cusping the drop-arch and the varied treatment of these in nave, choir
and transepts are noteworthy while the little quatrefoil at the
intersection of mullion and transom is a really happy innovation. The
flying buttress over the south aisle restores a feature of the old
building which had disappeared. Of the variously panelled and
battle-raented parapets, of nave, chancel and aisles a view of 1864
gives no visible hint. As the report of Sir (then Mr.) G.G. Scott in
1856 specifies as desirable the "renewing all the parapets according
to the portions of the original which remain," we can only hope (but
with no sense of certainty) that these parts are faithfully
reproduced.

The limited site on which the chancel was built (only 40 feet deep)
caused the builders to omit any buttresses or other projections at the
east end. The east window was renewed in 1861 but the proportions are
not good and it is said that one light was suppressed although the old
sill remained intact.

The west end has a large six-light window with two transoms. It was
restored in 1841 and is said to be a precise reproduction of the
original design. On the gable above it is a large niched pinnacle
which appears to be an "unauthorized" addition.

While the north aisle is later than the south, the clearstory, as has
been said is earlier, being of late Decorated date with large
three-light windows of reticulated tracery. The north transept is more
consistent in style than the south. The large four-light window is
peculiar in design. It has one transom and the tracery is brought down
much below the spring of the arch. The centre mullion is very solid,
coming forward almost to the wall face both inside and out and running