^{page 81 note 1} Westminster Abbey and the King's Craftsmen, 100.

^{page 82 note 1} Journal of the R.I.B.A., 3rd S. xvi. 80Google Scholar. Models in stone of the Norman bases (a quarter of the original size) have been made, and are preserved in the Norman undercroft. Mr. Lethaby has acceded to my request that he would append a note on the architectural conclusions which may be drawn from them.

^{page 82 note 2} Lanfranc's nave at Canterbury was 72 feet wide, which is one foot less than the nave of his abbey at Caen (Willis, , Architectural History of Canterbury, 64 fGoogle Scholar. Mr. J. Bilson, however, tells me that the nave of St. Stephen's at Caen is practically 74 feet wide). The present nave of Westminster is 73 ft. 5 in. across from wall to wall.

^{page 82 note 3} Compare the language of Gervase of Canterbury, who thus describes the “cruces”, or transepts, of Lanfranc's church: “utraque (sc. crux) in medio sui pilarium fortem habebat, qui fornicem a parietibus prodeuntem in tribus sui partibus suscipiebat … crux australis supra fornicem organa gestare solebat: supra fornicem et subter porticus erat ad orientem porrecta “(Rolls Series 73, i. 10).

^{page 83 note 1} ordita] orditum MS. The writer, or a copyist, wrote it carelessly, as though the nominative had been multiplex opus.

^{page 84 note 1} As at St. Stephen, Caen, and at Gloucester. A trace of such a vault is to be seen in the south aisle of the presbytery at Cerisy.

^{page 84 note 2} Rolls Series 73, i. 10.

^{page 85 note 1} Lives of Edward the Confessor (Rolls Series 3), 417. Previously the passage had only been known from an extract given by Camden in his Reges, Reginae, etc.

^{page 86 note 1} About the same time Athelais, the first wife of Geoffrey de Mandeville, was buried there: as appears from his gift of the manor of Eye (Westminster “Domesday “, f. 103): “Ego Goffridus de magna villa pro anima mea et pro anima conjugis mee Athelais in claustro sancti Petri sepulte, qui et juxta eam sepeliendus sum,” etc. Abbot Edwin had already been buried in the cloister, probably in the east walk. So also Hugolin, King Edward's chamberlain; and Sulcard was to follow. The remains of these three, together with the supposed Queen Ethelgoda, were afterwards disturbed at the time of King Henry III.'s rebuilding, and placed in one tomb in the chapter-house (Flete, 83).

^{page 86 note 2} Widmore, , History of Westminster Abbey (1751), p. 10Google Scholar f.

^{page 86 note 3} Gesta Regum, Rolls Series 90, i. 280Google Scholar.

^{page 87 note 1} Materials for Life of Becket, Rolls Series 67, v. 19: “in ecclesia … quam a fundamentis erectam constituit, et amplissime dotatam, omnibus quae ad decorem domus Dei sunt in honorem Dei et beati Petri nobilitatam, beatissime consummavit.”

^{page 87 note 2} D. ( = Westminster “Domesday”) ff. 51 b, 52 b.

^{page 87 note 3} It is right to refer to a statement quoted by Mr. Lethaby (p. 104) from Leland, who extracts it from a chronicle of Malmesbury: “Anno D. 1110, inchoatum est novum opus Westmonasterie “[Leland, i. 305]. The date is a mistake for 1220, and the reference is to the new Lady Chapel: the next sentence speaks of the removal (hoc anno) of the Canons of Salisbury from Old to New Sarum. The whole is given in Eulogium Historiarum, Rolls Series 9, iii. 116, under the year MCCXX (not MCX, as Leland must have read).

^{page 88 note 1} “Innan Nicholaes portice”: rendered “in porticu sancti Nicholai”, in Waverley Annals, Rolls Series 36, 192. For the use of “porticus “as a chapel cf. Bede, H. E. ii. 3, v. 20: also Ethelwold's Regularis Concordia, “eundum est ad matutinales laudes de Omnibus Sanctis, decantando antiphonam ad venerationem sancti cui porticus ad quam itur dedicata est” (Reyner, Apostol. Ben., app. p. 81) Willis, Canterbury, p. 39, gives reasons for his bold rendering of it as apse.

^{page 88 note 2} “The earliest authentication in an English calendar of the feast of St. Nicholas “appears to be in the Cotton MS., Nero A ii, of the eleventh century (Edm. Bishop, Bosworth Psalter, 171).

^{page 88 note 3} Rolls Series 73, i. 5, 10: “in hac predicta navi … post incendium per quinquennium exulavimus.”

^{page 89 note 1} Transcript, p. 445: “hoc, ut prefertur, pro defectu altarium ab usu recessit moderno.’ The corresponding passage in the derived Customary of St. Augustine's, Canterbury, (p.311) flounders curiously in its attempted adaptation.

^{page 89 note 2} “Set idem sacrista quinque proculdubio lampades per totum annum, quae in ecclesia die noctuque ex recta et antiqua consuetudine jugiter ardere solent, invenire tenetur: unam videlicet ante altare sanctae crucis in navi ecclesiae; … et aliam ante altare beati Pauli et crucifixi imaginem, ad quam devocionis causa ad orandum pedesque illius osculandos plebei per gradus ex una parte scandere et ex alia parte descendere consueverant; atque terciam ante vetus altare beatae dei genetricis Mariae; quartam vero coram altare sanctae trinitatis; et quintam coram altare beati patris nostri Benedicti.”

^{page 90 note 1} The word pulpitum is used in various senses. I consider that the use of it for the rood-screen with its two doors and altar between, as distinguished from the quire-screen with its one door, is justified not only by the language of Gervase (Rolls Series 73, i. 9, 10), but also by the following passage relating to Bury St. Edmunds (James, M. R., Canib. Antiq. Soc. Communications, xxviii. 178)Google Scholar: “A penitent under gravis culpa … pergit in ecclesiam usque ad magnum hostium chori, scilicet in medio loco inter pulpitum et predictum hostium, et ibi debet sedere super magnum scamnum “(comp. Rites of Durham, 33 f., “under the said loft by the wall there was a long forme which dyd reche from the one Roodedore to the other”).

^{page 90 note 2} So at Albans, St. (Gesta Abbatum, Rolls Series 28 [4], i. 287)Google Scholar the old cross, etc. which had been in the middle of the church, being removed when new ornaments were made, were placed “in ecclesiae nostrae parte aquilonari, ad laicorum et omnium illic adventantium aedificationem “.

^{page 90 note 3} Cf. Indulgence (D. [ = Westminster “Domesday”], f. 432): “capella ad ostium boreale … et imago virtuosa ejusdem virginis.”

^{page 91 note 1} D. f. 364: “ad altare sanctae trinitatis, ubi idem sanctus Edwardus vidit regem Dacorum submersum.”

^{page 91 note 2} Osbert MS., Brit. Mus. Add. MS. 36737, f. 142.

^{page 91 note 3} Osbert MS. f. 147.

^{page 91 note 4} I may add here that in King Henry III.'s time a certain rent was granted to the “procurator” of this altar by Master Simon of London (D. f. 373 b).

^{page 92 note 1} Customary, transcr. pp. 425, 428 (cf. i. 297, 299); also ii. 239. I give parallel references to vol. i, the St. Augustine's Customary, where the Westminster Customary is not printed. At St. Augustine's the altar of St. Gregory held a corresponding position, and the altar of St. Benedict corresponded to the altar of Holy Trinity at Westminster.

^{page 92 note 2} Customary, ii. 239, 241 ff.; transcr. p. 453 (i. 316).

^{page 92 note 3} MSS. of Westminster Abbey, 9–12.

^{page 92 note 4} In the old church Harold Harefoot had been buried, but he was dug up almost at once by his brother Harthacnut (Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, sub anno 1039).

^{page 92 note 5} I follow the earliest authority, the contemporary Vita Edwardi, which places the death “pridie nonas Januarii” (p. 434); as also does Osbert (MS. f. 153). This harmonizes with the fact that the feast of the “Depositio S. Edwardi” was kept on 5th January. But the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle says that he died “on Twelftan aefen”, and was buried “on Twelftan dæg”. So, too, William of Malmesbury (1124) places the burial on 6th January, “die Theophaniae” (Gesta Regum, Rolls Series 90, i. 280); and Ordericus Vitalis gives “nonas Januarii” as the day of death (ed. Le Prevost, ii. 118). Flete likewise says: “obiit nonis Januarii in vigilia Epiphaniae domini” (p. 82); and he is followed by Widmore and Stanley.

^{page 93 note 1} Vita Edwardi, p. 434, “coram altare beati Petri”; Sulcard MS. f. 16 b, “ante ipsum altare principis apostolorum”; Osbert MS. f. 153, “secus altare beati Petri apostoli.”

^{page 93 note 2} Osbert MS. f. 156: “qua de causa triumphator Anglorum Willelmus super sanctum regem Edwardum ex auro et argento capsae fabricam condidit, quae utique in hodiernum diem in ecclesia beati Petri apostoli gloriosum corpus obumbrat et tegit.”

^{page 93 note 3} Gesta Regum, Rolls Series 90, i. 332: “quae apud Westmonasterium studio ejus [sc. Willelmi] prope conjugem locata habet tumbam argenti aurique expensis operosam.”

What is called the First Charter of William I. contains the statement that on his first visit to the abbey the Conqueror laid two precious palls on King Edward's grave (D. f. 51 b): and in reference to a later occasion it says (D. f. 52b): “et quia macerias [= enclosure-walls?] ecclesiae maxima ex parte jam imperfectas esse cognovi, ad perficiendum quod in ilia residuum fuerat centum libras argenti devotus optuli. Itaque ob reverentiam nimii amoris quem erga ipsum inclitum regem habueram, tumbam ejus et reginae juxta eum positae ex auro et argento fabrili opere artificiosi decoris mirifice operiri feci.” The charter is dated 1067, but the queen did not die till 1075. Yet, though not a genuine document, it may contain a true tradition on these points.

^{page 93 note 4} Anglo-Saxon Chronicle.

^{page 93 note 5} D. f. 165.

^{page 93 note 6} D. f. 363 b.

^{page 94 note 1} A preliminary sketch was made for me by the Rev. R. G. Parsons, Fellow of University College, Oxford, who went with me to Jumièges at Easter, 1909, and to whom I owe valuable suggestions. I have used as the groundwork Mr. J. H. Cheadle's excellent new plan of the existing church.

^{page 95 note 1} Bouet, , Clochers du diocèse de Bayeux, 40, where reference is made to Description des travaux de reprise en sous-oeuvre de la cathédrale de Bayeux par MM. H. de Dion et L. Lasvigne (Paris, Morel et Cie, 1861).Google Scholar

^{page 97 note 1} The third remnant is only a plinth stone. It is remembered that the fourth, opposite to the eastern one on the north side, was sought for, but nothing was in place.

^{page 98 note 1} The Archaeological Journal, March, 1894.Google Scholar

^{page 99 note 1} Mr. Wallace has kindly given me these dimensions.

^{page 100 note 1} See vol. i of London in the Victoria County Histories.