Visited by the Society in 1890. 



265 



we must not too severely criticise this alteration by the architect for 

 the restoration, who has, at any rate, given us a beautiful little 

 Church. 



The chapel and tower were erected together at the latter part of 



the fifteenth century. The brass on the west wall of the former 



bears the following inscription : — 



" Off yo r . charite pray for the soul of Willm Chaucey gentylma & Marion 

 his wyfe which Willm edefied thys Chapell and decessyd the ix day of Juni 

 Anno dni M.°ccccc°xxiiij°." 



The arms are those of Chaucey impaling Dunch, and as the same 

 appear on a shield in the spandrel of the porch doorway it is probable 

 that both chapel and tower were erected, or " edefied/' by William 

 Chaucey. The archway between chapel and nave is panelled like 

 that of the tower of Rushall, and has a rich oak screen, the com- 

 munication being by means of a traceried opening in the same, 

 without a door. The carving in this screen is not cut out of the 

 solid, but cut separately and planted in, a treatment often found in 

 late work. The chapel has two square-headed windows — a four- 

 light in the south wall and a two-light in the east. There are 

 corbels for figures in the angles on each side of the site of the altar, 

 and a piscina in a perfect state of preservation on the south side. 

 The original flat-pitched roof remains in this part. 



The chancel screen, which forms the only separation of chancel 

 and nave, is of the same date as the screen of the chapel, but it has 

 doors. The original colouring remains on the old parts; the rood 

 loft does not exist. 



The tower is of three stages, and its somewhat unusual position 

 is accounted for by its having been built with the chapel. There is 

 no staircase to give access to the belfry. The lower stage forms the 

 porch for the nave, and from it the sanctus bell was rung during 

 mass. 



The question of the use of low-side windows has lately been 

 revived in the columns of the "Antiquary," and I was invited by 

 Dr. Cox to give my views upon it. 1 From the various examples 

 which I have studied I have no doubt that the low-side window was 



1 " Antiquary," vol. xxi., p. 122. 



