The next step consisted in the erection of the three bays of very beautiful polyphant stone on the south side exactly co-extensive with the three Norman arches, so that a line drawn from the foundation-stones of the Norman church southwards through the church would mark the boundary of the polyphant extension also. It is difficult to assign a date to this very beautiful addition, but we must suppose that the present wall-plate, with its richly and boldly carved foliage, dated from this period. There would seem to be good ground for this argument, inasmuch as the last addition to the church in 1564, when the two granite arches were erected on the south-eastern side of the church, had a piece of wall-plate specially carved for that new portion. It is quite certain that the whole roof of the church was put up in 1564 at the time of the erection of the granite arches, and I have no doubt that this roof was placed upon the older and magnificent wall-plate, since much injured by the leaks which a defective roof has caused in so many places. It is worth noting that, although the polyphant arches were erected prior to the granite ones, yet they were taken down and the whole arcade entirely rebuilt at the same time. This I consider proved by the fact that the relieving arches are so very similar in character. The effect, meanwhile, on the wall-plate on the south side of the nave was not good, the exactly perpendicular line of the pillars and arches not catching it on every point, and thus giving it a somewhat ragged appearance which it will require care to rectify. A word here on the height of the building. It is probable that the present height was attained when the early English arches were erected. Before that time the church was evidently lower. This, again, may be proved by the additional stonework which was added above the Norman arches, and which must have been so added at the next additional work, as the two lofty arches (especially that at the east) would really require it. A very interesting question remains, as to whether the portion of ground now spanned by the granite arches was formerly disused, or whether it formed a Baptistery or other building in connection with the church, such as priests’ chambers, etc. That it was separated off from the portion of the church at the west end of the south aisle is evident by the discovery of a portion of the wall which so separated it, running southwards from the westernmost of the granite pillars. I may add that in the same way traces of the Norman chancel further to the west than the present chancel were found when the workmen were engaged in the work of restoration.