the transactions of that aera,
doors, windows, floors, wood-work, lead, iron, marble, manuscripts, and
books, were given up to indiscriminate destruction: bells were broken,
roofs stripped, altars profaned, the very tombs opened; and, as if no
point had been gained, so long as aught was suffered to remain, the
central tower was undermined, in the hope that its fall would involve
the ruin of the whole edifice. And fall, indeed, it did; but happily
only carried away with it a portion of the eastern end. From this
circumstance, however, have arisen discrepancies of style, for which it
would be difficult, without such knowledge, to account. The nave and the
transepts are the only pure remains of the original building: the choir
and aisles are of pointed architecture, and are, consequently, not of
equal antiquity. Even the western front partakes, in a measure, of the
same mixture. All, to the top of the towers, is genuine Norman, and of
the eleventh century: the spires, with their surrounding turrets, are
of a later aera.[42] At the same time it may reasonably be doubted how
far the Abbe De la Rue is right in ascribing them to the fourteenth
century. To differ from so able an antiquary and so competent a judge in
matters of this description, is always hazardous; but the author of this
article must, nevertheless, be allowed to hesitate before he gives a
full assent. It is known that the choir was enlarged, and the apsis
built as it now exists, during the prelacy of Simon de Trevieres, which
extended from the year 1316 to 1344; but history is silent as to any
other additions made at that period to the church; and the style of the
architecture of the spires does certainly appear to be earlier than that
of the parts just mentioned. No argument is to be drawn from the general
aspect of the building; for such is the great excellence of the Caen
stone, and so little has it suffered in an atmosphere untainted by coal
smoke, and in a climate probably superior to our own, that all the parts
appear to be in equally good preservation, and the whole looks as fresh
as if but yesterday hewn from the quarry. An opinion has commonly
prevailed, that an epitaph, still visible on the exterior of the apsis,
is that of the builder of the church. Facsimiles of it have been given
by Ducarel[43] and Gough,[44] the former of whom seems to have no doubt
of the fact. Such, however, cannot be the case; the very shape of the
characters sufficiently dispro