and the most careful study, and the most painstaking investigations, have failed to detect the slightest break in the continuity or character of the work.  This applies to the whole of the eastern part of the transepts, excepting of course the alterations that were made in later times.  As Martin remained abbot till 1155, it is probable that he went on with his building after the choir had been opened, and that this work in the transepts was done in the latter part of his abbacy, but there is no record of it.

Of Abbot William of Waterville (1155-1175) we are told that in his time were erected the transepts (ambae cruces) and three stages of the central tower (tres ystoriae magistrae turris).  This does not contradict what has been said above as to the eastern part of the transepts being built in Abbot Martin’s time.  For the walls and aisles to the east only would be in position; and his successor might well be credited with the erection of the transepts, if he built the ends and western walls, and roofed in the whole.  It is tolerably clear also that this same abbot must have built the two bays of the nave adjoining the central tower.  A tower of three stages, presumably of the massive character that marks all large Norman towers, must have had some western supports.  Two bays of the nave would act as buttresses; and it is easy to see the difference between these two bays and the rest of the nave.  Apart from many minute points of difference which only an expert architectural student could fully appreciate, there is one conspicuous variation which all can see.  This is in the tympanum of the triforium arches; in all four instances we notice rugged ornamentation here which occurs nowhere else in the nave.

Exclusive of the western transept we may assign eighty years as the period during which the Norman Minster was being erected.  And it is one of the most noteworthy points in connection with its architectural history, and one that has produced the happiest result in the grandeur of the whole effect of the building upon the spectator, that each successive architect carried on faithfully the ideas of his predecessors.  The whole work has been continued, as it were, in the spirit of one design; and the differences in details, while quite observable when once pointed out, are yet so unobtrusive that they seldom attract notice.  To mention one such instance, Mr Paley calls attention to the different ornamentation on the windows of the south transept when compared with those in the north transept, as well as to the fact that on the south those windows have straight sides to the inner surface of the wall, while those on the north have the sides splayed.  He justly argues, from these and other considerations, that the south transept was built first.