Chapter IV: The Precincts--The Cloisters and St. Mary’s College

The College of St. Mary was founded conjointly by John of Gaunt, Duke of Lancaster, his wife Blanche, and Bishop Adam Houghton in 1377, but it was endowed solely by the Bishop for the maintenance of a Master and seven Priest-Fellows, who were bound by a solemn oath to live in strict obedience to such regulations as the founder thought fit to ordain. The priests wore the same dress as the vicars-choral, and were under the control of the Precentor or Treasurer of the cathedral. They were bound to say the Hours and Masses of Requiem and perform certain services in the church. Any view from the northern side of the cathedral must include the graceful proportions of St. Mary’s, and it is surprising how well these buildings group with those of the cathedral. The cloisters and the cloister-garth, which separate the two buildings, date from about the same time as St. Mary’s and doubtless were common to the members of both foundations. The Early Perpendicular chapel is built on a large crypt, being quite contiguous to the river Alan, not unlike the chapel and hall of Magdalene College, Oxford. At the south-east angle was a Sacristy, with an upper chamber built over the cloisters, which had alleys to the north, west, and east; the latter running from the college to the north wall of the transept. As at Hereford, therefore, a covered way existed between the cathedral and the college.

To the north of the cloisters was the square occupied by the college; on the north side of which, again, was the principal entrance. And on the south side of the square stood the chapel of which we now see the remains, showing that it must have been a very fine building of its kind. The elegance of the proportions and subtlety of the detail betray the hand of a very skilful architect. The dimensions of the chapel are 69 ft. × 23 ft. 9 in. × 45 ft. high. It was lit by three windows in each side 24 ft. × 9 ft. broad each, and the east window must have been a grand affair, as it occupies the whole of the east wall. The tower is 70 ft. high, to the north of which are the remains of the Infirmary.[89]

The cathedral cloisters, unlike most English cathedrals, never had an alley next the church, and it is most probable that no cloister existed before the time of Bishop Houghton.

But so fragmentary are the remains of the cloister and so complete its destruction that we will only give a brief outline of its state as inferred by Freeman, that the visitor may understand the ruins.

A reference to the plan will best locate the cloister, but it will be noticed that the massive western buttresses, which take the thrust of the nave, show traces of the cloister wall. Also the wall-arcade and vaulting-springers are visible on the south wall of the chapel of St. Mary’s. The sacristy to the chapel, which has a piscina, was over the eastern alley, and under this can be seen the lines of four bays of the cloister and part of a fifth. Apparently the east side of the cloister was never completed, as the buttresses show no sign of additions; therefore, although a covered way was obtained between the cathedral and college, the north door remained as a separate entrance from the prebendal and other houses.

The crypt[90] on which the chapel stands is roofed with a simple elliptical barrel-vault and rear arches of small lights cut into it on the northern side. Below the tower was the cloister entrance, but the steps up to the chapel have quite disappeared. The landing at the top of these steps and two bays to the north formed an ante-chamber to the chapel, and a turret-stair on the northern or garden side led down to the domestic buildings as well as to a room over the vestibule. This room had two windows, one of which looked into the chapel, as at St. Cross. It will thus be seen that there could not have been a west window.

The chapel is in four bays, but as the eastern bays were utilised, on the north by the existing recess for the founder’s tomb and on the south by the sacristy, there are only three windows. The great east window--as well as others--was denuded of much ashlar-work and tracery to help in Nash’s extraordinary concoction the west window of the cathedral.[91] This great east window filled up almost the whole of the wall, and must have been a fine example of the best sort of Perpendicular. Indeed, it would not be impossible to reconstruct it even now.

There is a legend (found by Browne Willis in an Elizabeth manuscript) that Houghton was excommunicated by the Pope Clement, and that he retaliated by returning the compliment, and further pictorially displayed the event in stained glass.[92] Clement died, however, in 1352, before Houghton was made bishop, but was succeeded by Innocent VI. The names may thus have got confounded, or the Pope may have been the Anti-Pope, Robert of Geneva, known at Avignon as Clement VII. Although the story is of doubtful authenticity it is quite in accord with Houghton’s vigorous character, being as he was the friend of Chaucer and John of Gaunt. He also established several ordinances for the diocese, which shows that he was no mere figure-head. He held the office of chancellor for two years.[93]

The tower of the chapel--the only part yet undescribed--was evidently designed for a broached spire, as is shown by the squinches within. But a settlement, owing to the close proximity of the river, evidently not only prevented further weights being imposed, but caused the south-west angle buttress to be added which is so prominent (_vide_ p. 82).

Of the collegiate domestic buildings there only remain a few vaults, except a single entrance, with a four-centred arch, to the north.

THE BISHOP’S PALACE.

After crossing a bridge to the north-west of the cathedral we pursue a most picturesque alley, whence a good view of the tower and north side is obtained, and shortly, on the left-hand side, we come to the entrance to the =Bishop’s Palace=.[94]

In the times before Gower (1328-47), who built the whole of this once magnificent palace, there undoubtedly was some

_From an engraving after Paul Sandby, R.A._]

sort of episcopal residence or guest-house, as Kings Henry II. and Edward I. were here entertained. However, not only is there no trace of a pre-existent building, but this of Gower is a superb ruin. It is said that we have to thank the scandalous Bishop Barlow (1536-49) for initiating the work of destruction, removing, as he did, the lead from the roofs to provide marriage portions for his daughters who married five bishops. He also attempted to remove the see to Carmarthen. “Barlow’s letter to Cromwell on this subject strongly urges the removal, partly on account of the inconvenient situation and partly because the hopes of Protestantism rested on getting rid of the _religio loci_.”[95]

“It is hardly necessary to say that many churches, even of inferior ecclesiastical rank, greatly surpass St. David’s Cathedral in extent and in positive beauty, though certainly there is none which could so well occupy its peculiar position; of the Palace, on the other hand, it is hardly too much to affirm that it is altogether unsurpassed by any existing English edifice of its own kind. One can hardly conceive any structure that more completely proclaims its peculiar purpose. It is essentially a palace and not a castle; we have not here the moat, the tower, the frowning gateway, or any feature proclaiming, if not an intention of hostility, at all events a state of things involving the necessity of defence. The prominent parts 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.”[96]

With all due deference to Messrs. Jones and Freeman, however, the great arcaded parapet, which is certainly the most noticeable feature of the building, gives at least a hint that Bishop Gower had an _arrière pensée_ against defence. As the close was fortified, it was not necessary to make any elaborate preparations against attack; but it will be noted that, although there is no moat, the river Alan--then much larger than now--runs past one side, and that on the others there were very few windows, and those small; in fact, most of the remainder opens on to the great quadrangle, which was self-contained. Let us look at it again from another point of view. Eliminate the parapet, and what do we find? Truly, except for an excellent plan and mere bulk, nothing at all extraordinary from an architectural point of view.

A particular description must be given to the =Parapet=. It consists of a series of arches, with a hollow ornamented by Gower’s four-leaved flower, carried down on octagonal shafts, which rest on corbels of considerable variety about two feet down the wall. Above the arcade is a corbel-table carrying a projecting battlemented cornice. The battlements have extremely narrow embrasures and loopholes. The sills of the arcade are steeply slanted outwards, and the jambs show the old shape of the roof and finish with a neat weathered projection. Great richness is obtained above the arcade from the various coloured stones employed. They are set in squares, alternately purple and grey, in the voussoirs of the arches and the spandrils above them, and make a mellow and harmonious chequer-work which greatly adds to the character of the whole building.

A similar parapet is only known to occur in two other buildings (also attributed to Gower), viz., Swansea Castle and Lamphey Palace, near Pembroke.

We can place the date of the building about 1340, as an ordinance by Bishop Gower, dated May 27, 1342, orders that only certain buildings belonging to the bishop be kept in repair,[97] which includes the palace. Architecturally, the arrangements are excellent. The leading idea is a great quadrangle, but so skilfully broken up with projections that the monotonous rectangular effect of the square gives place to a most pleasing and picturesque variety, and although the main portion is kept about the same height throughout, yet the most dignified chambers are given due prominence and the parts of lesser importance treated with a fit reticence.

The building is raised on crypts, which, however, were evidently used for domestic offices from the windows (once glazed) and the divisions. The vaults are of the plain barrel description, without ribs, although there are some which rather suggest ribs. These vaults do not run longitudinally, as under St. Mary’s Chapel or, indeed, the chapel in the palace; the reason being that divisions, for living purposes, were necessary on both floors.

On entering the quadrangle, which is about 170 feet square, we find a small building immediately to the left which many call the =East Chapel=. The West Chapel (K)[98] was probably not built till later, and then probably this little one became the Bishop’s private chapel. There are indications of a way through to the ante-room adjoining in the south-west wall, and a passage also leads to the lower floor.

The =Bishop’s Hall= (I, about 60 ft. by 23 ft.) is approached from the quadrangle by seven modern steps and a porch with a semi-octagonal arch. The point of the octagon is at the centre of the opening, and resembles that leading to the rood-loft in the cathedral. The small window in the porch has two five-foil lights.

The Hall was lit by two windows to the north-west and four to the south-east. Possibly the recess, which cuts into the window at the south angle, may have contained the refectory pulpit, and behind it was a passage and stair leading to the minstrels’ gallery.

There was a diagonal entrance (just above the head of the I on plan) leading from the Bishop’s Hall to his =Study= or private apartment. Just by this entrance there is also a way down. There are two fireplaces and chimneys, and as there are indications of a divisional wall there were probably two rooms, the further of which has a blocked doorway and may have been utilised before the main entrance was built. H is the _Kitchen_ (about 26 ft. by 23 ft.), to the west end of the Bishop’s Hall. This room is very interesting, as it was evidently domed, and later a wall had to be built to support it. The chimney, which was standing in 1857 when Messrs. Jones and Freeman published their book, is now lying in a mass on the floor. As this is a good object lesson to the modern flimsy designers of to-day, the dimensions will not be without interest: flues, 1 ft. 11 in.; outer walls, 1 ft. 3 in., inner, 1 ft.

On the northern side of the kitchen was an aisle leading behind the Great Hall, and so out to the garden.

=The Great Hall= is approached from the quadrangle by a fine porch, richly adorned and of the whole height of the building. The entrance is an unusual one at so early a period.

It is about 9 ft. wide by 11 ft. 6 in. high, and has an ogee six-centred arch, but the flight of steps are somewhat inconvenient, as the tread is about fourteen inches and the rise about eleven and a half. Above were two niches containing statues of King Edward III. and Queen Philippa. Fragments of one remain now, but where is the other? It seems sad that this should have disappeared within the last few years.

(_From Jones and Freeman._)]

The Hall itself is a magnificent stately apartment, even unroofed as it is. It measures 116 feet by 31 feet, but this includes a smaller chamber of about 30 feet which was originally a withdrawing room. At the south corner is a staircase (down and up), and another at the east leading to the turret. A doorway from the kitchen aisle is now blocked. In the south-east wall is an exceptionally beautiful rose-window. The centre is an upright quatrefoil, and at the cardinal points radiate four strong mullions, and in between each of these are three lesser ones. The heads are of the trefoil kind. The inner circle is not concentric with that enclosing the tracery, but is dropped a little to create, as was often done in these circular windows, an optical delusion. Thus the splay at the top is considerably less than at the bottom, but _looks_ about the same. Gower’s four-leaved flower is again in evidence in the hollow at the outside edge of the splay. Bedrooms in two floors occupied the western end of the hall.

The =West Chapel= is entered from the northern corner of the hall, and projects from the main building. There must have been a fine window to the east judging by its proportions, and it has niches with canopies outside. A large arched piscina can be seen on the south wall inside, and at the east corner a double-bodied grotesque. In the north-east angle is the belfry turret, which terminates in a very pleasing broached spire; but the porch, which occupied the angle between the chapel and the domestic buildings, is all destroyed.

Of the _Domestic Buildings_ to the north-west less remains than of any other part. The well of the palace is to be seen in a crypt, and a fine example of a stone chimney-place with brackets, like the one in the library of the cathedral, is also worthy of notice. The northern side was probably used for stables, and the foundations for the enclosing wall on the north-east side can still be traced.

In conclusion, it must be remembered that the very high regard in which St. David’s was held as a pilgrims’ haven, particularly in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, and that the Bishop was bound to entertain all who came, necessitated a very large guest-house, and here, indeed, was one which was deemed worthy of the attention even of royalty on many occasions.