THE STORY OF EAWULF
Note.—During excavation alongside the south aisle footing of the nave, in continuation of the work on the south-west tower footings, an interment of a curious nature was encountered. The skeleton lay in the clay just outside the wall, and the head was protected by a "dropstone" having a cylindrical hollow, open at the neck, in which lay the skull. Between the legs of the skeleton was a second skull, but broken. At the foot was a flat stone laid across, and against it on the further side a number of leg-bones, etc. The following was written shortly after the discovery:
SITTING XXXIV. 19th September, 1908.
"Radulphus Cancellarius, who slew Eawulf in fair fight, did nevertheless suffer by his foeman's seaxe, which broke his bones asunder.[39] He, dying after many years, desired that they who loved him should bury him without the church where he was wont to feed the birds in his chair. The sunne did shine there, as he loved it, for his blood was cold." "It is strange, yet wee know it is true. The head of Eawulf was (there). As they digged around his body they knew not that the head of Eawulf fell, and so lay betwixt his feet. And thus have ye found it.
"I, Gulielmus, I knew the old church that Radulphus did pull downe, and much lieth beneath the floor of ye newe church. Search estward of where ye now digge and ye shall find much, and of the old work made they the vaults, and some are deeper. Be not deceived by appearances. Under where ye now think is the end of all, there will be seen very deep walls of the older church. None knew of them, and they were not destroyed. Seek also north of the said cutting: there is somewhat there ye might not know of."
Q. "Why was the head of Radulphus protected by a dropstone, when the body was not enclosed?"
A. "Soe he wished it. Let the worms of the earth devour my poor body with all its sinnes, saith he. Mine head did ever fight against the body. It is the best part of me. See ye, saith he, that ye protect it! That foul body—let hym go, saith hee."
Q. "How did Eawulf come to be buried there, and who was he?"
A. "Know ye not Eawulf, the Yarl of Edgarley, of royal blood, who harried the Norman, and would have slain Turstinus?[40] A doughty Saxon he, and one who said that Glaston was builded by the Saxon, and Saxon it should remain. So he was buried in Glaston, and not in his own chapel at Edgarley.[41] The holy men of Glaston, they who were of Saxon blood, suffered much through his violence in their behalf, and, God wot, through no rebellion of their own; and they had their reward, for a Saxon[42] again was Abbot for a time."
SITTING XXXVII. 23rd September, 1908.
Q. "How is the great difference in date between Radulphus and Eawulf to be explained? We cannot reconcile this."
A. "Wee know not your dates, nor the tymes gone by; but this we know—Eawulf and Radulphus[43] did fight, and the Norman did slay the Saxon. This is fact, as we know it. Be sure of your own tymes and look at Domesday for light.
"We remember (Radulphus) was an hundred years and three when he went to hys fathers:—hale and of a good visage even then—but hys bones did grieve him (by reason of) ye payne in them. Soe did he seek ye sunne. More we will serche in the great army of past things. They are soe hard to find!
"That wych is hidden will be found out and all ye Abbaye is at your hands; but serche. Alle three churches are open to ye, and one whych was of old time in the midst of the nave of ye newe—not much, for Turstinus did remove ... them when he builded anewe the Norman churche" (i.e., built the new Norman church.—F.B.B.).
Q. "Did Eawulf lead the assault in the fight? How did it come about?"
A. "Old men have strong anger, but youth should have spared him. More we know not,—we wil serche."
The script here breaks off into the description (already given) of the pilgrims' procession at sunset, with the music of organs and bells.
SITTING XLII. 18th April, 1911.
The problem of the dates was left for further consideration, and remained in abeyance for two and a half years. At this sitting other matters of early history had been touched upon, and it occurred to F.B.B. to ask a question as to Radulphus and Eawulf.
Q. "Please explain the apparent discrepancy of dates in the story of Radulphus and his fight with Eawulf."
A. "Ne Radulphus of Henry the King" (i.e., FitzStephen, 1184.—F.B.B.). "Radulphus the Treasurer was Norman of the time of Turstinus—annos One Thousand and Eighty-seven. Ralph was hee. Eorwulf of Edgarley, old in years, was wroth because the soldiers of Turstinus did slay the Saxon monks. Ralph the Norman knight and Treasurer of Turstinus, slew him. Who was hee? Radulphus FitzHamon—as wee wot, an evil man."
Q. "Where was Ralph FitzStephen—of Henry II.—buried?"
A. "Ralph, ye cousin of ye King, dyed as we deem, at Wincastre—there yburied. Chancellor of Angleland was he."
Note.—The two foregoing answers were now read, but unfortunately the first was incorrectly interpreted, as the writing was a little difficult. F.B.B. made the mistake of thinking that it implied that Ralph of Turstinus was FitzStephen (though the sense is clear enough on further inspection), and consequently asked as follows:
Q. "Why do you say that Ralph, treasurer of Turstinus, was Ralph of King Henry?"
(Here the influence changes and a masterful "personality" of whom we have had previous experience, controls the utterance.)
A. "Rede. I said it not. I said not 'Ralph of the King Henricus,' but 'Ralph ye Norman.' Taedet damnosum. Lege!—IMPERATOR.
"Audi me, barbari stultissimi! Ego Imperator, qui feci interpretationes pro anima insularium.—CAESAR."[44]
PART III
THE LORETTO CHAPEL
The interest of this section is greatly enhanced by the fact that the foundations of the Loretto Chapel were discovered last summer in the place indicated by the script. The work of excavation will not be completed until next season, but already more than half of the plan of the chapel has been laid bare, and a full report with illustrations has been contributed by the author to the Somerset Archæological Society, and will appear in their Proceedings for 1919, now being published early in 1920. The report will be accessible to all archæological students at the principal libraries. The footings of the chapel show that it was 20 feet wide, as the script indicates, but the author's interpretation was at fault in assuming this width to be an internal one, whereas it is the external dimension. The length may be found to follow suit. The chapel lies about 5 feet within the bank as stated, and the west wall-footing is the best preserved, thus bearing out the accuracy of the writings.
CONEY'S VIEW OF THE ABBEY (1817).
Frontispiece to Part III.
[THE LORETTO CHAPEL]
Among the lost features of Glastonbury Abbey recorded by Leland[45] is a chapel built by Abbot Bere on the north side of the nave. Leland says of this:
"Bere cumming from his Embassadrie out of Italie[46] made a Chapelle of our Lady de Loretta, joining to the north side of the body of the Church."
But apart from his record, which has preserved the bare memory of the work and its approximate location, we have no surviving facts, either historical or descriptive, to guide us in the search for its vestiges, save one or two trifles which the orthodox archæologist would probably despise, but on which the imagination might build an airy and tenuous fabric, a mere gossamer which the rude touch of practical argument would dispel, and which would find its place more fittingly in the pages of romance than in the chronicles of the labours of serious-minded antiquaries.
Here, then, was a chance for the subliminal mind to exercise its powers, just the opportunity most desirable for an experiment in the psychology of inductive and deductive processes, and a test of the possibility of drawing by the thread of slenderest and most imperfect knowledge, some kindred knowledge from the great reservoir of the memory of nature. This experiment was made, and the result of it I am going to give my readers without any sort of reticence or reserve, making no claim, but asking that they will regard it with an open mind, and accepting it for analysis as an illustration of the working of the latent powers of the mind under the same conditions that we in the onset laid down for our work.
The material from which our sublimated essence was distilled was as follows:
1. Leland's note, as above.
2. A fragment of walling shown in Coney's view of the Abbey, 1817. This appears in the sketch just on the spot where the wall of the north aisle of the nave would have joined that of the transept at its eastern extremity, but it is diminutive in height—only about a third of the height proper to the nave wall, as is clearly evident by comparison with the surrounding features. It is like a little screen-wall, and such as might have filled at one time an archway at this point opening from the last or most eastward division of the north aisle wall towards a chapel just without, in the angle between the aisle and the north transept. But in Coney's sketch it does not look like a Gothic work, but is more like a building of the modern times, since it has four little dumpy windows with round heads and the projecting cills which we associate with our everyday experience of domestic building. No one but Coney, so far as I am aware, has indicated any sort of remnant of building at this point, and there are several older views of the Abbey, which would be expected to show it if anything had been there. Look, for example, at Stukeley's panoramic view of the ruins, published in 1723. (See Fig. [10], p. 115.) Nothing visible there—the whole of the north side of the nave an open field, as it had been for at least half a century previous (vide Hollar's view).
3. In the Cannon MS., a diary referring to Glastonbury about the time of George II., is a sketch plan of the Abbey, very crude, in which the writer shows a mound of rubbish and rough stones with suggestions of a broken wall on the ground at or near this point, and he makes a note to the effect that it is the remains of "The Chapter House."
But, of course, the Chapter House was on the south side of the Choir, and could not have been elsewhere in the case of Glastonbury, as its site was never in doubt, and it has now been recovered and its dimensions tested and proved.
4. Marsh, the old gardener at the Abbey for over forty years, used to say to me that in the grass bank which runs along the north side of the nave area, under the trees, there was a fine bit of freestone walling, some of which Mr. Austin, his earlier employer, used up for building. I dug in, but could find nothing of this at the point he indicated.
Now, at the risk of being a little tedious, I propose to quote a short paragraph from my Architectural Handbook, because it shows what I was thinking about this matter in 1910, and such evidence is needed for any useful analysis of the psychology of the whole subsequent matter.
I would add that, so far as I can remember, my friend J.A. had formed no theory as to the nature of the chapel or its real position other than my own, and what I here quote represents the utmost that could at the time be said (Architectural Handbook of Glastonbury Abbey, second edition, pp. 32, 33, 1910):
"Some fragments of building on the north side of the nave were surviving as recently as 1817, when Coney's drawings were published. In one of these we see a wall with a row of windows having a rather unusual detail in their heads (Fig. 10). This would be near the site of the Loretto Chapel, built by Abbot Bere. Carter, writing some few years later, tells us that the Loretto Chapel was then standing, and if he be correct, it must have been a substantial piece of masonry exterior to the church, and not a light internal structure within it, as has been conjectured. But he may have been referring to the Chapel of Saint Thomas the Martyr in the north transept, which has sometimes been miscalled the 'Loretto Chapel.'
Fig. 10.—View of the Ruins in 1723. (From Stukeley's Itinerary.)
Fig. 11.—Glastonbury Abbey in 1655 circa: Enlargement of Hollar's View.
Fig. 12.—MS. Plan of John Cannon, 1740 circa.
A, Chaple; B, quire; C, the great arch; D, the nave or body; E, the chapter house; F, gate to ye kitchen; G, St. Joseph's Chaple.
"A sketch plan in the Cannon MS. shows a group of ruins in an apparently similar position, and he records the tradition of a very magnificent building at this point, which he terms the 'Chapter House.' However erroneous this designation, we may at least accept his record as corroborative of the existence of a richly ornamented building of some special nature (as distinct from the body of the Church at the junction of the Nave aisle and North Transept)."
It seems, then, that we had formed the impression of a fine building just outside the nave wall and in the angle of aisle and transept; but to be strictly accurate, I do not think that Coney's sketch had much weight as regards the character of the work it might have contained, and so far as one's normal impressions were concerned, it was dismissed as "modern."
Record of Excavation in 1911.
In the early part of June, 1911, the footing trench of the north aisle wall of the nave was opened up at its eastward end, and the junction of the same with the west wall of the north transept was found. The area just outside the angle of the two walls was cleared with the object of discovering traces of a chapel at this point, but beyond a few very beautiful sections of window mullions of the style of the late fifteenth or early sixteenth century—good Tudor work—nothing material came to light in the way of detail. But about 13 feet west of the transept wall, and running parallel to it, meeting the line of the aisle wall at right angles and going north from it, was found another broad foundation, and this we assumed at the time to be the footing of the west wall of the Loretto Chapel. The inference was clear that there must at least have been some building of a permanent nature, and rather substantial, attached to the west face of the transept wall just outside its junction with the aisle, and perhaps it was not unreasonable at the time to suppose that this was the Loretto Chapel. The architectural detail discovered pointed to a Gothic chapel, and was entirely inconsistent with such a building as Coney showed. Neither was it of like character with the work in the Nave. Such was the position when, on 13th June, 1911, we obtained the following automatic script:
SITTING XLVII. 13th June, 1911.
"I made that building. All that I didde anywhere is fannes. Ne barrel vault. And under them, three faire windowes of foure lights with transomes and littel castel-work on the ramps thereof. And if ye digge in the wall of the navis, there is much fell in. Serche the great pier of the nave opposite the cutte: yt is full ... but they threw therein the fragments of my capella, a canopy at the west, and all the central ones—faire canopy work, and in the midst a littel one for Our Ladye, sylver guilt and very faire. Somewhat remaineth of ye outer walls and ye walle by ye crossinge, but they have taken hym mostly away long syne. Very deepe fannes ... and each fanne had twelve ribs, and they were ycoloured red and gold, like my chapel of Edgar. There yet remaineth somewhat of Our Ladye. Yt lieth in front of the west walle three feet or thereabouts. Seek ye well out the bank to the Est: something remaineth of ye transept (?) wall whereon we placed the tabernacles, but most is ygone. Ye doore unto hym is at the west,[47] nigh unto the pillar of the navis, one doore only, on nave.
"R. B. scripsit, pro instructionem tuam. Ye roundels of ye volte were golden, and also ye bosses, and ye hollows were bright redde; likewise ye tabernacle of Oure Ladye in the est wall golde and redde; and ye windowes were of glasse yellow in canopies with redde and blewe in ye little lights thereof. Ye floore was of tileis red, with shields, and ornaments in yellow likewise, and it was very faire and magnifical, like unto my chappel of Edgar, but more faire, for I builded hym later, for I hadde a vowe of mine owne which I performed."
Q. "What was your vow?"
A. "Know ye not that wee were borne downe by rude men in foreign parts and the mule which bore me fell, for I was a grete and heavy man. And being like to fall down a steepe place or be trampled by ye mule, I called on Oure Lady and shee heard me, soe that my cloke catching on a thorne I was prevented, and then said I: 'Lo! When I returne I will build a chapel to Our Lady of the Loretto, and soe instant was I inn (my vowe) that the brethren were grieved, for yt was arranged in Chapitre that wee shold build a Chapel to oure Edgare before I wennt in ye shyppe. Therefore builded I hym first, for it was a public vowe: but mine owne vowe I fulfilled afterer, and soe all was well—Yt is given."
Q. "What was the occasion of your journey?"
A. "Know ye not of my Ambassadrie, when ye Kinge wold know what the BisP of Roume would doe? Even soe journeying fromm Padua whither came the shippes, we felle among evil menne who would hold us to ransome. Here fell ye mule, and ye reste ye knowe."
Notes on Beere's Embassy.
Abbot Richard Bere was deputed by Henry VII. to visit Rome in 1503, in order, it is said, to congratulate the new Pope, Pius III., on his election. Whether there was any political object intended to be served by his embassy does not appear, but it is strongly suggested by subsequent events. The new Pope did not live to establish his policy. He survived his election only twenty-six days, and was succeeded during the same year by Julius II., a "political" Pope, who formed the "League of Cambrai," which was followed by the "Holy League" of powers against Louis XII. of France, including England, Spain, and Venice in the bond, which Henry VIII. afterwards joined, until the peace with France in 1514 ended it. As to the story of the journey, the mention of Padua as his port of call seemed odd, and a little hard to understand. The usual route to Rome for English travellers of that period was via Antwerp, Augsbourg, and Venice. From Venice he might have taken boat to the wharves of Padua, and would thence proceed southward along the Adriatic side, till near Ancona, and here he would strike Loreto, which would be the start of an overland journey, the Apennines being crossed possibly on mule-back.
Q. "What were the dimensions of the work about which you have been telling us?"
A. "Yn feete twenty and two, and foure paces in width thereof, and ye walle of ye nave was strengthened thereby, for ye towre hadde pressed ye walls through the volt of the navis, and hee was crackt all ye way to the bottom thereof. Therefore my chapel was high, in height twenty and three feet, and very strong in the volt, soe that it tied the wall of ye nave and ye wall of ye crossing where it was weake. They who builded ye towre should have made arches in ye walle to help ye higher windowes, carrying them along ye crossing in ye walle to helpe ye towre at ye angle, but they did not. Therefore helped I yt by my chappell and by an arche I builded from ye toppe of ye aisle to the roofe of ye chappell to bond ye whole at ye angle. Also builded I ye grete arches in ye towre. It wasne ye volte that did caste out, but ye towre gave inne as against ye volte by reason of its weight,[48] and soe it even gave away from[49] the crossing in its lowre part and gave out in its upper.—R. B."
Q. "Can you give us an idea of the state of opinion in the religious establishments of your day—of the views and ideals current?"
A. "Ne helde I wyth superstitions. Ever I was for ye people and ye better understanding of ye mysteries. It was meet that it be soe, and notte kept in the hearts of the religious only. More wold ye? What more I didde as seemed best, for the old tymes were changing and menne loved the glory of our ceremonial. They were angered at the deceits which hadde kept their fathers humble and meek. Through the eye the glory of our services might make them wish for noble things, but I knew, and hee my friend knew[50] they were no longer to be fooled with trickery. All was changing in my day and the wars made for greater knowledge. The Englyshe were (a)sleepe no more, ne ever to be. Dixi."
The dimensions given for this little chapel could be applied to the foundations discovered only if the longer measure (22 feet) were taken north and south, and the shorter (four paces) east and west. This would make the building cover one bay of the transept, and extend to the outer footing wall exposed by the excavation. But this footing did not stop at 22 feet, but ran on north, and was found to be co-extensive with the northerly projection of the transept, so that the chapel described would only have occupied one-half of the length, and it looked as if there had been an aisle to the transept such as F.B.B. showed in his drawing of the reconstructed interior. The description of the strongly built little chapel in the angle, buttressing up the weak tower and transept wall, was a plausible one, but the description, and especially the dimensions, would not throw any light on Coney's sketch, and left the wall in the bank, spoken of by the gardener, still unexplained. The dimensions were small—unsatisfying for a special work of this nature, and one which had merited individual mention by Leland. And the proportion was so unusual, in that the east and west measurement was the lesser and would be insufficient for its purpose, one would think, unless the altar were placed at the north end, which would not be an English custom. Was this little building, after all, the real Chapel of the Loretto, or was it only an antechamber, through which access would be had from the nave to a more important work farther out? The long aisle-like footing looked like an adit or approach. It could hardly have been part of the transept because of the sharp difference in level between the two floors, that of the transept being 4 feet or so above the nave. But only further digging could bring light, and this was at the time impossible, so there the matter was bound to remain until a more favourable opportunity should occur for further research. So it rested for five years.
In December, 1916, F.B.B. and J.A. found themselves near neighbours, and it had been mutually agreed, in view of the greatly revived interest in the subject of spiritual phenomena, that the experiments in writing should be resumed, but no definite day had been fixed. Some days before F.B.B. had given J.A. some MS. notes to transcribe, being extracts he had made some years before from the Cannon MS. It had been proposed to publish these in the Proceedings of the Somerset Archæological Society, and with them was the sketch of the ruins already referred to, at which both had casually glanced; but this had not been the subject of attention. and J.A.'s transcript had not arrived at that point when the first sitting was held. This was on 4th December. Glastonbury matters were not to the fore in recent conversation, which had been given to the subject of the Greek Cabala and the geometry connected with it. J.A. says his mind was still full of this on 4th December, to the exclusion of Glastonbury, and that the reference in the Cannon MS. had not been in his thoughts. F.B.B.'s experience was similar. He had been busy with letters until the moment of J.A.'s arrival, and his last envelope having been sealed, he, on the spur of the moment, proposed a sitting, to which J.A. agreed. F.B.B. had an idea that if any writing were obtained it might be on the subject of the war and current events; and J.A. anticipated something on geometrical symbolism. No suggestion was made as to the subject of the proposed communication. The following is the record:
SITTING. 4th December, 1916.
The first page of writing is cramped and well-nigh illegible. The following can be made out:
"Cosmic facts are everywhere, but not easily attained....
"... by assembling yourselves together and obtaining the inspiration ye seek consciously or unconsciously. The result obtained is the same, but the word endures....
"... The material world is the screen between—the complex fabric of the simple weaving. The essential facts are eternal which (? move) in a circle, and to them that know the circle, somewhat will pass into all times, only ye see but little at a time. The centre is the point on which all revolves, and ye, revolving, are conscious of the influence, but cannot know the radius...."
"Obliviscor. So long we have slept near Capella Loretta under the bank full thirty paces from the Navis. Ye did not go farre enow beyond the (bank) they cast up there. It was full five feet in, and buried in the place where he didd drawe the Chapitre Howse.[51] and the end of the pilgrimmes (way) is ... through ye porche, thro ye wicket gate in ye corner, and by ye steppes over against ye lower graveyard. There shewed wee the relics and ye pilgrimmes passed by this way to the Chapell of St. Mary, by ye steppes, and to Navis majoure."
Then in a different hand:
"Abbot Bere ybuilded ye Loretto Chapel faire and large to the north (side of the) navis. We said that itt ... was not ye Chapitre Howse....
"... The syde of it was distant from ye navis thirty-one feet and a half, and from ye aisle of ye transept he was fulle tenn feet with a covered way unto, and four steppes up unto ye aisle aforesaid. Yt ... was ybuilded by Bere most faire and wonderfull in ye newe style brought from Ytaly when he didd goe there upon ambassadrie.
"Ye have heard of yt. Ye Chapell was full forty feet, and width between twenty and ... twenty-one feet, and hee had an entrance unto (hym) from the roade which ledde from St. John his gait unto ye navis, and thus might ye Bp and the Kinges majestic (enter).
"Bere used to approach by entering into the Claustre, and soe he didde close it oftentimes."
The foregoing script at first sight seemed impossible to decipher, and a repetition was asked for. This was clearly written, and by its aid the sense of the foregoing was mastered, and word by word picked out, but there are yet some seemingly hopeless blanks. These, however, may not be material, and will probably refer to the ruinous state of the Chapter House and its repair, as re-stated in the following communication:
"We have said he was of the Ytalian style new and very faire, and Bere ybuilded coming from embassadrie in Ytaly. Hee was not ye Chapitre, but Bere did use hym so because ye Chaptre House was dammp and ruinous and was being repaired. We have said so. Hee met ye King and ye Bp who sojourned (with him). The same was forty feet (long) by twenty (or) thereabouts and his grylled doore was to the west and a pavement joyned him to the Road from St. John's gate to ye churche.
"He wasne like anything else (but was of the) newe style. There were four steppes—nay, six—to the aisle of ye transeppt, and a covered way vaulted in a rounde vaulte to ye Chappell....—THESIGER."
Q. "By 'steps' do you mean ascending steps, or paces?"
A. "Ten feet, and four or six steppes up to hym."
The signature "THESIGER" is of peculiar interest. At the beginning of this communication will be seen the words "Obliviscor." "So long we have slept near Capella Loretta," etc. Only once before, at Sitting XLII., on the 7th September, 1910, has the same signature been observed. This was at the close of a communication dealing with the shrine of St. Dunstan, and was given as follows:
"Sub marmore dormio, quod taedet me—obliviscor.—CAMILLUS THESIGER."
The identity of this person was at the time a matter of speculation, but F.B.B. concluded that it must be meant for Camel, the Purse-bearer to Abbot Bere, whose marble tomb with coffered panels is a feature in St. John's Church. Camel had a house in the upper part of the town, in the High Street, on the south side, some little way above St. John's Gate, and to the east.
The architectural details which we here reproduce were then given, some explanatory notes appended.
[THE LORETTO CHAPEL]
Architectural Plans
Description of Plan A.
I. a, Drawing of a gable with "stepped" coping, probably meant for the west gable.
I. b, Plan of the Chapel, showing four bays in length, with buttresses having a pointed profile, labelled "Cappella Loretta."
I. c, Elevation of a circular-headed recess, with ornament in head, labelled "Cava."
I. d, Plan (enlarged) of the Chapel, showing an entrance ("portus") apparently in the south-west bay.
Description of Plan B.
I. e, Plan of the east end of Chapel, showing the convex "Cava Virginis," and the door ("portus") leading to the church.
I. f, Another and clearer plan of the Chapel, confirming the four-bay division.
I. g, Elevation of the east wall of Chapel, as seen internally, the "Cava Virginis," or semicircular recess, being in the centre and the door to the transept on the right or south side.
Description of Plan C.
I. h, This appears to be another effort to show the east wall, but the "Cava" is so small that the alternative suggests itself of an elevation of the west wall, with a central doorway.
I. j, k, Head of the "Cava," with attempt to represent a shell ornament filling the hollow of same.
II. a, Elevation, probably of exterior of west wall, with round-headed door, and "Virgo" over—i.e., a statue of the Virgin here. There is a suggestion of undulating parapets, with a sitting lion at the corner.
II. b, c, Divisions of the copings, with lions at intervals.
Description of Plan D.
II. d, Another drawing of the east end of the plan, with the position of the east door, written "portus ad ecclesiam et voltus quadripartus." Note "portus" for "porta," and "voltus" for" volta," always occurring in these writings.
II. e, f, Repetition of the undulating contours of the parapet, labelled "parapetus." The lions at intervals as before.
Description of Plan E.
II. g, Undulating outline of a parapet, with foliage ornament applied, and the word "leo."
II. h, Sketch of a small pier or baluster form. This is labelled "patella and pillar." The word "patella" has the same intention as the word "patera," well known as an architectural term and implying a plate or panel, often of rectangular form. This may be let into the surface of a pilaster. The plan clearly indicates a flat pier or pilaster; or it may imply an abacus for the support of the lion.
Description of Plan F.
III. a, Two sketches of the lions. They are sitting lions, holding shields, as we see them in many Tudor buildings, but the ornament is more customary in domestic work than in ecclesiastical.
III. b, More parapets, this time partly of a Florentine pattern. Whether these are meant for a more detailed study of the undulations previously shown, or are some in a special position, does not yet appear. The little "angels" seem to be connected with them.
III. c, Probably meant for one of the heads of the side-windows in the Chapel. There is clearly a semicircle at head, and there appears some sort of filling like open scroll-work. No English precedent of this date is known to the writer.
Description of Plan G.
III. d, Another sketch of the "Cava," with the description of the treatment of its recess: "Golden stars on azure, at the back of the Virgin's Hollow"; and it proceeds: "Ad orientem, in cava Virginis Mari(a)e Lorettae quod ... ad ecclesiam ... via claustra ad ecclm ... ad orientem ... ad ecclesiam" (To the east, a covered way, or cloister, leading to the church).
III. e, Again a plan of the east end of the Chapel, with the door marked "portus," and a line going east.
III. f, The "via claustra" shown from the Chapel to the "ecclesia."
Description of Plan H.
IV. a, "Chapel is forty (in) feet by twenty." Then follows an elevation of one side showing the round heads of the windows connected by a string-course, and the writing "forty feet, four parts."
IV. b, Sketch of a rounded vault, its groin carved along the whole length. Described thus: "Volt of fruit and flowers painted very cunningly. Ye ribs of volts ycarven so."
IV. c, Small sketch of one of the sitting lions at the angle of the Chapel, with one crenelle of the parapet adjoining. Described thus: "Ye Leones cornerwise, and thre(e) between. The partitions were 10 feet, forty in length and twenty wide," with round vaults: ribs carven with fruit and many colours.
PLAN I.
IV. d, Another sketch of a sitting lion.