In this place the following summary of the evidence will suffice:—
1. There is no document or anything tending to show that the original fabric, as restored and enlarged by Ethelred, was ever rebuilt on a new plan.
2. Several of the choir capitals differ essentially in their ornamentation from any others in the cathedral; but resemble very closely the ornamental work in illuminated MSS. of Ethelred's time. They should consequently belong to the church as enlarged by him in 1004 (p. 72).
3. The junction of the eleventh century, or Ethelred's work with the later work, is clearly visible at the north and south-west corners of the choir; and the abaci, though resembling each other, are of different thickness. The ashlar work is different, and the courses are not continuous (p. 61).
4. The manner in which the Norman vaulting shafts are inserted in the north choir aisle implies that vaulting was not contemplated in the original plan of the church, and that the aisle was built at a date when vaulting ribs were not in use (p. 33).
5. The introduction of attached shafts in the tower piers shows that additions were made, about 1160, to earlier work with roll mouldings corresponding with those of the choir: similar proofs of alteration are to be seen in the imposts of the tower and transept arches, which have been cut through to admit late Norman capitals (p. 58).
6. There is also good evidence that the Norman Presbytery is not part of the original choir, or the earliest part of the church, as was assumed, but probably stands on the site of an apse which belonged to Ethelred's building (p. 79).
7. The worn condition of the choir capitals can only be accounted for by the state of disrepair into which the church had fallen by the middle of the twelfth century (p. 74).
The reason is not far to seek for the unusual magnificence of Ethelred's plans. His brother-in-law was Richard II., Duke of Normandy, whose fame as an art-patron and church-builder was spread so far that, according to the Chronicles of Fontenelle, "bishops and clergy, abbots and monks," travelled from all parts, from Greece and Armenia, to visit him, and William of Jumièges speaks of him as producing a kind of renaissance in his country. It so happens that one bay remains in the abbey church of Fécamp of the original building commenced by Duke Richard in 1001, just before Ethelred began his operations; and the capitals in this bay are ornamented with the same curious twining foliage that is found in the choir at Oxford. It is more than likely, then, that the Saxon king sought assistance from the cultured court of Richard-le-bon; the Queen Emma may well have been anxious to have the church rebuilt on a scale that would accord with the monastic buildings of her own land; and so important was the work considered, that King Ethelred (as we learn from his charter) had contributions given him for carrying it on by his whole people.
But more troubles were to follow, for Ethelred had yet to pay the penalty for the massacre of St. Brice's Day, and his "long reign of utter misgovernment" was interrupted in 1013, when the heathen Viking Sweyn drove him out of his kingdom to take refuge in Richard's court in Normandy. The exile of the king, and the triumph of the Danes, who besieged and took Oxford in the same year, must have interrupted the work there for a time; and a remarkable break of joint between the masonry of the choir and the south transept bears silent witness to the dislocation of the Anglo-Saxon rule (p. 61). When Sweyn died in 1014, Ethelred returned, and for three years, with the help of his noble son Edmund Ironside, held Canute in check. At this time the work at St. Frideswide's was probably resumed, the king being doubtless anxious to complete the fulfilment of his vow at a time when he sorely needed the divine assistance; and a certain difference in the character of the capitals and foliage in the transepts points to their having been built at this time, for they bear traces of oriental influence similar to that in the church at Bernay which Duke Richard was building in the year when Ethelred was with him in exile, and the eastern monks were flocking to his court in Normandy. But it is probable that, what with the strain of the terrible war, and the constant drain of the Danegelt, the work was never finished according to Ethelred's complete design, for he died in 1016, and his son Edmund Ironside only reigned for seven months.
Nor have we any record that anything further was done under Canute or Edward the Confessor. Though it is not at all improbable that Canute continued the work, for we know that he restored many monasteries which had been injured or destroyed by his father, being very fond of the monks; and that the Witenagemot met several times at Oxford during his reign. His marriage to Ethelred's widow Emma, also, placed him in the same relationship to the Norman court as Ethelred himself. The church must have been in use during this time; for we read that in the reign of Edward the Confessor troubles arose owing to the substitution of Regulars for the Secular Canons. Under King Harold the Seculars were restored, and, says Anthony Wood, "It was not long after this but that, whether by the negligence of the Seculars or the continuall disturbance of the expelled Regulars, it was almost utterly forsaken and relinqueshed, and the more especially because of that troublesome warre betweene King Harold and William the Conqueror—a few persons all that while only remaining in it." In this ruinous state it proved a kind of white elephant that no one cared to possess; given first to Abingdon Abbey, and then to Roger, Bishop of Salisbury, it was at last handed over to Henry I., who made Guimond his chaplain Prior.
Although the whole church has been sometimes attributed to Prior Guimond, it is probable that he was too much taken up with restoring order to devote himself to architecture. And, as there is no suggestion in history that Ethelred's church was destroyed, so there is no mention of any building by Guimond. William of Malmesbury, his contemporary, praises his piety and learning (excellentis literaturæ et non aspernandæ religionis), but is totally silent about architectural talents. Besides, the establishment was at that time too impoverished for anything of the kind, many of the lands and revenues having been alienated, as we learn from the Domesday Book. If Guimond built at all, he would have had enough to do, we may imagine, in adapting the tumble-down monastic buildings for their occupation by canons regular. Sir G.G. Scott attributes the Norman doorway into the chapter-house to him; and he may have begun the restoration by putting a roof on the old church; for the weathered condition of some of the choir capitals bears out the historians who tell us that in the eleventh century the place was become ruinous.
Robert of Cricklade, called Canutus, another excellent man, was next prior. He ruled from 1141 to 1180. There was a copy of one of his works, says Dr. Ingram, in the library of Balliol College in Leland's time. In 1158 Cricklade obtained a confirmation of the privileges of the priory from Pope Hadrian IV. (Nicholas Brakespear, the English pope) who wore the tiara from 1154 to 1159. It was probably at this time that the restoration of Ethelred's church was begun, for the monks would almost certainly not have undertaken such extensive works until their property was secured them.
Robert of Cricklade did not build a new church, but it was probably he who restored Ethelred's church on the old plan, rebuilding those portions of the walls that required it, and inserting most of the later Norman work, especially the clerestory and presbytery. Much of the earlier work appears to have been imitated at this time, as is known to have been the case elsewhere when enlarging or rebuilding a church; and some of the carved work was used again. Cricklade appears, from architectural evidence, to have left most of the old pillars, but he rebuilt two of those in the nave, and reduced the girth of the rest.
The restoration must have been pretty well finished by 1180, for in that year