544 LON 
when its revenues amounted, according to Speed, to 
3977I. 6s. 4d. per annum, a fum at lea(t equal to twenty 
thoufand pounds a-year of prefent money. Befides its 
furniture, which was of ineftimable valuer it had, in dif¬ 
ferent parts of the kingdom, no lefs than two hundred and 
fixteen manors, l'eventeen hamlets, with ninety-feven towns 
and villages; and, though the abbey was only the fecond 
in rank, yet in all other refpefts it was the chief in the 
kingdom, and its abbots had a feat in the houfe of lords. 
It has been often obferved, that molt of thefe great con- 
yentualities (fince, with all the gluttony and other capital 
fins attributed to monks, they could not fwallow the whole 
revenue of their property) uled to do a great deal of good 
to the furrounding country, by relieving the poor; and 
that, fince their fupprefiion, here as well as in the fitter 
kingdoms, beggars fprang up every-where, on account of 
the lubtraclion of that daily fupport which the cottage re¬ 
ceived from the neighbouring abbey; and that thus our 
poor-laws, which did not fublift before, hecame necelfary; 
for Dugdale remarks, that, while the convents flood, there 
was no aft for the relief of the poor, f'o amply were they 
provided for by thefe houfes; whereas in the next age there 
were no lefs than eleven bills brought into the houfe of 
commons for that purpofe. That the monafteries afforded 
relief to the poor is a pofition maintained alfo by Smith 
and Blackftone; and the latter attributes to the diffolution 
of thefe the numerous ftatutes made in the reign of Henry 
VIII. and his children, for providing for the poor and 
impotent. Indeed from the zzd of Henry VIII. to the 
43d of Elizabeth, hardly a parliament met, in which 
lome laws that regarded the poor were not enafted.-—As 
for the abbots of Weftminfter having a feat in the houfe 
of lords, that was perfdftly in unifon with the eftablilhed 
religion of thofe times. Abbots, as well as bilhops, were 
prelates of the realm; they were the heads of corarau- 
jaities holding immenfe landed property, and therefore: 
intimately connefted with and interefted in the welfare 
of the kingdom. Their contributions were often very ac¬ 
ceptable to the minifter and his king. The only differ¬ 
ence that, in exterior ornaments, diltinguifhed them from 
bilhops, was that the latter wore the crofier with its fpi- 
ral without, and the abbot with the fpiral within, to fliow 
the jurifdiftion of the firft was abroad, and that of the 
fecond at home. A faft the more interefting, as it is little 
known. 
After the diffolution of the abbey, the fickle monarch 
Henry VIII. erefted it firft into a college of fecular ca¬ 
nons, under the government of a dean, an honour which 
he chofe to confer on the laft abbot; and the accepting 
of which plainly fliows the charafter of the monk, who, 
like fome churchmen in the courfe of the temporary re¬ 
volution in France, quietly made this interefted calcula¬ 
tion, viz. that it is better to be any thing than nothing 
at all. This eftablifhment, however, was of no long du¬ 
ration ; for two years after Henry converted it into a bi¬ 
shopric, as we have noticed before. His fon Edward VI. 
broke-the crofier, and again reduced the eftablifhment 
40 a deanery, which continued till Mary’s acceftion to 
tire crown. After a lapfe of eighteen years, the con¬ 
ventual exiftence was reftored; and the cloiders again 
£iw the monks pacing their gloomy walks. No fcenery 
•in a playhoufe fhifts falter than the fucceffive fituations 
of this abbey; for, three years after, the monks were 
obliged to pack up their cowls, rofaries, and brevia¬ 
ries, and leave their dear convent, by order of Elizabeth. 
In 1560 fhe re-erefted Weftminfter-abbey into a college 
as before, under the government of a dean and twelve 
fecular canons, or prebendaries. She alfo founded a fchool 
for forty fcholars, denominated the Queen's, to be educated 
in the liberal fciences preparatory to their going to the 
univerfity, and to have all the neeefl'aries of life, except 
clothing, of which they were to have only a gown each 
year. To this abbey belong choritters, finging-men, an 
4)rganiff, twelve almlinen, See .—We might add leveral par¬ 
ticulars to this ejfitoine of the origin, building, and hif- 
D O N. 
tory, of Weftminfter-abbey ; but we find not, in many 
of them, that appearance of truth which ought to be the 
guide of an hiftorian; and we fhall therefore proceed with 
our furvey. 1 
The appearance of the weft front is extremely magni¬ 
ficent. The gate is wrought with much delicacy ; ^and 
the fereen above it wants neither elegance nor lightnefsi 
and agrees with the large window which it fupports, i« 
tracings and other ornaments peculiar to Gothic archi¬ 
tefture. The two towers, it is plain, are of later con- 
ltruftion ; and indeed, the execution of fome of the parts 
is fo cl unify, that it clafhes confiderably with the original 
flendernels of mouldings, as well as depth of carving#, 
fo juftly admired throughout the whole work. Sir Chnf- 
topher Wren repaired thefe two towers; and, although 
his fame ftands almoft unparalleled in the ftately monu¬ 
ment he raifed to his own reputation when he built St. 
Paul’s, yet it is plain that he could not ftep out of the 
five ancient orders of architefture into that fantaflical one;, 
which, when well executed, is, as well as the others, wor¬ 
thy of admiration. Here we do not find that delicacy,, 
that whimfical originality of tracery, fo confpicuous.m 
ancient buildings of that defeription ; and the two towers 
look like a fecond-hand fac-fimile, or the worn-out caff 
of a once-elegant mould. The north fide, which is the 
only one expofed to view, (the other being fo incumbered 
with buildings, that even its fituation can hardly be dif- 
tinguifhed,) prefents a noble range of fublfantial but- 
treli'es ; but to a certain height, the edacity of time, Tempuet. 
edax, has flattened the boldly-raifed mouldings, and le¬ 
velled all to a plain furface, except where the drippings 
of water, the pickings of pigeons at lunrife, and (as 
fome people fay and believe) the worm-like-eating beams 
of the moon, have excavated little holes in the Itone, and 
properly honey-combed thefe noble fupports of one of the 
liobleft piles which the world can boaft of in this ftyle of 
architefture. The top and canopied pinnacles of thefe 
buttrefles were, each of them, adorned with a ftatue of 
one of our kings, of no bad workmanfhip. Some of them 
have been prefented upon paper in their juftly-fuppofed 
original fhapes by feveral antiquaries and draughtmen, 
among whom we are proud to mention that very zealous 
and undaunted defender of the ancient honours of, as he 
calls it, Eriglifh architefture, Mr. John Carter; and we 
would advife that portion of our readers who may be fond 
of fuch purfuits to follow his very interefting obfervations 
and profound ftriftures in feveral numbers of the Gentle¬ 
man’s Magazine.—Had the refiltlefs hand of Time itfelf 
crumbled into duft the reprefentatives of thole whom he 
had long before reduced to their original clay, we could 
have no licenfe to complain—but here it is not the cafe. 
—They were ftatues of kings ; and, when the majefty of 
the people is allowed to reign with unlimited and truly- 
unqualified fway, ftatues of kings are condemned as idols j 
fubmifiion to power, fuperftition ; and loyalty, a deadly fin. 
Molt of thefe ftatues were brought down by the raging; 
hands of an infuriated and blind multitude in thole un¬ 
happy civil commotions that defaced, in childilh revenge, 
the beauty of moft of the religious edifices in this kingdom. 
This beautiful range of buttrefles leads the eye gently 
and pleafingly to the north tranfept, projecting out with 
great prominency. Three large windows on each Itage add 
light to the interior, and ornament to the exterior.—When 
we turn to the afpeft of the north porch, we let loofe the 
reins of our praifing faculties ; for the portico, that leads 
into the north crofs, is looked upon as magnificent, and 
has been called the beautiful , or Solomon's Gate .— Now this 
is very fine; but, as no men are more ready to do juf- 
tice to real merit and beauty than we are, (and we are 
confcious of having, throughout our work, given reiterated 
proofs of it,) and yet, as we declared it from the begin¬ 
ning, (fee p. 396.) none lefs apt or liable to fwerve from 
truth, we mutt indeed confefs that we do not fee any ground 
for comparing this handfome Gothic gate with what we 
may fuppofe the Portaformofa of the Temple of Jerafalem 
<0 
