Page:Notes on the churches in the counties of Kent, Sussex, and Surrey.djvu/449

Rh known, as alluded to above, p. 281, it seems easy to perceive, that the vestiges of earliest construction suffered injury from violence; while farther mischief has been perpetrated by injudicious improvement (?) and reparation. The lateral chancels are separated from the church, and used, one as a schoolroom, the other as the fire-engine house, the remainder being, certainly, quite as large as can be desirable for the service of the English Liturgy. The roofs and arches are very lofty, and the whole must have been on a grand scale in all states, but undoubtedly in the E.E., the remnant of which part appears to have supplied the proportions adopted in the rebuilding. There are pinnacles at the angles, which, though probably not actually E.E., may have been restored imitations of the originals.—The effects visible in the older portions of Eye church, which we have authority for believing were damaged by fire, so precisely resemble those to be observed in the church of Rottingdean, namely, the red tint imparted to very many of the Caen stones, and the ragged surfaces of many others, that they strongly confirm the supposition, which has been expressed in the Note on Rottingdean, that the latter church was injured by fire at some early period, and very probably when a hostile party of French landed there A.D. 1377.

238. .—The description of this church in p. 292 is incorrect and incomplete. The chancel is comparatively modern; the extreme western arch on either side of nave is less ornamented than the others, the western piers being partially, though slightly, engaged in the end wall, and the side walls above the arches having an unfinished appearance. Between chancel and nave is only one arch, which seems however to have been intended for a central tower. The lower parts of the clerestory windows were built up, when the present aisle roofs were substituted for the old ones, the lead whereof was sold for some other parochial object. The eastern arch of the south aisle only contains carving different from that in the nave. Font, which has been renovated, a quadrangular block of Sussex marble, early (?) Norm. Porch and tower Perp., the latter very late. The existence of foundations beneath the turf for more than half the distance between the east end of the present building and the boundary of the churchyard implies, either that the chancel once extended so far, or that preparations had actually been made for such an erection.

262. .—Chancel retains one Tr. Norm. window. The south wall is of rubble masonry. A very little coloured glass remains here.

265. .—Chancel, nave, north aisle, new south porch, and west tower. Chancel E.E., with piscina and sedile, also a rounded tomb arch in the outside of the south wall. East window, of rather peculiar pattern, Perp. Some Dec., or Tr. Dec. work, and more Perp. A later chapel has been added to the east end of the aisle. The windows retain a few fragments of coloured glass, chiefly, or entirely, yellow. Font circular. Brass, Will. Prestwyk, mutilated.—Priory. At a meeting of the Sussex Archaeological Society, held 23d Oct. 1851, it was stated, that, only a few days previously, some Norm. and E.E. capitals had been discovered among the remains of this priory, affording reasonable ground for the inference, that some (probably) religious establishment existed on the spot, anterior to the contemplated removal hither of Bricet's foundation from Hastings. The capitals above mentioned were described as being very small.

271. .—Chancel, nave, south transept, north aisle and porch, west tower. Eastward of the aisle are indications of a destroyed chapel, and a round arch is still visible externally in the east wall of the aisle.—In a remote part of this parish stands Green Lees or Glenlee, a former residence of the Fagg family, now a farm-house. A portion has been pulled down, but the remainder, including the entire front, is a large edifice of brick with stone dressings, dating,