beyond those of any other; to which may be added, the impossibility of deducing positive rules in all cases for determining their dates; result difficulties of classification and uncertainty in the use of facts, which can only be fully overcome by the most laborious research, or removed by the collection and comparison of almost countless examples. Again, when any gencral principle or any apparently consistent theory shall have been formed, by which these questions may seem capable of plausible solution, we sometimes find the exceptions so numerous, and the contradictory evidence so strong, that we are compelled either to abandon in despair, or to regard. As an unsafe and therefore a valueless system, the conclusions at which we may have arrived. And if even well-defined and seemingly indubitable characteristics of style are not always to be depended upon, still more frequently does the absence of distinctive marks cause perplexity in the investigation. A rude block of stone, hollowed out at the top, with scarcely a Moulding or a particle of sculpture upon it, requires in truth a critical and experienced eye to guess at its probable antiquity. For it is manifest that the date of the church in which it may be placed is the most unsafe and unconvincing evidence that can be followed in deciding that of the Font. The sanctity rightly and reasonably attached to the consecrated instrument of a Holy Sacrament caused the careful preservation of Fonts unchanged by centurics of rebuilding and alteration. Thus, we cannot doubt that
- Mr. Rickinan remarks, Archæologia, vol. xxv. p. 163, that the Fonts
in France are generally of little interest or antiquity. 9
