
This
is an important church even though that is not especially evident
outside. It is also a building whose history is difficult to
unpick with complete confidence, for there is Norman,
Norman-Transitional and Early English work here, which grade into one
another, besides Victorian restoration work - the responsibility,
according to Ian Nairn, of Sir Thomas Graham Jackson
(1835 - 1924) in 1869 (The Buildings of England: Sussex,
Harmondsworth, Penguin, 1965, pp. 120-122) - that greatly adds to the confusion
by mimicking these styles only too successfully. The note that
follows attempts to describe the various features of the building in
some detail, in approximate age order, but inasmuch as differences in
particulars within an overall style may sometimes have been due to different masons working on
the church simultaneously, quite apart from any slight differences in date, this is unlikely
to be a perfect system. The church consists of a W. tower, nave
and chancel, with transepts and a lean-to S. aisle and porch. The
aisle windows are small and low, and the nave has no clerestory, so the
church interior is dark on even the sunniest of early autumn days.
Ian Nairn
suggested that the N. transept was built shortly after the original nave
and chancel, in the early twelfth century, that the S. transept was
added c. 1160, and that the S. aisle, which has pointed
instead
of round arches
to the nave, was constructed some twenty years later.
However, he appears to have overlooked the tiny band of dog-tooth above
the N. transept W. window (shown
right), which if original, would scarcely
permit a date much earlier than c.1190. This could suggest the
S. transept was built first and is more elaborate simply because
there was then more money to spend. Alternatively, the whole
church, minus the tower, might have been erected in a single extended
building phase over, say, a thirty year period, c. 1185-1215, suffering
the sort of disruptions in the interval that were probably then
commonplace, such as the death of one or more master masons. The
tower is not part of this puzzle but rather presents a small one of its
own, for apart from the renewed W. window with supermullioned tracery
above the very worn W. doorway, all its windows and bell-openings
consist of plain rectangles only, and it can be little more than a guess
whether this is late fourteenth or fifteenth century work. Undivided by string courses
and capped by a tiled pyramidal roof, its most prominent feature is
the large rectangular stair turret projecting at the northeast angle and
rising to a small saddleback roof above the tower battlements. The
arch between the tower and nave comprises two flat-chamfered
orders, of which the inner dies into the jambs.
However,
to return to the principal difficulty in interpreting this building,
which lies in unravelling its twelfth and thirteenth century work, the
earliest could still derive from the first half of the former
century and be revealed in the blocked N. doorway to the nave, the upper
half of which now forms a window. The transepts could then have
been added in the late twelfth century, in whatever order, and the S.
aisle added c. 1200, after which the important remodelling of the
chancel may have been carried out, as will be described below. The
arch to the N. transept from the nave is composed of a single
flat-chamfered order above imposts resting on jambs with stopped
chamfers down the angles. The arch to the S. transept must be
described, in turn, from the north and the south, as its two sides are
different. The N. side is formed of two deeply stepped orders,
resting on very pronounced imposts supported on shafts with scalloped
capitals, and bearing two rolls under the soffit, a third roll between
the orders, and prominent chevron moulding on
both the horizontal and vertical planes on the outer order. The S.
side (shown left) is still more remarkable, for the chevron has now evolved into a
series
of large 'V's, almost detached from the wall, that chase each other
round the arch, and there is a hood-mould above, with carved beast label
stops. As for the arcade between the nave and aisle, this proves
not to be an arcade at all but instead, two separate and quite
disparate, though not necessarily
different-aged, Norman-Transitional arches, separated by some eight feet (2.4
m.) of wall. Both arches are pointed and the simpler western
arch consists of a single order with roll mouldings on the angles,
springing from jambs with nook shafts at the corners with capitals akin
to waterleaf, which is itself a transitional form, associated with the
years c.1180-1210. The eastern arch
(illustrated right, in a view into the aisle and S. transept from the
nave) consists of two orders, of which the
inner bears two rolls under the soffit, supported on an order of shafts
with scalloped capitals, and the outer has a narrower roll on each side
(i.e. north and south) rising from shafts with cushion capitals bearing
differing carvings in shallow relief. Perhaps fortunately after all
this, the arch from the S. transept to the aisle and the chancel arch
from the nave, can be seen, on careful observation, to be part of the
restoration work, mercifully saving the visitor from any further
attempted detective work of this kind.
This brings
this account to the unambiguously thirteenth century part of the
building, though the
date may not be very much later here either. This does not include the
lancets in the aisle and porch, which were part of the restoration, nor
probably the S. transept windows,
judging by the circular window above
the two south lancets, which does not look authentic and probably gives
the game away.
However,
the chancel windows are mediaeval and include a lancet on each side
(south and north) and the group of three small and widely-spaced,
stepped lancets to the east.
(See the photograph of the church at the foot of the page, viewed from
the east.) The other chancel windows are
early fourteenth century (Decorated) insertions and comprise a lowside
window in the S. wall towards the west, formed of a single
trefoil-cusped ogee light, and towards the east on each side, a window
formed of two adjoining, similar but somewhat broader lights, unenclosed
in any encompassing arch. The two, three-light square-headed windows in
the nave N. wall, are conspicuously renewed and at odds with all the
other work, so probably not by Jackson.
However, the
most exceptional feature of the church has still to be described, for
the relatively large and high chancel is vaulted in two quadripartite
bays (as illustrated left, from the
west), with each rib formed of a pair of
rolls, and the infill between, formed of blocks of white clunch,
producing a surprisingly light effect after the gloom of the nave,
assisted here by the larger windows. The vault is supported
on a pair of keeled shafts between the bays and on little more than
projecting ledges in the chancel corners, but it is a most remarkable
conceit and clearly shows this was a most important building at the time
of its construction, in the early years of the thirteenth century.
Finally, the church furnishings may be quickly described. The
font is Perpendicular and octagonal, with quatrefoils on the faces of
the bowl and flowers in the centre of each, a pair of quatrefoils (one
above the other) on the cardinal faces of the stem, and trefoil-cusped
arches on the ordinal faces between. The only carpentry of note
appears to be the communion rail, which has turned balusters and is
probably seventeenth century work. The transept and nave roofs
have been entirely renewed.