1805. } 
. / 
ral obfervations I have lately made on the 
ftyle of architeMure, inour ol eft churches 
and caltles, I am pretty much convinced, 
that the three firit Norman Kings made 
no alteration in the form et their build- 
ings from that of the .Saxons, except ting 
the ‘oi namental mouldings of the win- 
dows (fuch as we find in the chancel of 
St. Peter’s in the Eaft,* and Ifficy, Weft 
End), which fcem to be the earlie& mode 
of the Saxon times. If you will look in- 
to Drake’s H:ftory of York (which if it 
be not in the Bodiey, is in the Univerfity 
College library), you re oe pleafed to 
find, at p. 308, a print of St. Margaret’s 
church porch, in that city, exactly re- 
fembling the weft end of the Ifley:+ the 
mouldings contain the figures of the Zo- 
aac and grotefques which thew a lux- 
uriancy of fancy almoft equal to that of 
fome of our belt. poets; as Spenfer, &c. 
See alfo page 33, in the Appendix, fec- 
tion the laft, where there is a reference to 
the Aynfty map, page 380, in which you 
svill find depiéted the old Saxon cathedral 
of York, as a device for a feal. Here 
we find the fcmicircular arches, and low 
capped towers, like thofe at St. Peier’s 
before mentioned. Did you obferve an 
aral tomb, on the left hand, in the fouth 
aile, juft as you enter St. A!lban’s church, 
the flat ftone of which is compofed of a 
fort of marble full of fhells, like what is 
found in this county, and Whichwood 
forett, in Oxfordfhire (though the fpecies 
of the fhelis are different from both), and 
the fide and end ftores confit ct a fine 
oriental granite. Thistomb is, dovbtle(s, 
very ancient, and very remarkable for 
the above-mentioned materials ; as we 
hardly find any before the reign of King 
® James the Fist, or rather his fucceflor, 
but what were ecapotd of our country 
* In Oxford. 
+ Drake’s Hiftory of York fays, that the 
porch of St. Margaret’s, York, was origi- 
nally brought from the diffolved hofpital of 
St. Nicholas without the city walls. Like 
Iffley, the figures on the outer mouiding of 
the arch way confift of the twelve figns, 
mixed with other emblems of a more fan- 
taftic kind. The hofpital of St. Nicholas 
was, at leaft, as ancient as the time of Maud, 
who wasa benefaGtrefs to it: and one would 
almoft be inclined to think, that the perch 
now at St. Margaret’s, was by the famine ar- 
tifts who executed that at Iffey, they have 
fo great a fimilarity of pattern. Iffley is 
known to have been built by a Bifhop of Lin- 
coln, toward the clofe of the twelith cen- 
tury. 
Dr, Lyitheton’s Letters on Saxon eee 
3F 
materials. 1 fuppole you’ furveyed the 
ruins of the famous Veral.m, and did 
not overlock the fine monument of fhe 
great ‘Lord Bacon, at St. Michagi’s 
church.” — 
‘s Hagley, Sept, 20, 1749. 
«J had the ftisfaction of viewing 
fome noble Saxon remains, In my way 
fromthe north; one very confiderabie, i 
may venture t> fay, Lfrft difcovered, viz. 
the partfh church of Vucbury, in the coun. 
ty of Stafford ; for although Mr. Erdet 
w.ck and Dr. Plott make greatxhmentina 
of the famous cafile there, yet not a hagle 
remark do they vouch afe on this venera= 
ble piece of Saxon architecture; except 
the ea't front, and part of the feuath, with 
about one-third of the tower, the whole, 
both within and without, is Saxon. The 
pulars (of which there are two rows) arg 
as thick as thofe in the choir at Chriét 
church, Oxford; the wet front is very 
fpacious, the door-way as large as inte 
moit ca hedrals, and the mouldings within 
he arch nearly refemble thofe at Ifficy, 
but the workmanfhip ruder, whence I cun- 
jeCture it is a more ancient, ftrusture, 
Ts e windows above the weit door are fall 
of mof curious ornaments; they confft of 
thiec innumber, viz. a large one between 
two {mall ones; and the latter are exactiy 
like fome which you fhewed me in the 
Saxon MS. at the Bodley. 
<6 IT faw the ciry of York to great 2 ade 
vantage, havino Dr Drake, the author of 
the Hittory of @boracum, for my Cicer oni. 
We treverfed every part of it together, 
and a delicious repaft it afforded me doth 
of Roman and Gothic antiquities. “The 
crypia, under the cathedral (which henas 
taken ne notice of in his furvey), are, in 
erty particular, fimiarito the arches and 
pillars io &t. Grimbald’s ch apel, under 
St. Peter's in the Hatt 5° from hence | cone 
vinced him that they were part cf the old 
Saxon chureh ; and from hence, allo, 1s 
an undoubted proof that Mauritius his 
church of St. Paul's, London (erctted 
temp. Will. 1.), was not the firk churca 
that was built on arches, potwiltanding 
Wiliam of Maimefbury’s bold ae 
en this | point. No spe foon cahave a 
ing of tis, and of a Saxon perch ite 
moat leads into a modzrn chapel 2 
bridge at York.” 
DR.LYTTLETON fo MR. COLE. 
“6 Fiillfireci, Det. 219, 475s 
‘J fear your sealo:s for Lutbary 
BON being the priory church are unane 
{werable, Phe allowing it to be fo, 
hinges all my hypothelis of the $a 
Wir 
KOA 
2c Bt 
