By C. H. Talbot. 347 



the arcade. The junction with the old arch was treated as a corbel, 

 and ornamented by simply stretching out the members of one of 

 the octagonal caps of the small shafts. It had a strange appearance 

 and was not really ornamental, but worse than that, it was not safe. 

 My belief is that, in a very short time, the thrust of the old arch 

 must have pushed out the pillar, towards the north, but the ad- 

 ditional load of walling, placed on the old arch in 1861, made the 

 matter worse, and a joint opened. The condition of things was so 

 threatening, that, in 1875, it was determined to take down and 

 re-build half the great arch ^ of the south transept and half the 

 easternmost arch of the nave arcade, with the clerestory window 

 above. This was done, under the architectural superintendence of 

 my friend, Mr. J. T. Irvine, who was, at that time, in charge of 

 the works at Bath Abbey, under the late Sir Gilbert Scott. The 

 slight Perpendicular pillar was found to rest on a very bad foim- 

 dation, so that the danger had, by no means, been exaggerated. 

 I suggested that, as we did not desire to remove the late Decorated 

 arch, as the Perpendicular builders ultimately intended to do, it 

 would be desirable to restore the lost north jamb of that arch, and 

 form a compound pier, which would be stronger and more satisfactory 

 in appearance. This suggestion was adopted, and the whole work 

 carried out in a satisfactory manner. The south aisle of the 

 nave has originally had a wooden span roof,- of low pitch. 



' In the west respond of the great arch, next the clerestory, we found that 

 more mouldings than were wanted had been worked on the stones, and after- 

 wards built up. This makes it probable that the stones were worked at the 

 quarries. The mouldings, also, of the great arches, on the sides next the 

 transepts, where they run back behind the face of the wall, were built up, 

 intentionally, I believe, by the original builders. They were exposed to view 

 in 1861. 



' The indications of this are a plain stone corbel, remaining in situ, at the 

 north-west angle, and the outline of half the roof, against the west wall. 

 From the position of the corbel, I am inclined to think it older than the nave 

 arcade. There is a central corbel of the fifteenth century, over the west 

 window, an angel bearing a shield charged with a bend, which may have 

 belonged to this roof, but I am not certain ; immediately over which is a beam, 

 with the date 1617 cut on it, which is, therefore, the date of the present roof. 

 In the south-west angle, and on the south side, are two corbels of the fifteenth 

 century, kings' heads, which appear to me not to be in their original positions. 



