14 PAPERS, ETC. 



Crewkerne is decidedly preferable, as the heavy central 

 mullion has a very awkward efFect at Yatton. Both have 

 large and magnificent western doorways, that at Crewkerne 

 at once suggesting the portal of King's College Chapel. 

 Elther front is a most noble and magnificent design, of a 

 character quite uusurpassed among our parochlal edifices ; 

 indeed thelr bold and harmonious simplicity mlght read a 

 lesson to several of our proudest cathedrals, including the 

 stately fabrlc of Wells itself. 



Of west fronts of other kinds I have hardly anything to 

 say, as the two most remarkable, that last mentioned and 

 St. Mary Redcliffe, hardly come within my direct province, 

 as their main peculiarities are entirely owing to architects 

 earlier than Perpendicular times. 



GENERAL EXTERI0R8. 



From towers and fronts I must now proceed to the bodies 

 of the churches. The subject of their extemal appearance 

 I have to a certain extent forestalled in speaking of their 

 general character. I there observed that the clerestory is 

 by no means so universal in Somerset as in many other dis- 

 tricts, even where the Perpendicular style is far lass pre- 

 valent. We find it absent even in very large and magnifi- 

 cent churches, as Axbridge, Dunster, Wedmore, and YeovU. 

 I coiiceive this partly to arise from the predilection of the 

 architects throughout the whole west of England and South 

 Wales for various modifications of the coved or cradle roof. 

 This necessarily involved an externalhighpitch; andit isof 

 course only in structvires on a very magnificent scale that 

 sufiicient elevation is afforded for both a high roof and a cle- 

 restory. That this was the cause I imagine is pretty clearly 

 shown from the very slight appreciation of merely picturesque 

 beauty shown by the Perpendicular architects in Somer- 



