Part 2

The next and final augmentation we have to notice appears to have been begun in the latter part of the reign of Henry VII, though most likely not finished till after the accession of his successor. This augmentation is the West Front, the Consistory Court, and the South Porch. It is possible the Perpendicular Architect before spoken of might lay the foundation, and carry up part of the walls, of this part of the Building, which is clearly distinguished as an augmentation, by the level on which it is built. But the finishing is very different from what remains visible of his work, which, though rich, is simple; while the whole of this part has evident marks of that frittered multiplication of ornament so visible in Henry VII’s Chapel. Yet though this work, particularly in the upper part of the Porch, begins to be thus frittered, there is certainly much beauty in the design, and peculiar delicacy in the execution.

The West Entrance, the adjoining niche work, the window above, and the door itself, all deserve minute and attentive examination; for though, from the nature of the stone, much of the original beauty is gone, there are yet parts in which the carvings preserve nearly as much sharpness as when first executed.

With this work the Edifice seems to have been completed, and we will now endeavour to look at it as it then appeared, at which time I believe the view of the South side was free, as those disgraceful erections which now form the narrow passage at the corner of the South Transept were not then in existence. {13b} The Building therefore could be viewed in its whole length, by an observer placed opposite the centre of the South Transept.

At this period I conceive the South View, or, as it may be called, the Show side of the Cathedral, was perhaps but little inferior in real beauty to any one in England,—Canterbury, York, and Salisbury excepted. To prove this, let us examine its parts. The West End newly finished, and the Tower, and the other works of his predecessor and the architecture of the upper part of the Choir, new enough to harmonize therewith, this front view must have presented a very beautiful appearance. Though the battlements are now all gone, enough remains to lead us to suppose that the whole line was finished with rich pinnacles, and battlements. {14a} The buttresses were very fine, and the grouping of those at the corner of the South Transept peculiarly good.

All the Windows appear to have had fine canopies, and what original tracery remains is of great beauty of design, and delicacy of execution; and though now none exists, we may reasonably suppose the Windows filled with painted glass. The picture appeared complete; but it was not long to last, as the funds for its support were soon afterwards absorbed; and tradition avers that during the Usurpation of Cromwell, it was even degraded so far as to become a stable!

At the Restoration, it was probably in bad condition. The exterior of the Choir appears to have been worse than the rest, for that has been cased; while from the workmanship of that casing, and the present mullions of the Windows, I apprehend these reparations were made since the Restoration. This casing is the last considerable reparation of the walls, but as the roofs have been kept in repair, and the present worthy Dean {14b} is laudably assiduous in giving every reparation the funds of the building will admit, we may hope that no further dilapidations will ensue, and perhaps, after a time, that some restoration may take place. More minute attention than I have hitherto been able to bestow on some particular parts, may enable me hereafter to make some addition to and perhaps corrections of the present rapid sketch of this very interesting Edifice.

I know not how far these observations may coincide with Historical Records; but it is proper to state that they are made up solely from my own examination of the present state of the Building.

Footnotes.

{3a} Mr. Thomas Hodkinson, Architect.

{3b} In his _Description of the Cathedral Church of Ely_.

{3c} _Architectural Antiquities_, Vol. I. p. 3.

{5} In allusion to these military predilections, his professional friend and associate, Mr. R. C. Hussey, thus writes, “These really remained with him to the end of his life. He would always converse readily and with animation on military subjects; and his wife observed that if he saw a soldier approaching, he would cross the street in order to get as near to him as he could.” An old friend of Rickman’s told me that he once met at dinner, at Dublin, an officer (I think a major in the army) who said an extraordinary thing had occurred to him, for he once came across a Quaker who knew more about his (the major’s) regiment than he did himself. It need scarcely be added that the Quaker was no other than Mr. Rickman, our architect.

{6a} I may here relate an anecdote of my own personal meeting with Rickman. I was once travelling in a stage coach, and had drawn the conversation gradually into an architectural channel. One of my companions, an elderly gentleman in Quaker costume, after some general remarks, addressed me as follows:—“Young friend, thou seemest to have some taste for architecture,—where did’st thou pick it up?” My reply was, that the little I knew of the subject had been gleaned from the perusal of Mr. Rickman’s clever work on Gothic Architecture. “Indeed, friend,” continued my querist, “is that verily so? Then, I am Thomas Rickman.”

{6b} This Church (writes Mr. Hussey) was erected under the Church Building Commissioners, very soon after they were appointed; and it was under their auspices, indeed, that he commenced his Church building. He used to say that when he had an interview with these functionaries, he enquired how large a projection he might give to the Chancel. The reply was, that two feet was enough for a Chancel; and two feet is given to it in this Church. He is buried in the graveyard of St. George’s Church, where a monument, erected by subscription, exists to his memory. At this time of day masons were so little accustomed to work Gothic windows, that no one would give an estimate for work of this kind, consequently no contract for a Gothic Church could be made. As this would not suit Rickman or the Church Commissioners, he had a set of patterns made for cast iron Windows, and these he used for all the windows in St. George’s Church, except the east window, which is of stone. St. George’s is in the Decorated style.

{7} The architect here named was the father of the Rev. T. N. Hutchinson, formerly Vice-Principal of the Chester Training College, and now second Master of King Edward’s School, Birmingham. The members of the Chester Archæological Society need not to be reminded how thoroughly the architectural tastes of the father are inherited by the son.

{8a} Article on Rickman in Knight’s _Cyclopoædia of Biography_.

{8b} It will be observed that, in the following paper, Rickman has distinctly pointed out what he supposes to be the dates of erection of the several portions of the Cathedral building. Having no historical authorities to refer to, he had fixed these entirely from his own notions of the _probable_ periods, drawn from his examination of the distinctive characteristics of the several parts. We have it in our power now to verify these dates from authentic records, and to show, as we have done in foot notes, the singular accuracy of Rickman’s judgment in fixing them.

{9a} This fault has since Rickman’s time been remedied by the substitution of two handsome and appropriate windows.

{9b} The _Presentation Book of the Abbey_ says, “The Choir, Steeple and Body of the Church were rebuilt about the time of King John, i.e. 1199 to 1216, Hugh Grylle, Abbot.” The Early English period dates from the accession of John in 1199, to 1272, in which year Henry III died. The work continued languidly through the abbacies of Marmion, Pincebeck, Frind, and Capenhurst, to Simon de Albo Monasterio, who became Abbot in 1265, died in 1289, and was buried in the Chapter House. During this energetic abbacy, says Dr. Ormerod, “the monastery or a considerable portion thereof was rebuilt.”

{10a} The Decorated period extended from A.D. 1272 to 1377, or during the reign of the three Edwards.

{10b} Simon de Albo Monasterio was Abbot from 1265–1289, while his important part of the work was in rapid progress.

{11a} The Perpendicular style ranged from the accession of Richard II. in 1377, to the death of Henry VIII. in 1546.

{11b} Simon Ripley, who was Abbot of St. Werburgh’s, 1472 to 1479, is stated to have rebuilt the _Nave_, _Tower_, and _South Transept_; but in Webb’s portion of the _Vale Royal_ it is distinctly recorded that, in 1506, in the abbacy of John Birchenshaw “The old steeple of St. Werburgh was taken down,” while two years afterwards the same record states that “the foundation and the first stone of the Abbey laid, the Maior being then present.” This record has been hitherto connected with the western tower, but Rickman’s argument seems to be conclusive, unless indeed, which is quite probable, both were in progress at the same period.

{12} _Not_ the windows which are to be found there now, which were erected at the time of the general repair of the fabric, about 1816, after Rickman’s survey.

{13a} The Dean and Chapter have for some years past been gradually restoring this beautiful structure to its original character; and the Perpendicular work here half-complained of by Rickman has now almost disappeared.

{13b} The erections here so deservedly condemned were the remains of an old cloth hall, originally built for the stranger merchants frequenting the great annual fairs at Chester. These buildings occupied great part of the space now enclosed with railing on the S.W. side of the nave and St. Oswald’s Church, and were pulled down about 20 years ago.

{14a} In the print of Chester Cathedral given in Willis’ _Survey of Cathedrals_, A.D. 1727, the battlements and rich crocketted pinnacles are shown as existing then. The South end of the South Transept is also shewn to have been richly decorated with niches.

{14b} Probably H. Cholmondeley, who was Dean of Chester, from 1806 to 1815.