SOME FURTHER NOTES ON BURTON ABBEY PLAN. 38 
early Norman door. Note the worn threshold ; also, the remains of 
the column, and compare it with the West front excavation, and you 
will see at once the difference in the masonry. Now, what else can 
we learn from this excavation. First, that the plan given by Shaw, 
and said to be at Beaudesert, is correct, as far as general outline, 
that there must have been a Gallilee, and that on the walls there 
were evidences of a wall continuing West. 
A second point is now proved ; that is, the width of the South 
aisle, and for all practical purposes the South wall of the Churchyard 
stands on the South wall of the aisle, and the pillar from which the 
iron rails of the Churchyard start, on the South West or Market 
Place side, represents the line of the pillars and arches of the South 
nave arcade. 
Thirdly, ‘‘ here a tower,” as mentioned on Shaw’s plan, was, I 
think, also confirmed by the foundations at the North-West end. 
On the North side we were able to uncover a bit of the founda- 
tion of the North Transept. Now this would be the West wall of the 
N. Transept, and again it coincides with the Plan, with this one 
exception, that the plan shows the wall inside the Church, but it 
projected two feet outside. If my plan had been drawn as it should 
be at the West end, this would have been right as well. 
And what was there to learn from this foundation? It was, 
without doubt, the earliest workmanship we have come upon—much 
earlier than the West front, much earlier than is shown of the N.E. 
Cloister door—and I should almost be inclined to say it might 
probably have been some of Wulfric Spot’s work. I wish there had 
been more to see and judge by. It was rough masonary on a bed 
_ of rough concrete. We get this in Saxon work, as at Peterborough, 
in the old 7th century Church, which was found in the present 
Cathedral. We get it in York Minster, where it is put down to 
being the great stone Bassilica, which Bede says King Edwin began 
