were introduced into the style of religious architecture,' "the old spire was taken down, and the upper part of the tower rebuilt in the pointed style and embattled." Now, unless there is some confusion with the central tower, which may possibly enough have had a spire, one is led to suppose that the notion of its having existed must have originated in the way in which the Perpendicular work is joined to the Norman. The new stage is much smaller than the old, and is set back from the west wall with a slope, in a manner not very easy to describe, but which looks most temptingly like a tower clapped down right into the middle of a broach spire, the pilasters seeming to support the squinches. But, to say nothing of the general improbability of such a proceeding, it is clear that no spire could ever have sprung from this point, only level with the clerestory walls, or what could have become of the nave roof, doubtless originally of lofty pitch? Nor are any traces seen except at the west end; on the south side the diminution in thickness has been taken advantage of to make a passage on to the roof. In short, as is shown by the string, this slope is merely part of the Perpendicular work of the tower, and is a very ingenious way of recessing a smaller upper story. It is simply carrying out what is commonly seen to a smaller extent under belfry windows, at Ludlow perhaps a little more conspicuously than usual. Within, a narrow Perpendicular belfry arch was thrown across the Norman nave, in the position occupied by its Norman predecessor. It is partially panelled, but, oddly enough, the ornament diminishes as it ascends, the lower stages of the respond being richer than the upper, and the actual soffit of the arch having none at all. At the same time three arches were thrown across the other three sides of the tower, with shafts between them, seemingly for a vault which has never been added. Of these arches the western one conceals the rear arch of the west window, but, by an unusual exercise of forbearance, that beautiful relic of the old church was spared any further alteration. It was really wonderful how Perpendicular innovators could resist so grand an opportunity of making a new west window. For the Early English composition, whatever was its nature, which occupied the next division of the west front, the designers of this period, or of one rather later, had much less respect. The superb window which has usurped its place seems later in the Perpendicular style than the tower, and has several points of resemblance to the west window of Gloucester Cathedral, on which however it is certainly a great improvement. Its bold simple pointed arch is far superior to the untoward form of that at Gloucester, and though taste or necessity reduced its authors to the same expedient of supporting its primary mullions by large detached buttresses, they are far from having the same heavy and awkward appearance. Besides the tower and this window, there is no good Perpendicular work of any consequence in the church. LATER CHANGES.-Of the effects of the dissolution of the monastery in the destruction of the monastic portion of the church I have found it more convenient to treat at an earlier stage of this essay. But a question might still be asked, What effect had the destruction of the south transept upon the east end of the Early English additions? This I am prevented from answering by reason of an unfortunate fire which took place in the year 1699, and whose devastations were so extensive that we ought to be very thankful that so large a portion of this splendid fabric is still preserved to us. It seems chiefly to have affected the interior and east end of the later portions; at least it was their east wall and the arcade between them which had to be rebuilt in consequence. Of the new east end I need only say that it is very distinguishable both in its masonry and in its central east window-the extreme southern one seems to have been renewed still more recently-from the work in a line with it of the date of the Dissolution. It is just the difference between extremely bad, but still living, Gothic and a mere imitation of its forms when they were no longer understood. The arcade is perhaps better, five pointed arches resting upon tall round pillars; they are likely to be no inapt representatives of their predecessors, when we consider that, the south aisle being the full height, the arcade was doubtless one of this form, as at Bristol and Dorchester. The condition of the church might easily be improved. I am fully aware that perhaps no church in England must be more difficult to adapt to our present ritual; the old Norman nave and the southern additions are practically two distinct churches, utterly impossible to be employed by a single congregation; unless then, in so large a parish, they could anyhow be made available for distinct services, one portion must remain disused; this of course is the Norman nave, as the smaller of the two. This part therefore remains in that state of neglect and desolation which almost always seizes upon some portion of a parochialized minster, and which is even more unpleasant than one of total ruin. Still even its uncleanly whitewash is less offensive to antiquarian eyes than the pewed, galleried, plastered and scored neatness of the adjoining portions, which has destroyed the evidence of masonry far more completely. Some of the large windows seem in a dangerous state; and generally it would be desirable if the whole church could assume an uniform aspect, which might be a sort of tertium quid between the dreariness of one part and the spruceness of the other. I have now said all I have to say more immediately relating to this noble minster. But we must not quit its precincts without casting at least a passing glance on the conventual buildings still remaining to its northeast. We here find a structure, boldly spanning the adjoining stream through its whole length, which, after passing through many vicissitudes, has at last settled down into the character of an union workhouse. adaptation to that purpose has robbed it of all beauty of outline, by raising its walls, lowering its roof, and inserting a row of ugly windows. Happily however, a goodly store of the original lancets still remain. Its My subject is Leominster and not its neighbourhood; and I have seen far too few of the Herefordshire churches to attempt any such generalization as I have made in the cases of Gower, Monmouth, and South Pembroke. But I cannot help recommending to your attention two very remarkable churches which I visited during my stay in Leominster. One is the church of Bodenham, a Decorated building of very singular and majestic outline; the other that of Marden, historically interesting as the supposed scene of the murder and first burial of St. Æthelberht, and architecturally no less so, as exhibiting, among other points worthy of notice, what is so great a rarity in English architecture, a trilateral apse. It is of the Geometrical style, and, apparently, as I have already implied, a plainer version of the south aisle of Leominster. I now say farewell; hoping that, as this is not the first, so it may not be the last, time that I may have the pleasure of illustrating some portion of the architectural antiquities of Wales and its Marches under the auspices of the Cambrian Archæological Association. EDWARD A. FREEMAN. 9 Since this paper was written, the excursions of the Association from Ludlow, and especially the able guidance of Mr. Penson, have introduced me to several more of their number. I have not seen many of much size or magnificence, but for picturesque outlines and singularities of detail, those Herefordshire churches which I have seen must rank among the most interesting in England. Marked peculiarities are the combination of high roofs with early clerestories, which produces a very stately external effect, and the singular position of the towers, which are not unfrequently detached. Richard's Castle is a very interesting church, Kingsland no less so, and they contain such studies of window tracery that I heartily regret that I had not the opportunity of enriching my work on that subject with some of the singular and beautiful patterns which they display. ARCH. CAMB., NEW SERIES, VOL. IV. F ANCIENT NAMES OF GREAT BRITAIN. "Tri enw a ddoded ar Ynys Prydain o'r dechreuad; cyn ei chyvaneddu y doded arni Clas Merddin, a gwedi ei chyvaneddu y doded arni y Vel Ynys, a gwedi gyrru gwledigaeth arni y gan Prydain ab Aedd Mawr y doded arni Ynys Prydain.”—Triad i. Third Series. THE first name which is traditionally, assigned to our beloved country is variously written "Clas meitin,”1 "Clas meiddin," and "Clas merddin." "Clas," which signifies a green surface, or any enclosed space of ground, has suffered no variation during the development of the Welsh dialect, being still composed of primitive letters. "Meiddin" must have been originally the same as "Meitin," and its subsequent modification only indicates the sense in which the word was understood by the scribe, viz., that of a range of mountains. The same meaning, indeed, might have been attached to "meitin," by those who adopted the word in comparatively modern times, for the dd was not uniformly used long after its introduction into the alphabet, yet it is also possible that the naked form was retained under the impression that it was synonymous with "meityn,' a term denoting distance, properly of time. Whichever of these interpretations be the correct one, whether the green range of mountains, or the distant green spot, it cannot be denied that both are equally suitable designations of the external or objective character of our island. Undoubtedly the verdant summits of our hills would convey to the mind of the roving mariner the first and only impressions respecting the country, and he would naturally talk of it on his return home, as the green spot he had seen in the far west a long time ago. Appropriately descriptive, likewise, of the insular position of the place would be "Clas mertin," or merddin, which literally signifies the sea-girt green spot. The cognomen being Celtic, could not, of course, have 1 Another reading of Triad i. First Series. |