O'Ekilia- — Old CliHrchea of DaJhci/ Tonn and Island. 209 



of the sua on the horizon, and thus to fix the precise period of the 

 equinox and summer solstice — the former fundamentally necessary for 

 the correct determination of the Paschal Time. 



The plan of the church was carefully made, and, for.reasons here 

 unnecessary to explain, the dimensions were taken in metres and 

 centimetres, which can always be converted into English feet and 

 inches when required. It will be observed that the plan (PI. XIV., 

 fig. 1 ) does not indicate a very great precision in the laying out of the 

 foundations, and that measurements to a centimetre give the amount 

 of accuracy attainable. 



The principal feature which strikes one on the examination of the 

 plan is the projections of the north and south side wall, beyond the 

 gable faces, so as to form what have been called, in the description by 

 Wakeman, " pilasters," but which, more properly, might be called 

 " antae " — a detail of form so characteristic of the more ancient styles 

 of Greek and Italian temples. These projections are not quite equal 

 at the four corners ; the two at the western end of the building are 

 practically equal in amount of projection ; but at the east end the 

 projections are unequal and somewhat greater than at the west end. 



The door in the western gable is marked in its style as noticed by 

 Wakeman. The jambs are slightly inclined ; the breadth of doorway 

 between them is, at the top, under the lintel, 80 centimetres; while at 

 the ground, where a sill may have existed, it is 82 centimetres: thus 

 barely an inch, but determinable. 



A character of the building, which does not seem to have been 

 noticed, is the " batter'' of the tvalls, which may be observed on the 

 angles of the building, but more particularly on the jambs of the door, 

 which showed a thickness of wall of 93-5 centimetres at the floor, 

 and only 85*5 centimetres under the lintel. This batter, or inward 

 inclination of the walls, is fairly recognisable in the photographic 

 vignette placed at the end of the chapter (p. 80) in Mr. Elrington 

 Ball's work already referred to. It would favour the presumption of 

 great antiquity for the building, and would, to some extent, account 

 for the resistance of the walls to the destructive action of time, wind, 

 and weather. 



The masonry is very rough, and is composed of stones, which 

 seem to have been either surface-boulders or very weathered material 

 from some other structure. The sizes of the stones vary much, fi-om 

 very large in the lower parts, to middling- and small-sized in the upper 

 parts. Of courses there are, strictly speaking, none, the stones 

 having been seemingly fitted to one another as they came to hand, 



