. J A oa 
By C. E. Ponting, F.8.A. 209 
diagonal buttresses were evidently added in the fifteenth century. 
= The north transept has undergone but little alteration, and 
_ retains even its original early trussed-rafter roof. In the east 
wall are two single-light lancet windows, and in the north wall 
is a coeval window of three lights with early tracery formed of three 
circles with quatrefoil cusping. The coeval aumbry in the east wall 
is of large size, with shelf, and indicates the original intention of a 
chantry. On the outside this transept has no plinth or parapet; 
_ the square buttresses have had their weatherings renewed and lost 
_ their original characteristics. 
Near the end of the fourteenth or early in the fifteenth century an 
extraordinary re-modelling of the Church was taken in hand,' and 
_ the operation appears to have commenced with the nave and aisles. 
_ The arcades dividing these were removed, and the side walls rebuilt 
to form a nave equal in width internally to the previous nave and 
_ aisles. A glance at the west front shows exactly how far the re- 
_ building there was carried—the lines of the early aisle roofs are 
indicated by a change in the masonry (the earlier work being faced 
with finer rubble) and the quoins of the coeval nave (which was 
probably elerestoried) are left above these. The external width of 
the whole only appears to have been inereased sufficiently to gain 
the greater thickness of wall whieh was apparently deemed necessary 
to carry the wide-span roof: the south wall is about 4ft. thick, and 
the north wall, which has no porch to buttress it, is 6in. thicker ; 
_ both walls have far-projecting buttresses, evidently constructed with 
_ the wide span in view, and there are diagonal buttresses at the two 
angles carried up to the cornice. The west front is most cleverly 
treated to obviate the unwieldly effeet of a wide and broad gable: 
the cornice and embattled parapet which crown the side walls are 
earried round almost horizontally—a slight camber only being given, 
as was usual at this period in the case of a tie-beam—and the gable 
kept back to admit of a passage between. Exactly the same treat- 
“ment had only recently been carried out at Edington by the man 
for whom I claim the credit of having designed the neighbouring 
‘> 1 This work might, I think, be put as late as 1417—the date suggested in Mrv 
Hutchinson's paper. . 
