tended for doorways, an unusual arrangement in Norman churches of this size, or, as is more probable, for strength, as if to support western towers, the wall being very thick, cannot now be ascertained; the outer surface of the wall having been since cased with plain masonry, obliterating nearly all traces of its original character. In the centre of the west front is a doorway ornamented with beak-heads, and other heads of un- usual design with scrolls issuing from the mouths. Above are the remains of an arcade of intersecting arches with zig-zag work, in part cut away to admit the insertion of a sharp- pointed window, with early Perpendicular tracery; and a flat roof and battlements were put up when the clerestory was added to the nave. The north aisle has been widened, but the line of the original wall may easily be traced by the Norman base-moulding on the outside of the west end.
The central tower and the transepts were originally Norman, and, so far as could be ascertained, of the same date as the nave. The tower-piers, which were taken down in 1841, had been obviously cut away in parts, and altered by the addition of side shafts, to carry the ribs of the pointed arches set upon them, about the middle of the thirteenth century. There is also good reason to believe, that the walls of the north transept were either in part the original Norman walls, projecting, as was usual in the smaller churches, but little beyond the line of the walls of the side aisles, with additions of Early English work; or that at all events they stood upon the site of the old foundation. And as it will generally be found that in the older churches, the transepts correspond very nearly with each other in their dimensions, it may be fairly presumed that a short Norman transept had originally been erected on the south similar to that on the north. The chancel also had evidently been of Norman construction, for part of a corbel-table still remains in the upper end of the north wall of the chancel, next the tower-pier, shewing the continuation of the older masonry. This chancel would probably be short, and have the usual apsidal termination, as may be represented by the. imaginary dotted line; and thus the ground-plan of this church would correspond very nearly with that of Melbourne in the same county.
The upper part of this tower and the south transept were taken down and rebuilt about the middle of the thirteenth century; the transept being considerably lengthened, and,
