574 
S A L I S 
he died in exile. John Jewel next obtained this prelacy. 
He was a man of great talents and erudition, and strenu¬ 
ously advocated the cause of Protestantism, in the tenets of 
which he had been educated. He terminated his mortal 
existence at Monkton-Farley, in Wiltshire, on the 22d of 
September, 1571, and gave place to Edmund Guest, or 
Gheast, who presided seven years, and was a great benefactor 
to the cathedral library. His death occurred in 1578, and, 
in the same year, John Piers was translated hither from 
Rochester. He held this see ten years, and was then pre¬ 
ferred to the archbishopric of York, in 1589, from which 
time the prelacy remained vacant for three years, when John 
Caldwell obtained it. This prelate is remarkable for having 
been the first married bishop of Sarum. He sat five years, 
and was succeeded, after a lapse of two years, by Henry 
Cotton, who died in 1615, and made way for Richard 
Abbot, a celebrated lecturer in support of the royal autho¬ 
rity, in opposition to Bellarmine and Suarez. This bishop 
died in 1617, and had for his successor, Martin Fotherby, 
D.D., who being far advanced in age, scarcely held the see 
a complete year, before his death. A similar fate happened 
to his successor, Robert Tounson, who was succeeded by 
John Davenant, his brother-in-law, a prelate of great abili¬ 
ties, and an adept in controversial argumentation. He died 
in 1641, when Brian Duppa, tutor to prince Charles, was 
elevated to the see. After the death of king Charles I. he 
resided privately at Richmond, till the Restoration, an event 
which again put him in possession of his bishopric ; but he 
died in less than two years afterwards. His successor was 
Henry Henchman, a strenuous supporter of the Stuart cause, 
who presided three years, and was then advanced to the see 
of London. During his prelacy, considerable alterations 
were made in the form and decorations of the choir. John 
Earle next held this bishopric, a man highly extolled by his 
contemporaries for his learning and wit. He was author of 
“ Microcosmography, or a Piece of the World displayed,” 
which has lately been republished, with notes and an appen¬ 
dix, by Philip Bliss, Fellow of St. John’s College, Oxford. 
Earle died at Oxford, in 1665, and was succeeded by Ed¬ 
ward Hyde, a native of Salisbury, who scarcely survived 
two years. The next bishop was the celebrated Seth Ward, 
by whom the cathedral and bishop’s palace were materially 
repaired, and through whose influence the chancellorship of 
the Garter was made hereditary in the bishops of Salisbury. 
In his time, the spire of the cathedral was struck by light¬ 
ning, and apprehensions being entertained of its stability, 
on account of its remarkable declension from the perpen¬ 
dicular, Sir Christopher Wren was engaged by the bishop to 
survey the whole structure, and draw up a report on the 
state of its architecture. This prelate further founded the 
College of Matrons, situated in the Close, and likewise en¬ 
gaged in a warm controversy with dean Pierce, respecting 
the right of bestowing prebends. His death occurred in 
1689, when Gilbert Burnet, equally celebrated for his poli¬ 
tical conduct and his historical writings, obtained the vacant 
see, and held it till 1715. The succeeding bishop was Wil¬ 
liam Talbot, whose death, in 1730, made room for Richard 
Willis, then bishop of Gloucester. The latter died in 1734, 
and in the same year, the far-famed Benjamin Hoadley, 
bishop of Bangor, one of the most distinguished polemical 
writers of his own, or perhaps any other age, was consecrated 
Bishop of Salisbury. The Bangorian controversy is familiar 
to every ecclesiastical reader. He presided at Salisbury 
twelve years before his removal to Winchester, at which time 
Thomas Sherlock was installed in his place, and likewise 
attracted notice by his controversial writings. His successors 
were John Gilbert, afterwards Archbishop of York; John 
Thomas, who was translated to Winchester; Robert Drum¬ 
mond, who was promoted to York; a second John Thomas, 
who died herein 1766; John Hume, who died in 1782; 
and the Hon. Shute Barrington, Bishop of Durham, 
during whose prelacy extensive improvements were executed 
in the internal arrangement and ornaments of the cathedral, 
and also in the bishop’s palace and gardens. On his removal, 
John Douglas, D. D., the able detector of Lauder’s forgeries 
BURY. 
against Milton, was nominated to the bishopric, which he 
held till 1805, when he died, and was succeeded by John 
Fisher, D.D. and F.S.A., preceptor to the Princess Charlotte' 
of Wales. 
The cathedral of Salisbury is admitted by all, who are 
capable of appreciating architectural merit, to be one of the 
most interesting ecclesiastical edifices in Europe, combining 
the qualities of simplicity and harmony of design, with beauty 
of proportion and chasteness of decoration. In its parts, it 
displays the utmost lightness and elegance, and, as a whole, 
is grand and impressive, without being, gloomy. Though 
slight variations of style are perceptible in some of its mem¬ 
bers, particularly in the west front, tower and spire, these 
nevertheless harmonize so well with the general character of 
the building, that even were record wanting to authenticate 
the fact, the intelligent artist would immediately recognize 
it as the work of one period, and the result of a determinate 
and settled plan. The church consists of a nave, with two 
lateral aisles; a bold and lofty porch, projecting on the 
north side, near the west end; a large transept, with an 
eastern aisle; a choir, with lateral aisles, and a second, or 
small transept, with an aisle; a chapel at the east end, with 
an intermediate vestibule or double aisle terminating the 
choir ; and a lofty tower and spire, which rise from the in¬ 
tersection of the great transept. To the south of the church 
are appended the cloister, chapter-house, consistory-court, 
and vestry. Such are the chief portions, or features, of this 
edifice, but it will be proper to describe some parts iriore par¬ 
ticularly. The west front is separated into five compart¬ 
ments, longitudinally, and several irregular parts horizon¬ 
tally. Four large buttresses, ornamented with niches, statues,’ 
&c., project from the elevation. In the central compartment, 
at the bottom, between two of the buttresses, is a portico, con¬ 
sisting of three arches, one of which faces the chief entrance, 
and communicates with the nave of the church; over this- 
is a series of arcades with acute canopies, and above them a 
large window, formed by a lofty pointed arch in the centre, 
and a smaller one on each side. The upper division, or 
pediment, displays two windows, with two lights in each, 
also three circular windows or pannels. To the right and 
left of the centre portico, is another similar one, but 
smaller, and over each are five different compartments of 
windows, blank arches, &c. Both angles of this front are 
supported by square turrets, having their exteriors covered 
with columns, canopies, tracery, and pedestals; and their 
interiors occupied by stair-cases, surmounted by a central 
spire, and four corner pinnacles. Each transept is divided, 
in elevation, into four compartments, with acute pediments 
in the centre, and pinnacles at the angles. A series of 
double window’s are continued all round the aisles, while the 
upper division or portion over the roof of the aisles is lighted 
by a continued series of windows, of three openings to 
each. The tower above the roof of the church consists of 
two divisions, variously decorated with pilasters, canopies, 
&c., and crowned with four octangular crocket'eed pinnacles 
from the centre, between which rises the spire, whose sum¬ 
mit is 404 feet above the level of the ground. The style of 
architecture, in this member of the church, is more elaborate 
than in most of its other parts, and hence it is generally 
thought to have been executed at a somewhat later period. 
That a structure so lofty, and so light and tapering in its 
construction, as this spire, should have swerved 22| inches 
from the perpendicular, in the course of five centuries, is not 
surprising; but when the narrowness of its base is considered, 
it seems astonishing that it has stood for so many ages. 
The fact of its having done so, is a conclusive proof of the 
talents of the architect, and the skill of the mason, as well as 
of the excellence of the materials which compose it. To 
raise such a mass of stone, was at once an arduous and dan¬ 
gerous experiment, and demanded the highest application of 
science in its design, and the greatest energy and courage in 
its execution. 
The cloisters and chapter-house, as before noticed, are; 
situated on the south side of the church. The former are 
covered with a lofty vaulted ceiling, and are separated from 
the 
