io 
a) 
By the Right Rev. the Lord Bishop of Salisbury. 169 
probably on the site of the old kitchen, parallel to the present chapel 
wing, thus making with the hall three sides of a court or quadrangle, 
a very common arrangement. We shall discuss the date of the 
chapel presently. Access to the hall in our case must have been by 
a staircase. I incline to imagine that there was both an outer stone 
staircase from what is the court and a turret staircase at the head or 
southern end of the hall, where our old plan shows a projecting 
circular building of the right size, but only on the ground-floor, or 
perhaps in the corner where the solar is attached to it. The plan of 
Bishop Poore’s house would thus have been very much the same as 
that of Bishop Joceline’s at Wells, which was building about the 
same time (1205—44). In both the hall is raised on a vaulted 
undercroft, and in both the chamber is at right angles to one end 
of the hall, forming the same gamma-like figure with it. Thus 
they both differ from the plan of Lincoln Old Palace, which had a 
hall upon the ground-floor divided into a nave and aisles (like the 
present chapel, once the hall, of Auckland Castle, and the King’s 
Hall at Winchester.) At Lincoln, too, the solar was added across 
the end of the hall, as seems to have been the ordinary arrangement 
in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, not at right angles to it, 
as here and at Wells (cp. Parker, “ Domestic Architecture, Fourteenth 
Century,” p. 87, Oxford, 1852). The kitchen and offices at Wells 
seem also to have been in the same position as ours, with the chapel 
parallel to them, and having a court between as with us, though 
the proportions are all larger. There is thus, as we should expect, 
a certain provincial similarity between the palaces of these two 
neighbouring cities, Wells and New Sarum. But while Bishop 
Poore’s work is very fine, Bishop Joceline’s at Wells is magnificent 
and princely. Where the substructure of our house is three bays 
long his is seven, and three bays wide instead of our two; so as to 
leave room for a long side passage or gallery, both on the ground- 
floor and above, under a separate line of roof. This passage, of 
course, may have existed here, but there is no evidence at all of it. 
I have spoken of Bishop Joceline’s hall as if it was one splendid 
room, but though this is possible I should say that Mr. J. H. 
Parker considers it more probable that it was divided into three 
N 2 
