further ill-treated during the architectural supremacy
of Sir Christopher Wren and his school, when the smaller canopies and
other projections were pared off to make a level surface for the
classical piece of woodwork placed in front of it. When this
incongruous structure was removed and the restoration taken in hand
(in 1833) by Mr. Wallace, liberties were again taken with the
unfortunate screen, more or less spoiling the design, though
undertaken on a good motive. Perhaps the least objectionable of these
innovations was the insertion of panels for the Creed, Lord's Prayer,
and Ten Commandments, in perpetuation of those in the wooden
altar-piece, where the formulae had been set up in the spirit of the
Injunctions of 1536 and 1538. Above the stages Mr. Wallace introduced
rows of angels, the highest row being surmounted by a cornice of
strawberry-leaf ornament for which there was no sort of precedent,
either in the original work here, or in other altar-screens of similar
character elsewhere.[27]

The screen is about thirty feet in height, and extends to the main
arcades on either side. Three tiers of canopied niches, ten in each
tier, divided down the centre by a perpendicular series of three
larger niches, all occupied by statues, made up a composition which
was at once "a thing of beauty" and an object lesson on the
Incarnation. The total number of niches (thirty-three) suggested a
mystic reference to the years of our Lord's earthly life, while the
image of the Pelican "in her piety," here and there, besides being a
reminder of Bishop Fox (whose peculiar device it was), also typified
the sacrament of the altar. The original materials of which the screen
was built are quoted as "Caen and fire-stone," for which Mr. Wallace
substituted stone from Painswick in Gloucestershire, as more easily
obtained and agreeing in colour with the old work.[28]

Above the altar the first architect had left a vacant panel (square)
possibly intending it for the reception of sculpture or mosaic. This
space, as well as some of the side panelling, was covered by the
Decalogue, etc., before mentioned. The space is now vacant, pending
the complete restoration of the screen, and is simply concealed by the
dorsal and lateral curtains. The doors on each side will be noticed,
with their depressed ogee headings, which indicate that this screen is
of somewhat later date than the corresponding one (also by Bishop Fox)
at Winchester. Another indicati