Since the last issue of this work, the foundations of the Chapel of the Loretto at Glastonbury have been partly excavated, and are found to accord, so far, with the statements received in automatic writing. This discovery sets the seal upon the veridical nature of the writings, and emphasizes the importance of the method employed by the author for the recovery of latent knowledge.

---

THE GATE OF REMEMBRANCE

THE LOST CHAPEL

The green isle of Glaston, severed as it was from the outer world by its girdle of marsh and mere, was from old time a haunt of peace. Its history as a religious foundation goes back into the mists of antiquity, and is lost in legend and fable. To this quiet retreat, this secluded stronghold of a more ancient faith, the footsteps of the first Christian missioners were guided, and the company of Eastern pilgrims found rest in its green recesses and a well-guarded focus for the great work of evangelising the isle of Britain.

Successive waves of pagan immigration flooded the land, yet never was the lamp of truth extinguished here; and, stranger still, those who came, though of alien race and custom, cherished the older landmarks and sought not to destroy; for the heritage of Glaston was not the heritage of any individual race, but of all—a trust for Christendom.

Within the sacred precincts the dust of many holy men was preserved, and the church enshrined their relics. She grew great through the pious benefactions of kings and nobles whose memory she kept green. Among these the gifts of the great Saxon King, Edgar, "yclept The Peaceable,"2 were always gratefully remembered. In the great Abbey Church there was a chapel to his honour, well endowed, and, we doubt not, sumptuously furnished. But it was not esteemed sufficient, and in the day of Richard Bere, the last great building Abbot, it was decided that a new and more glorious monument should be erected to his memory. So we learn from Leland, who saw the chapel as it stood, a completed work, but a few years before the dissolution and ruin of the monastery. Then came, in 1539, the forced surrender, the barbarous execution of the last Abbot, Whiting, the violation of the shrines, and the dispersal of all the treasures of art and learning stored within the Abbey walls. But of the Edgar Chapel nothing more is heard, save that we can infer from a document we quote that it was standing in the days of Elizabeth. Yet it is doubtful whether it can have lasted through half her reign. And perhaps it was one of the first of the buildings to be utterly destroyed, since even its memory had perished and its form and grandeur were alike forgotten. Those who have seen the delicate and beautiful work at St. George's Chapel in Windsor Castle, or that masterpiece of stonecraft, the Chapel of King Henry VII. at Westminster, may form some idea of the general character of this Chapel of Edgar in its finished state.

Local memory and tradition generally preserve some traces, however dim or distorted, of an architectural work of great magnitude and beauty, but it is a strange fact that this one had utterly faded out of knowledge save for some scattered and obscure notes in the pages of the old county antiquaries, which contained no hint of its identity.

Shewing in dotted lines the reminiscence of an eastward Lady's, or Retro-Chapel, thought to have been built by Abbot Adam de Sodbury in the early part of the fourteenth century.
Two different states are shewn, both lettered 'F' by these authors, and here numbered 1 and 2. No. 1 shews by scale a projection from the retro-choir of 30 feet; whilst No. 2 gives a total length of 95 feet. This is called by Warner, "the chapel according to its original proportions." The two measurements are approximately harmonised by Leland's record of the lengthening of the choir by Abbot Monington to the extent of two bays, and the throwing out of his new retro-choir to the east, which would absorb about two-thirds of the length of this chapel.

---

DISCOVERY OF THE EDGAR CHAPEL, GLASTONBURY ABBEY:

AN ACCOUNT OF A PSYCHOLOGICAL EXPERIMENT

The following is the story of the discovery which, in 1908, caused a good deal of public interest, and provided the archÆological world with an object of attention.

Although known to a small circle of friends of the writer and his colleague in the research, and to the Secretary of the Society for Psychical Research, who was intimately acquainted with both, and in touch with them at the time, no publication of the circumstances has yet been made, and this was withheld largely for reasons more or less personal to the writer, though the intention had always been to make known the facts whenever the time should seem ripe for the disclosure.

The entire record has been preserved, and the testimony of both the writer and his friend being available, as well as the contemporary evidence of the Secretary of the S.P.R., it will be seen that the matter stands on a fairly good basis in respect of documentary witness.

For reasons of convenience, initials will be used in the ensuing account. F.B.B. will denote the writer, and J.A. his friend, John Alleyne.

In anticipation of an appointment to the position of Director of Excavations at Glastonbury Abbey on behalf of the Somerset ArchÆological Society, of which he was a member, F.B.B. had, during 1907, devoted considerable time to the study of the ruins and their history, and to that of the older religious foundations, and in this J.A. assisted him. Most of the surviving accounts of the Abbey were gone through, both the works of the mediÆval writers and those of the seventeenth, eighteenth, and nineteenth centuries, with the fragments collected by them from older sources. Among the first, the works of William of Malmesbury, Adam de Domerham, William Wyrcestre, and John of Glaston, were examined, whilst Leland was not overlooked, and the later antiquaries, Hearne, Dugdale, Hollar, and Stukeley, had their share of attention. Following these, Browne-Willis, Britton, Carter, Collinson, Phelps, Kerrich, and Warner, were consulted, and finally some careful attention was bestowed on the modern antiquaries, Parker, Freeman, and last, but not least in importance, Professor Willis, whose Architectural History was the standard book of reference on the subject during the latter half of the nineteenth century, and still remains of the greatest usefulness to students.

Glastonbury Abbey having passed out of private hands into the custody of a body of Trustees, acting on behalf of the National Church, it was hoped that a greatly increased opportunity for research and excavation would ensue. All published plans of the Great Church had been necessarily very incomplete, in the absence of visible remains and the lack of trustworthy evidence from documents. In particular the following features were in doubt:

1. The form of the retro-quire, and eastward termination of the Abbey Church.

2. The question of a north porch to the nave, and its probable position, if it existed.

Retro-quire and Chapels.

In 1866 Professor R. Willis published his invaluable Architectural History, being the substance of a communication he had made to the ArchÆological Institute in the year previous. He devotes two pages (40, 41) to a discussion of the number and arrangement of the chapels east of the processional path in the retro-quire, and arrives at the conclusion that they were five in number. And in his plan (Fig. 2), which appears as a frontispiece to his work, he shows these five, the central one projecting about 12 feet. On p. 43 he says:

"As Bere is also said to have built Edgar's Chapel at the east end of the church, it is probable that this chapel was one of those that we are considering, and that Bere fitted it up and completed it. The complete eradication of the east wall of the church in the centre may be accounted for by supposing that the central chapel projected eastward, as I have shown in the plan, and that this chapel was Edgar's; for if it had been only one of the ordinary chapels it would not have been worth mentioning as a distinct building."3

Professor Willis's conjecture represents the largest or most liberal interpretation yet placed by any antiquary upon the passage from Leland—which, it may be said, is the only known contemporary evidence of this work of the last two Abbots.

Parker,4 who reviewed the whole subject of the plan in his work for the Somerset ArchÆological Society (see his article in their Proceedings for 1880), does not support Willis's conclusions, inclining rather to the view that the Edgar Chapel was in the south transept, to the east of the nave, but it is within the writer's knowledge that Professor Freeman believed that the original quire, which, before Monington's addition of a fifth and sixth bay, must have been shorter by some 39 feet, was furnished with a large eastern chapel, probably a Lady-chapel, and that this may have been of quite considerable dimensions and even co-extensive in total length with the plan as given by Willis. But this view does not appear to have gone farther than a mere expression of opinion verbally given at a meeting in the Abbey, and the writer only heard it quoted as a reminiscence some time after the discovery of the Edgar Chapel.

It appears to have been put forward as an explanation of the curious diagram given in Phelps's Somerset, where a plan of the church is published, showing in dotted lines a short projection at the point where Willis shows his chapel, and this is given a semicircular or apsidal end.5 Phelps calls this the "Lady's Chapel." And in the corner of the same sheet this author gives another long rectangular diagram, again with a semicircular end, which Warner, who reproduces the plan, calls the "Chapel according to its original dimensions." The apse being the constant feature, these additional dimensions would be to the west, and would answer to the difference in the former and the latter dimensions of the quire which Monington lengthened in 1344-5. And it will be clear that some such reasoning may have guided Parker or Freeman to the tentative conclusion mentioned, and have assisted Willis to form his definite theory of a slight prominence in the central chapel of the later retro-quire.

Among the documents which have been recovered whose period is that of the immediate post-Reformation, is one which would have been readily accessible to Willis and others, and which is preserved by Phelps and copied by Warner in his Glastonbury, published in the twenties of the last century. This is a transcript of a report made to Queen Elizabeth by a Commissioner, who was sent to make an inventory of the Abbey buildings, and he gives a series of measurements of the principal parts of the monastery, including the Abbey Church, as to which he says:

"The great church in the Aby was in length 594 as followeth:

The Chapter House, in length, 90 foot.
The Quier, in length, 159 foot; in breadth, 75 foot.
The bodie of the Church, in length, 228 foot.
The Joseph's chapell, in length, 117 foot."

In the seventeenth century we have the bare statements of Hollar and of Hearne, that the total length of the Abbey Church was 580 feet.

All the measures given by the Elizabethan Commissioner are very excessive, and perhaps for that reason, as well as for the confusion of idea suggested by the association of the Chapter-House measure with those of the Church, they have been rejected, or not regarded, by modern antiquaries. In like manner the bare statement of Hollar and Hearne, being without any description of what buildings were to be included in their measure, has not been taken into account.

Professor Willis's review of the probabilities of the plan of the east end seemed conclusive as regards the existence of five chapels in a row on the east wall of the retro-quire, for the construction he places upon William Wyrcestre's description must be admitted to be most reasonable, fortified as it is by the record of Wild's plan (1813), in which the bases of two piers with fragments of wall attached and running eastward are shown in precisely the position required as partitions for the forming of the three central chapels of the five.

These piers had evidently been recently discovered, and are figured in Britton's Architectural Antiquaries, vol. iv., p. 195. But all trace of them has been cleared away, and, as Willis himself says (op. cit., p. 42):

"Unfortunately, the practice in respect to these ruins until the beginning of this century and later was always to remove not merely the wrought stones, but also to eradicate the foundations. And although the remains have been for many years protected from this kind of destruction, THERE IS NO HOPE LEFT OF RECOVERING ANY DETAILS OF PLAN BY EXCAVATIONS." (Capitals mine.—F.B.B.)

So the matter remained until, in 1903-4, the ArchÆological Institute decided to make Glastonbury the scene of its labours, and Mr. (now Sir William) St. John Hope was deputed to prepare a paper for their annual meeting.

Mr. Hope, having in mind such plans as Abbey Dore, where four chapels appear against the east wall of the retro-quire, reviews William Wyrcestre's statement in this light, and places on his words an alternative construction such as would be correct if that writer had been habitually precise in his descriptions. But he is not precise, and a general inspection of his writings will sufficiently show that he has a peculiar method of representing facts where number, series, locality, or dimension are involved. In the present instance he says:

"IN ORIENTALI PARTE ALTARIS GLASTONIE.

"Spacium de le reredes ex parte orientali magne altaris sunt 5 columpnÆ seriatim et inter quamlibet columpnam est capella cum altare."

Mr. Hope thought that Wyrcestre counted each respond as a whole column, which would mean three whole columns and two responds or piers engaged with the walls north and south, suggesting, of course, four chapels only. He caused trenches to be cut east and west along the site of his supposed central dividing wall, and one north and south immediately outside the east wall of the retro-quire and across the gap where the central chapel of Willis ought to have been. But nothing turned up which to his mind was indicative of an extension of building beyond the line of the two remaining fragments of walling marking the eastward end of the retro-quire, and his conclusion is definite—that there was not, and could never have been, any such extension of a central chapel. And he claimed to have found support for his view of a mid-partition giving a total of four, and not five, chapels, through the confirmatory results of his excavation. Such was the position in 1907 when the writer commenced his studies, and it will readily be seen that no prospect of success could reasonably be expected to attend further research by excavation beyond this point.

All the evidence was sifted and discussed by F.B.B. and J.A. F.B.B. attached perhaps as little weight to the conflicting records of a longer measure as had those who went before him. But he distinctly preferred Willis's solution to others, as there was no gainsaying the significance of Wild's plan with its two intermediate column-bases. And instinctively he felt, as his friend also felt, that the question was not solved, the last word not said. More than once, the feeling returned that a chapel which was thought worthy of special mention by Leland, and which, according to his account, was the work of two Abbots, must have been a work of some importance.

Still, nothing came uppermost in the mind which would tend to modify the writer's respect for Willis's view, nor, indeed, to challenge its probability. It was rather with the object of defending this view, as against the contradictory one more recently put forward, that the intention was formed to examine, as soon as circumstances might permit, the site of Wild's twin piers, and to dig deep around the spot in the hope of finding yet some trace of footings characteristic of a crypt; for Wild noted these as being "probably part of the crypt," and it did not appear that anyone had taken the trouble to investigate this matter.

Wild's plan, incorporated in Britton's "Antiquities," may be regarded as a standard work. In this respect it claims greater weight than others such as Phelps's or Stukeley's, which are vague and inaccurate. Warner copies Phelps, and claims a fourteenth-century Lady-Chapel at the east, but neither Britton nor Stukeley, whose plan is two hundred years old, supports his view. Warner's note is quoted by Professor Willis (ref. to p. 31 of his Architectural History).

---

PRINCIPLES AND METHODS OF PSYCHOLOGY APPLIED TO ARCHÆOLOGICAL RESEARCH

It has been said that the great distinction between East and West in the matter of learning has been that whilst Western science deals with phenomena and builds upon deductions from observation of external things, Eastern wisdom looks always inwardly, seeking to find the answer to all enigmas of creation in the mind of man. The one develops the logical faculty, often, perhaps, at the sacrifice of the imaginative functions; whilst the other follows the intuitive powers, not regarding logical rules. But, as a matter of fact, neither method can be employed to the exclusion of the other, and any great discovery of Western science will be found the outcome of interaction between the two principles. It had always been clear, however, to the writer that the part played by the intuitive or, as Myers would say, subliminal powers of the mind is habitually set aside by the orthodox naturalist, who is apt to see little beyond his specimens and what can logically be inferred from them. And archÆological research has been in such a manner hidebound, and, it must be admitted, with some reason; for, as a comparatively young science, it has had to protect itself against many a foolish fantasy launched by a half-instructed or over-enthusiastic devotee. To describe these as "vain imaginations" would be correct, as the word "vain" is a sufficient qualification, but the writer at all times deprecates the use of the noble word "imagination" in the debased sense of a mere fantasy. Imagination is a great gift, a Divine power of the mind, and may be trained and educated to receive and to create only that which is true. And this, maybe, is the secret of much of the spiritual understanding and wisdom of the East.

But we Western folks think it unpractical to cultivate this gift. We have no system for training it, and our bourgeois habit of mind despises it. In our slipshod way, we say of anything not founded on fact, "It is all imagination," and similarly we are wont to misuse the term "illusion" by employing it to characterise positive delusion.

The training of the imaginative faculty upon scientific lines and its application to archÆological research had long been a favourite notion of the writer's, and he and J.A. had many a talk on the subject; but the difficulty was as to the method most likely to secure the results at which they aimed.

What was clear enough, however, was the need of somehow switching off the mere logical machinery of the brain which is for ever at work combining the more superficial and obvious things written on the pages of memory, and by its dominant activity excluding that which a more contemplative element in the mind would seek to revive from the half-obliterated traces below.

And it occurred to F.B.B. that in the faculty of automatism which his friend was believed to possess, but which he had never used deliberately (it had operated once or twice in his life spontaneously), there might be found the key to success in this direction. F.B.B. was a member of the Society for Psychical Research. Both he and J.A. were intimate with Mr. Everard Feilding, Secretary of the Society, who had been greatly interested in J.A.'s account of certain phenomena of automatism which he had experienced. And E.F. had been present at one or two experiments in the calling of these powers into play.

Before entering upon the actual narrative of the discovery in connection with Glastonbury, it must be further premised that neither F.B.B. nor J.A. favoured the ordinary spiritualistic hypothesis which would see in these phenomena the action of discarnate intelligences from the outside upon the physical or nervous organisation of the sitters. They would regard such a view as something like a reversal or turning inside-out of the truth. But that the embodied consciousness of every individual is but a part, and a fragmentary part, of a transcendent whole, and that within the mind of each there is a door through which Reality may enter as Idea—Idea presupposing a greater, even a cosmic Memory, conscious or unconscious, active or latent, and embracing not only all individual experience and revivifying forgotten pages of life, but also Idea involving yet wider fields, transcending the ordinary limits of time, space, and personality—this would be a better description of the mental attitude of the two friends.

The following may be quoted as indicating F.B.B's temper of mind and feeling at a time closely following the date of the experiments he made with J.A. It may be found as a passage in the Illuminated Address which he prepared for, and which was accepted by, the Queen on her visit as Princess of Wales to the Abbey in 1909, and was conceived as a part of the "lovynge Greetinge of y^e monkes of Glaston to theyre Prince and Princesse. xxii Jun: A^o Mcmix." This extract runs as follows. It was not automatic, but was doubtless influenced to some extent by a strong feeling in more than one quarter that Glastonbury would be renewed as a centre of spiritual realisation and reconciliation between the various racial elements in these islands and their distinctive religious expressions, not yet co-ordinated (see the writer's article on "Glastonbury" in the Christmas number of the Treasury for 1908, also an address by Canon Masterman given in London in the same year). Glastonbury, as is well known, was a centre of pilgrimage from all parts of the world. In most ancient times it was compared with Rome and Jerusalem:

"For y^e past dyeth not but slepeth, nay ffor perchaunce hit wakyth and hit ys they of y^e present who doe slepe and dreme. Hit ys euen as a ffar countrie ffrom y^e which they heare tydynges: Yet men will fare vnto londes ffarr distant and y^e weelth hath bene theyr guerdon euen soe wayteth euer ffor man y^e treasure of y^e wisdom of past tymes and yeeldeth her vnto y^e loue whych seekyth and ys ne wearyed; soe schal y^e memorie of oldetyme thinges be reuealyd and of Glaston hit ys sayd y^t when y^e tymes ben ripe y^e glorye schal return: May hit bee euen soe Gracious Prince and Princess yn youre tyme."

These verses were evolved one day in automatic writing. What their origin neither F.B.B. nor J.A. know—neither can recall having read them. Owing to their beauty and suggestiveness, they were incorporated in the Address in a form slightly modified from the original.

---

ON AUTOMATISM

The essential objection to the methods and practices of the spiritualists, and the ground of that instinctive repugnance which is normally felt towards these methods, is undoubtedly that they imply a surrender of the will and powers of self-control to activities which, for good or evil, are outside the personal sphere of the medium. The higher spiritual gifts are those in which the recipient acts as a conscious participator in the act of transmission. Between these two extremes is a class intermediate in nature, which is apparently recognised by St. Paul in the first Epistle to the Corinthians,6 the typical instance quoted being that of the "gift of tongues" whose exercise, whilst not discouraged by him, was nevertheless noted as of inferior value, since it did not tend always to the edification of the Church. But it was one phase of a form of inspiration then known, probably as a common phenomenon, and there can be little or no doubt that it was accompanied by others of a similar sort, and that inspirational writing was possibly one of the most ordinary of these. The one necessarily follows from the other. There is even a possible element of the kind to be weighed in any satisfying theory of Biblical inspiration, and the prophetic utterances connected therewith, and it will have to be considered fairly and apart from theological preconceptions.

It is clear from the chapter in Corinthians (1 Cor. xiv.) that in the exercise of the gift of tongues the speaker generally knew little or nothing of the meaning of what he was saying, though it is not necessary to assume that the utterance was beyond his control. But it implies the action of what, in modern language, has been spoken of as a supraliminal part of the mind, when, to quote the Apostle, "the understanding is unfruitful."

The exercise of automatism—a controlled automatism—in the production of writing seems to the author a reasonable parallel, and, where the result is capable of ready interpretation, there, according to the Apostolic dictum, is the hope of "edification" by its means. And for those prepared and ready for its exercise the gift of prophecy in those days awaited manifestation through them. And it is not necessary to suppose that the gifts then bestowed were unique, in the sense that they were afterwards to be withdrawn for all time. On the contrary, it is quite clear from Scripture itself that a great revival of them was to be expected in later days, as Peter says in Acts ii. 17, quoting the prophet Joel:

"And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out My Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams."

Are we not led to believe that there is no limitation to the "liberal gifts" of the spirit nor to the variety in the nature of the spiritual gifts which may be exercised? They may be concerned with any possible branch of mental activity, and all new ideas, whether in art, science, philosophy, politics, religion, or what not, must be held to be included. Nor need the manner or method of such inspiration concern us as of primary importance, however unusual such may chance to appear. The one test is the quality of its message, whether it be truthful or otherwise, edifying or lacking in helpful qualities. If a message of this nature be found true, it cannot be dictated by a spirit of falsehood; if sane, then not by insanity; if wholesome and moral, then not by a vicious or depraved intelligence. Men do not gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles.

The germination of new and profitable ideas in the mind may in this respect be brought about, firstly, by a suitable system of mental exercise and culture; secondly, by a willingness to hold back all mental preferences and preconceptions, and to restrain also the surface activities of the brain, so that the channel of pure "idea" which resides in the subconscious mind may be maintained, and the finer activities allowed to percolate. Then surely may be hoped for the reaction of those energies sent forth by previous effort of the mind and will, and ideas will flow back, not singly and alone, but accompanied by a spiritual reinforcement which may include elements new and of great value, from sources beyond the ken of the individual mind.

These new elements may be of all conceivable kinds, moving instinct, intuition, imagination, affection, or will. They may be vague and abstract, or tinged, as in dreams, with a vivid sense of personality; dispassionate or pulsing with new enthusiasms; lighting the intelligence, or moving in the dark region of the subliminal mind—in this case perhaps incapable of being evoked save by automatism or the telepathy of other minds. From some inward and mysterious fount they come, borne in upon us by dynamic impulse carrying with it the fruition of memories and experiences long dormant and inaccessible to us, though within the range of the spiritual intelligence which is the Directive power. Man is a very complex being, and although, spiritually speaking, he lives and acts in relation with his fellow-men in, and by virtue of, his memories, personal and ancestral—for what are character and conscience but the fruition of all those memories and experiences which are his own or those of every pre-natal element in him?—yet, may it not be that when released from physical conditions, as at death, there will take place some dissociation of the strata of his personality, the mere brain-record, the husk, the mechanism of his memories of common things, being scattered as the chaff, or shaken off as a discarded coat, whilst their fruit is garnered as new spiritual power and knowledge in the soul's Æonial treasury?

---

SOME NOTES ON THE SCRIPT AND ITS PUBLICATION

The decision to publish these writings was formed after much careful weighing of all reasons for and against, and their issue at the present juncture was largely influenced by the feeling that public interest in such matters had greatly ripened since the war, and that the fruits of the author's experiment should not be withheld, since they might serve to direct that interest into a new and perhaps profitable channel.

The script produced during the fairly long period of time (from the end of 1907 to 1911, and again in 1912 and more recently) was obtained under varying conditions, and was of very varied quality. A large proportion had reference to Glastonbury and to monastic affairs and history, and of this only a part would claim to possess any sort of evidential value. Some was of private interest only, and would be useless for publication. Occasionally the attempted communication was a failure. In a few cases there were noted some very obvious misstatements. The most serious of these was in the measures first given for the Edgar Chapel, "Et Capella extensit 30 virgas ad orientem et viginti virgas in latitudine(m)." A "virga" is a yard. The script was very obscure, and the measure was asked for again, with the result that "quinquaginta virgas" was written. A third time the confirmation was sought, and this time the "30 virgas" was repeated. "Quinquaginta" (50) was obviously a mistake, but the repetition of the 30 virgas, though indicating a length vastly in excess of anything we had ever thought possible for this chapel, made one less inclined to dismiss it without further attention. The "viginti virgas" given once for the width seemed quite out of the question. And as the event proved, no measure approaching 20 yards for the extreme width of the chapel could then be shown to have existed. It appeared absurd, and was then and there ruled out, together with the inconsistent and excessive "quinquaginta virgas" of length.7 This occurred at the close of the first sitting, which had been a long one. The writing was becoming less clear; the power was failing, and the sitters beginning to feel weary.

No further attempt was therefore made at the time to elucidate the measures, but it was resolved to try again on a subsequent occasion. There was a very cold spell in the early winter of 1907-8, and the attempts during this period were mostly failures. On the 13th December the sitting was abandoned for this reason. Another on the 21st produced nothing satisfactory. Again, on the 3rd January, 1908, when the cold was at its height, only a few cramped and uncertain words could be obtained, in which these were traced:

"Frigidus sum ... memoria oportet nullum ... nescio quid aut quo8 fecimus scriptum...."

Another and much more important cause of failure must now be noted. About the beginning of 1908 certain circumstances of a rather anxious and trying nature were affecting one of the sitters. This produced a preoccupation of mind unfavourable to the production of automatic writing; and it seems a well-established rule that the sitters' minds must be placid and their mood quiescent to obtain the best results. On the 30th January, 1908, a further attempt was made to obtain writing, but with entire lack of success from this cause, and all that was worth recording was a few words, ending with the following: "Eschew self. Something clogs the tones. Search yourselves straitly."

It was not until the 19th of February that any further really satisfactory results were attained, and at this sitting the unspoken desire of the sitters was met and a detailed description of the Edgar Chapel given, including its outside measure of width—namely, 34 feet. But it was not until Sitting XXXII. on the 16th June that the final confirmation came. This was in answer to a question, and it was given as follows:

"The width ye shall find is twenty and seven, and outside, thirty and four, so we remember.—BEERE ABBAS."

At the date of this sitting, the west wall of the chapel had been located, but its length not yet ascertained, so that there was nothing to guide opinion as to this save what could be inferred from the position of the small section opened, which showed it to be probably about 20 feet in the clear of the footings, if placed centrally with the quire. Then, in response to the further question, What was the clear internal length of the chapel? came the reply,

"Wee laid downe seventy and two, but they builded longer."

And the veridical nature of these figures was shown by later knowledge. (See Table, p. 76.)

But to return to the subject of errors. At Sitting XXXVI., on the 19th September, 1908, there was given the story of a Saxon Earl, one Eawulf, or Eanwulf, who was slain by a certain Radulphus, Norman knight of the time of Turstin, first Norman Abbot. The story is quite a good one and contains what appears to be veridical matter, but it is marred by a peculiarity. Halfway through the script a strange mistake is noted. The name of Turstin is substituted for Radulphus, and the script says, "Eawulf and Turstinus did fight, and the Norman did slay the Saxon." Now such an error is tiresome, as it spoils the clearness of the story. Yet, in another way, it is interesting, for the light that it throws on the mechanical action of the brain as the probable source of error in automatic writing or speaking.

It is a fact well known to those who are called upon to speak in public, or who are engaged in literary work, that unless the attention be fixed and concentrated on the subject in hand, the brain will act mechanically, causing repetition of any word recently impressed on the mental tympanum, and such word may easily be substituted for another. Where there is fatigue, this may happen very easily. In the case of automatic writing, the mind is relaxed, and there is probably a predisposition to such errors. The example given seems a proof of it. It seems, indeed, a matter for surprise that such mistakes are not more numerous in the script obtained by us. On the contrary, another phenomenon has been frequently observed in connection with it. This is, that at the commencement of a sitting the thread of a former communication, broken by the termination of a previous sÉance, would be resumed almost as though no interval of time had elapsed.

It had been intended in the present work that only the veridical matter concerning the Edgar Chapel should appear in print; but the scope was enlarged by the inclusion of Johannes, whose personality seemed attractive. Later, it was decided to allow the remarkable reminiscence of the "Loretto" Chapel also to see the light of day, in anticipation of further knowledge. But readers will understand that nothing like a wholesale reproduction of the script in the author's possession would be possible. At the same time it may be clearly stated that in what is reserved there is nothing which contradicts or negatives the value of what is given, and of this the fact that the author has been able with success to follow out the indications given may be held sufficient warrant.

No apology seems needed for the quality of the "Latin" in the script, which is very much what one might imagine to be the colloquial jargon of illiterate members of the community, whose knowledge of the tongue would be chiefly confined to the service-books, or what they understood of them.

The author would here record his indebtedness to his friend J.A., not only for that cordial interest and co-operation without which the new line of research could not have been undertaken, nor this work have seen the light of day; but also for the verses he has written on the subject of Plate III., and on the final Envoi. His thanks are also due to Miss A. M. Buckton for her sonnet (Plate I.) and for many valued suggestions; to Mr. T. H. Felton for his permission to use material from the Cannon MS.; to the Council of the Somerset ArchÆological Society for loan of several blocks (including Plate II.); and to Mr. Edward Everard for the loan of Coney's and Stukeley's plates; also to Mr. Everard Feilding for his constant interest in the work and many helpful suggestions.

---

NARRATIVE OF THE WRITINGS

It was on the 7th of November that F.B.B. and J.A. had their first sitting for the purpose of furthering the Glastonbury research. This took place at 4.30 p.m. in F.B.B.'s office. J.A. held a pencil, F.B.B. provided foolscap paper, which he steadied with his left hand, whilst placing his right lightly on the back of J.A.'s, so that his fingers lay evenly across its surface.

F.B.B. started by asking the question, as though addressed to some other person:

"Can you tell us anything about Glastonbury?"

J.A.'s fingers began to move, and one or two lines of small irregular writing were traced on the paper. He did not see what was written, nor did F.B.B. decipher it until complete. The agreed method was to remain passive, avoid concentration of the mind on the subject of the writing, and to talk casually of other and indifferent matters, and this was done. The writing turned out to be a sort of abstract dictum—viz.:

"All knowledge is eternal and is available to mental sympathy."

Then followed:

"I was not in sympathy with monks—I cannot find a monk yet."

F.B.B. suggested that one of their living monk-friends might be a sympathetic link, and the writing was resumed. After a short interval J.A.'s hand moved and began to trace a line, ultimately making a drawing which on inspection looked like a recumbent cross, but which when examined proved to be a fairly correct outline of the main features of the Abbey Church traced by a single continuous line, but at the east was a long rectangular addition, nearly as long again as the quire, and this was given in a double line as though to emphasise it. Down the middle of the plan were written the words—

"Gulielmus Monachus." (See Fig. 4.)

Next followed what appeared to be an elaborate plan of the great enclosure of the Abbey Church, with a sketch of a central tower, with square pinnacled top, a west front or gabled faÇade, with two peaked turrets and a large arched light between. Across the middle of the surrounding enclosure a line was drawn, and at one point something like an ornamental turret with two curved diverging lines below appeared, and the words, "linea bifurcata"9 were written. Then something looking like a gabled building was sketched, from which a line was traced to two rows of arches, perhaps representing a cloister, and thence another straight line to a drawing recognised as being intended for St. Mary's Chapel, and approaching it from the south. The plan of the chapel showed a large square projection (? turret) on the south, and two doors on the north side.

Note.—The drawing has all the marks of a blindfold tracing. The line is continuous, commencing at A, and the north transept is first drawn, very small. Next the line runs east, and the north-east angle of the retro-quire is traced, and, following this, the Edgar Chapel, extending east for about half the length of the quire. Here the line is drawn three times over, as though to emphasise the feature, and it then returns over the old ground, the north transept being again drawn, but larger and further removed, and the whole outline of the church is completed, to the junction south-west of the Edgar Chapel, ending with the signature Gulielmus Monachus (William the Monk).

Q. (by F.B.B.). "What does this drawing represent?"

A. "Guest Hall ... St. Maria Capella ... Rolf monachus."

The first drawing was now examined, and both F.B.B. and J.A. expressed a view unfavourable to the possibility of so large a chapel at the east of the church. It was resolved to try again.

F.B.B. "Please give us a more careful drawing of the chapel sketched just now at the east end of the great church."

In reply, a new sketch of the rectangular chapel was given (see Fig. 5), with an attempt to indicate the position of two smaller chapels on the north. Again the line was drawn double, and below was written the following, in cramped characters not easy to decipher:

"Capella St. Edgar. Abbas Beere fecit hanc capellam Beati Edgari ... martyri et hic edificavit vel fecit voltam ... fecit voltam petriam quod vocatur quadripartus sed Abbas Whitting ... destruxit ... et restoravit eam cum nov ... multipart ... nescimus eam quod vocatur.

"Portus10 introitus post reredos post altarium quinque passuum et capella extensit 30 virgas ad orientem et (? viginti)11 in latitudine cum fen (?) ... (?)."

F.B.B. "Please repeat; we cannot read this."

(Repeated.) "Quinquaginta12 virgas et fenestrae transomatae."

The line starts at the east, and again it is repeated for emphasis. The chapel is shown at first, clear of the east wall, but there is a subsequent loss of position which brings the little chapels beyond their prescribed limit and makes the plan appear confused. Below is written "Capella St. Edgar, Abbas Beere fecit hanc capellam" (Chapel of Saint Edgar, Abbot Beere built this chapel).

F.B.B. "Please give length again."

A. "30 virgas ... et fenestrae (cum) lapide horizontali quod vocatur transome et vitrea azurea; et fecit altarium ornat(um) cum auro et argento et ... et tumba ante altarium gloriosa aedificavit ad memoriam Sanct ... Edgar...."

F.B.B. "Which Abbot did this?"

A. "Ricar(d)us Whitting.... Ego Johannes Bryant monachus et lapidator."

This concluded the sitting.

SITTING II. 11th November, 1907, 1 p.m.

"The material influences were at fault when last ... I think active influences were overpowering my will. Those monks were anxious to communicate.... They want you to know about the Abbey. They say the times are now ripe for the glory to return and the curse is departing. I do not know about these things. They have been wishing to influence you for a long time, and they have been (endeavouring to?) reproduce things in your minds."

Here the influence changes.

"Benedicite. Go unto Glaston soon. Gloria reddenda antiqua. Laus Deo in saecula seculorum. Nubes evaserunt ... memoria rerum manet et red ... Ecclesia catholica extensit et comprehensit latera (sic,? latentia) vera et res occultas sapientibus.

"JOHANNES."

SITTING III. 13th November, 1907.

Writing commenced without any direction by sitters.

"I think I am wrong in some things. Other influences cross my own.... Those monks are trying to make themselves felt by you both. Why do they want to talk Latin?... Why can't they talk English?... Benedicite. Johannes.... It is difficult to talk in Latin tongue (repeated, being illegible). Seems just as difficult to talk in Latin language."

"Ye names of builded things are very hard in Latin tongue—transome, fanne tracery, and the like. My son, thou canst not understande. Wee wold speak in the Englyshe tongue. Wee saide that ye volte was multipartite yt was fannes olde style in ye este ende of ye choire and ye newe volt in Edgares chappel.... Glosterfannes (repeated). Fannes ... (again) yclept fanne ... Johannes lap ... mason."

Q. "What is meant by 'lap mason'?"

A. "Lapidator ... stonemason."

Having this signature "Johannes" now again repeated, F.B.B. felt curious to know how far this dramatisation or memory of a personality might be developed.

Q. by F.F.B. "Tell us more about yourself."

A. "I ... died in 1533." (Repeated because almost illegible.) "Yn 1533 obitus ... curator capellae et laborans in mea ecclesia pro amore ecclesiae Dei ... sculptans et supervisor ... yn Henricum septem13 ... anno 1497 et defunctus anno 1533."

NOTE ON THE FIRST THREE SITTINGS.

We observe in these communications an individual tone, as of a directing influence, at first manifesting without intermediate links, but almost immediately yielding place to the monkish elements introducing themselves as "Gulielmus Monachus," "Rolf Monachus," and "Johannes Bryant." There appears something like a clash of intention, a strain which reacts on the physical condition of the sitters, and which seems to account for the rapid exhaustion of power towards the end of the first sitting, and the consequent lack of clearness and consistency in the results.

In the second sitting the directive agency speaks of the monks as "active influences"—an expression to be noted. And it is explained that "the material influences were at fault." Then in the third sitting we get, "I think I am wrong in some things. Other influences cross my own."

It seems very much like a man trying to make a trunk call on a telephone, who is worried because the local office will either persist in switching him off at critical moments, or else because the wires are out of order and imperfectly isolated, so that fragments of other conversation are interjected.

When we come to consider the matter of the monkish communications, under the name Johannes, we are at once confronted by the question, "Is this a piece of actual experience transmitted by a real personality, or are we in contact with a larger field of memory, a cosmic record latent, yet living (the "eternal knowledge" of the first writing we record), and able to find expression in human terms related to the subject before us, by the aid of something furnished by the culture of our own minds, and by the aid of a certain power of mental sympathy which allows such records to be sensed and articulated?"

As to this, it is too early to dogmatise, but in either case room must be left for the presence of a Directive Power accessible to man, capable of stimulating and energising dormant consciousness, and directing it into such channels as man has developed for its reception and expression.

SITTING IV. 19th November, 1907.

The result was interesting, but contained nothing important as regards the Abbey.

SITTING V. 22nd November, 1907.

A further plan was produced of the general range of Abbey buildings, signed "Johannes." This was followed by a short script as here given:

"When you dig, excavate the pillars of the crypt, six feet below the grass—they will give you a clue. The direction of the walls ... eastwards (this word might almost as easily have been 'westwards,' or even 'outwards,' and it was so ill written that nothing could be decided from it) ... was at an angle ... clothyards twenty seven long, nineteen wide."

It would have been just as easy to read the last as "thirteen." The pencilled original of the plan is preserved, but not the script, as it was not regarded as of value at the time, but the mention of the "walls at an angle," referring, as it would appear, to some part of the chapel whose dimensions are in the context, is an interesting point.

The mention of the crypt seemed simply the mentality of the sitters—a reflex of their study of Wild's plan. It is again referred to, however, in later writings.

SITTING VI. 26th November, 1907.

F.B.B. "Perhaps Johannes will tell us something more?"

A. "Johannes Bryant is striving for the glory of Glaston. There is much under the grass deep down and unrifled. The east of St. Mary's has a vault under the stairs and under the nave there are vaults14—the destroyers feared, and the ruin of the walls hid the entrance in. Under the tower the volt is perfect, and many names of those buried therein very deep down."

Q. "Where should we commence to dig?"

A. "The east end. Seek for the pillars, and the wall(s) at an angle. The foundations are deep."

SITTING IX. 30th December, 1907.

Commencement of writing quite illegible.

"... (the) end of the time approaches. The year is big with issues and Glastonbury will engage much of your attention....

"JOHANNES, MONACHUS."

"Wait, and the course will open in the spring. You will learn as you proceed. We have much to do this season...."

"... The chapel of Our Lady of Glaston—type of spiritual things which are not manifest to you. The changes need not alarm you. The reconstructions will be more perfect. Let the State fall in ruins and the outward garments of Faith perish—fear not!"

"... For greater things will rise into being—great nations and great ideals. We work for it. Be willing, and strive not against the tide. Up on the crest and prosper. All will work for the best.... The spark will live thro' the rains and re-light dead fires, fire which is still fire but with purer flame. We cannot hasten the time, but it is sure and is not delayed. You are between two influences. Earth and spirit mingle not. Losing earthly grasp leaves you without earthly support. Hold fast to earth's duties. Work as men for man's meat. Keep open ears for spiritual help and whisperings. Assimilate and combine both forces. Stand in the market-place and cry your wares, but listen for the still small voice in the silence of your chamber. Work in the sun. Listen in the starlight...."

Both F.B.B. and J.A. expressed a good deal of surprise at the nature of the first part of this communication, as any idea of impending revolution in Church or State had been utterly remote from our minds and not in any way the subject of conversation. The passage was an intrusion and a puzzle. But we did not regard it as of any special interest; more as a curiosity for which a psychological explanation was lacking.

Later there occurred more such intrusions, pointing with increasing definiteness to the nature of that which we were warned to anticipate, but they belong to another story and have no connection with the discovery of the Edgar Chapel. Hence the record of many sittings will be omitted, and we pass to the nineteenth, held 19th February, 1908, after a visit to the Abbey. F.B.B. had not yet received his appointment, but was steadily preparing, and at the moment was engaged in working out the probable appearance of the approaches to the central chapel of the retro-quire, and the work of Bere's time had been discussed.

N.B.—All the 1907 sittings were at Bristol. The next to be recorded (Sitting XIX.) was held at Glastonbury.

SITTING XIX. 19th February, 1908. At Glaston

"The arche is flatte—three ells from side to side—ten feet high—all panellae. All ye midst of ye est ende was panellae and the grete chappell was15 ...

"... we have told you long tyme sins—panellae everywhere ... thin walls and poore foundations in the new work.

"Two capellae north and south and between them a greate space with a tall doore in the midst, of four centres, all panelled under ye fann-tracery over ye lintel. And there were two altares on either side and much carven woode very blacke which was took away for the panellae. And the holes in ye walls were covered with the panellae so that they shewed not, and yt was all of stone very white and faire and in ye doore was a greate stairway with two windowes on either hand that did rise one above the other of equal height above ye stairway.... And ye stairway was divided in ye midst by a grete rail of stone so that they who went upp might not meet with they who came down ye said stair.

"And beyond rose a Capella of Edgar ye sainte, faire and high with grete windowes with transomes and between ye windowes were pillars as panellae the whych did holde ye roofe of stone vaultid very faire in panellae which were fanwise very fine much like carven yvorie and carvings ypainted in ye bosses and in ye spandrels and there was a grete windowe in ye est parte of eight lights all ye arches and ye roofe being flatte as of the period and the chamber was yflagged with tiles of many colours and in ye midst was a tumbe of silver and precious stones and pictures in the panellae over against ye est window. And ye chamber was in length seventy feet in four bayes and in width it was thirty and foure16 ... and the walls were thin and all of faire squared stone and newe carven soe that they who did destroy this ... first, even before the great church.

"And soe hyt was not. There were faire steppes of marble and ye fannes over ye doore did hold a lyttel galerie the whych did open close on ye stairway looking down on them that passed there and a lytell windowe was above for to lyte ye chapell in ye church at back of ye two altares for hyt was darke.

"Forty and two feete was the hight of ye newe chapelle and yt was ybuttressed with faire buttresses and walls slantwise at ye cornere."

There appears throughout this communication a tendency to older forms of spelling never quite achieved, and constantly slipping back into the normal. The phrasing seems more consistently old-fashioned.

Note the further reference to "walls slantwise at ye cornere," recalling the "walls at an angle" mentioned in an earlier script.

SITTING XXIV. 5th March, 1908.

"... Wold I could tell you of the great Est window in the gabell. It is hard to say its many parts but ye shall see it a noon. (This is of the quire.—F.B.B.)

"The buildings on the south side of the east end were two. One was a chapell, the other for the priest to robe in.

"Saint Edgar was buried in the window where ye see the cross. Afterwards Beer moved him to the new chapell that he builded. Chapell was like unto Wells but more faire."

This obviously alludes to Bishop Stillington's Chapel, a fan-vaulted structure of rich sixteenth-century work, now destroyed.

SITTING XXV. 10th March, 1908.

F.B.B. obtained the appointment as representative of the Somerset ArchÆological Society, with licence to excavate, in the month of May, 1908.

SITTING XXVII. 17th March, 1908. At Bristol.

"The time is ripe for the stones to be studied. Go ye soone."

"The corbel-stones are full large." (This refers to a sketch reconstruction of the transept wall by F.B.B.) "Put ye ten between each buttress."

Q. "Is the parapet right?"

A. "The parapet is right."

Q. "What about the quire vaulting shown?"

A. "Ye volte is welnigh righte for what ye see, but over Arthur's tombe to the Est window it was fayrer and much ygilt soe that the lightes of the Altar shold shine thereon and make a glory."

"Looke for ye ribs of the choir, plain ones and carven, and ye bosses. Some be at the East End. Enow has been left from the destroyer, just enow and no more: it was so ordained lest they should destroy for ever. Make ye yourselves a scheme—enow left everywhere."

"Why destroyed they not the walls that came to hande? They cared not, but indeed they left it and digged deepe for stones.

"They could not an they would."

"Why left they the altar stones when they might have digged up? say, why?"

Q. "You say, 'Saxon, Norman, and Native, all strive together for the glory of Glaston.' Can you put us in touch with any of these early influences?"

A. "What wold they tell ye? Their works were rude, and have departed. The Abbey is not of them—nothing save certain books—and we wold that the books were againe, only the Church as it was wont to be. We who speke are of its different orders: Gulielmus of old tyme, and Johannes later, and he who builded last—our Abbot Beere. What more is needed? Wee point the way; to you it is to follow, and all that is needed is given you. Worke wyth brain and handes, and all is there. So it is ordained, for what ye desire, that is good that ye shall strive for. Wee worked in our day: ye must work in yours. Ne work, ne wages,—ne what you call honour."

Q. "It is St. Patrick's Day to-day. Can you tell us anything of his time and of his work, and St. Brigit's? No doubt there was much in the great Library of the Abbey."

A. "Olde legends, meet for the people—but what value? They were, and didde, much among the heathen. We know not more, save that their workes were old and very dry to rede." (This passage is signed with a cross in a circle, and a capital letter, not clearly identified.)

Q. "Please write your name."

A. "Reginaldus, qui obiit 1214—one thousand, two hundred and 14."

The identity of this Reginald is not clear. Bishop Reginald of Wells, who consecrated the Chapel of St. Mary at Glastonbury, died in 1191 according to the chronicles. The Chapel is said to have been completed in 1216.

The script has been retraced, as it was done in soft pencil and could not be preserved.

SITTING XXIX. 20th April, 1908.

"Gloria in excelsis tibi Deo. Pax vobiscum, filii.

"The time is near. Dig well and those things which ye seek shall be given you but serche carefully lest ye eradicate those things that be left for your guidance....

"... the est end will be the first, and then ye shall find proof of ye goodly towers at ye west end.17 Serche the ruins for the way they were finished. There is much left to guide you...."

"... Influence man, and that which was before decreed shall aid you and they who are around you shall feel your influence and ours.

"In very truth it was a goodly church and it is said that ye of your time shall know what works we did pro gloria Dei.

"We were mistaken in some things—all men are—but the thought that made the great church of Glaston was not bounded by ye mind and that thought must live and prevail.

"Move, work, and unceasingly persist, and in time there will be a place for what once was and ye shall know its buildings yet again as they were wont to be. The lesser works first: and then cometh one who will build the great church—a son of Glaston from beyond the sea. Even now he waits and watches. We wait and watch and hope with the knowledge that comes to men on the other side. The church is always the church, and in the great schema of the world we come soon and our instrument Glaston shall find a mighty place.... Thus Johannes saith."

At this point the sequence of the writing is broken by the story of Johannes going a-fishing, and lingering in the lanes. This we give in Part II.

Q. "We should like to know something of the nature of the old foundations which were found under the Quire in the 1904 excavations, also whether any light can be thrown upon the subterranean piers, their date and purpose?"

"... The window was straight as we knew it, but18 was somewhat changed by Abbot Beere when he made the chapell. Ye are right about ye end walls. Johannes saw to the building thereof for they were five years before they builded the last part because there was nothing in the coffers—so the church was perfect without the new parts.

"What was it Beere performed? We will remember. The olde church had a chapell going east like to Edgar's and the corners were cut off most like. The foundations ye mean remain. We know but that which we heard and that which they who followed after did, we know not, save only we can enquire.

"Beere, Abbot, is not with us now. He has a work to perform. There are others who build in your England and he hath to lead them as they should be led. They who builded in our day and were masters, lead ye now.

"ROBERT. ANNO 1334. GLASTON."

NOTE ON SITTING XXIX.

The blending of influences is again very marked, but the dominant thought is that of one of the inmates of the great abbatial House. The signature "Robert" (anno 1334) does not help us. This was the year that witnessed the election of John de Breynton as Abbot, vice Adam de Sodbury, and it was an era of great building activities. But Robert speaks, or is made to speak, for those of an era two hundred years later, or nearly, and it is strange to find a voice from the fourteenth century recalling the "window" as it then was, and going on to describe alterations made at the beginning of the sixteenth.

And the allusion to Abbot Beere's living influence is of peculiar interest. Among the best modern exponents of the Gothic English styles, the call of the past, and the influence of the past, is vital as an element in their work, and it is precisely in the measure in which they are able to translate the spirit of the past, that they can claim inspiration in what they strive to produce.19 Occasionally a sincere student will obtain some mental pictures of a bygone time of singular clearness and fidelity, whence, he knows not; only that they are spontaneously apparent to him when in a state of mental passivity after intellectual exertion in the particular direction needed. It may be of interest here to quote an experience once related to the writer by an old friend, W., now retired from practice, but who in the 80's of the last century was responsible for a good deal of scholarly restoration work in the west country. W. was very partial to the Early English forms, and if he had a fault, it was the fault of his day, when restorers were a little ruthless, as we should think nowadays, in substituting Early English detail for the fifteenth century "vernacular" of the district. On one occasion he was called upon to undertake "restoration"—which, in this case, meant a partial rebuilding—of a decayed church in the very decayed town of I. The south wall of the nave, a work of the ordinary "Perpendicular" sort, had to be rebuilt, and he had to construct a new arcade for the aisle adjoining. Somehow he felt disinclined to do this in the fifteenth-century style, but was prompted to design afresh, in the manner of the thirteenth. And for his pillars he imagined a form of capital having rather a complex moulding. There was nothing visible to guide him, but it appealed to him as suitable. Nor was it a local type—at least, this would be the writer's recollection of the impression he derived from the drawing which W. showed him.

The capitals were provided of this pattern, the old wall was pulled down, and hidden within it and built into its substance was found a pier-capital of a moulding identical in detail. I myself was satisfied that he had never seen any particle of this early work, and he allows me to retell the story here. As to the story of Johannes, the truant monk and nature-lover, it takes the form of an interpretation of his memory-record by another. Whether we are dealing with a singularly vivid imaginative picture or with the personality of a man no one can really decide. But later examples will elucidate the part he plays in the scheme, and it is one of much interest from the psychological point of view.

SITTING XXIX.—Continued. 20th April, 1908.

"Ye crypt was mere a chamber under the stairs and it was at the west end of the chapel. It was not for sepulture and it is gone long syne by reason of the fall of the floor of ye chapel.

"Yt wasne underground and was low—a man might hardly walk sans stooping."

The work of excavation commenced shortly after the receipt of this communication.

SITTING XXXII. 16th June, 1908 (after excavation No. 4).

"All is well. We direct your course and will continue. There is some difficulty and ye must use your own intelligence. There are two chapels and ye must try and judge old and new. The scheme of Abbot Monington gave one, and under the church are remains yet older. The pillar of many shafts20 was in the midst between the buttress and the chapel wall, and the great window needed the buttress to hold hym up. Seek out the choir wall, where the arches were behind the altar, and it will be plaine. Digge for the vestries on the south choir wall—there is somewhat left here, and there is alsoe a chantry under the window by the crosse.21

"Judge not the wall by the foundations thereof. They are mighty but—wee have told you—thin walls were over them.22

"Search far for the est end of Edgar's Chapel. It is but little damaged. S. Mary and S. Andrew's Chapels, over the ends of ye choir aisles."

The only reminiscence of a retro-chapel is to be found in the plan of the Abbey embodied in Phelps's Somerset, reproduced by Warner. Phelps shows a dotted-line extension of the east wall of the retro-quire of nearly the same projection as Willis's plan, but in this case it ends with a semicircle—a feature impossible for anything but a Norman chapel, which here would be out of the question. In a corner of Phelps's plan appears a similar diagram, but with the rectangular part much lengthened. Both are lettered "F," and the reference table gives "F" = Lady's Chapel. Warner copies this plan, calling this latter one "the Chapel according to its original dimensions." Neither F.B.B. nor J.A. had at that time seen Warner's copy of Phelps's plan, because the copy of Warner accessible to them in the Bristol Public Library had lost this sheet. But owing to the general haziness of the plan, and its numerous inaccuracies, and the entirely impossible suggestion of a semicircular apse (in a dotted-line figure), as well as owing to the suggestion "Lady's Chapel," these records had proved the reverse of illuminating, save as inspiring a guess that the original and shorter quire might very likely have been furnished with a Lady Chapel, for use in the remote days, before the western chapel of St. Mary had been opened up and thrown into the general series by the inclusion of the "Galilee"—a work of the fourteenth century, and that this Lady Chapel had been ultimately shorn of the greater part of its length by its absorption into the new retro-quire, what time Abbot Monington caused the quire to be lengthened by two bays (about 40 feet) temp. 1344 or thereabouts. Such an hypothesis would entail the deduction that after the lengthening of the retro-quire in the fourteenth century, there would remain at the east end a relatively short projection—say, of 12 feet or so—and some such reasoning may well have inspired Willis's scheme (see his plan in the Architectural History of Glastonbury Abbey), though he rightly rejected the semicircle as an eastern finish.

Q. "Was there any crypt under Edgar's Chapel? What were the clear dimensions of the chapel itself?"

A. "The cript is fallen in, but the clay is not the old clay. Clear out the midst thereof, and many fragments be there. The width ye shall find is twenty and seven, and outside, thirty and four, so we remember.

"BEERE, Abbas."

Q. "What was the clear internal length of the chapel?"

A. "Wee laid down seventy and two, but they builded longer, and he who followed made new schemes for a certaine roofe in golde and crimson, very cunning. Ye must use your talents, lest they weaken. Piece by piece ye shall rebuild it and there is enow, I wot, for ye.

"Digge east beyond the beds of feathered grasses. There was a passage to the east doore in ye walle to the streete. In the midst it remaineth. There was a lodging where now is the great howse, and wee loved passages. They were safe, and the priesthood loveth secret places. There is somewhat in us that loveth mystical things, so we tell not all, but leave it to the love which seeketh and is not wearied."23

At the time of this writing, only the west end of the chapel had been excavated, so that the length was still a matter of complete doubt. A massive wall running north and south had been found just about in the position of that shown as a projection in Willis's plan—namely, about 12 feet east of the walls of the retro-quire, and on the farther side of this the foundations commenced at a much higher level, indicative of a later extension by Bere from this point onwards. And the whole of this cross-wall must have been Bere's work, for it ran north and south for some 32 feet, and beyond that came the projection of its buttresses. When the continuation walls of the chapel to the east were further revealed, the clear width between their footings was about 18 feet, and as they were each about 6 feet 6 inches in width, the whole was not quite 32. So the suggestion in the script of a clear internal width to this chapel of 27 feet is by no means improbable if measured into the window recesses. As to the length given (72 feet), a total of 90 had already been spoken of, so that the 72 must represent the rectangular portion of the chapel, plus either the antechapel or the eastward extension only, either of which give this approximate total.

As afterwards revealed (see plan in Som. Arch. Soc. Proc. for 1908), the correspondence proved to be faithful, as the scale shows. Measure from the interior of the east wall of the retro-quire, which will include all the space within the antechapel of Bere's work, eastwards to the end of his rectangular walls, and the whole is close on 72 feet—viz., 12 + 5 + 50 + 5 in approximate measures.

There were several clumps of pampas grass on the high bank, but farther east than our advance at the moment. Another fragment of script, unfortunately now lost, again referred to one of the clumps on the south side, as being just west of a large mass of masonry. This was correct. The large mass in question is that which stands up high above the rest at the south-east angle of the rectangular chapel. Again, we have the curious and unusual suggestion of an east door to the chapel (compare the "Portus introitus post reredos," etc.). When, long subsequently, the two inclined walls of the apse were revealed, the gap in the middle was remarked. The footing on the north side of the eastern gap was cut squarely off, and evidently by intention, and was thus strongly suggestive of a doorway or archway here.

In "the walle to the streete" we may perhaps discern an explanation of the continuation of the angular wall on the south, which runs on for a distance not yet ascertained in the direction of the upper part of the town, and would have passed near the building which formerly occupied the site of the present Abbey House.

"Use your talents. Wee guide. It is meet. Noe worke, noe wage. All workes well. This wee tell you. Ledde was on the roofe—ne stones, the wych cometh from meaner buildings elsewhere. The stone tiles were high roofes but ye chappell was flatte or thereabouts.

"As how think ye the est ende would have looked to them who came from the green pathe in the wall?

"... and ye can see right well. Dig deeper: it needeth. Fear not. It will be clear to you ere another night fall. Even yet there is somewhat east and south to finde. Ye are skilled to find the stones which we put there. All are of the chapelle that ye have noted.

"Benedicite.
"WHYTTINGE, nuper Abbas."

It was not until several months later that the whole of Bere's rectangular chapel was disclosed. The bank increased in height as we proceeded east. But the farther we went, the more stone we found on the south side, until at last, at the south-east corner, a block of solid masonry was uncovered which rose several feet above the general level. And to the south of the last two buttresses on this side there came to light the trench or matrix of a small additional building, a chantry or a sacristy. These trenches were cleared and filled with solid concrete to preserve the record of the lost walls, which must otherwise have perished through the falling-in of the loose and crumbling earth.

SITTING XXXVI. 9th October, 1908.

"Ye must see owre old manor of Sharpham. There is somewhat for you there. Search it diligently, and the walls around.

"Ye church ye have found is ye one which Ina builded and it was yjoined to the olde churche by a timber passage-way and many steppys. Yt had no towre, but as it were the short arms of a crosse and ye pillars were greate and rounde as ye see. (This alludes to an excavation in the nave.)

"Ye roofe was woode and it was rough and rude, ne like unto our church of St. Mary.

"Would ye could digge around ye altare,24 for there ye will find much black marble of the style ye call 'decorated.'

"We wold make ye see it—square, and as it were square buttresses with canopies and imagery, full forty feet in height, somewhat level in ye toppe, like a screene, and in ye midst a faire canopy of gilded stone in width four feet and full of fifteen feet in height; and in front an image of Our Lady in gold and scarlet robes holding in her hands the Christ and a sceptre of power. On either side two doors with steppys leading down to the path for processions behind ye altare. Can ye not see it? Black stone and images, and guilding in the hollow places under the ornaments. On ye south side, as we deem it, ye will find most of ye pieces and even ye tombes of Arthur and of ye two saints Edgar25 (sic) all black stone with much guilding and ye effigies of ye Kinge and ye Queene with ye Lyons in blacke stone—nay, rather, ye Lyons were in light stone like ye bases of ye tombes.

"And ye grete east window in pannels like unto ye sides of ye choir, and very faire, with a balcony. Ye balcony was underneath ye window and from yt did lead the way to ye altare back where was an ymage of Saint Mary, of great value and very olde, which was saved from the fire long synce.

"Ego sum JOHANNES qui ex memoria rei dico—meminisco—dixi annorum 1492." (I am Johannes, who speak from memory of the matter. The time of which I spoke would be 1492, as I remember.)

SITTING XXXVII. 30th November, 1908.

"The ending of the chappel was at an angle, the sides makyng as it were a baye in the east wall there. The last bay to the east hayde an arche like unto a chancel arche and with a feather ornament, as hadde all the other arches; and the space beyond into the baye was as it were three fannes with thin pillars running up the angles and spreading toward the arche. In the three faces of the east wall were three windowes, and all this was faire made by Abbot Whitting, who lengthened Edgar's Chappel somewhat, to the extent of half a bay.... The fannes are flat which Whitting builded, and ye will see them how they fitted together.

"The lytell chantry was roofed in pannels by ... Beere, and ye have found the pieces, deep cut and faire—quatrefoil with lozenges, cuspings on either side, and ye roofe as was called 'barrel' shaped—ne fannes in ye chantry."

This script was obtained before the angular walls of the apse had been found. The description generally is quite a plausible one, and there is good reason for thinking that the apse would have been finished by the last Abbot (Whiting). Some stones of the fan-work were found at the end of the year. The "little chantry" would seem to refer to the projecting footings found between the last two buttresses on the south side. It compares again with Gloucester Lady Chapel, where such additions are found north and south of the fourth bay from the west.

Q. "Whence came the vaulting-rib, which we have found?"

A. "He went in the passage-way to Edgar's Chappel and the volting of like molding went with it—east of the arches behind the altare.

"Monington was used to what ye call 'decorated' and the choir roof wasne of the newe style—ye 'perpendicular,' but the other style done after Gloster fashion."

SITTING XXXVIII. 2nd December, 1908.

"Gulielmus monachus qui in area chori requiescet26 ... Reginaldus. Hee wots not what they didde but saith the olde procession path went round three corners and they builded the new window after hys tyme straight. Ye have found the old wall before Monington. I guess but doe not know.

"Gulielmus monk of Saint Benedict wold speke but he hath been long ded and cannot as he wold. He of Monington Abbas qui ... he did make the est end full square, that know I he didd, and in hym three arches and a grete screene ... soe it was in my day, that he who followed after did enlong the window and it was full weake and they rebuilded it.... He did build strong walls over ye lytell chapel of Our Ladye that then was and in them a new window and on either side he placed a walle which did continue the walls of the choire and did put in an arche and under hym a tombe on either side with the altar in the midst, and above the arche as it was two grete high windows, very narrow which did make on to the grete east window and wyth hym made a grete faire window which did light up all the choir and did fill it with glassen cleare and bright of many colours."

SITTING XXXIX. 5th December, 1908.

"Johannes wold speke. There is (somewhat) gone from us. The olde foundations were left and they did add to them. The walls at an angle were put in by Abbot Beere when he builded the chappell and enlarged the windows. We have told ye of the high windowes and the arche under wych the tombe(s) of Edgar (sic) one on either side—the Elder and the Younger. The arch was ycarven very faire and panellae did rise to ye roofe, and ye volte over the Est window was ydonne in fanne worke: likewise the eastern part of ye choire was in fannes wyth a great arch as soe it was donne with panellae between."

During the summer and autumn of 1908 the work of excavation had been steadily continued. By December practically the whole of the rectangular portion of Beere's chapel had been laid bare, and proved to be of four bays, in accordance with the script. The excavation of the antechapel entirely confirmed Willis's view of the divisions of the retro-quire, and, strange to say, justified his plan in regard to the length of the central projection, for it was abundantly clear from the appearance of the two flanking walls (or, rather, their foundations) that there had been an original projection here of the same extent as he showed, and that Beere had merely taken on at this point and started his new work with a massive cross-wall at a different level. The footings of the north and south walls of Beere's chapel were about 6 feet 6 inches broad and a little over 18 feet apart in the clear. The thin Perpendicular work above would normally stand rather over the outer margin of the footings to allow of the projecting piers supporting the fans of the roof, and this would entirely justify a computation of width approaching 27 feet clear into the recesses of windows. But the total internal length on the foundations between east and west footings measured 49 feet, a dimension in itself insufficient to justify the 70 feet claimed in the script, even if it were considered that part of the breadth on the west footing, and an even larger part on the east footing must be included in the interior area of the chapel. Possibly a further 6 feet or so might be allowed for these margins, making a total internal length for the rectangular chapel of 55 feet, to which another 15 feet must be added if the measurement of 70 feet given in the script were to be justified.

But the rectangular chapel ended off with a proper finish to the east, and the two return buttresses were well marked. At this point the digging had been very deep, as the level of the bank rises steadily from west to east, and we were now about 10 feet under the grass level. The rectangular end was cleared, and before us rose a sheer face of clay without trace of any continuance. Nothing had yet been seen of "walls at an angle," and the writer scanned the face of the clay many times, trying to detect any signs of disturbance or of a further junction of building, and so matters remained till the end of December.

In the meantime a report had been prepared for the annual volume of Proceedings of the Somerset Arch. Soc., and as by this time F.B.B. was fully persuaded that Hearne and Hollar are giving us fact when they state that the total length of the Abbey was 580 feet, he boldly drew a plan of the excavated chapel with an addition in dotted lines, making out the requisite dimension and showing a polygonal annexe or apse, and this he caused to be published in the 1908 Proceedings.27

During the Christmas holidays F.B.B. again visited the site, and on a bright sunny day looked at the clay bank, and for the first time detected a small squarish patch of pale brown discoloration in the clay at a level much higher than the footings of the chapel. He caused the face to be cut into at this point, which was nearly opposite the southern return buttress, and at a point about 2 feet within the clay face the stump of a wall appeared. This was traced and proved to run north-east at an angle of 67 degrees from the north and south axis of the chapel.

The ground was opened in the corresponding position on the north side, and here a trench was found well and truly cut in the clay, and filled with debris of sixteenth-century freestone, tile, and glass fragments, chiefly of painted work, and largely of azure blue.28 The footing-trench was inclined at a similar angle, but instead of meeting a cross wall at east, it stopped short at the point where such a return wall should be, and this indicated that in all probability the annexe had a door in the east wall,29 behind the reredos, suggestive of the use of this part as a feretory or relic-chamber, and this recalls almost exactly the plan of the church (collegiate) of Westbury-on-Trym, which is also furnished with a semi-hexagonal apse.

Calculating that the inner faces of the three walls of this annexe would have been designed to be more or less equal in breadth, for sake of symmetry, a line was struck across the apse at the required point, a stake put in, and a very careful chain-measure made from end to end of the whole range of Abbey buildings—i.e., from the internal face of the Lady Chapel or Church of St. Mary at the west, to this point, and the measure was then found to be precisely 580 feet, as given by Hearne and Hollar. The true plan of the chapel was published in the 1909 volume of Proceedings, and makes an interesting comparison with the conjectural plan (see Fig. 7, p. 64).

Two years later, in the collection of Colonel Wm. Long, J.P., of Clevedon, an eighteenth-century manuscript plan of the ruins, hitherto quite unknown, came to light, and was found to show the two inclined wall-sections of the apse of the Edgar Chapel. A note attached to this plan gives the extreme dimensions of the chapel as 87 feet by 49 feet. The latter would only be correct if it included the little chantry projecting on the south side. It would not represent the true outside measure of the chapel proper, which is elsewhere stated as 34 feet, and must have approximated to that width.

Eighty-seven feet is of course fairly correct as an internal measure of length, and thus substantiates the record.

SITTING XXXIX.—Continued.

"AWFWOLD ye Saxon hath tried, but hee knows not ye tongue. He hath somewhat of olden tyme that ye have found in ye este. He sayth hee hadde a house or housen in wattlework and a churche within the forte, ye which wee did enter when wee made Edgar hys newe chappell. Soe he sayth. And that wych is beyond the chappell, is not there a chambre, the wyche ye shall see when ye have digged full deepe. And from hym did go a passage way to the Lodge over the gate that leadeth to Chalice. Hyt is gonne full syne, wee wot. Wyth hym—the chambre—ye church was six hundred and twenty-eight feete in length inside and sixteene more outside walls, soe wee remember."

The blackened wattlework was found at a great depth in the clay near the south-east corner of the Edgar Chapel. It was examined together with other remains, and reported on by Mr. St. George Gray in the Proceedings of the Somerset ArchÆological Society for 1909. No attempt has been made to explore the site beyond the eastward limit of the Chapel. The ground is very deep, and there are other difficulties. As the proved internal length of the Abbey with the Chapel is 580 feet, this measure of 628 feet would imply another large addition, and in the absence of any sort of evidence of its probability, it is impossible to attach the least weight to it.

"The tombe of Arthur in shining blacke stone was in front of ye altare. Ye can see hys size even now, an ye wis, in ye claye, and certain fragmentes that yet are for hym to seeke. Blacke and scarlet and golde was ye choire, save where they didde paint ye leaves in greene, and somme tyme browne where ye clausteres were. Ye windowe was much clere glasse wyth colours in ye midst under golden canopyes in ye heades of the pannels. There was under ye alare (sic) a chambre ye wyche ye did enter from the rear, but hee was low and smalle, and there were many buried in hym. The pathe for processions wasne needed, and soe they went not behind ye altare where ye chappells were nor behind ye greate screene under ye este windowe. The churche he was soe grete there was room enow in ye aisles and soe across ye altare in front of hym by Arthur's tombe."

Q. "As to traces of an interment behind the reredos wall. Can you tell us anything of this?"

A. "Yee martyr was hee. They made a martyr's grave. He was not coffined, for they were but bones got by ye faithful from Bathe and Tauntone, and brought in secret. He was yplaced under ye altare, and they who pulled yt downe when Elizabeth was Queene drew hym out. They knew not who hee was, our Abbot. Ye knowe.... Hee who swam in ayre when hee wold not. Whytynge. They knew not. Wee deemed the altare wold stande for alle tyme."

Q. "Who desecrated the Abbey?"

A. "My Lord Somersete. Hee cared but for golde—ne faith, ne good—Hee a Protestant, a traitor hee. A heretic was hee."

Q. "Is there any foundation for the legends of secret passages in and about the Abbey?"

A. "Covered ways to the corner of the cloyster by ye Prior's House. Hee is fallen in, we wot, and likewise hym that goeth to King's Gate, but somme is left. Some of ye passage at the east end ye shall finde. (Here follows a plan.) The Kingswaye seeke ye neare ye Gatehouse—ye cellars that wee used. Ye shall find ye passage. Ye shold seek the grete draine. Many things are therein. Ye should seeke for it.

"JOHANNES et alii.
"Permultae memoriae."

SITTING, 1st September, 1910.

The script begins in a cramped hand, very disjointed and confused. It is mostly in Latin words, and we trace the name of one John of Aller, in the rural district of Somerset ("in agros Somersetiae"), formerly a husbandman, but later a watchman at the Abbey. But he cannot tell us what he would, and the power which should recall his memories fails. "Nescio quid sum," it ends, "aut inde veni."

Then the writing commences afresh, thus:

"Ambrosius the Cellarius wold speke to ye. And hee isne a scholar. Ye binnes in ye cellar ye wot they were full of good wine, but ye cellars of ye Guesten Hall lye deeper downe.

"Ye roofe of ym30 is but even with ye floor of hym. But I wot they have left ye little enow.

"Ye Abbot's lyttell kitchen he lay in between ye two halles, and ye cooke hadde enow to feed them on the one syde and alsoe ye guesten folk on ye other. Therefore ybuilded ye Abbot ye grete Kitchen afore ye Howse, for to make feast on grete feast-dayes. Ye olde kitchens and ye minte-garden wasne used much after that. Ye newe howse of ye Abbot hadde kitchens enow, and soe.... Know ye ye lytell cloystere ahint ye Prior's Lodging and ye Halle convent over against the Stabels of ye horses? They were near ye Guest Halle on ye syde of our Lord Abbat's Howse, and ye menne lay over them. There were foure horses, and rooms for ye guesten horses in ye same stable."

The script here deals with an area still unexcavated, as to which we have but little documentary evidence. The position of the Guest Hall may be reasonably inferred to be on the site suggested, due west from the Refectory. The statement about the kitchens seems reasonable. At this point the communication under the name Ambrosius ceases and an entirely different handwriting is noted. The script continues:

"Ricardus de Tanton, who did make ye drawings for my Abbot Bere, wold tell you that which Ambrosius can not."

We gather that the level of the ground was lowered and four cellars made for storing wine for the Guest Hall above. Next we read:

"The grete Halle was ybuilded not long syne, and ye must goe where the kitchens did joyne him to the Refectorium. Aufwold says that the convent of Arimathia was at hys south-west corner, builded long tyme since, and there was as it were a little cloystere between the Hall and the chapel where Beere did saye masse. The stabel was over aganst the Abbat's new howse which Beere builded, and which was in front of the Guest Hall but away from hym. The crypt under the new Hall was deeper downe. His roofe was near level to the floore of the vault of the Refectorium....

"Goe you through the grete door at ye corner of ye Cloyster on ye est syde downe XII steppes and on through ye passage-waye. Then shall ye rise uppe ye steppes IX on ye south syde, and soe acrosse ye mint garden to the Newe Halle where was a doore, and through hym cometh a passage to the further syde and soe to the lyttel cloyster, and beyond hym the lyttel convent and ye lyttel chapel builded long time syns. And there was a grete wall to the est of all these places high and stronge, and over hym was the dormer, and beyond, the parlour beneath and the scriptorium above hym: and soe unto ye wall of ye lyttle cloystere, and after a space, a yarde and the schola with its chappel and buildings around yt ... for ye boyes, alsoe ye changing room for ye choire who sang in ye minster.

"Ye boyes were ofttimes joyous and did playe and make a shouting, and ye Abbat sayde: 'Chide not youth in its playe, but may ye keepe them afar from ye claustre places lest they weary my devowte,'—and so ye schola was far from ye (same)."

Q. "Which was the Chapel of St. Dunstan?"

A. "Hym on ye North syde of ye Crete Church, at ye ende, near to ye newe chappel which Bere (built)."

Q. "What was the exact length of the Church as completed?"

A. "CCCXI31 in passibus. CCCXI et capella nova. CCCXI in tota longitudine."

Q. "Please state it in feet."

A. "Pedes DCCXXXIII32 circa."

Q. "Was there anything east of the Edgar Chapel?"

A. "Yes, but not Ecclesia major. On the wall was a capella for them who came from over the hill called Chalice—a little capella, but he was not of the grete church. You have hym all.

"We sayd he (the church.—F.B.B.) was somewhat over three hundred passuum on the path which passeth on the north syde of hym. This I knowe. The chappell was ninety-one33 of feet, for I did draw hym.

"RICARDUS T^a."

---

TABLE OF THE VERIDICAL PASSAGES IN THE AUTOMATIC SCRIPT, SIXTEEN IN NUMBER, REFERRING TO THE EDGAR CHAPEL AND EAST END OF QUIRE

---

Extract from Letter of Hon. Everard Feilding, Secretary of the Society for Psychic Research, to the Author, dated 15th March, 1917.

"My dear Bond,

"... As to your record of the script, it would be most interesting if you were to publish it. There is no question but that the writing about the Edgar Chapel preceded the discovery of it by many months. I was present, if you remember, at what I believe was the beginning of the recrudescence of—— 's automatism, ... and that was before you ever started your work at Glastonbury, and before you were even appointed to the work. I remember your telling me when you were appointed, how interesting it was, as you were then able to test some of the statements made.

"No, there is no doubt whatever in my mind on that point; you will remember that the only doubt I have ever expressed was on the question as to how far something in one of the books on Glastonbury which you showed me afterwards, and which might have suggested the possibility of the actual position of the Edgar Chapel, might conceivably have influenced—— 's mind subconsciously; I forget what book it was, but I remember it was not the book which was taken at that time as the most authoritative."

Signed Statement of J.A.

"I, the undersigned J—— A——, hereby certify that I am the J.A. referred to in Mr. Bligh Bond's account of the automatic writings concerning Glastonbury Abbey and other matters, and that the transcript which he has made of the series of about fifty communications dating from 7th November, 1907, to 30th November, 1911, and also some supplementary writings produced in 1912 and later, appears to me correct so far as the same could be deciphered by us. I furthermore affirm that the writings were produced through my hand, but without knowledge of their nature or purport, and contain conclusions which I could not have arrived at normally, and which in many cases—as, e.g., in the case of the Edgar Chapel—were such as appeared to me most improbable, and were deemed fanciful until further research had elucidated points then obscure. My knowledge and reading were confined to documents which have been accessible to all students of the Abbey, and I had no unique source of information. The writings were produced often whilst my normal attention was devoted to other matters, and promiscuous conversation at these times was our rule. I held the pencil and Mr. Bond laid his fingers on the back of my hand or lightly grasped it. He did not direct it. There was nothing in my knowledge or experience that I know of to suggest the names of Bryant and others which are appended to the writings. Even the possible meaning of such a name as Manumetaxyl was unknown to me.34

"I am disposed to concur with Mr. Bond in the view that the subconscious part of the mind may in its operation traverse the limitations of individual knowledge, either acting telepathically through contact with some larger field of memory, or as itself part of a larger unit of a more pervasive kind as regards time and space, conditions which would imply that the individual may have powers of self-expression far greater than those which are normally available through the brain-mechanism controlled by the will and logical faculties.

"Gloucester,
"July 24th, 1917."

---