. n. NOV. 12/98.1 NOTES AND QUERIES.
393
ment of John Trehearne, Gentleman Porter,
which may have led to the query of E. T. and
the consequent discussion of the office, I have
submitted to the Editor for special insertion
a note relating to the monument and a copy
of the inscription. (See 'John Trehearne,
Gentleman Porter,' 8 th S. xii. 478.)
W. L. RUTTON. [See supra, p. 381.]
CHURCHES WITHOUT FONTS (9 th S. ii. 268). Allow me to correct E. L. G.'s statement with regard to Salisbury Cathedral. There is a font in Salisbury Cathedral, in the north- west transept. The present font took the place of one which stood at the same spot and was standing there between 1820 and 1840. Before Wyatt's alterations the font stood in the west part of the nave. E. L. G.'s grand- father must have mistaken the base and steps of the old cross which stood before the west doors for a font. A. R. MALDEN.
Pugin in his 'Glossary of Ecclesiastical Ornament ' (1868) says : '
"Fonts were originally placed in baptisteries, outside churches ; but the discipline of baptizing by immersion having been changed for that of affusion by water, the fonts were reduced in dimensions, and placed inside, and near the doors of churches."
This, of course, would be prior to the Nor- man era; of the many hundred eleventh- century fonts I know, no bowl exists large enough for immersion. HARRY HEMS.
Fair Park, Exeter.
A CHURCH TRADITION (9 th S. i. 428 ; ii. 68, 150, 173, 256, 296). I cannot answer for the archaeological faith of "sane" architects at this end of the century, but I believe there may have been some sound of mind at the other who held the pious opinion that the deviation of the chancel of a church from the orientation of its nave had mystic mean- ing. I say this because it is likely that there were architects compos mentis working with the sometime Cambridge Camden Society, which, after developing into the Ecclesiological Society, published 'A Handbook of English Ecclesiology ' in 1847, and taught thereby (pp. 40, 41) :
" In many churches the orientation of the chancel differs from that of the nave. It is so in York Minster and Liehfield Cathedral. Very remark- able examples occur in Coventry, S. Michael, and Coventry, S. John Baptist, where the deviation is to the north, and Holy Trinity, Bosham, Sussex, where it is to the south. In S. Andrew, Lammas, Norfolk, the direction of the nave is 15 south or east ; that of the chancel due east. In England the deviation is perhaps generally to the south ; in France it is almost universally to the north : inso- much as it mystically represents the bowing of our
Saviour's head in death, which Catholic tradition
asserts to have been to the right side."
The deflection at St. John's. Coventry, is so remarkable that the most unobservant person could not overlook it. It is also a feature at Holy Trinity, Stratford-upon-Avon, and, as Poole and Hugall note, in the abbey church at Whitby. The cathedral at Quimper and the Kreisker church at St. Pol % de Leon, Brittany, offer striking and well-known examples. In York Minster the deflection is not readily apparent. Messrs. Pople and Hugall thus refer to it in their ' Historical and Descriptive Guide to York Cathedral,' a handsome illustrated quarto volume pub- lished by R. Sunter, one knows not from the title-page how many years ago :
" In a description of the choir the first place is due to a peculiarity in the ground-plan which it shares with many other churches. The choir is not carried on in a right line with the nave, but it has an inclination towards the north. This arrange- ment is often supposed to bear allusion to what may have been the position of pur Lord's head as He hanged upon the cross ; but it is far from certain that this is the right view of the matter. In order to satisfy the intention of recalling the view of the crucifixion the inclination of the choir out of the right line ought to be so marked as to be obtrusively visible At York, among other instances, the de- flection is_ so slight as to be general view of the church, enough in a correct ground-plan. "Pp. 102, 103.
This impugns the accuracy of the plan pub- lished in Messrs. Poole and Hugall 's book it was taken from that given by Britton, and it does not make the deviation evident. Neither can my eyes detect it in that issued by the Builder, 7 January, 1892, in illustra- tion of one of a series of articles ' Cathedrals of England and Wales.' The writer surely one of the "sane" architects MR. NEILSON wishes to hear says (p. 11) :
"The whole of the eastern arm of the church the choir, presbytery, and Lady Chapel presents some curious instances of irregularity. When Thoresby's Lady Chapel and presbytery (the four eastern bays of the present church) were built, the early English choir was standing, causing some difficulty in the setting out of the new work. The centre of the east front was, however, made to agree with the centre line of the nave and central tower. But beyond this the lines of the new work do not seem to have been laid down with very accu- rate measurement. In the first place the main axis of the centre of the presbytery bends to the north (going westward), and at the eastern face of the lantern is as near as possible 2 ft. 6 in. north of the centre line of the lantern and nave. In addition to this, the sides of the presbytery (the four east bays of the eastern arm) erected by Thoresby are not parallel, but are closer together at the bay west of the present reredos than at the east end. This is still more marked in the side aisles, the result being that the east walls of the aisles are not parallel
hardly perceptible on a
, though it is obvious
