trefoil or ball, and is much used as a crest for screens, on fonts, niches, capitals, and in almost all places where such ornament can be used.

The foliage of this style is frequently very beautifully executed, almost as faithful to nature as in the Decorated style, in which the fidelity to nature is one of the characteristic features. In Devonshire the foliage of the capitals is peculiar, often resembling a wreath of flowers twisted round the top of the pillar; and this may probably have been the idea of the sculptors, as the custom of decorating churches with flowers at certain seasons is a very ancient one; it is probable also that the sculpture was originally coloured after nature. There is comparatively a squareness about the Perpendicular foliage which takes from the freshness and beauty which distinguished that of the Decorated style. Indeed, the use of square and angular forms is one of the characteristics of the style; we have square panels, square foliage, square crockets and finials, square forms in the windows,—caused by the introduction of so many transoms,—and an approach to squareness in the depressed and low pitch of the roofs in late examples.

It is frequently said that it is not easy to distinguish the moldings of the Perpendicular style from those of the earlier styles, but this is in general because people do not pay attention to them. The moldings of Fotheringhay are particularly good, and they have a positive date, yet if these are compared with either of the earlier styles the difference is very evident. The hollows are more shallow, the projection not so bold, and these are the usual characteristics.

The Buttresses of this style do not differ materially from those of the Decorated, but the triangular heads to the different stages are less frequently used; the set-offs are more frequently plain slopes only. The projection of buttresses of this style is usually greater than in any of the previous styles, especially in those that have to support towers, when there are commonly three stages, sometimes more, and they are often placed diagonally at the corners, or there are two, one on either side of the corner. Sometimes a buttress of this style is very thin, and has two diagonal faces; there is frequently a niche on the face of the buttress, either for an image, which seldom remains, or for a shield of arms only, and this more often remains. Sometimes there is a half-arch through the lower part of the buttress, as at Gloucester, and this is quite distinct from the flying buttress, the object of which usually is to support the wall of the clere-storey, by carrying the pressure across the roof of the aisle on to the outer wall, and on these pinnacles are placed over each buttress, the direct outward weight of the pinnacle serving to counteract the side pressure, as at Fotheringhay.

In this excellent example it will at once be seen that the upper end of each of the arch-buttresses must catch the lower end of the timbers of the roof, and so conveys the pressure to the outer wall, where again the weight of the vertical pinnacle helps to counteract the side pressure of the arch-buttress. There is also a massive part of the buttress against the lower wall.

Empty niches for images are very abundant in this style, but it is rare to find the figure left in the niches that were made for it; they do occur occasionally, and are sometimes almost as good as those of the preceding style. There is a very good one in the tower of S. Mary Magdalen Church, Oxford, which is believed to have been brought from the ruins of Osney Abbey, as that tower is of the time of Henry VIII.

The figure of the patron saint over the outer door of the porch of a parish church has frequently been preserved; occasionally the figures in the niches of a churchyard cross still remain.

The frequent use of figures, simply as corbels between the windows of the clere-storey to carry the roof, is a good characteristic of the late Perpendicular style; they are generally of the time of Henry the Seventh or Eighth, as at Rushden, Northants. The figure used is generally that of an angel, and each angel is sometimes represented as carrying a different musical instrument, so as to make up a heavenly choir. In this instance the instrument carried is one sometimes called a mouth-organ, or shepherd’s pipes.

The splendid Open Timber Roofs, as at St. Stephen’s Church, Norwich, which are the glory of the eastern counties, belong almost entirely to this style; the screens and lofts across the chancel-arch, and often across the aisles also, and the richly carved bench-ends for which the West of England is so justly celebrated, also belong to it; in fact, nearly the whole of the medieval woodwork which we have remaining is of this style, and this material appears to be peculiarly adapted for it. It may reasonably be doubted whether the modern attempts to revive the woodwork of the Norman and Early English styles are not altogether a mistake. Nothing can well exceed the richness and beauty of the Perpendicular woodwork, and it is easy to imagine that a church of the twelfth or thirteenth century has been newly furnished in the fifteenth or sixteenth. We have, however, some very beautiful examples of Decorated woodwork in screens, and stalls with their canopies, as at Winchester; there are also a few wooden tombs of that period.

In Norfolk there are several fine examples remaining of galleries and screens, commonly called roodlofts, being used at the west end of the church also, under the tower, and across the tower-arch; and this in churches where the roodloft, properly so called, still remains across the chancel-arch, so that there is a

quasi-roodloft at each end of the nave. There is no doubt that this custom prevailed in many other counties also, but the western loft has generally been destroyed in consequence of the barbarous custom of blocking up the tower-arch, which is often the finest feature in the church. The roodloft-galleries seem to have been used for choristers to stand upon; the lessons were also read from them. They are sometimes very large, extending over the eastern bay of the nave and occasionally over the western bay of the chancel also, as may be seen by the remains of the staircases for them.

The Redcliffe Church, Bristol, the west front and south porch of Gloucester Cathedral, and part of the choir of St. Alban’s Abbey Church, with the tomb of Abbot Wheathampstead, are also of this period, and good specimens of the style. Within the next twenty years we have a crowd of examples, which it is not necessary to enumerate.

But a few more specimens of the later period of this style can hardly be passed over, such as St. George’s Chapel, Windsor, King’s College Chapel, Cambridge, and Henry the Seventh’s Chapel, Westminster; and of the very latest before the change of style, Bath Abbey Church, the Savoy Chapel, in the Strand, London, with its very beautiful panelled ceiling, and Whiston Church, Northants.

Gothic Architecture is usually considered to have come to an end in England in the time of Henry VIII. This is only partially true, it lingered on in many districts for another century; this was especially the case in Oxford, and I have much pleasure in republishing an excellent memoir on this subject by the late Mr. Orlando Jewitt, read at the meeting of the Royal Archæological Institute at Oxford, in 1850. It has never been much circulated, and has been quite forgotten, but the facts speak for themselves, and are clearly stated by Mr. Jewitt, and proved by his admirable woodcuts of these buildings. He was a thorough artist, and an enthusiastic lover of the subject of Gothic Architecture. His woodcuts differ from any others in this respect, they are not made from drawings, but are drawn on the wood by himself from the objects, and then handed to his brother, Henry Jewitt, to be engraved; the latter long had the reputation of “being able to cut the finest line of any one in the trade,” and in wood-engraving, where the lines have to be left standing to be printed, and the other parts to become white surface, cut away, the finest lines necessarily produce the finest woodcuts.

Some people talk of the Elizabethan and Jacobean style, but this is really no style at all, any more than what is foolishly called “the Queen Anne style.” All of these are jumbles of various styles, they are neither Gothic, nor Grecian, nor Roman, nor Italian, but can only be called with truth a mongrel mixture of styles, to which various names are given for convenience. The idea that they are cheaper on this account is entirely a delusion; the same amount of space to be covered, and the same extent of walls and of ornament, will cost the same whatever the style may be; that is a matter of taste only, about which it is needless to dispute; if any people are so blind as to prefer this mongrel work to a genuine style there is no help for it, they must expose themselves to the ridicule of the next generation.

The Gothic Architecture of Oxford, even as late as the seventeenth century, was not in this mongrel style, it was as good as the generality of modern Gothic of the Victorian school. The fan-tracery vault over the staircase of the hall of Christ Church, for instance, carried on a central pillar, as in a mediæval chapter-house, is thoroughly good Gothic, although the only record that we have of it is that it was built by “one Smith, an artificer from London,” in the time of Charles the Second. In the county of Somerset also there are some excellent examples of very late Gothic, and in some other districts; the English people were not willing to give up their preference for this their own national style to any other.

ON THE LATE, OR DEBASED, GOTHIC BUILDINGS OF OXFORD.

From the Reign of Elizabeth to the end of the Seventeenth Century.

Gothic Architecture seems to have attained its ultimate perfection in the fourteenth century, at which period everything belonging to it was conceived and executed in a free and bold spirit, all the forms were graceful and natural, and all the details of foliage and other sculptures were copied from living types, with a skill and truth of drawing which has never been surpassed. Conventional forms were in a great measure abandoned, and it seems to have been rightly and truly considered that the fittest monuments for the House of God were faithful copies of His works; and so long as this principle continued to be acted on, so long did Gothic Architecture remain pure. But in the succeeding century, under the later Henries and Edwards, a gradual decline took place: everything was molded to suit a preconceived idea, the foliage lost its freshness, and was molded into something of a rectangular form; the arches were depressed, the windows lowered, the flowing curves of the tracery converted into straight lines, panelling profusely used, and the square form everywhere introduced; until at length the prevalence of the horizontal line led easily and naturally to the renaissance of the classic styles, though in an impure and much degraded form. The mixture of the two styles first appears in the time of Henry VII.,—a period in which (though remarkable for the beauty and delicacy of its details) the grand conceptions of form and proportion of the previous century seem to have been lost. Heaviness or clumsiness of form, combined with exquisite beauty of detail, are the characteristics of this era.

In the time of Henry VIII. the details became debased, and there was a great mixture of Italian work, but still the Gothic ideas predominated, and there are some good examples of this date remaining, of which the Hall of Christ Church may be adduced as a proof.

In the reign of Elizabeth the mixture of the two styles was more complete; and though the details were frequently incongruous, there resulted from the union a style which, when applied to domestic buildings, was highly picturesque, and occasionally produced great richness of effect[G].

In the succeeding period the decline still continued; feature after feature was lost, until at length all was swallowed up by its rival. That feature, however, which was always the most important and most characteristic of Gothic architecture, and on which at all periods the distinctions of the styles chiefly depended, namely, the window, was the last to depart; for when every other trace of the style was lost, we find the windows still retaining either their Gothic form or their Gothic tracery, and thus evincing the lingering love which was still felt for the ancient forms.

During all this period of decline, however, frequent attempts were made to stay its progress, and in no place more successfully than in Oxford, as the number of buildings of this period will testify. To point out the peculiarities, and to give the most remarkable points of the history of these buildings, will be the subject of the present paper, the historical facts of which are taken chiefly from Dr. Ingram’s “Memorials of Oxford,” and from Anthony à Wood.

The first building of this period which claims attention is the Bodleian Library, and in order to understand the history of this, it will be necessary to go a little farther back. It seems that various donations of books had been made by different individuals in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, but that no proper depository had been provided for them, and that they remained either locked up in chests or chained to desks in the old Congregation-house, and in the various chapels of St. Mary’s Church, until a room or “solar” having been built for them by Bishop Cobham in 1320, over the old Congregation-house[H], they were, after various disputes, removed there in 1409. It seems, too, that the University had at this time fallen into great irregularity, and suffered great inconvenience from the want of public authorised schools; the various professors using for that purpose apartments in private houses in various parts of the city.

This led to the erection of a building for that purpose in 1439; and about the same time the University resolved to erect a separate School for Divinity on a large scale, in a central situation near the other schools. Liberal contributions having been made by various persons, and especially by Humphrey, Duke of Gloucester, son of Henry IV., they were enabled, about the year 1480, not only to complete the Divinity School as it now

stands, but to build the room over it for a library; and from the circumstance of the Duke being the principal donor, both in his lifetime and at his death, and of his bequeathing a number of valuable manuscripts, he is styled the founder, and the Library was called by his name. Into this Library the books from St. Mary’s were removed[I].

The Divinity School yet remains in much the same state as when built, except that a doorway was made by Sir Christopher Wren, under one of the windows on the north side for the convenience of processions to the Theatre, and that at the east end the doorway has been altered externally. On examination, it will be found that the outer moldings have been cut down even with the wall; and from the marks on the wall, it seems probable that there was a groined porch projecting in this direction, and that this was removed to make way for the covered walk, or Proscholium, when the Bodleian Library was built.

After the Reformation, the schools appear for some years to have been almost deserted and in ruins, until,

in the reign of Elizabeth, in the year 1597, Sir Thomas Bodley, a gentleman of a Devonshire family, who had been educated in the University, (and who had afterwards travelled through most parts of Europe, and been employed by Queen Elizabeth in many important matters,) resolved, as he tells us himself, to “set up his staff at the Library-door at Oxford,” and restore the place to the use of students. He commenced the same year the restoration of Duke Humphrey’s Library, which he repaired and refitted, and to which he added a new roof; and afterwards, in 1610, commenced building the Library which now bears his name, but which he did not live to see finished[J]. This new building he placed at the east end of, and transversely to, the Divinity School, the north-east and south-east buttresses being built into the new wall, and leaving in front of the east door the Proscholium or covered walk already mentioned, popularly known as the “Pig-market.” Of this Wood says, “In which Ambulachrum do stand such that are candidates for, or sue after, their graces to the Regents sitting in the Congregation House adjoining.” The reason of this being, that any requisite questions might be put to them previous to granting the degrees,—a practice which was discontinued when the system of public examinations was introduced[K]. It was necessary,

therefore, in making the new building, to retain this space, and the present groined room was formed accordingly. It is lighted by a window at each end, one of which is not, nor has ever been intended to be, glazed. It has a vaulted ceiling, with bosses at the intersections, the alternate ones being shields, with the arms of the founder[L]. Some of the bosses are of good design and execution, but others are of late character. The general effect is good, but the details, particularly the moldings, are of very debased character.

The buttresses of the Divinity School are panelled the greater part of their height, and one of these, as has been mentioned before, is built in, and forms part of Bodley’s new wall, so that the panelling is visible on both sides; but on the east end it is carried forward on the face of the wall, as far as the point from which the porch seems to have projected; and it is tolerably evident, from the remains of the shafts which have been cut away, and from other marks on the wall, that this porch must have been groined. It seems to have been the wish of Bodley to have his new building to agree in character with the old, and he therefore had the whole of his building panelled in the same manner as the Divinity School. This forms the west side of the Schools’ Quadrangle[M], and is different in character from the rest of the buildings. The width of the quadrangle of the schools is greater than the length of the front of the Bodleian, and therefore a few feet had to be added at each end of Bodley’s work. This may be seen inside these

staircases, particularly between the entrances to the Bodleian and the Picture Gallery, where the old work is panelled, and has a corbel-table the same as the rest of the front, but the new work is plain. The upper storey of this building joins Duke Humphrey’s Library, and is lighted by a large window at each end, and another opposite the old library. This window is a curious combination of mullions, transoms, and tracery of different forms. The rest of the windows are small.

Sir Thomas Bodley, shortly before his death, had conceived and matured the plan of a new building for the Public Schools of the University, and everything was settled for carrying the plan into execution; but he did not live to see it commenced. He died at his house in London in 1613, his body was brought to Oxford, and buried in Merton College Chapel on the 29th of March in that year; and the day after the funeral the first stone of the new Schools was laid, the building of which occupied the next six years.

This building, which, with the Bodleian Library for its west side, forms a complete quadrangle, is plain, poor, and heavy in its general appearance, and little skill has been displayed in giving either variety of

outline or of light and shade. This plainness is still further increased by the removal of the transoms with which the windows were originally furnished, and which are still retained in those in the tower. The Gateway-tower on the east side, which afforded an opportunity for this, is not distinguished by any projection from the flat wall, but merely rises above the parapet on the same plane. The oriel, too, over the doorway, which might have given effect, is tame and poor. The whole mass is square, without buttresses or any other projection to relieve it. In the inner front of the Tower, however, more pains have been taken; the five storeys into which it is divided are each ornamented with columns of one of the five classic orders, the plinths, friezes, and the shafts, for a third of their length, being covered with the peculiar Arabesque of the period, intermixed with the national emblems, &c. In the fourth storey is a figure of James I., and the whole is surmounted with a parapet of open scroll-work enclosing the royal arms. These figures were originally gilt. Taken altogether, this composition is a favourable specimen of the style of that time, though it does not harmonise with the Gothic turret and pinnacle which rise above it. The archway is groined, and is a curious example, the bosses being all more or less of Elizabethan design.

The wooden door is panelled, the panels being filled with the arms of the various colleges as late as Wadham, that being then newly-erected.

An addition was made at the west end of the Divinity School, 1634 to 1640, the lower part of which is the Convocation House, and the upper part an addition to the library for containing the books of the learned Selden, and is called by his name.

The next building in order of time is Wadham College, which was commenced in 1610, and finished in 1613, the year in which the Schools were commenced. It was founded by Sir Nicholas and Dame Dorothy Wadham, (whose effigies appear over the doorway of the hall,) but was not begun until after the death of Sir Nicholas in 1609. The building was commenced in 1610, and the whole of the quadrangle, the hall and chapel, were completed in 1613.

The general character of the buildings of the quadrangle is the same as that of the Schools, having a tower-gateway, and oriel-window in the same situation; but the hall and ante-chapel are of somewhat different character, having debased tracery in the windows formed of scroll-work, and of which the large window of the hall is a very curious example. But the most singular part is the chapel, which is totally different in style from the rest of the buildings; the windows have good Perpendicular tracery and moldings, though of rather late character, and there is little to distinguish it from a pure Perpendicular building, except the upper moldings of the buttresses, In the east window, however, there is a singularity in the subordination of the tracery, which would not have occurred in the best period of Perpendicular. The two mullions of the centre light are carried through the head and on each side in the sub-arches. The other two mullions are not carried through, but another rises from the second and fourth lights, cutting through the sub-arches; and by this means the primary tracery, not being equally distributed over the space, produces an awkward effect, though the window has evidently, but not skilfully, been copied from those of New College. The side-windows are of three lights with transoms, and are good in all their details; and there are in the interior two lofty arches, which divide the ante-chapel from the transept, and which are of the same character, and are also an imitation of those in New College. The rest of the ante-chapel

corresponds with the hall, so that it produces one uniform front towards the quadrangle. The character of this part is totally different to that of the chapel; and the contrast of the two (shewn in the woodcut on p. 239), is very striking. The tracery of the one is good Perpendicular, but that of the other is of a kind unknown to Gothic. It is composed of scroll-work in elliptic forms, and with a kind of flat bosses at the intersections. The moldings, too, are totally different, one not differing much from the usual section of a Perpendicular window, and the other non-descript, as will be seen from the sections.

These striking differences have naturally induced

a belief that the chapel was either a prior erection, or that the old materials of the Augustine convent, on the site of which the college was built, had been used up again; but by the investigations of the Rev. J. Griffith, whose valuable paper on the subject gives the accounts referred to, it is clearly shewn that the building of the two parts was carried on simultaneously. The foundress seems to have had a proper idea that a building used for Divine service should have a different character from those which were intended for domestic uses, and therefore, as the regular masons at that period could not have been much used to church-work, and as it is shewn by the accounts[N] that the masons employed were brought to Oxford from a distance, it seems probable that she brought, from her own county of Somerset, workmen who had been used to this kind of work. The churches of Somersetshire are mostly of rich and late Perpendicular character, and it is probable that the style might continue later there than in other places. It would, therefore, be a curious subject to inquire if any churches were built so late as that on which these masons might have been employed. The Hall of Wadham has an open timber roof, which is curious, as shewing how, while the Gothic form was retained, the details were altered to suit the taste of the times. The large window is a remarkable example of Jacobean tracery. The entrance under the principal gateway is groined, with fan-vaulting, having in the centre the arms of the founder and foundress impaled.

The buildings of this period in Oxford are very numerous; indeed there are few colleges which have not some additions of this time; but it will not be necessary to do much more than enumerate the most favourable examples, with their dates.

The inner quadrangle of Merton College is stated to have been built by J. Bentley, one of the builders of the Schools, and the gateway into the gardens is an evident imitation of that of the Schools. It has four of the orders, and the spaces between are filled with Gothic panelling, but the effect is poor and flat. The external front of this part, which faces Merton, is, however, a very good composition, and embowered as it is with trees, has quite the character of one of the fine old mansions of the Elizabethan or Jacobean period.

The Hall of Trinity College, built in 1618 to 1620, has good Perpendicular windows.

Jesus College Chapel, built in 1621, and the east window of the chapel, which was added in 1636, are much better than might have been expected at the period, but there is no subordination of tracery, which all springs from the same fillet.

The Chapel of Exeter College, built in 1624 [since rebuilt], was a better specimen than the last. The tracery of the windows seems to have been copied from

New College, and the subordination is preserved. The door, however, is completely of Jacobean character.

The second quadrangle of St. John’s, which was built by Archbishop Laud between 1631 and 1636, is remarkable, and different from anything else in Oxford. It is by Inigo Jones, and the effect of the garden front is highly picturesque, and the combination of the Gothic forms with Elizabethan details skilfully managed. This mixture of styles, though it will not bear examination in detail, produces in the mass an effect highly pleasing; and harmonising so well as it does with the foliage by which it is surrounded, it seems well suited for the purpose for which it is here employed. The quadrangle is on two sides supported on Doric columns and arches, the spandrels of which are filled with heads, and with emblems of the sciences and of the moral virtues.

The Hall and Chapel of St. Mary Hall were built between the years 1632 and 1644. The arrangement is curious and unusual, the hall occupying the lower storey, and the chapel the upper. The windows of the hall are square-headed, but those of the chapel on the north and south sides are round-headed, with intersecting tracery. The filling-up of the heads of the lights is singular. The tracery, which assumes something of a Flamboyant form, springs from the chamfer

.]

in the manner of a cusp, and its fillets do not touch in the middle. The east window is pointed, and of five lights, with a mixture of intersecting and Perpendicular tracery, the whole exhibiting a good example of that commingling of preceding styles which is so frequently found in late Gothic structures.

The Chapel of Lincoln College was built in 1631, and is one of the best examples of the period; the subordination of the tracery is preserved, and the moldings are good, except one peculiarity, which seems to belong to this period, as it is found likewise at Oriel and other places. This is,—the fillet is left broad, and is grooved down the centre with a rather deep channel. This has the effect of dividing the fillet into two lines, and produces a clumsy appearance.

Oriel College was built about 1620, but the Hall and Chapel were begun in 1637, and finished in 1642. The character of the building is poor and clumsy. The tracery is of very late character, and it has the grooved

fillet above mentioned. The entrance to the chapel is under a bay-window, which has an open parapet of scroll-work.

The windows of the Hall and Chapel of University College, which were built about 1640, are much like those of Oriel. The east window of the chapel is particularly bad. Both colleges are built with fractable gablets.

In the Chapel of Brasenose College, which was built between 1656 and 1666, all traces of Gothic, except the windows and roof, seem to have vanished. The exterior is Corinthian, with pointed windows inserted between the pilasters. The tracery is of rather early form, and the whole is a very incongruous mixture. In the east and west windows even the tracery is altered, and the oval form introduced, so that this may be taken as one of the last and most curious examples of the decline of Gothic before its extinction. The roof of the chapel, which is a kind of hammer-beam with fan-vaulting above, was brought from the chapel of St. Mary’s College, which formerly stood in the Corn Market, and which was founded by Henry VI. in 1435. This kind of vaulting seems to have retained its hold longer than any other feature of the Gothic styles, unless it be the windows. It is extensively used in Oxford under gateways and other small spaces,

as at Wadham, University, St. John’s, &c., but the finest specimen of it is the beautiful staircase to the Hall of Christ Church; and it is remarkable to find that it was erected so late as 1640; but it is stated by Peshall to have been built by Dean Fell, “by the help of —— Smith, an artificer of London.” Who Smith of London may have been, or whether he executed any other works beside this, does not seem to have been ascertained; but certainly this work alone, executed at a time when Gothic Architecture everywhere else was sunk in utter debasement, ought to rescue his name from oblivion. Its chief fault is a want of boldness in the ribs, but this flatness was a fault of the time, which he did not overcome.

It has been generally considered that the whole of the work outside of the Hall was of this date, but it will be evident on examination that the two open doorways opposite the Hall-door, as well as the arches and doorways under the landing, are of Wolsey’s time; all the details and the boldness of the work shew them to belong to his building. The parts, therefore, which Smith executed were the central pillar, and the vaulting which it supports, the steps, and parapets. This part, it seems, was left unfinished by Wolsey. The steps were not completed, and it was not roofed. It is, therefore, possible, as this design harmonises so well with the rest of the building, that the original drawings might have been preserved, and the present staircase built from them; but whoever was the designer, it stands as one of the most beautiful things in Oxford, and one which no visitor should omit seeing.

The buildings hitherto described or mentioned are all in Oxford, but there is another in its immediate neighbourhood which is worth notice; this is Water Eaton, a house which appears to have been built in the beginning of James I.’s reign, and to have been the residence of Lord Lovelace. It is now a farm-house, but remains in a perfect and almost unaltered state. The house has transomed windows and a projecting porch, ornamented with pillars and pilasters. It has a large court-yard, with a detached building for offices on each side of the gateway in front. On the north side of the court-yard is the chapel, having a yard on the south side. It is this building which is remarkable, as it remains almost in the same state as when built, the screen, pulpit, and open seats being the same as when first put in, and the building, though late, has scarcely any mixture of the later style.

The plan consists of a nave and chancel, divided by a chancel-arch and screen, and having diagonal buttresses at all the angles. There are no windows on the north side, but on the south the nave has two, and the chancel one; and there are an east and west window, and a door on the south side. The doorway is pointed under a square label. The arches of the windows are much depressed, but slightly pointed; the lights are foliated and carried up to the head without tracery. The east window has five lights, and the others three lights each. The moldings are of late character, but not debased; the bell-cot and cross are modern.