By ©. H. Talbot, Esq. 249 
the arch, appear to form its whole thickness. Immediately round 
it runs as before a narrow strip of stone, projecting like a hood- 
moulding, which cannot add to the strength, as it is only slightly 
let into the wall! This strip continues down the jamb, close to the 
edge of the pilaster, and in this case the impost necessarily bonds 
beyond it into the wall. The faces of the jambs are ornamented by 
the introduction of squares of stone, filling at intervals the space : 
between the pilasters. This necessarily leaves a series of sunk panels 
which are backed with red tiles. Tbe stones are carved with the 
vine and interlacing bands. On the west jamb the only carving that 
occurs is on one of these square stones, showing plainly that the 
carving was all executed after the work was built, and was never 
finished. Two stones at the bottom of the jambs are puzzling. 
They have the form of bases of pilasters. Possibly they may be 
insertions,’ but this is very doubtful. 
The third arch differed very much from the other two. There 
are indications of the design of its north side. As far as I can 
judge it was entirely of stone, the arch being formed of a thin course 
of stones. On the face of the jamb there are remains of a projecting 
pilaster, worked on the same stones as the rest of the jamb. Its 
angle is finished with a slight hollow which runs down and at the 
. base is curved outwards till it becomes horizontal. The rest of the 
pilaster is cut away, but I presume it was symmetrical. There is a 
groove in the soffit of the arch, apparently for the insertion of a 
sub-arch corresponding with this pilaster. This was probably for 
1Tt is shown, in the drawing, in section, as having a considerable bond, and 
as not projecting ; but it is evident that it did project throughout, on both sides 
of the arch, though much of it has been cut away ; also, that it had hardly any 
bond, as may be seen in one place where a tile has been chipped away for its 
insertion. Moreover, in the drawing, the tile at the crown of the arch, given 
in section, is not shown quite in its right place. It should be higher, as it forms 
the back of a sunk panel. 
2They are very similar to such bases as the pilasters of the third or south- 
west arch must have had. That they project over the chamfer worked on the 
plinth beneath them, would seem to imply that they are insertions, but there is 
no other sign of insertion. Possibly they may be examples of a design aban- 
doned almost as soon as begun. 
VOL. XVII.—NO. L, 7D 
