been recently published :— 
 
 “ T. Warton, in his Description of Winchester, has said of the college library, that it was made 
 by Warden Pinke, which Milner, vol. ii. p. 144, calls an unpardonable error in a Wykehamist. Dr. 
 Milner’s is a good and useful history in many particulars; but he should have been aware of charging 
 any other writer with errors. In this very sentence he has made an error of the same sort, and as 
 great as that which he censures. T. Warton was not a Wykehamist, as any member of the college 
 could have told him ; and with as little trouble he might have learned what ground there was for 
 saying that Warden Pinke made the library; for, though T. Warton’s expression was careless, yet 
 in the main it was true. In the same part of the volume, besides this mistake concerning T. Warton, 
 there are left, between Dr. M. and his printer, more errors than pages for a dozen together. Again, 
 p. 141, Dr. M. says of Warton’s book, that the errors of the press are exceedingly numerous and 
 gross, particularly in the epitaphs. Now he himself has given eight of those epitaphs, in each of 
 which, taking one with another, he has made two errors ; and in vol. ii. p. 27, he has printed 
 William of Wykeham’s epitaph, in which he has made as many faults as lines.” History of 
 Winchester College, with plates, 4to. 1806, p. 40, published by Mr. Ackermann, London. 
 
 “ Reflections on the Principles and Institutions of Popery , with reference to Civil Society and 
 Government, especially that of this kingdom ; occasioned by the Rev. John Milner’s History of 
 Winchester. In Letters to the Rev. John Monk Newbolt, Rector of St. Maurice, Winchester. By 
 John Sturges, LL.D. Prebendary of Winchester, Chancellor of the Diocese, and one of his 
 Majesty’s Chaplains in ordinary.” 8vo. Winchester, pp. 298. 
 
 “ Letters to a Prebendary : being an Answer to Reflections on Popery, by the Rev. J. Sturges, 
 LL.D. Prebendary and Chancellor of Winchester, and Chaplain to his Majesty; with Remarks on 
 the Opposition of Hoadlyism to the Doctrines of the Church of England, and on various publications 
 occasioned by the late Civil and Ecclesiastical History of Winchester. By the Rev. John Milner, 
 M.A. F.S.A.” 4to. Winchester, 1800, pp. 300. Six editions of this have been since printed in 
 octavo. 
 
 In the “ Hampshire Repository ,” vol. i. and ii. is a Review of Milner’s “ History and Antiquities 
 of Winchester.” Its beauties and defects are pointed out, and its errors refuted. The conductor of 
 the Repository defends himself from the censures and reflections cast upon him by M. Milner. 
 Dr. Sturges’s “ Reflections on Popery,” and Mr. Milner’s Answer thereto, are also briefly noticed. 
 
 “ An Historical and Critical Account of Winchester Cathedral; with an engraved View and 
 Ichnographical Plan of that Fabric, extracted from the Rev. Mr. Milner’s History and Antiquities of 
 Winchester. To which isadded, a Review of its modern Monuments.” 1801, 8vo. pp. 148. 
 
 “ The History and Antiquities of the Cathedral Church of Winchester,” in sixteen pages, 
 with eight prints, and a plan, constitute the fourth number of “ A Graphic and Historical Description 
 ot the Cathedrals of Great Britain,” 1813, demy 8vo. 7s. 6d., super-royal 8vo. 12s , and quarto 
 11. Is. The plates are, aground plan:—PI. 1, “ great west door-way,” or porch:—PI. 2, west 
 Iront, from north west angle : —PI. 3, view of the north side of nave, west side of north transept:— 
 PI. 4, distant view from the ruins of Wolvesey : — PI. 5, N. E. with houses in the foreground : — 
 Pi. 6, S. transept, upper part of the choir, &c.— PI. 7, part of S. side of nave, and W. side of 
 transept:—PI. 8, interior view of N. transept. 
 
WINCHESTER CATHEDRAL:—LIST OF BOOKS, ESSAYS, &C. 
 
 137 
 
 In the second volume of “ Vetusta Monumenta ” are long accounts, by R. Gough, of the Chan¬ 
 tries of Cardinal Beaufort, Bishop Waynfleie , and Bishop Fox; with anecdotes of each prelate, 
 and six engravings by Basire, from drawings by Schnebbelie, representing the said chantries, and 
 some of their ornaments. Had these plates been accurately drawn and engraved, they would have 
 proved highly interesting and valuable ; but the slovenly style in which they are executed, seems 
 rather to tantalize than to gratify our curiosity. In Gough’s Sepulchral Monuments, are similar 
 accounts 
 
 ACCOUNTS OF BISHOPS. 
 
 “ The Life of William of Wykeham, Bishop of Winchester ; collected from Records, Registers, 
 Manuscripts, and other authentic Evidences. By Robert Lowth, D. D. Prebendary of Durham, 
 and Chaplain in ordinary to his Majesty.” 8vo. pp. 404, 1758. This is the title to the first 
 edition: a second was printed in the following year, “ with additions,” and a third in 1777. Dr. 
 Milner says, that this volume “ contains much useful information, and also many mistakes.” 
 
 “ Historica Descriptio complectens Vitam ac Res Gestas Beatissimi viri Gulielmi Wicami quon¬ 
 dam Vintoniensis Episcopi, et Angliee Cancellarii, et Fundatoris duorum Collegiorum Oxoniae et 
 Vintoniae. Oxoniae, e Theatro Sheldoniano, An. Dorn. 1690. 4to. 137 pages.” With the arms 
 of William of Wykeham to front the title-page. 
 
 N. B. The author of this Memoir was Dr. Thomas Martin, Chancellor of this Diocese under 
 Bishop Gardiner, and it was first printed in 4to. in 1597. — Gough. 
 
 “ The Life of William Waynflete, Bishop of Winchester, Lord High Chancellor of England, in 
 the Reign of Henry VI. and Founder of Magdalen College, Oxford: collected from Records, 
 Registers, Manuscripts, and other authentic Evidences. By Richard Chandler, D. D. formerly 
 Fellow of that College.” 8vo. pp. 428, London, 1811, with Plates. 
 
 ENGRAVED PORTRAITS OF THE BISHOPS OF WINCHESTER. 
 
 1. William of Wickham : Houbraken, sc. 1. h. sh. from apicture in Winchester College. Illust. 
 
 Head.—Whole length, from the picture in Winchester College, Grignion, sc.—tomb of, sh. 
 by J. K. Sherwin.—Large 4to. New College, Winton, J. Faber, f.—-From effigy on his tomb. 
 Grignion. —One by Parker. Granger and Bromley. 
 
 2. Henry Beaufort, at Mr. Walpole's, done for Harding’s Shakspeare, by J. Parker. Granger. 
 
 3. William Waynflete: Houbraken, sc. 1742, from a print at Magdalen College, Oxford, 
 
 large h. sh. Illust. Head.—Gulielmus Patten, alias Waynflete, Mariae Magdalen College, 
 Oxon, 1459, J. Faber, f. large 4to. mez.—One by Parker. Granger and Bromley. 
 
 4. Richard Fox : Johannus Corvus Flandrus faciebat, Vertue, sc. 1723. In Fiddes’ “ Life of 
 
 Cardinal Wolsey,” from the original picture at C. C. C. Oxon.— G. Glover, sc.— Sturt, sc.— 
 A small oval, for Dr. Knight’s “ Life of Erasmus.”—One of the founders, J. Faber, f. large 
 4to. mez. 1516.— One by Parker. Granger and Bromley. 
 
 5. Thomas Wolsey : Holstein, p. Faber, sc. One of the founders, 4to. mez.—A label from his 
 
 mouth, inscribed “ Ego meus et rex,” 4to.—Two, with and without arms, prefixed to his 
 “ Life” by Cavendish. Elstrake, sc. 4to. — Head by Loggan, in Burnet’s “ History of the 
 
 Reformation.”-in Holland’s “ Heroologia,” 8vo.— W. M. (Marshall) sc. small in Fuller’s 
 
 “ Holy state.”—P. Fourdriner, sc. h. len. h. sh. in his “ Life,” by Fiddes, fol. 1724.- 
 
 Houbraken, sc. Illust. Head, in the possession of Mr. Kingsley.- Desrochers, sc. 4to.— 
 
 inscribed C. W. Vertue, sc. a small oval.-One by Parker. 2 Granger and Bromley. 
 
 6. Stephen Gardiner: in Harding’s Shakspeare, 1790, W. N. Gardiner, by Gunst. Bromley. 
 
 7. Robert Horne: inscribed “ Stephen Gardiner,” fol. Holbein. R. White. Granger and 
 
 Bromley . 3 * S 
 
 2 “ There is no head of Wolsey which is not in profile.” Bromley. 
 
 3 “ It seems now pretty clear, that this print is really the portrait of Bishop Horne, as appears from the 
 figure of the person, and the arms, ‘ three bugle horns.’ Edmund Tumor, Esq. of Sackville.-street, who did 
 
 me the honour of communicating this article, purchased at a sale, a portrait of a bishop, with the arms of the 
 See of Winchester impaled with B. a cross, or ; between four birds’ heads, erased of the second, in the centre of 
 the cross a cinque-foil,gules: which w r ere the arms granted to Bishop Gardiner. Mr. T. afterwards compared it 
 with an undoubted portrait of that bishop in the lodge of Trinity Hall, in Cambridge, (whereof Gardiner was 
 some time master,) and fuund it to be the same countenance exactly, but in better preservation.” Bromley. 
 
 S 
 
138 
 
 WINCHESTER CATHEDRAE:—LIST OF BOOKS, ESSAYS, &C. 
 
 8. James Montague: 4to. S. Pass.-one 12mo.-one by Elstrake-one 24mo. by S. Pass, 
 
 1617-one in the “ Heroologia,” copied. Bromley. 
 
 9. Lancelot Andrews: J. Payne, f. 1632, Frontispiece to his “ Exposition of the Ten Com¬ 
 
 mandments,” fol. This is copied by R. White, in 12mo.- R. Vaughan, sc.4to.- Hollar , 
 
 f. 1643, 12mo. In Bishop Sparrow’s “ Rationale of the Common Prayer,” in which are 
 several other heads by Hollar. — Prefixed to his “ Preces Privatse,” D. Loggan, sc. 1675, 
 12mo.— Frontispiece to his “ Devotions,” 18mo. — By Simon Pass, without his name, 1618, 
 
 4to.--By Simon Pass, looking to the left, 1616, 4to. (rare), inscribed “ Episcopis Win- 
 
 ton.”-From his Monument at St. Mary Overies, two different aspects. Granger and 
 
 Bromley. 
 
 10. Walter Curle : fol. T. Cecil, sc.-Another by Droeshout. Bromley. 
 
 11. Bri an Duppa : R. W. (White), sc. before his “ Holy Rules and Helps of Devotion,” &c. 
 
 small 12mo. 1674.-A Portrait of him at Christ Church, Oxford. Bromley. 
 
 12. George Morley: P. Lely, p. R. Thompson, ex. c. large h. sh. mez.— Lely, p. Vertne, sc. 
 
 1740. In the collection of Gen. Dormer, at Rowsham. Illust. Head. — Sitting in a chair, h. sh. 
 mez.-A portrait of him at C. Ch. Oxford.— Bromley and Granger. 
 
 13. Peter Mews: D. Loggan, ad vivum del. et sc. h. sh.-Two oval prints, no name. —A 
 
 portrait at St. John’s College, Oxford. Bromley. 
 
 14. Jonathan Trelawney : portrait at C. Ch. Oxford. Bromley. 
 
 15. Charles Trimnell: mez. J. Faber. Noble, Bromley. 
 
 16. Benjamin Hoadley: aet. 67, 1743, sitting in robes, sh. W. Hogarth, p. B. Baron, sc.— 
 
 aet. 80, Profile prefixed to his “ Works,” fol. 1773, N. Hone, p. J. Basire, sc. 1772- 
 
 Oval, in a canonical habit, J. Faber, mez.-Altered to a bishop’s, with Simon’s name.- 
 
 Canonical habit altered to a bishop’s, la. fol. G. Vertue, sc.—Oval, in a canonical habit, 4to. 
 mez.— One by M. V. Gucht, 8vo. oval in wood before his “ Life.” Bromley. 
 
 17. John Thomas : standing in the robes of the garter, mez. B. Wilson, p. R. Houlston, sc. 1771. 
 
 PORTRAITS OF DEANS OF WINTON. 
 
 1. Lawrence Humphrey : in the “ Heroologia,” by Pass. -Another in “ Boissard.” Bromley. 
 
 2. Richard Meggot : la. fol. G. Kneller, p. D. Loggan, sc.-Another la. fol. G. Kneller, 
 
 R. White. -One prefixed to his “ Sermons,” 1685, 8vo. R. White. Bromley. 
 
 3. Zachary Pearce: prefixed to his “Works,” 1777, 4to. Penny, 1768, T. Chambars. - 
 
 Three quarters length, sitting, mez. T. Hudson, 1754, J. Faber, sc. Bromley. 
 
 4 Jonathan Siiipley : oval frame, mez. J. Reynolds, p. J. R. Smith, sc. 1777.-Prefixed 
 
 to his “ Works,” 1792, 8vo. J. Reynolds, p. T. Trotter, sc. Bromley. 
 
 VIEWS AND PRINTS OF THE CHURCH, AND OF ITS MONUMENTS. 
 
 In addition to the prints already specified as belonging to different books, the following have 
 been published :— South prospect of the Cathedral, by Dr. King, in Dugdale’s Monasticon, vol. i. 
 In Gough’s “ Sepulchral Monuments,” are the following: Wil. de Basyng’s coffin lid, vol. i. pi. ii. 
 p. 63 : — Inscriptions from the Church, ib. vol. ii. pt. i. pi. xxxii:—in Carter’s “ Ancient Architec¬ 
 ture of England,” the following subjects are represented, viz. Tomb of William Rufus : — An Arch 
 in the wall of the west aile of the south transept: —one compartment of the North Transept, with 
 details at large:— Door-way, formerly in the wall of the south transept: —view of one side of the 
 Font also elevations of the two sides charged with sculpture, and of the upper surface.—Other 
 prints of this font are given in the “ Archaeologia,” vol. x. also in “ Vetusta Monumenta,” vol. ii.— A 
 South-east view of the Cathedral, drawn and etched by J. Buckler, and aquatinted by R. Reeve, 
 was published in 1808 : —a North-west view of the Cathedral, drawn and etched by J. C. Buckler, 
 and a South-east view, by the same artist, are published in No. IV. of “ Etchings of the Cathedral, 
 C ollegiate, and Abbey Churches.”—In Carter’s “ Specimens of Ancient Sculpture and Painting,” 
 are four etchings of the Paintings on the Walls of St. Mary’s Chapel, with a long dissertation on 
 the subjects by the Rev. J. Milner.—A view of the Nave of the Cathedral, engraved by D. Havell, 
 from a very beautiful drawing by F. Mackenzie, is published in Ackermann’s “ History, &c. of 
 Winchester College,” 4to. 1816. 
 
139 
 
 A CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE 
 
 OF THF. 
 
 AGES AND STYLES OF DIFFERENT PARTS OF THE CHURCH, &c. 
 
 Bishops. 
 
 Kings. 
 
 Temp. 
 
 Walkelyn .. 
 
 William I. . . 
 
 1079 
 
 to 
 
 1093 
 
 Hen. de Blois 
 
 Henry I . 
 
 1129 
 
 De Lucy. ... 
 
 $ Rich. I. . } 
 
 X John . . S 
 
 1189 
 
 to 
 
 1205 
 
 N. Eliensis.. 
 
 ( Hen. III. ) 
 
 X Ed. I. II. $ 
 
 1280 
 
 to 
 
 1310 
 
 Edington.... 
 
 Edward III.. 
 
 1330 
 
 Wykeham .. 
 
 J Edw.III. ) 
 1 Rich. II. 5 
 
 1370 
 
 to 
 
 1400 
 
 Beaufort . ... 
 
 Henry IV. .. 
 
 1410 
 
 Waynflete .. 
 
 Henry IV. .. 
 
 
 Courteney .. 
 
 Edward IV. 
 
 1480 
 
 Lang ton .... 
 
 Henry VII... 
 
 1493 
 
 Fox . 
 
 Henry VII... 
 
 Henry VIII. 
 
 1500 
 
 Gardiner. ... 
 
 1540 
 
 Rich. Neile. . 
 
 Charles I. . 
 
 1627 
 
 Parts of the Edifice. 
 
 Described. 
 
 Plates. 
 
 Crypts under the Presbytery and \ 
 Ailes, also under de Lucy’s J 
 work. Part of the Chapter- f 
 house, Transepts, and Tower, / 
 Internal Parts of the Pters, and 1 
 Walls of the Nave, afterwards 1 
 cased by Wykehain. Font .. J 
 
 57, 8, 9 . 
 70, 77 ... 
 91, 99, 87 
 
 II. III. VI. IX. XII. 
 XIII. XXIII. XXIV. 
 XXIX. 
 
 105 
 
 XXX. 
 
 Arches in S. Transept 
 
 60,104 .. 
 
 t Chantry Ailes, east of the Altar 
 ) Screen, with Part of the Lady 
 1 Chapel, the Two Side Chapels, 
 V. and Staircase Turrets . 
 
 97 
 
 1 
 
 Presbytery from the Tower, to the 
 
 Altar Screen .... 
 
 Old Screen, with Niches, &c. 
 
 XXIX. 
 
 ( III. VII. VIII. XVII. 
 x XVIII. XX. XXIII. 
 
 XIII. XXVIII. 
 
 XXII. XXIII. XXVI. 
 
 { 
 
 { 
 
 Stalls of the Choir. 
 
 West Front, Two Windows on the ) 
 North, and One on the South.. $ 
 Edington’s Chantry. 
 
 Nave and Ailes.j 
 
 Wykeham’s Chantry and Tomb .... 
 
 Beaufort’s ditto... 
 
 Waynflete’s ditto, and Altar Screen . j 
 
 St. Mary’s Chapel, Pulpit.^ 
 
 Langton’s Chapel.. 
 
 C Fox’s Chantry Chapel, Windows V 
 < of Presbytery and its Ailes, and £ 
 C the Screens.,. j 
 
 Gardiner’s Chantry . 
 
 Fitting up Altar Screen, Screen to ) 
 Choir, &c. \ 
 
 63, 92 .... 
 
 XIII. XIV. 
 
 64, 88, 89 . 
 
 IV. V. XI. 
 
 101 . 
 
 XXV. 
 
 65, 75 .... 
 
 102.91.. .. 
 
 101.93.. .. 
 
 $ III. IX. X. XI. XIII. 
 
 * XXVII. 
 
 t XVI. XVII. XVIII. 
 
 * XIX. 
 
 94. 
 
 XVII. XVIII. XXV. 
 
 101,98.... 
 96, 92 .... 
 
 $ XV. XVII. XXII. 
 $ XXIII. XXV. 
 
 67, 76 .... 
 97, 90 .... 
 
 jvill. XX. XXI. 
 
 67, 77,83 . 
 
 XVII. XXI. 
 
 67, 94 .... 
 
 t vii. ix. xv. xvi. 
 
 ( XXII. 
 
 96. 
 
 XVIII. XXIII. XXVIII. 
 
 80. 
 
 X. XXIV. 
 
 
 s 2 
 
140 
 
 LIST OF PRINTS, 
 
 ILLUSTRATIVE OF WINCHESTER CATHEDRAL. 
 
 Plates. 
 
 I 
 
 II. 
 
 III. 
 
 IV. 
 
 V. 
 
 VI. 
 
 VII. 
 
 VIII. 
 
 IX. 
 
 X. 
 
 XI. 
 
 XII. 
 
 XIII. 
 
 XIV. 
 XV. 
 
 XVI. 
 
 XVII 
 
 Subjects. 
 
 Ground Plan of the Cathedral 
 Plan and Section of the Crypts, &c 
 View of Capitals and Bases of 
 the Nave and Choir. 
 
 View of the West Front . 
 
 Section and Plan of ditto. 
 
 View of the North Transept, &c. 
 
 I from N. E. 
 
 View of the East end 
 
 South Transept, with Ruins 
 
 $ View of the North Transept, } 
 
 ( looking N. E.} 
 
 View of the Choir, looking West 
 { Part of the Stalls of the Choir. } 
 
 ( For the Title Page .5 
 
 View of the Altar Screen .... 
 
 View of Wykeham’s Chantry, &c... 
 
 XVIII. 
 
 XIX. 
 
 XX. 
 
 XXI 
 
 XXII. 
 
 XXIII. 
 
 XXIV. 
 
 XXV. 
 
 XXVI. 
 
 XXVII 
 
 XXVIII. 
 
 XXIX. 
 
 XXX. 
 
 with Part of Fox’s and Wayn- . 
 
 C flete’s .j 
 
 $ Waynflete’s Chantry, with those } 
 ( for Chandler and Beaufort .. \ 
 
 C Groined Roof of Waynflete’s A 
 Chantry, and Plans of Clus- J 
 
 (_ tered Columns . J 
 
 j Elevation of Three Compart- 
 ) ments on the North Side .... 
 Carved Wood Work. 
 
 4 Parts of Altar Screen; Old 
 ( Screen; and Fox’s Chantry.. 
 
 $ Section and Elevation East of 
 
 \ the Altar Screen . 
 
 C Elevation and Section of the 
 ? Church and Tower from N. 
 
 (_ to S. 
 
 f Monumental Effigies of Bishops 
 
 Edington, Wykeham, and 
 C Waynflete . 
 
 5 Side of an ancient Tomb, and 
 
 ( Two Effigies . 
 
 4 Nave, One Compartment, exter- 
 
 l nally and internally. 
 
 4 Elevation, interior and exterior, 
 
 ( near the Altar . 
 
 Arches and Parts of the Tower ... 
 Two Views of the Font . 
 
 Drawn by 
 
 Engraved by 
 
 E.W. Garbett 
 . E. W. Garbett 
 
 G. Gladwin.. 
 J. Roffe .... 
 
 C. F. Porden 
 
 T. Ranson .. 
 
 E. Blore .... 
 
 J. Le Keux.. 
 
 E. Blore .... 
 E. Blore .... 
 
 E. Turrell .. 
 J. Le Keux.. 
 
 E. Blore .... 
 
 J. Le Keux.. 
 
 E. Blore .... 
 
 R. Sands.... 
 
 E. Blore .... 
 
 R. Sands.... 
 
 E. Blore .... 
 E. Blore .... 
 
 -Edwards 
 
 W. Radcly ffe 
 
 E. Blore .... 
 
 R. Sands.... 
 
 E. Blore .... 
 
 W. Radclyffe 
 
 E. Blore .... 
 
 H. Le Keux . 
 
 E. Blore .... 
 
 H. Le Keux . 
 
 E. Blore .... 
 
 W. Radclyffe 
 
 E. Blore .... 
 
 E. Turrell .. 
 
 E. Blore.... 
 
 J. Le Keux.. 
 
 E. Blore .... 
 
 R. Roffe .... 
 
 E. Blore .... 
 
 J. Roffe .... 
 
 E. Turrell .. 
 
 G. Hollis.... 
 
 E. Blore .... 
 
 E. Blore .... 
 
 J. Le Keux.. 
 
 C. F. Porden 
 
 H. Le Keux . 
 
 E. Blore .... 
 
 -Edwards 
 
 E. Blore .... 
 
 H. Le Keux . 
 
 E. Blore .... 
 
 J. Le Keux.. 
 
 E. Blore .... 
 
 H. Le Keux . 
 
 E. Blore .... 
 E. Blore .... 
 
 G. Hollis.... 
 J. Le Keux.. 
 
 Inscribed to 
 
 Hon. and Rev. Arch¬ 
 deacon Legge 
 
 \rch- ) 
 
 • • • • 3 
 
 Sir Thomas Baring, Bart... 
 Rev. Dr. Nott. 
 
 Described. 
 
 Rev. H. Lee . 
 
 $ Rev. Dr. Rennell,Dean ) 
 
 ( of Winchester. \ 
 
 B. Winter, Esq. 
 
 Rev. Archdeacon Hook .. 
 
 Dr. Powell...... 
 
 Rev. E. Poulter. 
 
 C Warden and Fellows of A 
 3 NewCollege.Oxford, ( 
 \ and of Winchester ? 
 V College .J 
 
 C President and Fellows V 
 ■? of Magdalen College J- 
 (. Oxford .3 
 
 Rev. F. Iremonger 
 W. Garbett, Esq. . 
 
 81,2, 3. 
 
 87. 
 
 88 . 
 
 88 . 
 
 88 . 
 
 89. 
 
 90. 
 
 90. 
 
 90. 
 
 90. 
 
 91. 
 
 91. 
 
 91. 
 
 92. 
 
 92. 
 
 93. 
 
 94. 
 
 96. 
 
 97. 
 
 82, 6, 97. 
 
 98. 
 
 98. 
 
 98. 
 
 99. 
 
 101 . 
 
 83, 102. 
 
 102 . 
 
 103. 
 
 104. 
 
 104. 
 
INDEX. 
 
 A. 
 
 Agilbert, bp. account of, $6. 
 
 Alfred, King, crowned in Winchester Cath. 33. 
 
 Alfrith, or Adferth, bp. 32. 
 
 Altar Screen, Pi. XV.; described, 92 ; of St. 
 Alban’s, 93, n. ; PI. XXII.; described, 98. 
 
 Alwyn, bp. account of, 42. 
 
 Andrews, bp. 127. 
 
 Arches, early pointed with ornaments, PI. XXIX.; 
 described, 104; semicircular ditto, pointed ditto, 
 60. 
 
 Architecture, Ancient, only to be understood by 
 Plans, Sections, &c. 88. 
 
 Asser, Reginald de, bp. 116. 
 
 Athelm, bp. 34. 
 
 Austen, Jane, 109. 
 
 B. 
 
 Balguy, Dr. Thomas, 107. 
 
 Banbury, Earl of, 108. 
 
 Beaufort, Henry, bp. 122. 
 
 Beaufort’s Chantry, PI. XVII.; described, 95. 
 
 Bertulf, bp. 34. 
 
 Bilson, Thomas, bp. 127. 
 
 Birinus, extraordinary Miracle of, 23. 
 
 •-, death of, 26. 
 
 Bishops, Seven consecrated in one day, 35. 
 
 Bishop’s Throne, 76. 
 
 Blois, bp. de, 54 ; Account of, 112. 
 
 Brinstan, or Birnstan, bp. 36. 
 
 Buttress, Profile and Plan of, PI. V.; Views of, 
 PI. VI. ; various, PI. VII. 
 
 C. 
 
 Calefactory, 100. 
 
 Canute, King, 42. 
 
 Capitular Chapel, 62. 
 
 Cathedral Church begun, 48 ; converted into a 
 Heathen Temple, 22; fortified, 31; Chapter- 
 house, 83; Choir, 76, 80; described, 91 ; Crypt, 
 58, 77 ; described, 86 ; Nave, 75 ; described, 
 ,102 ; Tower, 56, 78; Norman Roof, 57 ; Exte¬ 
 rior described, 73 ; Interior, 74. 
 
 Cathedrals considered as national property, 78, n. ; 
 
 -disgraced by trifling tombs, 79, n. 
 
 Cerdic, obtained possession of Venta, 22. 
 
 Chapter-house, 83; Plan of, PI. I.; Ruins of, 
 PI. IX. 
 
 Cheney, Dean, 107. 
 
 Chests, with remains of Saxon Kings, &c. 103 ; 
 
 one of them shown, PI. XV. 
 
 Christianity, conversion of the Britons to, 10. 
 Choir, 76, 80; View of, PI. XIII.; described, 91. 
 Civil Wars between Stephen and Matilda, 54. 
 Clobery, Sir John, 109. 
 
 Cloister Wall, extent of, Plan I. 
 
 Columns, Plan of, PI, I. VI. ; one of the Crypts, 
 PI. II. ; Clustered, Caps, Bases, and Plan of, 
 PI. III.; Plans, PI. XIX. 
 
 Cooper, bp. account of, 127. 
 
 Coeur-de-Lion, Rich, the First, 54; account of, 
 113. 
 
 Courteney, Sepulture of, 84; bp. account of, 123. 
 Cross, St., Hospital and Church, 112. 
 
 Crypts, 77; Plan and Section of, PI. II.; de¬ 
 scribed, 86. 
 
 Curfew Bell first established at Winton, 47. 
 
 Curie, bp. 128. 
 
 D. 
 
 Daniel, bp. 28. 
 
 Davies, Colonel, 109. 
 
 Day, Wm. bp. 127. 
 
 Defects of Exterior, 78. 
 
 - of Interior, 79. 
 
 Denewulf, or Denulf, bp. 33. 
 
 Dorchester Church, Account of, 24. 
 
 Dunbert, bp. 33. 
 
 Duppa, bp. 128. 
 
 E. 
 
 Eadmund, or Edmund, bp. 30. 
 
 East End, View of, PI. VIII. ; described, 90. 
 Edington, bp. account of, 117 ; Chantry, PI. XI. 
 Edington’s Effigy, PI. XXV.; described, 100. 
 Edward the Confessor, 43. 
 
 Edwy, Coronation of at Winchester, 37. 
 
 Effigies of a Knight, PI. XXVI.; described, 102 ; 
 of a bishop, ditto. 
 
 Effigies of Beaufort, &c. 81 ; Edington, Wyke- 
 ham and Waynflete, PI. XXV. 
 
 Egbert, King, crowned King of all Britain at 
 Winchester, 29. 
 
 Eleutherius, bp. 27. 
 
 Ely, Nicholas of, bp. 116. 
 
 Elphege, St. the second, bp. 41. 
 
142 
 
 INDEX. 
 
 Elsin, or Alfin, bp. 36. 
 
 Emma, Queen, Fiery Ordeal of, 43. 
 
 Ethelwold, St. bp. 38. 
 
 Ethelmar, bp. Sepulture of, 91 ; account of, 115. 
 Exon, or Oxon, bp. 116. 
 
 Eyre, Dr. 108. 
 
 F. 
 
 Foix, Wm. de, Effigy of, described, 102. 
 
 Font, two Views of, PI. XXX.; described, 104. 
 Fox, bp. his Architecture, 86 ; Chantry, PL XVII.; 
 described, 94; Part of, PI. XX.; described, 98; 
 PI. XXII.; described, 98. 99; Account of, 124. 
 Freemasons, 113. 
 
 Frithstan, bp. 36. 
 
 G. 
 
 Garbett, Mr. his Architectural Account of Winton 
 Cathedral, 55. 
 
 Gardiner’s Chantry, PI. XVIII.; described, 96, 
 99; bp. account of, 125. 
 
 Giffard, Wm. bp. 50 ; account of, 111. 
 
 Ground Plan, 81. 
 
 Groining of Roofs of Nave and Ailes, PI. I. and 
 PI. V.; of Waynflete’s Chantry, PI. XIX. 
 Guardian Angels, or Portland Chapel, 83. 
 
 H. 
 
 Harris, Dr. Wm. 108. 
 
 Hedda, bp. 28. 
 
 Herefrith, bp. slain at Charmouth, 30. 
 
 Helmstan, or Helinstan, bp. 30. 
 
 Hoadly, Ben. bp. 128. 
 
 Holland, Sir Nath. 109. 
 
 Horne, Robt. bp. 108, 126. 
 
 Hunting-ford, Jas. 108. 
 
 I. 
 
 Improvements made by Dean and Chapter, 78. 
 
 K. 
 
 Kenewalsh, King, founded the See of Winton, 25. 
 Kenulph, or Elsius, bp. 41. 
 
 Kinegils, death of, 25. 
 
 Kingsmill, Dean, 108. 
 
 L. 
 
 Lady or Virgin Chapel, 82 ; Windows, Plan, &c. 
 86 ; Elevation of, PI. XX.; described, 97 ; PL 
 XXI. p. 98. 
 
 Langton Chapel, 77, 83, 96 ; Wood-work of, PL 
 XXI. ; described, 98. 
 
 Langton, bp. account of, 124. 
 
 Lucius, a British King, enquiry concerning his 
 history, 12 ; death of, 14. 
 
 Lucy’s, bp. de, Architecture, 86 ; Columns of, 88 ; 
 Elevation of, PL XX. 97 ; Section of Three 
 Ailes, PL XXIII.; described, 93; account of, 
 113. 
 
 M. 
 
 Mayor appointed, 53. 
 
 Mews, bp, 128 ; Vault of, 83, 87. 
 
 Minstrels’ Gallery, 88; View of, PL V. 
 Misereres, or Seats, 92. 
 
 Montague, bp. 127. 
 
 Montagu, Eliz. 108. 
 
 Monuments and Slabs generally injurious, 79. n. 
 Morley, bp. account of, 128. 
 
 Mullionsof Windows, PL I. 
 
 N. 
 
 Nave, 75 ; Plan of Pier, PL III.; described, 88; 
 View of, PL X. XI.; described, 91 ; Elevation 
 of one compartment, PL XXVII.; described, 
 102 . 
 
 Naylor, Dean, 108. 
 
 Neile, bp. account of, 127. 
 
 O. 
 
 Orleton, bp. 116; death of, 83. 
 
 P. 
 
 Panelling over West Front, PL IV. 
 
 Pinnacles of West Front, PL IV. 
 
 Pontissara, bp. de, 116. 
 
 Portland, Earl of, and Chapel, 83, 87. 
 
 Poynet, bp. account of, 126. 
 
 Presbytery, 78; Column of, 88 ; Elevation of one 
 Compartment, PI. XXVIII.; described, 103. 
 Pulpit, 76 ; PI. XXL ; described, 98. 
 
 Pyle, Edm. 108. 
 
 Q. 
 
 Quilchelm baptized at Dorchester, 24. 
 
 R. 
 
 Richard (Coeur-de-Lion) crowned a second time, 
 54 ; account of, 113. 
 
 Raley, bp. de, account of, 115. 
 
 Rufus, Wm. death of, 49 ; Tomb, 91. 
 
 Rupibus, bp. Effigy of, PI. XXVI.; described, 
 102 ; account of, 114. 
 
INDEX. 
 
 143 
 
 S. 
 
 Screen to Choir, 80; to Altar, 81 ; behind Altar, 
 PI. XXII.; described, 98. 
 
 Silkstede’s Chapel, 83 ; Sepulture of, 85. 
 
 Stalls of Choir, PI. XIV.; described, 92. 
 
 St. Paul, doubts of his residence in Britain, 12. 
 
 Stigand, bp. 44 ; death of in Winchester Castle, 
 45. 
 
 Stratford, John de, bp. 116. 
 
 Swithun, St. bp. 30; died, 32 : tomb of, 85. 
 
 T. 
 
 Thomas, bp. 108. 
 
 Toclive, bp. account of, 113. 
 
 Tower, 78; Section of, PI. XXIV.; described, 
 100; Part of, PI. XXIX.; described, 104. 
 
 Transepts, South and North, 76, 80; exterior 
 View of the latter, PI. VI.; described, 90; S. 
 Transept, View of, PI. IX.; described, 90 ; in¬ 
 terior of N. P). XII.; described, 91 ; West ex¬ 
 terior of N.; described, 99 ; interior of S. PI. 
 XXIV.; described, 100. 
 
 Trelawney, bp. 128. 
 
 Tribune, or Minstrels’ Gallery, 88. 
 
 Trimnell, bp. 108 ; account of, 128. 
 
 V. 
 
 Venta, Church of, rebuilt, 21 ; obtained the rank 
 of a Metropolis, 22. 
 
 W. 
 
 Walkelyn, bp. 46 ; account of, 111; curious grant 
 of William the Conqueror to, 48. 
 
 Walton, Isaac, 109. 
 
 Warton, Dr. Jos. 109. 
 
 Watson, bp. 108, 127. 
 
 Waynflete, bp. account of, 122; Chantry, PI. 
 XVIII.; described, 96; Roof of, Pi. XIX.; de¬ 
 scribed, 97; Effigy of, P1.XXV.; described, 101. 
 
 West Front, View of, PI. IV.; Section of, V.; 
 described, 88, 89. 
 
 White, John, bp. account of, 126. 
 
 Wickham, Wm. bp. account of, 127. 
 
 Wighten, bp. 30. 
 
 Willis, bp. 107, 128. 
 
 Wina, bp. 27. 
 
 Winchester partly destroyed, 52; partly restored, 
 53 ; Castle begun, 47; conquered and occupied 
 by French troops, 54; place of importance at 
 an early period, 10. 
 
 Windows, Plans of five, PI. I.; Great Western, 
 PI. IV.; square-headed ditto; Elevation and 
 Section of, PI. V.; Circular, PI. VI.; of Nave, 
 PI. XXVII.; of Presbytery, PI. XXVII.; of 
 East End. 
 
 Woodloke, or Merewell, bp. 116. 
 
 Wolsey, bp. account of, 125. 
 
 Wykeham’s Chantry, ill placed and bad in design, 
 79 ; PI. XVI.; described, 93 ; Architecture of, 
 PI. XXIV.; described, 100; Effigy, PI. XXV; 
 described, 101; account of, 118. 
 
 THE END. 
 
 Marchant, Printer, Ingram-court, Fenchurch-street. 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ,v • *1 
 
 - J 
 
 _■ 
 
 •-P 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 .. ' ,• ' • • • 
 
 * • V‘ • 1 ‘ r . 
 
 : • • ' ‘ - 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 . 
 
 
 
 
 
 . ,■ 
 
 
 
 ■ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ■ ’ ; 
 
 
 
 
 . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ■ •" f* ■ - 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
666 fp extj'emc 
 
 (CATHEID)RAX. ANTIQUITIES 
 
 PE cl. 
 
 -E. W. Garbctt. del 
 
 &. GLiduin sc . 
 
 I ni i t u r ii : 
 
 •Scale of jo a x 
 
 joo feet 
 
 ■ WW(32BE3SST2E2E (DJ®'35EJB31DJE^OLi (MWIEUSIBI c 
 
 GBOUND PIiAIST OV THE CEVXCH, SHOWIXTO THX OJIlOJfX?irT<B OF »00>’, SITES O J TOMBS fee. 
 
 also Plans of Tarts. 
 
 London ■ liLbUoncd JcuiVi • S’S b 
 
 s 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
C ATMEM&AX. AN" TIQUIT1TE §. ]?X* «HTo 
 
 
 
 
 • "'I 1 ! 
 
 . ■ 
 
 i 
 
 WOT© HIE ST Em (CATfflllEM&AIL (DEHEHECD 
 
 PI tin Sc Section of the Crypts She. 
 
 ZmimJUtMuhcdMarch j.jtkj. by Zariyinan Sc C?ZaXanostcrBow. 
 
ir AT iHnF. W M at. AKTMJTOTEES. 
 
 i.m. 
 
 Scale or t-j—f —f—f- 
 
 Engrawed by Ronscn from, a Drawing bv C.F. He rden fur Brittons History kc. of Winchester Cathedral. 
 
 WUNCMBSTEIR (DATHIIEMEiyL (SMHJIE(PEI, 
 
 CAPITALS fe BASES. 
 
 Lciido^lhiblished Oct r lj6l7, by Longman k c" TaZerru?ster How. 
 
Engraved by JLeJSaur, rhm aTrawinq by EIw.RJcre.tcrRTiSruM^rykc. cr'WnJujter Cathedral 
 
 WMssnEOTim c-ATMiEimmAiL 
 
 * View of the West front. 
 
 TO THE HONORABLE AM) REVEREND AUGUSTUS GEORGE LEGGE, , Y.. i. ARCHDEACON OF WINCHESTER, CHAPLAIN 
 
 IN ORDINARY TO HIS MAJESTY kc. kc. This Flute is uucriMtl by w d , 
 
 ■ t/w t. author. 
 
 I.iv/J, •JiyPhtlishei May USD. by Longman k CFaternosttr £o w. 
 

 CATHEBH-AX. antiquities. 
 
 IPL.V. 
 
 Umi 
 
 Miitl 
 
 III %1 
 
 ^NVX^V^f 
 
 1 H 
 
 ?:•*:>. l :^. x\xsx^xxxx\\ N 
 
 mmi f.\\\s x ^^w\\\ 
 
 JB l^x\^ xx xv 
 
 IMP 
 
 I^H|x\^n>>X\ X X\x 
 
 mm h ^\\\\>> x \\ c 
 
 
 Drawn, by EJilrre. 
 
 JZrWrwed by Z. 
 
 WH^TCMIS STTIE'IE (D ATMSIDmidL ®IHnt T IR<ClHI 5 
 
 Section ScTlan oi'the West, front. 
 
 Zendm Published ZecTzadi6. by Zmpman kC?Rvtenioster2li/)v . 
 
 0 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
s. > 
 
PL.V1. 
 
 Cathedral Antiquities . 
 
 lEngnwed fa .TZe iteur.irom a JDnuwi/h} faJirfw'.iBIere, Tor Jiritlvfis TUstiny &v_ od ~Wift Chester I'ruinlnd. 
 
 ©ATEEBiBIEMa ©HTOCSIEL 
 
 Tiew a/'the TTorth Transept &c. 
 
 TO srm TKOMuiS JtJKmORtR T thir-T/ate is rcspect/hflv inscribed by the similar. 
 T.ondan. Published Man h i . iSj.j, fa Zorh/man tic L'lJiulemosta 'JUnv. 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 
 ZimdariJ^ublishedJ)?*: r .z jdjfi. by Zo/iynuui Sc c'Zrlv/viostc'/ • Row. 
 
Drawn "by E&wfUare. Jirittanu History tec. at Winchester Cathedral. Exigraved "bv R. SaneLs. 
 
 WEEyEJJBIlE&TIEIE. (D ATPIETEIDmAIL (ClHUTlRffilHI, 
 
 VIEW OF TELE EAST EJUQ. 
 
 TO THE REV.” HARRY REE; AZZZtfW OF WINCHESTER COLLEGE, kc. kc. 
 
 This Plate is inscribed hv 
 
 J the AUTHOR,. 
 
 Zondon.,FubUshtd Jati# i. lSrd,byLcrwnuin ScifJiiterru 
 
 CATHEBTELAX. ANTIQUITIES. 
 
 osier Mow. 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 . 
 
 
 
 \ . 
 
 
 
 . 
 
 
 
 
 v 
 
 
 y 
 
 - 
 
 A 
 
 
 .j 
 
 - 
 
 £ m. 
 
 ‘ * 
 
 
 v'; 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 »' • 
 
 
 
 '*» 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 fg- ■ / 
 
 . • . t -m,' • . W *■ * . *_ 
 
 
 •> 
 
 - 
 
 
 
 
 . • v« ■ *» 
 
 
 
 - 
 
 ' - '• 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 V - 
 
 • • ; , 9 
 
 • . •• 
 
 • « 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
URAL ANTIQUITIES 
 
 
 siii 
 
 .a ,’i 
 
 fflfiife' 
 
 fc tni >gif< 
 
 ;- -:t t' 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 B i 
 
 
 |[t))li'®'-h 
 
 l!|illiii||i!lj;.;:;;i) 
 
 : 0maK^St% 
 
 M 
 
 t-j 
 
 
 s 
 
 4 
 
 g 
 
 V> 
 
 <8 
 
 s 
 
 'ri 
 
 K 
 
 Pi 
 
 q 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
 h 
 
 5 
 
 
 . M fekv 
 
 J,ondoiv^ubTished-Auxj?J, J8u. by Zcngrnan k C]\ite/7U)sterRow. 
 
CATHEBRAL ANTIQUE TIDES 
 
 EL.X. 
 
 MVE ; Jl, O OM115CG JSA § T <■ 
 
 To BARNARD WINTER,Esq 1 ! of Winchester. this plate is Inscribed from Motives 
 
 Friendship bu v s -u,,, 
 
 J ^. Jlntuon. 
 
 Isndvn-lUbliskfd IantijS/8, by Zciunnsn I , T Paternoster Tow. 
 
 v 
 
Erupaved T?y~WJ&adelyffe, after a 'Drawing T/yEdwJilore, for Brittons History ke . of Winchester Cathedral. 
 
 WUNcnmOTim catmeidi&ail ommcKi, 
 
 To the Net?Archdeacon Soon. LLSTF.RS.SSA- Prebendary of Winchester See. this Plate is inscribed by thefhtdwr. 
 London Published Ocfi.idiO, by Longman Sc C°Paternoster Row. 
 
TO BICHARD TOWJXJ, MD.FJIS.kA.S.Fellow 
 
 T7ew ot. the J T orth Transept. lot 4cwi<pSFE. 
 
 et'tfic (b/huje oflhysTaans^ffsiaan to .(TPan/helomews. Hospital. Sc Vice President of the. Sodety of-Arts See. 
 ZmttwitaN&tkrJ Mtnii -utjpty &• it fittimoftrrJlw.. this Flair is inscribed by /lutb nr 
 
 I 
 
 - 
 
 5 
 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ' 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Erurraxfed bu W Eadrluffe .from a Drawing 
 
 wm<sisnis^Fim (DAirsiisi&mAn. ctiwirc®, 
 
 CHom.Loorac wist. . 
 
 To the JtEV .' 1 TJiC ? S TLYER.T.C.L. Fro fcssor of Toetnj,in die Umversitz/ of Oxford.kx.fccTTiisplafe' is 
 
 
Erujraved by K.Le Keux, from a,Drawing by Edw. Blare,forBrittertsHistory Scc.af Winchester Cathedral 
 
 N . 
 
 
 I 
 
 TO J7I£ ME VR.EDMUND TO UTTER. M.A. Prebendary of Winchester, and. Chaplain to the Lord Bishop of the. diace/s. 
 
 27m Plate is inscribed, by dw ^ M / Wr 
 
 london,Published. July 1 , 1811 , tyJjtnujman kCTatavostcrAow. 
 
 
 

 
 JEngraxcd lyW^Raddyffo, after a Drawing ty Zdiv.Blorc for Dritto/fs History he. of Winchester Cathedral. 
 
 WhmcmiestiEiIB. sisnsnEsifii, 
 
 ■view qy v/mSEiAM’s chantkts*. ■ - 
 
 To tflO TlZAEDENk FELLOWS of NEW COLLEGE OXECSELiind to tJwV&LRJXEN kiFEIXOWS of WINCHESTER COLLEGE, 
 the &mrdims k Preservers of the at ova Chantry, this view of it is inscribed by y_Q/-[ttvn. 
 
 Eondcn. Published ju/wl.lSn. byXmgrnmkClPetterrwstcrEtow. 
 
 1 1 
 
 I 
 
 ■ 
 
CATHEIIJRA.1L. ANTIQUITIES - a. » C d. e PL.X.VII 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 * - .V 
 
 
 
 
 
 , 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 -• 
 
 
 
 
 
 ' 
 
 
 . . - 
 
 ■ • - 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 -• •' • 
 
 - 
 
 •h • 
 ’ : 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ■ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 . \ 
 
 
 * 
 
 
 
 
 
CATHEKRAIL ANTIQUITIES 
 
 • -, •- 
 
 
 ■n ■ - 
 
 
 
 ;?> 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 .- ■ 
 
 
 \ • 
 
 
 - 
 
 — 
 
 _ 
 

f aTT flHK.irro a i a antiqitDitie s 
 
 1PI,.WT 
 
 Inches 1 ? .f. * _ t _ ? Feet 
 
 Engraved bv Edm? TurreW,otter a Drawing by EJw.Elore. 
 
 ■ WlrW(SIRIIEOTISm (SAinsmMAIL CGIHIIU]E.(DM , 
 
 ('ary ed HI b o d HI brk. 
 
 I,ondon, Published Mav 1.1811 by Longman k CEutenwsterlow. 
 
 
 
 
 


 CATHEBMAJL ANTIQUITIES 
 
 Engraved by JohnLe Keux from cLDrayvinq by Edxv. Blore for Brittons History kc _ of IVivichoster Cathedral . 
 
 'WHH(SISIlgTriSlS,’(SATrMIEPISA]L' (CfflUETMlHI, 
 
 SECTIOlf k ELETATJOITJEAgT OE THE A1LTAR. SCKEIEHo 
 TO TEEREV 0 IREEERIC IBEMCNGERA.M.-E.X.S.TLuxher of Sermons kEJsays on The reformation of uimituds 
 • k education of poor Children kc. This plate is Inscribed by 
 
 London.. Published Stun-1,1811. Vy Longman, k C?Paternoster Row. 
 
 ) 
 
 
 
 

 
 
 
 
 * 
 

 1 ; fc 
 E v 
 
 
 9! ^ 
 
 ;; 
 
 « 5 
 
 
 5 § 
 
 ** $; 
 
 £, 3 
 
 
 k r - 
 
 .; 
 
 c 
 
 W £ 
 
 
 s ^ 
 
 H *>o 
 
 r^S 
 
 VJ 
 
 £ S' 
 g 
 
 3? E'-l 
 
 * b 
 
 t=i 
 
 «; ft 
 W to 
 
 'W 
 
 ri5 
 
 r »■ 
 
 ■| oc3 
 
 He 
 
 ;|| 
 
 'v ^3i 
 
 « [=4 
 
 J H 
 tQ 
 
 ■if j 
 
 ii 
 
 I H 
 
 In 
 
 £ ^ 
 
 .>>9 
 
 ;ia 
 
 40 
 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 I 
 
 
 ' 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 * 
 
 
CATHEDRAL ANTI QUOTE S • . . • ' ■"IPL.XXV; 
 
 
 

CATHEDRAL ANTIQUITIES, PL.IT7I. 
 
 Tt.-hr.j lv TTTr 7Trr/.r Tr,wi .1 '/)'niwiruj h-~£,iw.HLvr. nnZrifor/is ZLstcrn’ kc— of' ‘ft’uiAestw Cathedral. 
 
 wnKTcraiiE^TiEm' catmie'meail: cmpiech. 
 
 Side of cm Ancient Tcvrib k hvo Effigies.. 
 
 Zandm ZubUrhed 3Rzrch i.idz'j. JfyZarupndn I 6 °Rzt&'noster Raw. 
 
WOTCIHIESTEm (DTOMIBI, 
 
 Nave: One Compartment, externally Sc intcr/ially. 
 
 Ionian .RchUshed, FeiSxTdr/.fy Ztmgmm Sc C’TatcmasterSew. 
 
- 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ' 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 • ' • • 
 
 - 
 
 
 , . . 
 
 i 1 ' 
 
 , 
 
 • \ * • • . • 
 
 
 ■ v 
 
 ■ 
 
 
 
 
 - 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 : 
 
 ’ 
 
 
 >• * - ;• 
 
 
 
 
 
 c'- -' * . • 
 
 • • * ► . * * •— J . . . i . . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ■ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 - . ' . 
 
 . 
 
 
 
 ‘ 
 
 
 
 
 
 * \ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ■ • 
 
 
 > - • ' 
 
 ■ 
 
 . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 . - , ■ . •* 
 
 
 
 
 
 • - x 
 
 
 ■ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 -du M , ...» . Jki 
 
jElevatu?zi ulterior X' eoi&wr. near, tiusiltdr 
 f,o7iJon Jid)/irhidj)hirrfi, liSj 7 ,by Zcmy/nan k CfZatemoJt&'Jtmv. 
 
 dy i 'eet 
 

 
 
 . ■ 
 
 ' 
 
 
 
 
 ' 
 
 
 
 
 
 / 
 
 
 
 
 ■ . 
 
 \i ■ ■ 
 
 ' ./■< - S ■ •; . ■ 
 
 ■> 
 
 .• . 
 
 V'.. - 
 
 • ■' ■.< , , 
 
 . •. . • • 
 
 ,v'.- ; ■ ■ s ■ ■ • ; ■ • ■ ' v- .. a 
 
 / V - ■ : 
 
 . 
 
 
 •j 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 * 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ■ : -• '■* • ■ 
 
 ■ 
 
 .. * 
 
 
 . 
 
 . 
 
 
 
 ■ 
 
 
 
 A • 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ' 
 
 •' 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Tiro Views of the Font . 
 
 Zmidtm,FiU>lis7ud Zoru/man kCtZasernostcrUaw. 
 
 ■ 
 
 
 
 

 
 
 
 
 »* 
 
 
 ' 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 . 
 
 
 
 . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
THE 
 
 HISTORY AND ANTIQUITIES 
 
 OF TIIE 
 
 SEE AND CATHEDRAL CHURCH 
 
 OF 
 
 LICHFIELD ; 
 
 JLEUSTHATED BY 
 
 A SERIES OF ENGRAVINGS 
 
 OF 
 
 VIEWS, ELEVATIONS, PLANS, AND DETAILS 
 
 OF THE 
 
 ARCHITECTURE OF THE CHURCH: 
 
 WITH 
 
 BIOGRAPHICAL ANECDOTES OF THE BISHOPS 
 
 OF 
 
 LICHFIELD AND COVENTRY. 
 
 BY JOHN BRITTON, F.S.A. 
 
 ETC. 
 
 LONDON: 
 
 M. A. NATTALI, 19, SOUTHAMPTON-STREET, COVENT-GARDEN. 
 
 1836. 
 
MARCUANT, PRINTER, 1 KC R A M-COU RT, I'ENCIl U RCII-STREET 
 
TO 
 
 THE VERY REVEREND 
 
 JOHN CH APPEL WOODHOUSE, D. D. 
 
 DEAN OF LICHFIELD: 
 
 AND 
 
 TO THE REV. CHARLES BUCKERIDGE, D.D. 
 
 PRECENTOR, AND CANON RESIDENTIARY: 
 
 THE REV. HUGH B A I L Y E, M. A. 
 
 CHANCELLOR, AND CANON RESIDENTIARY: 
 
 THE REV. EDWARD OUT RAM, D.D. 
 
 TREASURER, AND CANON RESIDENTIARY: 
 
 THE REV. JOHN NEWLING, B.D. 
 
 CANON RESIDENTIARY: 
 
 THE REV. ROBERT NARES, M. A. 
 
 . CANON RESIDENTIARY". 
 
 AND TO 
 
 THE REV. SPENCER MADAN, M.A. 
 
 canon residentiary: 
 
 THIS VOLUME, 
 
 ILLUSTRATIVE OF THE HISTORY AND ARCHITECTURE OF THE CATHEDRAL OVER WHICH 
 THEY PRESIDE WITH DISTINGUISHED HONOR TO THEMSELVES, 
 
 IS RESPECTFULLY INSCRIBED BY 
 
 THE AUTHOR. 
 
 December , 1819. 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 0 
 
 
 ' 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 It is a common remark, that “ church work is slowand it may be 
 also inferred, by the practice of authors and artists, that literary and 
 embellished works on Ancient Architecture, are also slow. Two years 
 have elapsed since the present volume was announced ; and it may 
 have surprised and disappointed some persons to have watched its tardy 
 progress and final completion. As now presented, it has not been 
 accomplished without considerable difficulties and solicitude; and 
 though it may not afford that general satisfaction which the author is 
 always anxious to impart, or be equal to his intentions and wishes, 
 it is hoped that it will be interesting to many of the collectors of this 
 species of literature. It must be allowed by the impartial critic, that 
 the architectural forms, proportions, and ornaments of the church have 
 never before been given with equal accuracy; and it is presumed that 
 its history and description will be found carefully investigated and 
 developed. In this, as in all other literary works, the author has 
 anxiously endeavoured to ascertain facts, and to elucidate those points 
 of history which have hitherto been obscure or questionable ; yet he 
 cannot help regretting that he has on the present occasion sought in 
 vain for original documents and evidence. His practice has been to 
 compare and analyze the contents of all published works, and to obtain, 
 if possible, access to new and authentic sources of information. From 
 these he deduces historical data, and in every instance refers to author¬ 
 ities. Fastidious and scrupulous himself, he concludes that his readers 
 may require the same demonstration and validity of evidence which he 
 regards as necessary to produce conviction. He is also willing to 
 believe that the purchaser of this work, whether architect or antiquary, 
 will be satisfied with nothing less than accurate delineations of the 
 geometrical forms of arches, and other parts of the edifice, by which 
 
 a 
 
VI 
 
 PREFACE. 
 
 alone substantial knowledge can be obtained. Many persons, no doubt, 
 prefer pretty picturesque views and artificial effects of light and shade ; 
 they seek only to please the eye, and do not wish to trouble the think¬ 
 ing faculties with doubts and investigations. To such persons, however, 
 the Cathedral Antiquities is not addressed ; for this is intended to 
 elucidate and define the ecclesiastical architecture and antiquities of 
 our native country; which can only be done by plans, sections, and 
 elevations of buildings. Much controversy and discussion have been 
 employed respecting the shapes and varied gradation of arches ; and 
 there still exists much uncertainty and confusion on the subject. All 
 this may be avoided by having them correctly drawn, in elevation, 
 and their mouldings and ornaments defined by horizontal sections. 
 This system is attempted in the present work; in the ground plan, 
 sections of the west front, transept, &c. and in the elevations of the 
 same, with parts at large. 
 
 It is but justice to the respectable members of this church establish¬ 
 ment to acknowledge their polite attentions to the author, and readiness 
 to give him every assistance and every facility of ingress and egress to 
 their cathedral, its books, and its archives. Unlike some ecclesiastical 
 officers, who either deny access or render its attainment difficult and 
 vexatious, here the worthy dean and chapter seemed as if they were 
 the obliged, rather than the obliging parties. The author therefore 
 begs to present his best thanks to the following gentlemen, for their 
 many marks of personal civility and assistance during his execution of 
 the volume now submitted to the public :—The Dean of Lichfield ; 
 the Rev. Dr. Buckeridge; the Rev. Hugh Bailye; the Rev. 
 Archdeacon Nares ; the Rev. John Newling ; the Rev. Henry 
 White; R. J. Harper, Esq.; Wm. Hamper, Esq.; Mr. Potter, 
 Jun.; Mr. Johnson ; and Mr. Lomax. 
 
HISTORY AND ANTIQUITIES 
 
 OF 
 
 LICHFIELD CATHEDRAL CHURCH. 
 
 CHAP. I. 
 
 LICHFIELD, THE BIRTH-PLACE AND HOME OF PERSONS OF TALENT :-THE 
 
 ORIGIN AND NAME OF LICHFIELD I-TRADITION RELATING TO BRITISH 
 
 MARTYRS: - ESTABLISHMENT OF CHRISTIANITY IN THE KINGDOM OF 
 
 MERCIA, AND OF THE FIRST MERCIAN BISHOPS:-HISTORY OF THE SEE 
 
 OF LICHFIELD AND COVENTRY. 
 
 The name of Lichfield is intimately associated with the history and litera¬ 
 ture of the kingdom. In the early annals of Britain we frequently find it 
 mentioned in the accounts of several religious and military events. It 
 is connected with our national literature as the natal spot, or the home, of 
 many distinguished authors, particularly of Dr. Johnson, David Garrick, 
 Bishop Newton, Joseph Addison, Lady Mary Wortley Montague, Mr. and 
 Miss Edgeworth, Dr. James, Gilbert Walmsley, James Day, Dr. Darwin, 
 Miss Seward, and Richard Green. Many of the Prelates and Deans of the 
 See have also been distinguished for their literary, or ecclesiastical talents, 
 and have been promoted to high stations in the church or state. Every 
 reader who has a heart to feel, and a head to appreciate the profound 
 lucubrations of the stern moralist Dr. Johnson, must experience a degree 
 of reverence and respect for the place where he first drew his breath and 
 
b 
 
 LICHFIELD CATHEDRAL. 
 
 derived his early perceptions. In the character of this colossus of litera¬ 
 ture, we observe a strange and anomalous mixture of wisdom and weak¬ 
 ness, of philosophy and credulity ; whilst the consummate histrionic 
 talents, and professional jealousies of a Garrick, naturally excite the 
 mingled emotions of pleasure and of pity. From such contemplations we 
 may infer that Providence organizes and regulates the mental as well as 
 the material world on a plan above our comprehension, by blending wis¬ 
 dom and folly, good and evil, light and shade so intimately, but incon¬ 
 gruously together, that what mankind esteem perfection is never to be 
 
 found. Of Gilbert Walmsley, who was registrar of this See, Dr. Johnson 
 
 observes, in his Life of Edmund Smith, that he was “ not able to name a 
 man of equal knowledge. His acquaintance with books was great; such 
 was his amplitude of learning, and such his copiousness of communication, 
 that it may be doubted whether a day now passes in which I have not 
 some advantage from his friendship. At this man’s table I enjoyed many 
 cheerful and instructive hours with companions such as are not often 
 found ; with one who has lengthened, and one who has gladdened life; 
 with Dr. James, whose skill in physic will be long remembered ; and with 
 David Garrick, whose death has eclipsed the gaiety of nations, and impo¬ 
 verished the public stock of harmless pleasure.” Thus, by the power of 
 
 exciting particular reflections and sentiments, certain spots of the earth 
 
 become endeared to our memories, and consecrated to our admiration; 
 and this interest belongs preeminently to the birth-place of genius and the 
 asylum of talent. Hence Woolsthorpe is justly immortalized for a New¬ 
 ton :—London for a Milton :—Plympton for a Reynolds : — Stratford-upon- 
 Avon for a Shakspeare, and Lichfield for a Johnson. It is thus that 
 places and persons become mutually associated and linked together, and 
 produce those “ Pleasures of Imagination” which at once afford exercise 
 and delight to the thinking faculties. Influenced by this feeling, we shall 
 view with additional gratification the beautiful cathedral of this city. As 
 an object of architecture and antiquity it excites our admiration : but 
 examined in all its relations and connexions with the history of religion, 
 the progress of art, the varied states of civilization, and with the good 
 
NAME OF LICHFIELD. 
 
 9 
 
 and eminent persons whose ashes repose beneath its roof, it is replete with 
 interest and importance. It invites at once the contemplations of philosophy, 
 and the pleasing toil of antiquarian research ; which, if judiciously directed, 
 cannot fail to elicit additional objects of mental recreation and pleasure. Let 
 us proceed to verify this position by a brief view of the history of the See 
 and Cathedral of Lichfield. 
 
 When the fierce and credulous Anglo-Saxons were induced, by the mis¬ 
 sionaries of the Roman pontiffs, to exchange their gloomy superstition for 
 the name, rather than the principles of Christianity, and to transfer their 
 idolatry from the blood-stained altars of their imaginary gods to harmless 
 relics and images, a radical alteration commenced in their manners, institu¬ 
 tions, and policy, and rapidly produced the most important results. A 
 faithful and comprehensive history of these events would be peculiarly 
 interesting and instructive ; but most of the meagre records of the Anglo- 
 Saxon age have long since perished, and those which remain abound 
 with gross fabrications. The most blind and ignorant credulity, and 
 the most humiliating submission to ecclesiastical despotism, were suc¬ 
 cessfully inculcated by the Roman emissaries, and adopted by their Saxon 
 converts as the primary articles of their new religion ; and the principal 
 object of the histories or legends of the times was to extend and perpetuate 
 those delusive notions. Hence we are disgusted by their clumsy miracles, 
 shocked at the misapplication of the most sacred epithets, and compelled 
 to view their simplest statements of facts, apparently indifferent, with 
 doubt and suspicion, because we know not how far the interest of the writers 
 may have influenced their assertions. Such are the materials however from 
 which the early history of the English episcopal sees must necessarily be col¬ 
 lected, not only by patient and laborious investigation, but by the exercise of 
 rational discrimination. 
 
 The introduction of Christianity into the kingdom of Mercia, the insti¬ 
 tution of the Mercian episcopacy, the establishment and history of the See 
 of Lichfield and Coventry, are subjects on which ancient authorities are 
 so discordant, that the most opposite conclusions have been drawn from 
 them. The following account, it is hoped, will be found the most clear and 
 
10 
 
 LICHFIELD CATHEDRAL. 
 
 satisfactory which has hitherto appeared : it has at least been procured with 
 great care and research from original sources of information. Nothing is 
 advanced without authority ; no single authority has been implicitly relied 
 on ; nor have even the most rational conjectures been assumed as facts. 
 Where certainty could not be obtained, the author has submitted his own 
 opinions, or those of former writers, which in his judgment were well 
 founded, together with the grounds on which those opinions have been 
 formed. 
 
 The name of Lichfield is of Saxon origin, but its etymology has long 
 been a subject of dispute. In the Saxon Chronicle the word is written 
 Licetfelcl; in Bede, Lyccetfelth , and Licitfeld; subsequent writers call it 
 Licethfeld, Lichesfeld, and Lychfeld. By some authors it is derived from 
 “ leccianfi to water; as being watered by the river; by others, from “Itece," 
 a physician ; perhaps it may with more probability be supposed to have 
 originated in the verb “ licean,” or “ lician,’' to like , 1 or be agreeable; and 
 therefore, to signify Pleasant Field. But it has generally been considered as 
 derived from “ lie” a dead body, and consequently as signifying “ cadaverum 
 campus ,” the field of dead bodies. This derivation is however conceived to 
 be supported by a tradition, which prevails very generally in Lichfield, of 
 the martyrdom of a great number of British Christians there, during the 
 persecution under Dioclesian and Maximian. As this tradition has been 
 noticed in every history of the cathedral, and in some is adduced as the 
 reason for the establishment of the See on the spot consecrated by an event 
 of such religious importance, it cannot, with propriety, be neglected in this 
 place. The substance of it is, that a thousand Christians, the disciples of 
 St. Amphibalus, suffered martyrdom in the time of that persecution, on 
 the ground whereon Lichfield was afterwards built. “ Whence the city 
 retains the name of Lichfield , or ‘cadaverum campus,’ the field of dead 
 bodies, and bears for its device, rather than arms, an escutcheon of land- 
 
 1 To like was formerly used in the sense of “to be liked.” Thus “the offer likes not,” in 
 Shakspeare’s Henry V. (Act III. chorus) means, ‘the offer is not liked.’ In Hamlet, “ it likes 
 us well,” is used for ‘ it is well liked by us ; ’ or, as we should now say, ‘ we like it well.’ Act. II. 
 Scene 2. 
 
KINGDOM OF MERCIA. 
 
 11 
 
 scape with many martyrs in it in several ways massacred.” 2 But as this 
 device could not have been used in any authentic shape before the incor¬ 
 poration of the guild in 1387, (when it might be borne in the common 
 seal,) it can add little weight to the tradition of a fact so very remote. 
 Several writers of eminence are of opinion, that St. Amphibalus (like St. 
 Veronica, and several other Saints in the Roman calendar,) never existed ; 
 that his name originated in a mistake made by Jeffrey of Monmouth, and 
 that the whole legend relating to him was fabricated after the time of that 
 historian. 3 
 
 The first authentic mention of Lichfield occurs in Bede's Ecclesiastical 
 History, where it is alluded to as the see of an Anglo-Saxon Bishop, nearly 
 four hundred years after the date ascribed to the martyrdom of the dis¬ 
 ciples of Amphibalus. In that long interval the Romans had been com¬ 
 pelled to abandon the province of Britain, in order to defend the centre of 
 their falling empire : the Britons, overpowered by their more warlike neigh¬ 
 bours, the Scots and Piets, had summoned the Saxons, an idolatrous nation 
 of Germany, to their aid : the latter having possessed themselves of the coun¬ 
 try they were invited to defend, had driven its aboriginal inhabitants into 
 Wales and Cornwall; established seven kingdoms in Britain; and almost 
 universally adopted the Christian religion. The conversion of the kingdom 
 of Mercia, of which the present diocess of Lichfield and Coventry anciently 
 formed a part, must however engage our present inquiry. 
 
 Among the kingdoms of the Saxon Heptarchy, that of Mercia, under 
 its pagan monarch, Penda, was the most extensive and powerful. The 
 neighbouring princes had embraced the profession of the Christian faith, 
 
 2 Plot’s “ Natural History of Staffordshire,” ch. x. § 12, p. 398. This account is given on the 
 authority of John Ross or Rous, whose work is quoted by Plot in several places thus, “ Ex libro 
 Johannis Rufi, MS. de episcopis Wigorn.” Bishop Nicholson says he should not have believed 
 the existence of this MS. had it not been quoted by Dr. Plot. (Historical Library, fo. 1736, p. 135.) 
 And Shaw seems disposed to think that it never existed, and misquotes Bishop Nicholson in support 
 of his opinion. (Hist. Staffordshire, vol. i. p. 298.) But the MS. is quoted to the same effect by 
 Speed. (Hist. Great Britain, fol. 339.) 
 
 3 Lloyd’s “ Historical Account of Church Government,” &c. p. 151, 152; and Archbishop 
 Usher’s work, “ De primordiis Ecclesiae Britannic®,” p. 151, 156, 159, 641, 
 
 B 
 
12 
 
 LICHFIELD CATHEDRAL. 
 
 and as Penda was continually engaged in successful warfare against them, 
 he has been erroneously characterized as a sanguinary persecutor of the 
 Christians. 4 But there is no reason to believe that he ever attacked any 
 of his neighbours on account of their religion. 5 The nominal Christians 
 of those, and of subsequent times, were more addicted to such impious 
 aggressions than the Mercian idolaters, or any other pagans : and it is not 
 improbable that Penda himself fell a victim to their fanatical zeal. This 
 monarch had delegated to Peda, his eldest son, the government of the 
 Middle Angles, who inhabited Leicestershire. That young prince, in 653, 
 visited the court of Oswy, the Christian king of Northumberland, and 
 became a suitor to his daughter, Alcfleda. Oswy consented to their union, 
 on condition that Peda would renounce idolatry ; which he agreeing to, 
 was baptized, and soon afterwards married. On returning to his province 
 he was accompanied by four priests, for the purpose of instructing the people 
 in the Christian faith. 6 Within two years after these events, Penda was 
 defeated in battle by Oswy, and slain ; and Peda was deputed by the victor 
 to rule the Mercians, south of the Trent, who occupied the most considerable 
 portion of Penda’s dominions. Although the monastic historians represent 
 Penda as the aggressor, and tell us that Oswy, with a small band, over¬ 
 came the mighty host of the Mercians, through the special interposition of 
 Providence, the modern reader may be allowed to distrust this marvellous 
 tale. Peda does not appear to have combated for his father ; on the con¬ 
 trary, we find him, after the victory, high in Oswy’s favour: and although 
 it is not recorded that he, with his newly converted subjects, followed the 
 banners of Oswy in this war ; yet we must at least conclude that he ob¬ 
 served a neutrality, which would deprive his father of a very material part 
 of the aid he had a right to expect. But Peda was not long permitted to 
 
 4 “ Immanissimi tyranni, et paganis ritibus deditissimi.” Ang. Sac. v. i. p. 423. 
 
 5 “ Nor did King Penda obstruct the preaching of the word among his people, that is, the 
 Mercians, if any were willing to hear it; but, on the contrary, he hated and despised those whom 
 he perceived not to perform the works of faith, when they had received the faith of Christ; saying, 
 They were contemptible and wretched, who did not obey their God, in whom they believed.” 
 Bede’s Eccles. Hist. 1. iii. ch. xxi. p. 234. Translation of 1723. 
 
 6 Bede’s Eccl. Hist, ut sup. 
 
FIRST BISHOPS OF LICHFIELD. 
 
 13 
 
 share the extensive sway of Oswy, being murdered about twelve months 
 after the death of his father. Common report imputed the deed to the 
 treachery of his wife, the daughter of Oswy. 7 From this period the Nor¬ 
 thumbrian king possessed the throne of Mercia nearly three years without 
 partner or rival ; when some of the Mercian nobles, unable longer to endure 
 his yoke, raised an insurrection, expelled his forces from their country, 
 and placed Wulfere, the younger son of Penda, on the throne. When 
 we consider the inveterate enmity between Penda and Oswy, the impla¬ 
 cability and ferocity of the latter, 9 the critical period of Peda’s conversion, 
 and his untimely fate so speedily following the overthrow of his father, it 
 is impossible not to suspect that the conversion of the Middle Angles was 
 undertaken for the purpose of dividing the power of Penda; and that 
 Peda was instrumental in advancing the ambitious Oswy to the Mercian 
 throne. The crimes and follies of mankind are often seen to aid in fulfilling 
 the benevolent purposes of the Almighty : thus the ambition of Oswy, and 
 the fatal passion of Peda for an unworthy object, introduced the Christian 
 faith into the most powerful kingdom of the Saxon Heptarchy. 
 
 This important event happened in 656, when Oswy and his son-in-law, 
 Peda, founded the Mercian Church, by appointing Diuma, one of the four 
 priests who had accompanied the prince on his return from Northumbria, 
 to preside as bishop over the Mercians, Middle Angles, the people of Lin- 
 disfarne, and the neighbouring provinces. 10 Cellach succeeded Diuma, but 
 retired on the revolution which raised Wulfere to the throne, who nominated 
 Trumhere to this bishopric. Jarumarm succeeded Trumhere, and upon the 
 death of Jarumann, the famous Ceadda was appointed to this diocess. 11 
 This prelate had been consecrated Bishop of York, and had governed that 
 diocess for three years. But on being reproved by Theodore, Archbishop 
 
 7 Bede, 1. iii. ch. xxiv. 8 Ibid. 
 
 9 Witness his base assassination of Oswin. Bede, I. iii. ch. xiv. 
 
 10 Bede’s Eccl. Hist. I. iii. ch. xxiv. 
 
 11 Many particulars of the life of Ceadda will be found dispersed through Bede’s Ecclesiastical 
 History; and little reliance can be placed on any anecdotes or leg-ends relating to him that are not 
 derived from that source. 
 
 B 2 
 
/ 
 
 14 
 
 LICHFIELD CATHEDRAL. 
 
 of Canterbury, as irregularly ordained, the submissive Ceadda, with great 
 humility, offered to resign the episcopal dignity; and although Theodore 
 would not accept his abdication, he retired to his monastery of Lastingham, 
 which had been founded by his brother Cedd, then Bishop of London. 
 From this seclusion, Ceadda was summoned by Theodore, in 669, to assume 
 the government of the Mercian diocess, vacant by the death of Jarumann. 
 The monks of Medeshamstead, or Peterborough, invented a romantic tale 
 respecting the conversion of King Wulfere by this bishop. 12 It relates, that 
 while Ceadda was living in a cell by the side of a spring, where he was 
 nourished by the milk of a doe, the two sons of King Wulfere accidentally 
 discovered his retreat; and, being converted by the hermit to Christianity, 
 frequently repaired to his cell for purposes of devotion. But the cruel pagan, 
 their father, having watched their movements, slew them both in the presence 
 of their instructor. Being afterwards distracted with remorse for these un¬ 
 natural murders, he sought the pious bishop, who had fled from his cell, and 
 earnestly implored his forgiveness and intercession with heaven. Ceadda 
 embraced this occasion to impress on his mind the truths of Christianity ; but, 
 unwilling to trust too much to his admonitions, adopted the expedient of 
 hanging his cloak upon a sunbeam ! which notable miracle completed the con¬ 
 version of the penitent idolater. 13 But if this story had not been totally 
 unfounded, it would surely have been noticed by Bede, who gives a very 
 particular and sufficiently marvellous account of St. Ceadda; 14 nor do either 
 the Saxon Chronicle, or William of Malmesbury’s History, allude to any 
 such events. 
 
 12 Leland’s Collectanea, vol. i. p. 1. The account of this conversion is abridged by Leland, 
 from a book “ Autoris incerti nominis, sed monachi, ut col/igo, Petroburgensis.” Speed also 
 relates this affair on the authority of “ the Liger-Booke of the Monastery of Peterborow.” Hist, of 
 Great Britain, book vii. p. 356.—In Gunton’s *•' History, &c. of the Church of Peterburgh,” this 
 account is noticed in some monkish verses from the Cloister Windows. 
 
 13 See Gunton’s “ History of the Church of Peterburgh,” pp. 2 and 3, with the Supplement by 
 Dr. Patrick, pp. 229 to 233, where'this silly and impious story is treated as the forgery of an old 
 anonymous writer. 
 
 14 The Legend states, that the monastery of Peterborough was founded by Wulfere in expiation 
 of his crime ; but Bede ascribes the foundation to Sexulf, its first abbot, afterwards Bishop of 
 the Mercians. In the Saxon Chronicle it is attributed to King Peda. It is to be remarked, that 
 Wulfere is always mentioned by Bede as a zealous Christian. 
 
DIVISION OF SEES. 
 
 15 
 
 “ Ceadda,” according to Bede, “ had his episcopal see in the place called 
 Licitfield, in which he also died, and was buried ; where also the see of the 
 succeeding bishops of that province still continues. He had built himself an 
 habitation not far removed from the church, wherein he was wont to 
 pray and read with a few, that is, seven or eight of the brethren, as often 
 as he had any spare time from the labour and ministry of the word.” 15 
 After presiding upwards of two years, he died in 670, and was first buried 
 near St. Mary’s church ; 16 but afterwards, when the church of St. Peter was 
 built, his remains were removed into that edifice. 17 Miraculous cures were 
 said to have been wrought by his relics; and a story having been indus¬ 
 triously circulated that his death was announced, and his departure solem¬ 
 nized by the songs of angels, his sepulchre became the resort of numerous 
 superstitious devotees. 18 
 
 In 673, Archbishop Theodore assembled a synod at Heorutford, 19 
 wherein ten of the canons, chiefly relating to ecclesiastical discipline, were 
 propounded by the archbishop, nine of which were agreed to; but one, 
 which directed that more bishops should be made, as the number of the 
 faithful increased, was for that time passed over. 20 Winfrid, the successor 
 of Ceadda, was soon afterwards deposed, on account of some disobedience, 
 (says Bede ); whence it has been rationally inferred that he had refused his 
 consent to the ordination of more English bishops; a measure devised by 
 Theodore chiefly to effect a division of the immense province of Mercia, 
 which comprised nearly half of England, and was then under the government 
 
 is Eccl. H ist. book iv. ch. iii. Translation of 1723. 
 
 16 This is the earliest mention of a church at Lichfield : which appears to have been dedicated 
 to St. Mary: it was probably one of the monasteries founded by Oswy after his victory over Penda. 
 See Bede, Eccl. Hist, book iii. ch. xxiv. Or perhaps it was one of the parish churches then lately 
 raised under the auspices of Archbishop Theodore. 
 
 17 Bede, ut sup. 18 Ibid. 
 
 !9 Generally supposed to be Hertford, but more probably Retford in Nottinghamshire, as Bede 
 dates this council in the third year of King Egfrid, in whose dominions it must therefore be sup¬ 
 posed to have been held. Carte, Hist. England, vol. i. p. 246. 
 
 20 Bede, lib. iv. ch. v. Wilkins’s Concilia, vol. i. p. 41. 
 
16 
 
 LICHFIELD CATHEDRAL. 
 
 of the Bishop of Lichfield. 21 This object was steadily pursued, and at length 
 procured by the archbishop; 22 but the dates and particulars of the several 
 alterations and divisions are involved in almost impenetrable obscurity. 23 
 The learned editor of “ Anglia Sacra,” having minutely and patiently 
 investigated the subject, by comparing all the authorities, the account given 
 by him, and supported by numerous references, will here be chiefly relied 
 on. 24 Sexulf, the successor of Winfrid, manifested a partial compliance 
 with the views of Theodore, by instituting the See of Hereford in 676. 
 Between the years 670 and 675, King Ecgfrid, 25 of Northumberland, having 
 defeated Wulfere, reduced the province of Lindsey under his own domi¬ 
 nion ; which, therefore, according to the law of that age, became separated 
 from the Mercian See, and incorporated with that of Wilfrid, the Northum¬ 
 brian bishop. In 678, after much contention with Wilfrid, Theodore pre¬ 
 vailed on King Ecgfrid to divide the Northumbrian province into several 
 bishoprics; among which he assigned the district of Lindsey to Eathed, 
 whose see he fixed at Sidnacester. In the following year the Mercians 
 recovered Lindsey, and restored it to the See of Lichfield ; but this re¬ 
 union was of short duration, for Theodore having procured the confirmation 
 of the Synod of Hatfield to the decree for increasing the number of bishops 
 in the same year, 679, prevailed on the king of Mercia to divide the 
 remainder of the Mercian diocess (that of Hereford having already been 
 taken out of it) into four bishoprics, viz. Lichfield, Legecestre (supposed 
 
 3* 
 
 21 Warton’s Ang. Sac. vol. i. p. 426, note. 
 
 22 Theodore was equally distinguished as a prelate, a scholar, and a Christian ; and his religion 
 seems to have approached nearly to the primitive standard. His extraordinary talents were 
 uniformly exerted for the purposes of extending and inculcating the pure doctrines of Chris¬ 
 tianity. With equal firmness he maintained his own legitimate jurisdiction, and resisted the 
 ambitious encroachments of the court of Rome. In the History of Canterbury Cathedral (now 
 preparing for the press) the author will attempt a sketch of the biography of this truly eminent 
 divine, to whom the church of England is probably more indebted than to any other of the prelates 
 who presided in it before the Reformation. 
 
 23 “ Our history here is very dark : and the succession of the first bishops of Rome is not more 
 involved than is that of Lichfield.” Johnson’s “ Ecclesiastical Laws,” Part I. dclxxiii. 
 
 24 Ang. Sac. vol. i. p. 423. 25 Called Egbert by Warton. Ang. Sac. ut sup. 
 
s 
 
 FIRST CATHEDRAL. - A. D. 700. i7 
 
 by Johnson to be West-Chester, 26 but by William of Malmesbury and 
 Camden, 27 stated to be Leicester) Lindsey, and Worcester. The See of 
 the first remained at Lichfield, the second was placed at Leicester, the 
 third at Dorchester, in Oxfordshire, and the fourth at Worcester. Sexulf 
 being allowed his choice, preferred Lichfield, which still retained by far 
 the most extensive jurisdiction. Soon afterwards Cuthwin, who had been 
 appointed to Leicester, resigned, or died ; after which Sexulf governed 
 both bishoprics till the time of his death, which happened in 691. At that 
 period, Wilfrid, having been expelled from the See of York, resided with 
 Ethelred, king of Mercia, who committed to his care the diocess of Lei¬ 
 cester; while Hedcla obtained that of Lichfield. But Wilfrid being de¬ 
 prived, by the Synod of Nesterfeld, in 703, both dioceses again coalesced 
 under the authority of Hedda; nor were they disunited during the time of 
 his successor, Aldwin. But on the death of the latter, Huicta, or Witta, 
 was appointed to Lichfield, and Totta to Leicester. Henceforth the diocess 
 of Lichfield experienced no further alteration in its limits until, in a sub¬ 
 sequent age, that of Chester was dismembered from it. Hedda erected the 
 cathedral church of St. Peter at Lichfield, which he consecrated, 2 Kal. 
 January, 700, and the bones of St. Ceadda were then translated into the new 
 edifice as already mentioned. 28 
 
 About the year 785, Offa, King of Mercia, who had subdued the respective 
 kings of Kent, of the East Angles, and of the West Saxons, conceived the 
 idea of exalting the diocess of Lichfield to the dignity of an archbishopric. 
 
 26 Ecclesiastical Laws, Part I. dclxxiii. 
 
 27 De Gest. Pontif. lib. iv. de Epis. Legecest. Rer. Angl. Scrip, post Bedam praecipui, 1601. 
 Gough’s Camden, vol. ii. p. 202. Much confusion has arisen from the similarity of the Anglo- 
 Saxon names of these cities, which are frequently mistaken for each other by historians. Lei¬ 
 cester was called Legerciester, Lygeraceaster, Legraceaster, Ligoracester, and Ligora—Chester, 
 Legecestre, and Legeacester. Yet Malmesbury applies the word Legecestra to Leicester. See 
 Ormerod’s “ History of the County Palatine and City of Chester,” vol. i. p. 70, &c. It is with 
 peculiar pleasure that I refer to, and recommend this valuable work to the attention of all lovers of 
 topography. 
 
 28 Thomae Chesterfield, Canonici Lichfeldensis, Historia de Episcopis Coventrensibus et Liche- 
 feldensibus. Ang. Sac. vol. i. p. 428. 
 
18 
 
 LICHFIELD CATHEDRAL. 
 
 To this measure he was induced partly by a jealous dislike of Janbrycht, 
 Archbishop of Canterbury, and partly by the desire of increasing the im¬ 
 portance of his native kingdom, and emancipating its bishops from the 
 jurisdiction of the Kentish prelate, which, after the conquest of Kent by 
 the Mercians, was incompatible wtth the civil state of the respective king¬ 
 doms. A synod of English bishops, assembled at Calchyth, compelled 
 Janbrycht to resign all jurisdiction over the Mercian and East Anglian 
 Sees, which were made subordinate to Higebert, then Bishop of Lichfield. 
 Application was immediately made to Rome for a pall, but it was not received 
 during the life of Higebert, who died in 786. But the representations and 
 munificence of Ofia obtained this favour for the succeeding prelate, Aldulf> 
 who enjoyed the archiepiscopal dignity during the life of that prince. But 
 Kenulph, the succeeding king of Mercia, at the instigation of the English 
 clergy, petitioned Leo III. then pope, to reverse the edicts made under 
 the influence of OfFa, 29 and obtained a decree that the See of Canterbury 
 should be restored to all its rights and privileges. Under this sanction, a 
 synod held in Cloveshoe, in 803, unanimously pronounced the grant of the 
 pall and metropolitical dignity to the Bishop of Lichfield to be null and void, 
 as surreptitiously and fraudulently obtained. The name of Aldulf is signed 
 to this council, with the addition of “ Episcopus.” 
 
 The history of this See presents nothing more of particular interest until 
 after the Norman Conquest; when the national council, held at London, in 
 1075, resolved upon the removal of the Sees of Sherburne, Selsey, and 
 Lichfield, to the cities of Salisbury, Chichester, and Chester, according to 
 the decrees of the councils of Sardica and Laodicea, which prohibited the 
 establishment of episcopal sees in villages. 30 The Saxon prelates, however, 
 had never been disturbed in their preference of solitude and retirement, 
 and this measure was, in reality, only part of the Norman policy, which 
 
 29 See the epistle of Kenulph, and decree of Leo, in Will. Malmes. de gestis Regum Angl. 
 lib. i. ch. iv. Also an epistle of Leo to Kenulph, and another from the English clergy to the 
 Pope, in Ang. Sacra, vol. i. p. 460. 
 
 30 Wilkins’s Concilia, vol. i. p. 363. 
 
NORMAN BISHOPS .*—PREBENDS. 
 
 19 
 
 aimed at the entire subjugation of the English. Norman bishops had 
 been introduced into almost every diocess, and their sees were now to 
 be fixed in towns overawed by Norman garrisons. Accordingly Peter, 
 then Bishop of Lichfield, transferred his See to Chester, where he was buried 
 in 1085 or 1086. His successor was Robert tie Lymesey , who removed 
 the See to Coventry, attracted, as it is said, by the immense riches of the 
 monastery which had been originally founded there by Canute, and after¬ 
 wards restored and greatly enriched by Leofric, Earl of Hereford, and the 
 celebrated Lady Godefa, or Godiva, his wife, about the year 1044. De 
 Lymesey is accused of having plundered the monastery of its treasures, 
 and of oppressing the monks ; but the monastic historian who charges him 
 with these crimes is not remarkable for impartiality in cases concerning the 
 regular clergy. 31 Robert Peche , chaplain to King Henry I. was consecrated 
 bishop of this See in 1117; and, according to some authors, he was the 
 first who established prebends in this church ; the number of which was 
 augmented by the succeeding Bishop, Roger tie Clinton,™ who was con¬ 
 secrated in 1128. This bishop was a great benefactor both to the city and 
 to the cathedral church of Lichfield, the latter indeed he is said to have 
 rebuilt. A modern author attributes the present fabric to him, but it may 
 be confidently said, that the greater part of it is subsequent to the time 
 of this prelate, as will hereafter be shown. De Clinton restored the See 
 to Lichfield, and assumed the title of ‘Bishop of Lichfield and Coventry. 
 The succeeding bishops were, until the establishment of the modern diocess of 
 Chester, sometimes called Bishops of Lichfield, sometimes of Coventry, and 
 often of Chester, 33 having episcopal residences in each of those places. The 
 title of ‘ Coventry and Lichfield’ was that most frequently borne, until Bishop 
 Hacket, on the restoration of monarchy, placed the name of Lichfield before 
 
 31 William of Malmesbury, De Gest. Pontif. ut supra. 
 
 32 In Willis’s Survey of Cathedrals, (vol. i. p. 425) this account is maintained to be correct, con¬ 
 trary to the assertion in the Chronicle of the Church of Lichfield, which ascribes the institution of 
 prebends to Athelwald, who was bishop in 847.—Thomas de Chesterfield, ut sup. p. 431. 
 
 33 Ormerod’s History of Cheshire, vol. i. p. 70. 
 
 C 
 
20 
 
 LICHFIELD CATHEDRAL. 
 
 that of Coventry, on account of the approved loyalty of the former city. 
 u Rob. de Peche—Rog. de Clinton—Walter Durdent—Ric. Peche—and 
 Gerard de Puella,” all successively styled themselves Coventries, Episcopi only ; 
 and had a fair palace at the north-east corner of St. Michael’s church yard.-- 
 Dugdale's Warwickshire , p. 101. 
 
 The violent dissensions between the chapters of Lichfield and Coventry, 
 with regard to their respective rights in the election of bishops, which long 
 agitated this diocess, afford some remarkable instances of the ambition 
 and obstinacy of the monks. These disputes commenced on the election 
 of a successor to Roger de Clinton ; although it was the first occasion on 
 which a license to elect had been granted ; the preceding bishops having 
 been appointed by the king, by investiture with a ring and pastoral staff. 
 As no election could be made, in consequence of the disputes of the chap¬ 
 ters, King Stephen appointed Walter Durdent to this See. 34 By the me¬ 
 diation of Henry II. the succeeding bishops, Richard Peche, Gerard de 
 Puella, or La Pucelle, and Hugh de Nonant, were elected without any 
 material commotion. 35 The latter was an implacable enemy of the monks, 
 on account of their unjustifiable interference in secular affairs, and ejected 
 those of Coventry from their monastery. They were afterwards recalled 
 by Hubert, Archbishop of Canterbury, who, having been himself a monk, 
 in some measure favoured their proceedings. Not long after their restora¬ 
 tion a new quarrel occurred, in which they beat and wounded the bishop 
 and his attendants, and drove them out of the church of Coventry. For 
 this outrage he procured their solemn excommunication; and, but for the 
 opposition of the archbishop, would probably have succeeded in expelling 
 the monks from every cathedral in England. He was obliged however to 
 confine his exertions to his own diocess, and prosecuted his complaints at 
 Rome with such effect, that his enemies were at length formally ejected 
 from the monastery of Coventry, where secular priests were established in 
 their stead. 36 But in 1198, during the exile of this bishop, the monks 
 
 34 Warton Angl. Sac. vol. i. p. 434. 
 
 35 Vita Hugonis de Nonant Giraldi Cambrensis Speculo Ecclesise. Ang. Sac. pars ii. p. 35L 
 
 36 Vita Hugonis de Nonant, ut sup. 
 
bishops: — 1228 , etc. 
 
 21 
 
 were restored by the influence of their patron, Archbishop Hubert, under 
 the authority of a papal decree. On the death of Nonant, in 1199, Geoffry 
 de Muschamp was elected by the monks and canons, at the recommenda¬ 
 tion of Hubert. 37 But on the next occasion, both chapters being left to their 
 own uninfluenced choice, the monks elected Josbert their prior; while the 
 canons chose Walter de Grey, afterwards Archbishop of York. Both parties 
 adhering obstinately to their respective nominations, Pandulf, the pope’s 
 legate, annulled all the proceedings, and afterwards induced them to concur 
 in the election of William de Cornhull, Archdeacon of Huntingdon. To 
 this prelate the chapter of Lichfield is indebted for the right of choosing its 
 dean. 38 The next license to appoint a bishop was granted “ to all those who 
 ought and used to elect,” upon which the canons entered a protest against 
 any person to be brought in by the monks : they nevertheless chose their 
 own prior; but confirmation was refused, and the election annulled. The 
 monks, however, appealed to Rome, and a tedious litigation ensued ; but 
 in order that the See might not remain vacant, the Pope, Honorius III. 
 prevailed on both parties to commit their powers to him on that occasion, 
 and he assigned Alexander de Stavenby to the vacant See. In 1228 a 
 compromise was effected by Gregory IX., whereby it was decreed that 
 the chapters should unite, and form one body of electors, and that the 
 appointment should take place alternately in the churches of Coventry and 
 Lichfield. 39 According to this agreement, on the death of Stavenby, Wil¬ 
 liam de Raleigh was elected in the church of Coventry ; but being at the 
 same time chosen for the diocess of Norwich, he preferred the latter; 
 upon which the monks insisted that a new election should take place at 
 
 37 Thomas de Chesterfield, ut sup. 
 
 38 “ Iste Willielmus episcopus capitulo Lichesfeldensi primo liberam in Domino concessit potes- 
 tatem eligendi aliquem de gremio in Decanum Lichesfeldensis Ecclesiae. C-onfirmata est hsec con- 
 cessio per Papam Honoriam IV. Nam antea, usque ad hoc tempus, episcopus solebat conferre 
 Decanatum sicut et Canonicatum.” Thomas de Chesterfield, ut sup. 
 
 3 9 “ Quod una vice in Coventrensi ecclesia conventus Coventrensis et capitulum Lichesfeldense 
 electionem episcopi celebrent, et altera vice similiter ab utrisque in ecclesia Lichesfeldensi electio 
 celebretur.” Thomas de Chesterfield, ut sup. 
 
 c 2 
 
22 
 
 LICHFIELD CATHEDRAL. 
 
 Coventry, the former being rendered nugatory ; while the canons main¬ 
 tained that it must be held at Lichfield, as Coventry had had its turn. This 
 dissension again produced two elections, that of Nicholas de Farnham by 
 the monks, and that of William de Manchester by the canons. The latter, 
 however, declined the See in favour of the former, to whose election the 
 canons agreed, saving the question of right. But Farnham also declined the 
 episcopal dignity. A third election was therefore made by the two chapters, 
 jointly, at Coventry, when Hugh de Pateshulle, a Canon of London, and 
 Treasurer of England, son of Simon de Pateshulle, formerly Chief Justice, 
 was duly chosen, and consecrated in 1240. The election of the succeed¬ 
 ing prelate, Roger de Weseham, was preceded by new differences, and 
 an appeal to the court of Rome; in the course of which proceedings, the 
 canons and monks entered into an agreement that each party should vote 
 in all future elections by an equal number of persons. This agreement 
 was reduced to writing, and sealed, in 1255. These disputes were not 
 again revived until after the death of Bishop Walter de Langton in 1321 ; 
 when a new quarrel arose on the subject of the number of electors, the 
 monks refusing to abide by their solemn agreement. An appeal was 
 instituted by the canons, pending which, Pope John XXII. appointed 
 Roger de Norburgh to the vacant See, who was accordingly consecrated in 
 1322. 
 
 As the little which is known of the history of the fabric of Lichfield Ca¬ 
 thedral will be noticed in the succeeding chapter, the next remarkable eera 
 in the history of the diocess is the thirtieth year of King Henry VIII., when 
 the church of Lichfield was despoiled of its ornaments. The statues of 
 saints, shrines of gold and silver, gems, and other valuable articles, were 
 converted to the use of the crown, with the exception of the shrine of St. 
 Ceadda, which, on the petition of Bishop Roland Lee, the king granted to 
 the use of the church. The monastery of Coventry was surrendered to the 
 crown, and its fine church, notwithstanding the urgent remonstrances of the 
 bishop, was entirely demolished. An act was then passed, that the pro¬ 
 ceedings of the dean and chapter of Lichfield should be as valid, without 
 the chapter of Coventry, as the joint acts of the two chapters had formerly 
 
EXTENT OF DIOCESS. 
 
 23 
 
 been. 40 And the monastery of St. Werburg, in Chester, having also been 
 suppressed, was by letters patent, dated July 16, in the thirty-third year 
 of King Henry VIII. (1542) made the episcopal See of the diocess of 
 Chester, then created; the limits whereof include a very considerable 
 portion of the district formerly within the jurisdiction of the bishops of 
 Lichfield and Coventry. This new diocess was made suffragan to the 
 Archbishop of York. 
 
 The diocess of Lichfield and Coventry now contains the whole county 
 of Stafford, (except Brome and Clent, which belong to Worcester,) all Der¬ 
 byshire, the greater part of Warwickshire, and nearly half of Shropshire. 
 It is divided into the archdeaconries of Salop, Coventry, Stafford, and 
 Derby. That of Salop comprises the deaneries of Salop and Newport, 
 whilst that of Coventry contains the deaneries of Coventry, Arden, Marten, 
 and Stonely, in the county of Warwick; the archdeaconry of Stafford 
 includes the deaneries of Lapley and Treizull, Leek and Alton, Newcastle 
 and Stone, and Tam worth and Tutbury, all in the county of Stafford; 
 and the deaneries of Derby, Castillar, Chesterfield, Ashbourne, High Peak, 
 and Repington, all in the county of Derby, appertain to the archdeaconry 
 of Derby. There is no archdeacon denominated from Lichfield, which is 
 the only cathedral (except Peterborough and Bristol, which are of Henry 
 the Eighth’s foundation) that does not give title to an archdeacon. The 
 parishes within the city of Lichfield are in the peculiar jurisdiction of the 
 Dean of Lichfield. This diocess contains, according to Heylin, five 
 hundred and fifty-seven parishes ; and the clergy’s tenths amount to 
 £590. 16*. lit/. 41 
 
 40 33 Henry VIII. Gulielmi Whitlocke, Continuatio Hist. Lichfeld. Ang. Sac. pars i. p. 458. 
 See also Dugdale’s “ Antiquities of Warwickshire.” 
 
 41 Willis’s Survey of Cathedrals, vol. i. p. 371. 
 
24 
 
 CHAP. II. 
 
 HISTORICAL NOTICES OF THE CATHEDRAL;-ITS FOUNDATION, ERECTION, 
 
 SUCCESSIVE ALTERATIONS AND ADDITIONS—WITH AN ACCOUNT OF ITS 
 PRESENT STATE. 
 
 It is generally said that King Oswy, and his son-in-law, Peda, founded the 
 Cathedral of Lichfield; and Bede relates that the Mercians received the 
 Christian faith, and that Diuma was appointed their bishop in 605. Thomas 
 Chesterfield, however, who wrote the “ Chronicle of the Church of Lich¬ 
 field” in 1350, asserts, that the Mercian Church was formed, and a cathe¬ 
 dral founded, anterior to the time of Diuma. His account does not how¬ 
 ever appear entitled to much credit. According to Bede, Ceadda had his 
 episcopal See in this place, where he was buried, and where the seat of 
 the succeeding bishops still continues. Warton, in Anglia Sacra, (1-424) 
 infers, that the prelates who preceded Ceadda, “ had no cathedral, or 
 certain See appointed them, but were content to live in monasteries.” We 
 have already related that Ceadda resided in a habitation built by himself, 
 and after death was first interred in the church of St. Mary, but his 
 remains were afterwards removed to that of St. Peter. This church may 
 be regarded as the original cathedral, and, as before shown, was finished 
 and consecrated by Hedda in January, a.d. 700. 
 
 There is some reason to suppose that the church was commenced by 
 Jarumann, the predecessor of Ceadda. 1 It probably occupied the site of 
 
 1 In the Harleian MSS. 3839, it is stated that Dugdale found an old document in the treasury 
 that noticed the consecration of the church in the close by Bishop Jarumann, the predecessor 
 of Ceadda, in 666. 
 
LICHFIELD CLOSE. 
 
 25 
 
 the existing edifice, and continued to be the cathedral church of the 
 diocess until after the Norman conquest. 2 
 
 An inscription, formerly placed over the great western door, obscurely 
 attributes the foundation to Oswy; but as it purports to have been 
 written above a thousand years after that event, it has no pretensions to 
 authority. 3 
 
 From the time of Hedda to that of Bishop Roger de Clinton, who suc¬ 
 ceeded to this See in 1128, a period of four hundred and twenty-eight 
 
 2 A memorial from the archives of the church, printed in Angl. Sac., (pars i. 459) and in the 
 Monasticon, (vol. iii. p. 219) which must have been written after the twelfth century, details 
 the following particulars; “the city of Lichfield was formerly called Liches, from War. In 
 it are two monasteries; one in the eastern part called the Station of St. Ceadd, or Stow: the 
 other in the western, dedicated to the Virgin, and inclosed with ditches and fences; and 
 formerly decorated with many gifts by the Mercian kings. In this was the Archbishop’s See. 
 And this monastery is situate between Leman Sych, and Way-cliffe. The close of this monas¬ 
 tery is divided into two parts, the greater and the less. In the greater, the bishop’s dwelling 
 stands in the eastern corner of the north side, and contains in length three hundred and twenty 
 feet, and in breadth one hundred and sixty feet. The dean’s habitation, adjoining the bishop’s, 
 contains half the dimensions of the former in length and breadth. The dwellings of the canons, 
 built round the monastery, each contain half the dimensions of that of the dean: except that 
 mansion which lately belonged to Master Odo de Bikennar, because he purchased from the 
 bishop a certain place in Lemanskey, and inclosed it with stone. There are in the said close 
 twenty-six mansions, including that of the bishop.” 
 
 3 As this inscription is mentioned in every history of the church, and incorrectly quoted by 
 several authors, it has been considered proper to introduce it here. 
 
 Oswyus est Lichfield fundator, sed reparator 
 Offa fuit: regum fama perennis erit: 
 
 Rex Stephanus, rex Henricus, primusque Ricardus, 
 
 Rex et Johannes plurima dona dabant. 
 
 Supra hsec millenos ecclesia floruit annos, 
 
 Duret ad extremum nobilis usque diem, 
 
 Daque, Deus, longum ut haec sacra floreat aedes, 
 
 Et celebrent nomen plebs ibi sanctum tuum. 
 
 Fundata est ecclesia Merciensis 
 Quae nunc Lichfeldia dicitur 
 Facta Cathedralis, 
 
 Anno Domini 
 
 DCLVII. —Dugdale’s Visitation of Staffordshire. 
 
26 
 
 LICHFIELD CATHEDRAL. 
 
 years, the history of this edifice is wholly unknown. Of the last named 
 prelate the chronicle asserts, that “ he raised the church of Lichfield, as 
 well in fabric as in honour; —increased the number of the prebends,— 
 fortified the castle of Lichfield,—surrounded the town by a wall, or vallum, 
 and infeoffed knights.” 4 
 
 This is all the information which history affords on the subject of the 
 erection of a church here by De Clinton; but modern writers have sup¬ 
 plied the deficiency from their own imaginations. By merely assuming 
 that the whole of the present edifice was built by De Clinton, 5 it has been 
 found easy to describe his work with minute accuracy. 3 But a moderate 
 acquaintance with ecclesiastical architecture will be sufficient to convince 
 any observer that little of De Clinton’s architecture now remains. 
 
 4 “ Ecclesiam erexit Lichesfeldensem, tam in fabrica quam in honore, numerum praebendarum 
 augendo, castrum Lichesfeldense muniendo, villam vallo vallando, milites infeodando.” Ang. 
 Sac. pars i. p. 434. The meaning of the latter words is, that he granted the church lands to 
 be held as knights’ fees; of which, according to Stow, the religious houses before their 
 suppression possessed 28,015, each containing, as Coke asserts, twelve carrucates, or plough 
 lands. 
 
 5 It is not very extraordinary that Plot and Bishop Godwin should, in the absence of direct 
 historical evidence on the subject of the erection of the existing edifice, have concluded it to be 
 the work of Clinton ; but that Mr. Carter’s architectural experience should not have prevented 
 his committing the same error, is certainly unaccountable. See the Gent. Mag. vol. lxxix. part ii. 
 p. 697, arid vol. lxxx. part i. p. 525. It has been however the common practice of this visionary 
 antiquary to ascribe, if possible, exery ancient edifice to the date of its original foundation; and 
 if precluded by notorious facts from indulging this propensity, to seize on the most remote date 
 the circumstances of the case would permit, without regard to the known progress of our national 
 architecture. 
 
 h Jackson, in his “ History of the City and Cathedral of Lichfield,” p. 75, states, (without 
 giving any authority) that “Clinton pulled down the old church, 48 Henry I. 1148, (which year 
 was not the 48th of Henry I., who only reigned thirty-five years, but the 13th of Stephen; and 
 was the very year of Clinton’s death) and rebuilt it upon its present magnificent style—roofed 
 it, with that noble stone vault, which is the admiration of architects, and then covered the 
 whole with lead.” This account is evidently erroneous, as may be inferred from its own state¬ 
 ment, and as may be clearly perceived by the varied styles of architecture in the church. 
 Browne Willis construes more rationally the Lichfield Chronicle, in stating that Bishop Clinton 
 
 built good part of the church.” Survey of Cathedrals, vol. i. p. 377. 
 
BUILDING THE CATHEDRAL. 
 
 27 
 
 In 1235, King Henry III. granted to the dean and chapter a license to dig- 
 stone in the forest of Hopwas 7 for the fabric of the church of Lichfield, and in 
 the precept then addressed to the Sheriff of Staffordshire, commanded him not 
 to impede the workmen on the occasion. Only three years afterwards another 
 precept was issued to Hugh de Loges, then keeper of the same forest, to 
 allow the canons of Lichfield to dig more stone from the same quarries to carry 
 on the works at their church. 8 From these documents it is evident that some 
 buildings were prosecuting at that time, but we do not find any evidence as 
 to the parts of the edifice then raised. From the year 1200 to 1385, all the 
 bishops of this See were interred in the cathedral, whence it may be in¬ 
 ferred that the church, during that time, was in a condition for the per¬ 
 formance of public service. It is also very probable that the greater part of 
 the present fabric was raised in the same time. The registers of the bishops 
 who presided during the progress of the work, would probably have furnished 
 the dates of its erection, in the accounts and documents relating to the ex¬ 
 penses of the building; but these records were unfortunately destroyed during 
 the civil wars of the seventeenth century, when the close being fortified and 
 garrisoned, the cathedral alternately suffered the injuries of a siege from each 
 party; and when in possession of the parliamentary forces, its monuments, 
 ornaments, and records were spoiled and demolished, to gratify their avarice 
 and fanaticism. 
 
 Walter de Langton who succeeded to this See in 1296, was one of the most 
 
 I This forest extended over a large tract of country on the south side of the city. 
 
 8 Pro nova fabrica Eccl. Lichf. tern. R. H. III.—Mandatum est Vicecomiti Staffordiae, quod non 
 1 mpediat vel impedire permittat decanum et capitulum Lichfeldiae, quo minus fodere possint petram 
 in foresta regis de Hopwas, ad fabricam ecclesiae suae de Lichfield, sicut earn fodi fecerunt ante tem- 
 pus suum. Teste rege apud Wallingford xii Junii. (Claus. 19, H. III. m. 9.) 
 
 Mandatum est Hugoni de Loges quod permittat Canonicos de Lichefeld, fodere petram, ad fabricam 
 ecclesiae suae de Lichefeld in quarrera de Hopwas ; ita tamen quod hoc fiat sine detrimento forestae 
 nostrae. Teste Rege, &c. xxviii April, Claus. 22, H. III. m. 15. 
 
 Mon. Angl. vol. iii. p. 239. The expression, ad fabricam , used in both these writs, has been 
 s upposed to imply that the work then proceeding consisted merely of repairs. But Dugdale un¬ 
 derstood it to allude to a new building, as appears by the title, pro novd fabrica, which he has pre¬ 
 fixed to these records. It is conceived that it would be equally applicable to either case ; and there¬ 
 fore that it affords no light to guide us in developing the history of the fabric. 
 
 D 
 
28 
 
 LICHFIELD CATHEDRAL. 
 
 liberal benefactors to the church and city. He surrounded the close with 
 a high stone wall, and constructed “ two beautiful gates” on the west and 
 south sides of the close; inclosed the relics of St. Chad in a magnificent 
 shrine, at the expense of two thousand pounds; founded and raised part 
 of the Lady Chapel at the east end of the cathedral, and constructed the 
 vaulted roofs of the transept; but dying in 1321, before it was finished, he 
 bequeathed a sum of money for its completion. His successor, Roger de 
 Norburg, or Norbrigge, removed Langton’s remains from the Lady Chapel 
 to a more appropriate sepulchre on the south side of the high altar, 
 where there are some vaults and chantries very singularly situated and 
 designed. According to Fuller, the cathedral had attained its final com¬ 
 pletion in the time of Bishop Hey worth, who was consecrated in 1420. 9 
 Early in the sixteenth century, some extensive repairs appear to have taken 
 place; and Bishop Blythe contributed fifty oaks, and the sum of twenty 
 pounds towards the same. The destruction of the shrines and ornaments 
 at the Reformation has been already mentioned. In the wars between 
 Charles I. and his parliament, this church suffered great injury. The close 
 being surrounded by a wall and ditch, presented an eligible situation for 
 defence; and it was accordingly garrisoned early in 1643, by the royalist 
 inhabitants of the city and neighbourhood, under the command of the 
 Earl of Chesterfield. The parliamentary forces, not only anxious to dis¬ 
 lodge them, but zealously intent on pillaging and defacing the cathedral, 
 
 9 “ But now in the time of the aforesaid William Hey worth, the cathedral of Lichfield was in 
 the verticall height thereof, being (though not augmented in the essentials) beautified in the orna¬ 
 mentals thereof. Indeed the west front thereof is a stately fabric, adorned with exquisite imagerie, 
 which I suspect our age is so far from being able to imitate the workmanship, that it understandeth 
 not the history thereof. Surely what Charles the Fifth is said to have said of the citie of Florence, 
 that it is pitie it should be seen save only on holydayes ; as also that it was fitt that so fair a 
 citie should have a case and cover for it to keep it from wind and weather, so, in some sort, 
 this fabric may seem to deserve a shelter to secure it. But alas, it is now in a pittifull case indeed, 
 almost beaten to the ground in our civil dissentions.. Now, lest the church should follow the 
 castle, I mean, quite vanish out of view, I have at the cost of my worthy friend here exemplified 
 the portraiture thereof: and am glad to hear it to be the design of ingenious persons to preserve 
 antient churches in the like nature, (whereof many are done in this, and more expected in the next 
 part of Monasticon) seeing when their substance is gone, their very shadows will be acceptable 
 to posteritie.” Fuller’s Church History, cent. xi. book iv. sect. iii. p. 175. 
 
CIVIL WARS. 
 
 29 
 
 that hated temple of episcopacy, as they termed it, soon besieged the 
 close. Their leader, Robert Lord Brook, is said to have invoked some 
 special token of God’s approbation of the enterprise; and it is certainly 
 remarkable that on the commencement of the cannonade, this commander 
 was shot in the head by a gentleman posted at the battlements of the 
 great tower. 10 This event happened on the 2d of March, the festival of St. 
 Chad, to whose influence the cavaliers superstitiously attributed their success. 
 Sir John Gell of Hopton succeeded to the command of the parliamentary 
 troops on the following day, and so vigorously pressed the siege that the gar¬ 
 rison surrendered on the 5th, “ upon condition of free quarter to all in general 
 within the close.” 11 In April following Prince Rupert marched to Lichfield, 
 and commenced another siege of the close, which was now better fortified, 
 and was resolutely defended for ten days by the parliamentary forces, under 
 Colonel Rouswell, or Russell. At length the prince succeeded in draining the 
 moat, and springing a mine, which enabled him to storm the place ; yet he 
 was repulsed with great loss. But the garrison, unable to withstand a se¬ 
 cond siege, made proposals of capitulation on honourable terms, which being 
 accepted, the whole evacuated the place on the 21st of April, 1643. 12 It 
 was then garrisoned by the king’s troops, under the command of Colonel 
 Harvey Bagot. 
 
 The most sacrilegious conduct is attributed to the parliamentary forces 
 during their short possession of the cathedral. They demolished and defaced 
 the monuments, stripped the grave-stones of their brasses, broke the painted 
 windows, and destroyed the records. We are also told that they “every day 
 hunted a cat with hounds through the church, delighting themselves in the 
 echo from the goodly vaulted roof; and to add to their wickedness, brought a 
 calf into it, wrapt in linen; carried it to the font, sprinkled it with water; 
 and gave it a name in scorn and derision of that holy sacrament of baptism; 
 and when Prince Rupert recovered that church by force, Russell the go- 
 
 10 Dugdale’s “Short View of the late Troubles in England,” p. 117. 
 
 11 Historical Tracts collected by R. Holme. Harleian MSS. 2043, p. 24. 
 
 12 A perfect Diurnal of some passages in Parliament, 1643. Clarendon’s History of the Re¬ 
 bellion, book vii. p. 313. 
 
 D 2 
 
30 
 
 LICHFIELD CATHEDRAL, 
 
 vernor carried away the communion plate, and linen, and whatsoever else was 
 of value.” 13 
 
 The close was occupied by the king’s garrison till July, 1646, when the 
 king’s affairs had become desperate, and the parliamentary forces, under the 
 command of Adjutant-general Lowthian, again besieged this devoted place. 
 The governors, Sir Thomas Tyldesley, and Colonel Bagot, being satisfied by 
 the report of Colonel Hudson (who had gone out of the garrison to obtain in¬ 
 formation, and had been permitted to return to it) “ that the king had no army 
 in the field to the amount of one hundred men, nor any one garrison unbe¬ 
 sieged,” agreed to articles of capitulation, whereby their lives and some part 
 of their arms and property were secured to them, and surrendered the place 
 on the 10th day of July, 1646. 14 
 
 During these vicissitudes of war, the cathedral suffered most extensive 
 injury. It is calculated that two thousand cannon-shot, and fifteen hundred 
 hand grenades had been discharged against it. The centre spire was battered 
 down; the spires of the west end nearly demolished; the roof beaten in; 
 the whole of the exterior greatly damaged; and the beautiful sculpture of 
 the west front barbarously mutilated. The bells, lead, and timber were 
 afterwards purloined during the protectorship of Cromwell; so that when 
 Dr. Hacket succeeded to this See in 1661, he found the cathedral in a most 
 desolate condition ; and with a truly laudable zeal immediately commenced 
 the necessary repairs. “ The very morning after his arrival in Lichfield, 
 he roused his servants by break of day, set his own coach horses, 
 with teams and hired labourers, to remove the rubbish, and laid the 
 first hand to the work he had meditated. By his large contributions, the 
 benefactions of the dean and chapter, and the money arising from his 
 assiduity in soliciting the aid of every gentleman in the diocess, and almost 
 every stranger that visited the cathedral, he is said to have raised several 
 thousand pounds. In eight years he restored the beauty of the cathedral, 
 to the admiration of the country.” 15 Besides a grant by King Charles II. 
 
 13 Dugdale’s “ Short View of the late Troubles in England,” p. 560. 
 
 14 These articles of capitulation are printed in Jackson’s History of Lichfield. 
 
 15 Life of Bishop Hacket, by Dr. Plume, prefixed to his Century of Sermons. 
 
MODERN REPAIRS AND RESTORATIONS. 
 
 31 
 
 of “ one hundred fair timber trees out of Needwood Forest,” the subscription 
 for the repairs amounted to 9092/. Is. l\d. The bishop himself contributed 
 no less than 1683/. 12s. Having- completed the repairs, and fitted up the 
 choir with new stalls, pulpit, and organ, he reconsecrated the church with 
 great solemnity on the 24th of December, 1669. In the following year he 
 contracted for six bells; the first of which only was hung during his last 
 illness. “ He went out of his bed-chamber into the next room to hear it, 
 seemed well pleased with the sound, and blessed God who had favoured him 
 with life to hear it; but at the same time observed that it would be his own 
 passing bell; and retiring into his chamber, lie never left it until he was carried 
 to his grave.” 16 
 
 Since that event, the cathedral church of Lichfield has only suffered from 
 the effects of time and weather; and the ravages of those destructive agents 
 have frequently called forth the zeal and liberality of the clergy and laity of 
 the diocess. 
 
 The general appearance of this building was considerably improved by 
 several judicious alterations effected about the year 1760; when the cathedral 
 library, built by Dean Heywood, and an adjoining house, very incommodiously 
 situated between the church and the deanery, were demolished ; the ground 
 of the cemetery was at the same time levelled; the tomb-stones were laid flat; 
 some useless walls and gates were removed ; and slates were substituted for 
 the old leaden covering of the roof. But in 1788 it was found that the 
 fabric itself was in so dilapidated a state that a heavy expenditure would be 
 required for its restoration. For this purpose, subscriptions were immediately 
 raised throughout the diocess; which, chiefly through the zealous activity of 
 Dean Proby, produced a sum of money considerable in itself, but inadequate 
 to the requisite expense. The present worthy bishop not only contributed 
 liberally on this occasion, but exerted his influence in obtaining an act of 
 parliament, by which a fund was provided, not only applicable to the future 
 support of the fabric, but to the discharge of the debts which it was 
 unavoidably necessary to contract for completing the repairs then in progress. 
 Dean Proby is said to have advanced, as a loan, 250/. for these purposes. 
 
 16 Life of Bishop Hacket, by Dr. Plume. 
 
32 
 
 LICHFIELD CATim.JJXtAi,. 
 
 A thorough and substantial repair was accordingly commenced under the 
 direction of the late Mr. James Wyatt, and was completed, with many 
 improvements, in the year 1795. Besides the general restoration of the doors, 
 windows, and flooring throughout, two of the spires were partly rebuilt, 
 the ends of the transepts were strengthened by new buttresses, the external 
 roofs of the ailes were raised, and five divisions of the stone roof in the nave 
 were taken down, and replaced with plaster. The Lady Chapel was united to 
 the choir, by removing a screen which had been erected by Bishop Hacket. 
 On taking this away, the workmen discovered the beautiful old screen which 
 formed in all probability the original partition when the Lady Chapel was 
 completed by the executors of Walter de Langton. This elaborate piece of 
 architecture was in a very mutilated state; but Mr. Wyatt, having restored it, 
 by the assistance of Roman cement, to a very perfect condition, appropriated 
 part of it to the new altar piece, and the remainder to the organ screen, or 
 partition which divides the nave from the choir. 
 
 The Stained Glass which embellishes some of the eastern windows of the 
 Lady Chapel, formerly decorated the magnificent chapel of the abbey of 
 Herckenrode, a wealthy convent of Cistertian nuns, in the bishopric of Liege, 
 in Germany. The chapel of Herckenrode abbey was rebuilt in the sixteenth 
 century, when the windows were adorned with these choice specimens of the 
 art of glass-staining. On the establishment of the French republic, this 
 abbey was suppressed with many other religious houses. Sir Brooke Boothby, 
 who happened to be then on the continent, purchased the stained windows for 
 the moderate price of two hundred pounds, and very generously transferred 
 this extraordinary bargain to the dean and chapter, who expended about eight 
 hundred pounds more in the importation, repair, and arrangement of the glass 
 in its present situation. The Rev. W. G. Rowland, of Shrewsbury, super¬ 
 intended the latter operations, and furnished designs for the requisite accessary 
 and ornamental works, the staining of which was executed by Sir John Betton, 
 of Shrewsbury, knight. A large window at the end of the north transept is 
 filled with stained glass by the latter gentleman, from designs by I. J. Halls, 
 Esq., an artist of considerable talent. 
 
33 
 
 CHAP. III. 
 
 DESCRIPTION OF THE FORM, ARRANGEMENT, AND CONSTRUCTION OF THE 
 
 church: of its exterior and interior beauties and defects: — 
 
 REMARKS ON ITS STYLES OF ARCHITECTURE, AND ON THE VARIOUS 
 PORTIONS OF THE EDIFICE; WITH REFERENCE TO THE ACCOMPANYING 
 PRINTS. 
 
 The Cathedral Church of Lichfield possesses many singularities and 
 beauties. Its plan, design, general features, present state, and situation, 
 are all peculiar, and calculated to prepossess the stranger in its favour. 
 Unlike the generality of cathedrals, which are surrounded and encroached 
 on by common dwellings, shops, and offensive appendages, this is com¬ 
 pletely insulated, and every part of its exterior may be readily examined. 
 It is placed in an open lawn or close, which is environed with handsome 
 or very respectable detached houses. These have their respective gardens 
 and plantations; and on the north and eastern sides of the close are some 
 fine forest trees. Hence the external appearance of the church and effect 
 of the whole on the visitor are pleasing and interesting. An air of rural 
 simplicity, and genteel life, pervades the precincts of the edifice, and im¬ 
 presses the mind with quiet, respectful, and religious sentiments. About 
 one hundred yards from the south side is a large piece of water, or lake, 
 which may be regarded as a pleasing appendage : and but for a few houses 
 which are placed between it and the church, would be a beautiful and 
 unique accompaniment. In Plate vi. the Cathedral is shown as it would 
 appear, if some houses were removed from the south-east ; and no person 
 can deny the improved effect that might be thus made. Such a material 
 alteration in the value and property of the ground, though it may be wished 
 
34 
 
 LICHFIELD CATHEDRAL. 
 
 for, cannot however be reasonably expected. Another singularity in the 
 edifice, now under notice, is its general exterior form. At the west end are 
 two towers, surmounted by spires, and at the intersection of the nave with 
 the transept, is another tower, with a spire more lofty than those at the 
 west end. Hence every approach to the city is distinguished by the varied 
 combination of these acute pyramids. 1 From the east and west they are 
 seen grouped in a cluster ; whilst, from the northern and southern sides 
 the two western spires seem attached; and the central one is shown as 
 springing abruptly from the middle of the roof, and rising much higher 
 than the others. As a distant object, however, this church has no preten¬ 
 sions to grandeur or beauty. Very little but the ridge of the roof, and the 
 three spires, is presented above the houses and contiguous trees. From 
 the east, at Stow-pool, the view is picturesque and pleasing, as the three 
 spires are seen grouped together, rising above the surrounding trees and 
 houses; but the church constitutes only a small object in the scene. 
 
 The only approaches to Lichfield Cathedral from the city, are on the 
 south-east, and on the west; and these present the best and most interesting 
 features of the edifice. The south side of the Lady Chapel, with its 
 tall, narrow windows, the clerestory of the choir, and its southern aile, 
 with the present vestry, south transept, part of the nave, central and 
 western towers and spires, are successively displayed from the former 
 approach; whilst the latter presents the western front in all its richness 
 and variety of ornament. Though now much mutilated and disfigured by 
 the corrosive effects of the weather, this front still displays simplicity of 
 design, and richness of ornament. It is nearly a flat facade, with small 
 octangular buttress-turrets at the angles. A large double door-way, re¬ 
 cessed, is seen in the centre, and two smaller lateral door-ways : each of 
 these was formerly much ornamented with insulated columns, bold archi- 
 volt mouldings, charged with foliage, statues, &c. Externally the church 
 may be said to be more picturesque than beautiful. It has no pretensions 
 
 1 Rippon Minster had formerly three leaden spires, similarly situated with those at Lichfield; 
 but these are now pulled down. 
 
STYLE OF THE CHURCH :—PLAN. 
 
 35 
 
 to grandeur; and therefore cannot vie with the noble and imposing cathe¬ 
 drals of York, Lincoln, Canterbury, Wells, or Durham: nor is it so pic¬ 
 turesque or beautiful as Salisbury. The natural colour and quality of its 
 materials indeed detract from its beauty; for the stone is of a dusky red, 
 and of a crumbly, ragged character. Though deprived of strongly marked 
 beauties, yet it displays many pleasing and even interesting features. The 
 architectural antiquary will find in it much to admire; for if the opera¬ 
 tions of time, of wantonness, and of bad restorations, have tended to de¬ 
 face and injure it, there is enough left to indicate its original and pristine 
 design. The exterior, it is true, displays five or six different styles and cha¬ 
 racters of architecture; but these are not of very opposite and incongruous 
 forms. All is in the pointed style, and of quick succession as to dates, 
 and proportions. There is no part of the circular, or Norman style, and 
 none of the last period of the pointed. These remarks, however, do not 
 apply to the centre spire, or modern restorations. The general character 
 of the interior of the Church is cleanness, cheerfulness, and elegance. Every 
 part is preserved in good condition, and displays the laudable exertions 
 made by the present dean and chapter to uphold its stability, and improve 
 its beauty. Their conduct, in this respect, is not only highly praiseworthy, 
 but ought to excite the emulation and shame of the curators of some other 
 national churches. 
 
 The more particular characteristics of this Cathedral will be noticed in 
 referring to the accompanying illustrative plates. 
 
 Plate I. Ground Plan, with reference to the monuments, indications of 
 the groining, &c. The Roman capitals, from a to w, refer to different 
 parts of the church; and the Arabic figures point out the situations of 
 the principal monuments. It will be seen from this plan that the church 
 consists of a nave, d. with its ailes, e. and f. :—a transept, h. and i. branch¬ 
 ing from the centre tower, g. : —an eastern aile to the transept, k. and l.: —a 
 choir, from m. to p. :— with its ailes, n. and o. : — a lady chapel, q. :— a vestry, r. : 
 — an inner vestry, or chapel, s. : —a vestibule to the chapter house, t. :— and 
 a chapter house, w. At the west end are three entrance door-ways, a.b.c., 
 deeply recessed in the wall, and richly adorned in their sculptured mould- 
 
 E 
 
36 
 
 LICHFIELD CATHEDRAL. 
 
 ings and capitals, a. communicates to the nave, b. to the north aile, and c. 
 to the south aile. On the north and south sides of the west end it is shown 
 that the walls project beyond those of the ailes, and thus form a sort of 
 small transept. These walls, with the octangular buttresses at the western 
 angles, square buttresses at the eastern angles, and two large piers at the 
 west end of the choir, support the two western towers and spires. The 
 figures refer to, 
 
 1. A font:—2. Staircase to the north-west tower: — 3. to the opposite 
 tower, which is entered at present by a door-way on the outside, as cor¬ 
 rectly shown in the plan, Plate IV.: — 4. ascending steps to the door-way 
 of the south transept: — 5. doorway to the north transept, with steps de¬ 
 scending to the church : — 6. the dean’s consistory court, or eastern aile of 
 the south transept, in which are placed busts of Dr. Johnson and Garrick, 
 7. and 22.: — and the monument of Mr. Newton, 8.: — 9. and 20. point out 
 the places where the effigies of Bishops Pateshull and Langton, and the 
 remains of Hacket’s tomb, are laid in recesses under the windows: — 10. 
 is the famed modern tomb, by Chantrey : —11. altar table: —12. stair-case 
 to the library over the chapter house:— 14. effigy of Sir Thomas Stanley: — 
 15. an ancient effigy in a niche in the wall:— 16. 17. 18. point out the situa¬ 
 tions of three old effigies in the walls: — 19. an old tomb in the wall, sup¬ 
 posed to be of the founder of the chapel. The measurements are figured 
 on the plan. 
 
 Plate II. View of the West Front. The point chosen for taking this 
 view is at such a distance from the church, that the whole facade is dis¬ 
 played to advantage, and exempt from quick perspective which is often un¬ 
 pleasing, and calculated to distort the objects delineated. By taking a dis¬ 
 tant station, and standing at, or near the middle, as in the present instance, 
 the proper forms and proportions of the front are shown : and when these 
 are in unison and harmony, the effect must be pleasing to the eye, and be 
 well adapted for pictorial delineation. Believing that the west front of Lich¬ 
 field would be best represented in this way, and that its three spires would 
 form a pleasing pyramidal group, was the reason for choosing the point of 
 view now alluded to. It is true there are some small houses that inter¬ 
 cept part of the church from the station chosen; but this did not pre- 
 
WEST FRONT. 
 
 37 
 
 elude the artist from representing the true architectural forms of the 
 building as it would appear if these obstructions were removed. In addi¬ 
 tion to what has been already said of the western facade, it may be de¬ 
 scribed as consisting of three leading divisions, in height; viz. two towers 
 with spires of nearly corresponding design, and a central compartment, 
 with a door-way, a large window, and an acute pediment. The whole 
 front has been richly and beautifully adorned with architectural ornaments, 
 and sculpture. These comprised niches, arched mouldings, columns both 
 insulated and detached, niches, canopies, pedestals, statues, doors, windows, 
 and tracery. At each angle of this elevation is an octangular stair-case tur¬ 
 ret, corresponding in divisions and ornaments with the front; and having 
 the same divisions, &c. returning round the north and south sides. Both 
 turrets are terminated with stunted pinnacles, with crockets at the angles, 
 and finials at the top : and attached to these are square pinnacles, which 
 serve to connect the former to the spires. The upper part of each tower 
 is finished with a band of lozenge mouldings, inclosing quatrefoil and tre¬ 
 foil panels. The spires are divided into six compartments, four of which 
 have open windows, with acute pedimental mouldings in each face, whilst 
 the fifth has only panels separated by crocheted ribs. The upper story is 
 plain, but has some small windows. These spires are open from the bottom 
 to the top, and without any timber or cross beams of any kind. (See 
 Plate IV.) 
 
 By the accompanying plate it will be seen that a series of statues stil 
 remain in niches over the western doors. It is unusual to see a west end of 
 a cathedral without windows to the ailes. In the third story are windows 
 to the belfry floors. The central window, as well as the niche and statue 
 in the pediment, do not harmonize with the other parts of this front. The 
 statue is meant to represent Charles II., and is said to have been executed 
 by a stone-cutter, named Wilson, of Sutton Coldfield, who was knighted 
 for his loyalty. Disfiguring as it does this beautiful front, it is hoped that 
 it will be speedily removed. 
 
 Plate III. View of the principal Door-wap in the West Front , which 
 may be regarded as one of the most beautiful designs in the country. It 
 may be compared, in some respects, with the very elegant door-way on the 
 
 e 2 
 
38 
 
 LICHFIELD CATHEDRAL. 
 
 south side, near the east end of Lincoln Cathedral , 1 which is nearly of the 
 same style and period of erection. Both are peculiarly rich and fanciful, 
 and calculated to excite the warmest admiration. The present door-way 
 was profusely embellished with sculptured foliage, and figures, running 
 round the architrave mouldings, and between the columns. These are 
 now so much battered, that not only their beauty is g’reatly injured, 
 but it is almost impossible to ascertain the characters of some of the 
 statues. The door-way is divided into two openings, by a clustered 
 column in the middle, to which is attached a figure, said to personify the 
 Virgin Mary. There are also two corresponding statues on each side of 
 the door, standing on beautifully formed brackets, and surmounted by 
 equally beautiful canopies. Stukeley conjectures that these figures 
 were meant for the Evangelists, and that two other statues on the 
 outside of the door-way, represented Moses and Aaron. These are 
 destroyed, as well as their accompanying canopies, &c. The two doors 
 are covered and strengthened with ornamental iron hinges, or scroll work, 
 which appear to be original . 2 
 
 Plate IV. Section of the Southern Tower ancl Spire , of the Nave , and 
 North A He, also an Elevation of the Eastern Side of the North Tower and 
 Spire , with Ground Plan. The architect and architectural antiquary will 
 immediately understand the design and construction of this part of the 
 fabric by the annexed plate. It shows the thickness of the south wall of the 
 tower, with the situations of the two windows in it, the return of its octa¬ 
 gon buttress, the floors and timber roof in the tower, with the face of the 
 western wall, and the interior of the spire. This section is made through 
 the centre of the south tower, and continued in the same line to the middle 
 of the nave, when the line of section is taken through the first division and 
 
 1 A view of this door-way will be given in “ The Chronological and Historical Illustrations of the 
 Ancient Architecture of England.” 
 
 2 Mr. Carter made a drawing of this west front for the Gentleman’s Magazine, 1810, in which 
 he represented the statues and ornaments as in a perfect state. He has shown the middle spire 
 lower than those at the west end, as they really appear when the spectator is near the church. 
 In his “Ancient Sculpture and Painting,” folio, 1780, he has given an etching of “ the porch or 
 principal entrance”—and promised to furnish “ a particular description of it,” but never fulfilled his 
 engagement. 
 
DOOR-WAY OF NORTH TRANSEPT. 
 
 39 
 
 window of the north aile. This should have been indicated on the plan, 
 but was omitted by mistake. By the present plate, the real proportion of 
 the arch of the north aile, (and the south is the same,) is displayed, and 
 the section of the arch, with the size of the columns and piers under the 
 tower, are shown. Over the northern pier is a section of the triforium 
 arch, as well as of the clerestory window over it. A profile and elevation 
 of the two buttresses at the north-east corner of the tower, with their 
 plans, are represented; and the design of the eastern face of the north 
 tower and spire, with its panelled and purfled pinnacles, is shown. In 
 the centre we perceive the double doors, with an ogee moulding, an em¬ 
 battled gallery above, and behind that the chief window. This is terminated 
 with a flattened roof, over which is the high pitched roof, with its timber 
 ties. It is also seen, that a lofty wall screen, with an acute pediment and 
 crocketed sides, rises considerably above the roof. 
 
 Plate V. A perspective view of the Door-way in the Northern Transept 
 is a fine and peculiar specimen of this style of architecture. It consists of 
 a deeply recessed arch, divided into five principal and several smaller 
 mouldings, the former of which are charged with sculpture. Two of these 
 consist of foliage, scrolls, &c. and the other three are enriched with ovaler 
 compartments, inclosing basso-relievos in groups, of angels, saints, patri¬ 
 archs, See. Among them are two figures supposed to represent St. Chad 
 baptizing the Saxon Prince Wulfere. On each side of the door-way are 
 detached and clustered pillars, with fine foliated capitals, with five rows of 
 ornament, commonly called the dog-tooth moulding. In the centre is a 
 clustered column, composed of four pillars, with a very richly cut capital, 
 and supporting a double archivolt moulding, also covered with foliated 
 sculpture. 
 
 Plate VI. is a view of the whole Church, from the south-east, and 
 displays the general forms and tracery of the windows in the Lady Chapel, 
 the choir, the aile of the choir, the south transept, and the clerestory of 
 the nave. Beneath the windows of the Lady Chapel are three recesses, or 
 arched vaults, with pedimental roofs, and which appear to have constituted 
 sepulchral chambers for some distinguished members of the church. It is 
 
40 
 
 LICHFIELD CATHEDRAL. 
 
 supposed that Bishop Langton’s remains were finally placed in one of them. 
 The clumsy modern buttresses, to the south transept, are shown conspicu¬ 
 ous, and the lofty crocheted pinnacles to the vestry are also prominent features 
 in this view. The flattened arched window, with several perpendicular 
 mullions, and the circular window, with the small triangular one above, in 
 the gable of the south transept, are all delineated. Beneath the aile window 
 of the transept is an arched recess, containing a mutilated statue. This view 
 has been already noticed. 
 
 Plate VII. View of the Nave , looking east. As the style, or treat¬ 
 ment, of this plate has been objected to, it may be proper to remark, that 
 I directed this view to be drawn and engraved in outline, as a mode best 
 calculated to define and characterize the architectural members of the nave. 
 Here are many lines of columns, mouldings of arches, enriched capitals, 
 and other ornaments; and had these been covered over with colour, for the 
 purpose of imitating the effect and perspective of the scene, the detail of 
 the architecture would have been inevitably obscured and sacrificed by the 
 process. Having seen several interesting architectural subjects spoiled, and 
 the real forms disfigured, by attempts to represent a real perspective and 
 the accidental effects of light and shade in similar scenes, I am convinced 
 that it can only be satisfactorily displayed by an outline, or with a slight 
 degree of shadowing. In subjects with large columns, and plain arches, 
 &c. as in the nave of Norwich Cathedral, a high degree of finish and 
 bright effect may be successfully and pleasingly employed, without sacri¬ 
 ficing any essential details of the building; but in such a subject as the 
 one now under notice, or the chapels of King’s College, and Henry the 
 Seventh, it would be absurd and unjust to attempt to display, in a small 
 scale, their numerous beautiful members and details, in union with pictu¬ 
 resque effect. 
 
 The Nave of Lichfield Cathedral is a beautiful and interesting part of 
 the Church. Its piers are solid and large, and consist of several attached 
 and insulated shafts, with deep mouldings between. These are raised on 
 bases of many mouldings, and are terminated at top with richly sculptured 
 foliated capitals. From the latter spring the architrave mouldings of the 
 
TRANSEPT AND CENTRAL TOWER AND SPIRE. 
 
 41 
 
 arches, which are numerous and bold, and produce a fine effect. Between 
 every two arches is a cluster of three demi-columns, rising from the base 
 to the springing of the vaulting, and sustaining five ribs, which diverge to 
 a central rib and to a small transverse one. The two last are ornamented 
 with foliage, and bold rich bosses at the junction of the different ribs. 
 The spandrils of the arches are adorned with trefoil panels. Above these 
 arches is the triforium, each compartment consisting of a double arch, and 
 each arch again divided into two others. The clustered columns, deep 
 arches, rich capitals, and dog-tooth moulding, combine to produce a pecu¬ 
 liarly fine and elegant effect. The elaborately sculptured capitals of the 
 lofty pilaster columns, the ornamented string course, and numerous ribs and 
 mouldings, tend to render this portion of the Church highly interesting and 
 sumptuous, without being overcharged with minute detail. In the clerestory 
 we perceive a triangular window of rather unusual shape and style. Latterly 
 the inner mullions of these windows have been filled in with trefoil mouldings. 
 The interior and exterior elevations of the nave, with the arcade and window 
 of the aile, are shown in Plate IX. c. d. 
 
 Plate VIII. Section of one half, and Elevation of the other half of the 
 Church, from north to south, looking east. This plate shows the forms 
 and designs of the windows of the transepts, both externally and internally, 
 the style of the buttresses, the section of the north aile of the nave, with 
 its roof and flying buttress above, the form of the great arch under the 
 centre tower, with the external and internal peculiarities of that and the 
 spire. Beneath the arch of the tower is the organ screen, with a glazed 
 window above, which separates the nave from the choir, and serves to 
 render the latter more warm and comfortable in winter. It will be seen by 
 this section, that the ground is higher than the level of the floor on the 
 north side, and that there is a descent of some steps on the south side. It 
 also shows that the design of the transepts is very different to that of the 
 nave, in arches, piers, triforium, clerestory windows, &c. 
 
 Plate IX. Elevation of one compartment of the Choir , externally and 
 internally, a. and b., and of the Nave c. and d. The latter has been already 
 described, and the former will be noticed in referring to the next plate. 
 
42 
 
 LICHFIELD CATHEDRAL. 
 
 Plate X. View of the Choir, looking- west. For the reasons already 
 assigned, this plate has been executed in outline ; and it must be admitted 
 that the surface of the plate is abundantly covered with work, indicating 
 the mouldings of the arches, clustered columns, &c. The present choir of 
 Lichfield Cathedral is noted for its length and narrowness, the former of 
 which is occasioned by the whole extent from the organ-screen, under the 
 tower, to the east end being an uninterrupted open space : and the latter, 
 by the filling up the side arches to the ailes. These two great innovations 
 in cathedral architecture were advised by Mr. Wyatt, in 1788, and have been 
 much censured by some antiquaries, whilst others approve of the change. 
 Since Mr. Wyatt’s time an essential improvement has been adopted, by 
 widening the choir. This celebrated architect had directed a plain walled 
 screen to be raised flush with the inner face of the arches, and thus forming 
 a flat surface on each side of the choir. This wall has been removed, 
 and re-erected farther back ; thus showing nearly the whole of the clustered 
 columns with the soffits of the arches to the choir: the general architec¬ 
 tural design of this part of the Church is accurately delineated in Plate 
 IX. a. b. In this elevation are shown the styles and marks of two distant 
 dates : as the clerestory windows are evidently of a later period than the 
 arches beneath. Here is no triforium in these divisions, but merely blank 
 panelling beneath the windows, with an open ornamented parapet. The 
 jambs and soffits of the windows are adorned with quatrefoil panels ; and 
 thus, as well as in its windows, greatly resemble the choir part of Norwich 
 Cathedral. The groining of the roof nearly corresponds with that of the 
 nave. 
 
 Plate XI. View of the Lady Chapel , looking east. Although this 
 subject is rather elaborate in detail, and abounds with ornaments, yet I 
 was induced to attempt a finished plate, in consequence of the beautiful, 
 delicate, and true effect which the artist had given to his drawing. This 
 Lady Chapel may be regarded as one of the finest and most elegant 
 examples of the ecclesiastical architecture in England. Its semi-octangular 
 form is well adapted to display both its sumptuous painted glass win¬ 
 dows and its numerous and rich sculptured ornaments. The whole is cal- 
 
VESTIBULE AND CHAPTER-HOUSE. 
 
 43 
 
 culated to seduce and convert even infidelity itself; for cold and callous 
 must that person be, who can contemplate such a scene, and such lessons 
 as here exhibited, without emotions of admiration and some degree of 
 enthusiasm. Here the two branches of art seem to vie with each other for 
 superiority; Architecture prefers her claim to dignity, beauty, and utility, 
 whilst Painting vaunts her captivating powers of pleasing every eye and 
 fascinating the enlightened mind. This Lady Chapel, or as it may be now 
 termed, the chancel, is of the same height as the choir, and nearly of the 
 same width : it is lighted by nine tall windows, with mullions and varied 
 tracery. Seven are filled with ancient and very fine stained glass; whilst 
 the two nearest to the choir are embellished with modern glass, which 
 appears gaudy and meretricious compared with its elder neighbours. Six 
 of the very elegant sculptured brackets of this chapel are delineated in 
 Plate XIV. This cathedral, like Salisbury, has no crypt beneath, and its 
 pavement is level from east to west, excepting at the altar table, where there 
 are three steps. 
 
 Plate XII. View of the Vestibule , or entrance passage to the chapter 
 house, marked I. in the ground plan. The architecture of this apartment 
 is simple in forms, but from the depth and boldness of the mouldings and 
 ornaments, is calculated to produce very fine effects. The bases, capitals, 
 bosses, &c. are all cut in bold and powerful relief. On the west side is a 
 singular passage, or arcade, of thirteen arches, beneath the windows, the 
 original intention of which is not ascertained: whether to receive the 
 thirteen minor canons or priest-vicars belonging to the cathedral, or for 
 communication with the outside, as there is a small aperture behind each 
 recess in the wall, is not known. The opposite side of the vestibule has 
 eight niches, or spaces between the columns, and suited to receive the 
 eight choristers: and on the same side are entrances to the chapter house 
 and to a staircase leading to the library over it. The niches at the north end, 
 and the plain window above, are modern, and the latter is executed in a very 
 bad style. 
 
 Plate XIII. Arches at the East End of the Chapter House. These are 
 of the same style and date (beginning .Henry HI.) as the arches in the 
 
 F 
 
44 
 
 LICHFIELD CATHEDRAL. 
 
 vestibule; but the capitals and bracket are more profusely enriched, and 
 the outer hollow moulding of the arches is filled with the dog-tooth, 
 ornamented. The capital of the centre column, or clustered columns of the 
 chapter house, is shown, with six brackets, in 
 
 Plate XIV. This capital is very highly ornamented with a series of trefoil 
 leaves, fancifully and variously disposed, and many of them cut in complete 
 relief. The cluster consists of a large central column, with ten smaller 
 detached shafts, resting on a base with many mouldings, and a plinth of ten 
 sides. From the capital diverge twenty ribs, which spread across the roof, 
 and terminate against the exterior walls in thirty ribs. 
 
 Plate XV. Is a View of the Door-way to the Chapter House, with a 
 representation of the interior of that apartment. 
 
 Plate XVI. View of a Monument raised to the memory of two daughters 
 of the Rev. Wm. and Ellen Jane Robinson: the black slab behind the tomb 
 records the decease of the father, who was a prebendary of this cathedral, 
 and died March 21, 1812, aged 35. In a subsequent page will be given a 
 description of this tomb, with remarks on its merits. 
 
45 
 
 CHAP. IV. 
 
 ACCOUNT OF THE MONUMENTS AND PAINTED GLASS. 
 
 Perhaps there is not a cathedral in England that has been so completely 
 stripped of its ancient monuments and brasses as that of Lichfield. We 
 look in vain for fine specimens of old monumental sculpture, engravings on 
 brass, and inscriptions. Excepting two mutilated statues of bishops, and 
 two or three other fragments, all have been destroyed. There are, how¬ 
 ever, a few sepulchral memorials which claim attention, for the talents 
 and virtues of the individuals to whom they are raised, rather than for any 
 excellence of sculpture. In noticing the monuments, I cannot neglect 
 the opportunity of reproving the common-place practice of opposing white 
 marble slabs by black backgrounds; and inserting both in the walls, or 
 against the pillars of a fine church. Where an edifice, like Lichfield Cathe¬ 
 dral, presents a general effect of symmetry and harmony, it is painfully 
 offensive to have the eye and attention distracted by spots of black and white 
 —by the obtrusion of subordinate parts on the attention as principals. If 
 monuments be admitted within a fine church, they should be made subser¬ 
 vient to general effects; and, what is still of greater consequence, they 
 should not be indiscriminately inserted in or attached to beautiful and 
 substantial parts of an edifice. It is, however, merely justice to observe, 
 that the present worthy dean and chapter are laudably careful in preserving 
 the stability and beauty of their Cathedral, and I am confident would not, 
 knowingly, permit any thing to be done injurious to its walls or to its archi¬ 
 tectural ornaments. 
 
 It appears by Dugdale’s “ Visitation of Staffordshire,” in the Herald’s 
 
 f 2 
 
46 
 
 LICHFIELD CATHEDRAL. 
 
 College, that this cathedral, previously to the civil wars, contained many 
 handsome tombs, coats of arms, effigies, brasses, and inscriptions. 1 Of these 
 monuments the wrecks, or fragments, of four only remain : viz. a part of an 
 effigy, or statue, representing the human body in an emaciated state, which 
 formed a portion of a large monument, raised to the memory of Dean Heywoocl , 
 who died in 1492, and who had been a liberal benefactor to the church. 
 The tomb was battered down in the time of the civil wars, but an idea 
 of its character may be formed by a print in Shaw’s Staffordshire, from 
 Dugdale’s “ Visitation.” 
 
 A mutilated effigy, placed in the wall of the south aile, supposed to 
 represent Captain Stanley , son of Sir Humphrey Stanley, knight of the 
 body to King Henry the Seventh. Pennant, in his “ Tour from Chester to 
 London,” says that Captain Stanley was excommunicated, but was allowed 
 to receive funeral rites, in holy ground, having evinced signs of repentance, 
 on condition of having his monument distinguished by certain marks of 
 disgrace. 
 
 In the south aile of the choir are two broken effigies, in purbeck marble, 
 of prelates, said to commemorate Bishops Langton and Pateshulle. These are 
 shown in Plate XVI. but not in the situation in which they are now placed. 
 Gough, in “ Sepulchral Monuments,” vol. i. part 2, has given a plate of 
 these figures, from drawings by J. Carter, and relates some particulars of 
 Langton, p. 84. The former effigy has been finely executed, and had some 
 peculiarities in design. 
 
 In the south wall of the nave are parts of two monumental effigies , 
 singularly placed in square holes, and showing only the heads and lower 
 parts of the figures, whilst the bodies, or intermediate parts, are either 
 concealed in the wall, or were never formed. They are said to represent 
 two old canons of the church ; and are evidently of ancient date, as they 
 appear to have been placed in the present situation at the time of building, 
 or finishing the nave. 
 
 The monuments erected since the restoration of Charles the Second are 
 
 1 See also Abingdon’s “Antiquities of Worcester, with the Antiquities of Lichfield,” 8vo. 1723. 
 
MONUMENTS. 
 
 47 
 
 numerous; and some of them commemorate persons of the first celebrity, 
 while others attest the domestic virtues of individuals whose lives were 
 confined to a more limited sphere of action. Few of them, however, are 
 remarkable for any particular excellence in design or execution. 
 
 In the south aile of the choir is a table monument, sustaining an effigy of 
 Bishop Hacket , who died October 21, 1670. It is placed beneath a window, 
 the soffit of which is ornamented with a profusion of sculptured foliage. 
 On the face of the tomb is an interesting, well written Latin inscription, 
 eulogizing his merits, and recording his preferments ; and stating that the 
 whole was executed by the direction of Sir Andrew Hacket, Knight, the son 
 of the bishop. 
 
 At the western end of the north aile of the choir, is a marble figure of a 
 female, to the memory of Lady Mary Wortley Montagu , with an inscrip¬ 
 tion recording her philanthropic exertions in the introduction of inocula¬ 
 tion for the small pox into this country; by which that fatal disease has 
 for nearly a century been checked in its destructive career. Lady Mary 
 was born at Lichfield, and, whatever were the faults or follies of her private 
 life, her benevolent character and eminent literary talents will always 
 render her memory dear to her native city. “ Her letters,” says Smollett, 
 “ will be an immortal monument to her memory, and will show, as long as 
 the English language endures, the sprightliness of her wit, the solidity of 
 her judgment, the elegance of her taste, and the excellence of her real 
 character.” 
 
 Against the west wall of the north transept is a marble monument, with 
 a statue in relief of a female, by R. Westmacott, with a simple and affect¬ 
 ing inscription to the memory of Mrs. Buckeridge, wife of the Rev. Charles 
 Buckeridge. 
 
 In the east aile of the south transept (called the Dean’s Consistory 
 Court), is a bust of Dr. Samuel Johnson, a native of this city, whose name 
 and memory are commemorated by the inscription, written by the doctor’s 
 friends, “ as a tribute of respect to the memory of a man of extensive 
 learning, a distinguished moral writer, and a sincere Christian.” Had all 
 the admirers of Johnson been content with this moderate and justly 
 
48 
 
 LICHFIELD CATHEDRAL. 
 
 merited praise, his weaknesses would never have been drawn into that 
 public notoriety, which makes the present generation hesitate to rank 
 him with the truly great. In early life, Johnson attempted to establish a 
 school at Lichfield, for preparing gentlemen for the universities. Of his 
 three pupils, David Garrick was one ; and, after a short probation, the 
 master and the scholar migrated together to the metropolis, in search of more 
 congenial pursuits. This journey ultimately led the way to fame and 
 fortune for the latter, and literary fame to the former. Their friendship 
 was only terminated by death. Mrs. Garrick erected a cenotaph, after a 
 design by James Wyatt, to her husband, near that of Dr. Johnson, with a 
 bust by Westmacott. 
 
 A fine marble monument with figures, by R. Westmacott, R. A. adjoin¬ 
 ing, attests the extensive charities of Andrew Newton , Esq. a native of 
 Lichfield, who founded a noble institution in the Close for the widows and 
 orphans of clergymen, by a donation of twenty thousand pounds in his life¬ 
 time, and a testamentary bequest to the same amount. Mr. Newton died 
 January 14, 1806, aged 77. 
 
 In a recess of the north transept, against the aile of the choir, is a 
 handsome monument, designed and executed by Mr. Bacon, jun. in 1813. 
 It was erected by order of Miss Ann Seward , who died March 25, 1809, 
 aged 66, to the respective memories of her father, mother, and sister. 2 A 
 female figure, intended to personify filial piety, is represented as weeping 
 
 3 The Rev. Thomas Seward , father of Miss Seward, was a prebendary of Salisbury, a canon 
 residentiary of Lichfield Cathedral, and rector of Eyam, in Derbyshire. He was a poet, as 
 may be seen in Dodsley’s collection, and also edited an edition of Beaumont and Fletcher’s 
 plays in 1750. The poetical and epistolary talents of Miss Seward are rendered familiar to the 
 general reader by an edition of her Poems, in 3 vols. with a biographical preface by Walter 
 Scott, Esq.; and of her Letters in 6 vols. The former she bequeathed to the accomplished and 
 exhaustless author of “ Marmion,” &c. &c. and the latter to Mr. Constable, of Edinburgh. 
 Whilst the Poems manifest considerable fancy and facility at versification, the Letters at once 
 characterize the benevolence, weakness, and vanity of the writer. Rhodes, in his interesting 
 work on the “ Peak Scenery of Derbyshire,” happily remarks, “ A fire that sparkles and dazzles, 
 but warms not, pervades the productions of Miss Seward and Dr. Darwin; pictures for the eye, 
 and not the mind, crowd on their respective canvasses, and towards the close of their intimate 
 connexion there was a marvellous assimilation of style and construction of their verse.” 
 
MONUMENTS. 
 
 49 
 
 over a tomb, while her harp hangs on a willow. The inscription, by Mr. 
 Scott, concludes thus, 
 
 “ Honour’d, belov’d, and mourn’d, here Seward lies ; 
 
 Her worth, her warmth of heart, our sorrows say,—• 
 
 Go seek her genius in her living lay.” 
 
 In the nave and its ailes, and in the transepts, are many mural tablets, 
 among which is a large slab of marble, placed on the north side of the 
 west door, to the memory of Dean Addison , who died 1703, aged 71. 
 Against the same wall is an inscription to Gilbert Walmesley , Esq. who died 
 August 3, 1751, aged 71 : he was registrar of the ecclesiastical court at 
 Lichfield; and of his learning and abilities Dr. Johnson has passed a very 
 high encomium, in his life of Smith. 3 A plain tablet records the decease 
 of Richard Smallbreoke , D. D. “ who was consecrated Bishop of St. David’s, 
 February 2, 1723; confirmed bishop of this diocese, February 20, 1730, and 
 died December 22, 1749, aged 77.” 
 
 Against the west wall of the north transept is a mural slab, inscribed to 
 the memory of the Rev. Wm. Vyse, LL.D. Chancellor of the diocess of 
 Lichfield and Coventry, &c. who died February 20, 1816, aged 75. 
 
 At the eastern extremity of the south aile is a modern monument, 
 which justly attracts the attention and admiration of all visitors. Though 
 it be not the chief province of this work to animadvert on the produc¬ 
 tions of living artists, yet the present subject has such imperious claims 
 on the critic and historian, that they would neglect their duty, were 
 
 they to pass it without comment and without praise. It is a small tomb, 
 
 / 
 
 raised to commemorate the guileless characters and elegant forms of 
 two female children of the Rev. W. Robinson and Ellen Jane , his 
 widow. This memorial may be regarded as original in design, and 
 tasteful in execution; and, as calculated to commence a new era in our 
 national monumental sculpture, must be viewed with exultation by every 
 real lover of art. From the demise of Henry the Eighth to the beginning 
 
 3 See ante, p. 2. 
 
50 
 
 LICHFIELD CATHEDRAL. 
 
 of the present century, the sculpture of this country has rarely presented any 
 thing admirable or excellent. It has either exhibited a vulgar imitation of 
 vulgar life, in monstrous costume, or tasteless copies of Greek and Roman 
 models. The present age, however, is likely to acquire a better, and indeed 
 a good character, and prove to surrounding nations, that while Britain is 
 justly renowned for science, commerce, and arms, she boldly and confi¬ 
 dently prefers a claim to competition with former ages in her artists. Some 
 departments have certainly failed, either for want of talents or for want of 
 patronage; but the sculptor is now publicly employed and publicly rewarded: 
 and if something truly English, original, and interesting is not produced, 
 we shall still have cause to attribute the failure to the ungenial climate of 
 Britain, or the want of talents in our countrymen. In traversing the abbey 
 church of Westminster, and that of St. Paul’s, we look in vain for tasteful 
 and apposite English sculpture. Almost every subject is disfigured by unin¬ 
 telligible emblems, mythology, and allegory ; and crowded with lions, fames, 
 and angels. It is time this incongruity of composition, this violation of taste, 
 be avoided, and that a little of nature, of Shakspeare, and of England, be 
 substituted in the place. 
 
 To appreciate Mr. Chantrey’s monument fully and justly, we should 
 inquire what has been effected by the sculptor; what is usually done, and 
 what the art is susceptible of. The Egyptians, Greeks, and Romans have 
 certainly left behind them many works of peculiar beauty and excellence; 
 they have also bequeathed to us many pieces of inferior workmanship. In 
 the former we readily perceive their reference to nature as a prototype; 
 and in the latter, the presumptions of art. It is thus with sculptors of the 
 present age : most of them are wholly educated in the school of art—in 
 studying and copying from the antique; whereas the greatest masters of 
 the old world sought beauty of form and truth of expression in the inimit¬ 
 able and diversified face of nature. Hers is an unerring and unmannered 
 school: it is untrammelled by laws and regulations; every student may 
 readily obtain admission into it, and freely pursue the bent and energy of 
 his genius. From this school arose the artist who executed the monument 
 now under notice : he looked at living models and English forms for proto- 
 
chantrey’s sculpture. 
 
 51 
 
 types ; and has skilfully extracted from the shapeless marble the resemblance 
 of two pleasing female figures. These, however, are not common-place forms, 
 nor imitations of Venuses, Graces, or Hebes ;—but they faithfully and feel¬ 
 ingly resemble the persons of young and lovely maidens. These are re¬ 
 presented as lying on a couch ; the head of the eldest impressing the downy 
 pillow, and that of the youngest reclining on the other’s bosom. One of its 
 arms is beneath her sister’s head, and the other extends over the body. In 
 one hand is a bunch of snow-drops, the blossoms of which are apparently 
 just broken off, but not withered. The faces of both incline towards each 
 other with apparent affection—the eye-lids are closed, and every muscle seems 
 lulled into still and serene sleep: all the other bodily members partake of the 
 same serenity and repose. The arms and the legs, the fingers, and the very 
 toes, are all alike equally slumbering: the drapery is also smooth and 
 unruffled, and is strictly in unison and in harmony with every other part 
 of the design. The whole expression seems to induce silence, caution, and 
 almost breathless solicitude in the observer. A fascinating and pathetic sym¬ 
 pathy is excited ; at least these were the effects and sentiments produced on 
 myself in contemplating it alone, and towards the close of day. Analyzing 
 it as a work of art, and endeavouring to estimate its claims to novelty, 
 beauty, and excellence, I must own that all my powers of criticism were 
 subdued by the more impressive impulses of the heart. With these sensations, 
 and with mingled emotions of admiration at the powerful effects of English 
 art, and the appeals to nature through this medium, I was turning away from 
 the pleasing group, when the plaintive song of a robin, which had perched in 
 the adjoining window, diverted the train of reflection, but touched another 
 chord of the heart, which vibrated in perfect harmony. 4 
 
 Painted Windows .—The magnificent display of stained glass which dis¬ 
 tinguishes this cathedral, cannot fail to attract the admiration of the spec¬ 
 tator. Seven of the principal windows at the east end are enriched with 
 
 4 If the fastidious critic examines these remarks with a wish to find fault with either the sentiment 
 or language, I have only to observe, in explanation, that they were penned in Lichfield Church, on a 
 fine summer evening, and with the monument immediately before me. 
 
 G 
 
52 
 
 LICHFIELD CATHEDRAL. 
 
 very fine specimens of this exquisite species of decoration. Five of the win¬ 
 dows are filled with scriptural designs, but one on the north side contains 
 several portraits and legendary subjects. They are supposed to be executed 
 from designs of Italian and Flemish masters. In the first compartment of 
 the north-east window, the Annunciation to the Virgin and her visit to 
 Elizabeth are represented; above this are two compartments, representing 
 “ Jesus crowned with thorns, derided, and beaten,” and “ Jesus scourged.” 
 The east window, over the altar-piece, presents two appropriate subjects, 
 “ Jesus with the two disciples at Emmaus,” and the Ascension. In these 
 pieces the figures are of a large size, and are finely designed and drawn; 
 the faces in the Ascension are touched with peculiar force and spirit. The 
 south-east window contains three compartments, enriched with the following 
 subjects, 1. “ Jesus washes his disciples’ feet, and then takes the pascal 
 supper with them.” “ Judas Iscariot goes out to betray him,” (John xiii. 
 4—6.) 2. “ Jesus enters into Jerusalem, and afterwards the Greeks are 
 brought to him,” (Mark xi. 7—9.); and 3. “ Jesus betrayed by Judas,” (Luke 
 xxii. 51.) The glass of these pictures has suffered some injury from the 
 attacks of time and weather, but the parts which remain perfect are very fine. 
 The first window on the south side from the east end, contains three subjects, 
 viz. 1. “ The Last Judgment2. “ The Descent of the Holy Ghost upon the 
 Apostles;” and, 3. “ The Incredulity of Thomas reproved.” These are justly 
 admired for composition and execution. The next window, on the same side, 
 is divided into four compartments, which are embellished with 1. “ Pontius 
 Pilate delivering Christ to be crucified,” (Mat. xxvii. 24—27.) 2. “ Jesus 
 going forth to Crucifixion,” (John xix. 17.) 3. “ The Descent from the Cross,” 
 (John xix. 38, 40.) and, 4. “ The Resurrection of Christ,” (Mat. xxviii. 4.) 
 All these are rich in architectural ornaments, and executed after designs of 
 considerable excellence. The two easterly windows, on the north side, are 
 filled with portraits of distinguished characters connected with the abbey of 
 Herckenrode. Among them are said to be Matilda de Lechy, or Lexy, 
 abbess of Herckenrode, in 1532 ; St. Bernard, who was abbot of Clairval 
 in the twelfth century; Humberlina, his sister, and the Emperor Lotharius 
 the Second. In the larger window are Cardinal Evrard, or Erard de la 
 
PAINTED GLASS. 
 
 53 
 
 Marck, enthroned Prince Bishop of Liege, in 1505; Floris, Count Egmont; 
 Maximilian, Count Egmont; John, Count Horn, and his Lady Anne. These 
 portraits, with many shields of arms, are richly emblazoned. 
 
 The westerly, or episcopal window, on the south side, contains the 
 armorial bearings of the Bishops of Lichfield and Coventry, from the period 
 of the Reformation to the present time, impaled with the arms of the see 
 over which each prelate presided at the time of his death. This heraldic 
 window was executed under the direction, and in part from the designs, 
 of the Rev. W. G. Rowland, of Shrewsbury, prebendary of Curborough, 
 by Sir John Betton, of the same place. The expense amounted to £226, 
 of which the Hon. and Right Rev. James Cornwallis, the present bishop, 
 most liberally contributed £163. The westerly window, on the north side, 
 or prebendal window, is divided into three columns; the first containing 
 the arms of the deans and residentiaries, and the second and third those 
 of the prebendaries, who were possessed of stalls during the time this window 
 was under the hands of the respective artists, i. e. from 1806 to 1808 
 inclusive. 
 
 In one compartment of a window in the South Aile of the Choir , is the por¬ 
 trait of a knight worshipping, supported by St. Hubert, the patron of hunters. 
 Another compartment contains the armorial bearings of the same knight; and 
 between those compartments is a beautiful picture of a dead Christ, lying in 
 the arms of a venerable old man; a dove, encircled with celestial glories, 
 hovers near; the whole is intended to symbolize the sacred Trinity. 
 
 The Window at the extremity of the North Aile presents figures of a knight 
 and his lady, between whom is St. Christopher, with the infant Jesus. In 
 that of the Dean's Consistory Court is seen Mary Magdalen, embracing the 
 cross upon Mount Calvary. 
 
 It is to be regretted that no historical information on the subject of these 
 fine productions of the art of glass-staining, was ever obtained from the abbey 
 of Herckenrode. 5 
 
 5 The foregoing account is abridged from a very useful and well written pamphlet, entitled 
 “ A short Account of Lichfield Cathedral, more particularly of the Painted Glass,” &c. Lichfield, 
 2d edit. 1818. 
 
 G 2 
 
54 
 
 LICHFIELD CATHEDRAL. 
 
 The great Window of the North Transept is decorated with stained glass, 
 presented by the very Rev. Dr. Woodhouse, the present dean. The principal 
 founders and patrons of this cathebral are here presented standing on pedestals, 
 under lofty canopies of tabernacle-work; viz. Oswy, King of Northumberland; 
 St. Ceadda; Offa, King of Mercia ; King Stephen; Roger de Clinton ; King 
 Richard I.; King John; Walter de Langton; and the worthy Bishop Hackett. 
 The original designs for this window were made by John James Halls, Esq.; 
 the architectural ornaments by the Rev. W. G. Rowland, and the glass is 
 painted by Sir John Betton. The same artists are now engaged on a corres¬ 
 ponding decoration for the great window of the south transept, exhibiting 
 eighteen figures of the most distinguished characters and inspired writers in 
 the Old and New Testament. 
 
 The great Western Window was restored by King James II. when Duke of 
 York, whose arms are seen in the centre. It was afterwards filled with painted 
 glass, the work of Brookes, by the legacy of Dr. Addenbroke, who died dean 
 of this Cathedral, in 1776. 
 
55 
 
 CHAP. V. 
 
 BIOGRAPHICAL ANECDOTES OF THE BISHOPS OF LICHFIELD AND 
 
 COVENTRY. 
 
 The preceding chapters comprise notices of those bishops of Lichfield, who 
 are more immediately connected with the structure of the cathedral. Several 
 of the prelates who have thus been mentioned, were among the most conspi¬ 
 cuous characters of their times ; while the names of others, to whose pastoral 
 care this diocess has successively devolved, though little distinguished in its 
 local and particular history, are associated with reminiscences of historical, 
 literary, and moral interest. To preserve and disseminate a few anecdotes of 
 these is the object of the present chapter. 
 
 The devotion and sanctity of Ceadda, and the superstition of his votaries 
 have had their full share of notice, and leave nothing material to be related 
 of the other Saxon bishops. With respect to their successors, under the 
 Norman dynasty, having noticed the rapacity of De Lymesey and the 
 munificence of De Clinton, we proceed to a signal instance of the tyranny 
 and avarice of Richard I. in his conduct to Hishop Hugh de Nonant. 
 This prelate had the misfortune to be brother to Robert de Nonant, who 
 was implicated in the measures of John, Earl of Morton (afterwards king) 
 for prolonging the imprisonment of Richard. When the latter obtained 
 his freedom, he immured Robert de Nonant for life in the castle of Dover, 
 and after depriving Hugh of his bishopric, banished him from England. 
 The prelate was afterwards allowed to purchase restitution to his dignity, 
 at the price of five thousand marks; but could never regain the royal 
 favour. 1 It is obvious that blame must attach to the monarch in this 
 
 1 Anglia Sacra, pars i. p. 436. 
 
56 
 
 LICHFIELD CATHEDRAL. 
 
 transaction. If the bishop was a traitor, he was unfit for the ecclesiastical 
 dignity; and the money obtained from him was an infamous extortion. If 
 he was innocent, the king’s conduct was wholly inexcusable. The death 
 of the bishop, as related by Giraldus, affords a remarkable instance of the 
 spurious piety of the age, which consisted almost entirely in watching, 
 fasting, corporeal discipline, and other outward austerities. Some authors 
 affirm that this bishop repented deeply of his former severity towards the 
 monks; but Giraldus says nothing on the subject; and it is probably a 
 fabrication. 
 
 Alexander de Stavenby, or Savensby , was more fortunate under similar 
 suspicions in the reign of Henry III. Being suspected as an accomplice 
 in the ambitious schemes of the Earl Marshal, he solemnly passed sentence 
 of excommunication against all persons who entertained any treasonable 
 designs; and this proceeding served materially to ingratiate him with the 
 king . 2 
 
 Walter de Langton has already been noticed as one of the chief 
 benefactors to Lichfield Cathedral. In the reign of Edward I., he was High- 
 Treasurer of England; and enjoyed the esteem and confidence of that 
 monarch. But the dissolute heir apparent (afterwards Edward II.) became 
 his inveterate enemy. The worthy bishop had endeavoured to restrain the 
 boundless prodigality of that prince, and had censured the profligacy of his 
 manners: these were offences which the degenerate prince was incapable of 
 forgetting, and he employed the basest means to obtain revenge. A false 
 accusation was preferred against the bishop, through which he not only 
 lost the king’s favour, and the office of treasurer, but was put to immense 
 expense in defending himself at the court of Rome, where charges against 
 rich bishops were eagerly encouraged . 3 The cause was referred to the 
 Archbishop of Canterbury, by whom Langton was acquitted. He re¬ 
 gained the king’s favour, and was reinstated in his offices. In his conduct 
 
 2 Godwin, de Praesulibus Anglise, p. 316. 
 
 3 They knew him to be a particularly fat ox : Noverant ipsum prae multis bovem valde pinguem. 
 Matt. Westm. 
 
BISHOPS LANGTON, STRETTON, AND SCROPE. 57 
 
 towards the prince, he persevered fearlessly and inflexibly; and particularly 
 reprehended his equivocal connexion with Piers Gaveston. On the death 
 of Edward I., who evinced his esteem for Langton by appointing him his 
 executor, the infamous Gaveston was recalled from exile, and he soon 
 obtained from the new king an opportunity of indulging his resentment 
 against the bishop. The latter was imprisoned, deprived of his offices and 
 goods, and compelled to answer fabricated charges, impeaching both his 
 ecclesiastical and civil administration, and supported by suborned witnesses. 
 Although he was never convicted on any of these prosecutions, he did not 
 obtain his freedom for several years. Yet, after his restoration to liberty 
 and his bishopric, when the nobility and clergy of the realm combined 
 against the favourite Gaveston, and demanded his punishment, the Bishop 
 of Lichfield alone refused to join in their declarations. This instance of 
 liberality and loyalty overcame the animosity of Edward. He restored the 
 bishop to the office of treasurer, which he enjoyed in tranquillity to the time 
 of his death. 
 
 Robert Stretton, chaplain to Edward the Black Prince, was, through 
 the interest of his royal patron, consecrated bishop of this see in 1360. This 
 man was so grossly illiterate, that another person was obliged to read his 
 profession of obedience, because he himself could not read. 4 
 
 Bishop Scrope’s name is distinguished in English history on account of 
 the share he took in the unfortunate insurrection against Henry IV. This 
 event happened after his translation to York. He was beheaded in 1405 ; 
 and from the justice of the cause for which he suffered, his fortitude, and 
 piety, he was long revered as a martyr. From his time to that of Bishop 
 Rowland Lee, nothing particularly interesting appears relative to the 
 Bishops of Lichfield. The latter prelate solemnized the marriage of King 
 Henry VIII. with Ann Boleyn, in the nunnery of Sopewell, near St. 
 Alban’s. He was appointed to this see in 1534, and soon afterwards became 
 President of Wales, which principality was, during his administration, in¬ 
 corporated with England. The establishment of the see of Chester, and 
 
 4 Godwin de Praesul. Angl. p. 320. 
 
58 
 
 LICHFIELD CATHEDRAL. 
 
 consequent reduction of the limits of this diocess, which happened in this 
 bishop’s time, have already been noticed. During the establishment of the 
 reformed religion, he had the mortification to see his noble Cathedral of 
 Coventry entirely destroyed, notwithstanding his earnest remonstrances. 
 
 Bishop Sampson, his successor, was compelled by King Henry VIII. to 
 alienate many manors belonging to this see, in exchange for impropriations of 
 inadequate value. He was confined for some time in the Tower of London, 
 on a charge of affording pecuniary assistance to some persons who had been 
 imprisoned for questioning the king’s supremacy. 
 
 The succeeding prelate, Ralph Bayne, was one of the furious partizans 
 who excited and directed the sanguinary zeal of Queen Mary. Two women 
 are named by Fuller as among the numerous victims of his cruelty. On the 
 accession of Elizabeth, he refused to administer the sacrament to her, by 
 which refusal, according to act of Parliament, he was ipso facto deprived of 
 his episcopacy. He died soon afterwards of the stone, at Islington, and was 
 succeeded by Thomas Bentham. On the accession of Mary this prelate 
 was ejected from his fellowship at Magdalen College, on account of his 
 adherence to the reformed church; and retiring to Zurich and afterwards to 
 Basil, became an eminent preacher among the English exiles. He returned 
 when the Protestant interest again triumphed, and was promoted by Queen 
 Elizabeth to this see. 
 
 George Abbot, elected in 1609, continued but one year in this see, 
 whence he was translated to London ; and almost immediately afterwards to 
 Canterbury. He was a man of mild temper and moderation, and has there¬ 
 fore been represented by the court writers as wholly unfit for supporting the 
 dignity and security of the established church in those turbulent times of 
 sectarian faction. 5 
 
 Richard Neile, or Neyle, Bishop of Rochester, succeeded Bishop 
 Abbot in this see. He was high in favour with James I., in whose Ar- 
 minian principles he participated. He became particularly severe against 
 the rigid Calvinists, and, while bishop of this see, condemned one of them 
 
 5 Le Neve’s Account of Protestant Bishops, vol. i. p. 89. 
 
BISHOPS MORTON, FREWEN, AND HACKET. 
 
 59 
 
 to the flames. On the 13th of June, 1629, the Commons voted “ that Dr. 
 Neile (then) Bishop of Winchester, and Dr. Laud, Bishop of Bath and 
 Wells, be named to be those near and about the king who are suspected 
 to be Arminians ; and that they are justly suspected to be unsound in their 
 opinions that way.” Soon afterwards Bishop Neile was accused by Oliver 
 Cromwell of countenancing some popish divines. But, notwithstanding 
 these accusations, he was afterwards elevated to the dignity of Archbishop 
 of York. 6 
 
 Thomas Morton, Bishop of Chester, was translated to this see in 1618. 
 In the reign of Elizabeth, he was chaplain to Lord Huntingdon, Lord Presi¬ 
 dent of the North, and in that capacity became celebrated for his zeal and 
 acuteness in disputation with the Popish recusants. He presided over this 
 diocess till the year 1632, when he was translated to the bishopric of Durham. 
 The famous impostor, commonly called “ the boy of Bilson,” was detected, in 
 1644, by the keen penetration of this prelate, after baffling the investigations 
 of many eminent persons. 
 
 Accepted Frewen was next consecrated to this see, but on account of 
 the civil commotions and revolution which ensued, lived in retirement with 
 Charles II. till the restoration of monarchy and episcopacy. 
 
 The name of the succeeding bishop, John Hacket, is justly famous in 
 the history of Lichfield, as the great restorer of the cathedral. He was 
 born in 1592, and educated at Westminster school, whence he went to 
 Trinity College, Cambridge. He was patronized by the Lord Keeper, 
 Williams, afterwards Archbishop of York, whose life he wrote at great 
 length, from a grateful wish to vindicate the memory of that distinguished 
 man from party aspersions. Hacket was, in 1640, appointed one of the sub¬ 
 committee for settling the peace of the church, and spoke eloquently on 
 that occasion at the bar of the House of Commons. When the use of the 
 liturgy was prohibited under severe penalties, Hacket continued to read it 
 in his church of St. Andrew, Holborn. A serjeant, with a file of men, 
 was sent to arrest him during service, and ordered him to desist on pain 
 
 6 Le Neve’s Protestant Bishops, p. 136. See “ History, &c. of Winchester Cathedral.” 
 
 Ii 
 
60 
 
 LICHFIELD CATHEDRAL. 
 
 of instant death. “ Soldier,” said Hacket, “ I am doing my duty, do you 
 do yours : ” and intrepidly continued the service, unmolested by the 
 
 soldiers, who were overawed by his firmness. When a bishopric was first 
 
 offered to him, he declined it, saying, “ he had rather future times should 
 ask why Dr. Hacket had not a bishopric, than why he had one.” Soon 
 after his elevation to the see of Lichfield, he received a visit from Christo¬ 
 pher Comyns, rector of Norbury, in Staffordshire. This gentleman was 
 noted for a profane expression, which he frequently used before the Restora¬ 
 tion, viz. that hell ivas paved with bishops' skulls; Dr. Hacket thus good- 
 humouredly addressed him, “ I hear you have often said that hell is paved 
 with bishops’ skulls, I desire you to tread lightly upon mine when you 
 come there !” 7 He is thus described by Lord Lyttleton, in his Persian 
 Letters : “ In the first place he resides constantly on his diocess, and has 
 
 done so for many years; he asks nothing of the court for himself and 
 
 family; he hoards up no wealth for his relations, but lays out the revenues 
 of his see in a decent hospitality, and a charity void of ostentation. At 
 his first entrance into the world he distinguished himself by a zeal for the 
 liberty of his country, and had a considerable share in bringing on the 
 revolution that preserved it. His principles were never altered by his pre¬ 
 ferment ; he never prostituted his pen, nor debased his character, by party 
 disputes or blind compliance. Though he is warmly serious in the belief 
 of his religion, he is moderate to all who differ from him ; he knows no 
 distinction of party, but extends his good offices alike to Whig and Tory ; a 
 friend to virtue under any denomination; an enemy to vice under any 
 colours. His health and old age are the effects of a temperate life and 
 quiet conscience: though he is now some years above fourscore, nobody 
 ever thought he lived too long, unless it was out of impatience to succeed 
 him.” 8 
 
 Thomas Wood and William Lloyd were, after the decease of Bishop 
 
 7 This anecdote, it is believed, has never before been printed. It is taken from Loxdale’s 
 Staffordshire Collections, in the possession of Wm. Hamper, Esq. of Birmingham; to whom the 
 author is indebted for this extract, and for many other literary favours. 
 
 8 Vol. i. p. 309. 
 
BISHOPS FROM 1688 TO 1774 . 
 
 61 
 
 Hacket, successively appointed to this see ; the latter was one of the seven 
 bishops who opposed the reading of the paper called “ the declaration for 
 liberty of conscience,” for which they were committed to the Tower by 
 James II. but triumphantly delivered by the verdict of a jury. 
 
 Bishop John Hough is memorable for his intrepid resistance to the tyranny 
 and bigotry of James II. The presidentship of Magdalen College, Oxford, 
 being vacant, the king issued an illegal mandate, requiring the fellows to elect 
 Anthony Farmer. They determined to resist this arbitrary encroachment, 
 and after proper remonstrances, proceeded legally and regularly to choose 
 Mr. Hough. He was, however, forcibly ejected by the king’s commissioners, 
 and nearly all the fellows of the college were expelled in consequence of their 
 refusal to submit to these despotic proceedings. But in the following year, 
 1688, the abject tyrant, sensible of his impending fall, and meanly anxious to 
 preserve his crown, restored Dr. Hugh and the fellows who had been deprived. 
 Soon after the Revolution he was nominated Bishop of Oxford, and in 1699 
 translated hither. 9 
 
 Edward Chandler was nominated to this see in 1717. He was a prelate 
 of great erudition, and distinguished himself as a learned and able defender 
 of Christianity in the controversy with Collins, the champion of the Free¬ 
 thinkers. His successor, Richard Smallbroke, was also distinguished as 
 a controversial writer. Besides his works against Dodwell and Whiston, he 
 published a “Vindication of our Saviour’s Miracles, in Answer to the Objec¬ 
 tions of Mr. Woolston,” London, 1729, 8vo. He died in 1749, and was 
 succeeded by Frederick Cornwallis, brother of the first Earl Cornwallis. 
 In 1768, this prelate being advanced to the see of Canterbury, John Egerton, 
 Bishop of Bangor, was translated to this see, whence he was appointed, in 
 1771, to the diocess of Durham. He was succeeded by the Honourable 
 Brownlow North, brother of the late Lord North, afterwards Earl of 
 Guildford. In 1774, this prelate was translated to Worcester, and afterwards 
 advanced to Winchester. 
 
 9 His life has been published, with many 'valuable letters and documents, by John Wilmot, 
 Esq. F. R. S. and F.S. A. 4to. 1812. 
 
 h 2 
 
62 
 
 LICHFIELD CATHEDRAL. 
 
 Richard Hurd, the late bishop of this diocess, was an eminent literary 
 character. He received the rudiments of his education at Brewood grammar 
 school, and completed it at Emanuel College, Cambridge. Soon after his 
 ordination he successively produced several learned critical works. His 
 commentary on the “Ars Poetica” of Horace, in which he introduced some 
 compliments to Mr. Warburton, procured him the friendship of that author, 
 which continued during their lives, and materially affected Mr. Hurd’s 
 opinions, as well as his style of controversial writing, which became truly 
 Warburtonian in its asperity. In 1756 he was entitled to the rectory of 
 Thurcaston, as senior fellow of Emanuel College. At this living he long 
 resided, and there continued his literary labours. In 1762, the Lord Chan¬ 
 cellor Northington gave him the sinecure rectory of Folkton, near Bridlington, 
 Yorkshire; and a few years afterwards he became preacher of Lincoln's 
 Inn and Archdeacon of Gloucester. In 1775, through the recommendation 
 of Lord Mansfield, he was promoted to this bishopric. In the following 
 year he was appointed preceptor to their Royal Highnesses the Prince of 
 Wales and the Duke of York ; and, 1781, he was translated to the see of 
 Worcester. On the death of Dr. Cornwallis, in 1783, the Archbishopric 
 of Canterbury was offered to Dr. Hurd, which he declined, on account of the 
 political distractions of the times. He died on the 28th of May, 1808, in 
 his 89th year. In 1810 his works were published in 8 volumes 8vo. They 
 consist of criticism, moral and political dialogues, sermons, and controversial 
 tracts. 11 
 
 The present Bishop of Lichfield and Coventry, the Honourable James 
 Cornwallis, L.L. D. third son of Earl Cornwallis, was educated at Eton, 
 and became fellow of Merton College, Oxford. He was chaplain to Marquis 
 Townsend, when Lord Lieutenant of Ireland; Prebendary of Westminster; 
 Rector of Wrotham, in Kent; and of Newington, in Oxfordshire. In 1775 he 
 was made Dean of Canterbury, and succeeded to the deanery of Windsor in 
 1791, which, in 1794, he exchanged for that of Durham. 
 
 31 Life of Bishop Hurd, prefixed to his works. “ Letters from an Eminent Prelate to one of his 
 Friends,” i.e. Bishop Warburton to Bishop Hurd. 8vo. 1809. 
 
THE DATES AND STYLES 
 
 Of the different parts of the cathedral, though not ascertained by records 
 or historical evidence, may be inferred from what has been adduced in 
 the course of the preceding pages, and by comparing their distinguishing 
 features with corresponding styles in other buildings. Bishop de Clinton 
 is generally represented to be the founder and even builder of the greater 
 
 part of the present church, but we are not justified in attributing any 
 
 of the architectural members to him, or to his prelacy. The oldest 
 
 parts are the lower portions of the transepts , with three divisions in the 
 
 ailes of the choir , the vestry (formerly the sacristy) on the south side , and 
 the vestibule and chapter house on the north side. Though these were 
 probably commenced by De Clinton, they were certainly not far advanced 
 before the beginning of the thirteenth century ; as the arches, columns, 
 and ornaments correspond in forms, &c. with many parts of churches 
 built about that time. We shall not be likely to err in assigning them to 
 the prelacies of Bishops Nonant and Stavenby, i. e. from 1188 to 1224. 
 Soon afterwards the choir and nave were progressively raised, and most 
 likely by Bishop Pateshulle, about 1235, as we have seen that a license 
 was granted by King Henry III. for the conveyance of stone. We have 
 very satisfactory evidence that the Lady Chapel was raised by Bishop 
 Langton, about 1300. The central and western towers and spires were 
 erected very nearly at the same time. An alteration appears to have been 
 next made by inserting a new and enlarged tier of clerestory windows into 
 the choir , most probably in the early part of the reign of Edward III. 
 
 Library. — Immediately over the chapter house is an apartment corres¬ 
 ponding in form and style with the chapter house, and appropriated to the 
 library. It contains ten bookcases, decorated with the arms of the munifi¬ 
 cent donors of their valuable contents. Among the most ancient and 
 curious volumes in this collection are the MSS. called “ Te.vtus S. Ceddcef 
 or St. Chad’s Gospels, a large 4to. volume of vellum. This curious 
 manuscript, which tradition attributes to the pen of St. Gildas, is supposed 
 to have been written before 720. It appears to have once belonged to the 
 
64 
 
 LICHFIELD CATHEDRAL. 
 
 church of Llandaff, and to have been afterwards used by the Saxons for 
 administering oaths and confirming donations. It is ornamented with 
 several grotesque illuminations, and the initial letters of each gospel are 
 decorated in a style particularly fanciful and curious. 
 
 Here is also a fine folio copy, on vellum, of “ Chaucer s Canterbury 
 Tales” in good preservation : the initial letters are coloured and gilt, and 
 those at the beginning of each tale are highly ornamented. The Ploughman’s 
 Tale, which Mr. Tyrrwhit pronounced to be spurious, does not appear in this 
 volume. 
 
 A copy of the “ Valor , or Ta.vatio, of Pope Nicholas IV.” is here in a 
 perfect state, with the exception of a few leaves at the end. This taxation 
 was made in 1291, for carrying into effect a grant to King Edward I. of the 
 tenth of all ecclesiastical revenues, towards defraying the charges of prosecu¬ 
 ting the holy war. The present copy contains several entries which do not 
 appear in that published by Parliament. 
 
 A fine Koran , taken from the Turks at Buda, and presented to this cathe¬ 
 dral by the Rev. Ben. Marshall. 
 
 “ Dives and Pauper a treatise on the decalogue, in MS. It was 
 printed in folio by Pynson in 1483, and again by Wynkyn de Worde in 
 1496. 1 
 
 “ Orders generally to be observed of the whole household of the prince 
 his highness:” being a large folio volume, engrossed on vellum, and marked 
 at every head with the sign manual of King Charles I. This was undoubt¬ 
 edly the official book of the chamberlain of the prince’s household. 
 
 A MS. presentation copy, to the Earl of Hertford, of the comedy of “ The 
 English Moore, or the Mock Marriage,” by Richard Brome. 
 
 A volume of MSS. superscribed “ Cantaria Sancti Blasii; Ordinatio Majis- 
 tri Thomae Heywood, decani Eccles. Licli. de et super Cantaria Jesu et Sancta 
 Anne in parte boreali eccles. Lich et de pensione Capellani ibidem perpetuo 
 celebraturi et aliis articulis,” &c. The volume also contains copies of several 
 deeds, &c. bearing the dates from 1471 to 1474. 
 
 1 Brit. Biblio. iv. 129, and Dibdin’s Typog. Ant. ii. 67 and 401, There is also an imperfect 
 copy in the Harleian Collection, No. 149. 
 
No. 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 4 
 
 5 
 
 6 
 
 7 
 
 8 
 
 9 
 
 10 
 
 11 
 
 12 
 
 13 
 
 14 
 
 15 
 
 16 
 
 17 
 
 18 
 
 19 
 
 20 
 
 21 
 
 22 
 
 23 
 
 24 
 
 25 
 
 26 
 
 27 
 
 CHRONOLOGICAL LIST OF THE BISHOPS OF LICHFIELD, &c. 
 
 WITH 
 
 CONTEMPORARY KINGS OF ENGLAND, AND POPES. 
 
 Consecrated or Installed. 
 
 Died or Translated. 
 
 Buried at 
 
 F rom 
 
 ANGLO-SAXON DYNASTY. 
 .To . 
 
 656 
 
 658 
 
 659 
 662 
 
 . 658 
 
 Resigned . 659 
 
 .662 
 
 .667 
 
 Kings. 
 
 OF MERCIA 
 
 Oswy. 
 
 Oswy. 
 
 Wulfhere . 
 
 Wulfhere .. 
 
 Popes. 
 
 Eugenius I. 
 Eugenius I. 
 Vitalian. 
 Vitalian. 
 
 669 
 
 672 
 
 674 
 
 691 
 
 721 
 
 737 
 
 752 
 
 765 
 
 768 
 
 785 
 
 786 
 812 
 
 Deprived 
 
 672 
 
 674 
 
 691 
 
 721 
 
 737 
 
 752 
 
 765 
 
 708 
 
 785 
 
 786 
 812 
 817 
 
 Lichfield 
 
 818 
 
 857 
 
 857 
 
 867 
 
 867 
 
 890 
 
 890 
 
 920 
 
 944 
 
 960 
 
 974 
 
 992 
 
 1007 
 
 1020 
 
 1027 
 
 1038 
 
 920 
 
 944 
 
 960 
 
 974 
 
 992 
 
 1007 
 
 1020 
 
 1027 
 
 1038 
 
 1054 
 
 1054 
 
 1066 
 
 Wulfhere 
 Wulfhere 
 W ulf here 
 Ethelred . 
 Ethelbald 
 Ethelbald 
 Ethelbald 
 
 Offa. 
 
 Offa. 
 
 Offa. 
 
 Offa. 
 
 Kenulph . 
 
 Vitalian. 
 Adeodatus. 
 Adeodatus. 
 Sergius. 
 Gregory II. 
 Gregory III. 
 Stephen III. 
 Paul I. 
 Stephen IY. 
 Adrian. 
 Adrian. 
 
 Leo III. 
 
 OF ENGLAND. 
 
 Egbert.. .. 
 
 Ethelwulph . 
 
 S Ethelbald, Ethel- ) 
 l bert, Ethelred.... ] 
 
 Alfred. 
 
 Edward the Elder.... 
 
 Edmund .. 
 
 Edgar . 
 
 Edgar . 
 
 Ethelred .. 
 
 Ethelred. 
 
 Canute . 
 
 Canute . 
 
 Harold . 
 
 i Edward Confes- } 
 1 sor, Harold.$ 
 
 Paschal. 
 Benedict III. 
 
 Adrian II. 
 
 Stephen IV. 
 John X. 
 Stephen IX. 
 John XII. 
 Domnus II. 
 Gregory V. 
 John XVIII. 
 Benedict VIII. 
 John XIX. 
 Benedict IX. 
 
 Leo IX. 
 
 1067 
 
 1088 
 
 NORMAN DYNASTY. 
 
 .1085 
 
 .1107 
 
 Chester 
 
 Coventry 
 
 William I.Alexander II. 
 
 William II.Urban II. 
 
66 
 
 A CHRONOLOGICAL LIST OF BISHOPS, ETC. 
 
 No. 
 
 33 
 
 34 
 
 35 
 
 BISHOPS. 
 
 OF COVENTRY AND 
 LICHFIELD. 
 
 Robert Peche. 
 
 Roger de Clinton. 
 
 Walter Durdent. 
 
 Richard Peche . 
 
 Gerard LaPucelle, or Puella 
 
 Hugh de Nonant. 
 
 GeolTry de Muschamp ..... 
 William de Cornhull ..... 
 Alexander de Stavenby .., 
 Hugh de Pateshulle.. 
 
 Roger de Weseham.. 
 
 36 
 
 37 
 
 38 
 
 39 
 
 40 
 
 41 
 
 42 
 
 43 
 
 44 Roger de Meyland 
 
 45 Walter de Langton 
 
 46 Roger de Norburg 
 
 47 j Robert Stretton ..., 
 
 48 Walter Skirlaw 1 ., 
 
 49 Richard Scrope, 
 
 50 John Brughill , 
 
 .Aug. 19, 
 
 Landaflf.Sept. 
 
 51 John Catricke, or Keterich. 
 
 52 William Hey worth . 
 
 53jWilliam Bothe . 
 
 54 Nicolas Cloose. 
 
 55 J Reginald Bolars . 
 
 56 John Halse.. 
 
 57 
 
 58 
 
 William Smiih 
 John Arundell 
 
 59 Geoffry Blythe 
 
 60 
 
 61 
 
 62 
 
 63 
 
 64 
 
 65 
 
 66 
 
 67 
 
 68 
 
 69 
 
 70 
 
 Roland Lee .... 
 Richard Sampson 
 Ralph Bane .... 
 Thomas Bentham 
 William Overton 
 George Abbot .. 
 
 Richard Neill . 
 John Overall.. . 
 Thomas Morton. 
 Robert Wright . 
 
 Consecrated or Installed. 
 
 From 
 
 March 13, 1121 
 . .Dec. 22, 1129 
 .. Oct. 22, 1149 
 
 Died orTranslated. 
 
 To . 
 
 .Aug. 22, 1127 
 
 .16 Cal. May, 1148 
 
 .Dec. 7, 1161 
 
 Buried at 
 
 Coventry 
 
 Antioch 
 
 Coventry 
 
 SAXON LINE RESTORED. 
 
 .. .Sept. 25, 
 .2 Cal. Feb. 
 ...June 21, 
 ... Jan. 25, 
 . April 14, 
 ... July 1, 
 
 ... Jan. 1, 
 
 . March 10, 
 ... Dec. 22, 
 .. .June 27, 
 ,. .Sept.27, 
 
 ... Jan. 14, 
 
 1162 
 
 1183 
 
 1188 
 
 1198 
 
 1215 
 
 1224 
 
 1240 
 
 1245 
 
 1258 
 
 1296 
 
 1322 
 
 1360 
 
 1386 
 
 1386 
 
 1398 
 
 . Oct. 6, 1182 
 
 .Jan. 13, 1184 
 
 . April 27, 1198 
 
 . Oct. 6, 1208 
 
 .Sept. 14, 1223 
 
 .Dec. 26, 1238 
 
 . Dec. 8, 1241 
 
 ( Resigned,Dec 4,1256 } 
 l Died..May 20,1257 S 
 
 .Dec. 16, 1295 
 
 .Nov. 16, 1321 
 
 . Dec. 1359 
 
 .March 28, 1385 
 
 Durham.. Aug. 18, 1386 
 
 York.July 6, 1398 
 
 ...May, 1414 
 
 Stafford . 
 
 Coventry. 
 
 Caen in Normandy 
 
 Lichfield. 
 
 Lichfield. 
 
 Lichfield ....... 
 
 Lichfield. 
 
 Lichfield. 
 
 Lichfield. 
 
 Lichfield. 
 
 Lichfield. 
 
 Lichfield. 
 
 Durham. 
 
 York . 
 
 Lichfield. 
 
 St. David’s.. May, 1415 
 
 .Nov. 28, 1420 
 
 .July 10, 1447 
 
 .Aug. 30, 1452 
 
 Hereford.. Feb. 7, 1153 
 .Nov. 25, 1459 
 
 LANCASTRIAN LINE. 
 
 Exeter.... Nov. 20, 1419 
 
 . April 10, 1446 
 
 York.... June 21, 1452 
 
 . Oct. 1452 
 
 .1459 
 
 .Sept. 30, 1490 
 
 Southwell 
 Lichfield . 
 Lichfield. 
 Lichfield . 
 
 UNION OF YORK AND LANCASTRIAN FAMILIES. 
 
 .. .April, 1492 
 . Nov. 6, 1496 
 .Sept. 20,1503 
 
 Lincoln .1495 
 
 Exeter... .June 29, 1502 
 .1533 
 
 REFORMATION. 
 
 . April 19, 1534 
 
 Chichester, March 12,1542 
 
 .Nov. 18, 1554 
 
 .March 24, 1559 
 
 .Sept. 18, 1580 
 
 . Dec. 3, 1609 
 
 .Jan. 24, 1544 
 
 .Sept. 25, 1554 
 
 Deprived .1559 
 
 .Feb. 21, 1578 
 
 April, 1609 
 
 Lincoln 
 
 London 
 
 Lichfield 
 
 Shrewsbury 
 
 London .. 
 
 Eccleshall 
 
 Eccleshall 
 
 London .1609 Guildford 
 
 UNION OF ENGLISH AND SCOTCH CROWNS. 
 
 Accepted Frewen 
 
 Rochester.... Sept. 1610 
 
 .April 3, 1614 
 
 Chester.. March 6, 1618 
 Bristol... .Nov. 28,1632 
 .April, 1644 
 
 Lincoln.Sept. 1613 
 
 Norwich.. Sept. 30, 1618 
 Durham... .July 2, 1632 
 
 .1642 
 
 York.Oct. 11, 1660 
 
 York . 
 
 Norwich. 
 
 Eastern Mauduit 
 
 York 
 
 Kings. 
 
 Henry I, 
 Henry I 
 Stephen 
 
 Henry II. , 
 Henry II. , 
 Henry II. . 
 Richard I. . 
 
 John . 
 
 Henry III. . 
 Henry III. . 
 
 Henry III.. 
 
 Henry III. , 
 Edward I. , 
 Edward II 
 Edward III 
 
 Richard II., 
 
 Richard II.. 
 Richard II., 
 
 Henry V. 
 Henry V. 
 Henry VI 
 Henry AH 
 Henry A 7 I 
 Henry VI 
 
 Henry VII. 
 Henry VII. 
 Henry AHI. 
 
 Henry VIII 
 Henry AH1I 
 
 Mary . 
 
 Elizabeth . 
 Elizabeth . 
 James I. ... 
 
 James I. , 
 James I. , 
 James I. , 
 Charles I 
 Charles I 
 
 Popes. 
 
 Calixtus II. 
 Honorius II. 
 EugeniusIII 
 
 Alexander III. 
 Lucius III. 
 Clement III. 
 Innocent III. 
 Innocent III. 
 Honorius III. 
 Gregory IX. 
 
 Innocent IV. 
 
 Alexander IA r . 
 Boniface VIII. 
 John XXII. 
 Innocent VI. 
 
 \ Urban AH. 
 t Clement VII. 
 S Urban AH. 
 
 I Clement AHI. 
 Benedict XIII. 
 
 Benedict XIII. 
 Martin V. 
 Nicholas V. 
 Nicholas A r . 
 Nicholas A r . 
 Pius II. 
 
 Alexander AH. 
 Alexander AH. 
 Pius III. 
 
 Clement AHI. 
 
 1 A Memoir of this prelate, by J. Crosse, Esq. is given in the Architectural Antiquities, vol. iv. p. 128. 
 
CHRONOLOGICAL LIST OF BISHOPS, ETC. 67 
 
 BISHOPS 
 
 Consecrated or Installed 
 
 Died or Translated 
 
 Buried at 
 
 Kings. 
 
 OF LICHFIELD AND 
 COVENTRY. 
 
 John Hacket. 
 
 From . 
 
 .Dec. 22, 1661 
 
 To . 
 
 .Oct. 28, 1670 
 
 Lichfield. 
 
 Charles II. 
 
 Charles II. 
 
 William and Mary. 
 William and Mary. 
 George I. 
 
 George II. 
 
 George II. 
 
 George III. 
 
 George III. 
 
 George III. 
 
 George III. 
 
 Thomas Wood . 
 
 
 . April 18, 1692 
 
 Ufiord. 
 
 William Lloyd . 
 
 John Hough . 
 
 Edward Chandler. 
 
 St. Asaph_Oct 20' 1692 
 
 Oxford.Aug. 5, 1699 
 
 St. David’s . .Feb. 20,1730 
 .1749 
 
 Worcester .1699 
 
 Worcester .1717 
 
 Durham.1730 
 
 .Hoc. 22 17AO 
 
 Hadbury. 
 
 Worcester. 
 
 Farnham Royal.. 
 
 Hon. F. Cornwallis. 
 
 Canterbury.17fi8 
 
 
 John Egerton. 
 
 Bangor .... Nov. 22, 1768 
 .1771 
 
 Durham.July 8, 1771 
 
 St. James’s. 
 
 Rio hard Hurd . 
 
 .1774 
 
 Worcester .1781 
 
 H^rtlehnry.« .. f . 
 
 
 .1781 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 No. 
 
 71 
 
 72 
 
 73 
 
 74 
 
 75 
 
 76 
 
 77 
 
 78 
 
 79 
 
 80 
 81 
 
 CHRONOLOGICAL LIST OF THE DEANS OF LICHFIELD. 
 
 Mo. 
 
 DEANS. 
 
 Installed. 
 
 i 
 
 
 .1140 
 
 2 
 
 Richard dp. T)a.la.m.... 
 
 .1165 
 
 3 
 
 
 .1173 
 
 4 
 
 Richard.. 
 
 .1190 
 
 5 
 
 
 .1193 
 
 6 
 
 Ralph Nevill . 
 
 
 7 
 
 William de Mancestre 
 
 
 8 
 
 Ralph de Sempringham 
 
 
 9 
 
 .Tnhn de Derby. 
 
 .1260 
 
 10 
 
 Stephen Segrave .... 
 
 .. Dec. 1320 
 
 11 
 
 
 .1325 
 
 12 
 
 
 .1328 
 
 
 
 13 
 
 Richard Fitz-Ralph .. 
 
 April20,1337 
 
 14 
 
 Simon de Borisley .... 
 
 6ld.Jan.1347 
 
 15 
 
 John de Bokingham .. 
 
 
 16 
 
 Anthony Rous . 
 
 
 17 
 
 Laurence de Ibbestoke 
 
 Feb. 23, 1368 
 
 18 
 
 
 .1369 
 
 19 
 
 William dePackington 
 
 
 20 
 
 Thomas de Stretton .. 
 
 May 15, 1390 
 
 21 
 
 Robert Wolvedon ... . 
 
 Sept. 23, 1426 
 
 22 
 
 John de Verney . 
 
 Dec. 2, 1432 
 
 
 
 
 24 
 
 John Yotton . 
 
 Feb. 23, 1493 
 
 Died, or removed. 
 
 f Bishop of Chi- 
 ( Chester, Nov. 1222 
 
 .Feb. 7,1253 
 
 .March 23, 1260 
 
 .Oct. 12, 1319 
 
 Archb.ofArmagh, 1324 
 
 .1328 
 
 t Called Episcopus 
 l Marciliensis 1334 
 Archb.ofArmagh, 1347 
 
 Bishopof Lincolil, 1363 
 
 April 30, 1390 
 
 .1425 
 
 ... Nov. 1432 
 
 .1457 
 
 . Oct. 25, 1492 
 . Aug. 2, 1512 
 
 No. 
 
 25 
 
 26 
 
 27 
 
 28 
 
 29 
 
 30 
 
 31 
 
 32 
 
 33 
 
 34 
 
 35 
 
 36 
 
 37 
 
 38 
 
 39 
 
 40 
 
 41 
 
 42 
 
 43 
 
 44 
 
 45 
 
 46 
 
 47 
 
 48 
 
 49 
 
 DEANS. 
 
 Installed. 
 
 Died, or removed. 
 
 Ralph Collingwood .. 
 
 James Denton . 
 
 Richard Sampson 1 .... 
 Richard Williams.... 
 John Rambridge .... 
 Lawrence Nowell 2 .. 
 
 George Boleyn . 
 
 James Montagu. 
 
 William Tooker. 
 
 Walter Curie. 
 
 Augustine Lindsell .. 
 John Warner. 
 
 Sept. 26,1512 
 ..Jan.7,1522 
 June 20, 1533 
 Nov. 23,1536 
 April 2, 1554 
 April 29,1559 
 Nov. 22,1576 
 July 16, 1603 
 Feb. 21, 1604 
 Mar. 24,1620 
 Oct. 15, 1628 
 .1633 
 
 Samuel Fell 
 
 1637 
 
 Griffith Higgs 3 
 
 1638 
 
 William Paul 
 
 April 8, 1660 
 
 Thomas Wood . 
 
 Matthew Smallwood.. 
 Lancelot Addison 4 .. 
 William Binckes .... 
 Jonathan Kimberley.. 
 William Walmesley .. 
 
 Nicholas Penny. 
 
 John Addenbrook .... 
 
 Baptist Proby . 
 
 J. C. Woodhouse .... 
 
 .. Feb. 1663 
 
 .1671 
 
 July 3, 1683 
 June 19,1703 
 July 7, 1713 
 May 7, 1720 
 Dec. 1, 1730 
 Feb. 15, 1745 
 Mar. 25,1776 
 Feb. 13, 1807 
 
 .Nov. 22,1521 
 
 .Feb. 23, 1532 
 
 Bp. of Chichester, 1536 
 
 Deprived .1553 
 
 Deprived .1558 
 
 .Oct. 1576 
 
 . Jan.1602 
 
 Bp of Winchester, 1616 
 
 . March, 1620 
 
 Bp. of Rochester, 1627 
 Bp. of Peterboro’, 1632 
 Bp. of Rochester, 1637 
 ( Dean of Christ- 
 £ church,Oxford,1638 
 
 .Dec. 16, 1659 
 
 Bishop of Oxford, 1663 
 Bp.of Lichfield,&c. 1671 
 
 . April 26, 1683 
 
 . April 20, 1703 
 
 . June 19, 1712 
 
 . March 7, 1719 
 
 Jan. 15, 1745 
 Feb.25,1776 
 Jan.16,1807 
 
 1 Afterwards Bishop of Lichfield, &c. ® Dean Nowell’s MSS. greatly assisted Somner in compiling his Saxon Dictionary. 
 
 » “ A liberal contributor to the ornaments of the Cathedral.*’—Wood. A Author of several theological works, and father of the great essayist. 
 
 I 
 
A 
 
 LIST OF BOOKS, ESSAYS, AND PRINTS, 
 
 THAT HAVE BEEN PUBLISHED RELATING TO 
 
 LICHFIELD CATHEDRAL; 
 
 also 
 
 A LIST OF ENGRAVED PORTRAITS OF ITS BISHOPS AND DEANS. 
 
 THIS LIST IS SUBJOINED TO GRATIFY THE BIBLIOGRAPHER, THE CRITICAL ANTIQUARY, AND 
 THE ILLUSTRATOR; AS WELL AS TO SHOW, AT ONE VIEW, THE SOURCES WHENCE THE 
 CONTENTS OF THE PRECEDING PAGES HAVE BEEN DERIVED, AND THE FULL TITLES OF 
 THE WORKS REFERRED TO IN THE NOTES. 
 
 SEE AND CHURCH. 
 
 The Ecclesiastical History, by “ the Venerable Bede,” contains the earliest authentic information 
 relative to the establishment of the Mercian diocess, and the see of Lichfield. From that work the 
 author of the “ Chronicon Lichfeldensis Ecclesice ’ copied, almost verbatim, his account of those 
 subjects. This chronicle is published in “ Anglia Sacra, vol. i. p. 423. We are informed by 
 Warton, in the preface to this work, that he collated five different copies of the Chronicon, which 
 vary considerably, and are all replete with errors. Of these, one is in the Cottonian library ; 
 (Vespasian, E. xvi. 2.) another in the Harleian library ; (MS. 3839) and a third in the Bodleian 
 library, at Oxford; (MS. n. 770, 865.) a fourth was formerly in the possession of Dean Addison of 
 Lichfield. The following curious memoranda appear in the Cottonian MS. (Vespas. E. xvi. 2.) 
 
 “ Anno Xl, 1684. Quidam Sprag habuit librum fol. bene crassm et ccc annorQ cui titulus 
 Chronicon Leichfeldense ; in eo multa de epis Mercioru.”— T. Gale. 
 
 “ This booke was found in the thatch of an house at Clitun Campuch, in the demolishinge 
 thereof. And was brought to mee by Mr. Darwin. The Cronicon agrees perfectly wth that wthin 
 ye church in the wall, by the south gate, in foldinge leaves of timber, wch was torn in pieces by my 
 Lord Brookes his soldiers. 
 
 “ But there is another antiquity called Liber Lichfieldensis, wch was in y e custody of y e Deane 
 and Chapter, and suffered an harde fate, for there having bin not many yeares since a sute betwixt 
 Mr. Sprat and certain prebendaries touching y e repairs of y e church of Stowe’s chancel, whereof 
 they were Parsons convicted. And y e cause was appealed after judgment given below', to London, 
 and so y e whole cause transmitted wth that record, wch was y e most pregnant evidence, but could 
 never bee obteined back agen. But I was shewed another copy under y 1 title in Graye’s Ine library, 
 wch they tould mee Mr. Selden had mutilated. This I saw some 20 yeares agoe, aut circiter.” 
 
 This original Chronicle was compiled by Thomas de Chesterfeld, about the year 1350 : and was 
 continued down to the year 1559 by William Whitlock, partly from the wmrks of other authors, and 
 partly from his personal knowledge. 
 
 “ A Survey of Staffordshire; containing the Antiquities of that County,” &c. By Sampson 
 Erdeswicke, Esq.:—with Observations upon the Possessors of Monastery Lands in Staffordshire, 
 By Sir Simon Degge, Knt. London ; 8vo. 1717. A new title page was afterwards printed for 
 W. Mears, 1723.— This edition was reprinted on thicker and lighter coloured paper. A new and 
 enlarged edition of this work has been published in 1820, by the Rev. T. Harwood, B.D. F.S.A. 
 8vo. price £l. Is.: and “ a few copies on large paper, price £1. 11s. Qd.” 
 
 Some particulars of the history and description of this cathedral are given in “ Leland's Itine¬ 
 rary,” Vol. iv. part ii. fol. 187. b. 
 
LICHFIELD CATHEDRAL : — LIST OF BOOKS, ESSAYS, ETC. 
 
 69 
 
 “ The Natural History of Staffordshire. By Robert Plott, LL. D. Keeper of the Ashmolean 
 Museum, and Professor of Chemistry in the University of Oxford.” Oxf. 1686, folio. This work 
 evinces some learning and acuteness in the author, but also displays his credulity and superstition. 
 
 Elias Ashmole intended to write “ The History and Antiquities of Lichfield,” his native city. 
 His collections are in his museum, 7470-84, 8093, and “ Historia Ecclesise de Lichfield,” Bib. 
 Bodl. 3553. 
 
 The “ Monasticon Anglicanumf contains an account of the foundation of the see and church, 
 taken from the Chronicle of Lichfield, vol. iii. p. 216 ;—some other particulars from Leland’s Col¬ 
 lectanea—description of the close and two monasteries, p. 220, &c. —depositions of the prior of 
 Coventry and others relating to the election of bishops—several statutes and ordinances of the 
 bishops; charters, and deeds relating to the church lands, &c. 
 
 “ Wilkins's Concilia ” contain the Statutes of Bishops Nonant, vol. i. p.496; Stavenby, ib. 
 p. 640 ; Langton. ib. p. 256; and the submissions of the bishops of Coventry to the Church of 
 Canterbury, vol. iii. p. 504. 
 
 “ Some short Account of the Cathedral Church of Lichfeld," 8vo.pp. 62. London, 1723. This 
 little work was first published separately in 1717, but afterwards in 1723, in a volume intituled 
 “ The Antiquities of the Cathedral Church of Worcester. By that learned Antiquary, Thomas 
 Abingdon, Esq. To which are added, The Antiquities of the Cathedral Churches of Chichester 
 and Lichfield.” It contains but little original information, and is evidently compiled from the 
 Monasticon, and Plot’s Survey of Staffordshire. 
 
 In Willis's “ History of the Mitred Abbeys," vol. ii. p. 359, are the dimensions of this church 
 from the preceding volume, and an account of its monuments. 
 
 In the same author’s “ Survey of Cathedrals," vol. i. p. 371, is an account of this church, and 
 the persons buried therein; — the endowment of the bishopric, and alienations from it; endowment 
 of the dean and chapter; an account of the bishops, deans, &c. Also a view of the church, from 
 the south, engraved by J. Harris. 
 
 An Account of the Cathedral and City of Lichfield constitutes part of an unfinished History 
 of Staffordshire, by the Rev. Stebbing Shaw, under the following title ; “ The History and Anti¬ 
 quities of Staffordshire; compiled from the Manuscripts of Huntbach, Loxdale, Bishop Lyttleton, 
 and other Collections, of Dr. Wilkes, the Rev. T. Feilde, &c. &c. Including Erdeswick’s Survey of 
 the County, and the approved parts of Dr. Plot’s Natural History. The whole brought down to the 
 present Time ; interspersed with Pedigrees and Anecdotes of Families ; Observations on Agriculture, 
 Commerce, Mines, and Manufactories ; and illustrated with a very full and correct new Map of the 
 County, Agri Staffordiensis Icon, and numerous other Plates. By the Rev. Stebbing Shaw, B.D. F.A.S. 
 and Fellow of Queen’s College, Cambridge.” 2 vols. folio. London, 1798. 
 
 The account of the cathedral occupies one hundred and nineteen pages, which are accompanied 
 by the following Prints :—1. West Front of the Cathedral, with Plan of North Side, said to be 
 drawn by Mr. Shaw, and engraved by R. W. Basire, but was drawn by J. Carter, and merely re¬ 
 duced by Mr. Sbaw :—2. South-west View of the Cathedral, engraved by Kidd, and originally 
 published by J. Jackson; May, 1796, with letter press: — 3. View near Lichfield, with large Willow 
 Tree, at the top of p. 114. E. Stringer, del. 1785;—4 and 5. On one sheet, being the South 
 Prospect and Ground Plan of the Cathedral. 1. Harris, sc.: —6. Effigies and Arms formerly in the 
 Cathedral, from Dugdale’s Visitation in the Herald’s College :—7. Altar Tomb, with Canopy ; 
 Effigy of a Bishop, &c. formerly in the cathedral: — 2. Monumental Effigy of a Bishop, in a niche, 
 with Canopy; an Inscription, and three other Subjects, etched, in a rough and bad style :—9. Mo¬ 
 nument of Dean Heywood, two Effigies, and Canopy : —10. Monument of Bishop Langton, from 
 Dugdale’s Visitation ; Effigy on Altar Tomb with Canopies, &c.:—11. A large folding-sheet show¬ 
 ing Eight Monuments, etched by the Rev. J. Homfray, in a very rough, slight, careless manner: 
 —12. Monument, with Effigy of Bishop Hacket, engraved by Hollar for the Bishops “ Century 
 of Sermons :”—13 : Eight Seals: -14. Gate-house belonging to the Choristers’ House; Portrait of 
 Richard Greene; East End of Cathedral from Stow' Pool. R. Greene, del. I. Wood, sc. for the 
 Gentleman’s Magazine. 
 
 The work is a strange jumble of undigested, unarranged, and indiscriminating matter. The lan¬ 
 guage is often puerile, and in some places illiterate ; the plates very badly engraved, and apparently 
 from equally bad drawings. 
 
 “ The Gentleman s Magazine," vol. Ixxix. contains some remarks on a publication, intituled, 
 “ An Historical Survey of the Ecclesiastical Antiquities of France : with a view to illustrate the 
 Rise and Progress of Gothic Architecture in Europe.” By the late G. D. Whittington. In 
 
 i 2 
 
70 
 
 LICHFIELD CATHEDRAL:—LIST OF BOOKS, ESSAYS, ETC. 
 
 these remarks, Mr. Carter maintains, contrary to the opinion advanced by Mr. Whittington, that 
 the pointed style of architecture originated in England. In the course of these observations 
 Mr. Carter introduces a short description of the West Front of Lichfield Cathedral, and a compari¬ 
 son between that and the West Front of the Cathedral of Noire Dame at Paris; vol.lxxix. part ii. 
 p. 697. But he met with an able opponent, under the signature of “ Amateur,” who defends the 
 Survey, in several letters, one of which in vol. lxxx. part i. p. 525, is a complete refutation of the 
 “ Architect’s” Remarks on Lichfield Cathedral. A view of the West Front, drawn by J. Carter, 
 and engraved by Basire, is in vol. lxxx. part ii. p. 403 
 
 “ History of the City and Cathedral of Lichfield , chiefly compiled from ancient Authors, &c.” 
 By John Jackson, Jun. London; 8vo. 1805, pp. 276. Embellished (among other prints) with a 
 South-west View of the Cathedral, engraved by Kidd. This was the third edition, materially 
 altered and enlarged, of a work originally published by the same author, at the age of eighteen, 
 under the title of “ History of the City and County of Lichfield ,” &c. 
 
 “ The History and Antiquities of the Church and City of Lichfield : containing its ancient and 
 present State, Civil and Ecclesiastical ; collected from various public Records, and other authentic 
 Evidences.” By the Rev. Thomas Harwood, F. S. A. late of University College, Oxford. Glou¬ 
 cester: printed for Cadell and Davies, London, 1806, pp. 574, 4to. Embellished (among other 
 views) with a South-west View of the Cathedral, engraved by B. Howlett, from a drawing by T. G. 
 Worthington, Esq. This work contains a history of the see and church, with a description of 
 the latter, its monuments, and epitaphs, biography of the bishops, lists of the deans, chancellors, 
 precentors, archdeacons, and prebendaries. 
 
 “ An Illustration of the Architecture of the Cathedral Church of Lichfield." By Charles 
 Wild. London, 1813, folio. This volume contains a short history and description of the Cathe¬ 
 dral, illustrated by ten aquatinta prints by Dubourg, from drawings by Mr. Wild. Plate 1. 
 Ground Plan of the Cathedral :—2. West and North Entrances, and Arcade of Nave :—3. South¬ 
 east View of Cathedral:—4. Part of South Side:—5. The East End: 6. The West Front: — 
 7. Part of the Nave :—8. Nave, and part of Transept:—9. The Choir :—10. Interior of the East 
 End. 
 
 The third volume of Storer’s “ Graphic and Historical Description of the Cathedrals of Great 
 Britain ” contains the “ History and Antiquities of the Cathedral Churches , and See of Lichfield 
 and Coventry .” 8vo. Sherwood and Co. 1816. This work is illustrated by ten plates, eight of 
 which are engraved by J. Storer, from his own drawings: and the other two from those of J. Hard¬ 
 wick and Capt. John Westmacott—viz. 1. The West Door:—2. Ground Plan:—3. South Tran¬ 
 sept, exterior:—4. Chapter-house, interior:—5. Interior of Cathedral, looking- North-west: — 
 6. North-east View:—7. North-west View-: — 8. View of Cathedral from North:—9. View of 
 the Bishop’s Palace: —10. West Front. With a concise history and description, in twelve pages of 
 letter-press. 
 
 ACCOUNTS OF BISHOPS. 
 
 The Chronicle of Lichfield Cathedral, already referred to, as printed in “ Anglia Sacra,” contains 
 some account of the bishops of this see, from Diuma to Bentham. 
 
 A fragment of the life of Hugo de Nonant, written by Giraldus Cambrensis, is also printed in 
 Warton’s Anglia Sacra, vol. ii. p. 351. 
 
 “ The Lives and Characters, Deaths, Burials and Epitaphs, Works of Piety, Charity, and other 
 munificent Benefactions, of all the Protestant Bishops of the Church of England, since the Re¬ 
 formation, as settled by Queen Elizabeth, A. D. 1559; collected from their several Registers, 
 Wills in the Prerogative Offices, authentic Records, and other valuable MSS. collections ; and 
 compared with the best Accounts hitherto published of this kind.” By John Le Neve, Gent. vol. i. 
 8vo. London, 1720, pp, 288. This volume (the only one ever published) contains the lives of 
 George Abbot and Richard Neill, Bishops of this See, who afterwards became Archbishops. 
 
 “ Memoirs of the Life of Roger de Weseham." By Dr. Pegge, 4to. 1761. 
 
 “ The Life of Bishop Morton,” by Baddiley and Naylor, 12mo. 1660, and by Dr. Barwick, 
 4to. 1669—with portrait by Faithorne. 
 
 The Life of Bishop Hacket, prefixed to his Century of Sermons, fol. 1675. By Dr. Plume. 
 This volume is embellished with a fine portrait by Faithorne, and a plate of the monument by 
 Hollar. 
 
 “ The Life of the Rev. John Hough, D. D. successively Bishop of Oxford, Lichfield and Co¬ 
 ventry, and Worcester; formerly President of St. Mary Magdalen College, Oxford, in the Reign of 
 
LICHFIELD CATHEDRAL'. — LIST OF PRINTS, ETC. 
 
 71 
 
 King James II. Containing many of his Letters, and Biographical Notices of several Persons with 
 whom he was connected.” By John Wilmot, Esq. F.R.S. and S.A. 4to. pp. 387. London, 1812. 
 This work contains the substance of a scarce memoir which was printed a few weeks after the 
 bishop’s decease, as “ Some Account” of his life : and is embellished with two portraits of the 
 bishop, and fac similes of his writing. 
 
 Memoirs of Bishop Hurd, with a portrait, are prefixed to an edition of his works, 8 vols. 8vo. 
 
 1811. 
 
 VIEWS AND PRINTS OF THE CHURCH AND OF ITS MONUMENTS. 
 
 In Fuller’s “ Church History of Britain fol. 1655, are two views of the cathedral, supposed 
 to be the oldest prints extant:— viz. View of the West Front, having all its niches filled with statues, 
 and the West Window, with its original mullions and tracery. S. Kyrk, pinx. W. Hollar , sc.— 
 Elias Ashmole presented this plate. A similar view was engraved for the Monasticon, most likely 
 by Hollar, though without his name, and with some variation. 
 
 A South View of the Cathedral. S. Kyrk, del. R. Vaughan, sc. 
 
 View of the West Front; engraved by King . 
 
 View of the North Side ; engraved by Harris. 
 
 A large View of the West Front, and a smaller one of the South Side, were executed by the late 
 Francis Perry, who afterwards destroyed the plates. These are poorly and inaccurately drawn, 
 and etched in a scratchy style. 
 
 East View of the Cathedral and Close, from Stow-pool, near St. Chad’s Church, 1745. Drawn 
 by R. Greene ; engraved by J. Wood. 
 
 In Carter’s “ Ancient Sculpture and Painting ” is a View of the West Porch, or principal 
 entrance ; drawn and etched by J. Carter, 1782. 
 
 In Gough’s “ Sepulchral Monuments ,” vol. i. part ii. p. 84, are engraved effigies of Bishops 
 Langton and Pateshulle, from their monuments in this cathedral. 
 
 View of the West Front; engraved by J. Basire, from a drawing by J. Carter, 8vo. for the 
 Gentleman’s Magazine, vol. lxxx. part ii. 
 
 A View of the West Front of the Cathedral; engraved by J. Roffe, from a drawing by T. Nash, 
 appears in the Beauties of England and Wales. 
 
 In No. VI. of “ Etchings of the Cathedral, Collegiate, and Abbey Churches of England and 
 Wales,” 4to. 1820, is a View of the Cathedral from North-west; drawn and etched by J. C. 
 Buckler ; also two leaves of letter press. 
 
 ENGRAVED PORTRAITS OF THE BISHOPS OF LICHFIELD AND COVENTRY. 
 
 1. George Abbot: in Clarendon’s “ History,” 8vo. M. V. Gucht, sc. —in Birch’s “ Lives,” 
 
 large fol. J. Houbraken, sc.—in the title page to his “ Brief Description of the World,” 1635; 
 12mo. W. Marshall, sc.—4to. 1616, S. Pass, sc.—a copy of the last in “ Boissard,” 
 Grainger and Bromley. 
 
 2. John Overall : a small oval in Sparrow’s “ Rationale of the Common Prayer,” 1657, 12mo. 
 
 Hollar, sc. —prefixed to his “ Convocation Book,” by Sancroft, 1690. R. White, sc. 
 Grainger and Bromley. 
 
 3. Thomas Morton, prefixed to his “ Life,” by Barwick, 1660, 4to. Faithorne, sc.—a Wooden 
 
 Cut, 4to. Grainger and Bromley. 
 
 4. John Hacket, prefixed to his “ Sermons,” fol. Faithorne, sc.—prefixed to his “ Christian 
 
 Consolations,” 8vo. Grainger and Bromley . 
 
 5. William Lloyd: fol. D. Loggan, sc.—another, fol. J. Sturt, sc.—aetat. 86, large fol. T. 
 
 Forster, pinx. Vertue, sc.—aetat. 87. F. Weidman, pinx. Vertue, sc.—Bishop of St. Asaph, 
 oval.—In the prints of the seven bishops. Bromley. 
 
 6. John Hough : aetat. 91, mez. Dyer, pinx. Faber, sc.—in Wilmot’s “ Life” of him, from the 
 
 same picture. James Heath, sc.— mez. Riley, pinx. Williams, sc.—mez. Dyer, pinx.—mez. 
 prefixed to his “ Life,” by Wilmot. Kneller, pinx. Caroline Watson, sc. Bromley and 
 Wilmot's “ Life of Bishop Hough.” 
 
 7. Edward Chandler: large fol. J. V. Bank, pinx. Vertue, sc. Bromley. 
 
 8. Richard Smallbroke: large fol. T. Murray, pinx. Vertue, sc. Bromley. 
 
72 
 
 LICHFIELD CATHEDRAL *.-LIST OF PRINTS. 
 
 9. Frederick Cornwallis: mez. N. Dance, pinx. E. Fisher, sc. Bromley. 
 
 10. John Egerton : oval profile, in Hutchinson’s “ Antiquities of Durham.” Anon. Bromley. 
 
 11. Richard Hurd: 4to. Gainsborough, pinx. Hall, sc. A small profile, from a model by 
 
 Isaac Gosset ; engraved by J. Neagle, 1809, prefixed to a volume of letters, from Bishop 
 Warburton to Bishop Hurd. 
 
 ENGRAVED PORTRAITS OF DEANS OF LICHFIELD. 
 
 1. James Mountagu, or Montagu, (as Bishop of Winchester): in the Heroologia, 8vo.—A 
 
 copy in Boissard.—Another, 4to.—See “ History, &c. of Winchester Cathedral.” 
 
 2. Walter Curle, (as Bishop of Winchester) : T. Cecil, sc. h. sh. See “ History, &c. of 
 
 Winchester Cathedral.” 
 
 LIST OF PRINTS 
 
 ILLUSTRATIVE OF LICHFIELD CATHEDRAL. 
 
 Plates. 
 
 I. 
 
 II 
 
 III 
 
 IV. 
 
 V. 
 
 VI. 
 
 VII. 
 
 VIII. 
 
 IX 
 
 X. 
 
 XI 
 
 XII 
 
 XIII. 
 
 XIV. 
 XV. 
 
 XVI. 
 
 Subjects. 
 
 Ground Plan* 
 
 EXTERIORS. 
 
 West Front, View of . 
 
 Ditto, Central Door-way. 
 
 Ditto, Section and Elevation. 
 
 North Door-way . 
 
 View of the Cathedral from S. E. .. 
 
 INTERIORS. 
 
 Nave, View of, from the W. 
 
 $ Half Elevation, Half Section, of ) 
 ( Transept, &c.$ 
 
 Compartments of Nave and Choir.. 
 
 Choir, View looking W. 
 
 Lady Chapel, looking E..... 
 
 Vestibule to Chapter House . 
 
 Arches, &c. in Chapter House .... 
 
 ( Capital in Chapter House, and } 
 ( Brackets.$ 
 
 Door-way to Chapter House . 
 
 Monument by Chantrey .. 
 
 Drawn by 
 
 Mackenzie .. 
 
 Mackenzie .. 
 Mackenzie .. 
 
 Potter. 
 
 Mackenzie .. 
 Mackenzie .. 
 
 Mackenzie .. 
 Johnson .... 
 
 Potter ...... 
 
 Mackenzie .. 
 Mackenzie.. 
 Mackenzie .. 
 Mackenzie .. 
 Mackenzie . 
 Mackenzie .. 
 Mackenzie .. 
 
 Gladwin 
 
 Engraved by 
 
 H. Le Keux .. 
 J. Le Keux.... 
 H. Le Keux .. 
 J. Le Keux.... 
 J. Le Keux.... 
 
 J. Le Keux. 
 J. Le Keux. 
 Turrell ... 
 Cleghorn... 
 Radclyffe . 
 Woolnoth . 
 
 Sands . 
 
 J. Le Keux. 
 
 J. Le Keux. 
 
 t Rhodes . 
 
 ( H.LeKeux 
 
 Dedicated to 
 
 Marquis of Anglesey.... 
 W. R. Boulton, Esq..... 
 Rev. Dr. Buckeridge .. 
 Sir Osw. Mosley, Bt. .. 
 Rev. H. Bailye. 
 
 Rev. J. Madan, M. A. .. 
 Rev. H. White. 
 
 Sir Edw. Paget, K.B. .. 
 G. W. Taylor, Esq. M.P. 
 J. W. Russell, Esq. . 
 Rev. Archd. Nares . 
 Rev. J. Newling ... 
 
 R. J. Harper, Esq. . 
 Dean of Lichfield ... 
 
 Described. 
 
 35 
 
 36 
 
 37 
 
 38 
 
 39 
 
 39 
 
 40 
 
 41 
 
 41 
 
 42 
 
 42 
 
 43 
 
 43 
 
 44 
 44 
 
 44, 49 
 
 * The general Measurements of the church are marked on Plates I. IV. and VII. 
 
INDEX. 
 
 A. 
 
 Abbot, bp. 58, 66; portraits of, 71. 
 
 Anglo-Saxons, remarks on, 9. 
 
 B. 
 
 Bayne, bp. 58. 
 
 Bishops of Lichfield, &c. 55 ; list of, 65. 
 
 Books, list of, 69. 
 
 Brackets, views of six, PI. XIV. 
 
 C. 
 
 Carter, John, a visionary antiquary, 26. 
 
 Ceadda, or Chad, saint and bishop, 13 ; miracle 
 attributed to, 14, 15; shrine of, 28. 
 
 Cathedral Church, despoiled of ornaments, 
 22; first founded, 15, 24; rebuilt by Bp. 
 Clinton, 26 ; licence to dig stone for, 27 ; lady 
 chapel built, 28 ; in its “ vertical height,” 28; 
 much injured in the civil wars, 29, 30; re¬ 
 paired under Mr. Wyatt, 32; situation and 
 description of, 33 ; approaches to, 34; exterior 
 and interior, 35; ground plan of, 35 ; west 
 front, 36, 37, 38, 39 ; north transept, door¬ 
 way, 39; south-east view described, 39, PI. VI.; 
 nave, PI. VII. described, 40; choir, PI. IX. 
 and PI. X. described, 42, 
 
 Chandler, bp. 61, 67 ; portrait, 71. 
 
 Chantrey, account of his style of sculpture and 
 monument by, 49, 50, 51. 
 
 Chapter house, vestibule to, PI. XII. described, 
 43; arches in, PI. XIII. described, 43; capital 
 of centre column, PI. XIV. described, 44; date 
 of, 63. 
 
 Clinton de, bp. 19, 65 ; his architecture, 26. 
 
 Choir, view of, PI. X. described, 42; elevation of 
 part, PI. IX.; date of, 63. 
 
 Christianity, introduction of, into Mercia and to 
 Lichfield, 12, 24. 
 
 Cornwallis, bp. 61, 62, 67; portrait, 72. 
 
 Coventry, see of, 19; and Lichfield, united title 
 of, 19 ; bishops of, 20; and Lichfield, disputes 
 between, 20, 21, 22; monastic church de¬ 
 molished, 22. 
 
 Curie, dean, 67, 72. 
 
 D. 
 
 Dates of building, 63. 
 
 Diuma, first bp. of Mercia, 13. 
 
 Deans, list of, 67. 
 
 E. 
 
 Egerton, bp. 67 ; portrait, 72. 
 
 F. 
 
 Frewen, bp. 59, 66. 
 
 G. 
 
 Garrick, Dr. Johnson’s remark on, 8; bust of, 
 48. 
 
 Glass, stained, 32, 51. 
 
 H. 
 
 Hacket, bp. state of church at his time, 30; 
 monument of, 47; anecdotes of, 59, 67; 
 memoir, 70; portrait, 71, 72. 
 
 Hurd, bp. 62, 66, 71. 
 
 Hey worth, bp. 28, 66. 
 
 Hough, bp. life of, 61, 66; memoir and portrait, 
 71. 
 
74 
 
 INDEX. 
 
 J. 
 
 Johnson, character of, 7 ; bust of, &c. 47. 
 
 L. 
 
 Lady chapel built, 28 ; view of, PI. XI. de¬ 
 scribed, 42. 
 
 Langton, bp. benefactor to the church, 27,56; 
 builder of lady chapel, 28. 
 
 Library described, 63. 
 
 Lichfield, eminent natives and inhabitants of, 
 and associations arising therefrom, 7, 8; 
 
 name and etymology of, 10; first foundation 
 of a church at, 5; see of, 13, 15; cathedral 
 erected, A. D. 700, 17 ; made an arch¬ 
 bishopric, 18; and Coventry, extent of dio- 
 cess, 23; two monasteries in, and ancient 
 state of, 25. 
 
 Lloyd, bp. 61, 67; portrait, 71. 
 
 M. 
 
 Miracle attributed to St. Chad, 14. 
 
 Mercia, introduction of Christianity into, 11 ; 
 church founded in, 13; extent of, 15; division 
 of sees in, 16. 
 
 Montague, Lady M. W. monument for, 47; 
 character of her Letters, 47. 
 
 Montagu, dean, 67 ; portrait, 72. 
 
 Monuments, remarks on, 45; fine one, by 
 Chantrey, 44 ; view of, PI. XVI. 
 
 Morton, bp. 59, 66; portrait, 71. 
 
 N. 
 
 Nave, PI. VII. described, 40; elevation, PI. IX. 
 41; date of, 65. 
 
 Neile, bp. 38, 66. 
 
 Newton, Andrew, charity of, and monument, 48. 
 Nonant, bp. enemy to monks, 20, 56. 
 
 North transept,door-way, PI. V. described, 39, 41. 
 
 O. 
 
 Overall, bp. 66; portrait, 71. 
 
 P. 
 
 Peda and Panda, government and wars of, 12. 
 Peterborough, foundation of monastery, 14. 
 
 R. 
 
 Ross, or Rous, MS. of, 11. 
 
 S. 
 
 Sampson, bp. 56, 66. 
 
 Seward, Rev. Tho. character of, 48. 
 
 Seward, Miss, character of, 48. 
 
 Scrope, bp. 57, 66. 
 
 Smallbroke, bp. 61,67; portrait, 71. 
 
 Spires described, 37. 
 
 Stavenby, bp. 56, 67. 
 
 Stretton, bp. 57. 
 
 Synod at Heorutford, or Retford, 15; at Hat¬ 
 field, 16; at Cloveshoe, 18; at Calchyth, 18. 
 
 T. 
 
 Theodore, abp. character of, 16 note. 
 
 W. 
 
 Walmsley, Dr. Gilbert, Johnson’s character of, 8 . 
 Windows, painted, 32, 51, 52, 53. 
 
 West front described, 35, 36, 37 ; view of, PI. 
 II.; centre door-way, PI. III. described, 38 ; 
 section of, PI. IV. described, 38; Carter’s 
 print of, noticed, 38. 
 
 THE END. 
 
 Marchant, Printer, Ingram-court, Fenchurch-street. 
 
NORTH 
 
 
 CATR22JKAX ANTIQUITIES. 
 
 Drawn Try- F.Mackenaie. 
 
 Drixtjn's JXf.’tvrv iee. of Iichri^Zd Cathedral. 
 
 ILISMIFIIE1LIE) (SATMlEIimAlL (CMU0IMB1, 
 
 O. : &;r 
 
 i-snao- 
 
 m F . e - 
 
 PX. I. 
 
 
 K- 
 
 * 
 
 Engraved "by G Gladwin.. 
 
 C&KOUNB PLAN 
 
 WITH INDICATIONS OF GROIN INGS, MONUMENTS. See. 
 
 
 
 London, Published July l, ldig, by Longman* Is C?Tate-niostor How. 
 
Engraved IryKZe J&ux.tnom, a Drawing fry F.lfackenzie. 
 
 MCffinFSESnalD) SATMUIDIEAIL (CMUJIESIHI, 
 
 WEST FRONT. 
 
 TO THE MO ST NOBLE THE MARQUIS OF -ANGLE SET , EARL OF IJXBRID GE See See See 
 This Plate is respectfully inscribed ■ky the 4UTHOR. 
 Lendcn.EublishccL Oct r i.i&zo.bylongrrum He C° Paternoster Row. 
 
• . 
 
 
 * 
 
 
 
 
1PJD.MIL 
 
 CAT HE BRAIL. AST TXQTJI TIES 
 
 Drawn lay F. Mackenzie. 
 
 Britton's History Jcc.of Lichfield Cathedral. 
 
 En.gravecLly JXe Kenx. 
 
 3L.ECIHnFIE3E3L]I2> CATHIEIBI&AJL CMTEJIRdHI, 
 
 VIEW OF THE WESTERN BOOR WOT. 
 
 TO MATTHEW ROBINSON B OUiTORT.ESQP ATT ADMIRER OF ANT1ENT ALRCKITECTURE SCC. 
 
 This Plate is inscribed "b^j BitlTTON 
 ZtmAarv, FuiUsTie-AAiu! 1 ! i8zo. byImyrruuh ScCfPaternoster Row- 
 

CATHEDRAL, ANTIQUITIES 
 
 PL. IV. 
 
 Drawn by Jos.Totter. 
 
 TO THE REV 
 
 Brittonj HL'tcry See cf Lithriohi Cadiedml 
 
 ILIKSMIFIIffiM SAT 311 IE BS IS AIL CmnSWJIHI, 
 
 SECTION" &c . OF THE WESTERN TOWERS. 
 
 CHARLES BTJ CKF.R.ID GE, D .D. PRE CENTOR & CANON RESIDENT LAKY OF LICHFIELD CATHEDRAL 
 This Plate is msc-nbea 
 
 London* Tublished- DcF.i.idig.by Longman k C°Pa£cmoster low. 
 
 Engraved. Tvy H Le JLeux. 
 
CATHEDRAL ANTIQUITIES 
 
 TTgS; 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 JirrOrrur JIL<Torv ice* or JLichtie/J Cathedral. 
 
 (C ATHElSm 
 
 Drawi l by F. Mackenzie. 
 
 JLESHIOISIL.IS) 
 
 DOOR WAY IN N. TRANSEPT. 
 
 277 SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE ,T_RE SILENT OF TJ1K ROYAL ACADEMY OF ENGLAND, See. See. 
 
 TMs Hate is inscribed W 
 
 London,Published Jv.ne-i.i 520 , by Zsniwnmi: Cf Faterrioster Jtmv 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

. 
 
 
 
 
 
 Drawn ~by T. Mackenzie. XrittLvis Mistory kc.ofXnOtfiAd Cathcdr.ii. Bagraved. Toy J.XeXenr. 
 
 3L IKS M IF EIEILID) <E ATr.MIEin>3KA.3L OETUIEGIHL 
 
 TO THE REV? 
 
 SPENCER 
 
 MAD AN M. A. CACC027 HE SI DF 
 
 This Hate is inscribed try 
 
 'NTMHY OF 
 J. BRITTON. 
 
 Lit 'HFIELD 
 
 Lcndc/v,"Published April l.ifljp \r> JLonJinan 7ct^FilternosterHow. 
 
 CATHEDRAL . 
 
 
CATBEDBAL ANTIUJOTTIES 
 
 7 TL.VKI. 
 
 Drawn toy Thx> ? Johnson. 
 
 HrittorS History See. ofLididdd, Cathedral. 
 
 Engraved. Try J.Ee Ketix. 
 
 JL2SMIF231ILIE) CSATCIHDIIISI&AJI^ SHnumSBE, 
 
 HALF SECTION, HALF ELEVATION OF TBANSEPT &c. 
 
 TO THE REV? HENRY “WHITE . as a marX of esteem “by the AUTHOR 
 
 London,, Published Jem* i. idle. by Longman, k C°Patemaster Jfo w. 
 
 
CATHEDRAL ANTIQUITIES. ' PL.IE. 
 
 
 
 
 
 ]LH(CtBIIFlIJf5]L]© SATHlEIDmAIL (DMTOSIHI 
 
CATHEBILAI* ANTIQUITIES. 
 
 Drawn "by I’Mackenzie. J5 rittons Jfistory kc.rfLichndd Cathedral . Engraved, "by John Cleghorn.. 
 
 ILESMFHHILID) E ATHU® IEA3L (CmTIBGIHI, 
 
 CHOIR X.OOKIN<& "WEST. 
 
 TO LIEUTENANT GENERAL THE HONORABLE SIR EDWARD PAGET , G. C.E. &c. Scc.Scc. 
 This Plate is respectfully inscribed by ^^thoR 
 
 Z cndan , Tul'lio'hed March 2 ,i8zo . by Zongman k- a Paternoster Pew. 
 
CATHED3LA 
 
 ■j,a¥ 
 
 Brittons History lao.of J.ic/iYioiJ Cathedral. 
 
 Engi' scved dy W Baclclyffe. 
 
 Drawn dv 1 ? . Mackenzie 
 
 MDIHFinULIE 
 
 LADY. CHAPEL 
 
 TV GEORGE WATSON TAYLOR.ESQ? A FATROH OF THE FINE ARTS Sc FOZITE I1TERA ZTrRE 
 
 This Plate is inscribed by^ AUTHO R. 
 
 Zondcii,Tu&lished, Zii/ie 1,1820.by lothjmdn Sz CfTatcrncstut' How. 
 
CATHEBEAL ANTIQUITIES. 
 
 PL. 2 BL 
 
 
 
 • r ,J 
 
 ’Wwl 
 
 . nt- 1 * [ 
 
 fc 
 
 
 
 MfflK ( 
 
 
 
 Dravm ‘by F.Ma.c~kenzie. 
 
 JBritteris History ire. of Lichfield Cathedral. 
 
 .Engraved lav "W.'Woolnot3i. 
 
 OCDiailPEIEILI]]) GATMIE.ESIEAIL (CIUKI, 
 
 VESTIBULE TO CHAPTER HOUSE. 
 
 TO JESSE WATTS RUSSELL , ESQ? I.E.D. HIGH SHERIFF OF THE COUNTY OF STAFFORD, See. Sec. 
 This Hate , is respectfully inscribed "by , 
 
 -*■ •' 0 .N. 
 
 London, Published July 1 , i9iq, by Longman, Jo C* Laterno ft cr Ha 
 

ABCBTES AT THE EAST END OF THE CHATPTEE HOD: 
 

 
 CATHEDRAL ANTIQUITIES. ' 
 
 Drawn bv F. Mackenzie. 
 
 Brtiti'rlie JTistory See fffZicMdd utOtoinl 
 
 ILESIffl FUELED SATHEMA1L CMTOSM. 
 
 I. CAPITAL IN CHAP * HOUSE . 2.3.4.5.6.7. BRACKETS IN LADY CHAPEL . 
 
 TO THE REV? JOHN REWLIN G, B. D. CANON RESIDENTIARY OF LICHFIELD CATHEDRAL. 
 
 This Plate is inscribed by THI . AUTH0R . 
 
 London. Tublished July i . lSiy, by Longman Ic Cf Raternoster Row. 
 
 Eng-raved, by J. Le Keux. 
 
 
7 
 
 OTEML ANTIQUITIE; 
 
 -V> •, '\'\i 
 
 Jill 
 
 SSlSllSk 
 
 ( ffi|lif»g 
 §HMH 
 
 ■ i' i( |.i|l! J, 
 1 ii : 
 
 
 HER 
 
 Drawn. Dy F. Mackenzie 
 
 JSrittonk History fcc.af'Iichfield Cathedral 
 
 3L.ECIHIFIIIEIL1E) (DATHFID1&A3L SMUJBSM, 
 
 3500m«'WAY TO THE CHAP TEH HOUSE. 
 
 TO E.OKEKI JOHN HARPER,ESiJ? F.SJLas a testimony ctf respect, This Hate is inscribed bv 
 
 J the ATT THOU. 
 
 XciLiicw.Xuilistied Tafj iBig ,ty Longman lr C° Haerncster Jiow. 
 
CATHKDBAL -ANTIQUITIES. 
 
 
IHUMISJiIP®®JB CSA'CIHIIIIEISAIL. 
 
 HHmimiBBT OS' THE WKRTHr “WAUL OIF THE T.AlDgT CHAPEI.. 
 
 the BEV? HENRY T.EE WARNER, of TIBBESIUIT COTTRT: this Hate is inscribed as a token of friendship bjr 
 
 THE AUTHOR. 
 
 ZoruLon, TuJ'Ushr/l 27o v ^1,1^30, by ZonQman & C?Paternoster'Urn’. 
 
THE 
 
 HISTORY AND ANTIQUITIES 
 
 OF 
 
 THE CATHEDRAL CHURCH 
 
 ' OF 
 
 HEREFORD; 
 
 ILLUSTRATED BY 
 
 A SERIES OF ENGRAVINGS 
 
 OF 
 
 VIEWS, ELEVATIONS, AND PLANS OF THAT EDIFICE, 
 
 WITH 
 
 BIOGRAPHICAL ANECDOTES OF EMINENT PERSONS 
 
 CONNECTED WITH THE ESTABLISHMENT. 
 
 BY JOHN BRITTON, F.S.A. 
 
 ETC. 
 
 If. //. Bartlett, Del. MONUMENTAL NICHES IN S. AILEOF CHOIR. 
 
 S. IVilliams, Sc. 
 
 LONDON: 
 
 M. A. N ATT A LI, 19, SOUTH AM PTON-STREET, COVENT-GARDEN. 
 
 1836. 
 

 MARCUANT, 
 
 PRINTER, INGRAM-COURT, FENCI1URC1I-STREET. 
 
 
TO 
 
 THE HONOURABLE AND VERY REVEREND 
 
 EDWARD GREY, D. D. Dean of Hereford, 
 
 AND TO 
 
 THE REV. HUGH HANMER MORGAN, B. D. Chancellor and Canon Residentiary, 
 THE REV. THOMAS HUNTINGFORD, M. A. Precentor and Canon Residentiary, 
 THE REV. RICHARD WALOND, M. A., Treasurer, 
 
 THE VENERABLE J. J. CORBETT, M.A. Archdeacon of Salop, 
 
 THE VENERABLE HENRY WETHERELL, B. D., Archdeacon of Hereford, 
 
 AND 
 
 THE REV. THOMAS RUSSELL, M.A., THE REV. THOMAS UNDERWOOD, M. A., 
 
 THE REV. JOHN CLUTTON, D. D., AND THE REV. HENRY C. HOBART, M. A., 
 
 Canons Residentiary, 
 
 THIS VOLUME 
 
 ILLUSTRATIVE of the history and architecture of the cathedral over which they preside, 
 
 is, with permission, respectfully inscribed by 
 
 Feb. 1831. 
 
 THE AUTHOR. 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ; ■ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 - 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 _ 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 If literature, like the commerce, trade, and manufactures of the 
 country, has suffered in the general depression of the times, it cannot 
 excite the surprise of the sound politician ; for he is aware that 
 every thing dependent on national wealth must ebb and flow with 
 the corresponding fluctuations of the country. It is, however, an 
 admitted fact, that the higher classes of literary works were more 
 encouraged, and better appreciated, when the nation was involved 
 in a merciless conflict with France than they have been since. It 
 cannot be denied, also, that during the last twenty years literature, 
 with public taste, and public opinion, have undergone a palpable 
 change. The reading time, and reading thoughts of men, are now 
 almost wholly occupied in diurnal politics, cheap and attractive 
 publications, and popular novels and pamphlets. These emerge 
 almost daily and hourly from the rapidly multiplying steam presses 
 of the time, and combined with engravings on steel, which produce 
 almost an indefinite number of impressions of prints, and with the 
 improved execution of lithography, have co-operated to produce 
 not merely a reform, but a real revolution in literature. Although 
 in this great change the “ Cathedral Antiquities” has not 
 been surpassed by any cheaper rival work, nor by any thing com¬ 
 peting with it in all the different departments of its execution, yet, 
 as its sale does not repay the expenses appropriated to its execution, 
 it is not reasonable to expect that either author or publishers will 
 prosecute such a publication at a loss: nor can they reconcile 
 themselves to the mortifying situation of continuing the work at 
 inferior prices and reduced quality. 
 
 In prosecuting the “ Cathedral Antiquities,” the Author 
 has devoted nearly twenty years of an active, anxious life, zealously 
 
VI 
 
 PREFACE. 
 
 devoted to the subject; and had public encouragement kept up 
 rather than damped his energies, he would ere now have completed 
 the illustration and historical display of all the English Cathedrals. 
 
 On commencing the History of Hereford Cathedral, the Author 
 applied to the late Dean for permission to make drawings, and 
 personally to examine the Church under his care and custody ; 
 soliciting at the same time liberty to inspect any archives that would 
 be likely to elucidate the history, and thus gratify public curiositv. 
 He further intimated, that he hoped to be indulged with some encou¬ 
 ragement from the members of the Cathedral, as he had hitherto 
 struggled with inconveniences and losses in prosecuting his arduous 
 and expensive publication. Alarmed at this intimation, and probably 
 never having heard of the “ Cathedral Antiquities/' or its 
 author, the timid Dean advised the antiquary not to trouble himself 
 about Hereford Cathedral, as a publication on it might be likely to 
 involve him in further losses. Thus repressed, and certainly not a 
 little mortified, the Author determined to leave that city, and seek a 
 more courteous and kindly reception from the temporary guardians 
 of another Cathedral. Some gentlemen of the city and county, 
 attached to antiquarian pursuits, and proud of their provincial 
 Minster, not only urged the Author to prosecute his proposed work, 
 but persuaded their respective friends to patronize it. He has 
 complied with their wishes; and he also hopes that he has been 
 fortunate enough to gratify their expectations, and justify their 
 favourable opinions. For the local patronage he has received he 
 feels obliged and is grateful; and cheerfully acknowledges that the 
 History of Hereford Cathedral has experienced more support from 
 that district than any previous volume from local patronage. 
 
 That the Author has taken some pains to investigate and 
 elucidate the history of the Cathedral, will appear to those who 
 will examine the references in the following sheets; and that he has 
 endeavoured to illustrate and exemplify the architectural styles and 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 Vll 
 
 peculiarities of the Church, will be evident to all persons who can 
 appreciate the engravings of the volume. Having been engaged 
 in topographical and antiquarian literature for more than thirty 
 years, and read and analysed the published works of every English 
 writer on the Cathedrals, and, indeed, on all other antiquities, the 
 Author now ventures to express his opinions on some occasions 
 perhaps rather more decidedly and plainly than is customary with 
 churchmen who seek preferment, or with many other persons who 
 are more inclined to adopt the prejudices and dogmas of sects and 
 parties than think for themselves, and dare express their thoughts in 
 unreserved phraseology. These are not equivocating, temporizing 
 times : and an author is not deserving that honourable appellation 
 who will truckle to vice, folly, and imbecility, although it may be 
 decorated with a crown, mitre, or a coronet. 
 
 In taking leave of the present volume, and of the city of Hereford 
 and its connexions, the author most cheerfully tenders his best ac¬ 
 knowledgments and thanks to the following gentlemen, for literary 
 communications and personal civilities: — The Rev. Henry Lee 
 Warner : —The Rev. H. H. Morgan :—The Rev. T. Garbett:— 
 The Rev. A. J. Walker : —Tiios. Bird, Esq. F. S. A.:— Richard 
 Jo nes Powell, Esq.:—Dr. Meyrick :— Robert Anderson, Esq. 
 —The Rev. W. J. Rees William Hooper, Esq.;—and Messrs 
 Buckman, R. B. Watkins, and Vale. 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ' 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
THE 
 
 HISTORY AND ANTIQUITIES 
 
 OF 
 
 HEREFORD CATHEDRAL. 
 
 CHAP. I. 
 
 HISTORICAL REVIEW OF THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE SEE, AND FOUNDA¬ 
 TION OF THE CATHEDRAL OF HEREFORD; WITH NOTICES OF PUBLIC EVENTS 
 CONNECTED WITH THE ESTABLISHMENT, AND BRIEF ACCOUNTS OF THE 
 MOST EMINENT PRELATES WHO HAVE SUCCESSIVELY PRESIDED OVER 
 THE DIOCESS. 
 
 In all antiquarian and historical narratives it is very desirable to trace every 
 fact, or presumed fact, to its source—to ascertain the true origin and 
 commencement of a see, a state, or an invention which by time and 
 progressive improvement has grown to importance and greatness ; but, 
 unfortunately, our curiosity is seldom satisfied on these points. Antiquaries, 
 perhaps, more than any other class of writers, are destined to explore the 
 dark and obscure labyrinths of legendary story,—the credulous relations of 
 one annalist, and the misstatements of another, till they mistrust the accuracy 
 and fidelity of every one. An endeavour to verify the date of the first 
 establishment of Christianity in this part of Britain, and to fix the foundation 
 of the See and enthronement of the first prelate, shews how extremely difficult 
 it is to arrive at facts, and to obtain satisfactory evidence. It is not sufficient 
 that a cloistered chronicler of the tenth century states on his parchment roll, 
 or in an abbey register, that a certain event occurred at a given time in a 
 
 B 
 
2 
 
 HEREFORD CATHEDRAL. 
 
 previous century; for he may have been misinformed, or he may have 
 credulously and unhesitatingdy repeated what had been related by a former 
 scribe. The monkish annalists of the olden times rarely, if ever, exer¬ 
 cised a fastidious spirit of inquiry, or manifested much discrimination in 
 their writings. William of Malmesbury may be regarded as the best of the 
 class. From such sources, however, it is almost impracticable to obtain a firm 
 unequivocal foundation for the history of any ancient religious establishment. 
 Wanting this, we must supply its place with the best materials which can be 
 gleaned from old writers, or from the learned inferences of modern authors. 
 All these will be carefully and scrupulously employed on the present occasion ; 
 and whilst it will be both a duty and pleasure to me to exercise the most 
 diligent exertion to obtain, and the best judgment to display authorities, 
 the reader will doubtlessly admit only such evidence as satisfies his own 
 mind. 
 
 As the city of Hereford has nothing indicative of Roman occupancy, 
 either in name or remains, we must refer its origin, or at least its historical 
 distinction, to an Anglo-Saxon era. Seated in that part of England which 
 constituted the Mercian kingdom, we find the annals of the town and See 
 intimately blended with those of the government, the wars, and the institu¬ 
 tions of the state. In the “ History of Lichfield Cathedral ” I have already 
 had occasion to notice the establishment of Christianity in the Mercian 
 province early in the seventh century : Archbishop Usher, however, states 
 that there was a See at Hereford as early as 544, when an archbishop resided 
 at St. David’s. In 601 a Bishop of Hereford is said to have been one of 
 seven English prelates who attended an ecclesiastical synod at Canterbury 
 under Augustin, when Pope Gregory’s answers to that archbishop’s questions 
 were discussed. According to some authors the Mercian bishopric was 
 divided into five, in the year 673, by Archbishop Theodore’s canons. 
 Johnson, in his “Collection of Ecclesiastical Laws,” admits that the history 
 of the church, at that period, “ is very dark.” King Ethelred having 
 devastated part of Kent, drove Bishop Putta from his seat at Rochester, 
 who, after wandering about for some time instructing the clergy in music, 
 was appointed by Theodore, Archbishop of Canterbury, to a new See at 
 
BISHOP CUTIIBERT, AND KING ETHELBERT. 
 
 3 
 
 Hereford. Ralph Higden intimates that he paid more attention to music 
 than to his new office: and we seek in vain to find any memorable act or event 
 connected with his life or prelacy. We find the names of Tirktell, Tortere 5 
 and Walstod in sequence to that of Putta, and learn that the last commenced 
 a magnificent “ cross of gold and silver,” which Cuthbert, the next prelate, 
 finished, and caused to have inscribed upon it some verses commemorative of 
 his predecessors. “ The character of Cuthbert,” observes Mr. Duncombe, 
 “ as far as can now be collected, appears to have been that of a man of 
 probity and worth. He reformed many errors in the conduct of the clergy, 
 as well as in that of the laity; and, by his injunctions, the Lord’s prayer and 
 the Apostles’ creed were read to the people in the English language. He 
 also obtained from the Pope a dispensation for allowing burials within towns 
 and cities, a practice not allowed before his time, which was much abused 
 afterwards, and which might well have been omitted always.” 1 In 741, he 
 was translated to the See of Canterbury, which he held until his death. 2 
 
 Podda, his successor, was present at an ecclesiastical council held at 
 Clovesho, in 747 ; “ Wulwardus Herefordensis Ep. orientaliu Anglorum” 
 is enumerated as one of those bishops who became suffragan to the Arch¬ 
 bishop of Lichfield, when that See had been made metropolitan in the place 
 of Canterbury. 3 Hereford, as well as the whole Mercian kingdom, was 
 destined to experience considerable changes about this time. In 793, 
 Ethelbert, King of the East Angles, visited the court of Offa, the Mercian 
 King, to claim the hand of his daughter iElfrida in marriage. The Queen of 
 Offa, however, opposed the match, and insinuated that the marriage was 
 only sought as a pretext to occupy the Mercian throne. Indignant at this, 
 Offa employed an assassin to murder his guest, by cutting off his head, 
 which being effected, the body was privately buried on the bank of the river 
 “ Lugg,” near Hereford. According to the Monkish Annalist, “ on the night 
 
 1 History, &c. of the County of Hereford, vol. i. p. 449. 
 
 2 See History, &c. of Canterbury Cathedral, pp. 13 and 27. 
 
 3 Matthew of Westminster, edit. 1601, p. 143. This measure was effected by the influence of 
 Offa, King- of Mercia, in resentment for some injury, real or pretended, which he had sustained 
 from the Archbishop of Canterbury. 
 
 B 2 
 
4 
 
 HEREFORD CATHEDRAL. 
 
 r> 
 
 of his burial a column of light, brighter than the sun, arose towards heaven ; 
 and three nights afterwards the figure (or ghost) of King Ethelbert appeared 
 to Brithfrid, a nobleman, and commanded him to convey the body to a place 
 called ‘ Stratus Waye ,’ and to inter it near the monastery there. Guided by 
 another column of light, Brithfrid, having placed the body and the head on a 
 carriage, proceeded on his journey. The head fell from the vehicle, but 
 having been discovered by a “ blind man,” to whom it miraculously commu¬ 
 nicated sight, was restored by him to the careless driver. Arrived at his 
 place of destination, which, according to the Chronicler, was then called in 
 English “ Fernlega ,” in Latin “ Saltus Silicis ,” and which has since been 
 termed Hereford he there interred the body. 
 
 Asser, the biographer of King Alfred, relates that the miracles worked 
 at the tomb of the martyred monarch were so numerous and incredible that 
 Offa was induced to send two bishops to Hereford to ascertain the truth of 
 them. These messengers having had an opportunity of witnessing the 
 saint’s interposition in favour of a Welsh nobleman who had been afflicted 
 with the palsy, reported the same to their royal master, who, as an expiation 
 for his crime of incredulity, conferred on the Saint a tenth of all his posses¬ 
 sions, “ many of which,” adds the Chronicler, “ the church of Hereford now 
 holds.” 4 This frivolous, but sinister romance, is related here merely as 
 illustrative of the superstition of the times. 
 
 After the death of Offa, and of his son Egfrid, Milfred, who was viceroy, 
 according to the same authority, expended a large sum of money in building 
 “ an admirable stone church ” (ecclesiam egregiam, lapidea structura) at 
 Hereford, which he consecrated and dedicated to the murdered monarch, 
 and endowed with lands and enriched with ornaments. 
 
 When Milfred re-founded the Church of Hereford, he is reported to have 
 appointed a Bishop, but the name of that person is not given. Acea was 
 present at the council of Beaconsfield in 800 ; 5 Cedda , by the words “ ego 
 Cedda Herefordensis aspiravi,” subscribed as witness to a charter granted 
 
 4 Chronicon Johannis Brompton, in Decern script, ap. Twisden, ed. 1652, col. 750. 
 
 5 Wilkin’s Concilia Magnae Britanniae, vol. i. p. 162. 
 
BUILDING AND DESTRUCTION OF THE CATHEDRAL. 
 
 5 
 
 by Whitlaf, King of Mercia, to the abbey of Croyland in 833 ; 6 he died in 
 857, and was succeeded by Albert. Of the intervening bishops until the 
 commencement of the eleventh century nothing is known but their names, 
 and even those are disputed. William of Malmesbury, who with trifling 
 variations has been followed by Leland and all subsequent writers, thus 
 enumerates them : — “ Esna, Celmund, Utel, Wlfeard, Benna, Edulf, 
 Cutulf, Mucel, Deorlaf, Cunemund, Edgar, Tidhelm, Wlfhelm, Alfricus, 
 Athulfus, and 
 
 Ethelstan .” 7 During the long and obstinate contests which preceded the 
 establishment of the Danish dominion in England, the Church of St. Ethel- 
 bert, in common with the other religious establishments of the country, 
 doubtless suffered from the ravages of war : the episcopal lands were 
 desolated, the ecclesiastics dispersed, and the conventual buildings, with 
 the Church, became ruinous. Ethelstan, immediately after his appointment 
 to the bishopric, is reported to have repaired, or, according to some 
 authorities, rebuilt the Cathedral of Hereford. His exertions were, however, 
 of no avail, for during the continuance of hostilities between King Edward 
 the Confessor, and Algar, the son of Leofric, Duke of Mercia, who had been 
 unjustly deprived of his estates and banished the realm—the canons were 
 slain or taken prisoners, the sanctified relics of the martyred Ethelbert were 
 destroyed, and the Church was materially injured by fire. 
 
 The writer of the Saxon Chronicle, under the year 1055, speaking of 
 the ravages and enormities perpetrated by Earl Algar, and his ally, Griffin, 
 King of Wales, says : — “ They went to the town (of Hereford) and burnt it 
 utterly, and the large minster also, which the worthy Bishop Athelstan had 
 caused to be built, that they plundered and bereft of relic and of reef, and 
 of all things whatever, and the people they slew and led some away.’’ 8 The 
 Chronicle of Mailros, under the same year, more explicitly states, that the 
 Danes “ burnt the city of Hereford, and the Monastery of St. Albert, the 
 
 6 Hist. Ingulplii, in Gale’s Quindecim Scriptores, ed. 1691, vol. i. p. 2. 
 
 7 William of Malmesbury, De Gestis Pontificium Anglorum in Script, post Bedam, ed. 1601, 
 p. 285. 
 
 8 Saxon Chronicle, Ingram’s ed. p. 245. 
 
6 
 
 HEREFORD CATHEDRAL. 
 
 King and Martyr, and slew the canons and about four hundred others/’ 9 
 Simon of Durham and Roger Hovedon both concur in stating that “ Earl 
 Algar and his partisans entered Hereford, and having slain seven canons 
 who were defending the entrance of the principal basilica (principalis 
 basilicas), and burnt the monastery which the good Bishop Athelstan had 
 built, with all the ornaments and the relics of St. Ethelbert and other 
 saints, they killed and took captive the townsmen, and reduced the city to 
 ashes.” 10 
 
 Athelstan did not long survive the calamities which had befallen the 
 establishment over which he presided, but died February 10, 1055, and 
 was interred at Hereford “ in the Church which he had built from the 
 foundations (in ecclesia quam ipse construxerat a fundamentis" n ). He had 
 for thirteen years previously been afflicted with blindness, and the duties of 
 his office had been fulfilled by the Bishop of St. David’s. To Athelstan 
 succeeded 
 
 Leofgar, “ Earl Harold’s mass-priest,” who had held the See only three 
 months, when, to check an hostile incursion of the Welsh, he exchanged the 
 mitre and the crozier for the helmet and the sword, and led his retainers to 
 the battle-field. The carnal weapons appear, indeed, to have been more 
 familiar to him than the spiritual ones, for, according to the Saxon Chronicler, 
 “ he wore his knapsack in his priesthood, and when he was made a bishop, 
 relinquished his chrism and his rood, and took to his sword and spear.” 12 
 The expedition was, however, unsuccessful, and Leofgar, with many of his 
 followers, were slain. He has been characterised by Matthew of West¬ 
 minster, as “ a servant of God, a man perfect in religion, a lover of churches, 
 a reliever of the poor, a defender of widows and orphans, and the possessor 
 of chastity.” 
 
 9 Quindecim Scriptores, ap. Gale, ed. 1691, vol. i. p. 158. 
 
 10 Simon Dunelm in Decern Script, ed 1652, col. 188, and Roger Hoveden in Script, post 
 Bedam, ed. 1601, p. 443. 
 
 11 Roger Hoveden, in Script, post Bed. p. 444. From this passage it may be inferred that 
 the Church of St. Ethelbert had not been wholly destroyed by Earl Algar: but that the wood 
 work and combustible parts only were supposed to have been burnt. 
 
 12 Saxon Chronicle, Ingram’s ed. p. 246. 
 
BISHOPS WALTER AND LOZING, A. D. 1069 - 1094 . 7 
 
 After Leofgar’s death, the vacant See was granted in trust to Aldred, 
 Bishop of Worcester, on whose promotion to the archbishopric of York, in 
 1060, it was conferred by King Edward the Confessor on 
 
 Walter, a native of Lorraine, and chaplain to Queen Egitha. 13 Being a 
 foreigner, he was favoured by the new Norman monarch, who allowed him to 
 retain his ecclesiastical honours and emoluments, when many other prelates 
 and abbots who had opposed the Normans were dispossessed of their 
 respective appointments, and their places supplied by either dependants or 
 countrymen of the Conqueror. One of his enemies invented a ridiculous 
 and humiliating story against the bishop, which was readily believed and 
 circulated by those clergy who had been superseded by foreigners. This 
 tale having reached the court, excited the severe reprehension of the monarch, 
 who issued an injunction of punishment against any person who should be 
 convicted of slandering the calumniated bishop. 14 
 
 Robert Lozing, Robertus Lotharingus, or Robert of Lorraine, next 
 succeeded, and was consecrated in 1079. As a poet, a mathematician, and 
 an architect, he was superior to most of the churchmen of the age in which he 
 lived: but was so superstitious, that when requested by Remigius, Bishop 
 of Lincoln, to attend at the dedication of the church in that city, he consulted 
 the stars, and fancying them unpropitious, declined the journey. Intimate 
 with Wulstan, Bishop of Worcester, it is related in the silly Monkish 
 Annals, that during the last illness of that prelate, Lozing being at court, a 
 vision of his friend appeared to him in a dream, and said, “ If you wish to 
 see me before I die, hasten to Worcester.” Obtaining leave from the king, 
 he travelled night and day till he reached Cricklade, where, overcome by 
 fatigue, he retired to rest. The vision again appeared, and said, “ Thou 
 hast done what fervent love could dictate, but art too late. I am now dead, 
 and thou wilt not long survive me ; but lest thou should’st consider this as a 
 fantastic dream, know, that after my body has been committed to the earth, 
 a gift shall be given thee, which thou shalt recognise as having belonged to 
 
 13 Hist. Ingulphi in Quindecim Script, ap. Gale, ed. 1691, vol. i. p. 67. 
 
 14 William of Malmesbury, in Script, post Bedam, ed. 1601, p. 286. 
 
8 
 
 HEREFORD CATHEDRAL. 
 
 me.” On the following morning Bishop Lozing proceeded to Worcester* 
 and having performed the obsequies of his deceased friend, was preparing to 
 return home, when the prior said to him, “ Receive as a testimony of our 
 departed lord’s love this lamb skin cap which he long wore.” These words 
 caused “ his blood to run cold,” for he remembered the prediction that he 
 had not long to live: and the same annalist relates that Wulstan died in 
 January, 1094, and Robert did not survive the following June. Bishop 
 Lozing is celebrated as having commenced the rebuilding of the Church of 
 Hereford, which had remained in ruins since the time of Earl Algar. He is 
 said to have adopted as a model the church of Aken, now called Aix-la- 
 Chapelle, in Germany, 15 which is supposed to have been erected by Charle¬ 
 magne. 
 
 Gerard, the nephew of Walkelin, Bishop of Winchester, and chancellor 
 both to William the Conqueror and William Rufus, succeeded to the 
 Bishopric of Hereford; but being promoted in the following year to the 
 archiepiscopal see of York, 16 King Henry I. appointed Roger Lardarius , 
 who, as his name implies, was a servant of the royal household. This 
 person died at London, before he had received the rites of consecration, 
 which, according to William of Malmesbury, he was so anxious to enjoy, 
 that on his death-bed he sent to the Archbishop of Canterbury to attend him 
 for that purpose. 17 After Roger’s decease, the King, in defiance of the 
 ecclesiastical canons, which forbade churchmen to receive investiture from 
 lay hands, preferred to the bishopric, in 1102, 
 
 Raynelm, or Raynald, the Queen’s chancellor. 18 The Pope, however, 
 refused to confirm the appointment, and Anselm, Archbishop of Canterbury, 
 having in the following year explained to the King, in a general council held 
 in St. Paul’s Church, London, the relative privileges of the clergy and the 
 laity, Reynald, notwithstanding the opposition made by his royal master, 
 surrendered his bishopric. 19 Henry, exasperated at his ready compliance 
 
 15 William of Malmesbury in Scriptores post Bedam, ed. 1001, p. 286. 
 
 16 Eadmeri Hist, sui Saeculi, ed. 1622. p. 35. 62. 
 
 17 William of Malmesbury, ut supra. 
 
 18 Matthew Paris, per Watts ed. 1640, p. 58. 19 Ibid, p. 59. 
 
BISHOPS CLIVE, CAPELLA, AND BETUN, A. D. 1115 - 1148 . 
 
 9 
 
 with the will of the archbishop, banished him from court, and it was not until 
 1107, when it had been decided that those prelates who had been instituted 
 by the King should retain their sees, that he was confirmed in his office. He 
 performed the duties of his station with great credit, but it is related that he 
 was addicted to intemperance, and dying of the gout in 1115, 20 he was 
 interred in his Cathedral. In an obituary of the Canons of Hereford, 
 Reynelm is commemorated in these words: “ 5 Kal. Oct. obitus Renelmi 
 episcopi, fundatoris ecclesiae Sancti Ethelberti.” 21 From this passage it has 
 been inferred that Reynelm completed the new Church which had been 
 commenced by his predecessor. 
 
 Geoffry de Clive, or de Clyve, the succeeding Bishop, was distinguished 
 for his temperance and the simplicity of his dress ; he was partial to 
 agricultural pursuits, by which he increased the episcopal revenues. He 
 died in February, 1119, having presided over the See only four years. The 
 short lives of the two last prelates gave rise to a proverb, “ That no Bishop 
 of Hereford lives long.” 22 
 
 Richard de Capella, the “ clerk of the seal,” succeeded to the vacant 
 See, January 6, 1121, 23 but held it only six years, when he died at Ledbury, 
 and was interred in his own Church. This prelate contributed much towards 
 building the Wye-Bridge at Hereford. He had a dispute with the contem¬ 
 porary Bishop of Landaff, respecting the boundaries of their respective 
 diocesses, which was referred to Pope Honorius II., and by his holiness 
 transferred to the Archbishop of Canterbury. 
 
 Robert de Betun, a native of Flanders, who had previously been Prior 
 of Lanthony, was consecrated, according to Godwin, at Oxford, in 1131. 
 From an account of his life, written by William de Wycumb, his successor 
 in the priory, the following particulars are derived. His parents were of 
 superior rank, and he received his early education from Gunfrid his brother, 
 
 20 Will. Malmesb. in Script, post Bedam, ed. 1601, p. 287, Matth. of Westminster, and Ralph 
 de Diceot. 
 
 21 Hist, and Antiq. of the Cathedral Church of Hereford, 8vo. Lond. 1713, App. p. 27. 
 
 22 Will. Malmesb. in Script, post Bed. p. 289. 
 
 23 Annales Winton. in Wharton’s Anglia Sacra, vol. i. p. 298. 
 
 C 
 
10 
 
 HEREFORD CATHEDRAL. 
 
 a teacher of celebrity. When very young he was distinguished for great 
 attention to his studies : and delighted so much in prayer, fasting, and other 
 religious exercises that he obtained the appellation of “ our father.” Deter¬ 
 mined to lead a monastic life, he became a canon in the Priory of Lanthony, 
 and obtained celebrity for his theological acquirements, and for his strict 
 adherence to the rules of his order. On the death of Hugh de Lacy, Earl of 
 Hereford, he was appointed to superintend the building of a religious house 
 at Weobley, where that nobleman was buried. According to his biographer, 
 he exerted himself so much, by working as a common labourer, that his 
 health was injured, and he was recalled to the Priory he had previously left, 
 where he was soon afterwards made superior. In this new situation he soon 
 became pre-eminent for all the cardinal virtues. By his endeavours, the 
 number of canons was increased, religious duties were more strictly attended 
 to, the good rewarded, the evil exhorted and reproved, insomuch that his 
 fame spread over the whole kingdom. The See of Hereford being vacant, 
 Betun was recommended to the King by the Earl of Gloucester, as a fit 
 person to enjoy the episcopal dignity, and the bishopric was consequently 
 offered to him, which, after much hesitation, he accepted. 24 
 
 Of his activity in the prompt discharge of the duties of office, his 
 perhaps too partial biographer gives an animated and elaborate account, 
 which he concludes with some general observations on his character and 
 disposition; whence it is inferred that he possessed almost every virtue 
 belonging to man. As an instance of his humanity and disregard of per¬ 
 sonal safety, it is said that when journeying with one of his canons, the 
 latter, more intent upon psalm-singing than the management of his horse, fell 
 over a bridge into the river beneath. The bishop, perceiving the accident, 
 unhesitatingly leaped into the water, and having rescued the canon from his 
 perilous situation, received the applauses of all, whilst the unfortunate priest 
 was derided as an effeminate knight, who could not make a day’s journey 
 
 24 Vita Roberti Betun Ep. Heref. in Wharton’s Anglia Sacra, vol. ii. p. 297, et seq. There 
 is a manuscript Life of Betun in the library of the episcopal palace at Lambeth; another was in 
 the library of Holm-Lacy; and Thomas Bird, Esq. of Hereford, has either a copy of it or another 
 
 memoir. 
 
BISHOPS BETUN AND G. FOLIOT, A.D. 1 148 - 1163 . 
 
 11 
 
 without refreshing himself with a bath. Another instance of his humanity, 
 no less creditable to him, is related. Travelling in an unfrequented part 
 of the country, he heard a child crying, and soon found its mother, appa¬ 
 rently sleeping, by the road side. On examination, however, the woman 
 proved to be dead, when the humane prelate not only conveyed the body on 
 his own horse to a place of interment, but performed the funeral rites, and 
 made ample provision for the support of the orphan. 
 
 Notwithstanding the suavity of Bishop Betun’s disposition, the inferior 
 officers of his church rebelled against his authority, and he was necessitated 
 to appeal to the court of Rome for protection. He had scarcely obtained the 
 papal sentence in his favour when he was assailed by troubles from another 
 quarter. During the contentions between Stephen and the Empress Maud for 
 the throne, the country was almost devastated by the warlike adherents of 
 the contending parties. The city and diocess of Hereford were involved in 
 the general calamity attendant upon civil war. The episcopal lands were laid 
 waste, and many of the buildings demolished, the clergy were dispersed, 
 the Cathedral was deserted, and the Bishop himself compelled to seek safety 
 in disguise and flight. Peace, however, was once more restored ; Betun 
 returned to his See, recalled his scattered flock, cleaned and repaired the 
 Cathedral, and caused divine service to be asrain celebrated within its walls. 
 
 From the following passage in Madox’s History of the Exchequer, 
 vol. i. p. 306, it may be inferred that in or shortly before the fifth of King 
 Stephen (1139-40), the bishopric of Hereford was vested in the crown:— 
 “ Gaufridus Cancellarius f. c. de iiij 1 . & xij s . & vj d . de veteri firma Episcopatus 
 de Hereford.”—Mag. Rot. in Scac. 5 Steph. r. 14. b. This strongly corrobo¬ 
 rates the statement of Betun’s biographer. 
 
 Our prelate was soon afterwards summoned by Pope Eugenius to a 
 general council held at Rheims, in which city he died on the tenth kalends 
 of May, 1148. His remains were brought to England, and interred in the 
 Church of which he had been so distinguished a member. 
 
 Of Gilbert Foliot, Abbot of Gloucester, who was preferred to the See 
 of Hereford in 1149, and translated to that of London fourteen years after- 
 
12 
 
 HEREFORD CATHEDRAL. 
 
 wards, a memoir has been given in the author’s “ History of Gloucester 
 Cathedral.” 25 
 
 Robert de Melun, called Robertus Dunelmensis, Prior of Lanthony, 
 next succeeded, and was consecrated at Canterbury on the 22d of December, 
 1163. 26 He died on the 4th kalends of March, 1167, and was interred in the 
 south aile of the Cathedral, where an inscription records his name. He is 
 designated by the author of the annals of St. David’s, “ Episcopus Anglorum 
 sapientissimus.” 27 In consequence of the disputes between the King and the 
 clergy, which preceded and followed the murder of Archbishop Becket, the 
 See of Hereford remained vacant six years, during which time its possessions 
 were let to farm, and the profits thence arising paid into the exchequer. 28 
 When, however, the King had submitted to the papal authority, in 1173, 
 
 Robert Foliot, Archdeacon of Oxford, a personal friend and fellow 
 student of Archbishop Becket, was appointed bishop, and was consecrated 
 on the 6th of October, in the following year. 29 Foliot was one of the four 
 English bishops who, in 1179, attended the Lateran council for the purpose 
 of making oath that they would not do, or cause to be done, any thing to 
 
 23 He was annually commemorated by the Canons of Hereford on the 13th kalend of February, 
 as one “ qui multa bona contulit Herefordensi capitulo.” Hist, and Antiq. of the Cath. of Hereford, 
 App. p. 6. 
 
 26 Chron. Gervas. Dorobern, col. 1385. Gilbert Foliot wrote a Commentary on the Can¬ 
 ticles, which was published by Junius, 4to. London, 1638. There are seven letters of his among 
 those of Thomas a Becket, whose principal adversary he was. Bale has given a list of his 
 writings. 
 
 27 Wharton’s Anglia Sacra, vol. ii. p. 649. Robert de Melun’s System of Divinity, in manu¬ 
 script, is preserved in the library of St. Victor, at Paris, and is often cited by Father Northood, 
 in his notes upon Cardinal Pullus. Vide Dupin’s Twelfth Century. 
 
 28 Thus in Madox’s History of the Exchequer, vol. i. p. 306, note. “ Johannes Cumin r. c. de 
 
 C. & xv s . de veteri firma Episcopatus de Herefordia : Et idem denovafirma de ccc 1 . & xj 3 . & iiij d . 
 Mag. Rot. 16 Hen. II. Rol. 4. And again, p. 642. “ Johannis Cumin debet xxx 3 . de scutagio 
 
 Militum Episcopatus in exercitum Hybernia de his quos Episcopus non recognoscit reddendos; quia 
 Episcopatus tunc erat in manu regis.” Mag. Rot. 20 Hen. II. r. 9. b. 
 
 29 Math. Paris, by Watts, ed. 1640, p. 1173. See also Roger Hovedoa. 
 
BISHOPS R. FOLIOT, V£RE, DE BRUSE, AND H. FOLIOT, A. D. 1173-1234. 13 
 
 the injury of the King or the realm of England. 30 He dedicated the Abbey 
 Church of Wigmore, which had been founded by Roger Mortimer, and in 
 the words of Leland, “ Diversa jocalia dedit eidem ecclesise die dedications 
 ejusdem.” 31 He presided over the See with great credit for thirteen years, 
 and dying in 1 186, 32 was buried in the south aile of the presbytery of his 
 Cathedral, where a monument to his memory still remains. He was annually 
 commemorated on the 7th ides of May, and is stated in the obituary of 
 Hereford Cathedral to have given to that church “ multa bona in terris et 
 libris, vasis et ornamentis.” 33 
 
 William de Vere, a member of the illustrious house of Clare, succeeded 
 to the vacant See, October 6, 1186. He received, and magnificently enter¬ 
 tained at his palace, Baldwin Archbishop of Canterbury, the Lord Justice of 
 England, and other distinguished persons. According to Godwin, this prelate 
 was noted for the number of buildings he erected. Dying in December, 1199, 
 he was succeeded by 
 
 Egidius, or Giles de Bruse, or Braoes, a son of William, Lord Breck¬ 
 nock, who was consecrated on the 24th of September, 1200. Living in the 
 turbulent times of the baronial wars, he was compelled to leave his See, the 
 temporalities of which were seized by the crown. This prelate is considered 
 to have built the great central tower ; and an effigy in the south aile, with 
 the model of a church in one hand, is said to commemorate him and the 
 event. On returning to take possession of his See, he died at Gloucester, 
 on the 17th of November, 1215, and was interred in his own Cathedral. 
 
 Hugh de Mapenore, his successor, and who was then dean of the church, 
 was consecrated at Gloucester, December 6, 1216, but did not preside in it 
 much more than two years, when 
 
 Hugh Foliot, Archdeacon of Salop, was advanced to the See, in which 
 he was consecrated November 1, 1219. Connected with the town of 
 
 Ledbury, he founded and endowed an hospital there, and also founded two 
 
 31 Itinerary, vol. viii. fo. 78. 
 
 33 Hist, and Antiq. of Heref. Cath. App. p. 12. 
 
 30 Holinshed’s Chronicle, vol. ii. p. 178. 
 K Wharton’s Anglia Sacra, vol. i. p. 477. 
 
14 
 
 HEREFORD CATHEDRAL. 
 
 chantries in the chapel of St. Catherine’s on the south side of the Cathedral. 34 
 According to Hill’s MSS., he granted forty days indulgence for seven years 
 to all persons who contributed towards the building of St. Paul’s Cathedral, 
 in London. He died July 26, 1234, when 
 
 Ralph de Maydenstan, or Maidstone, his birth-place, was named and 
 consecrated bishop. Besides purchasing for himself and his successors in 
 the See, a house in London, for one hundred and fifty pounds, he conferred 
 on the canons of the Cathedral the church of Sellick, in Herefordshire, and 
 on the See the advowson of the church of St. Mary Monthalt. Forsaking his 
 prelacy in 1239, he became a Franciscan friar at Oxford, and thence moved 
 to and joined the monks of St. Peter’s at Gloucester, where he died, and 
 was interred without any memorial. 
 
 Peter de Aquablanca, or Egel blaunche, was appointed to this See in 
 opposition to a canon of Lichfield, a man of influence and high connexions, 
 who was preferred by the clergy. The monarch, however, either from 
 partiality to foreigners, or from other motives, gave the preference to Aqua¬ 
 blanca, a native of Savoy, who is described as being of low origin. He proved 
 himself a turbulent, ambitious, and mercenary man ; and hence his acts and 
 character are variously related by different monastic chroniclers. Having 
 free access to the king, it is related that he advised the monarch to give all 
 the church preferments to foreigners, and thus excited the hostility of the 
 English clergy. According to Matthew Paris our prelate assumed the cross 
 in 1250, and under the banner of the king of France went to the Holy 
 Land. In 1258 he returned to England from the court of Rome, with letters 
 from the Pope, which are described as having been forged by the bishop, 
 commanding all religious houses to grant a tenth of their possessions towards 
 carrying on the crusade. 35 The Chronicle of Dunstaple states that he 
 “ maliciously forged letters, as from the Pope, to demand money from the 
 clergy.” 36 The character of Aquablanca is brought out in consequence of the 
 
 34 Leland’s Itinerary, vol. viii. p. 37. 35 Gale’s Scriptores, vol. i. p. 348. 
 
 36 See Hearne’s edition, vol. i. p. 359. 
 
BISHOP AQUABLANCA, A. D. 1239 - 1268 . 
 
 15 
 
 King's wishes to promote him to the See of Lichfield, in opposition to the 
 canons of that church. He is then described “ as manifestly an improper 
 person, being a foreigner, ignorant of the English language, of bad character, 
 and considered an enemy to the realm.” 37 In 1263, he, with other foreign 
 monks and prelates, was expelled from England ; but in the following year 
 he must have returned, as King Henry III. then reprimanded him in a 
 letter, stating “ that coming to Hereford to take order for the disposing of 
 the garrisons in the marches of Wales, he found in the church of Hereford 
 neither bishop, dean, vicar, or other officer to discharge the spiritual 
 functions ; and that the church and ecclesiastical establishment was in a state 
 of ruin and decay. Wherefore, he commanded the Bishop, all excuses set 
 aside, forthwith to repair to his church ; and that if he did not do so, he 
 willed him to know for a certainty, that he would take into his hands all the 
 temporal goods belonging to the barony of the same, which his progenitors 
 gave and bestowed for spiritual exercise therein, with a godly devotion.” 38 
 It appears that this remonstrance, or royal command, made the Bishop return 
 to his See ; for Simon de Montford, Earl of Leicester, with his followers, 
 afterwards seized the prelate in his church, and took from him all his wealth, 
 imprisoned him in the castle of “ Ordelay,” and divided the treasure amongst 
 themselves. Though branded with general reproach, and apparently in 
 hostility with his flock and the clergy, it appears that he bequeathed one 
 hundred and ninety-two bushels of corn to be distributed yearly amongst the 
 members of the church, and two hundred bushels of wheat, to the poor of the 
 diocess. He purchased the manor of “ Homme Lacy,” or Holme Lacy, and 
 added it to the revenues of the Church ; and was also much engaged in 
 defending the liberties and privileges of the Bishop, and those of the Dean 
 and Chapter against certain encroachments attempted to be made by the 
 citizens. He founded a monastery at Aquabella, or Aqua-Blancha, in Savoy, 
 the place of his birth , and to that monastery his heart was conveyed and 
 enshrined. There is not, however, any mention of this event in the inscrip- 
 
 3 7 Math. Paris, per Watts, p 881. 
 
 38 Wilkins’s Concil. Mag. Brit. vol. i. p. 761. 
 
1G 
 
 HEREFORD CATHEDRAL. 
 
 tion on his tomb at that town. 39 He died on the 27th of November, 1268, 
 but his obit was annually celebrated on the 5th kalend of that month. He 
 was succeeded by 
 
 John Breton, or de Breton, LL. D., who was a lawyer as well as a 
 priest, and who has been generally noted in the legal annals, as author of 
 “ that excellent French manual of our laws, which bears the name of Briton.” 40 
 It is entitled “ De Juribus Anglicanis,” and was written by command of the 
 King. According to Fuller, in his “ Worthies of England,” the “ tenor 
 runneth in the King’s name, as if it had been penned by himself.” Sir 
 Edward Coke describes him as a “ man of great and profound judgment in 
 the common laws, an excellent ornament to his profession, and a satisfaction 
 and solace to himself.” Bishop Nicholson suggests doubts respecting the 
 authorship of the book, and, after examining different testimonies and autho¬ 
 rities, says, “ If I may be allowed to differ from all, I should think that the 
 true writer of this abstract was that same John Breton whom we find one of 
 the King’s justices (together with Ralph and Roger de Hengham) in the first 
 year of Edward the Second.” 41 It appears that our Bishop died in the third 
 year of the reign of Edward the First, and that the treatise in question 
 contains reference to a statute passed in the thirteenth year of that reign. 42 
 Although the time of his death is stated by Godwin and others, May 12, 
 1275, no one has specified the place of his interment. His successor was 
 a man of high repute during life, and obtained distinguished canonical 
 honours after death. 
 
 Thomas Cantilupe, or de Cantilupe, was archdeacon of Stafford, 
 and successively occupied the distinguished offices of Chancellor of the 
 University of Oxford, and of the kingdom. He was son of William, Lord 
 Cantelupe, and Millicent, Countess of Evreux. According to some writers 
 he was a native of Lancashire; but Fuller states that Lord Cantelupe’s 
 
 39 See Archseologia, vol. xviii. p. 189, in which there is an account of the tomb by the 
 Rev. T. Kerrich. 
 
 40 Nicholson’s Historical Library, fol. ed. 1736, p. 230. 41 Ibid. 
 
 42 See Kelham’s edition of “ Britton,” with Notes, References, and Records, 8vo. 1762. 
 
BISHOP CANTELUPE.-A. D. 1275-1282. 
 
 17 
 
 “ habitations were Abergavenny Castle, in Monmouth, and Harringworth, 
 in Northamptonshire.” 
 
 To write an account of the life of a saint, in the present day, with any 
 thing like discrimination, or with a hope of furnishing an impartial and 
 rational narrative, would be as vain as the attempt to fix the longitude, or 
 assert the discovery of the philosopher’s stone. Suffice it to remark, that a 
 good sized volume has been published under the title of “ The Life and 
 Gests (or Virtues) of Sir Thomas Cantelupe,” 43 but it is so truly hyperbolical, 
 credulous, and full of romance, that scarcely any part of it can be credited, 
 and hardly two pages, out of about three hundred, have the character of 
 real biography. From childhood to death Cantelupe is represented as all 
 saintedness and perfection, wholly devoted to God, or rather to Catholic 
 ceremonies ; and yet the silly, purblind author pretends that he fulfilled all 
 his worldly and professional duties in the varied offices of Chancellor of 
 the University of Oxford, Chancellor of England, and Bishop of Hereford. 
 He also describes the court, in which Lord Cantelupe and his family were 
 domesticated, as replete with folly, immorality, and vice. “ Infamy,” he 
 says, “ is no where more in credit, nor vice so canonized : it is a school 
 of ^Egyptian hieroglyphics, where beasts and monsters are supposed to 
 signify heroique virtues,” (p. 38). Of a man who “suck’d in sanctity with 
 his milk,” and whose “ childhood was a meer prologue, or dum show, before 
 a trajedy of miseries,” (p. 33,) although his whole life was exempt from 
 every misery, according to the same author, there are few events to record, 
 and few traits of character to comment on. The book referred to, said to 
 be made up from evidences in the Pope’s library, collected at the time and 
 for the purpose of his canonization, is very meagre in biographical materials. 
 It states that he was educated at home, sent to Oxford to study Latin and 
 canon law,—to Paris for philosophy—returned to Oxford, where he was 
 made Chancellor; and, “always advancing from good to better,” was 
 created High Chancellor of England under Henry the Third, and was 
 
 43 In the old authors Gest is used to denote action, or event. Warton, in “ History of 
 English Poetry,” derives it from the popular books entitled “ Gesta Romanorum,” containing 
 narratives of adventures. See Nares’s “ Glossary.” 
 
 D 
 
18 
 
 HEREFORD CATHEDRAL. 
 
 entrusted with the government of the kingdom during the absence of that 
 monarch. Though nothing is inferred from those civil and honorary 
 promotions by the credulous author, it must be clear that Cantelupe had 
 some knowledge of business, of politics, of the intrigues of a vicious court, 
 to deserve and obtain those honours and their consequent profits. He also 
 contrived to secure a few clerical appointments, which must have enhanced 
 his income and labours : he was Canon and Chantor of York, Archdeacon 
 and Canon of Lichfield and Coventry, Canon of London and Hereford, also 
 Archdeacon of Stafford. His last advancement and honour was to the See 
 of Hereford, “ where all voyced him their Bishop and where, says the 
 same romancer, at the age of fifty-six, he was “ set up as a light in 
 the candlestick of the See,” on the 8th of September, 1275. Here he 
 appears to have ruled only about seven years, and not always in peace 
 with the laity and clergy. Travelling to or from Rome, to obtain the 
 co-operation of the Pope against Gilbert Clare, Earl of Gloucester, or 
 John Peckham, Archbishop of Canterbury, or both, for with both he was 
 embroiled in disputes, he was seized with illness at Civita Vecchia, in 
 Italy, and died there on the 25th of August, 1282. His body, separated 
 into three parts, as customary at that time with saints, was destined to 
 honour and profit three separate places: the flesh was deposited in a 
 church near the city of Florence, the heart inurned at Ashridge, in Buck¬ 
 inghamshire, England, and the bones conveyed to and deposited in the 
 Lady Chapel belonging to Hereford Cathedral. Over these a tomb was 
 erected : but his successor, who had been his secretary, finding the people 
 prone to believe in miracles, and that such craft would tend to promote the 
 fame of his Cathedral, had a great many performed at the tomb of the saint. 
 According to Camden, Cantelupe’s fame soon eclipsed that of St. Ethelbert 
 himself; for, as Fuller quaintly but truly remarks, “ Superstition is always 
 fondest of the youngest saint.” To keep up, or rather enhance this fame, 
 the clergy of the Cathedral, most likely at the instigation of their Bishop, 
 had the relics of the saint removed from the Lady Chapel, and enshrined in 
 a new and splendid tomb, in the north transept, on the 6th of April, 1287. 
 To give eclat to this translation, and consequently attract more devotees, it 
 
BISHOP CANTELUPE. - A. D. 1275-1282. 
 
 19 
 
 is related that Edward II. came from Calais on purpose to attend the 
 ceremony. According to the unqualified assertions of the Catholic writers, 
 not only visiters from all parts paid their devotions and oblations at the 
 sainted shrine, but miracles without number were there performed. Healing 
 the sick, restoring sight to the blind, and reanimating the dead were among 
 these. Matthew of Westminster roundly asserts that these miracles amounted 
 to the number of one hundred and sixty-three; and the English Martyrology 
 augments the number to four hundred and twenty-five. In the “ Life and 
 Gests,” the number is said to be “ in a manner infinite,” and that forty 
 persons, one of whom was a public incendiary, and hanged as a just 
 punishment for his infamy, were restored to life, through the instrumentality 
 of the Hereford dead saint. It cannot but excite the pity and contempt of 
 every rational person to peruse such impudent fabrications and falsehoods. 
 These, however, are not merely repeated by old monastic chroniclers, but 
 Alban Butler, and other modern authors who have written on such subjects, 
 reiterate the same impious nonsense. Butler says that “ Cantelupe subdued 
 his flesh with severe fasting, watching, and a rough hair shirt, which he 
 wore till his death, notwithstanding the colics and other violent pains and 
 sicknesses with which he was afflicted many years, for the exercise of his 
 patience.” 44 The rodomontade of these writers not only excites our mistrust, 
 but their contradictory statements respecting the time and place of his death, 
 shew that none of them are to be credited. On the 3d of July, 1307, about 
 twenty-five years after his decease, a commission was appointed, to continue 
 for four months, to make inquiries respecting his life and character, for the 
 purpose of canonization, and in which Richard Swinford, his successor, 
 acted as solicitor. It is said that Cantelupe was the last Englishman who 
 was canonized. From his time the Bishops of Hereford adopted his arms 
 for their See, viz. Gu. three leopards’ heads jessant with a fleur-de-lis 
 issuing from the mouth, or. His monument, or shrine, will be described in 
 a subsequent page. 
 
 Richard Swinford, the successor of Cantelupe, was noted for his pulpit 
 
 d 2 
 
 44 Lives of the Fathers, &c. vol. x. p. 47, edit. 1815. 
 
20 
 
 HEREFORD CATHEDRAL. 
 
 eloquence, and resided long enough in the See to witness the effects of his 
 master’s miracles and canonization. By a document which Dr. Prattinton 
 discovered among the evidences of Sir Thomas Winnington, Bart, of 
 Stanford Court, in Worcestershire, it appears that Swinford’s chaplain, 
 John de Kemes, kept a journal, or register, of all the domestic affairs of the 
 Bishop, from 1289 to 1290, and probably for other years. This document 
 is a roll of several skins of parchment, one side of each contains the daily 
 expenses attending the Bishop’s table, specifying the remnants left, the 
 costs of the stable, and an itinerary. The other side notices the summer 
 and winter clothes, furs, spices, sugar, &c. ; also expenses at the court 
 of Rome, education of boys at Oxford, money laid out in Kent, where 
 the Bishop built a chapel. He was at Sugwas, one of his seats, from the 
 30th of September, 1289, to the 21st of October, when he removed to 
 Rosebury, another seat. In December he proceeded to Ledbury, thence 
 to Newent, Hyneham, Prestbury, another seat, where he kept his Christmas, 
 and where it appears that a sumptuous entertainment was provided, for one 
 day. The following articles are specified ; viz. a boar, ten oxen, eight 
 porkers, sixty fowl, thirteen fat deer, and nine hundred eggs. He after¬ 
 wards proceeded to London, where clothes, furs, &c. were purchased. 
 The Bishop’s travelling suite consisted of a company with from thirty to 
 fifty horses. He appears to have remained in London only six days, 
 and slept the first night, on returning, at Kensington. Swinford presided 
 thirty-four years over his diocess, and died the 15th of March, 1316. 
 He was buried in the Cathedral, but his tomb, or effigy, has been 
 destroyed. 
 
 Adam de Orlton was consecrated at Avignon, in France, September 12, 
 1316, and whilst on an embassy to Rome, hearing of the death of the Bishop 
 of Worcester, obtained the Pope’s bull of advancement to that See in 
 September, 1327. The chapter and the English king had previously elected 
 and confirmed Wulstan de Braunsford in the See, but the Pope’s influence 
 preponderated, and Orlton was firmly seated at Worcester in 1329, where 
 he presided six years, when he was advanced by the pontiff to the richer 
 See of Winchester. This favouritism provoked the jealousy of the English 
 
BISHOPS ORLTON, CARLTON, AND TRELLICK.-A.D. 1316 - 1361 . 21 
 
 monarch (Edward III.), who indicted Orlton in the ecclesiastical court:— 
 First, for imprisoning the King’s chancellor, in 1326 ; secondly, for a 
 treasonable sermon preached at Oxford, accusing the king of tyranny, and 
 inciting his subjects to depose and imprison him ; and thirdly, for his 
 endeavours to induce the Queen to desert her royal spouse. The parliament 
 also accused him of lending the Mortimers money to oppose the King. For 
 these offences he was placed at the bar for trial, when the Archbishops 
 of Canterbury, York, and Dublin took him away, and insisted that, as 
 a prelate, he was not amenable to a civil tribunal. Milner, in his 
 “ History of Winchester,” vol. ii. p. 233, &c. calls him “ an artful and 
 unprincipled churchman, who had been one of the most active agents of 
 the barons in their first war against the King, and for which he was tried 
 and found guilty.” He was deprived of all his property and banished. 
 Returning, he obtained the patronage of the higher ruling powers, and 
 was favoured by Edward III. He died during his prelacy in Winchester, 
 in which Cathedral he was buried, in 1345. See History, &c. of Win¬ 
 chester Cathedral. 
 
 Thomas Carlton, LL.D. the successor of Orlton, was progressively 
 appointed Treasurer of England, and Chancellor and Chief Justice of 
 Ireland, also custos, or guardian of that kingdom. He appears to have 
 resided in Ireland from 1337 to 1340, and consequently left his See during 
 that time. Dying in 1340, he was interred in his Cathedral, where a statue, 
 &c. was raised to his memory. The next prelate, 
 
 John Trellick, D.D. was an enemy to the plays or pageants which 
 were frequently performed in churches, and also to matrimony. To 
 prevent the first taking place within his diocess, he denounced all offenders 
 with the “ pain of cursing and excommunication and excommunicated one 
 William Anthony, of Birmingham, for marrying a woman of Herefordshire. 
 In advanced age he became too infirm to perform his official duties, and 
 employed Thomas Trellick, Dean of Exeter, to officiate for him. He 
 died in 1361, and was interred on the north side of the altar of his 
 Cathedral, where a grave stone marks the spot. An engraved brass 
 effigy with an inscription was removed, and the grave was opened in 
 
22 
 
 HEREFORD CATHEDRAL. 
 
 1813, when part of a crozier, and a seal of a pope’s bull were found, and 
 are preserved in a glass case in the Cathedral. 45 
 
 Lewis Charlton, or Caer-leon, as called by Bale, was chancellor of 
 Oxford in 1357, and was distinguished as a theologian, mathematician, and 
 also for possessing some knowledge of medicine. Advanced to this See in 
 1361, he presided here till 1369, when he bequeathed several articles, 
 and forty pounds in money, to his Cathedral, in which his remains were 
 interred: he also left some books and vestments to other churches. Accord¬ 
 ing to Bale he wrote several works. 
 
 William Courteney, one of the rich and influential family of that name 
 of Devonshire, after receiving several appointments of honour and profit in 
 the Cathedrals of Exeter, Wells, and York, was advanced to the See of 
 Hereford in 1369, and soon afterwards promoted to the archiepiscopal 
 chair of Canterbury. (See History, &c. of Canterbury Cathedral.) 
 
 John Gilbert was translated from Bangor in 1375, and sent on an 
 embassy to France in 1385. He was made treasurer of England, and in 
 July, 1389, removed to the See of St. David’s, in Wales. 
 
 John Trevenant, or Trefuant, who ruled the diocess from 1389 to 
 1404, was deputed by King Henry IV. on an embassy to Rome, and was 
 joined with John, Earl of Arundel, in a commission to investigate and govern 
 the affairs of Scotland. 
 
 Robert Mascall, a confessor to King Henry IV. was employed by that 
 monarch in embassies to various foreign courts, and published an account of 
 those embassies. Being one of the Carmelite, or White Friars, he contributed 
 towards rebuilding the church belonging to that order in London, and in 
 which his remains were interred in December, 1415. 
 
 Edmund Lucy, D.D. was advanced from the deanery to the See in 1417, 
 but three years afterwards was translated to Exeter, 46 when 
 
 Th omas Polton, then Dean of York, was appointed to, and presided 
 
 45 See “ Gough’s Sepulchral Monuments,” vol. i. pi. 40 and p. Ill, for a view of the tomb 
 stone; also “ Ancient Reliques,” vol. i. by Storer, for an engraving and a short account of these 
 reliques. 
 
 46 See History, &c. of Exeter Cathedral for an account of him. 
 
BISHOPS POLTON, SPOFFORD, BEAUCHAMP, ETC.-A.D. 1420 - 1474 . 23 
 
 over this cliocess only fifteen months, when he was advanced to Chichester, 
 and thence translated to Worcester. 
 
 Thomas Spoeford was promoted from the abbacy of St. Mary, York, to 
 this See, November, 1421, and governed it twenty-six years. He appears 
 to have made great alterations in the palace at Sugwas. In 1448 he with¬ 
 drew from his charge, and returned to St. Mary’s at York, where he died. 
 The record of his abdication is printed in Rymer’s Fcedera, vol. x. p. 215 : 
 in Wilkins’s “ Concilia,” vol. iii. p. 538, is a writ of pardon for abdicating 
 in favour of his successor, who was to allow him one hundred pounds 
 yearly out of the revenues. The Pope testified by his bull that Spofford 
 had expended on the buildings of his Cathedral upwards of two thousand 
 eight hundred marks. 
 
 Richard Beauchamp was consecrated in February, 1448, and after 
 presiding here two years and three months, was translated to Salisbury. 
 Having noticed this prelate in my History of Salisbury Cathedral (p. 36), 
 it need only be observed here that he was employed by King Edward III. 
 in superintending the building of St. George’s Chapel at Windsor, where, 
 and at Salisbury, he left specimens of his architectural works. 
 
 Richard or Reynald Butler, or Bolers, an Abbot of St. Peter’s at 
 Gloucester, succeeded Beauchamp, but his presidency was also very short, 
 being appointed in 1450, and translated to Lichfield and Coventry, April, 
 1453. Godwin says, “ Howbeit it seemeth that he lyeth buried in the Church 
 of Hereford before the high altar, under a marble inlaid with brass.” 47 
 
 John Stanbury, who succeeded Butler, was a most distinguished 
 Carmelite Friar at Oxford, and was appointed by Henry VI. to be the 
 first provost of the New College at Eton. The same monarch promoted 
 him to the See of Norwich, in which he was superseded by a favourite of 
 the Duke of Suffolk, but was by the same royal favour fixed in the chair 
 of Bangor, where he remained five years. He was then translated to 
 Hereford, where he presided twenty-one years, servilely devoted to the 
 Pope and all the papal decrees ; he was also equally attached to the 
 
 47 Catalogue of Bishops, edit. 1615. p. 450. 
 
24 
 
 HEREFORD CATHEDRAL. 
 
 monarch who had so greatly befriended him. In the service and retinue of 
 
 the king he was taken prisoner with his patron at the noted battle of 
 
 Northampton in 1460, and confined in the prison of Warwick Castle, 48 for 
 
 some time. According to Godwin, 49 and Prince, 50 he left behind him 
 
 “ several works of merit,” a list of which is given in Leland’s Itinerary. 
 After release from prison he retired to the Carmelite Friary of Ludlow, 
 where he died May 31, 1474. It is presumed that during his life and 
 residence at Hereford he built a handsome Chantry Chapel , against the 
 north side of the Cathedral, in which his remains were interred. Godwin 
 gives a copy of some “ barbarous verses,” which were inscribed on his 
 tomb; and Gough, in “ Sepuchral Monuments,” vol. ii. part iii. p. 240, 
 has copied, and also given some account of the chapel, with a view of its 
 interior and details. In the Bishop’s will, proved Oct. 20, 1474, is a 
 bequest of “ one cross of silver gilt to my baptismal Church of More-Stowe,” 
 in Devonshire. 
 
 Thomas Mjllyng, or Myling, D. D. of Oxford, and Abbot of West¬ 
 minster, wrs promoted to this See through the personal favour of King 
 Edward IV. one of whose privy counsellors he was. Dying at Westminster 
 in 1492, he was interred in the Chapel of St. John Baptist, in the Abbey 
 Church, where a stone coffin remains, which is supposed to have contained 
 his body. 51 
 
 Ed mund Audley, the next prelate, was advanced from Rochester to this 
 See in December, 1492, and after presiding here about ten years, was 
 promoted to Salisbury in 1502. In most of the accounts of Hereford 
 Cathedral it is stated that this bishop “ was a great benefactor to the Lady’s 
 Chapelbut it is not likely that he expended any money upon that edifice, 
 excepting, indeed, taking away part of the wall on the south side, and 
 building a chantry chapel for his own remains. Being, however, removed 
 
 48 Gough says, “ Windsor Castle.” 4 9 Catalogue of Bishops, p. 460. 
 
 j0 Worthies of Devon, edit. 1810, p. 719, in which are several particulars respecting the 
 Bishop. 
 
 51 See Brayley’s Account of the Monument and of the Bishop in Neale’s Illustrations of 
 Westminster Abbey, vol. ii. p. 185. 
 
BISHOPS AUDLEY, CASTELLO, MAYO, AND BOOTH.-A.D. 1492-1535. 25 
 
 to Salisbury, he raised a new and very elegant chantry chapel for himself 
 in the choir of that Cathedral, and therein it is presumed that his mortal 
 remains were interred after death, 1525. 52 
 
 Adrian, or Hadrian de Castello, a native of Cornetto in Italy, is 
 described by Godwin as a person of “very base parentage,” but he was 
 made a cardinal by the Pope, and by King Henry VII. was advanced to the 
 See of Hereford in 1502, as a reward for his fidelity and good conduct. 
 Amassing considerable riches he excited the envy and avaricious cupidity of 
 Caesar Borgio, that monster of iniquity, who endeavoured to poison him, but 
 who, with his own father, Pope Alexander VI., partook of the fatal draught 
 which they had prepared for Castello, and became victims of their own wily 
 scheme. In my History, &c. of Wells Cathedral, p. 51, are many particulars 
 of Castello, and the reader also is referred to Godwin’s “ Catalogue of 
 Bishops,” p. 380, and to “ Biographia Britannica.” This prelate and cardinal 
 continued at Hereford only two years, when he was succeeded by 
 
 Richard Mayo, or Mayew, who was almoner to Henry VII., president 
 of Magdalen College, Oxford, and chancellor of that university. He 
 presided here eleven years, and previous to his death, April 18, 1516, 
 
 bequeathed his mitre and pastoral staff to his successors, five hundred marks 
 for the use of the church, and ordered a handsome monument to be raised 
 over his grave, on the south side of the high altar. His will, dated 
 March 24, 1515, is in the prerogative office of Canterbury. 
 
 Charles Booth, the next prelate, who was chancellor of the Welsh 
 Marshes, has secured to his name and government of the diocess much 
 honour, by “ bestowing great cost in repairing his house at London,” and by 
 erecting the fine supplemental porch on the north side of the Cathedral. 
 He had many ecclesiastical appointments, as specified in the Bishops’ 
 Register. By his will he directed that his body should be buried in the 
 episcopal habit, and that six pounds six shillings and eight pence should be 
 distributed at his funeral. His books were left to the Cathedral library, 
 and a large piece of arras tapestry. Dying in 1535, he corpse was interred 
 
 52 For Accounts of Bishop Audley and his exquisite Chapel, see my History, &c. of Salisbury 
 Cathedral; also Dodsworth’s Account of the same Cathedral. 
 
 E 
 
26 
 
 HEREFORD CATHEDRAL. 
 
 within the north aile of the nave, where a monument was raised to his 
 memory. 
 
 Edward Foxe, an eminent statesman, provost of King’s College, Cam¬ 
 bridge, almoner to King Henry VIII., and an active partisan with the 
 vicar-general, Cromwell, against the Catholics, was advanced to this See by 
 the king in 1535. He was author of “Annotations on the Mantuan Poet 
 an Oration, in the story of Thomas Lord Cromwell, published in Fox’s 
 Acts and Monuments ; also “ De vera Differentia Regiae Potestatis et 
 Ecclesiastics,” &c. 1534 and 1538, which was translated into English by 
 Henry, Lord Stafford. Dying in London, May 8, 1538, his remains were 
 interred in the Church of St. Mary Monthalt, Fish Street Hill, in that city. 
 
 Edmund Bonner was bishop of this See only seven months, as Godwin 
 states, when he was translated to London, where he became notorious for 
 his “ butcheries,” as the same author properly designates his cruelties, and 
 died in the Marshalsea Prison, a proper home for such a Nero. 
 
 John Skipp, D.D. sat here twelve years, and witnessed a reform in the 
 Church, of the mummeries or interludes which had occasionally been acted 
 within the walls of these sacred buildings, in ridicule of the old catholic 
 superstitions. Attending the parliament in London in 1553, he died, and 
 was buried in the Church of St. Mary Monthalt. 
 
 John Harley was one of the victims of that cruel, heartless woman, 
 Queen Mary, who compelled him to abdicate his See for marrying, and 
 avoiding mass. Whatever stigma may attach to such acts, in the estimation 
 of bigotry, the man devoted to literature and moral worth will think highly 
 of this bishop from the testimony of Leland, who knew him, and praises him 
 for “ his great virtue and learning, especially in the classical authors and 
 poets, for his fine vein in poetry,” Sec. 53 He was consecrated May 26, 1553, 
 but deprived in the following year, and wandered about “ from place to place 
 in an obscure condition.” 54 
 
 Robert Pitrfey, or Warton, S.T.P. was advanced from the bishopric 
 of St. Asaph in April, 1554, to which he had been promoted from the abbacy 
 
 53 Wood’s Athenae Oxon. vol. ii. col. 769, edit. 1815. 
 
 5* Ibid. 
 
BISHOPS PURFEY AND SCORY. - A. D. 1554 - 1584 . 
 
 27 
 
 of Bermondsey in Southwark. His memory has been traduced by Godwin, 
 for having alienated the revenues of the See, but Browne Willis vindicates 
 him against the charge, asserting, “ it is clear that he did not impair that 
 bishopric in the least penny ; but lived there in his diocess in great hospi¬ 
 tality and credit, and contributed liberally to the building of the fine Church 
 of Mould, in Flintshire, and, as I presume, finished Gresford and Wrexham 
 Churches.” 55 By will he gave to the Cathedral his mitre of silver, set with 
 stones, a crozier of silver, and a parcel of plate, with other ecclesiastical 
 riches. He died September 22, 1557, and was buried in the south transept 
 of his Cathedral, in which there is a monumental effigy to his memory. 
 
 John Scory was translated from Rochester to Chichester, and thence to 
 Hereford, and was one of those prelates who suffered from the intolerant 
 and cruel persecutions of the “ bloody Mary.’’ Both at Chichester and this 
 See he appears to have incurred the displeasure of his brethren, and the 
 reproach of the church. By “ pulling down houses, selling lead, and by other 
 loose endes, &c. he heaped together great mass of wealth.” Anthony Wood 
 tells us that the money thus accumulated was foolishly squandered away by 
 his favoured son, Sylvanus Scory, “ a very handsome and witty man, and of 
 the best education both at home and beyond the seas that that age could 
 afford. His father loved him so dearly that he fleeced the Church of Here¬ 
 ford, to leave him an estate ; but Sylvanus, allowing himself the liberty of 
 enjoying all the pleasures of this world, reduced it to nothing, so that his 
 son Edm. lived by hanging on gentlemen and by his shifts.” 56 Bishop 
 Scory wrote and published some works adapted to the times, but such as 
 could not be read now. Sir Robert Naunton, in “ Fragmenta Regalia,” 
 reprobates his practice of swearing and using obscene language ; and 
 Sir John Harington, in “ Nugm Antiqum,” describes him as having amassed 
 “ some legions, or rather chiliads (thousands) of angels.” “ Whilst Bishop 
 Scory presided over this See the Diocese suffered an almost total revolution 
 under the specious pretext of an exchange with the Queen, to which, in 
 reality, he was obliged to accede. He alienated the Manors of Ledbury, 
 Bishops-Upton, Ross, Bishops-Castle, Venhampton, and Prestbury, and 
 
 5(5 Athenae Oxon. vol. ii. col. 770, edit. 1815. 
 
 E 2 
 
 55 Survey of Cathedrals, vol. i. p. 521. 
 
28 
 
 HEREFORD CATHEDRAL. 
 
 almost all the ancient demesnes belonging to the Cathedral.” 57 Though thus 
 accused, and proved guilty of many crimes, Scory, like too many other 
 rogues and tyrants, had his panegyrists and poetical encomiasts. In the 
 possession of the present venerable and learned Bishop of this See is a 
 copy of verses, by a contemporary of Scory, relating in doggrel rhyme his 
 advancement in the church, up to Hereford, 
 
 “ Wheare he hathe by enemyes often and by false slanderous tongues 
 Had troubles greate without desert to his continental wronges.” 
 
 He died at the Palace of Whitbourn in 1584, and was interred in the church 
 of that place. As a sort of posthumous atonement for living extortions, he 
 bequeathed two hundred bushels of corn to the poor of Hereford, and two 
 hundred pounds as a stock to be lent to young tradesmen of Hereford, and a 
 like sum to those of Leominster. 
 
 Herbert Westfaling, D. D., of German parentage, was educated at 
 Christ Church, Oxford. As a proof of his fortitude and Christian faith, 
 it is related by Sir John Harington, that whilst preaching in the Cathedral, 
 a mass of frozen snow falling from the tower upon the roof of the church, 
 so frightened the congregation that they hastily endeavoured to escape; but 
 the preacher remained serene and fearless in his pulpit, and calmly exhorted 
 them to sit still and fear no harm. Queen Elizabeth named him a com¬ 
 missioner, with three other Oxonians, to destroy or deface all the “ copes, 
 vestments, albs, missals, books, crosses, and other such idolatrous monu¬ 
 ments of superstition in Christ Church.” Such silly and contemptible 
 orders, almost as absurd and disgusting as the ceremony of worshiping 
 relics, at once excite our pity and indignation. Westfaling is described by 
 Willis, as humane, charitable, and of very singular gravity. The revenues 
 of the church he devoted to works of piety and hospitality, and left his 
 paternal property to his family. He was buried in the north-east transept 
 of the Cathedral in March, 1601. 
 
 Robert Bennett, D. D. of Trinity College, Cambridge, was made Dean 
 of Windsor, and Bishop of this See by Queen Elizabeth. He presided here 
 from 1603 to 1617, and appears to have been involved in contention, if 
 
 57 Dugdale’s “ Monasticon Anglic.” edit. 1831, vol. vi. pt. iii. p. 1211. 
 
BISHOP BENNETT. - A. D. 1603-1617. 
 
 29 
 
 not litigation, with the Mayor and Aldermen of Hereford, respecting certain 
 rights and privileges of the See. In a letter, dated May 23, 1607, he accuses 
 them of having “ committed many prejudices to my liberties, and many 
 violences to my tenants ; you enter into my liberties, make attachments, do 
 executions, summon my tenants to your court, implead there at your pleasure, 
 cast them into prison, and lay irons upon them, and that for petty and small 
 matters. You have also imprisoned my bailiff, wherein I must tell you that 
 you have forgotten the lawes of the realm, trangressed your charter, and 
 violated my privileges, which are more ancient than your city.' 1 '’ He proceeds to 
 accuse them of refusing to pay their fees,—of denying his bailiff the custody 
 and keys of the bishop’s gates,—of putting a watch to oppose his watch,—of 
 denying the “ bells to be rung as customary time out of mind,”—of forcing 
 every poor man to become a “ sword-man.”—“ I know your charter and every 
 branch of it; and you have given me occasion to look into my own records. 
 And be assured that if there be strength in law, I will bring you back again 
 within the compass of your own rights.” He then demands full control and 
 authority for his bailiff at the fair, with the keys of the gates, &c. These are 
 strong charges, and imperious demands ; and not much calculated to sooth the 
 ruffled passions of man. Accordingly the ma}mr and aldermen reply, but with 
 some equivocation, flattery, and denial of the charges, intimating that some 
 artful and false person must have misrepresented facts, and expressing an 
 earnest desire to preserve peace and good-will, instead of having “ the fire of 
 dissension cast among us by your Lordship. We know nothing done not justi¬ 
 fiable by our charter,—for the delivery of the keys of our city or bearing the 
 watch ; we humbly pray a favourable construction of an absolute refusal.” 
 Disputes respecting rights, tolls, &c. had subsisted before, between the citizens 
 and former bishops. In the eighth year of Henry VIII. the mayor, Mr. Phillips, 
 “ demanded” the customs during St. Ethelbert’s fair of nine days, i. e. five 
 shillings to the king’s customer, one shilling for every porter, and sixpence for 
 every sergeant, which demand the bishop refused. The mayor and citizens 
 remonstrated,—attended the bishop’s audit, and claimed their legal duties, 
 but desired to guard against any “ grudge and anger that might grow 
 between them.” These disputes led to an investigation of the respective 
 
30 
 
 HEREFORD CATHEDRAL. 
 
 rights and powers of the bishop, and of the mayor, &c.; and it was proved, 
 that at the Norman Conquest, the bishop was not lord of the city, but that it 
 belonged to the king till the 6th of July, 1189, when Richard I. sold the 
 lordship for forty pounds to the citizens, or rather forth pounds a year, as that 
 sum was to be gathered by three of the bailiffs, one of which was the mayor, 
 one the King’s bailiff, and one called the customer. The last was to collect 
 the tolls and profits at the gates, fairs, markets, &c. King John granted the 
 citizens the privilege of Guild Merchants. Bishop Aquablanca summoned 
 them to answer for selling merchandize, i. e. wool, hides, &c. within their 
 houses, during the fair of the said Bishop. The citizens admitted that the 
 fair and all its profits belonged to the prelate, and that his bailiff ought to 
 come on the eve of the fair to the city bailiff, and take custody of the city. 
 The citizens afterwards granted the King’s pillory and tumbrell, both in fair 
 time and out, to do their executions, and ordered the Bishop’s pillory to be 
 taken down. The tenants, servants, &c. of the Bishop, Dean, &c. to be free 
 from city toll and all exactions. Other agreements and stipulations were entered 
 into between the clergy and laity of the city, but not sufficiently binding to 
 prevent disputes : for in a letter from the mayor to the Bishop’s bailiff he states 
 that the plea of the latter “ is untrue, and slanderously devised and contrived 
 by a busy man, to put the former to slander, unjust vexation, and expense ; 
 and particularly to stir discord and strife between the Bishop and the citizens.” 
 Sir John Harington describes Bennett, when at college, as an active man, who 
 played well at tennis, and could toss an argument in the schools even better 
 than a ball in the tennis court. This prelate bequeathed twenty pounds to the 
 Cathedral ; twenty pounds to Trinity College, Cambridge ; twenty pounds 
 towards finishing the schools at Oxford; twenty pounds to the poor of Baldock, 
 in Hertfordshire, his birth-place, &c. He died the 26th of October, 1617, 
 and was buried on the north side of the high altar, where a handsome marble 
 monument is standing to his memory. 
 
 Francis Godwin, D.D. was promoted from the See of Landaff to that of 
 Hereford in 1617. He is distinguished by his valuable “ Catalogue of the 
 Bishops of England,” which was first printed in Latin in 1601. In his own 
 account of himself under Landaff he says he was “ Subdean of Exeter, son 
 
BISHOP GODWIN. - A. D. 1617-1633. 
 
 31 
 
 of Thomas Godwin, sometimes Bishop of Bath and Wells, born at Hansington, 
 Northamptonshire; collected and writ the Catalogue of Bishops in 1600, 
 which now this year, 1614, he hath augmented.” An edition in English was 
 printed in 1605, forming a small quarto, but thick volume of seven hundred 
 pages. Another edition, in Latin, was published in 1616 ; and an enlarged 
 edition, with many additions, was published in a large folio volume by William 
 Richardson, 1743. This was printed under the title of “ De Praesulibus 
 Angliae Commentarius,” &c. Bishop Nicholson, in his valuable “ Historical 
 Library,” fob 1736, says that two English editions “ were equally full of the 
 author’s and printer’s mistakes. The faults of the latter edition were so very 
 gross that they put him upon the speedy despatch of another in Latin, the 
 style of which is neat and clear.” Both Nicholson, and Wharton in “ Anglia 
 Sacra,” accuse Godwin of quoting from authors without acknowledgment—of 
 being guilty of chronological mistakes—of reliance on counterfeit charters— 
 an uncertain calculation of years—and giving “ false and imperfect catalogues 
 in almost every diocess.” Warton indeed assures us that he made better pro¬ 
 gress in eighteen months than Godwin had done in twenty years. Peter Le 
 Neve, Thomas Baker, Fleetwood, Gough, &c. made many additions and cor¬ 
 rections to Godwin’s work, copies of most of whose notes are inserted in the 
 Catalogue in my possession. Godwin was also author of some other works ; 
 among which may be named The Life and Reign of Mary, Queen of England, 
 published in Rennet’s Collection, vol. ii.; The Man in the Moon, or a Dis¬ 
 course of a Voyage thither, by Domingo Gonzales, 8vo. 1638, several times 
 reprinted ; Annales Rerum Anglicarum Henrico VIII. Edwardo VI. et Maria 
 Regnantibus, fol. 1616, and 4to. 1628. This was translated by his son, Morgan 
 Godwin, and published in fob 1630 and 1676, under the title of Annals of 
 England. Browne Willis does not give a very favourable account of our 
 Bishop, saying “ he was a great symonist, nothing is reported to have fell in 
 his gift but what he sold or disposed of in regard to some son or daughter; but 
 this practice, I persume, had been so notorious in Queen Elizabeth’s time that 
 it occasioned her aversion to Bishops’ marriages,” &c. Besides the revenues 
 of the See he secured several church preferments. Willis states that he died 
 April, 1633, and was buried in the north transept of this Cathedral, where an 
 
32 
 
 HEREFORD CATHEDRAL. 
 
 effigy of a Bishop is shewn and ascribed to him ; but Duncumb says that he was 
 interred at Whitbourn, “ without any other memorial than his arms, with this 
 enigmatical inscription underneath, Win Godwin allT In the register at Whit¬ 
 bourn is an entry of his interment, “ Sepultus fuit vicessimo nono Aprilis , 1633.” 
 
 William Juxon, Dean of Worcester, was elected to Hereford, but 
 removed to London before consecration. 
 
 Augustine Lindsell, S.T.P. was advanced from Peterborough to this 
 See in 1633, but resided here not more than eleven months, when he died 
 suddenly in his library, and was buried in his Cathedral. (See History, &c. 
 of Peterborough Cathedral.) 
 
 Matthew Wren, D.D. presided here about one year only, when he was 
 translated to Norwich in 1635, and afterwards to Ely, where he died in 1667. 
 (See Bentham’s History of Ely Cathedral.) 
 
 Tiieopiiilus Field, D.D. succeeded Wren, being advanced from the See 
 of Saint David’s in December, 1635. He did not live to enjoy this promotion 
 more than six months, when he paid the debt of nature, and was interred 
 against the east wall of the north transept, where a bust and an inscription 
 commemorate his features and name. 
 
 George Coke, S.T.P. was translated from Bristol to this See on the death 
 of Field. He presided about ten years, and dying in 1646, was interred in 
 the south aile, near the vicar’s cloisters, where his effigy, with a long inscrip¬ 
 tion, remains. After fourteen years’ vacancy, in consequence of the civil 
 wars, the See was occupied by 
 
 Nicholas Monk, S.T.P. then Provost of Eton College, who was conse¬ 
 crated January 14, 1660. He never visited his diocess, but dying in Decem¬ 
 ber, 1661, was buried in St. Edmund’s Chapel, Westminster Abbey. (See 
 Brayley and Neale’s Westminster Abbey, vol. ii.) 
 
 Herbert Croft, S.T.P. was advanced from the Deanery to the Bishopric 
 in January, 1661-2. Willis, and Wood in “ Athenm Oxonienses,” give 
 a most pleasing account of the conduct and character of this prelate; and 
 praise him particularly for the scrupulous care and zeal he manifested in 
 selecting prebendaries from the clergy who resided within the diocess. 
 This proved highly beneficial, and preserved a sympathy and local interest 
 
 
BISHOPS IRONSIDE, HUMPHREYS, BISSE, AND HOADLEY.—A.D. 1691 - 1723 . 33 
 
 between the members of the church and the laity. He presided till May 18, 
 1691, when dying, he was interred within the communion rails, where a plain 
 slab covers his grave. 
 
 Gilbert Ironside, D. D. was translated from Bristol to this See on the 
 death of Bishop Croft, and died in London in 1701, where he was buried 
 in the Church of St. Mary le Strand. (See History, &c. of Bristol 
 Cathedral.) 
 
 Humphry Humphreys, D. D. a Welshman, was translated from Bangor 
 to Hereford in 1701, where he presided till November 20, 1712. In the 
 year 1704 he appears to have been engaged in controversy with the mayor 
 and corporation respecting the jurisdiction of the city over “the Cathedral 
 Church, the church yard, palace, and college of vicarswhen the deputy 
 steward wrote a long letter to the Bishop, endeavouring to shew that this 
 jurisdiction was vested in the city from the time of the foundation of the 
 Bishopric. He died in 1712, and was buried near the altar of the Cathedral. 
 A short memoir is given of this prelate in the Gentleman’s Magazine, 
 December, 1826, by Dr. Meyrick ; and a notice of him appears in Wood’s 
 Athen. Oxon edit. 1820, col. 895, where he is described “as excellently 
 versed in antiquities.” 
 
 Philip Bisse, D. D. was a liberal but not a very tasteful benefactor to the 
 Cathedral, having erected the present ponderous, gloomy, and inappropriate 
 altar screen. It is related that he expended nearly three thousand pounds 
 in repairs and improvements of the palace. Dying at Hereford, September 6, 
 1721, he was buried near the altar of the Cathedral, where a massive and 
 ostentatious monument is raised to his memory. 
 
 Benjamin Hoadley, D. D. who succeeded Bishop Bisse, and presided 
 here from 1721 to 1723, is distinguished in the literary, polemical, and 
 political annals of his time as a man of great abilities and sound principles. 
 He was soon promoted to Salisbury, and thence advanced to Winchester, 
 in the accounts of both of which Cathedrals I have had occasion to record 
 some particulars of this eminent prelate. In consequence of espousing 
 opinions too liberal and benevolent for the age, he was violently and 
 vindictively opposed by those who could not bear the sunshine of true 
 
 F 
 
34 
 
 HEREFORD CATHEDRAL. 
 
 philosophy and good sense. According to his own language, “ fury seemed 
 to be let loose upon him.” An account of his life, with a list of his literary 
 works, is inserted in the supplement to the “ Biographia Britannica.” 
 
 Henry Egerton, D. D. fifth son of the third Earl of Bridgewater, was 
 promoted to this See in 1724, and presided over it twenty-two years. The 
 only memorable event connected with his character and prelacy was the 
 demolition of a very curious ancient chapel connected with the palace, which 
 the Bishop and some of the chapter pronounced to be ruinous and useless. 
 After expending above fifty pounds in taking down the venerable and 
 interesting building, they relinquished for a time their silly and useless task : 
 whereas the sum of about twenty pounds, properly employed, would have 
 been sufficient to uphold and preserve it. By direction of the Society of 
 Antiquaries of London, a plan, and an elevation of the front of it were drawn 
 and engraved, but not sufficiently well executed to furnish an accurate repre¬ 
 sentation of its architectural peculiarities. In Gough’s edition of Camden’s 
 Britannia, vol. ii. the same prints are badly copied. In an account from 
 Hereford, dated September, 1737, it is stated that “ they are pulling down 
 the venerable Gothic chapel belonging to the Bishop’s palace, in order to 
 erect a more polite and neat pile in the present taste.” It is related that the 
 entrance door-way was semi-circular, with at least ten receding mouldings, 
 springing from as many columns, on each side ; and if so, it must have sur¬ 
 passed the noble south porch of Malmesbury Abbey Church. The building 
 was nearly square, with an arched roof, sustained on two pillars, and covered 
 with stone, similar to some early buildings in Normandy. 
 
 The Ho n. and Rev. Lord James Beauclerk, eighth son of the Duke 
 of St. Alban’s, who was a natural son of Charles II. by Eleanor Gwynn, was 
 advanced to this See June 26, 1746, and presided here for the unusual 
 space of forty-one years. He is described as resembling his grandfather in 
 person, and as being very affable in manners ; but though he reigned over 
 his provincial diocess so long, we do not hear of any great or good works 
 that he performed, excepting the publication of a letter to his clergy. Dying 
 in October, 1787, in the seventy-seventh year of his age, he was interred in 
 the Cathedral, near the altar, where a marble slab covers his grave. 
 
BISHOPS HARLEY, BUTLER, CORNEWALL, ETC. — A. D. 1787 - 1831 . 35 
 
 The Hon. and Rev. John Harley, D. D. third son of Edward Harley, 
 third Earl of Oxford, was next advanced from the deanery of Windsor to 
 this See, and died in six weeks after his consecration. 
 
 John Butler, D. D. a native of Hamburgh, was a popular preacher in 
 London, an able political writer, and an effective assistant to Lord North and 
 his administration, in vindicating the unwise and impolitic American war. He 
 was consequently soon and handsomely rewarded by church preferments. In 
 1777 he was promoted to the See of Oxford, although he had never taken 
 a degree in either of the English Universities. Hence he was not very 
 cordially received in that city: but in 1788 lie was translated to Hereford, 
 where he presided till his death, in 1802. During his prelacy he built the 
 present Chapel of the palace, and liberally contributed towards the rebuilding 
 the west end of the Cathedral Church. 
 
 Folliott Herbert Walker Cornewall, D. D. a fellow of St.John’s 
 College, Cambridge, and Dean of Canterbury, was advanced to the See 
 of Bristol in 1797, and thence translated to Hereford in 1803, where he 
 remained only five years, when he was advanced to Worcester, over which 
 diocess his lordship continues to preside. 
 
 John Luxmore, D. D. was made Dean of Gloucester in 1800, Bishop of 
 Bristol in 1807, and thence translated to Hereford in 1808. Here his lord- 
 ship presided till 1815, when he was removed to St. Asaph. During his stay 
 here, his lordship was actively and honourably employed in promoting the 
 establishment of national schools in the Diocess. 
 
 George Isaac Huntingford, D. D. the present much respected and 
 venerable Bishop of Hereford, was translated from Gloucester to this See in 
 1815. He was made Warden of Winchester College in 1789, and by the 
 statutes of that College is obliged to reside there the greater part of the 
 year, whereby Hereford is deprived of the advantage of the good prelate’s 
 long continued presence. Bishop Huntingford is author of several classical 
 and religious works, of a learned and useful character; a list of which is 
 printed in Watts’s “ Bibliotheca Britannica.” 
 
36 
 
 HEREFORD CATHEDRAL. 
 
 CHAP. II. 
 
 HISTORICAL AND DESCRIPTIVE ACCOUNT OF THE CATHEDRAL CHURCH, 
 WITH REFERENCES TO THE ACCOMPANYING ENGRAVINGS. 
 
 The Cathedral Church of Hereford is one of those truly interesting edifices 
 of the olden times, which exhibits in its present features, and involves in its 
 associations, many facts and considerations of deep import in the history of 
 Christian Architecture, and in the annals of the country. If, by comparison, 
 it be not equal to the metropolitan churches of York and Canterbury, or the 
 grand minsters of Lincoln, Durham, or Wells, we shall find that it presents 
 some architectural parts and designs very different from any thing in either of 
 those justly famed buildings. It furnishes some links in the history of 
 architecture; and contains singularities which cannot fail to arrest the 
 attention and excite the curiosity of the antiquary. In the fall and rebuilding 
 of the western end, in recent times, it affords subject for speculation and 
 comment to the architectural critic. Browne Willis notices it as containing 
 more monuments to Bishops, Deans, &c. than any other English cathedral, 
 some of which are certainly peculiar in situation, forms, and adornment. 
 
 Whatever may have been the primary style, design, and character of the 
 building, or whether it was ever completed in one style, and according to 
 one design, it is now impossible to ascertain and exemplify. At present it 
 presents a variety of heterogeneous and discordant parts ; some of which 
 are old, and of uncontaminated Anglo-Norman design and workmanship; but 
 it will not be easy to prove any part to be truly Saxonic. It contains some 
 specimens of the lancet, or first pointed style, another part of almost unique 
 character with triangular arches, &c. ; and we also trace the second and 
 third grades, or eras, of the pointed class of architecture. In the monu¬ 
 mental chapels of Bishops Stanbury and Audley, we see a florid character 
 of decoration, as also in another specimen of elaborate execution in the 
 
DESCRIPTION OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 37 
 
 north porch, raised by Bishop Booth. The organ and altar screens, with 
 the new western end, and other additions and repairs made by the late 
 
 Mr. James Wyatt, are so many sad defects, and tasteless members of 
 
 the edifice, which cannot fail to give painful sensations to the critical 
 
 architectural antiquary. Whilst the genuine works of the Catholic builders 
 
 manifest consummate science, and untrammeled fancy, most of the modern 
 works, by provincial carpenters and masons, or professional architects, are 
 inappropriate and discordant, insipid and offensive. Some writers, however, 
 have vindicated and praised them ; but the late Mr. John Carter, and 
 Mr. Gough, in the Gentleman’s Magazine, and one or two other real lovers 
 of art, have properly and severely reprobated them. 
 
 Aided by the series of engraved plans, elevations, sections, and views of 
 the building which accompany these pages, I hope to furnish the reader 
 with such representations of its better parts as will enable him to understand 
 and appreciate the whole, as well as the details. The modern works are not 
 otherwise shewn in these engravings than in the Ground Plan, Plate i. 
 which marks that of the west end at b, and the organ screen, separating 
 the nave from the choir. By this plan, the arrangement, extent, and 
 subdivisions of the whole edifice are indicated, as they appear on the 
 ground. Walls, pillars, buttresses, door-ways, and windows, as well as the 
 open or covered areas between the walls, are thus shewn. The darkest 
 colour is intended to represent the oldest part of the edifice, whilst later and 
 subordinate portions are marked by lighter tints. As intimated by this plan, 
 the whole Church consists of a north double porch, a and b ; a nave, e, with 
 its two ailes, c and d ; a south transept, f, and north, g, with an aile to the 
 east, j ; a space beneath the central tower, forming part of the choir, h ; a 
 north aile, k, a south one, m ; a chancel, or altar end, at l ; a north east 
 transept at n, consisting of two ailes of equal height and character, and 
 another to the south, at p; a space behind the altar, forming a sort of 
 vestibule to the Lady Chapel, at o ; whilst q and r show the extent and 
 form of the Lady Chapel; at s is a chantry, or monumental chapel for 
 Bishop Audley ; T is an entrance porch, covering an exterior flight of steps 
 to the crypt beneath the Lady Chapel, a plan of which is represented at u; at 
 
38 
 
 HEREFORD CATHEDRAL. 
 
 v and w are very old parts of the building appropriated to the modern vestry, 
 &c. ; x is the cloister, commonly called the Bishop’s cloister, to distinguish 
 it from another, at i and j, connected with the vicar’s college, k and 1. At z 
 is the site of the western walk of the cloister, which was taken down about 
 1760, and a large pile of brick building, of most unsightly and unmeaning 
 character, raised in its stead, and appropriated to the Grammar School, and 
 to the triennial meeting of the three choirs. 1 The small letters in the Plan 
 refer to subordinate parts of the Cathedral, whilst the figures point out the 
 most material monuments, and which will be noticed in subsequent pages 
 of this volume.—a, original western entrance, which consisted of an Anglo- 
 Norman semicircular arched door-way, with several mouldings, and at least 
 four columns on each side. There were two small lateral door-ways to 
 the ailes. b, modern central western entrance, with two small door-ways to 
 the ailes; c, font; d, vestibule from the cloister to the Chapter House , 
 which has been taken down, excepting the lower part of the wall at e, 
 marked dark. The form of this Chapter House is indicated by dotted lines, 
 as also the groining of its roof, which was supported by a clustered column in 
 the centre; f, stair-case in a circular tower at the eastern angle of the north 
 transept; g, entrance to Bishop Stanbury’s chapel; h, open area; i, j, k, 
 and 1, have been already noticed ; m, stairs to a room over the inner north 
 porch ; n, stairs to the roof of the north transept, tower, See. ; o, a buttress, 
 having a door-way in it, the lintel of which has an inscription and shields of 
 arms belonging to Bishop Booth ; p, stairs in the angular turretted buttress to 
 a room over Bishop Booth’s porch ; q q, plan of one of the mullions, or piers, 
 with several shafts attached, between two windows on the north side of the 
 Lady Chapel, an elevation of which is given in Plate viit. ; rrr, plan of a 
 clustered column in the north transept, also profile of the base mouldings ; 
 s s, plan of pier, or mullion, between the windows at the east end of the 
 Lady Chapel, with the detached clustered column. See the elevation, 
 section, &c. of the same in Plate viii. d.—Such are the divisions and parts 
 
 1 In the “ History, &c. of Worcester Cathedral,” will be found a short account of the origin 
 and intention of the “ three choirs as constituting a part of the history of the Cathedrals of 
 Gloucester, Hereford, and Worcester. 
 
HISTORY, DATES, AND STYLES OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 39 
 
 intimated by the Plan, excepting the small figures, which are placed near 
 the monuments of persons of some note: these will be separately referred to 
 after a few remarks are made respecting the ages, &c. of different portions of 
 the building. 
 
 The history of an ancient edifice, consisting, as that of Hereford does, of 
 several parts, and those of distinct and distant eras of execution, and more 
 especially where contemporary records are wanting, can never be clearly 
 and satisfactorily elucidated. Hence persons of different sentiments, and of 
 varied degrees of information, will be likely to form different opinions, and 
 hence also theories will be substituted for facts. Many minds, indeed, 
 delight more in theory than in genuine history, because the one is self-created, 
 and the other springs from ratiocination and deep investigation. When we 
 reflect on the very imperfect and slight information that has been transmitted 
 to us respecting the extent and characteristic features of the churches that 
 have successively been built, or altered, at Hereford, it is not surprising that 
 contradictory inferences have been drawn by those who have directed their 
 attention to the subject, or that we should still be left in doubt and darkness. 
 The previous pages contain some notices respecting the first planting of a See 
 at Hereford, and of its successive Prelates, with allusions to the churches that 
 were built as the head of the diocess. 
 
 The dates and styles of the different parts of the present edifice are 
 proper subjects of inquiry for the architectural antiquary, as they constitute 
 material points in its history; but deprived of documental evidence, he 
 proceeds without proof, and can never arrive at demonstration. Whilst 
 one writer contends that a large part of it is of the Anglo-Saxon age, others 
 will not allow any portion to be anterior to the Norman conquest. If we 
 cannot settle this difference of opinion, we may briefly notice the eras when 
 new works are said to have been commenced, or were in progress, and then 
 endeavour to ascertain whether such dates are likely to exemplify the parts 
 of the building to which they respectively refer. Although Bishop Putta is 
 said to have been seated here as early as a.d. 676, there is not any account 
 of a Cathedral having been raised before 825, when, it is generally agreed, 
 that Milfred, a Viceroy to Egbert, King of Mercia, constructed a new 
 
40 
 
 HEREFORD CATHEDRAL. 
 
 building for that express purpose. The extent, materials, and architectural 
 character of that Church are not known; though one of the old chroniclers 
 calls it “ lapidea structural (See ante, p. 4.) It appears, however, that in 
 less than two centuries afterwards it was so much decayed, or dilapidated, 
 that Bishop Athelstan, who was promoted to the See in 1012, commenced 
 an entirely new edifice: but the style and nature of that are not more 
 defined by the chroniclers than those of the former Church. Very shortly 
 afterwards the Welsh, under Algar, Earl of Chester, and Griffin, King or 
 Prince of Wales, besieged the city of Hereford, “burnt it utterly, and the 
 large Minster also, which the worthy Bishop Athelstan had caused to be 
 built.” This is the account of the Saxon Chronicle (see ante, p. 5); and 
 the Chronicles of Mailros, of Simon of Durham, and of Roger Hovedon 
 concur, with trifling variations, in the same statement. As the corpse of 
 Athelstan was interred, in February, 1055, in the Church which he had 
 “ built from the foundations,” it may be inferred that the edifice was 
 not wholly destroyed by the Welsh : but how much, and what remained, 
 when Lozing was promoted to the See by the new Norman king, is not 
 defined by any historian. It is said to have remained in ruins from 1055 till 
 the year 1079. Following the fashion of the times, and in the spirit of other 
 Norman Bishops, Lozing soon commenced rebuilding the Cathedral and 
 it is related that he directed it to be raised in imitation of a famed church 
 which had been built by Charlemagne, at Aix-la-Chapelle, between 774 and 
 795. 2 3 This, however, is one of the traditions which can neither be confirmed 
 nor confuted ; though when we know that the church referred to was partly 
 made up of genuine Roman columns and other materials conveyed from 
 Rome and Ravenna, we are not disposed to place much credit in the story. 
 Besides, the architecture of Lozing’s Choir, &c. is quite in unison with the 
 prevalent works of his own age, and has little similarity to those of the 
 
 2 Bishops Walkelyn, at Winchester, Gundulph, at Rochester, Lozing, at Norwich, Carilepho, 
 at Durham, all Normans, built large and fine churches at their respective Sees. 
 
 3 See Gunn’s “Inquiry,” p. 90; Whittington’s “Historical Survey,” p. 32; and Paulus 
 iEmylius’s “ Life of Charlemagne.” In Hearne and Byrne’s “ Antiquities,” Lozing is said to 
 have copied from a work of the Emperor Charles V. who lived some centuries after the Bishop !! 
 
DATES OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 41 
 
 Romans, or the Italians of the eighth century. How far he proceeded with 
 his building we are not informed ; but Bishop Raynelm, who presided here 
 from 1107 to 1115, is reported to have completed the new Church. If, 
 however, that prelate did finish it, many additions and alterations have been 
 subsequently made by other Bishops. The part behind the altar was most 
 likely by De Vere, between 1186 and 1199 ; the Lady Chapel and its crypt, 
 about 1200 ; the central tower, by De Breuse, between 1200 and 1215 ; the 
 north transept by Cantelupe, or soon after his decease; about which time 
 the chapter house, and part of the cloisters were erected ; the ailes of the 
 nave and choir, and the eastern transept, the chantry chapels of Stanbury 
 and Audley, and lastly, the exterior portion of the north porch, by Bishop 
 Booth : all these constitute so many distinct features and classes of archi¬ 
 tecture in the Church, and it would be gratifying to ascertain the times 
 when, and persons by whom, they were respectively erected. 
 
 The Rev. Thomas Garbett published a small volume, in 1827, entitled 
 “ A brief Inquiry into the ancient and present State of Hereford Cathedral,’' 
 in which he says, “ there is the best reason for believing that the arches of 
 the choir, the east wall of the south transept, with its side aisle* also the 
 arches which communicate between the side aisles of the choir and nave, and 
 the great transept, are the remains of Athelstan’s Church; whilst the arcade 
 of the choir, the arches beneath the central tower (but not the piers), with 
 the whole of the Saxon work westward, are the additions of Lozing and 
 Raynelm; these prelates having repaired rather than rebuilt the Church.” 
 In another page the learned antiquary says, “ I must persist in regarding 
 Athelstan as the founder of the present Church.” It is rather a curious 
 circumstance that Mr. Wm. Garbett, the well informed and skilful architect 
 
 4 Surely Mr. Garbett must err in calling the passage, or corridor, on the east side of the 
 south transept, an aile. According to my plan and examination there were no open arches 
 between the two; and I consider that to be essential in constitute an aile. With all deference 
 to my learned friend, I also think the word side unnecessary in conjunction with aile. Again, 
 how does Mr. G. reconcile himself to the term “ Saxon work” applied to the architecture 
 of Lozing’s time ? If this gentleman’s writings and opinions were not regarded by me as superior 
 in accuracy and technicality to the generality of our architectural critics, I should not make 
 these remarks, and with all deference, now submit them for his candid reconsideration. 
 
42 
 
 HEREFORD CATHEDRAL. 
 
 of Winchester, published a similar opinion respecting certain parts of the 
 venerable Cathedral of that city; 5 and I could not coincide with him then, 
 nor with the Rev. Mr. Garbett now, in their opinions. Still I am aware that 
 both these gentlemen have diligently studied the subject, and have most care¬ 
 fully examined their respective churches ; I also admit that the architectural 
 parts alluded to by each as being Saxon are of inferior masonry, and plainer 
 and less adorned than the other divisions of the churches which are admitted 
 to be truly Norman. With such persons, and with such arguments as they 
 adduce, I most reluctantly, and even with some degree of self suspicion, 
 differ. Still I own that I cannot adduce proofs ; and therefore have merely 
 to urge my own opinion against theirs. It is, however, founded on a very 
 extensive, and I may say a fastidious examination of numerous churches in 
 this country, with the histories of each, and also a diligent study of the 
 history and characteristics of ancient churches at Caen, and other parts of 
 Normandy. 6 It would occupy too much of the present work to enter fully 
 into the argument, in order to substantiate or justify my opinion, and must 
 therefore refer the reader, who may be curious on the subject, to the volume 
 on Winchester Cathedral already noticed. 
 
 By an examination of the accompanying engravings, and a more particular 
 description of some of the parts referred to, we shall become more familiar 
 with their characteristic details, and be thus enabled, perhaps, to develope 
 something of their history. 
 
 The principal exterior architectural forms and features of the building 
 are represented in Plate ii. iij. vi. and vn. in all of which the central tower 
 is shewn. In Plate x. one compartment of the choir and aile, with Bishop 
 Stanbury’s chapel, is delineated, in elevation. 
 
 Plate ii. view of the Church from the north-west, displays four windows 
 and four buttresses, with the parapet of the north aile of the nave, also the 
 
 5 A long letter of Mr. Garbett’s is published in my “ History, fyc. of Winchester Cathedral ,” 
 and I refer to it with great satisfaction as containing much valuable information respecting the 
 ages and styles of different parts of that most interesting church. 
 
 6 For accounts and illustrations of the architecture of these churches, the reader is referred to 
 the “ Architectural Antiquities of Normandy,” by A. Pugin and J. Britton, 2 vols. 4to. 1828. 
 
EXTERIOR OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 43 
 
 clerestory of the latter, which, with its parapet, roof, and buttresses, were 
 nearly all rebuilt after the fall of the west end : the north porch consisting of 
 two parts of different styles and dates. The exterior porch is represented 
 to a larger scale in Plate iii., which displays its front entrance archway with 
 highly enriched spandrils, and two lateral octagonal stair-case turrets, at the 
 angles. These have glazed windows in the upper portions, forming a sort 
 of lanthorn to each. This exterior porch, built by Bishop Booth, and 
 bearing his name, consists of two stories, the lower of which exhibits four 
 wide arches, springing from four piers at the extreme angles, two of which 
 are united with the stair-case turrets, the others with the ends of the old 
 porch. Its upper story, containing an apartment, is sustained on a vaulted 
 and groined roof, and has three large windows, with elaborate tracery. The 
 north transept is externally shewn in Plates ii. iii. and vi. in which the large 
 buttresses, with bevelled angles, tall windows without transoms, and rising 
 nearly the whole height of the building, are conspicuous and characteristic 
 features. In Plate vi. the eastern side of this transept is represented, to 
 which there is an aile, and there is a remarkable architectural circumstance 
 on this side, viz. the windows of the triforium have semicircular arched 
 mouldings, enclosing a window of three lights of lancet shaped arches. 
 Beneath the aile window is a pointed arched door-way, which was probably 
 an original approach to the shrine of Cantelupe. In the angle is a stair-case 
 turret, which is circular at the bottom and polygonal above: and this 
 probably was an access to a private apartment for a monk over the aile of 
 the transept, containing the sainted shrine. The central tower , from this 
 point, is displayed in all its massive proportions, and with its profusion of 
 bead or bulb ornaments. In the present view the angular pinnacles of the 
 parapet are not shewn, but in Plate xi. the lower parts of two of them are 
 delineated, and again in Plate xiv. their general design and forms are 
 represented. When the great repairs and rebuilding of the west end were 
 made, there was a timber and leaded spire placed on the tower, but this was 
 taken down, and a stunted, squat appearance was thus given to the building. 
 In the year 1830 Canon Russell presented a sum of money to the Dean and 
 Chapter to build four appropriate pinnacles at the angles, which if well 
 
 g 2 
 
44 
 
 HEREFORD CATHEDRAL. 
 
 executed will improve the appearance of the tower. The interior character of 
 this tower, the thickness and openings in its walls, the arched flooring of the 
 belfry, &c. are delineated in Plate xi. The original pitch of the roofs of 
 the choir and north aile is indicated in Plate vi. ; that of the nave was 
 formerly of the same height. On that Plate the dressed or panelled parapet 
 of the eastern side of the transept, as originally executed, is also shewn, and 
 makes the modern one to the choir look very poor and insipid. 
 
 In Plate x. is an elevation of one compartment of the exterior of the 
 choir on the north side, shewing two buttresses of the north east transept, 
 part of the Stanbury chapel, a window, parapet and roof of the aile, a 
 clerestory window, with arcade dressings to the wall, and the modern 
 parapet above the whole. The style of architecture in the arcade and 
 window, and also the blank window, or double arch, with two smaller 
 arches within the wall of the clerestory, with the ribbed roof rising above 
 the Norman triforium, claim the particular notice of the antiquary. 
 
 Plate vii. shews the exterior style and architectural features of the east 
 end of the Lady Chapel, with its bold angular buttresses, rising from 
 immense bases, like the frustra of pyramids. The numerous and large base 
 mouldings running round the wall of this building, its tall lancet shaped 
 windows, arcades, and ovolar and lozenge shaped pannels, are so many 
 peculiarities of design in this chapel, which cannot fail of attracting the 
 attention and admiration of the architectural antiquary. On the south side 
 projects the Audley chapel, which has been already referred to. The 
 angular, embattled parapet, at the end, is a clumsy piece of modern 
 masonry. 
 
 The south side of the Church is almost excluded from the examination of 
 the public, being enclosed within the walls of a garden between the Bishop’s 
 and the Vicar’s cloisters, and the enclosed area of the former. 
 
 The Interior architectural features and arrangement of the Church are 
 delineated in the accompanying prints, i.—iv.—v.—vm.—ix.— xi. —xii. 
 xin. and xvi. The plan, Plate i. has been already noticed. Plate iv. is 
 an interesting and faithful display of the nave and its ailes, as seen from the 
 south-west angle, after the greater part of the fallen materials had been 
 
INTERIOR OF THE CHURCH :-WEST END. 
 
 45 
 
 taken away in the year 1786. My once much esteemed friend and country¬ 
 man, Mr. Hearne, was at Hereford in that year, and with his usual taste 
 and accuracy made the drawing from which the annexed engraving has 
 been copied. It becomes peculiarly valuable in the estimation of the 
 architectural antiquary, from shewing the style and character of the triforium, 
 the clerestory, with its thick wall pierced with a corridor, or passage, its 
 vaulted and ribbed roof, and its ailes, all of which were rebuilt, in a very 
 different, and I must add a very indifferent, style from the designs of the late 
 Mr. James Wyatt, who has unfortunately left other specimens of ill applied 
 and ill designed works in the Cathedrals of Salisbury, Lichfield, and 
 Durham. Without noticing any of the other places, or even referring to 
 the designs of Fonthill Abbey, and the castellated palace at Kew, one in 
 ruins and the other fortunately since taken down, the designs at Hereford 
 are sufficient to impeach the taste or judgment of an architect who could 
 make and recommend them to join to, or combine with, the bold, broad, 
 substantial Norman work of the original nave. That front, however, is not 
 the only or the worst part of the design, but the triforium and clerestory of 
 the nave have pointed arches, with their flimsy columns, poor, mean 
 mouldings, and all the dressings equally insipid, and wholly discordant to 
 the original work. I could no more reconcile myself to have a drawing 
 and engraving made of any part of such building (I will not miscal it 
 architecture) than I could re-engrave any of Batty Langley’s “ Gothic,” or 
 the u Bricklayer s Gothic ” of the present day, which Church Commissioners 
 unfortunately and heedlessly encourage. If a very great saving had been made 
 by adopting the light, pointed style, which Mr. Wyatt designed, both the 
 architect and the Chapter might have partly justified themselves; but when it 
 is notorious that the whole restoration, in conformity to the old work, might 
 have been executed at a less sum than was expended on the present, we can 
 neither palliate nor forgive the tasteless novelties which have been executed. 
 If my respected friend Mr. Garbett reprobates this language as wanting in 
 “ discrimination, and as the effect of prejudice’’ (see p. 20 of his Inquiry), I 
 must tell him that I have here, as upon most other occasions of a controverted 
 nature, and where the subject of architectural design is referable to any 
 
46 
 
 HEREFORD CATHEDRAL. 
 
 maxims of taste, science, or archaeology, endeavoured to analyse and criticise 
 my own opinions before I have committed them to paper. That the clergy 
 knew nothing respecting the dates, styles, and marked features of the 
 circular and pointed architecture of the monastic ages, is readily admitted, 
 and unfortunately the architect was not much better informed ; for there were 
 then no correct publications on the subject, and architects and antiquaries 
 had not studied it. Fortunately we live in an age when more correct ideas 
 are prevalent, and when the eyes of the public are opened to better principles. 
 At York, at Winchester, at Peterborough, &c. repairs and alterations have 
 been made in a style and manner, if not wholly unexceptionable, at least 
 commendable. The fall of the western end of Hereford Cathedral is the 
 most remarkable event of modern times in the history of English Cathedrals ; 
 whilst the rebuilding of it, we cannot say restoration, is as remarkable for 
 its inconsistent and discordant character. Inigo Jones built a Roman 
 screen, or portico, to the west front of old St. Paul’s, and Sir Christopher 
 Wren built two towers at the west end of the Abbey Church at Westminster, 
 both of which have been justly reprobated by all discriminating critics of the 
 present age. It is equally due to the canons of good taste and Christian 
 architecture to protest against such designs and works as those executed at 
 Hereford, between the years 1786 and 1796, for the work w 7 as more than 
 ten years in progress. 7 Mr. Gough, in a letter to the Gentleman’s Magazine, 
 
 7 It is not, perhaps, possible to specify the expenses attending' these alterations ; but it is 
 stated, in a local publication, that they “ amounted to nearly £13,000 ; and about £2000 more 
 at the same time were appropriated to the general repairs of the central tower and other parts of 
 the fabric: of these sums about £2000 were subscribed by the Bishop, Dean and Chapter, and 
 other members of the Cathedral; £5000 by the nobility, gentry, and clergy of the Diocess, and 
 the Bishops and Chapters of other dioceses; and the remaining £8000 were charged upon the 
 estates of the Church.”—“ Hereford Guide,” edit. 1827, p. 140. The new works and alterations 
 then made are thus specified in the same volume :—“ The total rebuilding of the west front 
 without a tower, the foundations of which were removed fifteen feet inward, and the nave 
 consequently was as much shortened ; the arcades and clerestory windows in the upper part of 
 the nave, altered from the circular to the pointed form ; the vaulting of the nave renewed ; the 
 roofs of the nave, choir, and transepts flattened; the spire taken down from the central tower; 
 the battlements raised somewhat higher, and pinnacles with crockets placed at the angles.” At 
 the same time the Cathedral yard was levelled. In the year 1793 the Dean and Chapter 
 
MR. WYATTS NEW WORKS, ETC. 
 
 47 
 
 1790 , indignant at the proceedings at Hereford, says, “ it is partly through 
 the neglect of the Chapters, and partly by the ill management of the 
 architects they employ, that they (the Cathedrals) are falling about our ears. 
 The lives of sixteen men were placed in danger, and some were killed by 
 the negligence of the influential persons in placing the scaffolding within the 
 nave. Even Mr. Garbett, who is disposed not only to justify but applaud 
 most of the new works in the nave, &c., admits that the “ doors and niches 
 of the west front are poor in themselves, and strikingly at variance with the 
 rest, as to offend at first view ; and to excite, from their prominent situation, 
 a prejudice against the whole fabric. Nor is this partial deviation in style 
 the only thing to be lamented. The foundation (the church) itself has been 
 so much abridged, that of the four arches which perished with the tower, two 
 only have been rebuilt, and those without the least decorative feature. A 
 change also took place in the interior, for which no reason has been assigned ; 
 and which merits unqualified condemnation, viz. raising the pavement so as 
 to conceal the square basement of the pillars, and consequently to diminish 
 the height both of the nave and side aisles. The choir was originally 
 approached by a flight of steps ; but these are now done away.” The 
 accompanying engraving shews the original style and finishing of the arches 
 and columns of the nave, the triforium, above, and the clerestory still higher, 
 though it seems that the last may have had its windows inserted subsequent 
 to the first building. The arched roof is also evidently of later architecture 
 than the lower arches, as are the walls, windows, &c. of the ailes. 
 
 The architecture of the original Choir is illustrated by Plate x. where 
 
 appealed to the public, in the Hereford Journal, &c. for additional aid, stating that they had 
 expended all the moneys raised, “ the income of their fabric estates, and the further sum of 
 £4000 raised upon their other estates, to the restoration of the necessary parts of their ancient 
 fabric, that there is still required to complete that object £3000, which must remain a charge 
 on the Dean and Chapter.” They then call for another subscription, to enable them to make a 
 finishing to the central tower, in place of the destroyed spire, and say that it is estimated at 
 £1000, towards which they had subscribed among themselves £547. The remaining sum does 
 not appear to have come in, for the works then executed did not appear to have satisfied many of 
 the former subscribers. Mr. Duncumb states that “ an expenditure of nearly £20,000 has 
 proved very inadequate to the restoration,” Collections for Herefordshire, &c. vol. i. p. 529. 
 
48 
 
 HEREFORD CATHEDRAL. 
 
 we recognize the style of its strong semicircular arches, between immense 
 piers; also its triforium, of corresponding design, and its clerestory of the 
 first pointed character. There were three of these compartments on each 
 side of the choir, but they are all either partially or wholly filled up by 
 screens, monuments, or walling, and hence the true effect of this part of 
 Lozing’s work is scarcely to be distinguished. This division of the building, 
 including the lofty semicircular arches under the tower, and the arch or 
 arches which originally opened to the Lady Chapel, must have exhibited a 
 fine and solemn example of true Norman architecture. It is also probable 
 that the Lady Chapel, of Lozing’s time, if finished, was terminated semi- 
 circularly, in accordance with the fashion of the age. We may safely infer 
 that the ailes of the choir were executed in a corresponding style, as the 
 terminating arches of the ailes, both to the west and to the east, are precisely 
 like those of the choir. In Plate xiii. one of these arches is shewn, and 
 also the soffit, mouldings, and capitals of the south eastern arch of the choir, 
 as seen in the aile. These prints represent the mouldings round the arch on 
 the choir and aile sides as different in their details, the latter having merely 
 a sort of bead, or torus, whilst the former has several torus and zigzag 
 mouldings. In the triforium, the mouldings, as well as the filling up of the 
 arch and the capitals, are variously enriched with Norman decorations. 
 “ The clerestory range of the choir,” says Mr. Garbett, p. 35, “ consists of an 
 inner and an outer wall, forming an avenue that, prior to the insertion of the 
 great east window, was continued round the extremity. The inner wall is 
 separated by piers into three compartments; each compartment contains 
 two low trefoil arches on the sides, and a high pointed arch in the centre, 
 which is subdivided by a tall clustered column, branching off in the head, 
 and forming two lesser arches. Each pier, which with the arches and 
 arcades is Sa.von, 8 is surmounted by two gothic pediments; and from 
 
 8 The application of the term Saxon to architecture admitted to be executed by the Normans 
 is calculated to mislead the young and uninitiated reader. It may as well be called Roman. A 
 discriminating and critical writer, as Mr. Garbett shews himself in most parts of his clever 
 little volume to be, should be more precise in his language. This gentleman recommends, very 
 urgently, that the choir be enlarged, by taking away the present clumsy altar screen, opening and 
 
TOWER AND TRANSEPT. 
 
 49 
 
 between these pediments rises a small clustered column, sustaining the stone 
 vaulting, the groins of which are the same in disposition and number with 
 those of the Lady Chapel.” 
 
 As indicated in the Ground Plan, the arches under the north and south 
 sides of the tower are propped up by square piers at the centre of each, 
 and pieces of masonry, built up against the old piers. The architect, or 
 builder, probably considered some support of this kind to be necessary to 
 sustain the superincumbent weight of the tower ; but nothing can be more 
 unsightly and unarchitectural in its character and effect. It is clumsy, 
 tasteless, and bad. If the arches were in danger, why not have constructed 
 screens, similar to those at Salisbury (see View in my Cathedral Antiquities, 
 Salisbury), or as at Canterbury; or with inverted arches, as at Wells. 
 “ Of all plans,” says Mr. Garbett, “ which a country mason could have 
 selected out of numerous blunders, this central pillar is, perhaps, the worst, 
 whether we respect its utter destitution of character, its glaring obtrusiveness, 
 its acknowledged inutility, nay, its tendency to impair the fabric, by exciting 
 a reaction, and forcing out of the perpendicular the clerestory range of the 
 choir. Nor is this all; for of the four circular arches which communicate 
 between the side ailes of the choir and nave and the transept, one only 
 remains in its original state, the other three having been blocked up, leaving 
 only a small passage way in each ; the adjoining arch on either side the choir 
 has shared the same fate; and as to the arches above, the present surface of 
 the wall exhibits not a trace of the rich work which lies concealed behind 
 it.” (p. 61.) 
 
 Of the Transept, we see by the dark colour of the Ground Plan that 
 parts of the wall are old, and part of a lighter shade, intimating a later date. 
 Mr. Garbett contends that the eastern wall of the south transept is a portion 
 of Athelstan’s Church. Its architectural style of arches, columns, triforium, 
 &c. is shewn in Plate xr. and the plan Plate i., but if this part of the 
 
 including the Lady Chapel, and terminating it at the west under the eastern arch of the tower. 
 This suggestion is certainly entitled to the consideration of the Chapter, and with some other 
 improvements, much wanted, may easily, and upon moderate terms, be made, when architect 
 and workmen are found to be skilful, honest, and industrious. 
 
 H 
 
50 
 
 HEREFORD CATHEDRAL. 
 
 building be of that prelate’s age, I must conclude that the lower part of 
 the tower, with the smaller arches to the ailes, and the present chapter-room, 
 &c. are of the same time. These members of the Church certainly exhibit 
 some dissimilitude of forms and details to the choir and nave, but it is 
 difficult to account for their preservation by the first Norman prelate : foj 
 he, like the generality of the Normans, was too ambitious of originality and 
 superiority, as well as too national, to engraft new works upon those of his 
 Anglo-Saxon predecessors. All, however, is left to conjecture,—and my 
 good friend, Mr. Garbett, may indulge freely and fully in his without any 
 fear of having it overruled by incontrovertible evidence. The south end of 
 this transept has a large window, of six lights, inserted, and also another of 
 four lights in the western wail. In the north transept we perceive a style and 
 character of architecture unlike any other part of the building, and, indeed, 
 of very unusual character. It is well defined in Plates xi. and xn., in which 
 the arch mouldings of the open arches of the triforium, and of the windows, 
 are represented as being almost triangular, or rather forming two sides of a 
 triangle. They display several mouldings, and, as in the Lady Chapel, are 
 enriched with a sculptured ornament called the dog-tooth. The capitals of 
 the clustered columns are richly foliated. Of this transept Mr. Garbett 
 says, “ The sharp pointed arches opening into the side aisle ; their distri¬ 
 bution into multiplied mouldings of the most delicate execution ; the arcades 
 immediately above, divided by mullions into lesser arches, and closed in by 
 perforated quatrefoils in circles; the high pointed and expanded windows, 
 differing only according to their situations, but especially that towards the 
 north, which occupies nearly the whole of the extremity; the dog-tooth 
 quatrefoil and patterns in mosaic, tastefully introduced within the arches, 
 and on the surface of the walls, all preserve the same acute and determined 
 character; with the lofty stone vaulting connecting together the different 
 objects, render this apartment an exquisite specimen of the architectural 
 genius of the twelfth century.’’ This transept is adorned by a very interesting 
 monument of ancient architectural and sculptural design, raised to the 
 memory of Saint Cantelupe, which will be hereafter noticed. It is, however, 
 most lamentably disfigured by numerous pews and seats, appropriated to the 
 
EAST TRANSEPT. 
 
 51 
 
 parishioners of St. John the Baptists parish, who formerly occupied part of 
 the nave, and who from prescriptive right claim accommodation within the 
 walls of the Cathedral Church. 
 
 Behind the altar, and extending north and south beyond the ailes, as 
 shewn in the plan, is the Eastern Transept, a portion dissimilar in 
 architectural character to any other part of the Church. It consists of two 
 ailes, of the same height and same width, with three columns and two piers 
 extending through the middle, north and south. One of the columns and 
 the piers are now incorporated in a screen and walls enclosing the western 
 end of the Lady Chapel. They are represented in Plate v., which also 
 displays the character of the rib mouldings, the varied and enriched style 
 of the capitals, the height of the vaulting, &c. In this view I have omitted 
 the temporary screen, which is made to fill up the two arches at the west end 
 of the Lady Chapel, and thus shut out the whole of that very fine and very 
 interesting apartment. It is not easy to account for the original meaning 
 and appropriation of this eastern transept, nor for its union with the Lady 
 Chapel, and the peculiar separation of that from the choir. It was most 
 likely intended to contain four or more chantries or altars under the eastern 
 windows, and might also have been connected with the College, as a 
 cloister or corridor communicates between that edifice, and the south 
 transept. “ In noticing the architecture of these transepts,” says Mr. Garbett, 
 p. 40, “ their construction must not be overlooked. Although they are in 
 part open from north to south, by means of the avenue which separates the 
 Lady Chapel from the choir, they are, in reality, nothing more than the side 
 aisles of the latter extended into double aisles, having a pillar in the centre 
 for the sustentation of the groined roof; and forming a square apartment 
 at each extremity, lighted by four windows. The head work of the 
 windows on the east side of the south extremity (see Plate xiii.) differs from 
 that of those in the north (see Plate v.), the spandrils formed by the centre 
 and side mullions in the crown of the arch containing each an oblong 
 quatrefoil. The windows towards the south are still more varied.” The 
 same gentleman considers this transept to be of prior date to the ailes of the 
 nave. Connected with, and branching from it, is the Lady Chapel, which 
 may be regarded as the most beautiful specimen of architecture in the whole 
 
52 
 
 HEREFORD CATHEDRAL. 
 
 Church. The Plan is given in the Ground Plan, which also displays the 
 situations, proportionate openings, and number of its windows ; whilst 
 Plates viii. ix. and xvi. will clearly illustrate the general design and style 
 of the interior architecture of this unique apartment. Plate viii. represents 
 one compartment, or severy, of the chapel on the north side, near the east 
 end, with a section through one of the windows at that end. This sectional 
 part shews the thickness of the wall beneath and above the window—the 
 numerous columns and mouldings of the window—the several base mouldings 
 on the outside, the geometrical forms, and mouldings, and clustered columns 
 of the windows on the north side, with the rib mouldings of the arched 
 ceiling, and a monumental niche with a statue, beneath. Above the windows 
 is a quatrefoil panel, enriched with cusps and rosettes. A perspective view 
 of the windows at the south east angle of this chapel is given in Plate xvi. 
 which serves to exemplify more clearly and fully the elaborate enrichments 
 of the architecture. The whole design of the east end, with its five lights, 
 or windows, and circular and ovolar panels above, with section of the 
 vaulted roof over, and floor supported on vaults below, are delineated in 
 Pl ate ix. This plate also displays the crypt, with its exterior porch and 
 stairs, on the north side, and Audley chapel to the south. The references 
 are, a, stairs ; b, crypt, or vault; c, lower part of the Audley chapel; 
 
 d, upper part, approached by stairs, as indicated on the Ground Plan; 
 
 e, roof to the stairs; f, an altar tomb, marked t in Plan, u; g, floor of 
 chapel; h, vaulting of the roof; j, section of wall over the window; 
 k, windows, a plan of the pier and pillars of one of which is given in the 
 Ground Plan, s. 
 
 “ The Lady Chapel, both within and without,” remarks Mr. Garbett, 
 “ displays simplicity of outline and beauty of detail. The sides consist of 
 three compartments, separated on the outside by prominent buttresses of an 
 antique kind ; and within side by clustered shafts, with sculptured capitals 
 of human heads and foliage, from whence springs the groined roof. Each 
 compartment contains two long and narrow lights, the receding piers of 
 which are enlivened by slender pillars, which sustain the detached mouldings 
 of the arch above. The east end differs from the sides, as well in respect of 
 design and ornament as of dimensions.” 
 
CLOISTERS, CHAPTER HOUSE. 
 
 53 
 
 From this brief account of the interior of the Lady Chapel, and from the 
 engravings, a stranger, and an admirer of Christian architecture, will lament 
 to learn that this fine room is filled and lumbered with old bookcases, and that 
 its walls, columns, windows, and mouldings are obscured and smeared over 
 with repeated coats of whitewash. Whilst many thousands of pounds were so 
 tastelessly expended in building a west front, and the upper part of the nave, 
 every lover of architecture must deplore the present neglected and dilapidated 
 state of this chapel. Five or six hundred pounds, judiciously expended, would 
 protect it from further injury, and remove all its disfigurements; but I can 
 almost excuse the Chapter from commencing architectural repairs, after they 
 have paid so dearly for experience, and suffered so severely from the conse¬ 
 quent tax on its income. 
 
 In addition to what has been said of the Church generally and particularly, 
 it will be proper to notice some architectural objects belonging to, or 
 materially connected with it. These are the cloisters, the chapter house, the 
 vestry, and the font. The first, commonly called the Bishop’s Cloisters, to 
 distinguish them from another cloister belonging to the college, consists at 
 present of only two walks, or covered corridors, that to the west having 
 been taken down to make room for a warehouse-looking pile of brick 
 building appropriated to the grammar school. It doos not appear that it 
 ever had a walk on the north side against the Church. Between a continued 
 series of buttresses are windows of large dimensions, with mullions and 
 tracery. The vaulting of the roof is adorned with numerous ribbed mouldings, 
 as indicated in the Ground Plan at x, at the intersections of which are 
 shields, charged with sculptured figures, foliage, arms, &c. These ribs 
 spring from slender pillars between the windows, and corbels heads on the 
 other side. The entrance door-way to the Chapter House, from the east 
 walk, still remains, but is walled up. It consists of a pointed arch, under a 
 lofty, richly ornamented pedimental moulding, having clustered shafts on the 
 sides, with foliated capitals. In the centre is a slender pillar, dividing the 
 arch-way into two smaller openings. The once elegant chapter room, to 
 which this door-way communicated, has fallen beneath the fanatic frenzy 
 of the Cromwellian soldiers, and the injudicious zeal of Bishop Bisse, who 
 carried away many materials to assist in repairing the adjoining palace. 
 
54 
 
 HEREFORD CATHEDRAL. 
 
 “ A structure so elegant, and withal so necessary an appendage to a 
 Cathedral Church,” remarks Mr. Garbett, “ was assuredly entitled to a 
 better fate than it unhappily met with from opposite parties, who, as we see, 
 anticipate by a rude despoliation the natural date of its decay and ruin.” 
 This Chapter House appears from its small remains to have been decagonal in 
 plan ; and though its lower division shews the architecture of the end of the 
 thirteenth century, the upper part was as late as the reign of Henry VI. Part 
 of the vestibule is built up in a modern house, and three sides of the lower 
 division remain in ruins. 
 
 Near the west end of the Cathedral Church, placed in its south aile, is 
 an ancient Font, which consists of one piece of stone, cut into a sort of half 
 globe, hollowed within, and adorned with sculpture on the exterior surface. 
 Beneath so many semicircular arcades are figures of the twelve apostles. 
 Round the rim is the Roman key ornament, the columns are twisted, and the 
 whole rests on four lions. In this part of the design it resembles some of the 
 architectural tombs of the Lombards. 
 
 The present Chapter Room, or vestry, marked w, in the Ground Plan, is 
 an ancient part of the edifice. Within it is preserved an old Map of the world , 
 which has long been regarded as a curiosity among antiquaries. The late 
 Mr. Carter made a drawing of that portion called Great Britain, which was 
 engraved for Gough’s “ British Topography,” wherein that zealous antiquary 
 has printed some remarks on its age and character. Strange to say, the former 
 members of the Chapter refused to allow any person to copy it for publication, 
 and also neglected to furnish the public with any representation, or account 
 of it. A better and more liberal feeling has operated on the present Chapter, 
 who have allowed the map to be sent to London to be copied for the use of 
 the “ Royal Geographical Society.” By a learned member of this very 
 useful institution, I have reason to believe (being one of its council) that a 
 memoir on, and engraving of this very curious specimen of early map drawing 
 will be speedily published. Expecting this, I forbear to make further remarks 
 here, as the subject is calculated to furnish an interesting topic for disquisi¬ 
 tion, and a few observations would neither be satisfactory nor do justice to 
 the map. 
 
CHAP. III. 
 
 SOME ACCOUNT OF THE MOST INTERESTING MONUMENTS, AND NOTICES 
 OF DISTINGUISHED PERSONS INTERRED WITHIN THE CHURCH. 
 
 It has been already remarked that the Church, which we are now reviewing, 
 contains more monuments of Bishops, Deans, &c. than perhaps any other 
 Cathedral in England. The “ Hereford Guide” tells us that it is the 
 burial place of at least thirty-four prelates, the sites of whose interments have 
 been ascertained, and of one other, John Le Briton, whose place of sepulture 
 is unknown. John Tyler, Bishop of Landaff, and Dean of this Cathedral, was 
 interred here, and many other persons of eminence have been buried within 
 the walls : but the sepulchral memorials of several have been destroyed, and 
 others much mutilated. It is asserted in the “ Guide,” that when the Parlia¬ 
 mentary soldiers occupied the city, in 1645, no less than one hundred and 
 seventy brasses were taken away, and several of the monuments mutilated and 
 defaced, but marks of some of them still remain. 1 Several brasses were like¬ 
 wise displaced'when the Cathedral underwent its extensive repairs, subsequent 
 to the fall of the west end in 1786, and no less than two tons weight was 
 sold to a brazier. 
 
 1 Though Hereford suffered materially in those barbarous, fanatical, psalm-singing wars, it is 
 particularly noted for its loyalty. On the restoration of its privileges by Charles II. its motto was, 
 “ Invictce fidelitatis prcemium .” And Phillips, the encomiast of Herefordshire Cider, says, 
 
 “ Yet the cider land unstained with guilt ; 
 
 The cider land, obsequious still to thrones, 
 
 Abhorr’d such base disloyal deeds, and all 
 Her pruning-hooks extended into swords, 
 
 Undaunted to assist the trampled right 
 Of monarchy.” 
 
56 
 
 HEREFORD CATHEDRAL. 
 
 In the present volume I propose to take notice of the most material still 
 remaining in the Church, and point out their respective situations by 
 references to the Ground Plan. 
 
 In the south aile of the nave, beneath one of the windows (No. 1), is a 
 tomb to the memory of Sir Richard Pembridge, Knight of the Garter, who 
 died in 1375. On an altar-shaped monument is an effigy of the deceased, and 
 on the sides and end are seven shields, charged with his arms, &c. : it was 
 removed to this place from the Grey Friars monastery. East of this, under a 
 pointed arch in the wall (No. 2), is a stone effigy, erroneously said to represent 
 Bishop Athelstan ; and near it, at No. 3, is another niche, with the remnant 
 of a tomb, ascribed to Bishop Walter, and noted in the Guide as “the most 
 ancient monument in the Cathedral.” 
 
 Inserted in the wall of the north aile of the nave (No. 4) is a handsome 
 monument to Bishop Booth, whose effigy rests on an altar tomb, pontifically 
 robed, which was painted and gilt ; there are two angels seated at the head 
 of the statue. Attached to the sides of the tomb, and in the spandrils of 
 the arch, are twelve shields of arms; viz. those of Ethelbert, the See, the 
 Deanery, Booth’s. This monument was painted and gilt, and is adorned with 
 an ogee arch, having bold and rich crockets, and an elaborate finial. 
 
 Following the order of numbers on the Plan, we next examine the 
 sepulchral memorials in the north transept , called St. Catherine’s aile : 
 No. 5 points out the situation of an old monument inserted in the walls 
 which is represented in Plate xii. It consists of an arched recess, and 
 contains a coffin-shaped tomb, supporting the effigy of a Bishop in pontifical 
 robes. This commemorates Thomas Charlton. A view of it is engraved in 
 Gough’s “ Sepulchral Monuments,” vol. i. p. 97. In the eastern aile of this 
 transept is the most interesting ancient tomb, or rather shrine, in the Church. 
 It is said to enclose the bones, or certain relics of the sainted Cantelupe, of 
 whom we have already recorded some particnlars. The annexed engraving, 
 Plate xiv., supersedes the necessity of description, excepting to remark that 
 one side of the shrine, with its six niches and mail-clad knights, is enclosed 
 by a pew, and thus shut out from sight. The execution of the sculpture, in 
 the armour and the varied attitudes of the figures, and the animals under 
 
MONUMENTS. 
 
 57 
 
 their feet, the foliage in the spandrels of the arches, and the capitals of the 
 columns are all beautiful and admirable. In the diversified expression and 
 character of the figures, and the fancy displayed in the whole design, we 
 recognise the hand of a skilful and experienced artist : and had this relic of 
 monastic superstition been met with among the ruins of some classical 
 building of Italy, its beauties would have been proclaimed by all the 
 connoisseurs and cognoscenti of that famed country. It has been already 
 remarked that the shrine was made, and the bones transferred to this spot, 
 about five years after the saint’s decease, and it is probable that the transept 
 was designed and erected at the same time, to give additional effect and 
 importance to the event. Mr. Duncumb describes the tomb of “ freestone,” 
 and Mr. Gough calls it “ red stone but I believe that it consists of Purbeck 
 marble, a stone of greyish colour, abounding with shells. It is, however, 
 absurdly coated with white paint, and thereby appears like common board. 
 In Gough’s “ Sepulchral Monuments,” vol. i. p. 62, is a short account of 
 this shrine, accompanied by an engraving, from a drawing by Mr. Carter. 
 On a gravestone, in this transept, is a long Latin inscription to the memory 
 of John Philips, author of the poem entitled “ Cider,” which was once 
 popular, but is now almost obsolete. He died in February, 1708, at the age 
 of thirty-two. 
 
 Against the north wall is a bust of Bishop Field, under a canopy. 
 Between the ailes of this transept and the choir, is a handsome monument 
 to the memory of Bishop Aquablanca (No. 7). It consists of columns, 
 three open arches, with canopies covering and enclosing an effigy of the 
 prelate. Near this monument, resting on the floor, is an effigy on a coffin 
 tomb, to the memory of Dean Aquablanca, nephew of the Bishop. 
 
 Against the north wall of the north aile of the choir (No. 8), is a 
 monumental memorial ascribed to Bishop Mapenore, with his effigy; nearly 
 opposite to which (No. 9) is another old monument, said to cover the grave 
 of Bishop Bennet. At 10 is an effigy, on a coffin tomb, for Bishop Clive ; 
 near which is a doorway (3) to the once splendid monumental and chantry 
 chapel of Bishop Stanbury. The plan of this is shewn (1) in the Ground 
 Plan, Plate i., and an interior view, with representations of its numerous 
 
 i 
 
58 
 
 HEREFORD CATHEDRAL. 
 
 shields, most of which are allusive to our Saviour and to saints, is 
 engraved in Gough’s “ Sepulchral Monuments,” vol. ii. p. 240. At the 
 time Mr. Gough wrote his account, he states that “ this chapel is used as a 
 vestry for the churchwardens, and not shewn by the vergers.” It is now 
 certainly unoccupied, but in a dirty, neglected condition. At the east end 
 was an altar, to the right of which, in a niche of the wall, is a coffin tomb, 
 supporting the effigy of a Bishop, of fine proportions, with a crozier in the 
 left hand. The whole interior of the chapel is covered with tracery and 
 panelling, as is the groined ceiling, which resembles in style that of King’s 
 College Chapel, Cambridge. On the north wall of the choir is a long 
 inscription to Stanbury, whence some have supposed that he was buried 
 near the altar ; and Willis thinks that the effigy in the chapel is intended to 
 represent some other Bishop, but this conjecture seems very improbable. 
 At the west end of the chapel are the arms of Canterbury, Hereford, and 
 Stanbury. 
 
 On the outside of this chapel, in the aile (No. 12), is an effigy beneath a 
 pointed niche in the wall, with an inscription to Bishop Lozing, but it is not 
 likely that such a distinguished prelate and builder would have been interred 
 in that situation. Indeed it may be remarked, in this place, that four or 
 five of the effigies of Bishops, with the niches in which they are placed, and 
 the accompanying inscriptions, were apparently all made at one time, and 
 subsequent to the decease of the respective persons. 
 
 Nearly opposite, beneath the eastern arch of this aile, is a very handsome 
 alabaster altar tomb (No. 11), sustaining a beautiful effigy, and adorned with 
 several small statues in niches, all of the same material. This monument is 
 variously ascribed, as it has no inscription to intimate the name of the 
 person for whom it was intended. Willis and Duncumb consider that it 
 belongs to Bishop Stanbury. There are eleven statues on the outside, two 
 at the feet, and the verger states that there are other figures on the side, 
 towards the altar. The shields on them would most likely enable us to 
 appropriate the monument to its proper Bishop. 
 
 In the north side of the eastern transept are two old tombs at 13 and 14, 
 respectively assigned to Bishops Swinford and Godwin, both much muti- 
 
MONUMENTS. 
 
 59 
 
 lated. Against the eastern wall, at 15, is a large, clumsy monument to 
 Bishop Westfayling, with his effigy reclining on one side. 
 
 The Lady Chapel, now the library, contains some ancient memorials worthy 
 of particular notice. No. 17 is the site of the very curious and interesting 
 monument represented in Plate xv. and generally attributed to a Humphrey 
 de Bohun, Earl of Hereford. An effigy of the deceased is placed on a 
 ledge, in a square recess, clad in chain and plate armour, with long spurs, a 
 small helmet, and a dog at his feet. The frame of the tomb is adorned with 
 rosettes and panelled buttresses, with a canopy of open trefoil arched mould¬ 
 ings above, and panelling below. It is surmounted by an open screen of 
 elaborate and exquisite workmanship, in which are two small statues of females, 
 seated, and apparently offering incense. The heads are gone. Duncumb 
 describes two shields of arms as attached to the tomb. In a niche to the east 
 (see Plate vm.) at No. 18, is an effigy of a female, said to be that of the 
 wife of the Earl. There is probably some error in ascribing these monuments 
 to Bohun, Earl of Hereford, and his Countess; for, on referring to the account 
 of that family in Dugdale’s “ Baronage,” I do not find that either of them 
 was buried here, or had any immediate connexion with the Cathedral. The 
 designs of the screen of the monument, and of the two effigies, are of different 
 ages. There were eight or nine Humphrey Bohuns. Mr. Gough, in “ Sepul¬ 
 chral Monuments,” says that the arms indicate the man to be a Bohun, but 
 not an earl of Hereford. 
 
 At the south-east angle of this chapel (No. 19) is a fragment of a statue, 
 which Mr. Duncumb describes as “ a lady wearing a coronet,” but which 
 other antiquaries consider to be that of St. Ethelbert, taken from a pedestal 
 near the high altar, where Bishop Mayo ordered by his will that his own 
 monument should be erected. Against the south wall, near the west end of 
 the chapel, is a monument, in a niche, to Dean Berew, or Borew, whose 
 effigy is placed on a slab beneath a pointed arch. Small figures of boars, 
 with sprigs of rue, are sculptured in a cavetto moulding round the arch. Near 
 this, on the floor, are monumental slabs, with fragments of brasses, See. which 
 covered the graves of persons who were interred here. (See Figures 38, 
 39, 40, 41, 42.) One of these commemorated Richard de la Marr, and his 
 
 i 2 
 
60 
 
 HEREFORD CATHEDRAL. 
 
 lady, Isabella, who died respectively in 1435 and 1421. Another was to 
 Dean Harold : 1393. 
 
 In the south wing of the eastern transept are the following monuments 
 (No. 21)— Bishop Lewis Charlton, a mutilated effigy of whom on a dila¬ 
 pidated tomb, with shields of arms, and an inscription, commemorate his 
 name and sepulture. 2 Near it, at 22, is a large mass of marble and stone, 
 painted, &c. in the bad taste of 1636, to the memory of Bishop Coke. At 
 the southern extremity are tombs to Bishop Lindsell (23), Dean Harvey 
 (24), and Dean Chandler adjoining. 
 
 The south aile of the choir is adorned with a very handsome monument 
 (at 25), to Bishop Mayo, whose effigy, in freestone on an altar tomb of the 
 same, and surmounted by a canopy of unusual and fine design, is represented 
 in the annexed engraving. (See Plate xm.) The monuments, Nos. 26, 27, 
 30, and 31, are indicated in the Wood Cut in the title page. Beneath 
 four pointed arches, on slabs, are four effigies said to represent Bishops 
 De Vere, Foliot, Betun, and Melun. On the floor is a fine, large, 
 inlaid brass, almost the only relic of the sort in the church, for Dean 
 Frowcester (37). The place of sepulture of Bishop Raynelm is pointed 
 out by No. 28. 
 
 In the south transept are three monuments pointed out by figures 32, 33, 34. 
 The first refers to a large altar tomb to Alexander Denton and his lady, 
 whose effigies repose on a slab of alabaster. Willis states that Denton was 
 buried at Hillesdon, in Buckinghamshire, in 1576. 
 
 Beneath the great south window in the wall is a monument to Bishop 
 Trevenant, who most probably rebuilt that end of the church. Against the 
 west wall (No. 34), is a mural slab to the memory of Dean Tyler, who 
 was also Bishop of Landaff. 
 
 The Choir has fifty stalls for the members of the Cathedral, a pulpit, and 
 a throne. Beneath the seats of the stalls are various carvings, some of which 
 are executed with much spirit; and others distinguished for the grotesque 
 and ludicrous figures represented. The great and inappropriate screen, 
 
 2 A view and account of this tomb are given in Gough’s “ Sep. Mon.” vol. i. PI. xlvii. 
 
bishops’ palaces. 
 
 61 
 
 which is returned on the north and south sides, has been already noticed. 
 Within the last few years, the east window has been filled with painted glass : 
 being a copy from a picture by Mr. West, of the Last Supper. 
 
 The Choir contains several monuments, some of which are very imposing 
 in materials and workmanship, though not very attractive as objects of art or 
 antiquity. No. 29 is the site of the ponderous mass of marble raised to the 
 memory of Bishop Bisse and the Countess of Plymouth, his lady. 
 When this monument was raised, another for Bishop Braoes, with his effigy, 
 was removed to the opposite side of the choir. 
 
 Bishops Butler, Beauclerk, Humphreys, Crofts, and Trellick were 
 interred in the choir, near the altar, where flat stones cover their remains. 
 
 The following Notices of the Palaces of the Bishops of this See are given 
 in Leland’s Itinerary, vol. viii. p. 54. ed. 1744 :— 
 
 PALATIA EPISCOPI HEREFORDEM. 
 
 Sugwas a slite Shot, or more, of Wy Ryver on the lifte Ripe of it 2. Miles 
 dim. It stondithe in the Roots of an Hillet, and a Park by it now without 
 Dere.— Colwel Park longed to the Byshope of Hereford by ^ Malvern Chace, 
 and a Pece of $ Malvern is the Byshops, fro the Crest of the Hill, as it 
 aperithe by a Dyche. 
 
 Bosberie x. Miles by North Est from Hereford at the Head of Ledon 
 Reveret, and thereby is a place longginge to Seint John's in London caulled 
 Upledon. 
 
 Gul. Ver. episcopus, ut patet ex ejus 01 epitaphio, multa egregia construxit 
 (xdificia. 
 
 Whitburne 7. Miles from Worcester. It is in the very extreme Parte of 
 Herefor deshire on the righte banke of Temde Ryver. 
 
 a 
 
 B Malvenn MS. 
 
 Epitaphia MS. 
 
62 
 
 HEREFORD CATHEDRAL. 
 
 Johannes FUius Alani, Dominus de Arundel, cepit Byssops Castell, et 
 constabularium & castri Jide data interfecit anno regni 45. Henrici 3. et y inde 
 tenuit pene 6 . annis. 
 
 There was a faire Mansion Place for the Byshope at Ledbryi xii. Miles 
 by Est North Est from Hereford, and vii, Myles or more from Rosse. This 
 Hous is all in Ruyne. The convict Prison for the Byshope of Hertford was 
 at Rosse, now at Hereford. 
 
 Rosse at the veri West End of the Paroche Churche Yarde at Rosse, now 
 in clene Ruynes. 
 
 By shops Castle a 23. Miles by North Northe West from Hereford in 
 Shropshire. —It is xn. Miles from Shrowsbirie. 
 
 Prestebyri 5. Miles from Glocester hard by Clife. Ther is a Parke hard 
 by Prestebyri. 
 
 Joannes le Breton episcopus Hereforden. fait aliquanto tempore vicecomes 
 Hereford : custos maner : de Abergeveney, et trium castrorum. 
 
 Breton episcopus custos Garderobe domini & regis. 
 
 Kilpek Castelle a 5. Mils from Hereford by Southe West very nigh 
 Worne Brooke. 
 
 Some Ruines of the Waulls yet stonde. Ther was a Priorie of Blake 
 Monks suppressyd in Thomas Spofford's Byshope of Herford's time, and clerly 
 united to Glocester. 
 
 $ Cast. MS. 
 
 y In detinuit MS. 
 
 Cl Rege MS. 
 
63 
 
 A CHRONOLOGICAL LIST OF THE 
 
 BISHOPS OF HEREFORD, 
 
 WITH THE CONTEMPORARY KINGS OF ENGLAND. 
 
 BISHOPS. 
 
 Consecrated or Installed. 
 
 Died or Translated. 
 
 Buried at 
 
 Kings. 
 
 [For the list of Bishops 
 previously to Ethelstan, 
 vide pages 3, 4, 5.] 
 
 Ethelstan 
 
 Supp, 
 
 Leofgar . 
 
 See vacant four years. 
 
 1012 Died..Feb. 10, 1055 1 
 1056 Killed June 16, 1056 
 
 Hereford 
 
 $ Ethelred II. to 
 ( Edw. Confessor. 
 Edvv. Confessor. 
 
 Aldred (in trust). 
 
 Walter of Lorraine.Con. 
 
 Robert Lozing.Con. 
 
 Gerard. 
 
 .1060 
 
 Dec. 29, 1079 
 
 1095 
 
 S York.1060 ) 
 
 \ D. Sept. 11,1069 S 
 
 Died .1079 
 
 Died. .June 26, 1095 
 
 ( York.1095 { 
 
 ( Died.1101 S 
 
 York... 
 
 Hereford 
 
 Hereford 
 
 York..., 
 
 $ Ed. Con Harold 
 * II. and Wm. I. 
 
 William I. 
 
 William I. 
 
 Roger Lardarius. 
 
 Raynelm, or Raynald.. .. 
 
 Geoffry de Clive. 
 
 Richard de Capella. 
 
 Robert de Betun. 
 
 Gilbert Foliot. 
 
 Robert de Melun. 
 
 See vacant seven years. 
 
 Robert Foliot .. 
 
 William de Vere. 
 
 Egidius, or Giles de ) 
 Bruse, or Braoes.... } 
 
 Hugh de Mapenore. 
 
 Hugh Foliot. 
 
 Not consecrated. 
 
 $ Appointed . 1101 } 
 ( Con.Aug.30,1107 S 
 Con...Dec. 26, 1115 
 Con. .. Jan. 16, 1121 
 Con.. .June 19, 1131 
 Con. .. Sept. 5, 1149 
 Con.,. Dec. 22,1163 2 
 
 Con... .Oct. 4,1174 
 Con.Oct. 6, 1186 
 
 Con. .. Sept. 24,1200 
 
 Con. .. Dec. 6, 1216 
 Con... Nov. 1, 1219 
 
 Ralph de Maydenstan.... 
 
 Con. 
 
 Nov. 12, 1234 
 
 Peter de Aquablanca .... 
 
 John Breton, LL.D. 
 
 Thomas Cantelupe . 
 
 Richard de Swinford .... 
 Adam de Orlton, LL.D.. 
 Thomas Charlton, LL.D.. 
 
 John Trellick, D.D. 
 
 Lewis Charlton, S.T.P. .. 
 Wm. Courteney, LL.D... 
 
 John Gilbert .. 
 
 John Trevenant . 
 
 Con... Dec. 23, 1240 
 Con. .. June 3,1269 
 Con. .. Sept. 8, 1275 
 Con...March 7, 1283 
 Con.. .Sept. 12, 1317 
 Con. .. Oct. 18, 1327 
 Con.. .June 24, 1344 
 Con... Oct. 25, 1361 
 
 Con.1369 
 
 .Sept. 12, 1375 
 
 Con... June 20, 1389 
 
 Died .. Oct. 28,1115 
 
 Died_Feb. 3,1119 
 
 Died. .Aug. 15, 1127 
 Died. .April 22, 1148 
 To London .... 1162 
 Died.. March 4,1167 
 
 Died .. May 9, 1186 
 Died..Dec. 24, 1199 
 
 Died .. Nov. 5, 1215 
 
 Died.. . April, 1219 
 Died.. July 26, 1234 
 C ResignedDec.17, ~\ 
 
 \ 1239 ) 
 
 t Died.1244 J 
 
 Died . .Nov. 27,1268 
 Died.... April, 1275 
 Died. .Aug. 25, 1282 
 Died March 15, 1316 
 Worcester .... 1327 
 Died . .Jan. 11, 1343 
 Died .... Feb. 1360 
 Died.. May 23, 1369 
 London Sept.12,1375 
 St. David’s ....1389 
 Died.. 1403 or 1404 
 
 Robert Mascall 
 
 Con 
 
 July 2,1404 
 
 Died..Dec. 22, 1416 
 
 Hereford. 
 
 Hereford. 
 
 Hereford. 
 
 Hereford. 
 
 • • • • 
 
 Hereford. 
 
 Hereford . 
 
 Hereford . 
 
 Hereford . 
 
 Hereford. 
 
 Hereford. 
 
 Gloucester .... 
 
 Hereford . 
 
 Hereford (supp.). 
 
 Hereford. 
 
 Hereford. 
 
 Winchester _ 
 
 Hereford . 
 
 Hereford (supp.) 
 
 Hereford. 
 
 Maidstone .... 
 Haverfordwest .. 
 
 Hereford . 
 
 { WhiteFriars, } 
 i London. . S 
 
 Henry I. 
 
 Henry I. 
 Henry I. 
 Henry I. 
 Stephen. 
 Henry II. 
 
 Henry II. 
 Henry II. 
 
 John. 
 
 Henry III. 
 Henry III. 
 
 Henry III. 
 
 Henry III. 
 Henry III. 
 Edward I. 
 Edward I. 
 Edward II. 
 Edward III 
 Edward III, 
 Edward III 
 Edward III 
 Edward III 
 Richard II. 
 
 Henry IV. 
 
 1 Leland says 1061 ; Antiq. of Cath. says I0i>6. 
 
 2 Antiq. of Cath. says Jan. 11, 1162; Willis says May 22, 1164. 
 
64 
 
 HEREFORD CATHEDRAL. 
 
 BISHOPS. 
 
 Edmund Lacy, D.D. .. 
 Thomas Polton, LL.B. 
 
 Thomas Spofford. 
 
 Rich. Beauchamp, LL.D. 
 Richard Butler, or Bolers 
 
 John Stanbury. 
 
 Thomas Milling, S.T.P... 
 
 Edmund Audley. 
 
 Adrian de Castello. 
 
 Richard Mayevv, S.T.P... 
 Charles Booth, LL.D. 
 
 Edward Fox, S.T.P. 
 
 Edmund Bonner, LL.D. 
 
 John Skyp . 
 
 John Ilarley. 
 
 Robt. Purfey, or Warton.. 
 
 Thomas Reynolds . 
 
 John Scory, S.T.P.. 
 
 Herb. Westfayling, D.D 
 Robert Bennett, D.D..., 
 Francis Godwin, D.D. , 
 
 William Juxon, S.T.P. .. 
 
 Augustine Lindsell, S.T.P. 
 
 Matthew Wren, D.D. 
 
 Theophilus Field, D.D... 
 
 George Coke . 
 
 See vacant fourteen years. 
 
 Nicholas Monk . 
 
 Herbert Croft. 
 
 Consecrated or Installed. 
 
 Con... April 18, 1417 
 Con. .. Nov. 9, 1420 
 
 ... Nov. 17, 1422 
 
 Con. .. Feb. 9, 1449 
 
 Con.Feb. 4,1451 
 
 Enth. .April 25, 1453 
 App.. .Aug. 15, 1474 
 From Rochester, ) 
 Dec. 26, 1492 S 
 
 Con.1502 
 
 Con .Oct. 1504 
 
 Con...Nov. 30, 1516 
 
 Con.. .Sept. 26, 1535 
 
 Elected Nov. 27,1538 
 
 Con... Nov. 23, 1539 
 
 Con. . .May 26, 1553 
 
 Con...April 24, 1554 
 Not consecrated .., 
 Con... July 20, 1559 
 Con... Dec. 12, 1585 
 Con.. . Feb. 20, 1602 
 Con... Nov. 28, 1617 
 $ Trans, to London \ 
 X before Con. .. $ 
 Con. March 24, 1633 
 
 Con. .March 8, 1635 
 
 Con.. . Dec. 23, 1635 
 Con. .. July 2, 1636 
 
 Died or Translated. 
 
 Buried at 
 
 Gilbert Ironside, D.D. . 
 
 Humphrey Humphreys, 
 
 D.D. 
 
 Philip Bisse, D.D. 
 
 Ben. Hoadley, D.D. 
 
 Hon. II. Egerton, D.D... 
 Lord James Beauclerk. .. 
 
 Hon. John Harley, D.D. . 
 
 John Butler.. 
 
 Foliot Herbert Walker ) 
 Cornewall, D.D.$ 
 
 John Luxmore, D.D... ., 
 
 Con. . 
 Con. 
 
 Con.. 
 
 Con. 
 
 Enth. 
 
 . Jan. 13, 1661 
 ,. Feb. 9, 1662 
 
 July 29, 1691 
 
 . Dec. 2, 1701 
 Sept. 17, 1713 
 
 Con. 
 
 1721 
 
 George Isaac Hunting- ) 
 ford, D.D.i 
 
 Con. .. Feb. 2, 1724 
 Con...June 26, 1746 
 
 Con.Nov. 1787 
 
 Con.1788 
 
 Con.Jan. 1803 
 
 Con.July 1808 
 
 Con. .. July 5, 1815 
 
 Exeter .... 1420 } 
 D. May 23,1455 S 
 $ Chichester 1422 } 
 l D. Aug. 23, 1433 (, 
 
 Resigned.1448 
 
 Salisbury Aug.l 4,1450 
 Lichfield, See. .. 1453 
 Died ..May 11, 1474 
 
 Died.1492 
 
 t Salisbury . .1502 ) 
 
 X D. Aug. 23, 1525 S 
 Bath and Wells, 1504 
 Died . .April 18,1516 
 Died .. May 5, 1535 
 
 Died .. May 8, 1538 
 
 $ London....1539 ) 
 l D. Sept. 5, 1569 S 
 
 Died .1552 
 
 $ Deprived.. 1554 ) 
 
 ( Died. 1557 $ 
 
 Died. .Sept. 22, 1557 
 Died.. Nov. 24, 1559 
 Died. .June 26, 1585 
 Died.. March 1,1601 
 Died.. Oct. 25, 1617 
 Died.... April, 1633 
 
 Died .. Nov. 6, 1634 
 c Norwich .. 1636 ) 
 
 < Ely. 1638 S 
 
 CD. April24,1667 ) 
 Died .. June 2, 1636 
 Died. .Dec. 10, 1646 
 
 Died. .Dec. 17, 1661 
 Died. .May 18, 1691 
 
 Died. .Aug. 27, 1701 
 
 Died. .Nov. 20, 1712 
 
 Died .. Sept. .5, 1721 
 c Salisbury. \ 
 
 < Winchester .... £ 
 
 (.Died.1761 3 
 
 Died .1746 
 
 Died .. Oct. 19, 1787 
 
 Died .. Jan. 7, 1788 
 
 Died. .Dec. 10, 1802 
 
 To Worcester .. 1808 
 
 $ To St. Asaph, } 
 ( June, 1815 5 
 
 Exeter 
 
 Rome 
 
 { St. Mary’s ^ 
 if Abbey, York $ 
 
 Salisbury. 
 
 Lichfield. 
 
 Hereford . 
 
 Westminster.... 
 
 Salisbury. 
 
 Hereford. 
 
 Hereford. 
 
 S S.MaryMont } 
 f halt, Lond. . S 
 i St. George’s, 
 
 X Southwark 
 London .... 
 
 Kings. 
 
 Hereford 
 
 Whitbourn 
 Hereford .. 
 Hereford .. 
 Whitbourn 
 
 Hereford ., 
 Cambridge 
 Hereford ., 
 
 Westminster.... 
 
 Hereford. 
 
 $ St. Mary So- > 
 f merset, Lon. S 
 
 Hereford. 
 
 Hereford .. 
 Winchester 
 
 Hereford ...... 
 
 ( Brampton ) 
 X Bryan .. \ 
 
 Hereford. 
 
 Henry V. 
 
 Henry V. 
 
 Henry V. 
 
 Henry VI. 
 
 Henry VI. 
 
 Henry VI. 
 
 Edward IV. 
 
 Henry VII. 
 
 Henry VII. 
 
 Henry VII. 
 
 Henry VIII. 
 
 Henry VIII. 
 
 Henry VIII. 
 
 Henry VIII. 
 
 S Edw. VI. & VII 
 ( Mary. 
 
 Mary. 
 
 Elizabeth. 
 
 Elizabeth. 
 
 Elizabeth. 
 
 James I. 
 
 Charles I. 
 
 Charles I. 
 
 Charles I. 
 
 Charles I. 
 
 Charles II. 
 Charles II. 
 
 Wm. and Mary. 
 
 William III. 
 Anne. 
 
 George I. 
 
 George I. 
 
 George II. & III. 
 
 George III. 
 
 George III. 
 
 George III. 
 
 George III. 
 
 George III. 
 
65 
 
 A CHRONOLOGICAL LIST OF THE 
 
 DEANS OF HEREFORD. 
 
 WITH BIOGRAPHICAL MEMORANDA. 
 
 The ensuing List of the Names, Dates of Election, &c. of the Deans of Hereford has been derived from the 
 published Accounts in Le Neve’s “ Fasti Ecdesice,” who acknowledges his obligations to Mr. Reynolds, 
 “ sometime Registrary of Hereford,” Willis’s “ Survey of the Cathedrals,” and various miscellaneous works. 
 Though the Author has endeavoured to make it complete and correct, and has attempted to reconcile, or at 
 least improve upon, the lists of each of the authors here specified, he is aware of defects and omissions which 
 he has not the means of remedying. 
 
 No. 
 
 DEANS. 
 
 1 Ralph 1 .. 
 
 2 Geffrey, or Geoffrey 
 
 3 Ralph . . 
 
 4 Geffrey, or Geoffrey 
 
 5 Richard . 
 
 6 Hugh de Breuse 3 * • • • 
 
 7 Hugh de Mapenore 4 * < 
 
 8 Henry.. < 
 
 9 Thomas de Bosbury • < 
 10 Ralph de Maideston 5 
 
 11 
 
 12 
 
 13 
 
 14 
 
 15 
 
 16 
 
 17 
 
 18 
 
 Stephen de Thorne 
 Ancellinus, or Amselm 6 
 Giles de Avenbury • • • • 
 John de Aquablanca 7 
 Stephen de Ledbury 8 • • 
 Thomas de Trellick9 
 William de Birmingham 
 John de Middleton 10 • • 
 
 Elected, &c. 
 
 Died or removed. 
 
 Held it 
 
 about 
 
 Consecrated Jan. 15, 
 
 • • .. about 
 
 Elected • • Dec. 14, 
 Elect, about Oct. 28, 
 
 .. about 
 
 Elected . 
 
 .. about 
 
 Elected . 
 
 Elected . 
 
 1140 
 
 1150 
 
 1157 
 
 1173 
 
 1187 
 
 1202 
 
 1203 
 
 1216 
 
 1218 
 
 1231 
 
 1234 
 
 1247 
 
 1271 
 
 1278 
 
 1320 
 
 1352 
 
 1363 
 
 Deposed by Bishop Betun. 
 
 Bishop of Hereford 
 
 1216 
 
 Died.Sept. 26, 1231 
 
 Bishop of Hereford.. 1234 
 
 Died.. 13 C. Oct. 1277 or 1278 
 
 Died.1320 
 
 Died-.1352 
 
 Dean of St. Paul’s.1363 
 
 Living in.1369 
 
 Deprived.about 1280 
 
 BIOGRAPHICAL MEMORANDA OF THE DEANS. 
 
 1 Some writers place John de Middleton as the first Dean, whilst others state that Ralph was constituted by 
 Bishop Betun, who shortly after deposed him. Ang. Sac. vol. ii. p. 312. He appeal's as witness to Will.Devereux’s 
 grant to Croyland in the time of King Stephen. Antiquities of the Cath. 223, and Mon. Anglic. 
 
 2 A second Ralph is given in the lists, but it is not clear that he is a different person to the first Dean. In the 
 Antiquities of Hereford he is described as opposing Bishop Betun, who was dead before this Dean was appointed. 
 
 3 Le Neve places Breuse as second Dean, but he occurs as sixth in Willis’s list, and third in “The Anti¬ 
 quities.” Giles de Breuse was Bishop at the same time, and probably his brother. 
 
 4 Giraldus tells us that this Dean was proposed for the See of St. David’s in 1203. In 1216 he was advanced 
 from the Deanery to the Bishopric. 
 
 5 See Account of Bishops, p. 14. 
 
 6 According to Willis and Dugdale, he held this Deanery in 1247 and 1262. In “ The Antiquities” he is 
 called Antellinus, with the date of 1256. 
 
 i He was nephew of Bishop Aquablanca. In his will he directed his body to be interred near the Bishop’s 
 in the north aile. His effigy, in the Dean’s habit, lies on a slab. 
 
 8 Dugdale gives the dates of 1341 and 1348; the Antiquities, 1331 ; and Willis, as above He was Preben¬ 
 dary of Bullinghope. 
 
 9 Treliick was made Bishop of Rochester in 1364. 
 
 10 Le Neve and Dugdale erroneously place Middleton as the first Dean. Willis. And his name occurs as the 
 second in “ The Antiquities.” 
 
 K 
 
66 
 
 HEREFORD CATHEDRAL. 
 
 No. 
 
 19 
 
 20 
 21 
 22 
 
 23 
 
 24 
 
 25 
 
 26 
 
 27 
 
 28 
 
 29 
 
 30 
 
 31 
 
 32 
 
 33 
 
 34 
 
 35 
 
 36 
 
 37 
 
 38 
 
 39 
 
 40 
 
 DEANS. 
 
 John Harold 11 . 
 
 John Prophet .. ... 
 
 Thomas Felde, LL. D. 12 • • • 
 
 John Stanwey. 
 
 Henry Shelford . 
 
 John Berew 13 . 
 
 John ap Richard •••••• • • 
 
 Richard Pede, LL. D.. 
 
 Thomas Chandeler, D. D. 14 ' 
 
 Oliver King, LL. D. 15 . 
 
 John Harvey 16 . 
 
 Reginald West. 
 
 Thomas Wolsey, Cardinal 17 ■ 
 Edmund Frowcester, S.T. P. 18 
 Galmaliel Clifton, LL. DCS ■ 
 Hugh Coren, or Curwyn 20 ■ 
 Edmund Daniel, A.M. 21 *** 
 
 John Ellis, M. A.. 
 
 John Watkins, A. M. 22 • •• 
 Charles Langford, D. D. 23 
 Edmund Doughtie, A. M. • 
 Richard Montag-ue, D. D. 24 
 
 Elected, &c. 
 
 Installed . 
 
 Installed* • Nov. 7, 
 Installed • • April 20, 
 
 Installed* • Sept. 26, 
 Elected • • 1445 or 
 Elected* • June 24, 
 Installed* - March8, 
 Installed March 26, 
 Installed March 23, 
 Installed about July, 
 Elected • • • • about 
 
 Elected.. * 
 
 Installed* • Jan. 27, 
 
 Installed • 
 Installed 
 Installed < 
 Installed* 
 
 • Aug. 14, 
 •June 1, 
 
 • July 3, 
 
 • Feb. 18, 
 
 Nominated* • Jan.9, 
 Installed • • April 5, 
 Installed • • Dec. 23, 
 Installed* • Dec. 9, 
 
 1380 
 
 1393 
 
 1407 
 
 1419 
 
 1434 
 
 1446 
 
 1462 
 
 1462 
 
 1481 
 
 1490 
 
 1491 
 1501 
 1512 
 1512 
 1530 
 1541 
 
 1558 
 
 1559 
 1576 
 1593 
 1607 
 1616 
 
 Died or removed. 
 
 Died. Oct. 19, 1393 
 
 Dean of York.1407 
 
 Died. July, 1419 
 
 Died. Aug. 9, 1434 
 
 Died. 1445 or 1446 
 
 Died. April 6, 1462 
 
 Deprived. June 26, 1462 
 
 Died.1480 
 
 Died. Nov. 2, 1490 
 
 Resigned. 1491 
 
 Died.about April, 1500 
 
 Resigned. 1512 
 
 Resigned.Dec. 3, 1512 
 
 Died. May 16, 1529 
 
 Died.*.April 26, 1541 
 
 Archbishop of Dublin.1555 
 
 Deprived. 1559 
 
 Died. about 1576 
 
 Resigned ..1593 
 
 Died.Oct. 28, 1607 
 
 Died.1616 
 
 Resigned. 1617 
 
 11 He was buried in the Cathedral, where the following fragment of an inscription remained in Willis’s time 
 —“ De Saline Mercy m.ccc.lxxxxiii.” Willis’s date is 1493. 
 
 12 By will he directed his body to be interred in the Church of Maidstone; that forty marks be given to the 
 Cathedral of Hereford, and ten pounds towards the fabric of Leighton Buzzard Church.— Willis. 
 
 13 This Dean was buried in the Lady Chapel, where an effigy in the south wall, under an arch, with figures 
 of boars, and the rue-leaf, is said to commemorate him. 
 
 14 His remains were interred in the Cathedral, where a monument with an effigy and an inscription remains. 
 
 13 He was principal secretary to Henry VII — Bishop of Exeter in 1492—transferred to Bath and Wells, 1495. 
 He pulled down and began to rebuild Bath Abbey Church, and died June 24, 1502. He was buried in St. 
 George’s Chapel, Windsor, where there is an inscription to his memory. See History of Bath Abbey Church ; 
 also History of Wells Cathedral. 
 
 16 By will he appointed to be buried in the Cathedral, before St. Margaret’s Altar, and a chantry to be erected 
 to his memory. Willis supposes the effigy in the upper end of the south aile to be his. 
 
 17 See Accounts of Wells Cathedral and York Cathedral. 
 
 18 He was Canon and Prebendary of Barton Colwalle—interred in the upper end of the south aile. His 
 monument of marble contains his “portraiture lying under a canopy, with figures of six saints engraved on two 
 pillars which support it.” Antiquities of Cath. p. 231. Willis gives a long inscription from his gravestone. 
 
 19 Canon of Windsor and York, and Rector of West Idesley in the county of Berks ; buried in the Cathedral. 
 In his will “ he directed a solemn dirge to be kept for him in the Cathedral.” Willis, p. 535. 
 
 20 See some account of this Dean in the History, See. of Oxford Cathedral, p. 25. 
 
 21 Prebendary of Worcester. In 1559 he was deprived of this Deanery by Queen Elizabeth. Retired to 
 Rome, where he died Oct. 13, 1576, and was buried in the English Collegiate Chapel of St. Thomas a Becket. 
 Willis gives a copy of the inscription on his monument at Rome. 
 
 22 Le Neve says he was installed March 13, 1574. Antiquities of Cath. say March 13,1557. He died May, 1594. 
 
 23 Prebendary of Bristol, and Rector of Stokehammond, Bucks. When he died he was Prebendary of Pratm 
 Minus, Vicar of Lugwarden, and Rector of Eastham. Buried in the Cathedral. Willis. 
 
 24 Exchanged the Deanery for the Archdeaconry of Hereford. Willis. 
 
CHRONOLOGICAL LIST OF DEANS. 
 
 67 
 
 No. 
 
 41 
 
 42 
 
 43 
 
 44 
 
 45 
 
 46 
 
 47 
 
 48 
 
 49 
 
 50 
 
 51 
 
 52 
 
 53 
 
 54 
 
 55 
 
 56 
 
 57 
 
 58 
 
 59 
 
 60 
 61 
 
 DEANS. 
 
 Silvanus Griffith, S.T. P. 25 - 
 Oliver Lloyd, LL. D. 26 ••• 
 Daniel Price, S. T. P. 27 • • • 
 John Richardson, D. D. 28 • 
 Jonathan Brown, S.T. P. 2 9. 
 
 Herbert Croft, D. D.. 
 
 Thomas Hodges, D. D. 30 • * • 
 George Benson, S.T. P. 31 • 
 
 John Tyler, D.D. 32 . 
 
 Robert Clavering 33 . 
 
 John Harris 34 . 
 
 Edward Cressett, M. A . 35 • 
 Edmund Castle, D.D. ••• 
 John Egerton, B. L. L. 36 • • • 
 Francis Webber, D.D. • •• 
 Nathan Wetherell, D.D. 3 ! . 
 William Leigh, LL. D. 38 • • • 
 George Gretton, D. D. 3 9 - - - 
 Robert James Carr, D. D 40 < 
 Edward Mellish, A. M. ••• 
 Edward Grey, D.D. . 
 
 Elected, &c. 
 
 Installed-• Sept. 16, 1617 
 
 Installed • 
 Installed- 
 Installed 
 Installed 
 Installed • 
 Installed • 
 Installed • 
 Installed 
 Installed- 
 Installed • 
 Installed- 
 Installed- 
 Installed • 
 Installed • 
 Installed • 
 Installed- 
 Installed < 
 Installed < 
 Installed 
 
 • Dec. 16, 
 •Oct. 27, 
 
 • Dec. 10, 
 •Sept. 10, 
 
 • Sept. 27, 
 
 • May 16, 
 
 • Oct. 8, 
 
 • March 2, 
 - Aug. 7, 
 
 • July 30, 
 
 • Nov. 9, 
 
 • March 4, 
 
 • April 5, 
 
 • • • Aug. 
 
 • July 8, 
 
 1623 
 
 1631 
 
 1636 
 
 1644 
 
 1661 
 
 1672 
 
 1692 
 
 1724 
 
 1729 
 
 1736 
 
 1748 
 
 1750 
 
 1756 
 
 1771 
 
 1808 
 
 1809 
 
 1820 
 
 1827 
 
 1831 
 
 Died or removed. 
 
 Died.Nov. 1623 
 
 Died.1625 
 
 Died.Sept. 23, 1631 
 
 Died.1636 
 
 Died. Dec. 1, 1643 
 
 Bishop of Hereford.1661 
 
 Died.Aug. 22, 1672 
 
 Died.Aug. 24, 1692 
 
 Bishop of Landaff. 1706 
 
 Bishop of Landaff. 1724 
 
 Bishop of Landaff. 1730 
 
 Bishop of Landaff. 1748 
 
 Bishop of Bangor.1756 
 
 Died.1771 
 
 Died.1808 
 
 Died.1809 
 
 Died.July 29, 1820 
 
 Bishop of Chichester. 1827 
 
 Died. Dec. 1830 
 
 Now living. 
 
 O 
 
 2s Not mentioned in Antiquities of Cath. And Wood, in Athen. Oxon. names George Carleton as Dean in 1617. 
 
 26 Not mentioned in Willis, or Le Neve, but described in The Antiquities as having exchanged with Montague. 
 See Wood’s Athens Oxon. edit. 1815. vol. iii. col. 878. He was Chancellor of Hereford, in 1615 Canon of 
 Windsor, which he exchanged with Montague for this Deanery. Died in Hereford. Antiq. of Calh. 
 
 27 Chaplain to Prince Henry, afterwards to James I., then to Charles I., Canon Residentiary of Hereford, 
 Rector of Worthing in Shropshire, and of Lanteglos, Cornwall, and Justice of the Peace. Died at Worthing 
 near Cause Castle, Salop, and was buried there. Willis gives a long inscription from his tomb. Survey , i. 536. 
 
 28 Le Neve says installed 1634, also Antiq. of Cath. In his will he gave five pounds to the Cathedral, and six 
 pounds to the poor of Hereford City, &c. 
 
 29 Prebend of Westminster, Minister of St. Faith’s, London, in 1633, and Rector of Herfingfordbury, co. Herts, 
 where he was buried. Willis. 
 
 30 Rector of Kensington, was a celebrated preacher before Parliament, one of the Assembly of Divines, and 
 a Covenanter; one of the clergymen who attended the Earl of Holland on the scaffold, to whom he was distantly 
 related; Rector of St. Peter’s, Cornhill, in 1662; buried at Kensington, where there is a gravestone to his 
 memory. Faulkner’s History, fyc. of Kensington, p. 166.; Willis. 
 
 31 Prebendary of Worcester, Archdeacon of Hereford, Prebendary of Wellington. Ant. of Cath. He was 
 Dean of Hereford, Master of Ledbury Hospital, and Rector of Cradley in Herefordshire. Buried near the 
 Altar at Hereford Cathedral. Wood’s Fasti Oxon. and Antiquities of the Cath. 136. 
 
 32 Prebendary of Bartonsham, and Vicar of St. Peter’s in Hereford ; held the Deanery of Hereford in com- 
 mendam with the Bishopric of Landaff. Antiquities oj the Cath. 
 
 33 See account of Peterborough Cathedral. 
 
 34 Resigned the Deanery, 1736. 
 
 35 Resigned the Deanery, 1748. 
 
 36 Son of Bishop Egerton; Bishop of Bangor, 1756; Lichfield, 1768 ; Durham, 1771 ; died, 1787.—See 
 Account of Lichfield Cathedral. 
 
 37 Head of University Coll. Oxford ; Prebendary of Cublington ; Died at Oxford. \ 
 
 38 Never resided at the Deanery, but made considerable repairs to the Deanery House. 
 
 39 Elected a Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge, B. A. 1776, M. A. 1779, D.D. 1791; promoted to this 
 Deanery through the interest of the Earl of Lonsdale ; died at the Deanery House, aged sixty-seven. He was 
 Vicar of Upton Bishop, near Ross, and Canon Residentiary of Hereford. Gent. Mag. 
 
 40 Resigned the Deanerv, 1827. 
 
 Iv 2 
 
68 
 
 A 
 
 LIST OF BOOKS, ESSAYS, AND PRINTS, 
 
 WHICH HAVE BEEN PUBLISHED RELATING TO THE 
 
 CATHEDRAL OF HEREFORD; 
 
 WITH A LIST OF ENGRAVED PORTRAITS OF ITS BISHOPS. 
 
 THIS LIST IS SUBJOINED TO GRATIFY THE BIBLIOGRAPHER, THE CRITICAL ANTIQUARY, AND 
 THE ILLUSTRATOR; AS WELL AS TO SHEW, ATONE VIEW, THE SOURCES WHENCE THE 
 CONTENTS OF THE PRECEDING PAGES HAVE BEEN DERIVED, AND THE FULL TITLES OF THE 
 WORKS REFERRED TO IN THE NOTES. 
 
 MANUSCRIPTS, BOOKS, AND ESSAYS. 
 
 The following notice from Bishop Nicholson’s “ Historical Library ,” edit. 1736, p. 130, contains 
 some information respecting the library and archives: — 
 
 “ That there were anciently several good old Register Books belong-ing to this Cathedral, is 
 beyond dispute. Sir H. Spelmari 1 quotes one of them ; and we have heard of several others 
 besides that of Bishop 2 Booth. The library and archives here fell under the like misfortunes, 
 during the ravage of our late days of usurpation, with those of other Cathedral Churches: being 
 made a very improper prey to a fanatical and illiterate army of rebellious blockheads. Amongst 
 these Silas Taylor ivas an officer of a more than ordinary fancy and respect for books and 
 learning; and having gotten part of the Bishop’s Palace 3 in his possession, thought it was also 
 convenient to seize as many of the Churches evidences and records, as he could possibly get into 
 his clutches. With these (and many of the like kind from the church of Worcester) he troop’d off, 
 upon the happy return of our old English government; and near twenty years afterwards, dy’d with 
 some of ’em in his possession at Harwich. His books and papers, together with the few other 
 moveables he left behind him, fell into the hands of his creditors; from whom (if any care was 
 taken to preserve them) it will now be a very difficult matter to retrieve them.” 
 
 In a volume printed in London in 1720, 8vo. is the following notice:—“In the public library 
 at Oxford amongst Mr. Jones’s MS. is one in folio, on vellum, entitled ‘ Inquisitiones et literce 
 patentes ad Ecclesiam Herefurdensem pertinentes MSS. Jones XXI .’ This was deposited in the 
 library since the publication of Dr. Bernard’s Catalogue. In a private hand is a Collection of the 
 Monuments in the Cathedral Church, made by Mr. Dingley in 1680, which has preserved some 
 few inscriptions; but is remarkable for the fine draughts of monuments and the original characters 
 in which the inscriptions are wrote.”—Gough’s Topography. A list of the same is given in the 
 Appendix to “ The Antiquities of the Cathedral Church,” &c. 
 
 “ RegistrumCaroli Booth , Edv. Fox , et Edm. Boneri Episcoporum Hereford." ab A. D. 1516 
 ad A. D. 1539 inclusive, MS. pergam. folio, nuper in bibl. Joannis Moore episc. Eliens. modo in 
 bibl. publ. Cantab. 
 
 In Bibl. Cotton MSS. Vitellius, E. ix. Adami Herefordcnsis episcopi qucedam ad Joannem de 
 rebus quibusdam et controversiis ad ecclesiam suam spectantibus. Ibid. Faustina , B. ii. 33, 
 appropriationem ecclesice de Lugwarden decano et capitulo Hereford. 
 
 Registrum pervetustum eccl. Cath. Hereford, temp. R. Ed. I. vol. ii. penes praehonorabilem 
 Thomam vicecomitem Weymouth. 
 
 In Bibl. Coll. Corp. Christi, Cant. MS. 120, p. 483, Consuetudines et Statuta Ecclesice 
 Hereford; p. 516, injunctions given by Queen Elizabeth’s Visitors to the Dean and Chapter of 
 Hereford. 
 
 In the “ Valor Ecclesiasticus,” temp. Henry VIII. is a map of the Diocess of Hereford, and 
 some account of the same. 
 
 In the “ Reports on the Public Records of the Kingdom ,” folio, 1800, published by authority 
 
 1 Glossar. in voce Panagia. 2 Hist. Episc. et Dec. Londin. et Assav. 
 
 a Ath. Oxon. vol. ii. p. 464. See new edition, vol. iii. col. 1175. 
 
LIST OF BOOKS, ESSAYS, AND PRINTS. 
 
 69 
 
 of Parliament, is a return from the Registrar of the Cathedral Church and of the Dean and 
 Chapter of Hereford, respecting- the records of this Cathedral. 
 
 In the British Museum are some MSS. relating- to Hereford Cathedral, its monuments, &c. 
 The following numbers in the Harleian Catalogue point them out:—Nos. 6149, 3048, 23d article 
 has relation to De Bohun.—4826, the Bishops of Hereford.—4768, Family of Cantilupe.—1430, 
 5th Article, ditto.—595, Episcopal affairs.—6303, Regulations respecting the Church of Here¬ 
 ford.— 3740, Article 12, Disputes between the Dean and Prebendaries. 
 
 “ The Life and Gests of Sir Thomas Cantilupe, Bishop of Hereford, and some time 
 Chancellor of England. Extracted out of the authentic Records of his Canonization as to the 
 most part. Anonymous, Matt. Paris, Capgrave, Harpsfield, and others. Collected by R. S. 
 (Qy. Surius) S. I. at Gaut. Small 8vo. 1674. Dedicated to the Duke of Tuscany.” 
 
 “ Dr, Stukeley saw a book of no little bulk at St. Omer’s, containing an account of his miracles.” 
 Gough’s “ Topography,” vol. i. p. 412. 
 
 *■* The History and Antiquities of the City and Cathedral Church of Hereford, containing an 
 Account of all the Inscriptions, Epitaphs, &c upon the Tombs, Monuments, and Gravestones ; 
 with Lists of the principal Dignitaries; and an Appendix, consisting of several valuable original 
 Papers,” was published, if not compiled by Dr. Rawlinson. London, 1717, 8vo. (By a notice, 
 in p. 23, of “ the present Lord Chancellor,” Harcourt, it is presumed that the volume was printed 
 in 1713, as he was Chancellor only that year.) The Appendix contains the obits of several 
 benefactors to this Cathedral, transcribed from a folio MS. missal secundum usum Hereford, 
 written about the reign of Edward III., and seventy-one charters or grants of lands to this 
 church, from a Bodleian MS. and dated 1510. Some years after it came out it was attacked 
 “ in a most ungenerous manner by a member of this church, in a very warm and angry preface to 
 a sermon preached in Landaff Cathedral, fathering it on Browne Willis, with some uncharitable 
 reflections.” In the account of this Church in his “ Survey of the Cathedrals,” &c. 1727, p. 500, 
 Mr. Willis disclaims all concern in the book, and gives the author of the sermon a sharp castigation. 
 
 The new edition of Dugdale’s “ Monasticon Anglicanum,” vol vi. by Caley, Ellis, and 
 Bandinel, contains the following engravings, drawn and etched by J. Coney: — 1. Ground Plan 
 of the Cathedral.—2. View of the West End, copied from Hollar’s print.—3. North East View, 
 and 4. An Interior View. The same volume contains some account of the Diocess, See, and 
 Cathedral, notices of the Bishops and Deans, copies of the following deeds, &c.—No. I. Historia 
 de prima fundatione ejusdem, 1212. — 2. Carta regis Edvvardi Confessoris, lb.—3. Prsedia 
 Episcopatus Heref. temp. R. Willielmi I. Ib.—4. Carta R. Henrici I. donat Rad. de Simesi 
 confirmans, 1215.—5. C. Simonis de Cliffords, de Manerio de Hamne, ib.—6. C. Radulhi 
 Heref. episcopi dec. et capitulo vi. ib. — 7. C. Walteri de Lascy facta priori et conv. de 
 Crassewell, 1216.—8. C. Prioris de Crassewell, et ejusdem loci fratrum, ib.—9. De dono et 
 concessionibus Petri de Aquablanca Herefordensis episcopi, ib. —10. Nomina maneriorum olim 
 eccl. Cathedr. Heref. spectantium, ib.—11. Carta Will. d’Eureus de Capella de putela, ib,— 
 12. Finis lavatus de advocatione eccl de. Putelego, 1217.—13. Confirmatio Radulfi Murdac, ib. 
 
 Tanner's “ Notitia Monastica ” contains references to several authorities relating to the See and 
 Diocess. 
 
 Willis’s “ History of the Mitred Abbeys," 8vo. 1719, contains measurements of the Cathedral, 
 with names of Bishops buried within it. 
 
 In Stukeley’s “ Itinerarium Curiosum," fol. 1724, Iter. 4, p. 67, is an account of Cantilupe's 
 shrine, the Chapter House, Lady Chapel, and Library. 
 
 Lord John Scudamore's Benefactions to this Cathedral , are recorded in Gibson’s “ View of 
 Door and Holm Lacy.” London, 1727, 4to. 
 
 In Wilkins’s “ Concilia Magnce Britannice ,” fol. 1737, vol. i. p. 761, Prseceptum Regis 
 Henrici III. episcopo Herefordensi contra non residentiam praelatorum. 
 
 Browne Willis’s “ Survey of the Cathedrals " 4to. 1742, contains accounts of the Cathedral, 
 Monuments, Inscriptions, sale of the estates and lands in 1647, 1648, 1649, and 1650, endowment 
 of the Dean and Chapter, notices of the Bishops, Deans, Precentors, Chancellors, Treasurers, 
 Archdeacons, Prebendaries, also an account of the Churches and Chapels in the Diocess, &c. 
 vol. i. p. 499 to 622. Plates, North Prospect, drawn by W. Merricke and engraved by J. Harris ; 
 West Front, ditto ditto. 
 
 Leland’s “Itinerary ,” 8vo. 1744, vol. iv. p. 86, of the Cathedral; vol. v. p. 10, vol. vi. p. 75, 
 
70 
 
 HEREFORD CATHEDRAL. 
 
 of Prestbury ; vol. viii. p. 37. 56, nomina episcoporum ; p. 41, ex libro martirologii; p. 55, 
 inscriptiones sepulcbrales in ecclesia Hereford; p. 57, palaetia episcopi Hereford; p. 59, de 
 fundatione. 
 
 In Carter’s “ Ancient Architecture folio, 1795, Pl. xlv. Shield from Cantilupe’s tomb, 
 lviii. Stone Seats in the Cathedral, lxxviii. Spandril on Cantilupe’s tomb. 
 
 Gough’s “ Sepulchral Monuments," fo. 1796, contains, vol. i. part i. p. lxix, Chalice, found 
 1524—p. cxx. Brasses stolen from—p. ci. Brass in Cathedral; vol. i. part ii. p. 18, account of 
 Tombs of Bishops Rainelm and Lozing — p. 32, five Bishops’ Monuments alike, Vere, Clyve, 
 Betune, Foliot, and Melun—p. 36, Monument of Giles Bruce (Bp.)— p. 62, Bishop Cantilupe, 
 account of his Tomb, &c. ; vol. ii. part i. cci., Charnel House; part iii. West End rebuilt by 
 Lochard, 115—inscriptions on two Monuments in south transept, 178. 315—Cathedral yard 
 levelled, 325; with the following Plates; Shrine of Cantelupe—Shrine of St. Ethelbert — Chapel 
 of Bishop Stanbury—Figures on the Tomb and Arms—Monument of Bishop Thomas Charlton, 
 1313—Monument of Sir Richard Pembridge, 1375—Monument of Lewis Charlton, Bishop, 1369 
 —Brasses on Tomb of Bishop Trellick—Monuments of Robert Lozing- and Raynelm. 
 
 Price’s “ Historical Account of the City of Hereford ,” 8vo. 1796, contains a South East 
 View of the Cathedral, erroneously called the west; Plan of the Cathedral; Remains of the old 
 Chapter House. 
 
 “ Collections toivards the History and Antiquities of the County of Hereford. By John 
 Duncumb, A.M. vol. i.” 1804, Hereford ; contain memoirs of the Bishops, from 680 to 1803— 
 accounts of the revenues of the Cathedral, and of monuments, &c. p. 443 to 283 ; Plates, 1. Five 
 Seals —2. Ancient Front (West)—3. Windows—4. Shrines of Ethelbert and Cantilupe. 
 
 In Newcourt’s “ Repertorium,” vol. i. p. 452, of the advowson of St. Mary Mounthaw, 
 London, and the Bishop’s house near it. 
 
 In the “ Beauties of England and Wales," vol. iv. 8vo. 1805, is an account of the Cathedral, 
 p. 458 to 479, and two Plates ; General View—Ruins of the Chapter House. 
 
 Malcolm’s “ First Impressions," 8vo. 1807, contain an account of the Cathedral, p. 82 to 109, 
 and two Plates, 1. of Windows—2. North Porch, drawn and etched by the author. 
 
 “ The History and Antiquities of the Cathedral Church of Hereford," by J. and H. S. Storer, 
 8vo. 1815, contains a short account of the Cathedral, and the following nine prints, Ground Plan 
 —South Transept - Interior of Nave —South West View—North West View—Interior North 
 West of Transept — Cloisters—South East End—East End. 
 
 George III. Anno 59. An Act to enable the Dean and Chapter of Hereford to discharge 
 certain Debts incurred in repairing the Cathedral Church of Hereford. P. A. 
 
 “ The Hereford Guide; containing a concise History of the City of Hereford, a Description 
 of its public Buildings, Episcopal See, Cathedral, Parochial Churches,” &c. by W. J. Rees, M. A. 
 12mo. 1827, contains a short account of the See, account of the Bishops, &c. history and account 
 of the Cathedral, Bishop’s Palace, &c. p. 110 to 173, and a View of the Cathedral engraved on 
 wood. 
 
 “ A Brief Inquiry into the ancient and present State of Hereford Cathedral, with an Attempt 
 to classify its Architecture, and suggestions for its renovation and improvement. By the Rev. 
 Thomas Garbett, M. A.” 8vo. 1827, contains remarks on the alterations and present state of the 
 Cathedral, and three plates of windows. 
 
 “ A short Description of a portable Shrine (St. Ethelbert's). By the Rev. Thomas Russell, 
 M. A.” 8vo. 1830, contains a plate of the shrine, with fac-simile of the inscription—an account of 
 the discovery of Bishop Trellick’s coffin, with a plate of the head of his crosier, 
 
 PRINTS. 
 
 West Front of the Cathedral as it stood in 1724, published in European Mag. 1792, 8vo. 
 
 In the “ Vetusta Monumenta,” by the Society of Antiquaries, is a View and Plan of the 
 Chapel called St. Magdalen's, 1747, folio, vol. i. pl. 49. The same is re-engraved for Gough’s 
 edition of “ Camden’s Britannia,” vol. ii. folio, 1789. 
 
 Four Views of Hereford, each taking in the Cathedral, Geo. Powle, del. ; James Ross, sc. 
 large 4to. 1778. 
 
 North View of the Cathedral, with Spire and Tower, published in the “ Christian’s Magazine,” 
 1784, 8vo. 
 
LIST OF BOOKS, ESSAYS, AND PRINTS. 
 
 71 
 
 Interior of the Chapter House, sketched 1784, J. Carter, sc. 1790.—Ditto, in “ The Beauties 
 of England and Wales,” T. Hearne del. ; J. Roffe, sc. 1803. 
 
 In “ Hearne and Byrne’s Antiquities,” 1786, is a View of the ruins of the West End, &c. of 
 the Cathedral, with an account. 
 
 Four Prints of the Cathedral, representing- the West Front before it fell, and view of it in ruins, 
 with the Nave and North West View, were engraved in aquatint by Middiman and Jukes in 1788 
 and 1789, from drawings by James Wathen. 
 
 View of the Cathedral after the spire was taken down, E. Dayes, del.; J. Walker, sc. 4to. 1795, 
 in Copper-plate Magazine. 
 
 View of the Cathedral from the North East, 1811, a large aquatint, from a drawing by J. 
 Buckler.—Ditto, 1816, etched by J. C. Buckler, 4to. 
 
 In the Gentleman s Magazine for July, 1824, is a View of the North Porch. The same plate 
 published in Malcolm’s “ First Impressions.” 
 
 Vertue engraved a Seal of the Dean, two of the Dean and Chapter (temp. Hen. III. and later), 
 those of Bishops Bennet and Coke, three of the Bohun families, and three others. 
 
 N. W. View of the Cathedral, with the Western Tower, published by Smith, in Exeter Change, 
 large folio.—The same, published in 4to. J. Harris, fecit. 
 
 King engraved a North View of the Cathedral, and Hollar both North and West Views, for 
 the third volume of the Monasticon, which Gough calls “ some of his worst.” 
 
 In Grose’s Antiquities of England and I Vales is a View, with an account of the Chapter House. 
 Engraved by Sparrow. 
 
 View of the East Window of the Cathedral, painted by Bachler. E. W. Gill, del.; on stone 
 by L. Haghe. Small folio, published by W. H. Vale, Hereford. 
 
 “ Ecclesiee Cathedralis Herefordensis Prospectus Occidentalis,” large print. 
 
 In -the Antiquarian and Topographical Cabinet are the following engravings, Shrine of 
 Bishop Cantilupe—Shrine of St. Ethelbert—Back of ditto — Crosier of Bishop Trellick. 
 
 ACCOUNTS OF BISHOPS. 
 
 Godwin in his “ Catalogue of Bishops small 4to. 1615, gives short Memoirs of the Bishops 
 from 680 to 1602. 
 
 In “ De Prcesulibus,” by Godwin and Richardson, fol. 1742, these accounts are continued to 
 1723. 
 
 Le Neve’s “ Fasti Ecclesice Anglicance,” fol. 1716, contains lists, with short accounts of the 
 Bishops, Deans, Prebendaries, &c. up to 1713. 
 
 Willis’s “ Survey of the Cathedrals ,” 4to. 1742, contains a list, with Memoirs of the Bishops, 
 Deans, Prebendaries, &c. up to that time. 
 
 “ The History and Antiquities of the Cathedral Church of Hereford.” 8vo. 1717, gives lists 
 of the Bishops, Deans, Treasurers, Archdeacons, &c. to 1712. 
 
 PORTRAITS OF BISHOPS. 
 
 1538 Edmund Bonner whipping Thomas Henshawe, a w-ood print, in the first edition of Fox’s 
 “ Acts and Monuments,” p. 2043. Granger. Bromley. 
 
 1617 Francis Godwin: —half sh. Vertue, sc. 1742, engraved for “ De Preesulibus.” 
 
 1633 William Juxon: —From a painting at Longleat, 8vo. Granger. In the set of Loyalists, 
 
 G. Vertue, sc. Bromley. In Lord Clarendon’s “ History,” 8vo. Vertue , sc. Bromley. 
 
 1634 Matthew Wren: — G Vander Gucht, half sh., eng-raved for the “ Parentalia.” Granger. 
 
 Bromley. A satirical print in “ Wren’s Anatomy,” 4to. Bromley. 
 
 1660 Nicholas Monk :— Jos. Nutting , sc., small, with others. Granger. Bromley. 
 
 1712 Philip Bisse, folio, Thomas Hill, p. ; G. Vertue, sc. Noble. Bromley. 
 
 1721 Benjamin Hoadley :— Sitting in robes, sh. W. Hogarth, p.; B. Baron, sc. 1743. 
 Bromley. Prefixed to his “ Works,” 1773, fob; N. Hone, p.; J. Basire, sc. 1772. 
 Bromley. Oval, in a canonical habit; J. Faber, sc. Bromley. Large folio; G. Vertue, 
 sc. Bromley. 
 
 1788 John Butler: — Prefixed to a volume of Sermons, iEtat. 82; Hall, pinx. ; Simon, sc. 
 Another, in Christian’s Magazine, as Bishop of Oxford, 8vo. 1783. 
 
72 
 
 HEREFORD CATHEDRAL. 
 
 LIST OF PRINTS, 
 
 ILLUSTRATIVE OF HEREFORD CATHEDRAL. 
 
 Plates. 
 
 Subjects. 
 
 Drawn by 
 
 Engraved by 
 
 Inscribed to 
 
 Described. 
 
 I. 
 
 Ground Plan, and Plans of Parts.. 
 
 T. H. Clarke 
 
 R. Roose.... 
 
 
 37. 
 
 38. 
 
 II. 
 
 View of the Church from N.W. 
 
 W.H. Bartlett 
 
 T. Higham.. 
 
 R. B. Phillips, Esq. 
 
 
 
 III. 
 
 North Porch, North Transept, &.. 
 
 W.H. Bartlett 
 
 J. Le Keux.. 
 
 Rev.JohnClutton,D.D. 
 
 42. 
 
 43. 
 
 IV. 
 
 v 
 
 
 T. Hearne .. 
 
 Jas. Redaway 
 J. Le Keux.. 
 
 Rev.A J.Walker, A.M. 
 Ben. Biddulph, Esq... 
 Rev.H.H.Morgan,B.D. 
 
 43. 
 
 
 
 W.H. Bartlett 
 
 44. 51. 
 
 VI. 
 
 Part of North Transept, Tower, Stc. 
 
 W.H. Bartlett 
 
 R. Sands.... 
 
 43. 
 
 
 VII. 
 
 
 W.H. Bartlett 
 
 W. Taylor .. 
 
 ( Rev. Thomas Un- ) 
 
 ( derwood, M.A. j 
 
 44. 
 
 
 
 
 
 VIII. 
 
 Lady Chapel,Compartment North Side, } 
 
 T. H. Clarke 
 
 G. Gladwin.. 
 
 
 52. 
 
 
 
 with Section of the East End.i 
 
 
 
 IX. 
 
 Section East End, Lady Chapel and Crypt 
 
 T. H. Clarke 
 
 J. Le Keux.. 
 
 Edward Haycock, Esq. 
 
 52. 
 
 
 X 
 
 Compartments of Choir, Interior and ) 
 Exterior, North Side . S 
 
 T. H. Clarke 
 
 J. Le Keux.. 
 
 
 42. 44. 47. 
 
 
 
 
 
 XI. 
 
 Section through Tower and Transept, } 
 
 North to South. S 
 
 View in the North Transept . 
 
 T. H. Clarke 
 
 J. Le Keux.. 
 
 William Tite, Esq. .. 
 
 43. 
 
 49. 50. 
 
 XII. 
 
 T. H. Clarke 
 
 J. Le Keux.. 
 
 The Rev. John Jones . 
 
 50. 
 
 56. 
 
 XIII. 
 
 South Aile, Monument of Bp. Mayo, &c. 
 
 W.H.Bartlett 
 
 W. Woolnoth 
 
 ( Rev. Newton D.H. ) 
 l Newton, A.B... \ 
 
 48. 
 
 51. 
 
 XIV. 
 
 Cantelupe’s Shrine (figured XV.). 
 
 W.H. Bartlett 
 
 J. Le Keux.. 
 
 ( The Lord Bishop \ 
 ( of Hereford .. ( 
 
 56. 
 
 
 XV. 
 
 Monument in the North Wall of the ) 
 
 1. H. Clarke 
 
 J. Le Keux.. 
 
 l The Rev. Henry ) 
 
 52. 
 
 
 
 Lady Chapel (Title). $ 
 
 
 ( Lee Warner .. ( 
 
 
 XVI 
 
 Windows at N. E. end, Lady Chapel .. 
 
 W.H. Bartlett 
 
 J. Le Keux.. 
 
 Sir E. S. Stanhope, Bt 
 
 52. 
 
 
 XVII. 
 
 View of Monuments in the South Aile ) 
 
 W.H. Bartlett 
 
 S. Williams 
 
 
 60. 
 
 
 
 of the Choir (Wood Cut).$ 
 
 
 
 A CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE 
 
 OF THE 
 
 NAMES AND DATES OF DIFFERENT PARTS OF HEREFORD CATHEDRAL. 
 
 Kings. 
 
 Bishops. 
 
 Date. 
 
 Parts of the Building. 
 
 Described. 
 
 Plates. 
 
 William II... 
 
 Lozing. 
 
 1079.... 
 
 
 41.4Q. 
 
 J. 
 
 Henry I. 
 
 Ravnelm. 
 
 1107.... 
 
 Nave, &c... 
 
 
 IV, XI. 
 
 Henry II. .. 
 
 De Vere . 
 
 1190.... 
 
 1 Part behind the Altar. 
 
 \ Ladv Chapel... 
 
 44. 51 . 
 
 V. 
 
 VII. VIII. IX. 
 
 Henry III... 
 
 Aquablanca .... 
 
 1240.... 
 
 Clerestory of the Choir. 
 
 42. 44. 47 .. 
 
 X. 
 
 Henry III. .. 
 
 Bruce . 
 
 s 1200 ) 
 
 Central Tower ... 
 
 4Q 
 
 IT. VT VTI. XI. 
 
 Edward II... 
 
 Cantelupe . 
 
 ( 12J6 S 
 
 1287.... 
 
 ( North Transept from the Ground .. 
 1 Cantelupe’s Shrine . 
 
 50•••••••••• 
 
 19. 
 
 XI. XII. 
 
 XIV. 
 
 Henry VI. .. 
 
 Stanbury. 
 
 1474.... 
 
 Stanbury Chapel .. 
 
 57. 
 
 x. 
 
 Henry VII... 
 
 Audley . 
 
 1502.... 
 
 Audley Chapel.. 
 
 .52. 
 
 IX. 
 
 Henry VIII. 
 
 Booth. 
 
 1536.... 
 
 North, or Booth’s Porch. 
 
 43. 
 
 III. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
INDEX. 
 
 Ailes, see Ground Plan; monuments in, 60; 
 remarks on the word, 41. 
 
 Aldred, Archbishop of York, 7. 
 
 Altar-screen, by Bishop Bisse, 33. 
 
 Aquablanca, Bishop, account of, 14; his 
 character, 15; annually commemorated, 16; 
 monument, 57. 
 
 Aquablanca, Dean, monument, 57 ; notice of, 65. 
 
 Athelstan, see Ethelstan. 
 
 Audley, Bishop, 24; chantry chapel of, 52 ; 
 section, plate ix. 
 
 Beauchamp, Bishop, 23. 
 
 Beauclerk, Bishop, 34. 
 
 Bennett, Bishop, 28; disputes between him and 
 the citizens, 29; a good tennis player, 30; 
 monument, 57. 
 
 Berew, Dean, monument, 59 ; noticed, 66. 
 
 Betun, Bishop, account of, 9 ; anecdote of, 10 ; 
 repaired the cathedral, 11 ; monument of, 60. 
 
 Bishops, biographical notices of, 2 to 35; chrono¬ 
 logical list of, 63 ; monuments of, see respective 
 names ; palaces of, 61. 
 
 Bisse, Bishop, 33; built the organ-screen, ib.; 
 monument, 61; portrait of, 71. 
 
 Bohun, Humphrey de, monument of, 59. 
 
 Bonner, Bishop, 26 ; died in prison, ib.; portrait 
 of, 71. 
 
 Booth, Bishop, 24; porch of, 43; monument of, 
 57. 
 
 Breton, Bishop, account of, 16. 
 
 Breuse, Bishop, 13 ; built the central tower, ib.; 
 monument of, 61. 
 
 Burials within towns, &c. 3. 
 
 Butler, Bishop Richard, 23. 
 
 Butler, Bishop John, 35 ; built the chapel of the 
 palace, and contributed towards the rebuilding 
 of the west end, ib.; portrait of, 71. 
 
 Cantelupe, Bishop, 16; account of, 17; his 
 shrine, ib. ; miracles performed at, 18 ; view of 
 shrine, plate xiv.; described, 56. 
 
 Capella, Bishop, 9; built the Wye Bridge, ib. 
 
 Castello, Bishop, attempt to poison, 25. 
 
 Cathedral—Milfred built a “ stone church,” and 
 appointed a bishop, 4 ; suffered from the Danes, 
 5 ; repaired or rebuilt by Ethelstan, ib.; burnt 
 by the Welsh, ib. ; commenced rebuilding by 
 
 Bishop Lozing, 8 ; injured in the civil wars, 
 temp. Stephen, 11 ; repaired by Bishop Betun, 
 ib. ; described, 37; exterior described, 42 ; in¬ 
 terior, 44 ; nave, 45 ; west end, 45 ; transept, 
 43. 49; choir, 44 to 48; east transept, 51 ; 
 Lady Chapel, 44. 52; cloisters, 53; chapter- 
 house, 54 ; tower, 43 ; repairs and rebuilding, 
 46. 
 
 Cedda, Bishop, 4. 
 
 Chandler, Dean, monument to, 60 ; see list. 
 
 Chapel, an ancient, account of, 34. 
 
 Chapel, Lady, described, 44; plan of, see plate i. 
 
 Chapter-house, remains of, 53 ; plan, plate i. 
 
 Chapter-room, ancient map in, 54. 
 
 Charlton, Lewis, Bishop, 22; monument of, 60. 
 
 Charlton, Thomas, 21 ; monument of, 61. 
 
 Choir described, 44. 48; monuments in, 61; 
 plate x. 
 
 Clive, Bishop, 9; monument of, 57. 
 
 Cloisters, Bishops’, described, 53 ; plan of, plate r. 
 
 Coke, Bishop, 32 ; monument of, 60. 
 
 Columns, plans of, see Plan, plate i.; see also 
 plates of interior views. 
 
 Cornewall, Bishop, 35. 
 
 Courteney, Bishop, 22. 
 
 Croft, Bishop, character of, 32. 
 
 Crypt, plan of, plate i.; section, plate ix.; de¬ 
 scribed, 52. 
 
 Cuthbert, Bishop, account of, 3. 
 
 Deans, chronological list of, with notices, 65. 
 
 Denton, Alexander, and his wife, monument of, 60. 
 
 Egerton, Bishop, 34. 
 
 Ethelbert, murder of, 3 ; his ghost, 4; interred at 
 Hereford, ib.; miracles at his tomb, ib.; new 
 church dedicated to, ib. ; supposed statue of, 59. 
 
 Ethelstan, Bishop, repaired or rebuilt the cathedral, 
 5 ; account of, 6; remarks on his building, 41 ; 
 monument of, 56. 
 
 Field, Bishop, 32; bust of, 57. 
 
 Foliot, Gilbert, 11 ; monument of, 60. 
 
 Foliot, Hugh, 13; hospital, ib. 
 
 Foliot, Robert, Bishop, account of, 12; monument 
 of, 13. 
 
 Font described, 54. 
 
 Foxe, Bishop, his works, 26. 
 
 Frowcester, Dean, brass to, 60 ; see list of Deans. 
 
 L 
 
74 
 
 INDEX. 
 
 Gerard, Bishop, anecdote of, 8. 
 
 Gilbert, Bishop, 22. 
 
 Godwin, Bishop, account of his works, 30, 31 ; 
 monument of, 58. 
 
 Harley, John, Bishop, account of, 26. 
 
 Harley, the Honourable John, Bishop, 34. 
 
 Harold, Dean, monument of, 60; see list of 
 Deans. 
 
 Harvey, Dean, monument of, 60. 
 
 Hereford, founded in the Anglo-Saxon era, 2 ; 
 See here in 544, 2. 
 
 Hoadley, Bishop, account of, 33; portraits, 71. 
 Humphreys, Bishop, disputes with the citizens, 33; 
 
 monument of, 61. 
 
 Huntingford, Bishop, 35. 
 
 Ironside, Bishop, 33. 
 
 Juxon, Bishop, 32. 
 
 Lady Chapel, described, 44 ; plates viii. ix. xvi. ; 
 described by Mr. Garbett, 52; remarks on its 
 present state, 53 ; monuments in, 59. 
 
 Leofgar, Bishop, account of, 6. 
 
 Lindsell, Bishop, 32 ; monument of, 60. 
 
 Lozing, account of, 7 ; built the cathedral, 8; 
 
 inscription to, 58. 
 
 Lucy, Bishop, 22. 
 
 Luxmore, Bishop, 35. 
 
 Mapenore, Bishop, 13; monument of, 57. 
 
 Marr, Richard de la, and his wife, brass to, 59. 
 Mascall, Bishop, 22. 
 
 Maydenstan, Bishop, his benefactions to the 
 cathedra], 14. 
 
 Mayo, Bishop, 25; monument of, 60. 
 
 Melun, Bishop, 12 ; monument of, 60. 
 
 Millyng, Bishop, 24. 
 
 Monk, Bishop, never visited his diocess, 32. 
 
 Nave, described, 47; view of, plate iv. 
 
 Orlton, Bishop, account of, 20. 
 
 Palaces of Bishops, 61. 
 
 Pembridge, Sir Richard, monument of, 56. 
 
 Philips, John, monument of, 57. 
 
 Podda, Bishop, 3. 
 
 Polton, Bishop, 22. 
 
 Porch, built by Bishop Booth, 25; see Booth. 
 
 Purfey, Bishop, or Warton, 26. 
 
 Putta, Bishop, account of, 2. 
 
 Raynelm, Bishop, account of, 9 ; monument of, 
 60. 
 
 Saxon Architecture, remarks on, 48. 
 
 Scory, Bishop, account of, 27 ; bequests to Here¬ 
 ford, 28. 
 
 See at Hereford in 544, 2; granted in trust to 
 Aldred — vacant six years — vacant fourteen 
 years, 1646, 32. 
 
 Shrine, see Cantelupe. 
 
 Skipp, Bishop, 26. 
 
 Spofford, Bishop, 23. 
 
 Stanbury, Bishop, account of, 23 ; built a chantry 
 chapel, 24; described, 57. 
 
 Swinford, Bishop, 19; journal of his domestic 
 affairs, &c. 20 ; monument of, 58. 
 
 Tirktell, Bishop, 3. 
 
 Tortere, Bishop, 3. 
 
 Tower, Central, built by Bishop Breuse, 13; 
 described, 43 ; views of, plates ii. vi. xi. 
 
 Transepts, Eastern, Account of, 51 ; windows of, 
 ib. 
 
 Transept, North, described, 43. 50. 57 ; plates 
 vi. xi. xii. 
 
 Transept, South, described, 49 ; monuments in, 
 60; plate xi. 
 
 Trellick, Bishop, an enemy to pageants and matri¬ 
 mony, 21 ; his grave opened, ib. 
 
 Trevenant, Bishop, 22 ; monument of, 60. 
 
 Tyler, Dean, monument of, 60 ; see list of Deans. 
 
 Vere, Bishop, 13; noted for buildings, ib.; monu¬ 
 ment of, 60. 
 
 Walstod, Bishop, commenced a “ magnificent 
 cross,” which Cuthbert finished, 3. 
 
 Walter of Lorraine, 7. 
 
 West Front, comments on, 45. 
 
 Warton, Bishop, or Purfey, 26. 
 
 Westfayling, Bishop, 28; anecdote of, ib. ; 
 character of, ib.; monument of, 59. 
 
 Wren, Bishop, 32. 
 
 THE END. 
 
 Marchant, Printer, Ingram-eourt, Fenchurch-street. 
 

 
 
 # 
 
 Measured &. Drawn by TJLClarke. &•- C.Hacker. 1829. 
 
 "Engraved by R.Knofe. 
 
 
 eaoasD klaw px*ans of vahts 
 
 ,-m.TBFjS]HLEStCBS TO MffiHUTlCEK’rS, &c. 
 
 
 Londoh,, Published, March 1.1&30: by Longman, Sc Cf Paternoster Row. 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 • • • ' '■ ■■ ' 
 
 - • - *. 
 
 * 
 
 
 ■ 
 
 ** • ''' 
 
 ■ . - . ; 
 
 
 4 
 
 ' ■ , - - 
 
 '■ • ^ *''• . 
 •f . ' . ‘ • 
 
 
 . 
 
 - 
 
 
 
 - • .. .• • ' - '•> • . • 
 
 : * - v ' 
 
 • - - - 
 
 ■ 
 
 .. A 
 
 
 • V 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 T . 
 
 - ‘ - ' - > 
 
 .. •. -j ■ 
 
 * ** . i ■' * 
 
 
 
 . » » >; 
 
 
 
 
 ; V- 
 
 • v . 
 
 
 
 . . s 
 
 ■ 
 
 
 ' . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
i: AimiRTBW at> ATOTQT mnnrF. s. 
 
 
 W ■ ^ 
 
 Lotuton/,^Published .ina. ljft.ll. by Jjangruart A- t'!’ fiitt'rno* 
 


 NOITK FG>BCE, FART OF N-TRAK§EFT Sec . 
 
 To the "REV? JOHN CLTJTTOTT, D. D . Canon Residentiary of Hereford Cathedral. this plate i9 inscribed "by 
 
 THE 
 
 Zondc<iuPubKshed/2fbv.l.lS30.- bv Zongman A CTRaemosterHm. 
 
 

A^nnrQTT mnnR S 
 
 ■ 7 
 
 
 
 
 Anonrr^^a- u su pap*.rtpop 8Z op^d snpi \PT V ' HSIHTV2VL NHOi* JWOV 
 
rATHlf 1KTD1RAT. AM TlIQi mnrUF. S 
 
 ‘VOLBartletfe did. 
 
 CAOTUBK-AT 
 
 HEW^HEHiHjni tihtf . _aeuh, loaDEra© s . 
 
 Xn^raved Tt^ XXe Keux 
 
 To BENJAMIN" E:LDJ)ULFH ESQ. of BurghDl,Eerefordshjxe ; this plate is inscribed ~bv 
 
 fttblishsil June 1,1X32. bv Icnoman X ffTaler/.r.-trr Ron’. 
 
 THE AUTHOR. 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 s 
 
 , \ 
 
 « 
 
 .. 
 
 ■ . • . - 
 
 < 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 . . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 , 
 
 ■- " • & 
 
 9 
 
 
 
 
 
CATHEDRA!. ANTIQUITIES. 
 
 Drawn "by W.H.Bartlett. ’ - Ivngraved.by.R.Sands. 
 
 ME3B.IEi1F®3SjS) <2A'3P3BI!lS!l©ISr AIL. 
 
 PART OF S.TIU'SSRPT, TOWEt, &C 
 
 To the REV? VJ.H. MORGAN. B.D. Canon Residentiary of Hie Cathedral. &c.&c.this plans is inscribed. by the 
 
 AUTHOR 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 London rUbk's/ud Jiuu.Ud30.-by J’Britton. Biwion Street. 
 
iRAX ANTIQUrriES * 
 
 
 
 
 r 
 
 3EA§3F UMI® 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 
 JI«ABY CHAPEE . COMPARTMENT, SIDE, AT EAST END,WJLTH SECTION OF THE UTTER. 
 
 ( vide Ground FI gun.) 
 
 London . RtbUshed June 1.1830. by J. Britton, Burton Street-. 
 

 
 — 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 % 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 — 
 
 -( HATWTF. TIl TOAT. AWlT^ll iVirilTK § . 
 
 TL.I 3 L. 
 
 
 J Le !Kenx fc. 
 
 Scale of 10 
 
 Men.-aired. & Drawn, "by T.H.Clarke. 
 
 EHllElglFCDIEID) ffiAWHEBMAJL , • . 
 
 STECTXGlK EAST JEITO3LAD1T CHAPEL & CKYPT X.OOSZH'G- EAST. 
 
 To EDWARD HANCOCK ~ESQV-^IRC3ITECT: Shrewsbury, this plate is inscribed as a mark, of esteem Try the 
 
 ‘ AUTHOR. 
 
 Zen don-Published. WovJ..18$C ,b\t Zorujman/ Se C?Paternoster Row . 
 
 * \ 
 

 1HI1^IEHF®IEID) <SATHI2EIG>3RAIL.« 
 
 
 
 ni.aarlc© del. 
 
 J. Le Kerne fc. 
 
 C ATIH1 Rll STOAT. AWTTQT mrTITF. « . 
 
 <C OMTEA3RT MENT OF CJEOML. EXXEBJOJtt. & JLNtEISJIOB. » W. SFDE . 
 
 Xtmdcn. Published JVpv? 1.1&30. byXcnnman <C* C?J?atei7Wst& m jR0H‘. 
 
CATHTETTCR AT, AWTTT Q'TTTfrTFF. § . 
 
 ffidSJEHF®M© <DA'TWmmUA)'L 0 
 sec™© TuraoiiGM; tower & transf^t. to s 
 

 
 fT ATIFTTRIUTR AT. A^TTQimi Xinfc S . 
 
 1HL.OT1. 
 
 T.W. Harke aa. 
 
 UngraFed-ljy J.ie Keux. 
 
 ®ATFEDllOlEAILi. 
 
 WinF.W im T1BTE a - . JltA^SBPI. 
 
 Ib the EEV" JOHN JOKES, M.A. or HERKFOJU)-, a Patron- of _&ntimiai'lan. Literatnre, this Plate is mscribecllj^ 
 
 ' THE JUTTHOK.. 
 
 Ltiu/.n Published u&tfttMJUS31.lvZimgmMi Cl’.it'niostei'Row. 
 
 ETT 
 
fAT3EEIDTRLAX, AWT 
 
 MUIRISIPOISRI© ©ATMII70IRA3L o 
 
 SOITTIEC A11LE, MOMIMEOT OF BIS.MOP MAYO, 3?Co 
 
 To tie REV? MEWTCW DICKUnTSOW HAND NEWTON, AJB. Hector of Hrolimy, & Vic;n- of hred-warcline ,this plate is inscribed 'by the 
 
 AUTHOR 
 
 London, Published July 1J.630: by Jonyman S’- C?PaternosterMow. 
 
 

 
 ' 
 
HTIFTOTRAT. ANTIQUlLTIE S 
 
 CATIHEMRAJL. 
 
 ^IT0J)pWS AT K.E. EJTO, XMWT CHAPEL . 
 
 Ti 
 
 SIR VITWTM SCUJlAMORE STANHO.KE. J1AR T of Holme lacc^Paik,Jfaefcn:dahij'e, tlii5 plate is inscribed Tjy- 
 
 THF. ATOICTR. 
 
 -Pui'hsJn a Ju/tfJJ&Sl. byXcnwnum 
 
 
 v. ^ „ 
 
 
 
 X- t fJPnttrrrp. n w Jton ■ 
 

 
 
 
 
 ■ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ; 
 
Princeton Theological Seminary Library 
 
 
 
 We/ |V 
 
 ijk qifcS, V KH 
 
 
 
 £x^ ' ‘ j nMk 
 
 
 
 
 
 ' w 
 
 
 
 
 
 T 
 
 
 /E/k 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 . 
 
 1 
 
 
 EE \ J s*Y> 
 
 
 
 
 Ti 
 
 
 \ 
 
 \ 
 
 \ 
 
 / 
 
 jRifcJHY ■ Jr/ 
 
 
 % j " V 
 
 mg TM ■’ 
 
 ■ T& 
 
 

 ij* 
 
 mssrm 
 
 m 
 
 , m 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 laBy.-- 
 
 SCm 
 
 --•zJm 1 
 
 
 
 JteMi 
 
 fij 
 
 i 
 
 * 
 
 m. ■ 
 
 
 \ m mm 
 
 -4 tASl 
 
 !BE§ 
 
 
 MS 
 
 . '« . r • 
 
 
 
 , Itlkl : (