VERY ancient traditions, which were accepted as facts throughout the Middle Ages, connected Gloucester with the first introduction of Christianity to Roman Britain. It was said to have been the chief city of Lucius, the British King who, about the year 160, sent messengers to Rome with a request that Pope Eleutherius would despatch Christian teachers into Britain, who might teach Lucius himself and his people. This was accordingly done. Lucius was baptized at Gloucester, and after establishing Christianity throughout the island, died at Gloucester in the year 201, and was buried in a church which he had built on the site of the existing cathedral[24]. What amount of truth may be involved in this story is altogether uncertain. The first who mentions the conversion of Lucius is Bede[25]. His death is placed at Gloucester by Matthew Paris, and by others of the later chroniclers; and his legend (for it is little more)has been illustrated in a window of stained glass, lately inserted in the nave of the Cathedral, (see Pt. I. §VI.)
VERY ancient traditions, which were accepted as facts throughout the Middle Ages, connected Gloucester with the first introduction of Christianity to Roman Britain. It was said to have been the chief city of Lucius, the British King who, about the year 160, sent messengers to Rome with a request that Pope Eleutherius would despatch Christian teachers into Britain, who might teach Lucius himself and his people. This was accordingly done. Lucius was baptized at Gloucester, and after establishing Christianity throughout the island, died at Gloucester in the year 201, and was buried in a church which he had built on the site of the existing cathedral[24]. What amount of truth may be involved in this story is altogether uncertain. The first who mentions the conversion of Lucius is Bede[25]. His death is placed at Gloucester by Matthew Paris, and by others of the later chroniclers; and his legend (for it is little more)has been illustrated in a window of stained glass, lately inserted in the nave of the Cathedral, (see Pt. I. §VI.)
Gloucester, the BritishCair glou, the RomanGlevum, had been walled during the Roman period, and was one of the strong “ceasters” of Mercia. In 681 it was granted by Ethelred of Mercia to Osric, as “underking” or viceroy of the district. Osric is said to have completed the establishment of a convent of nuns, which had been commenced in Gloucester by Wulphere, brother of Ethelred; and Archbishop Theodore of Canterbury dedicated it in honour of St. Peter. Osric was accordingly regarded as the founder of the monastery, which continued under the rule of an abbess untilA.D.767, between which year and 821 it lay desolate, and the nuns were dispersed. InA.D.821, Beornulph of Mercia restored the convent, and established in it a body of secular canons. They remained until 1022, when Canute introduced Benedictines in their place. From that time until the dissolution the abbey increased steadily in wealth and importance. The reception of the body of Edward II. brought vast sums to its treasury; and under Abbot Froucester it was raised to the dignity of a mitred abbey, by Pope Urban VI. Its income at the Dissolution was, according to Speed, £1,550.
The first Parliament after the Conquest was assembled by Henry I. in this abbey, and the young King, Henry III., (then but nine years old,) was crowned in the church, October 28, 1216. Richard II. held a Parliament in the great hall of the abbey, in November, 1378.
The most importantAbbotswere—
[A.D.1072-1104.]Serlo, who laid the foundation of the present church, dedicated in the year 1100. [A.D.1113-1130.]William, in whose time (1122) Serlo’s church was greatly injured by fire, (see Pt. I.) [A.D.1139-1148.]Gilbert Foliot, who in the latter year became Bishop of Hereford, and in 1163 was translated to London. He was the well-known opponent of Becket. [A.D.1306-1329.]John Thokey, who built the south aisle of the nave, (see Pt. I. §VII.,) and received the body of Edward II., (Pt. I. §XII.) [A.D.1329-1337.]John Wygemore, who commenced the great change in the architecture of the church by his reconstruction of the south transept, (Pt. I. §VIII.) [A.D.1337-1351.]Adam de Staunton; and [A.D.1351-1377]Thomas de Horton; who carried forward the work in the choir and north transept. (Pt. I. §§IX.,X.) [A.D.1381-1412.]Walter Froucester, the historian of the Abbey, (see Pt. I. §XVIII.,) who built much of the cloister and who procured the grant of the mitre from Urban VI. [A.D.1420-1437.]John Morwent, who rebuilt part of west end of the church, (Pt. I. §VII.) [A.D.1450-1457.]Thomas Seabroke, who built the tower, [A.D.1457-1472.]Richard Hanley; and [A.D.1472-1498]William Farley, who built the Lady-chapel. [A.D.1515-1539.]William Malverne, orParker, the last abbot, who subscribed to the King’s supremacy in 1534, and died soon after the Dissolution.
[A.D.1072-1104.]Serlo, who laid the foundation of the present church, dedicated in the year 1100. [A.D.1113-1130.]William, in whose time (1122) Serlo’s church was greatly injured by fire, (see Pt. I.) [A.D.1139-1148.]Gilbert Foliot, who in the latter year became Bishop of Hereford, and in 1163 was translated to London. He was the well-known opponent of Becket. [A.D.1306-1329.]
John Thokey, who built the south aisle of the nave, (see Pt. I. §VII.,) and received the body of Edward II., (Pt. I. §XII.) [A.D.1329-1337.]John Wygemore, who commenced the great change in the architecture of the church by his reconstruction of the south transept, (Pt. I. §VIII.) [A.D.1337-1351.]Adam de Staunton; and [A.D.1351-1377]Thomas de Horton; who carried forward the work in the choir and north transept. (Pt. I. §§IX.,X.) [A.D.1381-1412.]Walter Froucester, the historian of the Abbey, (see Pt. I. §XVIII.,) who built much of the cloister and who procured the grant of the mitre from Urban VI. [A.D.1420-1437.]John Morwent, who rebuilt part of west end of the church, (Pt. I. §VII.) [A.D.1450-1457.]Thomas Seabroke, who built the tower, [A.D.1457-1472.]Richard Hanley; and [A.D.1472-1498]William Farley, who built the Lady-chapel. [A.D.1515-1539.]William Malverne, orParker, the last abbot, who subscribed to the King’s supremacy in 1534, and died soon after the Dissolution.
Robert of Gloucester, whose rhyming “Chronicle of Englonde,” is important, both historically and as an example of “middle English,” was a monk of this abbey, during the reigns of Henry III. and John. His Chronicle was edited by Hearne.
Until 1541 the whole of Gloucestershire lay within the diocese of Worcester. In that year the see of Gloucester was erected, and the abbey church, which was re-dedicated to the “Holy and Individed Trinity,” became its cathedral. The first bishop was—
[A.D.1541-1549.]John Wakeman, who had been Abbot of Tewkesbury, and one of Henry the Eighth’s chaplains. He was a person of considerable learning, and had revised the translation of the Book of Revelation, in Cranmer’s Bible.[A.D.1551-Feb. 9, 1555.]John Hooperhad been educated at Merton College, Oxford, and afterwards becamea monk at Cleeves, in Somerset, his native county. He returned to Oxford, however, where he soon embraced the reformed doctrines, and was consequently obliged to leave the University in 1539. After many wanderings in Ireland, in France, and in Switzerland, Hooper returned to England on the accession of Edward VI.; and in 1549 became one of the accusers of Bishop Bonner, who was deprived in that year. Having with much difficulty overcome his own scruples as to the lawfulness of wearing episcopal robes[26], Hooper, who had been appointed to the see of Gloucester by the influence of the Earl of Warwick, was consecrated at Lambeth by Archbishop Cranmer. In the following year (1552) Bishop Hooper surrendered his see to the Crown. Bishop Heath of Worcester was deprived at the same time. Gloucestershire was at first converted into an archdeaconry, dependent on Worcester; but the two sees were afterwards (Dec. 1552) united, and bestowed on Hooper. The bishops were to be entitled of “Gloucester and Worcester,” and were to reside one year in each city, alternately. This arrangement only continued until the death of Edward VI.
[A.D.1541-1549.]John Wakeman, who had been Abbot of Tewkesbury, and one of Henry the Eighth’s chaplains. He was a person of considerable learning, and had revised the translation of the Book of Revelation, in Cranmer’s Bible.
[A.D.1551-Feb. 9, 1555.]John Hooperhad been educated at Merton College, Oxford, and afterwards becamea monk at Cleeves, in Somerset, his native county. He returned to Oxford, however, where he soon embraced the reformed doctrines, and was consequently obliged to leave the University in 1539. After many wanderings in Ireland, in France, and in Switzerland, Hooper returned to England on the accession of Edward VI.; and in 1549 became one of the accusers of Bishop Bonner, who was deprived in that year. Having with much difficulty overcome his own scruples as to the lawfulness of wearing episcopal robes[26], Hooper, who had been appointed to the see of Gloucester by the influence of the Earl of Warwick, was consecrated at Lambeth by Archbishop Cranmer. In the following year (1552) Bishop Hooper surrendered his see to the Crown. Bishop Heath of Worcester was deprived at the same time. Gloucestershire was at first converted into an archdeaconry, dependent on Worcester; but the two sees were afterwards (Dec. 1552) united, and bestowed on Hooper. The bishops were to be entitled of “Gloucester and Worcester,” and were to reside one year in each city, alternately. This arrangement only continued until the death of Edward VI.
After the accession of Mary, Hooper was summoned to London, (August 1553,) and was for some time confined in the Fleet prison; his see was declared void, and after an examination before Bishop Gardiner and others, he was condemned to be burnt as a heretic. The sentence was accordingly carried out at Gloucester, Feb. 9, 1555. A monument has lately been erected on the scene of his death.
[A.D.1554-1558.]James Brookes, “a zealous papist,” succeeded, but to the see of Gloucester only. On his death the see remained vacant for three years.[A.D.1562-1579.]Richard Cheyneyheld the see ofBristolin commendam. On his death the see remained vacant until[A.D.1581-1598,]John Bullinghamwas appointed to it. Until 1589 he held Bristolin commendam.[A.D.1598-1604.]Godfrey Goldsbroughheld the see of Worcesterin commendam.[A.D.1605, translated to London 1607.]Thomas Ravis, Dean of Christ Church, Oxford. He was a prelate of some learning, and was the translator of part of the New Testament in James the First’s Bible.[A.D.1607, translated to Worcester 1610.]Henry Parry, Dean of Chester. James I. said of him that “he never heard a better or more eloquent preacher.”[A.D.1611-1612.]Giles Thompson, Dean of Windsor, died without having ever visited his new diocese.[A.D.1612-1624.]Miles Smith, a prelate of great learning, translator of the whole of the Prophets for James the First’s Bible, for which also he wrote the Preface,—“as a comely gate to a glorious city, which remains under his own hand in the University Library in Oxford[27].” He is called by Sir Robert Atkyns (History of Gloucestershire) a “stiff Calvinist, and a great favourer of the Puritans.” He was buried in the Lady-chapel of the cathedral, “under a plain stone, without any inscription.”[A.D.1625, suspended 1640, died 1656.]Godfrey Goodman, Dean of Rochester. Bishop Goodman was strongly suspected of an inclination to Romanism: a curious entry in a volume now in the Chapter Library at Gloucester proves that that suspicion was far from being without foundation; and Fuller asserts that he “died a professed Romanist, as appeared by his will[28].” In 1640 he was suspended by Archbishop Laud, for refusing to subscribe the Canons, and was committed for some time to the Gate House; “where,” says Fuller, “he got by his restraint what he could neverhave got by his liberty, namely, of one reputed Popish to become for a short time popular, as the only confessor suffering for not subscribing the Canons[29].” He afterwards subscribed, and was restored, but soon had to bear his full share of the troubles during the time of the Commonwealth. He died in London, 1656, and was buried in St. Margaret’s Church, Westminster.[A.D.1661-1672.]William Nicolsonwas appointed to the see on the Restoration.[A.D.1672-1681.]John Pritchett.[A.D.1681, deprived 1691.]Robert Framptonhad been Dean of Gloucester since 1673. He was one of the Non-juring bishops, and retired, on his deprivation, to the living of Standish, in Gloucestershire, which he had held with the bishopric. He died in 1708, and was buried in the chancel of the church at Standish.[A.D.1691-1714.]Edward Fowlerwas the son of a Presbyterian who had been intruded, during the Commonwealth, into the living of Westerleigh, near Bristol. Fowler himself conformed after the Restoration, and was raised to the see of Gloucester on the deprivation of Bishop Frampton. He belonged to the school of “Latitudinarian divines,” then in special favour, and published many books which are now of little value. Bishop Fowler died at Chelsea, Aug. 26, 1714, and was buried at Hendon, in Middlesex, in which church there is a monument to his memory.[A.D.1715, translated to Salisbury 1721.]Richard Willis, Dean of Lincoln. From Salisbury Bishop Willis was translated to Winchester, in 1725.[A.D.1721, translated to Rochester 1731.]Joseph Wilcocks.Bishop Wilcocks held the deanery of Westminster with the see of Rochester. The western towers of Westminster Abbey were built during his rule.[A.D.1731-1733.]Elias Sydall, translated to Gloucesterfrom St. David’s. With Gloucester he held the deanery of Canterbury.[A.D.1735-1752.]Martin Benson.In 1741 Bishop Benson re-paved the choir of the cathedral, and added pinnacles to the Lady-chapel.[A.D.1652, translated to Worcester 1759.]James Johnson.In 1774 he was killed by a fall from his horse, at Bath.[A.D.1760-1779.]William Warburton, whose name is better known than that of any other prelate who has filled the see; and who was not the least remarkable among the men of letters of the eighteenth century. Warburton was the eldest son of an attorney at Newark-upon-Trent, and was born there, Dec. 24, 1691. He was educated at Oakham, in Rutlandshire, and was intended for his father’s profession, which he followed for a short time. He left it for the Church, however, and was in Orders in 1728, when his patron, Sir Robert Sutton, gave him the rectory of Burnt Broughton, in Lincolnshire. Here he remained for some years, and wrote here the first part of his “Divine Legation of Moses,” which procured him an introduction to the Prince of Wales, who made him one of his chaplains. In 1746 he was chosen Preacher at Lincoln’s Inn, and in 1757 became Dean of Bristol. In 1760 he was raised to the see of Gloucester, and died at the palace there, aged 81, June 7, 1779.Bishop Warburton was the close friend and companion of Pope, who derived much assistance from his criticism, and whose works he edited. His own most important works are “The Divine Legation of Moses,” and “Julian,” a discourse concerning the earthquake and fiery eruption which defeated the Emperor’s attempt to rebuild the temple at Jerusalem. The entire list of his works is a long one, and his literary life belongs too completely to the literary history of the century to be further noticed here. “He was a man,” writes Dr. Johnson, “of vigorous faculties, a mind fervid and vehement, suppliedby incessant and unlimited enquiry, with wonderful extent and variety of knowledge, which yet had not oppressed his imagination, nor clouded his perspicacity. To every work he brought a memory full fraught, together with a fancy fertile of original combinations; and at once exerted the powers of the scholar, the reasoner, and the wit. But his knowledge was too multifarious to be always exact, and his pursuits were too eager to be always cautious. His abilities gave him a haughty consequence, which he disdained to conceal or mollify; and his impatience of opposition disposed him to treat his adversaries with such contemptuous superiority as made his readers commonly his enemies, and excited against the advocate the wishes of some who favoured the cause. He seems to have adopted the Roman Emperor’s determination, ‘oderint dum metuant;’ he used no allurements of gentle language, but wished to compel rather than persuade.”All that modern readers can desire to know of Bishop Warburton, will be found in his Life by the Rev. J. S. Watson. London, 1863. He was buried in the nave of his cathedral; (Pt. I. §VI.)[A.D.1779, translated to Ely 1781.]James Yorke, translated to Gloucester from St. David’s. He was the youngest son of Lord Chancellor Hardwicke.[A.D.1781, translated to St. Asaph 1789.]Samuel Hallifax; had been successively Professor of Arabic and Regius Professor of Civil Law in the University of Cambridge.[A.D.1789, translated to Bath and Wells 1802.]Richard Beadon.[A.D.1802, translated to Hereford 1815.]George Isaac Huntingford, Warden of Winchester College.[A.D.1815, translated to Lichfield 1824.]Henry Ryder, brother of the Earl of Harrowby.[A.D.1824, translated to Exeter, and thence to Bangor, 1830.]Christopher Bethell.[A.D.1830-1856.]James Henry Monk.In the year 1836 the diocese of Bristol was united to that of Gloucester. The bishops of Gloucester and Bristol, after Bishop Monk, have been[A.D.1856, translated to Durham 1861.]Charles Baring.[A.D.1861, translated to York 1862.]William Thomson.[A.D.1863.]Charles J. Ellicott.
[A.D.1554-1558.]James Brookes, “a zealous papist,” succeeded, but to the see of Gloucester only. On his death the see remained vacant for three years.
[A.D.1562-1579.]Richard Cheyneyheld the see ofBristolin commendam. On his death the see remained vacant until
[A.D.1581-1598,]John Bullinghamwas appointed to it. Until 1589 he held Bristolin commendam.
[A.D.1598-1604.]Godfrey Goldsbroughheld the see of Worcesterin commendam.
[A.D.1605, translated to London 1607.]Thomas Ravis, Dean of Christ Church, Oxford. He was a prelate of some learning, and was the translator of part of the New Testament in James the First’s Bible.
[A.D.1607, translated to Worcester 1610.]Henry Parry, Dean of Chester. James I. said of him that “he never heard a better or more eloquent preacher.”
[A.D.1611-1612.]Giles Thompson, Dean of Windsor, died without having ever visited his new diocese.
[A.D.1612-1624.]Miles Smith, a prelate of great learning, translator of the whole of the Prophets for James the First’s Bible, for which also he wrote the Preface,—“as a comely gate to a glorious city, which remains under his own hand in the University Library in Oxford[27].” He is called by Sir Robert Atkyns (History of Gloucestershire) a “stiff Calvinist, and a great favourer of the Puritans.” He was buried in the Lady-chapel of the cathedral, “under a plain stone, without any inscription.”
[A.D.1625, suspended 1640, died 1656.]Godfrey Goodman, Dean of Rochester. Bishop Goodman was strongly suspected of an inclination to Romanism: a curious entry in a volume now in the Chapter Library at Gloucester proves that that suspicion was far from being without foundation; and Fuller asserts that he “died a professed Romanist, as appeared by his will[28].” In 1640 he was suspended by Archbishop Laud, for refusing to subscribe the Canons, and was committed for some time to the Gate House; “where,” says Fuller, “he got by his restraint what he could neverhave got by his liberty, namely, of one reputed Popish to become for a short time popular, as the only confessor suffering for not subscribing the Canons[29].” He afterwards subscribed, and was restored, but soon had to bear his full share of the troubles during the time of the Commonwealth. He died in London, 1656, and was buried in St. Margaret’s Church, Westminster.
[A.D.1661-1672.]William Nicolsonwas appointed to the see on the Restoration.
[A.D.1672-1681.]John Pritchett.
[A.D.1681, deprived 1691.]Robert Framptonhad been Dean of Gloucester since 1673. He was one of the Non-juring bishops, and retired, on his deprivation, to the living of Standish, in Gloucestershire, which he had held with the bishopric. He died in 1708, and was buried in the chancel of the church at Standish.
[A.D.1691-1714.]Edward Fowlerwas the son of a Presbyterian who had been intruded, during the Commonwealth, into the living of Westerleigh, near Bristol. Fowler himself conformed after the Restoration, and was raised to the see of Gloucester on the deprivation of Bishop Frampton. He belonged to the school of “Latitudinarian divines,” then in special favour, and published many books which are now of little value. Bishop Fowler died at Chelsea, Aug. 26, 1714, and was buried at Hendon, in Middlesex, in which church there is a monument to his memory.
[A.D.1715, translated to Salisbury 1721.]Richard Willis, Dean of Lincoln. From Salisbury Bishop Willis was translated to Winchester, in 1725.
[A.D.1721, translated to Rochester 1731.]Joseph Wilcocks.Bishop Wilcocks held the deanery of Westminster with the see of Rochester. The western towers of Westminster Abbey were built during his rule.
[A.D.1731-1733.]Elias Sydall, translated to Gloucesterfrom St. David’s. With Gloucester he held the deanery of Canterbury.
[A.D.1735-1752.]Martin Benson.In 1741 Bishop Benson re-paved the choir of the cathedral, and added pinnacles to the Lady-chapel.
[A.D.1652, translated to Worcester 1759.]James Johnson.In 1774 he was killed by a fall from his horse, at Bath.
[A.D.1760-1779.]William Warburton, whose name is better known than that of any other prelate who has filled the see; and who was not the least remarkable among the men of letters of the eighteenth century. Warburton was the eldest son of an attorney at Newark-upon-Trent, and was born there, Dec. 24, 1691. He was educated at Oakham, in Rutlandshire, and was intended for his father’s profession, which he followed for a short time. He left it for the Church, however, and was in Orders in 1728, when his patron, Sir Robert Sutton, gave him the rectory of Burnt Broughton, in Lincolnshire. Here he remained for some years, and wrote here the first part of his “Divine Legation of Moses,” which procured him an introduction to the Prince of Wales, who made him one of his chaplains. In 1746 he was chosen Preacher at Lincoln’s Inn, and in 1757 became Dean of Bristol. In 1760 he was raised to the see of Gloucester, and died at the palace there, aged 81, June 7, 1779.
Bishop Warburton was the close friend and companion of Pope, who derived much assistance from his criticism, and whose works he edited. His own most important works are “The Divine Legation of Moses,” and “Julian,” a discourse concerning the earthquake and fiery eruption which defeated the Emperor’s attempt to rebuild the temple at Jerusalem. The entire list of his works is a long one, and his literary life belongs too completely to the literary history of the century to be further noticed here. “He was a man,” writes Dr. Johnson, “of vigorous faculties, a mind fervid and vehement, suppliedby incessant and unlimited enquiry, with wonderful extent and variety of knowledge, which yet had not oppressed his imagination, nor clouded his perspicacity. To every work he brought a memory full fraught, together with a fancy fertile of original combinations; and at once exerted the powers of the scholar, the reasoner, and the wit. But his knowledge was too multifarious to be always exact, and his pursuits were too eager to be always cautious. His abilities gave him a haughty consequence, which he disdained to conceal or mollify; and his impatience of opposition disposed him to treat his adversaries with such contemptuous superiority as made his readers commonly his enemies, and excited against the advocate the wishes of some who favoured the cause. He seems to have adopted the Roman Emperor’s determination, ‘oderint dum metuant;’ he used no allurements of gentle language, but wished to compel rather than persuade.”
All that modern readers can desire to know of Bishop Warburton, will be found in his Life by the Rev. J. S. Watson. London, 1863. He was buried in the nave of his cathedral; (Pt. I. §VI.)
[A.D.1779, translated to Ely 1781.]James Yorke, translated to Gloucester from St. David’s. He was the youngest son of Lord Chancellor Hardwicke.
[A.D.1781, translated to St. Asaph 1789.]Samuel Hallifax; had been successively Professor of Arabic and Regius Professor of Civil Law in the University of Cambridge.
[A.D.1789, translated to Bath and Wells 1802.]Richard Beadon.
[A.D.1802, translated to Hereford 1815.]George Isaac Huntingford, Warden of Winchester College.
[A.D.1815, translated to Lichfield 1824.]Henry Ryder, brother of the Earl of Harrowby.
[A.D.1824, translated to Exeter, and thence to Bangor, 1830.]Christopher Bethell.
[A.D.1830-1856.]James Henry Monk.In the year 1836 the diocese of Bristol was united to that of Gloucester. The bishops of Gloucester and Bristol, after Bishop Monk, have been
[A.D.1856, translated to Durham 1861.]Charles Baring.
[A.D.1861, translated to York 1862.]William Thomson.
[A.D.1863.]Charles J. Ellicott.
LONDON: PRINTED BY W. CLOWES AND SONS, STAMFORD STREET.
HEREFORD CATHEDRAL.
HEREFORD CATHEDRAL.
A HANDBOOKTOHEREFORD CATHEDRAL./\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\WITH 15 ILLUSTRATIONS./\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\LONDON:JOHN MURRAY, ALBEMARLE STREET.1864.
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\WITH 15 ILLUSTRATIONS./\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\LONDON:JOHN MURRAY, ALBEMARLE STREET.1864.
Inpreparing the ‘Handbook of Hereford Cathedral,’ besides a careful personal survey, considerable use has been made of a pamphlet on the condition of the building, printed by Professor Willis before the restoration was commenced under Dean Merewether. Although due acknowledgment of this has been made in the notes, it is proper to mention it here also. The authority of Professor Willis is in no case to be disregarded.
Hereford Cathedral, which has been happily restored to its ancient beauty under the care of Mr. G. G. Scott, is, although not the largest, one of the most important in the West of England; and contains much of very high interest to the architectural student.
R. J. K.
August, 1864.
History and Details.
I.Thevery interesting cathedral of Hereford, which represents an episcopal see existing, it is possible, before the arrival of St. Augustine, (see Pt. II.,) has suffered much from the hand of time, and more perhaps from so-called restoration. On Easter Monday, 1786, the western tower (a later erection than the Norman nave) fell, carrying with it the west front, and greatly injuring the first bay of the nave. The architect Wyatt was then at work on Salisbury Cathedral; and the restoration of Hereford was unhappily placed in his hands. With Wyatt, restoration meant destruction. Between the years 1788 and 1797 he expended a sum of £20,000 on this cathedral; shortening the nave by one entire bay; destroying the Norman triforium and clerestory, which he replaced by others of his own device; and constructing the present west front, which it is to be hoped will not be permitted to exist much longer. In 1841, at the request of the late BishopMusgrave, a report on the actual condition of the cathedral was drawn up by Professor Willis; from which it appeared that the piers of the central towerwere in a condition of much danger, and that the eastern gable of the Lady-chapel would inevitably fall unless preventive measures were at once taken. Accordingly, these and other repairs and “restorations” were effected between 1841 and 1852, at a cost of £27,000. The architect employed was Mr. L. N. Cottingham; and the then DeanMerewether’sown superintendence—whose zeal for the restoration of the building cannot be mentioned with too great respect—was unremitting until his death in 1850. Mr. Cottingham was not so completely destructive as Wyatt had been, but he rebuilt rather than restored, and allowed his masons to re-work ancient sculptures. Since the year 1858 the final restoration of Hereford Cathedral has been in the hands of Mr. G. G. Scott, and it need hardly be said that the work has been of a very different character. Where reconstruction has been necessary, every stone has been preserved, and, if possible, replaced. Whitewash and other defects have been removed with a sort of wire comb, which effectually cleans the stone, but does not remove ancient tool marks; and the sculpture and foliage consequently remain uninjured. These last works, completed in the year 1863, (when, on the 30th of June, the cathedral was solemnly re-opened,) effectually set forth the original beauty of the building, which ranks among the most interesting cathedrals in England.
The extent and nature of the different restorations will be pointed out as we proceed. It is no doubt to be regretted that so much rebuilding should have beennecessary; but this has been partly owing to original defects of construction, and partly to the nature of the stone, which was taken, apparently without much care in selection, from quarries in the old red sandstone, near the city. This stone is so much weather-worn in parts as to resemble the face of a sea cliff. Throughout Wyatt’s rebuilding and all the restorations, the new stone has been brought from the Caplar quarries near Fawley; from Lugwardine; and from some quarries nearer Hereford; also in the old red sandstone, but yielding blocks of a much harder and more durable character.
II. The Saxon BishopEthelstan(1012-1056) built a church from the foundations; which shortly after the accession of his successor,Leofgar, (1056,) was burnt together with the greater part of the city, by the Welsh king Gryffyth. The first Norman bishop,Robert de Losinga, (1079-1096,) who found his cathedral in ruins, began to rebuild it, taking for his model the church of Aachen, or Aix la Chapelle,—the work of Charlemagne[30]. This building was so far completed as to be dedicated (in the names of the Blessed Virgin and of Ethelbert King of East Anglia, see §X.and Pt. II.) in 1110, during the episcopate ofReinhelm, (1107-1115). The Norman portions of the existing cathedral (the piers of the nave, the choir as high as the clerestory, and the south transept,) belong to Bishop Robert’s cathedral. With the exception ofits first foundation, however, and of the walls of the nave-aisles, “it is much to be regretted that the period of erection of no one part of this cathedral has been recorded[31];” and we are left to assign the various dates from the character of the architecture alone. They are probably as follows:—
Norman, 1079-1115. Piers of nave, choir as high as clerestory, and south transept, (which has had Perpendicular alterations).Early English,circ.1190. Vestibule of Lady-chapel.Early English,circ.1220. Lady-chapel.Early English,circ.1260? Clerestory and vaulting of choir.Transitional, from Early English to Decorated, 1282-1287. North transept.Geometrical, (Early Decorated,) 1287-1320. Eastern transept. Upper part of central tower.Late Decorated, 1360-1364. Outer walls and windows of nave-aisles.Perpendicular, 1492-1502. Bishop Audley’s chantry. 1516-1535. The north porch.
Norman, 1079-1115. Piers of nave, choir as high as clerestory, and south transept, (which has had Perpendicular alterations).
Early English,circ.1190. Vestibule of Lady-chapel.
Early English,circ.1220. Lady-chapel.
Early English,circ.1260? Clerestory and vaulting of choir.
Transitional, from Early English to Decorated, 1282-1287. North transept.
Geometrical, (Early Decorated,) 1287-1320. Eastern transept. Upper part of central tower.
Late Decorated, 1360-1364. Outer walls and windows of nave-aisles.
Perpendicular, 1492-1502. Bishop Audley’s chantry. 1516-1535. The north porch.
It thus appears that (besides the Norman work) Hereford Cathedral is principally rich in the architecture of the Early English and Geometrical periods. The Norman portions are curious and important. The Early English Lady-chapel is an excellent example; but the most remarkable part of the building is unquestionably the north transept. Bishop Cantilupe, who died in 1282, (and was canonized in 1320,) was buried in the Lady-chapel, which was the first additionto the Norman church. The north transept (into which the relics of the bishop were removed in 1287) was to all appearance built expressly for the reception of the Cantilupe shrine; and the further changes and additions during the early Decorated period may safely be assigned to the increase of riches and consequence which the possession of this shrine brought to the cathedral. In the same manner, at Gloucester (see that Cathedral) the possession of the remains of Edward II. was the cause of the entire alteration of the abbey church.
III. Hereford Cathedral is open on the north side, and a good general view may be obtained from the Close, [Frontispiece,] through which it is approached. On the south side the bishop’s palace and the college of the vicars choral fill the space between it and the river Wye. Eastward the cathedral was closely pressed on by the outworks of the castle, anciently one of the strongest on the Welsh marches, but of which only the foundations now remain. The Norman cathedral, built, as has been said, in imitation of that of Aachen, terminated eastward in a triple apse. (Compare Norwich, the most perfect example of a Norman ground-plan now existing.) The central apse was destroyed, in all probability, on the formation of the Lady-chapel; and the side apses, at a somewhat later period, were converted into the eastern transept, as it now appears. This double transept (possibly suggested by that at Worcester, which is a century earlier; see that Cathedral) combines, with Bishop Booth’s large projecting porch, in producing a degree of intricacy in the general outline, the effect of whichis not lessened by the various alterations and restorations, which, however necessary, render it difficult to distinguish between the new work and the old.
IV. The cathedral is entered, on the north side, through an elaborate Perpendicularporch, completed in 1530 by BishopBooth. It is of two stages. The lower is formed by three wide, open arches, at the outer angles of which are octagonal buttress-turrets, capped by very picturesque lanterns. The parvise chamber, forming the second stage, is lighted by three large Perpendicular windows, with rich tracery. This porch projects beyond an inner and smaller one, of the Decorated period, to which the doorway opening to the church (the mouldings of which should be noticed) belongs. The doors themselves are modern, and are covered with very good iron-work, designed by Mr. Cottingham, jun., and executed by Messrs. Potter of London. The hinges alone cost £140.
V. On entering thenave, the visitor should pass at once to the west end, where he will obtain the best general view. The great piers are Norman, and part of the original church. The triforium and clerestory and the vaulting of the roof are Wyatt’s work, (1788-1797,) as is the western wall with its doorway. The nave-aisles belong to the Decorated period. Wyatt, it must be remembered, shortened the original nave by one entire bay. The eye is at once struck by the massive grandeur of the great Norman piers and arches, and by the unusual darkness of the choir. Beyond the lofty circular arches of the central tower, and the superb
ARCHES OF NAVE.Plate I.
ARCHES OF NAVE.Plate I.
ARCHES OF NAVE.
Plate I.
modern screen on its eastern side, is seen the eastern wall of the choir, pierced below with a wide circular arch, receding in many orders, and above by three broad lancet lights. The lower arch is divided by a central pillar, from which spring two pointed arches, the spandrel between which is sculptured from a design of Cottingham’s. Beyond, again, is seen the east wall of the Lady-chapel, with its enriched lancets, and foliated ornaments above them. The effect of these three receding distances, with their varying light and shade, is unusually fine, and is not a little increased by the solemnity of the darkened choir. This darkness results partly from the heavy Norman architecture of the choir itself, and partly from the lofty transepts, which abut on it on either side. The nave and choir are of the same width (73-1/4 ft., including aisles; actual breadth of vaulting to nave and choir 31-1/4 ft.) and height (70 ft.)
The nave [Plate I.] now consists of seven bays. The massive circular piers have double half-shafts set against their north and south fronts. (The greater part of these are restorations, the original shafts having been cut away.) The bases are plain. The capitals of piers and shafts are rich and varied, especially those of the four easternmost piers, which have some very rich knot-work and foliage. The main arches recede in three orders, and are much enriched with the billet and other mouldings. The Norman work throughout the cathedral, when compared with that of the great buildings of the same age in the eastern counties, (Ely, Peterborough, or Norwich,)displays a richer and more involved class of ornament; such as reaches its highest development in the elaborate doorways of Kilpeck and Shobdon Churches, both in Herefordshire.
Thetriforium, andclerestory, both of which are Wyatt’s work, need not detain us. They are imitated from the Early English of Salisbury; and to make way for them, Wyatt destroyed the original Norman work, of which only a small portion had been injured by the fall of the tower[32]. The vaulting-shafts run up in groups of three, between each bay. The shafts themselves are restorations of the originals, much of which had been cut away before the fall of the tower; the corbels, below the capitals, are modern, and were copied by Cottingham from ancient examples. The roof is of wood, vaulted in imitation of stone, a description which is itself a condemnation. It has been coloured, under Mr. Cottingham’s direction, in a manner which can by no means be called satisfactory. The pavement throughout the nave has been laid (by Mr. Cottingham) with plain red and slate-coloured tiles. Two rows of gas-standards, the work of Messrs. Skidmore, are placed under the arches at intervals, four on each side.
VI. Thenave-aisleswere almost rebuilt during the late Decorated period. The Norman walls were allowed to stand for about 2 ft. above the foundations;and upon these bases the existing walls and windows were erected. The contracts for this work, dating between the years 1360-1364, were found by the late Dean Merewether, and are now preserved in the archive chamber. The vaulting of the roofs is coloured in the same unpleasing manner as that of the nave. The view looking up the aisle, into and beyond the transept, is remarkable, owing to the many receding stages. It terminates at the eastern end of the second transept.
In the second bay (counting from the west) of thesouthaisle is thefont, of Norman design, and curious. The basin is circular, and has figures of the Apostles beneath arches, in the spandrels of which is a leaf-ornament. A lion projects from each corner of the base, an unusual and perhaps unique example. In the fourth bay is the very fine alabaster effigy of SirRichard Pembridge,temp.Richard II. Sir Richard, an ancestor of the Chandos family, was one of the first knights of the Garter, and was present at Poictiers. The armour is an excellent example. Gold remains on the points of the cap to which the camail is attached, and on the jewelled sword-belt. The head rests on a tilting-helmet, with a sheaf of feathers coloured green. Between the feathers and the helmet is a coronet of open roses. The garter is on the left leg, and the feet rest on a greyhound. This monument was originally in the church of the Black Friars, and was brought thence to the cathedral after the Dissolution. The right leg, which had been destroyed, has been restored at the cost of the Rev. Lord Saye and Sele, Canon Residentiary.
In the wall of this aisle, in thethirdbay from the east, is the headless figure of an ecclesiastic, under a Decorated arch, foliated. In thesecondbay is an effigy of a priest of the early Decorated period, much mutilated, under a foliated arch, at the crown of which is a bearded head wearing a cap. In thethirdbay is a door opening to the cloisters, with a square heading which rises above the sill of the window over it. A row of heads in the hollow moulding of the door,—a fac-simile of a former composition, which had become entirely decayed,—and the modern iron-work, by Potter, with which the door itself is covered, deserve notice.
A narrow and lofty Norman arch opens from this aisle into the transept.
VII. Thenorthaisle is Decorated, of the same character as the south. In thethirdbay from the tower is the northporch, (§IV.); and in the bay above it is the monument of BishopBooth, (died 1535,) the constructor of the porch itself. The effigy lies under a foliated arch with canopy. The Bishop, mitred and fully vested, holds the crozier (the head of which has been broken) wrapped with the infula, or fillet. Much colour remains on this monument, which is protected by its original iron-work, banded with shields and heraldic ornaments.
In this aisle, a stained-glass window byWarrenton, with subjects from the life of St. John the Baptist, has been inserted as a memorial of CanonCluttonand his wife.
VIII. Between the eastern piers of thecentral tower, but projecting from their bases more than 3 ft. toward the nave, is placed the magnificentscreenof wrought iron-work, painted and gilt, executed by Messrs. Skidmore of Coventry, from the designs of Mr. G. G. Scott. This is the second great work of the kind which has been produced in England. It is in many respects finer and more important than the screen at Lichfield; but it is designed and constructed on precisely the same principles; and affords a complete vindication of the advantage and beauty of metal-work for the purpose to which it is here applied. Whilst the screen forms a sufficient division between the nave and choir, its extreme lightness permits the use of both tower and transept for congregational purposes.
The Hereford screen consists of five main arches, each subdivided by a slender shaft. The central arch, wider and higher than the rest, forms the entrance, and is surmounted by a lofty gable, on the summit of which is the cross. Panels of hollow tracery fill in the lower part of the arches on either side of the entrance, to the height of about four feet. The heads of the arches and the spandrels between them are enriched with elaborate tracery, chiefly formed by flowers and leafage; and the design of the cornice and cresting is of similar character. In the tympanum above the shaft which divides the arch of entrance is a figure of the Saviour, with hands outstretched in blessing. On either side, placed on brackets supported by the pillars of the main arch, are adoring angels, two in each group.Single figures of angels, holding instruments of music, are placed on brackets at the terminations of the screen, north and south.
The screen is wrought by hand throughout. It is mainly constructed of iron; but copper and brass are largely used; the first in the capitals, figures, and cornice; the second in the shafts of the smaller columns, and in parts of the larger. Coloured mosaics have also been employed. The variety of metals is another source of colour; but the hammered iron-work, forming the whole of the foliage, has been painted throughout. No colours have been used, however, but those of the oxydes of iron and copper—the metals employed in the work. The result is entirely successful. The beauty of the capitals of leafage, in which fine effects of light and shade are produced, and of the foliage and flowers in other parts of the screen, is very great; and every band and line of ornament deserves notice. The forms of both leafage and flowers are to a certain extent conventional, but may easily be recognised. The passion-flower especially has been much used, and with admirable effect. On the whole it may safely be said that this screen is the finest and most complete work of its class which has been produced in recent times; nor would it be easy to mention any piece of ancient metal-work—at least of equal dimensions—which will bear comparison with it.
Near the south-west corner of the screen is placed an eagle-lectern, designed by Cottingham and executed by Potter. The projecting branches, for lights, are unusual and picturesque. The cost of the lectern was defrayed by the Misses Rushout; but the money was misappropriated, and it was eventually paid for by subscription.
The old pulpit, of the seventeenth century, now stands against the north-west tower-pier; but will shortly be replaced by one more worthy of the cathedral.
The four great arches of the tower were in a condition of much danger when Dean Merewether commenced his restorations in 1841. The piers, and the four arches resting on them, were Norman; but owing to settlements in the foundations of the nave and tower, which had taken place at a very early period, they had been cased and otherwise repaired during the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries; and still later (probably during the episcopate of BishopBisse, 1712-1721) the two smaller arches of the tower (north and south) were filled with so-called “ox-eye masonry[33],” supported by two segmental arches branching from an octangular central column; whilst nearly all the smaller Norman arches in connection with the tower-piers were closed with solid masonry, leaving only doorways. In spite of all that had been done, however, Professor Willis, in his Report of 1841, pronounced the masonry of the great arches, and of the spandrel walls above, to be “in such a state of ruin as to make an immediate repair absolutely necessary for the preservation of the tower.” The piersthemselves were in a condition of less danger; but Mr. Cottingham, to whom the work was entrusted, proceeded to remove all the additions that had been made to them since the Norman period, and, in effect, to rebuild them according to their original design. In this state they remain at present. The arches resting on them were at the same time reconstructed, and the ox-eye masonry which filled those north and south was entirely removed.
Before these restorations a vault of the fifteenth century rose immediately above the great arches, and concealed the upper part of the tower. This was removed. The whole of the tower above the arches dates from the beginning of the fourteenth century; and the interior walls, which are now visible from below, “are of a very singular construction; twelve piers of compact masonry on each side, beside angle piers, are carried up to the height of 26 ft., and connected half-way up by a horizontal course of stone, in long pieces, and by an iron bar, which runs all round immediately under this bonding course. Upon these giganticstone gratings, if I may be allowed the expression, the interior wall of the tower rests; and they also carry the entire weight of the bell-chamber and bells. I believe this construction was entirely adopted for the sake of lightness[34].” This part of the tower, which has no decorative character, was not originally intended to be seen from below; and the fifteenth-century vaulting had replaced an earlier wooden ceiling. It is nowcompletely open, and the flat wooden floor of the bell-chamber above it is coloured in blue and gold. From this floor depends a superb corona of wrought iron, by Skidmore—a worthy companion of the great choir-screen, and coloured in the same manner.
IX. The peculiar darkness of thechoirhas already been mentioned. It results mainly (as will be seen from the Plan) from the arrangement of the transepts, which prevents the admission of light to the choir except from its clerestory.
The choir and sacrarium, as at present formed, consist of only three bays, eastward of the screen. (The Norman choir extended no doubt to the western arch of the tower, if not into the first bay of the nave.) As far as the top of the triforium, the choir isNorman: the clerestory and vaulting areEarly English, and date, apparently, from the middle of the thirteenth century. No record of their construction has been preserved.
Themain archesof the choir are of three orders, and spring from massive composite piers, with broad, square bases. The capitals of the semi-detached shafts are enriched with leafage and grotesque heads. Thetriforium, in each bay, consists of one wide Norman arch circumscribing two smaller, divided by a central shaft, and springing on either side from two massive semicircular piers, with small capitals. Both outer and inner arches spring from these piers. The capitals of the central shafts have square abaci, and are enriched. The tympana of the outer arches are covered with scallop, leaf, and billet-ornament. At the base of the triforium runsa square stringcourse, enriched with minute carving. The lozenge ornament prevails round the main arches of the choir, as does the zigzag round those of the nave.
Broad square pilasters, with semi-detached shafts at their angles, fill the spaces between the piers. They terminate at the spring of the triforium arches in double triangular headings, with crocheted sides, and finials of leafage. These headings are Early English, of the same date as the clerestory and vaulting; and between each pair rises a group of so-called vaulting-shafts, with capitals of leafage, terminating at the base of the clerestory; and connected (under the actual base of the clerestory) by a band of open flowers. Theclerestoryconsists of one lofty pointed arch in each bay, divided by a central shaft; on either side is a smaller trefoiled arch. The windows, of two lights, with a quatrefoil in the heading, are placed at the back of the wall-passage, and form in effect a double plane with the large inner arches. They are filled on each side with indifferent stained glass. The choirvaultingis plain quadripartite, with bosses of leafage at the intersections.
X. Before 1841, the east end of the choir was covered with an oaken screen, erected by Bishop Bisse in 1717; and above it was a Decorated window filled with a copy in stained glass ofWest’spicture of the Last Supper. The removal of the screen disclosed the great Norman arch of five orders, within which the reredos is now placed. Above this arch is a small blind arcade; and instead of the Decorated window,