Visited by the Society in 1890. 278 
the chancel in the fourteenth century, but no other alteration appears 
to have been made in the walls which stand as firm and solid as 
when first erected. 
On the north side of the chancel, in the straight part of the wall, 
is a recess or credence with semicircular head, and on the opposite 
side a similar opening for an aumbry, with rebate and marks of 
hooks for a pair of doors. Both of these recesses have semicircular 
arches, they are lft. 9in. wide, lft. 10in. deep, and 12in. high to 
the springing. 
The chancel arch is deserving of especial notice: it consists of 
plain jambs and semicircular arch of square section, with an impost 
Vin. thick worked with an early moulding which is carried to the 
side wall of the nave on each side. On the east face, the arch 
consists of two plain rings of thin stones, but on the west face 
these voussoirs are fitted together with a V-shaped joint which is 
unique. The wall here is 3ft. 4in. thick, the outer walls being 
3ft. 38in. This arch has less of the character of a doorway than that 
at Bradford—a point in favour of the greater antiquity of the latter. 
There were three consecration crosses discovered here under the 
whitewash on the circular end of the apse, about 7ft. 5in. above the 
floor, two simple lines of red colour 5in. long, crossing each other 
at right angles and enclosed by a quatrefoil, again within a circle; 
there were probably three on each side of the Church, the number 
which we have found in the much later Church at Edington. 
The oak door and its iron-work are of seventeenth century date. 
I have now described the main points of this extremely interesting 
Church: it is difficult to assign a definite date to it, but there are 
evidences—notably the distinct archway, rather than a doorway, 
between the nave and chancel—of a more recent date than the 
Church at Bradford, and yet it is not Norman. It will be observed 
that, with the exception of the moulding on the impost of the 
chancel arch, there is not a ¢race of ornamentation of any kind in 
the original work—and the lofty proportion of the walls and 
doorways is quite pre-Norman. I am disposed, therefore, to endorse 
the opinion of Dr. Baron in assigning the erection of this Church 
to the tenth century. 
