THE ABBEY CHURCH OF DORCHESTER. 105 completed. This choir aisle is fully as large in every dimension as the choir alone, without the later addition of the presl)jterj; in breadth I think it exceeds it. It forms in fact a sort of second church of itself, and can in nowise be regarded as an ordinary aisle, a mere accessory and subordinate to the choir. Now whether this be or be not either justness of architectural proportion or propriety of ecclesiastical arrangement, it is bej'ond all question a source of extraordinary effect. The appearance of spaciousness produced is wonderful. But it is clear that such a structure as this could not have been introduced into an ordinary' Cathedral or Conventual Church, without interfering in an unpleasant manner with its unity of design ; once granting the peculiar arrangement of Dorchester Church, this was by far the most majestic form that it could have received. The absence of a clerestory involves a distinct roof to the aisle ; how necessary this is may be shown b}"- looking at the north aisle of this very choir, where the low wall and steep lean-to roof are only adapted to an edifice furnished with a clerestory. As the soutli aisle is rather the later of the two, the architect may reasonably be supposed to have taken warning by this failure. He built then his aisle with a distinct gable ; but, once give an aisle a distinct gable, and its character is altogether changed ; it is no longer the mere adjunct, dependent upon the larger building to which it is attached, and as it were crouching under its shadow : it at once assumes a character of independence, and must be treated accordingl3^ The builder at once grasped this idea ; he gave his aisle the full dimensions of the choir, and we see what a majestic structure is the result. And we may remark the pains taken to prevent the east ends of the presbytery and the aisle from presenting a double of each other. I am not here speaking vdth perfect historical exactness, as the present east end of the presbytery is later than that of the aisle ; consequently whatever commendation is due on this score belongs to the architect of the former. There is a certain analogy between the two, so strong, that the earlier probably suggested the later ; still there is a remark- able diversity, amounting even to contrast. In both there is an attempt to occup}'- the whole space, but in quite different ways ; in the one it is by actually filling it up with an expanse of tracery ; in the other by scattering distinct windows over its surface. In both we find the central buttress ; but, while VOL. IX. z
