meaning, especially if (as I suspect) the figures are connected with St. Chad's history. It is possible that this bare forehead may be tonsured in front, as was the habit of the ancient British and Irish priests-what was called the Scots' tonsure.

It will be remembered that from the time of St. Augustine to that of St. Chad a great controversy existed between the British and Roman churches concerning inter alia the time of keeping Easter and the shape of the tonsure. The Latin ecclesiastics prevailed at the Synod of Whitby, so graphically described by Bede, and most of the English clergy, including Chad, accepted the decision and conformed.

The figure, P.2, might have been intended to represent Chad as a monk of Lastingham, wearing the Scots' tonsure of his youth. On the top of his head is a sort of cap. The Anglo-Saxon and Norman monks wore hooded cowls and chasubles with hoods were also worn; e.g., the chasuble of Abbot Elfnoth in the above-mentioned illustration. Such hoods usually cover the ears, as in the representation of the Last Supper on Brighton font,' but some did not, as in Chaucer's picture in Shaw's Dresses and Decorations. This P.2 cap reminds one more of Archbishop Wulfstan's (ob. 1023) in a contemporary drawing reproduced by Strutt. In some photographs there is a suspicion of a similar knob on the top.

The next figure (P.3) is very definitely barefooted, all his toes showing clearly. His right hand is raised in the act of giving the benediction in the Latin manner, while in his left he holds something, the nature of which I shall have to discuss at some length. The sleeves of the alb

1 Bond's Fonts, 162.

2 Dresses and Habits of England.

show well at the wrist, and the point of the chasuble reaches its lower edge. On the right side of the front lamella of the chasuble are two marks the upper crescentic, the lower a full circle. These may not be original. Over the upper edge of the chasuble two other garments show very clearly, but only one shows below, and on this there are wavy markings, as if it was made of hair. The Anglo-Saxon and Norman priests did wear a skin and hair garment-the pelisse, but normally it would not show, as it was worn under the alb or surplice. The latter was indeed an alb made sufficiently roomy to cover the pelisse and was called the superpellicium. He is 15 ins. high, and wears a mitre. The elevated arm, like the angel's, is crudely done. It is more like the joint of a crab than an arm. But the chasuble is managed quite well. The blessing hand is enormous. This was the conventional way of drawing attention to a part. Compare it with the still more enormous bound hands of St. Peter on the above-mentioned Curdworth font. The Norman sculptor never worked to scale, but enlarged and brought out prominently what he wanted seen. In this case he wished to emphasise the fact that this figure was giving the blessing.

The next in order (P.4) is the same height as P.3, and like him is bearded, mitred and barefooted. He also shows two vestments above the chasuble head-opening. This is not so clear as in P.3, but the top of the second shows clearly as a definite notch on the right side of the neck. All the figures but P.3 and P.4 show only one vestment about the neck above the chasuble opening. The front of the chasuble does not reach quite to the lower edge of the alb and the latter has the same sort of woolly markings as that

of P.3. In his left hand he holds a book and in his right is a long object which ends below in a volute. This has usually been considered to be a crosier and I took it to be such, but was surprised to find it being carried upside down. I could find no example of a crosier so carried, though I found several ancient representations of weapons being inverted at funerals as to-day. Looking carefully one day at the Kirkby font, I noticed that while the edge of the so-called crosier that is furthest from the figure can be traced clearly right up almost to the upper margin of the font overlapping the fillet, the nearer edge is only clear to the arch of the niche. Above that it has attached to it three strips, separated by two hollows, which pass over the top of the arch and cover the fillet or label. I came to the conclusion it was not a crosier, but a key, and made tracings of it and diagrams of what I thought its wards had been before being altered by wear and weathering.

Some with whom I discussed the matter said it was too big for a key; others that a key would never have such a crook-like handle. There is, however, the centre panel of a 13th century ivory triptych in the Mayer Museum, Liverpool, which has in the lower division, in the centre, a carving of the Virgin and Child with, on her left St. Paul with a huge sword, and on her right St. Peter with a key quite as large in proportion as the object on the Kirkby font. So size does not rule a key out. It only It only emphasises it. As regards the handle, I believe I have seen similar handles in museums, but cannot recollect where. There appears to be little literature of key history. Primitive Locks and Keys, by Pitt Rivers, gives

1 The right-hand figure in the view of the Orleton font in Bond's Fonts and Font Covers, appears to hold a short staff with a volute at the lower end, but what looks like a volute is really the folds of a chasuble of the old form.