^{page 86 note 1} These have been systematically destroyed, but two maunches and a bull's head are left on the wall immediately south of the niches over the altar.

^{page 88 note 1} p. 150.

^{page 88 note 2} Roll xv. 34, 71.

^{page 90 note 1} Why search should have been in the chapel records or royal archives has never been made clear to me. It would seem as useless as it has proved to make search in such records for that which one would suppose was a private matter,, having only concern with the families or executors of Lord Hastings and Canon Oxenbridge.

^{page 92 note 1} In Pilkington's Dictionary of Painters Lucas Cornelisen is described as coming with his wife and family to England, where he received marks of favour from King Henry VIII, who appointed him his principal painter.

^{page 93 note 1} In the Hastings picture, the continuation of the panel behind the pendentives leaves a doubt that though not painted in situ, it may have been designed and painted for its place, an inference apparently justified by the inclined position of the crowned Almighty to adapt the figure to the arch.

^{page 94 note 1} See inscription in Latin hexameters beneath the painting.

^{page 94 note 2} Flint stones are shown as being used, but although these are local it does not prove that this picture was painted for its present position.

^{page 95 note 1} Mr. Hope reminds me that instances of the figuration of the souls of the dying occurred i n several of the alabaster carvings recently exhibited by this Society.

^{page 95 note 2} Extract from article by Maury, M. A., Revue Archéologique, 1844, p. 507, &c.Google Scholar