By C. £. Ponting, P.8.A. 195. 
erected without a chancel, and it is difficult to believe that the 
chancel, if erected together with the rest, would have needed re- 
building within so short a space of time; does it not rather seem 
likely that the body of an older Chureh stood on the spot, and that 
the re-building of the chancel was left until the last? If this were 
the case here, the old Church was a Saxon one, and probably 
built of wood. This is of course mere speculation, but I think the 
material evidence here is sufficient to raise the question. The Norman 
nave was of three bays in length, the aisles a lean-to against the two 
westernmost of them, and the transepts (probably span roofed) 
against the east end bay. That transepts existed is indicated by the 
arch across the east end of the south aisle, and it is improbable 
that a tower then stood in the position of the present one. The 
columns of the arcade and the western respond are circular, and 
have square abaci, the capital of the former is carved in unusually 
refined work for the time; the volutes are foliated and there are 
three fleur-de-lys on each face. The arches, of two orders of chamfers, 
indicate transitional feeling. 
Soon after the middle of the fifteenth century the part about the 
east bay underwent a re-modelling and the rest of the body of the 
Church was re-built. The alteration for the erection of the tower 
is clearly defined by the remains, which present an interesting bit 
of history. The Perpendicular builders appear to have considered the 
oblong pier dividing the aisle arches from the transept arch of the 
nave arcade, and the responds of the arches opening into the nave 
.and aisle sufficiently strong to bear their tower, but they apparently 
_ distrusted the arches themselves—they therefore re-built the latter. 
The one oblong pier was re-modelled after the prevailing fashion by 
chamfering off the angles, and a patera was carved at the top to 
balance the cap of the Norman detached column, and the re-building 
started with the new abacus. The east and south responds remain 
unaltered; the arches then erected on them are of two orders of 
chamfers. The lower stage of the tower was intended as a chapel, 
and a corbel for the figure remains in the east wall, as well as two 
others higher up which might have been for the rood beam. 
A string-course marks the line at which the clerestory, added to 
