The Project Gutenberg eBook, On the Lady Chapel in Chester Cathedral, by
Rev. Canon Blomfield


This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most
other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions 
whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of
the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at 
www.gutenberg.org.  If you are not located in the United States, you'll have
to check the laws of the country where you are located before using this ebook.




Title: On the Lady Chapel in Chester Cathedral


Author: Rev. Canon Blomfield



Release Date: April 25, 2020  [eBook #61922]

Language: English

Character set encoding: UTF-8


***START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK ON THE LADY CHAPEL IN CHESTER
CATHEDRAL***


Transcribed from the 1859 Courant Office edition by David Price, email
ccx074@pglaf.org

                   [Picture: Public domain book cover]





                                  ON THE
                    Lady Chapel in Chester Cathedral.


                                * * * * *

                                * * * * *

                                * * * * *

                           A PAPER READ BEFORE
          The Architectural, Archæological, and Historic Society
                               of Chester.

                                * * * * *

                                * * * * *

                       BY THE REV. CANON BLOMFIELD.

                                * * * * *

                                * * * * *

                                 CHESTER:
             PRINTED AT THE COURANT OFFICE, NORTHGATE STREET.
                                  1859.

                                * * * * *




On the Lady Chapel in Chester Cathedral.
BY THE REV. CANON BLOMFIELD. {3}


THE Lady Chapel of the Cathedral of Chester has long been known to
antiquarian architects as an interesting and valuable specimen of the
Early English style, but it has scarcely ever been examined in detail by
them, and to the general observer has presented no features of special
interest.  The keen and accurate judgment of Rickman discovered the
general beauty of its proportions; but the destruction of all the
original windows, and other disfigurements of the building, which took
place when the side aisles were added in the 15th century, have served so
far to obscure its beauties, that it has been supposed to possess little
or nothing worthy of observation.

           [Picture: Exterior of Lady Chapel—Chester Cathedral]

It is now undergoing restoration, as far as circumstances admit of it;
and the chromatic decoration of the interior has been entrusted to the
care of Mr. Octavius Hudson, whose works at Salisbury and elsewhere have
established him as an artist of the first rank in this special
department.  The beauty and high finish of his work have attracted
general admiration, and awakened a new interest in the structure and
composition of the Lady Chapel itself.  On this account I am induced to
think that some remarks upon the history of Lady Chapels in general, and
of our own in particular, will not be inappropriate to the purposes of
the Chester Archæological Society.

I think it fair to state in my own defence, if the information which I am
able to give shall appear to be meagre and imperfect, that, when I
entered upon the subject I had hoped to meet with some materials
elucidating the origin, uses, and characteristics of Lady Chapels, which
I have failed to discover.  I have not been able to find that the subject
has been specially investigated, or that the history of Lady Chapels, as
separate from that of Cathedrals, has ever been traced up to its source.
I believe it to be a yet unexplored mine of antiquarian lore, and one
well worthy of the labour of the ecclesiastical archæologist.  But, for
myself, having neither leisure nor opportunity to explore it thoroughly,
I must be content to give such few and simple elements of the history as
I have been able to glean out of the few books within reach.

It is well known that all the European nations, from the earliest
introduction of Christianity among them, have directed their most solemn
worship towards the East,—a custom which we may clearly trace to the
course which the progress of the Gospel took in its advance through
Europe, arising from the East, and going on still towards the West, and
thus realizing to each nation the Scriptural promise of the “rising of
the Sun of Righteousness with healing on his wings.”  The hope, also, of
the re-appearing of the Saviour has always been directed towards the
East; and as that hope was of a very vivid and energetic character in the
earlier times of the Church, it gave further strength to the habit of
addressing their devoutest aspirations in that direction.  As soon as the
acknowledgment of Christianity by the Empire admitted of the erection of
public buildings for the celebration of divine worship, the system of
Orientation was introduced into them.  The altar was placed in or near
the eastern extremity of every church: all the higher ceremonies of
religion, and especially the administration of the Lord’s Supper, were
celebrated there; and thither the eyes and thoughts of the congregation
were directed as to the place of sacredness and honour.  For a long
period the eastern part of the churches was especially held sacred to the
name and honour of Jesus Christ.  But when the worship of the Virgin Mary
began to assume the prominence which it has ever since held in the Romish
Church, and to eclipse that of our Lord himself, it was usually
celebrated in the eastern portion of the church; and, as if to give to it
more special honour, the recess or chapel at the eastern extremity,
adopted from the holy place of the Temple at Jerusalem, was appropriated
to it.  And a still further eastern end was frequently thrown out from
the original structure, where the worship of the Virgin might be
specially celebrated; where her statues, and shrines, and offerings might
be placed; and to which not only the gaze of the people in the choir, but
of the officiating priest himself as he stood before the high altar,
might be constantly directed.  Thus, according to the quaint remark of
Fuller, a gradation of reverence was established—“The porch said to the
church-yard, and the church said to the porch, and the chancel said to
the church, and the Lady Chapel said to them all: ‘Stand further off, I
am holier than thou.’”

It sometimes, indeed, happened in particular Cathedrals or churches that
there was a Saint connected with the place who was locally held in higher
honour, on account of the miraculous powers attributed to his or her
relics, than even the Virgin Mary, and in such cases the eastern chapel
was devoted to the honour of that Saint: as that of Becket, at
Canterbury; St. Cuthbert, at Durham; St. Ethelreda, at Ely; St. Alban, at
St. Albans; and St. Edward, at Westminster Abbey.  In such cases we find
the Lady Chapel placed elsewhere, as at Canterbury in the north aisle of
the nave; at Durham, at the west end, where it is called the Galilee; at
Rochester, in the south transept; at Oxford and Bristol, on the north
side of the choir.  In all the other Cathedrals the Lady Chapel is at the
eastern extremity.

In the Cathedral of Chester it is most probable that the eastern
extremity of the _Norman_ choir was occupied by the chapel and shrine {5}
of St. Werburgh, reaching as far as the eastern arch of the present
choir; and, if so, the chapel of the Virgin would be at the extremity of
the south aisle of the choir.  Although the present building is far more
extensive than that of Norman times, we shall probably find the same
principles of structure and arrangement still adhered to.  We have a
niche still remaining, indicating the existence of an image of the
Virgin, and a piscina, implying an altar, at the eastern termination of
this aisle; and these are probably the vestiges of an earlier arrangement
which had appropriated that part of the building to the worship of the
Virgin, and they were merely repeated on the new and enlarged choir,
though the altar of the Virgin was then removed to a more honourable
place.

At the date of the erection of the present Lady Chapel, which I shall
endeavour to fix about A.D. 1280, St. Werburgh had begun to decline
somewhat in popular estimation; no miracles were ever performed at her
shrine, and the taste of the age was for some demonstration of the power
of the saints.  There happened also to be a burst of devotion at that
period towards the Virgin Mary.  And therefore, when the Norman Chapel of
St. Werburgh was pulled down, and the choir extended, it was natural that
a new and more sumptuous chapel should be given to the honour of the
Virgin, occupying the same relative position, at the eastern extremity of
the choir.  The original position of the shrine of St. Werburgh was
probably preserved under this new arrangement; but instead of being in a
separate chapel to the east of the Choir, it now fell within the Choir,
which was lengthened so as to include it.  In this position it is
believed to have remained until the period of the Reformation, when the
stone structure containing the shrine was removed and converted into a
throne for the Bishop.  Thus, without doing disrespect to the patron
saint of the Church, the Virgin Mary was honoured with a new Chapel, to
which special care and large expenditure of means were devoted.

The history of Lady Chapels, as they are found appended to all the larger
Churches of Europe, and forming a part of the interior arrangement of the
smaller ones, can hardly be investigated without some reference to the
rise and progress of the Mariolatry of the Church of Rome.  Such
reference would hardly fall within the range of subjects usually treated
of by this Society, and would lead us off into questions of theology and
ecclesiastical history far too extensive to be dealt with in a brief and
popular lecture.  I shall therefore content myself with observing that
the exaltation of the Virgin Mary as an object of worship took its rise
in the fifth century, and advanced by gradual stages of growth until we
find in the eleventh century, about the date of the Conquest, that a
daily office was instituted in her honour, divine titles began to be
ascribed to her, and every imaginable epithet, expressive of adoration
and extravagant superstition, was lavished upon her in the writings of
the time.  It was at this period, just when the first Norman Earl
re-founded the Monastery of St. Werburgh, and erected the building of
which so many portions still remain, that Lady Chapels began to be added
to churches in this kingdom.  The worship of the Virgin, which had then
assumed a very prominent and elaborate character, required a separate
place for the celebration of it.  And it is not uninteresting to remember
that Anselm, Abbot of Bec and Archbishop of Canterbury, whom Hugh Lupus
brought to Chester in order that he might re-model the conventual
establishment, was a devoted worshipper of the Virgin Mary, and
introduced into England a festival in honour of the Immaculate
Conception.  He would take care, therefore, that all honour was done to
her, and all due provision made for the celebration of her worship in the
new conventual church.  We have no exact plan of that Norman structure,
but from the vestiges of it which were discovered in 1841, it was
apparent that there was an eastern apse or chapel, extending beyond the
choir itself, which was intended probably as the chapel of the Virgin,
though, as we have suggested, used as a site for the shrine of St.
Werburgh.  All this structure disappeared at the end of the 13th century,
to make way for the present buildings, and just at this period the
enthusiasm on the subject of the honour due to the Blessed Virgin was at
its height.

We will endeavour now to fix, as nearly as we can, the date of the
present Lady Chapel.  Upon comparing it with the Chapter House the
earliest of our buildings of the Early English period, a marked
difference appears in the composition of the mouldings, the form of the
window jambs, the size and character of the bosses, bespeaking for the
Lady Chapel a more advanced period of the style.  We find here,
externally, ponderous upright buttresses, chamfered at the angles, and
with indications of clustered columns on those of the eastern part of the
building.  A rich and deep hollow cornice, with very large and massive
single dog-tooth ornaments, placed above a foot apart, over-hangs the
outer wall, but it is now concealed under the roof of the side aisles.
We have, internally, multiplied round-and-hollow mouldings around the
windows, interspersed with the dog-tooth mouldings; bold and massive ribs
in the groined roof, with very rich and highly-wrought bosses of great
size at the intersections of the main ribs.  These indications of an
advanced style lead us to fix the date of erection at the period of
transition from the Early English to the Decorated Order, or about the
close of the 13th century.  This would bring us to the time when Simon de
Albo Monasterio was Abbot of St. Werburgh.  He was the most able of the
Abbots of Chester, and the most magnificent in his architectural
restorations.  His accession to the Abbacy is dated as A.D. 1265, and he
lived until 1289, in the reigns of Henry III. and Edward I.  In the 12th
year of Edward I. we have a record of a precept being granted to allow
venison from the King’s forests of Delamere and Wirral, for the support
of the Monks of St. Werburgh who were engaged in the building of their
church.  It is clear that the first building on which they were then
engaged was the present Lady Chapel, which bears evidence of the desire
of the Abbot to make it worthy of her to whom it was dedicated, and of
his own character for munificence.  It is not improbable that this Chapel
was all that was finished during the life-time of this Abbot, for there
is an evident decline of architectural effort and means in the eastern
portion of the choir, which was erected immediately after the Chapel.
The great arch which unites the choir with the Chapel is remarked upon by
Rickman, for the richness of its multiplied rounds and hollows, but this
richness is not carried on to the westward.  I may here remark, by the
way, that this arch seems to have been formed out of the old Norman east
window of the original Lady Chapel, as there are plain indications of
Norman structure in the wall on each side of it.  We venture then to fix
the date of the erection at about 1280.

The Lady Chapel, as built by Simon de Albo Monasterio, was without
aisles; the outer walls being buttressed and corniced as before
described, and with a parapet, of which no portion now remains.  There
were three triplet windows on each side, of which the jamb mouldings only
remain.  The tracery of four of them was entirely removed when the side
aisles were built, and that of the other two replaced at the same period
by coarse perpendicular tracery.  The eastern window was probably of five
lights.  Traces of its mullions yet remain, running down on the external
face of the eastern end.  Sufficient vestiges of the composition of the
exterior of the Chapel yet remain to admit of its being restored
externally, as well as internally, to its original form.

It does not appear that there was any entrance to the Chapel, as it was
first built, except through the eastern arch from the choir.  We enter it
now through the side aisles, one of the windows having been cut away on
each side, down to the base of the wall, in order to open this passage.
This was probably done at the same time that the high altar was erected
in the choir and elevated upon a platform so lofty as wholly to obstruct
the passage under the eastern arch.  This platform, which buried the
columns up to four feet above the base mouldings, was considerably
lowered in 1841.

When we enter the Chapel, the first thing perhaps that strikes us is the
lowness of the ceiling, being only 32 feet from the floor to the central
rib, for it is one characteristic of the buildings of this date that they
rise far above the height of the Norman vaulting, and give a great
impression of loftiness and lightness.  The causes of this defect, if it
be one, in this building, seem to have been two:—In the first place, it
was necessary to keep the roof at such an elevation as would not
interfere with the light of the upper east window of the choir.  In the
second place, the floor of the Chapel has been raised above its original
level, as will be apparent from the line of the stone bench which runs
round the exterior; and from the position of the Sedilia at the east end.
Of the eastern window, as well of the two which are near it, on the north
and south, it is obvious to remark that the tracery is of a late
Perpendicular character, while the jamb mouldings are of late Decorated.
Thence arises one of the chief defects of the interior of the Chapel,—the
want of harmony in its architectural details, striking the eye most
forcibly in the east window, the plain perpendicular tracery of which is
so manifestly incongruous with the pointed English character of the
surrounding features of the building.  The liberality of the citizens of
Chester has indeed in some measure diminished the unpleasing effect of
this contrast, by the introduction of a fine east window of painted
glass, designed by Pugin, and executed by Wailes in his best manner.  But
it is impossible not to regret that the tracery itself was not restored
to its proper character before the painted glass was introduced; nor is
it unreasonable to hope that this may yet be done, and that the fine
window of five lights may yet be reconstructed, in order to complete the
restoration of the interior of this beautiful Chapel.

The next observable feature of the Chapel is the groined roof, marked
especially by its singular and beautiful bosses at the three principal
points of intersection of the ribs.  These bosses are of unusually large
size for so low a building, being of three feet diameter, and descending
below the ceiling more than 18 inches.  The weight of each boss is nearly
two tons.  They exhibit great care and skill in design and execution, and
are finished with that attention to details which marks the works of that
age, though it appears to be almost a waste of labour when employed on
objects so far above the eye of the spectator.

The central boss bears a figure of the Virgin and Child,—the eastern one,
a symbol of the Trinity,—and the western one a representation of the
murder of Thomas a Becket.

It is not improbable that these three subjects, placed in this order from
east to west, were designed to embody the three great features of the
Christian Church of that age.  We have in the first a figure of the
Father, seated on His throne, holding between His knees a small crucifix,
and the dove rests on the cross, in the attitude of whispering into the
Saviour’s ear.  This was not an uncommon form of representing the Trinity
in early times, and forcibly, though rudely, shadows out the elements of
Christian truth,—the Father, who is in heaven, holding forth the Son,
crucified for us; and the Holy Spirit concurring in the scheme of
redemption, and ministering comfort to the Saviour to support Him in His
last agony. {9}

We have in the second boss the representation of the worship of the
Virgin Mary,—the prominent characteristic of the Romish Church.  The
Virgin is represented, according to invariable custom, as seated, and
with the infant Saviour in her arms; _she_, and not the Saviour, being
the main subject of the work.  The Saviour was always thus represented,
as an infant in His mother’s arms, not only to mark her identity, but to
embody the idea of her influence and authority over Him and His Church.

We then have in the third boss an indication both of the worship of the
Saints and of the supremacy of the Pope, in the martyrdom of Thomas a
Becket.  And thus we have a complete series of symbolic representations
of the doctrine of the Church of Rome.

This third boss deserves some special attention.  It had long perplexed
the judgment of curious observers, and defied the skill of archæological
critics.  Being beyond the reach of minute examination, and the
arrangement of the figures being somewhat involved, it was not easy to
interpret it.  It passed with some for the Assumption of the Virgin; with
others for the Resurrection of our Lord, because the figures of armed men
were apparent in it; but no one guessed at the true subject, until a cast
was taken of it and it could be examined upon the ground.  There is no
question now as to what it represents,—the murder of Thomas a Becket,—and
that it gives a somewhat unusual version of that event.  There are many
representations of the murder—some almost contemporary with it—both in
painted glass and in sculptured stone, especially in France and Italy.
Not only was Becket himself one of the most distinguished and courageous
defenders of the rights and authority of the Romish Church against regal
aggression, but his death formed a great crisis in the history of the
Papal power, and opened the way to a vast extension of it throughout
Europe.  On this account the memory of his martyrdom was perpetuated in
every possible form.  But singularly enough, for an event so notorious,
and of which the details were recorded by nearly thirty contemporary
writers, the actual representations of it differ very much from one
another, and from the real facts of the story.  In Mr. Stanley’s
_Memorials of Canterbury Cathedral_, a careful comparison of all the
narratives of the martyrdom is instituted, and an accurate analysis given
of the facts which may be deemed authentic.  With these facts our boss
agrees more closely than most other delineations of the same subject.  We
have in it, of course, the figures of the four memorable Knights who were
the perpetrators of the deed: Reginald Fitzurse, Hugh de Morville,
William de Tracy, and Richard de Brez.  These are all represented as
wearing chain armour, with the usual steel caps of the Crusaders, and
bearing swords and shields.  The figures are curiously interwoven, and
turned backwards upon the stone, in order to bring them all into the
limited space.  The shields which they carry have all their several
heraldic devices.  This is exactly according to fact.  The figure of
Becket is represented, as usual, kneeling at an altar, with his head bent
forward.  Beside him stands the monk Grim, bearing the crozier or cross.
Fitzurse, whose identity is marked by the bears on his shield, holds his
sword with both hands, prepared to strike; but it seems to be Richard de
Brez, who bears a boar’s head on his shield, who strikes the blow, and
the blow is represented as falling on the crown of Beckett head, so as to
cut off the scalp.  This is precisely in accordance with the best
authenticated narratives.  For though the first blow which was struck was
from Tracy, the fatal one was given by Brez or Breton.  “The stroke was
aimed with such violence,” says the narrative of the monk Grim, “that the
scalp or crown of the head—which it was remarked was of unusual size—was
severed from the skull, and the sword snapped in two on the marble
pavement.”  This is the final act which is represented upon the boss,—the
act which completed the martyrdom and set free the soul of Becket, as it
was said, from its earthly prison, that it might go to receive its glory
in heaven, as one of the chiefest Saints of Christ’s Catholic Church.

It is not uninteresting to trace out a reason for the accurate
delineation of the facts of this murder upon this boss.  In the
celebrated translation of the body of the canonized Saint from the crypt
of Canterbury Cathedral, where it had been at first buried, to the
newly-erected Shrine at the east end of the choir of the same
church,—which translation was made by Stephen Langton, Archbishop of
Canterbury, in the presence of King Henry III. and all the Prelates of
the realm, and cost, in pomp and ceremony, more than a coronation,—the
Bishop of Chester of that day {11a} was a principal actor.  He was joined
with Langton in the Royal Commission, which bears date A.D. 1220.  The
Bishop would most likely bring back with him from Canterbury to Chester a
vivid impression of the solemnity of the scenes, and of the virtues of
the martyr.  He _did_ bring back with him a very precious relic of the
Saint, no less than the girdle which he wore at the time of his
martyrdom.  And this girdle he presented to the Abbey of St. Werburgh,
where it was preserved with religious care until the time when all such
relics acquired perhaps something less than their intrinsic value, and
were destroyed at the Dissolution.  With the relic, the Bishop would be
likely to bring with him an accurate version of the details of the
murder, and this version would be embodied on the sculptured stone of
this boss.

I will venture, on taking leave of this subject, to add to my remarks the
more valuable commentary of Mr. Stanley, {11b} which will point the moral
of my tale:—“We must all remember, that the wretched superstitions which
gathered round the Shrine (and name) of Thomas of Canterbury, ended by
completely alienating the affections of thinking men from his memory, and
rendering the name of Becket a bye-word of reproach, as little
proportioned to his real deserts as had been the reckless veneration paid
to it by his worshippers in the middle ages.”

    [Picture: No. 2 and No. 3.  Bosses recently discovered in the Lady
                        Chapel, Chester Cathedral]

I pass now from the architectural character of this Lady Chapel to its
history.  Would that I could say that any materials exist from which I
might construct a narrative of the events which have occurred within its
walls during the six centuries of its existence.  If we were able to look
back into the dark period of its early history, and discover the secrets
of monastic life which have been transacted here, we might tell some
tales which would interest and astonish hearers of these more enlightened
times.  But it is as well, perhaps, that curiosity cannot be satisfied
with the discovery of facts which we should be very likely to
misunderstand and misjudge.  And we must be content to pass the whole
period from the building of the Chapel in or about 1280 to the
dissolution of the Monastery, in 1541, as a blank on which no light of
history or of records, or even of tradition, has been thrown.  The only
fact of that period which bears the slightest interest, is the burial of
John de Salghall, one of the later Abbots, who died in the year 1452,
temp. Henry VI.  His burial place is described as being “between two
pillars on the south side of the Chapel, under an alabaster stone;” on
which we may observe that, as the spot so marked out is in the opening
made by the cutting away the wall under the south window to gain an
opening into the south aisle, that aisle must have been built previously;
and yet it is commonly _said_ to have been built in the reign of Henry
VII. {12}

The stone under which the Abbot was buried still remains,—not of
alabaster, but Purbeck marble,—and bears the traces of a very rich brass,
which must have nearly covered the whole stone.  About thirty years ago
this stone was removed, and the Abbot’s coffin was found under it, in a
tolerably perfect state.  His body was enveloped in folds of cerecloth;
and an illegible writing on parchment lay upon this breast.  His gold
ring of office, containing a large sapphire, was on the forefinger of his
right hand.  This was not interred again with the rest of the contents of
the coffin, but is now preserved amongst the treasures of the Chapter.

 [Picture: Martyrdom of St. Thomas of Canterbury.  A painting discovered
   at St. John’s ch. Winchester, Aug. 4th 1853.  From the Archæological
                       Association Journal Vol. x]

I may observe that, at the period of the Reformation, when the worship of
the Virgin was repudiated by the Church of England, it seems to have been
an object with the Reformers to desecrate all the Lady Chapels, with a
view to extinguish the yet lingering prejudice in favour of the places
where the interest and intercession of the Blessed Virgin had been sought
for during so many centuries.  They were, for the most part, converted to
some secular uses, and employed as schools, or vestries, or consistorial
courts.  To this latter use the Lady Chapel of our Cathedral was
appropriated; and there it was that Bishop Cotes, in the reign of Queen
Mary, (A.D. 1555) held the trial of George Marsh for heresy, and
condemned him to be burned at the stake,—a sentence which was shortly
afterwards carried into execution at Boughton on April 24, 1555. {13a}

We know not how soon after this the Consistory Court was removed from the
Lady Chapel to its present position in the south-western tower, but
probably at the period of the Restoration.  From that date the Chapel has
been restored to more befitting uses, and the early Morning Prayers, or
Matins, have been always read there.

In Webb’s _Itinerary_, {13b} speaking of the Lady Chapel as it appeared
in his day (A.D. 1640), he says that it was “adorned with a fair window
to the east, of very curious workmanship in glass, where hath been the
story of the Blessed Virgin, her descent from the loins of Jesse, in the
line of David; though now, through injury of time and weather, the same
story is much blemished.”

Forty years after that, the mischief which had been commenced “by time
and weather,” was completed by a tumultuous mob of the citizens of
Chester, instigated, as it was supposed, by James Duke of Monmouth, who
was at that time in Chester, courting popularity.  They broke into the
Cathedral, and amongst other outrages committed upon the contents of the
sacred building, wholly destroyed the painted glass of the east window of
the Lady Chapel.  It has been the work of the citizens in a later age,
and under a better feeling, to repair the injury done by their
forefathers, and once more adorn the east window with “very curious
workmanship in glass,”—an example which has been followed by many private
individuals, so that we have now all the windows of the Chapel so
decorated, at a cost of not less than £1,500.

Permit me to say a few words in conclusion, as to the purpose and
character of the works which are now going on in this Chapel.  I shall
not venture to name the person by whose suggestion they were entered
upon, and at whose cost the decorative part is to be executed, as it is
her desire to be kept in the back ground, and to let all be done to the
glory of God.  But I may state that the object is to restore the interior
of the Chapel to the same state in which we may believe it to have been
left by its first builders.  From a close and careful examination of the
bosses, ribs, window mouldings, and capitals, it is apparent that they
had received the decorative colouring usual in buildings of that date;
and the remains of it, found under accumulated coats of whitewash, were
sufficient to indicate precisely the several tones of colour, so as to
enable the artist who examined them to restore exactly the original
design.  Mr. Octavius Hudson, who has made this branch of ancient art his
special study, and has shewn his skill and knowledge of the subject in
his admirable chromatic works at Salisbury, has had the restoration of
this Chapel entrusted to his care.

I believe that there are some persons who look with no little suspicion
upon these attempts to revive the mediæval character of our sacred
buildings; thinking it to be symptomatic of Romanizing tendencies; or, at
least, likely to foster them; and apprehending that, if we begin by
introducing mediæval ornament, we may perhaps end by bringing in mediæval
ceremonies.

It is quite true that whitewash has long been the symbol of true
Protestantism.  Successive coats of it have been laid over the ancient
mural decorations of our Churches, in order, as it were, to perpetuate
the abhorrence of Popish superstition by washing out the stain of it from
the very walls.  Everything that would serve to please the eye, and
indulge the sentiment; everything that even tended to express a desire to
glorify the House of God, and to impress the worshippers in it with
reverential feelings, has been excluded, as if it were idolatrous.  We
have all been educated in an atmosphere of ecclesiastical whitewash.
People’s eyes have been so habituated to it, as the one established
Church pigment, that they are with difficulty brought to think anything
else orthodox or appropriate.

But, as to the principle of colouring, as a means of giving a pleasing
and reverent character to the interior of our Churches, surely we need
not confound the idea of simplicity in _the worship_ of God, with that of
plainness in _the building_.  To the former we are happily restricted, as
well by our established Ritual, as by our common sense of what is true
and edifying.  To the latter we are not limited by any rule, legal or
Scriptural.  Admitting that when we introduce fanciful varieties of
costume, and gesture, and embellishment into the offices of Divine
worship, we are lowering the spirit and the meaning of it, it by no means
follows that the same objection applies to the rich and chromatic
ornamentation of the edifice itself.  In that we are obviously doing
honour to Him whose name it bears, and shewing a desire to give Him the
best we have.  “The King’s daughter is all glorious within,” may be no
less applicable, though in a secondary sense, to the _material_ than to
the _spiritual_ Church of Christ.  All natural products are to be
employed “to beautify the place of my sanctuary,” under the Christian
dispensation no less than under the Jewish; “and I will make the place of
my feet glorious,” (Isaiah lx. 13).  We do not in these days question the
propriety of reviving the highly elaborate ecclesiastical architecture of
the middle ages, in order to give a rich and grand effect to our Houses
of God.  I do not see the difference between doing that, and enriching
them with appropriate colouring, to relieve the monotony of effect.  One
is as much calculated as the other to give a richer and more impressive
tone to what presents itself to the senses of the worshipper.  There is
no more symbolism in one than in the other; no more symptom of a return
to mediæval superstition.

Viewing the question simply in an artistic or archæological point of
view, it may be very well doubted whether we can form a correct estimate
of the real beauty and effect of mediæval architecture without restoring
the colouring which originally formed a part of it.  _We_ do not see it
as they who built the Churches saw it.  If we trust to them for a correct
taste in structural arrangement, why not trust them also in the point of
colour?  What would those mediæval artists feel, if brought back to see
the now colourless walls and ceilings of their richly ornamented
structures?  What would Simon de Albo Monasterio say to the state of our
Lady Chapel?  What would Michael Angelo, or any person of taste, say if
he could see the interior of St. Peter’s all covered with whitewash?

Whatever caution may be required in the revival of this ancient style of
decoration,—and, beyond all question, great judgment and skill are needed
to revive the ancient tone of colouring, so that it may serve to please
the eye without offending the sense of propriety,—yet I think the
advancing intelligence and taste of the age will be found to sanction the
attempt.  The few experiments which have lately been made in this art in
Ely Cathedral and Salisbury Chapter House, have been eminently
successful, and have brought out effects in the building unobserved
before.  It is probable that this will be also the effect here.  And I
will venture to add the expression of a hope that the day will come when
the same style of decoration may he extended, in some measure, to the
groined roof of the Choir.  That monotonous mass of wood and plaster
would be awakened into some life and beauty by a few touches of gold and
colour, and it would be relieved from the reproach, now sometimes cast
upon it, of being but a very poor attempt to represent stone.

To revert for a moment to the Lady Chapel.  I have already complained of
the incongruous character of the tracery of the east window as disturbing
the harmonious effect of the interior.  A project is now on foot for
replacing it by a five-light Early English window, from a design by Mr.
Scott.  It were much to be wished that the benevolence of individuals,
interested in Church restoration, could be applied to assist the Dean and
Chapter in restoring the _exterior_ of this Chapel.  It is now in a
dilapidated, if not a dangerous condition; and as it is the first part of
the building which presents itself to the eye of an observer on the City
Walls, it might be made as rich and pleasing in architectural effect, as
it is now poor and offensive.  The spirit of the citizens and of the
county has been once called forth to aid the work of restoration.  May it
be again awakened to promote the honour of Almighty God, by beautifying
this place of His sanctuary! {16}




FOOTNOTES.


{3}  Read before the Society on Monday, February 1, 1858.

{5}  Hanshall, in his _History of Cheshire_, 4to, 1817, page 221, states
that the Shrine of St. Werburgh, and the pedestal on which it rested,
“formerly stood in the Chapel of the Virgin at the east end of the Choir;
and that the pedestal was removed to its present position soon after the
Reformation, and converted into the Episcopal Throne.”  History is silent
as to the fate of the Shrine itself; but being of great intrinsic value,
it no doubt vanished at the Dissolution, along with other precious relics
belonging to the Abbey.

{9}  Several examples of this Trinitarian device occur to us; but it will
suffice to instance the beautiful contemporary seal of the Holy Trinity
Priory at York, the general design of which very much resembles that upon
the Lady Chapel boss, except in the position of the dove, which in the
York seal appears to be in the act of descending from the Father upon the
head of the crucified Saviour.  Another and a later example, of the 16th
century, is given in the _Journal of the British Archæological
Institute_, Vol. VIII., p. 317, from a silver medallion, the work of
Heinrich Reitz, of Leipsic, who flourished from A.D. 1553–1586.  It ought
perhaps to be mentioned, that this curious boss was for more than two
centuries hidden from view by an immense block of plaster moulded into
the form of a Tudor rose; and that its real character was only discovered
by mere accident, while preparing the groined ceiling for chromatic
treatment, at the hands of Mr. Octavius Hudson.

       [Picture: No. 1.  Boss from Lady Chapel, Chester Cathedral]

[Picture: No. 1.  Corresponding subject from seal of Holy Trinity Priory,
                                  York]

{11a}  William de Cornhill, Bishop of Chester, Lichfield, and Coventry,
from 1216 to 1223.

{11b}  _Memorials of Canterbury_, p. 110.

{12}  This southern aisle of the Lady Chapel is said to have been
anciently called the _Chapel of St. Erasmus_.  Close to the spot above
indicated, if not indeed in the same grave, were deposited, according to
Webb (_Vale Royal_, Vol. II. p. 26,) the remains of the good Bishop
Bridgman, about the year 1656.  Other accounts give Kinnersley Church,
Shropshire, as the place of his burial.

{13a}  A full account of the trial and execution of George Marsh will be
found in Foxe’s _Book of Martyrs_, Vol. I. p. 1481.

{13b}  _Vale Royal of England_, Vol. II. p. 33.

{16}  While these pages are passing through the press (November, 1859,)
the alterations and improvements suggested in the above concluding
paragraph are being actually carried out, under the auspices of the Dean
and Chapter.  The late east window of stained glass has, with the
tracery, been carefully removed, and will be placed in one of the north
windows of the Lady Chapel, while a new east window of five lights has
been erected in its stead, and will in due time be adorned with another
subject in stained glass.




***END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK ON THE LADY CHAPEL IN CHESTER
CATHEDRAL***


******* This file should be named 61922-0.txt or 61922-0.zip *******


This and all associated files of various formats will be found in:
http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/6/1/9/2/61922


Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions will
be renamed.

Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright
law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works,
so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United
States without permission and without paying copyright
royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part
of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project
Gutenberg-tm electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm
concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark,
and may not be used if you charge for the eBooks, unless you receive
specific permission. If you do not charge anything for copies of this
eBook, complying with the rules is very easy. You may use this eBook
for nearly any purpose such as creation of derivative works, reports,
performances and research. They may be modified and printed and given
away--you may do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks
not protected by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the
trademark license, especially commercial redistribution.

START: FULL LICENSE

THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK

To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free
distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project
Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full
Project Gutenberg-tm License available with this file or online at
www.gutenberg.org/license.

Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project
Gutenberg-tm electronic works

1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm
electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all
the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or
destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your
possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a
Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound
by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the
person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph
1.E.8.

1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be
used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few
things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works
even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See
paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project
Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this
agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm
electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.

1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the
Foundation" or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection
of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual
works in the collection are in the public domain in the United
States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the
United States and you are located in the United States, we do not
claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing,
displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as
all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope
that you will support the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting
free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm
works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the
Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with the work. You can easily
comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the
same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg-tm License when
you share it without charge with others.

1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are
in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States,
check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this
agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing,
distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any
other Project Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no
representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any
country outside the United States.

1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:

1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other
immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear
prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work
on which the phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the
phrase "Project Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed,
performed, viewed, copied or distributed:

  This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and
  most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no
  restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it
  under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this
  eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the
  United States, you'll have to check the laws of the country where you
  are located before using this ebook.

1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is
derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not
contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the
copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in
the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are
redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase "Project
Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply
either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or
obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg-tm
trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted
with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any
additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms
will be linked to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works
posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the
beginning of this work.

1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm
License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm.

1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
Gutenberg-tm License.

1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including
any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access
to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format
other than "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official
version posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site
(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense
to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means
of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original "Plain
Vanilla ASCII" or other form. Any alternate format must include the
full Project Gutenberg-tm License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.

1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works
unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works
provided that

* You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
  the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method
  you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed
  to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he has
  agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project
  Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid
  within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are
  legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty
  payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project
  Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in
  Section 4, "Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg
  Literary Archive Foundation."

* You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
  you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
  does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm
  License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all
  copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue
  all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg-tm
  works.

* You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of
  any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
  electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of
  receipt of the work.

* You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
  distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works.

1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project
Gutenberg-tm electronic work or group of works on different terms than
are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing
from both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and The
Project Gutenberg Trademark LLC, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm
trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.

1.F.

1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project
Gutenberg-tm collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm
electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may
contain "Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate
or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other
intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or
other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or
cannot be read by your equipment.

1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right
of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
DAMAGE.

1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you
received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium
with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you
with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in
lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person
or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second
opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If
the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing
without further opportunities to fix the problem.

1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS', WITH NO
OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT
LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.

1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of
damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement
violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the
agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or
limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or
unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the
remaining provisions.

1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in
accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the
production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm
electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses,
including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of
the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this
or any Project Gutenberg-tm work, (b) alteration, modification, or
additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any
Defect you cause.

Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm

Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of
electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of
computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It
exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations
from people in all walks of life.

Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's
goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will
remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future
generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see
Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at
www.gutenberg.org 

Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary 
Archive Foundation

The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit
501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification
number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by
U.S. federal laws and your state's laws.

The Foundation's principal office is in Fairbanks, Alaska, with the
mailing address: PO Box 750175, Fairbanks, AK 99775, but its
volunteers and employees are scattered throughout numerous
locations. Its business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, Salt
Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up to
date contact information can be found at the Foundation's web site and
official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact

For additional contact information:

    Dr. Gregory B. Newby
    Chief Executive and Director
    gbnewby@pglaf.org

Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation

Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide
spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest
array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations
($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
status with the IRS.

The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations
where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND
DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular
state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate

While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
approach us with offers to donate.

International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.

Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation
methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other
ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To
donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate

Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works.

Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project
Gutenberg-tm concept of a library of electronic works that could be
freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and
distributed Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of
volunteer support.

Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed
editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in
the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not
necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper
edition.

Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search
facility: www.gutenberg.org

This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm,
including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.