rivalry in this respect. Size is, of course, only one element in the
impressiveness of a building, and may even be neutralized by the
treatment (as, for instance, in the Duomo of Florence and St. Peter's,
Rome, by increasing the size of its parts rather than multiplying
them), but these few comparisons will help the visitor to judge how
far this element colours his appreciation of the whole. As an
illustration of mediaeval methods of church building, it is
interesting to trace the growth of the structure with the help of the
few historical notices already given and the evidence of the building
itself. The subject is full of difficulties, and the writer does not
hope to solve them conclusively, but to put before the reader the main
points which have to be considered before forming a judgement.

[Illustration: TOWER ARCH.]

Both historic and structural evidence agree that there was an existing
smaller church when the tower was built in the last quarter of the
fourteenth century, that the choir and apse were either contemporary,
or begun a few years earlier, and that the nave was built between 1434
and 1450. The south porch and the west crypt (beneath the original
Lady Chapel) are almost contemporary, belonging to the beginning of
the fourteenth century. Now the axis of the tower is parallel to the
axis and walls of the nave, while the centre line of the choir is
deflected towards the north about 7°. Notwithstanding this, however,
owing to the tower not being central with the nave, the axis of the
choir, if prolonged, runs directly to the centre of the tower arch, as
may easily be seen by anyone who stands there and looks along the
ridge of the choir roof. (_See_ dotted line on Plan.) Next we see
above the tower arch the mark of the old nave roof and the old north
wall of the nave. These show that the south wall stood where the