THE EXTERIOR
=The Cathedral Precincts.=--The wall of the Close, which extends to almost
a mile, dates from 1330, but of the four GATEWAYS only one remains.
This, to the south-east of the cathedral, is the main entrance to the
Close from the secular part of the city. It is about 60 feet high, and
the gateway is flanked on the north by an early Decorated (or
Transitional) octagonal tower--once the janitor’s lodge--and on the
south by a semicircular tower of an earlier character. This latter was
probably a detached bell-tower and contained a prison. It also formed a
Record Office and Consistory Court. The Precentor’s house abuts on the
southern enclosure; the Chanter’s orchard is to the south-west; the
Archdeacon has his residence to the west, and north of this is another
for the Archdeacon of Brecon; beyond this again are the Chancellor’s,
the Archdeacon of Cardigan’s, and the Treasurer’s houses. Adjoining the
bridge is a prebendal house.
[Illustration: PLAN OF ST. DAVID’S, 1806, BY JOHN CARTER.
A. Tower Gateway; B. City Wall; C. Cathedral; D. Bishop’s Palace; E. St.
Mary’s College; F. Garden; G. Great Hall; H. Kitchen; I. Bishop’s Hall;
K. West Chapel; L. Cloister Garth; M. God’s Acre (graves); O.
Subordinate Cathedral Buildings.]
On the north side of the Nave and parallel with it, but separated by the
Cloister garth, are the remains of the College of St. Mary; to the north
of its dignified tower are traces, possibly, of the infirmary, and to
the north and east of this again are the remains of the houses of the
Master and seven Priest-fellows of St. Mary’s, forming three sides of a
quadrangle, on the north side of which was an entrance gateway tower.
Across the Alan to the north-west are the attractive ruins of Bishop
Gower’s once splendid palace.
[Illustration: TOP OF TOWER (S.W. ANGLE) AND TENOR BELL.]
=The Church.=--An important feature in the general exterior appearance of
St. David’s is the walling material. Greys, reds, and purples, and
mottle-blends of all three, lend a peculiar richness and warmth to the
building on a sunny day, and the converse in wet weather. The quarries
from which the cathedral stone was obtained are at Caerbwdy, in the
immediate neighbourhood, and as these are almost the oldest sedimentary
rocks known, it is conjectured that some part of this locality existed
as an island in more than one primæval sea.[2] This ancient cathedral,
then, of the British Church has the distinction of being built of more
primitive stone than any other important building in the country. Many
things combine to render the general character of the exterior
architecturally uninteresting. There is a decided feeling of dignity,
but not of the grandeur with which one is apt to associate the idea of a
cathedral. It lies low; the roofs are of a flat pitch, with the
exception of those of the transepts; the highly picturesque and
exquisite ruin of Bishop Gower’s palace to the west, with its chequered
rampart, and the immense amount of new material used in the very
necessary restoration, at present combine to mask the real age of the
cathedral; and, finally, there is no hint of the gorgeous work within.
=The Tower.=--Few Norman towers, situated on the crossing of the nave,
transepts, and choir, have not fallen[3] or been in extreme danger of
doing so owing to the early architects having a very limited knowledge
of the weight of superimposed masses and of the thrust of arches, which,
as the orientals declare, “never rest.” The central tower of St. David’s
was no exception; it fell in 1220. But it can hardly be that any tower
has suffered worse than has this one from injudicious attentions even
till the general restorations under Sir G. Scott in 1862. After the fall
of 1220 the western piers and arch were allowed to remain, and the other
three arches and piers were rebuilt from the ground. This, however, did
not deter Bishops Gower and Vaughan adding, the first a Decorated and
the latter a Perpendicular stage on to the same faulty substructure. In
the rebuilding after the disaster of 1220 apparently but little effort
was made towards fully introducing the new style in vogue. In fact, it
is one of the most curious features of the whole of the details of the
building that all the work is behind the accepted contemporary types in
the matter of architectural advancement.
Internally the one old arch remaining is, of course, more or less
semicircular, but the three new ones are pointed and consequently the
string-course above them is carried at a higher level. Over this
string-course on the west side is an arcade of pointed arches with
slender shafts and foliated capitals. A corbel composed of a fox’s head
carries the centre shaft. Altogether these form a graceful combination
of shafts, corbels, and large bowtells with shaft-bases. Above is the
characteristic Norman billet string-course.
[Illustration: CEILING OF CENTRAL TOWER.]
Bishop Gower’s stage, above a string with the ball-flower ornament,
contains on each face a tall two-light window, having pointed arches
opening to a wall-passage, and externally a niche on either side. The
third storey (of Bishop Vaughan, c. 1515) has a top-heavy effect and a
most unusual parapet, with polygonal angle-shafts and a set of eight
pinnacles. There are at present three bells, and the one that is used
most and strikes from the clock is outside on the tower roof under a
wooden diminutive belfry. There are two bells at the west end on the
nave floor. Apparently there was an octave in the middle of the
fourteenth century, when the bells were recast and the largest was lost
at sea. About 1690 there were five (some cracked), and in 1748 the
Chapter ordered that the four large bells should be taken down as they
were both useless and dangerous, and in 1765 two were sold. The upper
part of the interior of the tower consists of an elaborate wooden vault,
which was raised by Scott and finely emblazoned. As the roof of the
tower must obviously have been raised at least twice before, it seems
hardly necessary for Scott to apologise (_vide_ Report, 1869, Appendix)
for doing so again. His success, however, is very patent.
=The South Side.=--Beginning at the west end, the first noticeable feature
is the =South Porch= in the second bay, with the parvise or first floor
chamber. The inner doorway has been, as Freeman[4] justly says, “one of
the most magnificent displays of ornament in the whole building ... and,
contrary to the common rule, the original Norman doorway has given way
to a later successor.... The present doorway is Decorated (Bishop Gower,
1328-47), without shafts, but with a superb display of sculptured
decoration, besides crockets and the ordinary four-leaved flower. The
arch is adorned with a series of sculptures, which are sadly mutilated,
but in which we may still trace the familiar representation of the Root
of Jesse. The position, however, necessarily involves some
singularities, and, as in the better known example of the Dorchester
window, the genealogy is by no means easy to follow. The western impost
is occupied by what appears to be a figure of Adam, with Eve issuing
from his side; the other supports the recumbent figure of Jesse, from
whom springs the branch, along which the figures are introduced,
somewhat after the manner of the Norman medallions at Iffley. Some of
the figures may still be discerned reading at desks; David with his harp
may also plainly be seen, as well as a representation of the
Crucifixion. Over the apex is an effigy of the Holy Trinity, with angels
on each side bearing censers. The doorway has pinnacles at the sides,
but they are cut off by the vaulting of the porch, which is plain
quadripartite, springing from corbels,
[Illustration: SOUTH ELEVATION.
_Drawn by F. Taylor Scott._]
among which we may observe the ornament called the mask, the only
example of that form to be found in the cathedral.” This porch is the
work of Gower, and the peculiar mouldings are readily traceable to the
same artist who designed the rood-screen. Scraps of the previous Norman
doorway, which was done away with by Gower, are still to be seen in the
plinth. At one time there were five steps in the porch, but these were
removed in 1885. The entrance to the upper chamber (added by Vaughan, c.
1515) is obtained from the nave by a turret-stair, and the room is now
used as a clerk-of-work’s drawing office.
In 1849 Butterfield renewed the tracery of the aisle windows as it
originally was in Decorated times, but it is not very attractive.
The Clerestory is Norman, of ashlar work, and the windows are rather
wide, stumpy, and round-headed, with flat pilaster-like buttresses
between each pair. But the restoration has deprived the exterior of much
of its interest, although one can easily imagine that those of the next
century will enjoy a very pleasing contrast between the purples of the
Caerfai buttresses and the yellows of the window dressings, which are of
Somersetshire oolite.
=The South Transept= still retains the outline of the arch of the great
south window which was blocked up when the four existing Perpendicular
windows of four lights each were inserted. A double buttress supports
the south-east corner of the transept, and behind this is the present
Chapter House.
=The East End.=--The south Presbytery aisle was put into proper repair at
the time of the general restoration, and new windows were inserted. The
upper tier of windows at the east end of the Presbytery have been well
restored also by Scott, and his own description[5] may well be given:
“In restoring the eastern arm of the church, a question arose
which, though but slightly suggested in my first Report, grew upon
my mind as we proceeded to such a degree, that it was more than a
twelvemonth before I could make up my mind as to which course to
take. The case was this:
“This wall of the church had originally side walls, much lower than
at present, with a high-pitched roof, and was constructed with
some view to stone groining, though it is clear that this was never
carried out, and was, in fact, deliberately relinquished.
“The east end had two ranges of windows, three most magnificent
lights below and four above.
[Illustration: SOUTH DOORWAY.]
“In the fifteenth century the high roof was taken off, the side
walls raised by the addition of some six feet of dead wall, the
gable lowered, and a very flat, though handsome roof placed upon
the walls thus altered; at the same time the upper tier of lancet
windows was removed, all but the outer jambs, and the space they
occupied converted into a single window in the Perpendicular style,
with a very flat arch.
“Sometime later still the three great lancet lights below were
walled up, owing to the erection of Bishop Vaughan’s chapel behind
them.
“Finding that the dead wall, thus added to the sides, was a
_perfect mine_ of the _débris_ of the ancient upper tier of
windows, that the Perpendicular window substituted for them was so
decayed as to require renewal, and that the timbers of the late and
low-pitched roof were much decayed, it was a tempting idea to
restore this limb of the church to its ancient design, and to add
groining (if not of stone, at least of oak) as at first
contemplated; while opposed to this was the judicious rule laid
down by Messrs. Freeman and Jones, the historians of the cathedral,
that when ancient alterations had become stereotyped as a part of
an historical monument, all change in them not included under the
term _restoration_ is set down as to be in itself reprehended, only
to be justified by special circumstances, the burden of proving
whose existence rests, in every case, with the innovator.
“This rule would certainly demand the repair and retention of the
later roof, and even, at first sight, of the later window, and
between these conflicting views I for a considerable time
oscillated, in a way which may have appeared weak to others, and
was certainly most painful to myself.
“I eventually took an intermediate course, which I think will be
admitted to be justified by the result.
“As regards the roof, though it was so bad as to necessitate its
being taken down, and though all its main beams (I think) but one
had to be renewed, the remainder, including much good carving and
many armorial bearings, was capable of reparation. As regards the
original intention of groining, I found unquestionable proofs that
it had been relinquished, if not by the original builders, yet
certainly by the reconstructors after the fall of the tower in
1220, for these builders had inserted niches just where the
vaulting would come. They had also erected the upper range of
lancet lights at the east end in a form incompatible with vaulting.
“These considerations led me at length to determine to relinquish
the idea of groining, and to return to my first intention of
restoring the later and existing roof.
“The case, however, was different with the upper east windows, for
not only was the later insertion so decayed as to demand renewal,
but on searching below its cill we found those of the original
lights still _in situ_, while on working the mine of _débris_ which
existed in the dead walls added to the original sides, we found not
only evidence sufficient to show the precise design of the ancient
eastern lancets, but sufficient to go a considerable way in
reconstructing them with their own ancient materials, though we
found no details to enable us to complete either the high gable or
its flanking turrets.
“While, then, I arrived at the conclusion that the
fifteenth-century roof should be restored, I also felt convinced
that, as regards the lancet lights, I had discovered just such
_special circumstances_ as would justify and almost demand the
restitution of their original forms.
“The design of the windows, thus reproduced from their original
materials after being for four centuries immured, is very excellent
and interesting. Internally they form a continuous arcade,
supported on little clusters of light shafts, while externally--the
lights being narrow, and the piers between them wide--the latter
are occupied each by a double niche, a fellow to which flanks
either jamb, so that while the arcade within consists of four
arches, that without is formed of four _groups_ of arches, making
twelve in all--four being windows and eight niches. The details of
all are excellent; unfortunately, however, the roof of Bishop
Vaughan’s Chapel prevents the external group from being seen with
any effect, though within we have now, so far as the forms of the
windows go, the ancient arrangement complete, and a most effective
and beautiful one it is.”
On the east wall of the tower the various weather-courses of previous
roofs are visible, which make a not unnatural appeal to the imagination
of the spectator. For the great defect of the exterior generally is that
the roofs are of such a very flat pitch.
=The Ruined Chapels=--on the south KING EDWARD’S, on the east that of OUR
LADY, on the north of ST. NICHOLAS, and the Ante-Chapel--will be
described later, as it is only by an unfortunate chance that they are
now roofless (except the last), and will, we hope, shortly be correctly
regarded as part of the interior if the proposed restoration takes
place.
Not far from the east end of the Lady Chapel is the spring which St.
David is credited with creating. Giraldus[6] has a very pretty legend
concerning this spring, which was known as St. Mary’s Well. It seems to
have been of somewhat variable quality, as its waters were sometimes
changed into milk and at others into wine. Sir G. Scott, however, with
scant respect for its saintly origin, caused it to be drained!
=The North Side= is much the more interesting of the two. After passing
the chapels we come to a very curious three-storied building, the roof
of which is higher than that of the cathedral. On the ground-floor was
the Chantry of St. Thomas, now a vestry, entered from the east side of
the north transept, and above this the turret stair from the north aisle
of the presbytery leads to the old Chapter House, now the Library, and
above this again is a disused room, once the Treasury.
No parallel has yet been found for this remarkable building, which
Freeman (1856) very accurately describes thus:[7]
“It is continued from the face of the north transept, which it
slightly exceeds in point of elevation. The external work is
Decorated; the east is flanked by two flat buttresses of very
singular character, which are terminated by rich pinnacles, now
mutilated. Equally singular is the buttress dividing its two bays
on the north side; flat at the bottom, after its first stage its
projection becomes angular, and so runs up the whole height of the
wall, becoming much smaller in its upper portion; its pinnacle is
quite destroyed (but is now restored). At the junction with the
transept a staircase is attached, in a singular and almost
indescribable way, to the upper portion of the broad pilaster at
the north-east corner of the transept....The east end has a very
strange appearance, having three windows over each other, and a
niche, not unlike a window, above all; that in the third stage is a
blocked spherical triangle (now restored). The lower part of the
wall is of ashlar, the occurrence of which is so rare in the
exterior of this church; the upper is of rubble, excepting the
buttresses.”
Butterfield is responsible for the large Decorated window in the =North
Transept=, and Scott raised the roof to its original pitch and rebuilt
the north-west angle turret. In the west wall are two Transitional
windows (but the northern one has long been filled in), and above is a
corbelled parapet. Below, but at a lower level than the transept floor,
is a doorway to the cloisters, with a semicircular outer arch having a
solid tympanum and segmental head within. At a contemporary period half,
and much later the whole, of this entrance was built up, and in the
recess thus formed was placed a lavatory and drain.
The east wall of the cloisters connects St. Mary’s College with the
north transept. An imposing view is obtained on going through the door
at the north-east corner of the cloisters. We now see the north side of
the nave, with flying buttresses supported on huge masses of masonry,
the ruins and graceful tower of St. Mary’s and, in the distance across
the Alan, the magnificent ruins of the episcopal palace.
The =North Doorway= (see p. 80) corresponds in position to the south
porch, and is a good example of a Transitional (Norman to Early English)
doorway, but it is much decayed. The principal ornament is, like those
in the arcade, a kind of hybrid composed of the Norman chevron and the
Early-English dog-tooth ornaments. There is a depressed arch to this
doorway, which, with other evidence, leads us to suppose that it has
been higher. Another feature which calls for comment--it is the same in
the arcade but in less marked degree--is that no matter what the size of
the stone, a complete part of the ornament has been carved upon it, thus
obtaining an irregular but not unpleasing effect.
The present =West Front= is from a design by Sir G. G. Scott, who based it
upon a drawing which he found in the library of the Society of
Antiquaries showing the church as it was before Nash’s alterations.
The illustrations on pages 2 and 7 show Nash’s design of 1793, which
seems to have received the sanction of the Society of Antiquaries. The
figures that appear in the first are Bishop Jones, Professor Freeman,
the authors of the best history of St. David’s, Dean Allen, and Sir G.
G. Scott. This execrable composition was a hopeless conglomeration of
Norman, Decorated, and Perpendicular, with a couple of heavy-arched
buttresses, which were apparently standing as recently as 1887.[8] The
rebuilding of the _West Front_ was undertaken at a cost of about £4,000
as a memorial to Bishop Thirlwall, who first seriously began to restore
the church in 1864, and his statue stands over the west door. The
material is Caerfai stone from the neighbouring quarries of Caerbwdy,
and suffers from its newness in appearance. In fact the design and the
purple stone combine to give the whole front a very heavy appearance,
which only years of exposure to the sea air will partially remedy.
[Illustration: _Photo. J. Valentine._
THE NAVE, LOOKING EAST.]