56 PAPERS, ETC. 
parapet to be employed. Again, the belfry windows at 
Wrington gain much, from their threefold division by a 
second transom, while at Wells there is only one. On 
these grounds, theretore, Igive Wrington the first place ; 
but St. Cuthbert’s need not be ashamed at being placed 
second after such a rival. 
The same general idea is to be found in St. John’s at 
Glastonbury, a steeple whose size gives it a still greater 
magnificence of general effect than either Wells or Wring- 
ton, but which, on minute critical examination, must be 
content with the third place. Its height is so great that 
the whole space above the roof could not be converted into 
one panelled mass ; there are therefore two distinct ranges 
of. panelling, which takes away something from the intense 
effect of unity which distinguishes the other two; at the 
same time, this being so, it would have been better if the 
lower range had assumed more of the character of a quite 
distinet pair of windows than it has. It is, in fact, a con- 
fusion between the notions of one and of two stages. 
Again, the slope of the buttresses may be considered too 
great, and they certainly finish too low down, so that the 
connexion between them and the great pinnacles is much 
less close than in the other two. These pinnacles again 
are somewhat squat, and the small spires rise out of pro- 
jecting battlements—an arrangement far less elegant than 
the beautiful canopy work at Wrington. Finally, the small 
projecting pinnacles and flying buttresses produce the same 
general effect of top-heaviness which I have already men- 
tioned in St. Stephen’s. 
These three are the only pure examples of this class with 
which I am acquainted, and I hesitate not to call them by 
far the grandest square western towers that I have ever 
seen or heard of. Next to these may come the noble 
