ON THE PERPENDICULAR OF SOMERSET. 39 
These smaller and more ancient fabries were far from 
being without influence on their more magnificent suc- 
cessors. A Perpendicular church seems to have been very 
seldom entirely erected from the ground ; the chancel at 
least of the old building is generally retained, and too 
frequently, from its smaller size and inferior architecture, 
it forms a sad blot on some of the most stately fabrics of all. 
Imay mention Wrington and Yatton, the latter especially. 
Here we have a cross church, of which the chancel, tran- 
septs, and central tower received only some modifications 
and additions during the Perpendicular repair, while a 
nave of the most magnificent character was erected to the 
west ofthem. The result is a ludicrous insignificance on 
the part of the chancel, and in the interior that ruinous 
eireumstance to the effect of a cross church, lantern 
arches disproportionately low. 
I suspect that in many cases, where the church was not 
eruciform, they first erected the tower to the west of the 
old nave, and afterwards attempted to bring the rest of the 
ehurch into harmony with it by re-building the nave, (or, 
what is practically much the same, adding aisles to it,) and 
subjecting the chancel to greater or less modifications in 
detail. This would account for the very small Perpen- 
dieular naves which we sometimes find attached to the 
most magnificent towers, as at Bishops Lydiard. They 
were eramped for room by the old chancel at one end and 
by the new tower at the other. 
I will allude briefly to a few instances where considerable 
portions of the early fabric remain, or where it has greatly 
influenced the subsequent Perpendicular structure. Whit- 
church, near Bristol, is a good specimen of the original cross 
ehurch without aisles ; viewed from the north, it appears 
to be entirely unaltered, but on the south side the transept 
