ON THE PERPENDICULAR OF SOMERSET. 47 
Now, in the name of common sense and common English, 
what does all this mean? If Mr. Ruskin thinks the tower 
of Magdalen College, or even the western tower of Wim- 
borne Minster, better than Wrington, Titchmarsh, and 
North Petherton, let him; it is a fair question of taste, 
on which we may differ quite comfortably ; but why all 
this rant and dogmatism? What is “ light-headedness in 
a tower ”” What is “ wratbful erest?” could Sir Samuel 
Meyrick himself have derived any idea from a tower “ with 
the vizor down, and the dark vigilance seen through the 
clefts of it”” The Glossary fails to inform me what is 
meant by “square-browed towers,” and “rent battlements,” 
unless indeed a tower cannot put in a claim to “ nobility” 
till its parapet has been damaged by a thunder-storm. 
Finally, wAy is all this? Why cannot our buttressed 
towers do all these fine things? Why cannot Taunton 
tower “rise and look forth,” &c. &c. thoush as I do not 
know the form of “the tower of Lebanon,” which I believe 
the royal lover likens to the nose of his bride, I cannot 
profess to say which of our Somersetshire types departs 
furthest from that ideal. To come to the main issue, I can 
of course only dogmatize back again; if I say “there 
should be no top-heaviness in your noble tower,” I feel 
quite sure of being right ; if I say it should have its “ vizor 
up,” though I do not know what that means, I think pro- 
bability is on my side, inasmuch as I am asserting the 
eontrary toMr. Ruskin; and I lastly solemnly affırm that 
what Mr, Ruskin says about “ crutches” and “ bulwarks 
supported by other bulwarks,” is simply a specimen of his 
false analogies. 
From Mr. Ruskin and his vagaries let us turn to one 
who does not indeed write about “Lamps,” or “Sheepfolds,” 
or “ Stones of Venice,” but who has an eye to discern, a 
