[6] “The painting may be thus generally described. The hollow of the abacus of the capitals red, the lower member of the same, green; the whole of the bell red, the leaves alternately green and yellow, with the stalks running down of the same colour into the red bell of the capital; the vertical mouldings between the marble shafts red and blue alternately; the lower shafts green or blue, with red in the hollows: the foliage on these also is green and yellow. Some of the horizontal mouldings are partly coloured also. The bosses in the groining are yellow and red, as in the capitals. All the colouring, which was very rich, was effected with water-colours; in one instance only has any gold been discerned, and that upon one of the bosses in the roof.”--_F. S. Waller._ [7] The Norman towers or turrets had, however, been rebuilt in the Early English period. “From an account of an accident which occurred between 1163 and 1179, we know that the west front was flanked by two towers; for while Roger, Bp. of Worcester, was celebrating mass before the high altar, the north-west tower, owing to a defect in its foundation, fell. It may be a question, however, whether these towers were not rather turrets, like those at Tewkesbury. The very fact that at Tewkesbury we have turrets rather than towers, is sufficient to make the suggestion very probable, for there is a great resemblance between the two churches. Moreover, if Abbot Morwent found a design with towers, properly so called, he substituted for it one provokingly inferior. This is hardly likely.”--(_G. A. P._) The rebuilding of the north-west tower was commenced in 1222, and its companion was also rebuilt between the years 1228-1243. These were the towers or turrets destroyed by Abbot Morwent. [8] “In the interior this wall falls outwards eleven inches in its full height; and on the exterior the more recent work inclines not more than four inches; from which it is evident that the Norman wall must have been out of perpendicular seven inches, prior to the erection of Abbot Thokey’s work.”--_F. S. Waller._ [9] “The south aisle has this great advantage, which other altered buildings do not possess;--in other buildings the proportions very often constrain the designs in the new work, and give it a mixed character, spoiling both,--giving, for example, heaviness to the Norman, and flimsiness to the Decorated. But this is not the case at Gloucester.”--_Willis._ [10] The attention of the public was first called to this fact in a paper read before the meeting of the Archæological Institute at Worcester, in the summer of 1862, by the Rev. Samuel Lysons, F.S.A.