10 PAPERS, ETC. 
narrow; and the general effect of the empty transept, being 
neither choked with pews, like the nave, nor yet left to 
decay, like the choir, is striking in the extreme. One may 
perhaps regret that the crossing itself is not vaulted, like 
Ilminster; but possibly that grand finish is more in har- 
mony with the idea ofa genuine lantern, a centre of unity, 
than with that of a tower forming a barrier between two 
distinet buildings. Externally there is a pleasing effect 
about the south transept front ; it has a pretty, simple, 
elevation, consisting of a tall, well-proportioned window, 
with a niche on each side, and a doorway below. 
East and west of this neutral space, the monks and the 
parishioners appear to have remodelled their respective 
portions, without much regard to each other’s proceed- 
ings. At least there is a wide difference in the details 
employed in the two, and we cannot hesitate in de- 
cidedly preferring those of the parochial portion. One 
expeetation which we might fairly form is doomed to dis-. 
appointment. As the Priory of Dunster was a cell to 
that of Bath, one might have fairly expected to find some 
approximation in its architeeture, to the magnificent, if 
anomalous, reconstruction of the mother church which was 
going on much about the same time. But no resemblance 
is to be seen, unless we look for it in so vague a point as 
the use of the four-centred pier-arch, and in the somewhat 
uncouth design of the east window. Most of the windows 
in the church are of very much better character. 
The monks, as I before said, now. removed their stalls 
into the limb east of the tower, one undoubtedly quite 
spacious enough to contain both the choir and presbytery 
of so small a foundation. But while they thus diminished 
their space from east to west, they gave additional dignity 
to their portion by that addition of aisles which has been 
