ARCHITECTURE OF NEIGHBOUEIIOOD OF YEOVIL. 15 



added, which seems to me to be the most natural niode of 

 enlargement, if enlargement were necessary. Now, as I 

 want you to be on the wbole pleased with this restoration, 

 I must ask you not to look at the monuments in these same 

 transepts, much less to read the very blank verse which is 

 written upon one of them. Come into the chancel, and 

 see a Somersetshire roof restored as it ought to be, 

 the good old coved ceiling boarded, and its eastern bay 

 richly painted ; here we have the best of all Substitutes 

 for a vault, indeed it is a barrel vault in wood. Turn 

 round then, and judge how far superior the genuine local 

 ecclesiastical roof is to the hall roofs which have been 

 allowed to intrude into the other parts of the church. 



We niay now turn our face slightly Yeovil-wards, and 

 take in succession three octagonal towers, Barton St. 

 DavicTs, Puddimore, and llchester. I have alluded to all 

 of them before ; Barton has its tower lateral and octagonal 

 from the ground, the others are westem, and set on Square 

 bases. Barton has also some good examples of the foliated 

 rear arch, and is altogether a picturesque and pleasing 

 little church. I would however suggest that the individual 

 playing on a harp, depicted on the western gallery, seems 

 to betoken a slight confusion between the Archbishop of 

 Menevia, who, as I conceive, is the David from whom 

 Barton takes its name, and the homonymous King of 

 Israel. Get rid of the gallery, and the false hagiology 

 will go with it. To return to architecture, the octagons 

 at llchester and Puddimore do well to compare together, 

 especially in the different ways in which they are connected 

 with the Square base. There is something ingenious about 

 the Puddimore device, but the simpler arrangements at 

 llchester better please the eye. I also prefer the more 

 massive proportions of its untouched Early English tower, 



