inside. The aisle has a sharp-pitched lean-to roof, covered with slates, and with a curved boarded ceiling to the inside.

The height of the nave from the floor to the flat ceiling is 52 ft., and of the aisles 30 ft. 7 ins. from floor to wall plate. The height from the floor to the springing of the arches of the arcade is 15 ft. 8 ins., and from the floor to the springing of the triforium arches, 29 ft. 4 ins., and to the springing of the clerestory arches 43 ft. The nave walls are 4 ft. 6 ins. thick, and the aisle walls 3 ft. 6 ins.

The original lighting was by single-light windows in the aisles and clerestory, and probably a great central window in the west end, and a single-light west window to each end. The circular windows in the aisle lighted the triforium storey. Many of the shallow external buttresses still remain to the aisles.

The bays of the main arcade are not treated as a repeat of a single bay, but are grouped into pairs, with a main and a minor pier to each pair, and each main pier has a semi-shaft next the nave running from floor to roof; but the corresponding shaft over the smaller piers starts at the level of the sill string to the triforium storey. As at present seen, the triforium stage has only a single arch, the inner ring of which is wanting. There can be but little doubt that this wide opening was subdivided: it may be into two, three, or four smaller openings. The clerestory stage has a wide central opening, and a small one on each side of it. The walls, in all probability, carried a massive open-timbered roof, which would certainly form an appropriate crown to this magnificent nave. The gaunt aisles as now seen, it must be said, have lost their first proportions, for they were assuredly spanned by appropriate vaulting, or what means the shafting on the aisle side of the nave piers? and for what reason do the strings under the aisle windows appear with gaps? and what else but vaulting shafts account for the present appearance of the aisle walls where the inner quoins of the vaulting shafts still appear? and what do the arched lines in the upper part of these walls mean, except as indicating the lines of former vaulting?

1897

11

Above all, who that has studied Norman art does not shun the idea that the original designer of this building omitted the vaulting of these aisles, both on the score of proportion and utility? Excepting that when these aisles were encumbered with great galleries, the real condition of things could not be seen, it would be hard to conceive that any practical man could for a moment think that they were originally devoid of vaulting.

It will be seen that the two western piers of the arcades are not only of differing shape, but also of much larger dimensions than the other piers; and on the exterior it is also to be seen that the aisle walls have strengthening projections opposite to these piers, and the walls themselves are increased in thickness. The late Professor Freeman, it is said, first pointed out that these special provisions were designed in reference to two western towers which originally occupied this position. Beyond the above-named points there are now no further indications that such towers were actually executed, except that in the western bay no clerestory was provided. On the other hand, there is nothing to suggest that towers at these points did not form part of the original western façade.

The first material change affecting the design of this church was the removal of its west wall and the substitution of the present one. What the original of the Norman west front was there seems to be no clue to; it was taken down and wholly rebuilt. But it must be safe to say that the western front of Rochester Cathedral (which we have recently seen under the able guidance of the Rev. Mr. Levett) represents the probable characteristics of the original Waltham front. Or it may be that Waltham went beyond this Cathedral in dignity and elaboration, equalling the west front of the ancient Benedictine Priory Church of St. Mary of Tutbury, in Staffordshire, and to which, with other drawings of this church, further allusion will be made when the question of dates is reached. It may be asked, What reason could there be for pulling down such a fine front so completely in harmony with the other parts of the church? Answer

to this may be made: First, that for aught we know, structural difficulties may have arisen; and then the motives of men living under circumstances now remote are not easy to be discerned. And again, then, as now, fashion had its changes, architectural styles succeeded one another, and in those days at least the past fashions were scarcely ever followed by a succeeding age; and, above all, ambition was deeply seated in the hearts of men then, as now, and out of such ambition and change of views, then, as now, came novel performances it may be to the advantage or disadvantage of succeeding ages. In the case of the rebuilding of this front, if a great work was taken down, another was substituted, if out of harmony with the building at large, yet in itself of exceeding beauty and boldness. Of this the great western doorway with its adjacent arcadings, the slight remains of the windows above the doorway, and the circular windows, and pinnacles, and buttresses to the aisles, sufficiently testify. The triforium floor and the gutters of the roofs were in all probability approached by stairs in this west wall, one on each side, with a passage running across the west end connecting them. An approximation to this arrangement is still in existence.

The other principal alterations in the church consist of the pointed arch work in the clerestories, the attempt to abandon the triforium storey, and to make the church of only two stages in height, as seen in the second bay from the west end; to provide for the erection of the Lady Chapel on the south side, and of the insertion in the north aisle of a three-light window early in the fourteenth century, and of a four-light window late in the fifteenth century. Everyone Everyone (who cares for such things) must thankfully rejoice that the bad taste which started to remodel the church, as seen at the west end, so as to destroy its Norman character, was frustrated in its attempt either by abhorrence of its own performances, or from the fear that their church would come to the ground ere they had completed the hideous change. To this same sad taste the removal of the vaulting of the aisles is probably attributable. The remains of ancient