be cited the common, if not general, usage of the early church, but chiefly that the altar upon which the great Sacrifice was first offered up-the cross itself was of this material.

Within the last few years a curious combination has The top or altar-slab is of stone,

Now,

become very common. whilst the framework supporting it is of wood. This seems to have its origin in the singular but wide-spread superstition that the altar must not be fixed. common sense dictates that it shall not be moveable. To meet these two not very harmonious requirements, men have endeavoured to make the altar, whilst really a separate piece of furniture," ponderous and fixed by its own massy weight." But a wooden top of sufficient thickness to effect this is almost certain to wrap and crack to avoid which architects often substitute stone. This standing of stone upon wood is, however, not to be commended as a rule, although a small altar may often be conveniently increased in height and length by placing a stone slab on the top of it.

Whatever be their material, altars should be perfectly simple in design. Elaborately-sculptured altars are of quite modern introduction, and I know of no sufficient argument in their favour. They are liable to catch the vestments of the clergy moving about them, and in appearance they are much inferior to altars vested in the usual manner. It is quite true that the altar should be equal, if not superior, in costliness to the other objects in the church, but this may be brought about by the use of valuable material.

A massive slab of rich marble, carried upon pillars of gilded bronze, will form an altar suitable for the most expensively furnished church. A slab carried on pillars is, I think, the best form for a stone altar; but it may be carried on walls, or on solid masonry.

If the altar is of wood, it should be framed like a large heavy table and not like a packing-case. But, above all, it must be simple and straightforward in design, and no such childish absurdities allowed as open traceried fronts, behind which, frontals stretched on frames are pushed in end-wise, like slides into a magic lantern, "according to the colour of the season."

The slab of an altar, whether of wood or stone, must not be moulded on its upper edge, but kept perfectly square; moulding here not only looks bad and renders the fitting of the altar vestments impossible, but it is very likely to cause accidents from the fall of things. placed near the edge.

Ancient altar-slabs have usually five rude crosses cut in them, which mark the places anointed by the bishop at the consecration. The reproduction of these crosses on unanointed altars is unmeaning.

It is now usual to place the altar-cross and candlesticks, not upon the altar itself, but upon a sort of ledge or shelf raised a few inches above it. For this ledge I know of no special mediæval name, although it was in use at least as early as the fifteenth century, and as none of the "correct" names happen in this case to be correct,

1 Until within the last three or four years it was always called the superaltar, and although superaltare has usually another meaning, I have very

I shall speak of it simply as the "altar-shelf." It adds very considerably to the importance of the altar, and should therefore be retained, but it should not be made part of the altar itself for reasons which cannot easily be explained, without entering at length into the question of the vesting of the altar. If the shelf is to be on the altar it must be loose, but I think it is better that it should be behind the altar, in which case it becomes part of the reredos, and must be considered with it. Sometimes, however, the former is the preferable method, especially when altering an existing building; for most modern sanctuaries are too short, and the altars quite broad enough to allow of the shelf being placed on them, whereby we avoid the reduction of the available length of the sanctuary consequent upon bringing forward the altar so as to place a reredos behind it. The best form for an altar-shelf of this kind is a wooden box, the length of the altar, and from nine to twelve inches broad, and from four to eight high.

little doubt that, if a mediæval Latin writer had had occasion to speak of the altar-shelf, this is the word which he would have used. Recently, however, our "correct friends have discovered, I don't know how, that this word is not correct, and they now with one consent laugh to scorn the benighted few who still retain it; whilst they themselves speak of the altar-shelf as the "Re-table," with a very long e and a pause after it, seemingly from a notion that it is a kind of table to put things on. The word retable is French, and about equivalent to our reredos as now commonly used; table=tabula, not mensa. I do not remember to have met the Latin form retabulum, although it is frequently used by moderns, especially when speaking of the well-known relic of thirteenth-century English art at Westminster, which is generally considered to be a "retable," but which I venture to think a frontal.

SECTION XV.

OF THE REREDOS.

It may possibly be thought that the reredos ought to be classed amongst the purely decorative features of a church. It has, however, or at least it may have, a certain practical use, in consideration of which, and also of its great importance in the composition of the interior, it is fairly entitled to be ranked with the furniture of the building. A bad reredos will ruin the best church ever designed; and, although a good reredos cannot convert a bad church into a good one, it may do much to lessen the offensiveness of its badness.

As the word reredos is now ordinarily used, it means a more or less ornate wall or screen placed behind the altar, to which it should give increased dignity, but which, in not a few modern instances, it crushes into insignificance, whilst it monopolises the whole interest to itself. The fault arises from the non-recognition of the proper function of a reredos. We will, therefore, begin by inquiring what this is.

In a large apartment a small object is by itself necessarily unimportant, and if we wish to draw special notice to it, we must provide some other object of sufficient size to attract the attention, and so placed as to carry down the eye of the spectator to the first. Thus,

in the House of Lords, a chair, the use of which prevents its being very large, is surmounted by a canopy and becomes the throne, strikingly the principal object in the place. Just so it is in a church-the dimensions of the altar are limited, especially in the most important direction of height; we must, therefore, add something which shall first draw the attention to itself, and then focus it upon the altar. In a church of ordinary size, a good reredos is the best means of effecting this, but a well-managed cloth dossal will do it almost equally well, and should always be preferred to a cheap reredos. A reredos is a luxury. If you can afford it, have it; if you cannot honestly go without it, do not make-believe with a shabby-genteel substitute. The evidence of poverty in essentials is no disgrace, but in superfluities it is tawdry and mean, qualities which, hateful everywhere, are doubly so in the sanctuary.

The reredos may take an almost infinite variety of forms. It may either stand against the east wall, or be in advance of it; it may be but little longer than the altar, or it may extend all across the sanctuary; it may be only a few feet in height, or it may cover the whole east end; it may be of stone, wood, marble, alabaster, bronze, earthenware, or, indeed, of almost any material; and it may be decorated with painting and sculpture, singly or combined. It would be impossible, even if I wished it, to lay down any general rules as to the designing of a reredos; I shall, therefore, confine myself to the general consideration of the chief requirements, with the view of determining the best means of meeting them.