support nothing, but are in fact borne up by what appears to rest on them. Notwithstanding this unreality, and the marked inconsistency of this roof with the architecture below-notwithstanding that its general character would have been much more adapted to some magnificent state apartment in a royal palace, still the richness and singularity of such an interminable series of fretted lines renders this, on the whole, one of the most attractive features of the cathedral. Both the arches themselves, and the straight lines which divide the principal panels, drip with minute foliations like lace-work in a style of almost Arabian gorgeousness."-(p. 59.)

The internal view of the choir next excites our admiration, but the description is too long for quotation :

"Bishop Vaughan's Chapel is an extremely fine specimen of late Perpendicular, and that of the best kind, and is the more conspicuous as being the only portion of the cathedral of any merit or importance belonging to that style. It exhibits the same chasteness of design and delicacy of execution which distinguishes King's College Chapel, opposed alike to the meagreness of Bath Abbey, and the corrupt forms and overdone ornament of Henry the Seventh's Chapel."-(p. 70.)

The parclose dividing the choir from the presbytery

"Deserves great attention from its remarkable, and, in this country at least, we believe unique, position; and as bearing the most distinct testimony to the threefold ritual division spoken of above. This division, although commonly marked in the construction of large churches, was not, so far as we know, ordinarily denoted by any actual separation; at all events, this is the only remaining instance that has fallen within our observation. It is perhaps the more important, as the present screen appears to have occupied a corresponding, though not identical, position from the middle of the fourteenth century, and to have been designedly retained, when removed to make room for Bishop Morgan's throne."-(p. 89.)

In the chapel of St. Thomas, now the chapter-house, there is a beautiful Early English piscina in the usual place, consisting of two pointed trefoil arches under a square head, having the spandrils filled up with extremely rich foliage. In one of the spandrils is a curious group representing a combat between a man and a monster in the act of swallowing another

man.

Into one of several altar-stones which have been laid in the pavement near the high altar, a small one of a different material has been inserted. It is fifteen inches in length by nine in breadth, and is thought to be unique;—the authors suggest that this may have been consecrated at a distance, by a non-resident bishop, and inserted in an unconsecrated stone in order to bring it into compliance with the requirements of the rubric.

We regret our inability to follow the authors in their description and other interesting matters, but pass on to the architectural history of the cathedral. The earliest portions of the existing buildings are attributed to Peter de Leia, the third of the Norman prelates, c. 1180. Of his work, the nave and the western arch of the lantern yet remain. Subsequently, as circumstances required, or devotion prompted, it underwent various repairs, alterations, and additions, Transitional and Early English, down to the time of Bishop Gower, 1328-1347, whose alterations in the complete Decorated style extend nearly throughout the whole building, and appear to have been carried on from one uniform design. After him, a few alterations in early and late Perpendicular bring us down to Bishop Vaughan, 1509-1522, who, more than any other prelate, may be said to have completed the present structure; all subsequent efforts having been limited to simple preservation or restoration. In 1630 Bishop Field held a visitation, and, by and with the consent of the chapter, decreed that his cathedral should be whitewashed!

It is questionable whether more harm occurred to the cathedral during the eventful era of the civil war or at the Reformation; probably the work of spoliation may be fairly divided between the two periods. To Bishop Horsley is due the credit of taking the lead in the work of restoration, who set on foot a subscription for the purpose, and under whose direction the sum of £2,015 was expended. This was in 1804, since which time various repairs have been effected.

St. David's ranks high in the extent of its subordinate ecclesiastical buildings. The chapel of St. Mary's College, founded by Bp. Adam. Houghton in 1377, forms a prominent object in viewing the cathedral from the north. Even in its present complete state of ruin it is easy to recognise traces of high architectural excellence. There is a small but very plain tower standing at the north-western corner, with a singular-looking buttress, which appears to have been added as an afterthought, to strengthen the tower, which was originally crowned, or intended to be crowned, with a spire. The chapel is roofless, and no vestige whatever of any internal arrangement remains, the whole building having been thoroughly gutted. Even Bp. Houghton's tomb, which must have been an immense structure, is only to be traced by marks against the wall where its ashlar has been torn away.

While many churches, even of inferior ecclesiastical rank, surpass St. David's in extent and beauty, of the palace, on the other hand, the authors affirm that it is unsurpassed by any existing English edifice of its own kind. Standing within a fortified close, it required no defences of its own; but its prominent features are the superb rose-window of the hall, and the graceful spire of the chapel, importing an abode, not of warfare, but of hospitality and religion.

The palace, like the college, has the advantage of being a structure of a single date and style, erected from one harmonious design. The founder was Bishop Gower, who held the see from 1328 to 1347, and the date of 1342 may be assigned to the building, which is a beautiful example of Decorated work. The general form of the palace is quadrangular, but so broken up by numerous projections, some at right angles to the main fabric, others assuming the form as it were of aisles, that the monotony of the square form is altogether lost, and a most varied and picturesque effect produced. The most striking feature is the very rich and singular form of the parapet; it consists of open arches resting on octagonal shafts corbelled off a little way down the wall. Over the arcade is a corbel-table; over which, again, is a battlement with extremely narrow embrasures and loopholes. The arcade remains perfect, and is shewn in the plate annexed, which, by the kindness of the proprietors of the work, we are enabled to present to the readers of our magazine. This parapet, it should be observed, is mainly indebted for its beauty to the roofless condition of the building it surrounds, otherwise its effect would be lost.

From the cathedral close, with its remarkable gate-tower, the authors proceed to the neighbourhood, in which there were formerly seven district chapels; - one only remains, and that in a ruined, roofless condition. Wells, ancient houses, crosses and stones, engage their attention, as doubtless they will also engage the attention of many of our readers, now that their curiosity has been attracted to this singular, but hitherto unexplored, region. We now pass on to the general history of the church and see, where, of course, the founder and patron-saint, St. David, occupies the foremost place. After a thorough sifting of the fabulous legend, the authors consider the

following to be the "residuum of historical truth" to be extracted from it :

"That St. David established a see and monastery at Menevia early in the seventh century, the site being chosen for the sake of retirement; that his diocese was regarded as co-extensive with the territory of the Demeta; but that he had no archiepiscopal jurisdiction; that a synod of the British Church was held at Llanddewi-Brefi, near the site of the ancient Loventium, in which it is probable that St. David played a conspicuous part, but that of the objects of this convention nothing certain is known; that no further particulars of the life of St. David are ascertained; and that of his immediate successors nothing whatever is recorded."―(p. 257.)

These are conclusions which, if they do not satisfy the old Welsh school, who insist on tracing their pedigree, will probably find many supporters among our English antiquaries. As a specimen of the manner in which the authors conduct the "sifting," we subjoin their reasons for deciding as they have done the question "whether St. David, from a misguided asceticism, fixed his seat in the least eligible spot of his diocese; or whether, under circumstances then existing, the position was more convenient and reasonable at that time than at present." Considering that the question turns upon the point whether or not there was ever a Roman station at Menevia, they argue thus :

"We have no contemporary written evidence to prove that the Romans penetrated to this extremity of the island; and it is certain they have not left extensive traces of their dominion. The principal towns of the Demeta were apparently converted into Roman stations, but these were situated at a considerable distance from Menevia. It is stated, however, in the work which bears the name of Richard of Cirencester, that the great Roman road which penetrated South Wales, the Via Julia, was carried on from Muridunum (Caermarthen) to a point on the western coast, from which there was a short passage of thirty miles to the shores of Ireland. There is no part of St. George's Channel so narrow as thirty miles, but the narrowest part is immediately opposite to St. David's Head, which is distant about five-and-forty miles from the Irish coast. this station the writer gives the name of Menapia, and the existence of such a place rests on his unsupported authority. The value of that authority has been keenly contested; but in spite of the serious difficulties attending the supposition that the work is genuine, it is undeniable that some of its statements have been verified by subsequent discoveries."-(p. 238.)

To

"But it must be observed that the Roman station of Menapia, granting its existence under that or any other name, cannot have been a very important one, as it is not mentioned either by Ptolemy or Antoninus; and that St. David, had he acted upon the principle observed in England, and still more on the continent, would probably have fixed his seat at Caermarthen, which has been, from the days of Ptolemy to the present time, the most important place in Demetia, and which has since become, for all practical purposes, the bishop's see."-(pp. 239-40.)

"Why did St. David go to Menevia? It has been already shown that we need not suppose it to have been a place of importance before his time. The inquirer therefore is forced back upon the ordinary answer, namely, that he chose it as a place of religious retirement. And whatever may be the difficulty in reconciling such a motive with that which ought to regulate a bishop in the choice of his seat, a solution is supplied to a certain extent by the account given in the legend; namely, that St. David combined the functions of a bishop with those of an abbot, as it is all but certain that his successors did in the seventh and eighth centuries, and as it is known from contemporary evidence that they did in the ninth. Such a practice, however alien from that of the Church in general, was common enough in Britain."-(p. 251.)

From St. David we have a succession of Welsh prelates down to the commencement of the twelfth century. In 1115 the see, which had been gradually losing its independence of the metropolitan powers of Canterbury, even to the suspension of Bishop Wilfred by Archbishop Anselm, passed into the hands of the Norman,-Bernard, chancellor to Matilda, being the first Norman bishop.