242 MIDLAND UNION OF NATURAL HISTORY SOCIETIES 
Those who remember the condition of the lantern as it 
presented itself to the eye after the walls were scraped, and as 
it appeared from that time to the time of its demolition, will 
remember how it was torn and rent by gaping fissures, and 
must often have wondered how a building showing such signs 
of weakness could have held together so long. The condition 
of the two eastern piers added to the surprise. The north¬ 
eastern pier had been partially rebuilt by the 14th century 
builders; the south-eastern pier had been crushed and 
peeled by the weight above, and instead of being repaired had 
been strapped together with wooden uprights and iron bands 
in the most unsightly manner. Still till near the end of the 
year 1882 no danger was apprehended. Then a sudden and 
alarming movement was discovered to be taking place, and 
immediate action became necessary to save the whole from 
instant destruction. 
Of course the lantern might have been preserved in its exist 
ing condition by underpinning and by tying its walls together 
by iron bolts as has been done in other cases, hut the dis¬ 
coveries which were made in taking down the lantern and the 
piers gave convincing evidence that Mr. Pearson was right in 
deciding to take them down altogether and rebuild them. 
The walls of the 14th century lantern were merely rubble and 
dust, held together by the thinnest facing of Barnack stone. 
The Norman piers were no better. The core of the piers was 
dust and the bonding of the stone courses was wretched. 
The foundations were of the poorest kind, consisting of small 
stones laid on the loose gravel, though some two feet and a 
half lower down the builders would have touched the solid 
oolitic rock. Magnificent as the Norman architects were in 
design, they were not equally careful as to the soundness of 
their structure. 
In taking down the tower and piers several interesting 
discoveries were made, of which I shall endeavour to give 
some account. But before I do this, it may be well briefly to 
state the facts with regard to the original construction of the 
tower and lantern, as we learn them from the ancient 
chroniclers. 
The tower of the Norman Church was built by the Abbot 
William de Waterville, who also built both the transepts. “ In 
suo etiam tempore (says Swapham) ambae cruces Ecclesiae, 
et tres liystoriae ( i.e ., stories which in more classical Latin 
would have been tabulata *) magistrae turris erectae sunt.” 
Mr. Paley infers from this statement that there must have 
* Paley. 
