nal splay--all of which may or may not indicate a
difference in date between the apse in this storey and in the crypt. The
hand of Archbishop Roger seems traceable here not only in the external
shafts and corbel-table, but also in the trefoiling (externally) of the
east window. The two vaulting-corbels at any rate seem to be his, as
well as the piscina. The upper part of the apse has lost its
semicircular shape and been squared, and some masonry has been thrown
across from its wall to the Decorated buttress, the motive having been
perhaps to make a better support for the rectangular east end of the
Lady-loft. The oak table in this room was probably the Communion-table
of the church during the period following the Reformation.

The question now arises how long the vestry and Chapter-house have
served their present purpose. Of the arrangements in this storey before
the time of Archbishop Roger nothing can be recovered with certainty,
but the (presumably Norman) wall between the two parts of the crypt
suggests by its thickness that it was intended to support a division of
some kind above. After being remodelled in the time of Archbishop Roger,
however, this upper storey was evidently open from end to end, and its
apsidal termination, containing both piscina and altar-step, indicates
that it was a chapel: indeed, as has been well suggested, it was
probably the original Lady Chapel. Nevertheless, in an age when every
action of life was invested with a religious character, the western part
may have been used for capitular purposes even without a dividing wall,
and the gritstone benches, so significant of those purposes, are
doubtless of considerable age. The statement in the old Records that the
trial of 1228[115] was held _apud Rypon in Aula Capituli_ is definite
enough to show that there was a recognised place for Chapter meetings;
nor is it improbable that the reference may be to the present building.
Some doubt is thrown upon this conclusion by a proclamation of
Archbishop Lee in 1537 sequestrating the Common Fund on the ground that
"the Chapter-house is ruinous in walls, roof, and stonework generally,
so that it is likely to fall." These words, it has been thought, can
never have been applicable to the present Chapter-house, and it has been
suggested therefore that there may have been another which has
disappeared. Archbishop Lee's words, however, are perhaps not
irreconcilable with the present building. They may refer to