the church of any importance
were made until the reign of Henry II.; and, if so, we may come to the
conclusion that the whole of the nave was built in his reign. The
difference in the style of architecture between the Late Norman and the
Transition to Early English is very noticeable as we look at the
remaining portion of the west front, south of the galilee porch, the
lower stages shewing no trace of anything but pure Norman, while above
we see pointed arches, quatrefoils in circles, and other indications of
the approaching change of style.

Bishop Eustace (1198-1215) made large additions to the fabric at his own
expense. One sentence in the account of his work has given rise to much
controversy: "Ipse construxit a fundamento novam galileam ecclesiae
Eliensis versus occidentem sumptibus suis." Was this the Early English
porch now known as the galilee? Some have thought that this name was
bestowed upon the whole of the western transept, not including the
porch. This is the view taken in recent years by Canon Stewart. He shews
it was the current local opinion at the beginning of the eighteenth
century. Dr. Tanner, who wrote the account of Ely in Browne Willis's
"Mitred Abbies," takes this view, and speaks of the south arm of the
transept as the "old Galilee" and the north arm as the "new Galilee." In
the plan in Willis's "Survey of Cathedrals," 1727, the south part is
described as the "South galilee, now the church workhouse," while on the
north side we read, "Ruined part of Galilee." No doubt the character of
the architecture is not inconsistent with the theory that the northern
part may have been built or finished by Bishop Eustace, soon after he
was appointed, in intentional imitation of the pronounced Norman work
adjacent. Canon Stewart also points out that Bishop Eustace is known to
have rebuilt S. Mary's Church, where the rough masonry and plain lancets
are wholly unlike the beautiful work in the west porch. And he adds: "It
is evident that Eustace had nothing to do with the erection of any part
of the present cathedral. The galilee which he built has totally
disappeared, and the porch which has gone under that name of late years
must be the work of some unknown benefactor, who had probably seen Hugh
de Northwold's presbytery, and determined to lengthen the church
westward as it had been extended in the opposite direction."[7] The more
generally received opinion, however, is that Bishop Eustace did really
build wh