Page:Archaeological Journal, Volume 9.djvu/68

42 lights of these two windows is evident from the fact of their being the narrowest lights in the building, and that the glass exactly fits them.

Let us, then, re-arrange the glass upon this supposition, and put in No. 1 light what is now in No. 7 light; in No. 2 what is now in No. 8; in No. 3 what is now in No. 9; in No. 4 what is now in No. 10; in No. 5 what is now in No. 11; in No. 6 what is now in No. 12; leaving the glass in Nos. 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, and 18 as it now is, and we shall find the Apostles arranged in a not uncommon order, and a perfect alternation preserved in the forms of the canopies, and in the colouring of the designs, throughout the upper tier of lights. Let us now put in No. 7 light the glass which is in No. 20 light; in No. 8 the remains of the canopy work first mentioned in No. 1, and the portion of the crucifix in No. 1; in No. 9 what is now in No. 4; in No. 11 the remains of the canopy-work first mentioned in No. 2, and the portion of the crucifix in No. 5; in No. 12 what is now in No. 23; in No. 20 the remains of the canopy-work first mentioned in No, 5, and the portion of the crucifix in No. 3; and in No. 23 the remains of the canopy-work first mentioned in No. 3, and the portion of the crucifix in No. 6; leaving No. 10 blank, and the glass in Nos. 19, 21, 22, and 24 as it now is; and we shall find, supposing the missing subject of No. 10 light to have been a duplicate of that in No. 19, and that the remains of the canopy-work, first mentioned in No. 6, belonged to it; that not only will a perfect alternation in the forms of the canopies and the colouring of the subjects be preserved throughout the East windows, in the one, whether regarded in a horizontal or in a perpendicular direction; in the other, when regarded in a horizontal direction—and it is obvious that a double alternation might, by a different arrangement, be produced in this as well as in the former window—but that the attitudes of