And thus leave we him here, and Sir Bedivere with the hermit that dwelled in a chapel beside Glastonbury.[5]

(To be continued.)

Inquisition of the Honour of Wallingford.

A.D. 1212 AN. 13 John.[6]

BY M. T. PEARMAN.

THIS inquisition is subsequent to that printed by Hearne, in the “Liber Niger,” but some years earlier than any of the lists in the “Testa de Nevill.” The Inquisition itself is in italics.

“Port” and “Port-Reeve.”

By J. H. Round, M.A.

PART III

(Continued from Vol. V. page 287.)

BEFORE tracing the working of this process in the similar case of ceaster, it may be as well to dispose etymologically of port. I have avowedly restricted myself, in this paper, to port as it occurs in “port-reeve.” But Professor Skeat, in his “Etymological Dictionary” (p. 457), while wholly ignoring, it would seem, its meaning in this and the similar compounds, assigns to the Anglo-Saxon “port,” not merely the derivation direct from portus, but an identity of meaning with that word. And in support of that meaning, “a harbour, haven,” he aptly adduces Alfred’s translation of Bede, in which “to tham porte” means “to the haven.” Here, however, it might perhaps be urged that Alfred was influenced in his choice of the term by the “portus” in the original before him. It need not follow that when not so influenced, he would have spoken of a haven as a “port.” Moreover, it is possible, and indeed probable, that the original sense of “port” was replaced by that narrower one of a “haven” or “sea-port,” which it had certainly come to bear by Middle English days, in consequence of that recurrence to Latin models, in which Alfred had himself led the way, and which would lead to what might almost be termed a re-introduction of the word into the language, fresh from the Latin itself.

But again, Alfred might have been influenced in his style by the Welshman, “Asser, my bishop.”[9] For though the Welsh, as I have said, adopted “portman” in the sense of a “trader” from the A. S., they had in their own word porth the equivalent at once of porta and portus. Of its use in the former sense we have an illustration, as Mr. Barnes has pointed out (Arch. Jour. xxii. 232), in the Welsh version of Matthew vii. 13:—“ehang yw’r porth, a llydan yw’r fford,” (“wide is the gate, and broad is the way “), where in the A. S. version the word used is geat. Its use in the latter is familiar.

This brings us to a consideration of such terms as the “Westport” and “East-port” of Wareham, and the “Newport Gate” of Lincoln. The survival, at Wareham, of “port” in the sense of gate, is ingeniously attributed by the above writer to a direct derivation from the Welsh porth, rather than from the Latin porta. At Lincoln, on testing Mr. Freeman’s statement that the gate was actually known simply as “The New Port” (Norm. Conq. iv. 212), I can find no evidence whatever for it.[10] If, therefore, as seems to be the case, “Newport Gate” has always been its name, within historic times, the inference is surely not that which has been drawn by Mr. Freeman in his paper on Lincoln,[11] but rather that the “barbarian” conquerors, ignoring the meaning of the “port” (porta), spoke of the Roman “porta” by their own word “geat,” distinguishing it from the other gates by the prefix “Newport,” and thus producing the, at first sight, unmeaning pleonasm, “Newport Gate,” just as Thorney Island, Mersea Island, &c., are pleonasms formed by the addition of “Island,” when the ea or ey (“Island”) no longer possesses a meaning.

We see, then, that the Latin porta failed to pass direct into our language in the form of port (“a gate”). It was, indeed, as Professor Skeat has shown, imported at a much later period, but then only through the French porte, and not direct from the Latin. But it could not, even so, succeed in establishing its position in the language. Found not unfrequently in the Elizabethan age, both in poetry and in classical prose, it lingered on, as a classical affectation, even so late as the Civil War, when we find it used of a city-gate, in a military sense, by such writers as Sprigge and Carter. A sure proof of its disuse is afforded shortly after this by the substitution of “port hole” for “port,” a pleonasm which, like those above quoted, implies that the original word no longer retained its meaning.

(To be continued.)

An Old Play-Bill—The following is a copy of the first play-bill issued from Drury-lane Theatre: “By His Majesty’s Company of Comedians, At the new Theatre in Drury-lane, This day, being Thursday, April 8th, 1663, Will be acted, a Comedy called THE HVMOVROVS LIEVTENANT. The King, Mr. Wintersel; Demétrivs, Mr. Hart; Selevcvs, Mr. Bvrt; Leontivs, Major Mohvn; Lievtenant, Mr. Clun; Celia, Mrs. Marshall. The play will begin at three o’clock exactly. Boxes 4s. Pitt 2s. 6d. Middle-Gallery 1s. 6d. Upper Gallery 1s.”

The History of Gilds.

By Cornelius Walford, F.S.S., Barrister-at-Law.

PART IV.

Chapter XXXII.—The Gilds of Lincolnshire.

THE Gilds of this county were not only very numerous, but they were regarded as important in several respects. I shall give some account of them under the several towns wherein they flourished. There were also many village Gilds.

Boston.—In this ancient town were various Gilds of great note, but the materials for detailed history have only been preserved in exceptional cases.

Gild of the Blessed Mary.—This appears to have ranked first amongst the Boston Gilds, and is believed to have been the Gilda Mercatoria of Boston, although its constitution in considerable part was ecclesiastical. The earliest mention of this Gild appears to be in 1393. The Gild itself was probably founded earlier—certainly other Gilds of earlier date existed in the town. The first Patent was granted to it at the date just named. Another Patent is dated in 1445, and a third in 1447. In this last year, Henry VI. granted a licence to “Richard Benynton and others that they should give to the Aldermen of the Gild of the Fraternity of the Blessed Mary of Boston, in the County of Lincoln, five messuages, thirty-one acres of land, and ten acres of pasture in Boston and Skirbeck.” Another Patent grant was issued to this institution in 1483. This Gild had a Chapel, called the Chapel of our Lady, in the Parish Church.

In 1510, Pope Julius II. in a “Pardon” granted to the town, provided that whatsoever Christian people, of what estate or condition soever, whether spirituall or temporall, would aid and support the Chamberlain or substitute of the aforesaid Gilde, should have five hundred years of pardon!

Item, to all brothers and sisters of the same Gilde was granted free liberty to eate in the time of Lent, or other fast-days, eggs, milk, butter, cheese, and also flesh by the counsell of their ghostly father and physician, without any scruple of conscience.

Item, that all partakers of the same Gilde, and being supporters thereof, which once a quarter, or every Friday or Saturday, either in the said Chappell or any other Chappell of their devotion, shall say a Paternoster, Ave Maria, and creed, or shall say or cause to be said masses for souls departed in pains of purgatory, shall not only have the full remission due to them which visite the Chappell of Scala Cæli, or of St. John Latern [in Rome]; but also the souls in purgatory shall enjoy full remission and be released of all their paines.

Item, that all the souls of the brothers and sisters of the said Gilde, also the souls of their fathers and mothers, shall be partakers of all the prayers, suffrages, alms, fastings, masses and mattens, pilgrimages, and all other good deedes of all the holy Church militant for ever.

This pardon—and many such pardons, indulgences, grants and relaxations, were issued by Popes Nicholas V., Pius II., Sixtus, as well as Julius II.—was through the request of King Henry VIII., 1526, confirmed by Pope Clement VII.

It appears that at the time Pope Julius granted his “Bull” the Gild maintained seven priests, twelve ministers, and thirteen beadsmen; and also seems to have supported a grammar school. “The seats or stalls (says Thompson in his “Collections,” &c., 1820) on the south side of the chancel of the church were no doubt erected for the use of the master and bretheren of this establishment.” At the dissolution (1538) this college, as it was then called, was valued at £24.

The Guildhall of this establishment is yet remaining, and is used by the Corporation for their corporate and judicial proceedings. Beadsman-lane, adjoining the Guildhall, was no doubt inhabited by the beadsmen belonging to this institution; and the ancient buildings in Spain-lane were, it is very probable, the warehouses of the merchants. The possessions of this Gild were given to the Corporation in 1554, first of Mary.

Gild of St. Botolph.—It is recorded that in 1349 (23rd Edward III.) a patent was granted for making a Gild in the town of St. Botolph—the ancient name of Boston. And also that in the same year Gilbert de Elilond gave to the Aldermen, &c., of the Gild of St. Botolph certain lands and tenements in that town. Another patent in behalf of this institution was granted in 1399.

In 1403, Henry IV. granted a licence to Thomas de Friseby and others, that they might give to the Aldermen and brethren of the Gild or fraternity in Boston one messuage, forty acres of land, and twenty acres of meadow with the appurtenances “which they held of the Lord of Bello-monto for services, &c.” In 1411, the King granted a licence to Richard Pynchebek and others, that they should give to Richard Lister, master of the Gild or fraternity in the town of St. Botolph, certain lands, &c.

It is not known who founded this Gild; what was the extent of its possessions; or the particular object of its institution. “It is most probable, however (says Thompson), that it was founded by a Company of merchants, and that its objects were entirely of a mercantile nature.” There is no account of any hall or other buildings belonging to this Gild.

Gild of Corpus Christi.—The first mention of this Gild is in 1389, when a patent was issued for the “Guild or Fraternity of Corpus Christi in St. Botolph.” Another patent was granted in 1392 for an Alderman, &c., of this Gild; a third grant bears date 1403. King Henry V. granted a licence in 1413 to John Barker, chaplain, and John Wellesby, chaplain, that they should give to the Alderman and brothers and sisters of the Gild of Corpus Christi, in the town of St. Botolph, two messuages with certain lands, &c., in Boston and Skirbeck. In 1414 another patent was granted to this Gild.

Mr. Thompson considers that this was in all probability a religious Gild. At the dissolution it was called a “College,” and its valuation, as given both by Dugdale and Speed, was £32. The situation of the hall of this institution was contiguous to Corpus Christi-lane, in Wide Bargate. No remains of any buildings, &c., belonging to it were visible in 1820.

Gild of the Apostles St. Peter and St. Paul.—The earliest record of this Gild is in 1393, when a patent was issued “for the Gild or Fraternity of the Apostles St. Peter and St. Paul, in the Church of St. Botolph in the Town of St. Botolph.” A second grant is dated 1448.

This appears to have been a religious establishment, and to have had a chapel, or at least an altar, in the parish church of St. Botolph. It was called a college at the dissolution, and was valued at £10 13s. 4d. It is supposed that St. Peter’s-lane, in Wide Bargate, had probably some connection with this Gild.

The charter of Philip and Mary, dated 1554, vested the possessions of this institution in the Corporation.

St. George’s Gild.—This was founded prior to 1403, for in that year a patent grant was issued in confirmation of a licence for the formation of this fraternity. In 1415 a patent was granted for the keeping or governing of the Gild of St. George in the town of St. Botolph.

This appears to have been a trading company, no mention being made of it at the dissolution.

The hall of this Gild was standing in 1726 at the bottom of St. George’s-lane, on the west side of the river.

Gild of Holy Trinity.—Patent grants to this fraternity were issued in 1409 and 1411.

It appears from documents in the archives of the Corporation of Boston that Stephen Clerke, warden and keeper of the fraternity of the Holy Trinity, in the town of St. Botolph, together with the brethren and sisters thereof, did surrender to Nicholas Robertison, mayor, and the other burgesses of the new borough of Boston, all the estates, effects, and property of the said fraternity whatsoever, by deed under the common seal of their Gild, dated 22nd of July, in the 37th of Henry VIII. (1546). This surrender was formally made in a house then called the Trinity Chamber, which was most probably the hall or Gild of the fraternity. Its site is unknown. The possessions of this Gild were confirmed to the Corporation by Philip and Mary A.D. 1554; as were those of the St. Mary, St. Peter, and St. Paul Gilds, at the same time, “the better to support the Bridge and Port of Boston.”

It is more than probable that these Gilds played an important part in connection with the great fairs held in this town, but no evidence is at hand.

Craft Gilds.—During the sixteenth and early in the seventeenth century, various Craft Gilds were founded in the borough. Of these, particular mention is made of the following: 1555, the Company of Cordwainers and Curriers established; 1562, the Tailors’ Company; 1576, the Glovers’ Company; 1598, the Smiths’, Farriers’, Braziers’, and Cutlers’ Companies; 1606, the Butchers’ Company established.

These Craft Gilds were founded and conducted on the usual model of the period, as may be seen by the constitution of the Cordwainers’ Company. This Company was authorised, and its regulations sanctioned by the Mayor, Aldermen, and Common Council of the borough in 1855, the following being the substance of its regulations:—

There should be elected on the Monday before the Feast of St. Martin, by the said Company, two wardens, who should choose a person as beadle, to be attendant on the said wardens.

The officers were to be presented before and sworn in by the Mayor for the time being, on the feast day of St. Andrew, to serve their respective offices for one whole year.

The said wardens should have authority over all manner of persons using the occupation or mystery of cordwainer in the said borough of Boston.

That no person or persons should set up within the said borough as cordwainers until such time as they could sufficiently cut or make a boot or shoe, to be adjudged by the said wardens, and were made free by the Mayor, Aldermen, &c., of the said borough, upon pain of forfeiting £3 6s. 8d., to be paid to the use of the Company: or to suffer imprisonment; this fine or imprisonment to be levied as often as any person should attempt the same.

If any foreigner, or person who did not serve his apprenticeship in the said borough, should be admitted to his freedom by the Mayor, &c., that he shall then pay to the wardens £3 6s. 8d. before he should be admitted a fellow of the said Company.

That no fellow of this Company, his journeymen or servants, should work on the Sabbath-day, either in town or country.

That the wardens of the said Company should have power once a month at least, or oftener if required, to search throughout the whole Company of Cordwainers and Curriers for unlawful wares or leathers.

There is no reference here to any powers of searching the stalls at the fairs for “unlawful wares;” but it is not improbable that such a power was exercised by the wardens of these Craft Gilds.

(To be continued.)

Collectanea.

“Clapham Chronicle.”—J. M. Kemble edited as a boy at school a little newspaper, a sheet of about six inches square, printed by himself from a diminutive hand press, and aping the style of the daily journals. I [i.e., C. J. M.] have a file of them still, “Edited by John Mitchell Kemble, printer, No. 1, Desk-row.” (See C. Dickens’ “Life of Charles J. Matthews,” vol. i. p. 34.)

Civic Conviviality in 1759.—Mr. J. H. Round communicates the following: “The Mayor was also empowered [23 Nov. 1759] to give a grand Banquet at the ’Change to the Duke of Grafton and the officers of the Suffolk militia. The Suffolk militia then lay at Leicester, officered by the first characters in that county. It was then considered the most elegant and costly treat ever given by the corporation, and one the most inebriating. Mr. Mayor [Nicholas Throsby], at night, was assisted by the duke downstairs; and the duke soon after was assisted to his carriage by the town servants: there not being a soul left in the room capable of affording help to enfeebled limbs—Field Officers and Aldermen, Captains and Common Council, were perfectly at rest; all were levelled by the mighty power of wine.” (Throsby’s “History of Leicester” (1791), p. 162.)

Reviews.

History and Description of Corfe Castle. By Thomas Bond. E. Stanford. 1884.

We have here a book to which we can conscientiously pay a high tribute of praise. The noble ruins of mediæval castles in which England is so pre-eminently rich have rarely found competent historians, for the reason that while, on the one hand, their architecture is a special study, and understood by only a very few, who have made it their own subject; on the other hand, those who have thus acquired the necessary general knowledge are too often lacking in the special local knowledge, which is, in such cases, absolutely essential. Mr. Bond, however, has unquestionably succeeded in combining these two qualifications. In the present work he gives us, in an enlarged and final form, the results of those valuable researches on the castle, of which the outline has previously appeared in the third edition of Hutchins’ “Dorset,” and in his paper read before the Archæological Institute in 1866. The chief point which Mr. Bond has throughout sought to establish is the early date of the actual keep, which, as he shows, may with good reason be assigned to the days of the Conqueror. In this last controversy the most important point is the locality of the “Castellum de Warham,” mentioned in “Domesday.” Mr. Bond identifies it, beyond the shadow of a doubt, with Corfe Castle itself. Mr. Freeman’s unfortunate attempt to defend his own identification of it with the later and infinitely less important fortress of Wareham Castle is utterly shattered by Mr. Bond’s arguments, though he does not, strangely enough, allude to Mr. Freeman’s contention, which will be found under “Wareham,” in his work on “English Towns and Districts.”

We gladly call attention to the valuable searches made by Mr. Bond among original MS. authorities in the Public Records, especially the instructive “Fabric Rolls.” The careful excavations which he has been permitted to make have also led to important results, and, in short, we have in his book the fruits of long and patient study on the spot, combined with an unsparing and yet critical use of all available sources of original information.

We must not omit to notice the excellent plans and illustrations, with which the volume is liberally adorned, and which, by their great clearness, are admirably adapted to their purpose.

Mediæval Military Architecture in England. 2 vols. By G. T. Clark. Wyman. 1884.

It is with a feeling of real gratitude that we welcome this noble work. The prolonged labours of “Castle Clark” have long been familiar to antiquaries, and no archæological meeting at any spot that could boast a castle has seemed complete without the presence of “the great master of military architecture,” as Mr. Clark has been justly termed by Professor Freeman: to whom, by the way, these volumes are dedicated, as having been issued “at his suggestion.” It has long been a matter of natural regret that the valuable results of Mr. Clark’s researches should have been so widely scattered as to render them, for practical purposes, inaccessible to the student. In these volumes they have now been collected, gathered together from many quarters, such as the “Transactions” of the national and local Archæological societies, the Builder, and, not least, the scarce volume known as “Old London,” from which Mr. Clark has been allowed to reproduce his important monograph on the Tower.

The work begins with twelve introductory chapters, of which we may select, as of special interest, that on “earthworks of the post-Roman and English periods,” an obscure subject, on which Mr. Clark has here collected much instructive information. Three chapters deal with “the Castles of England and Wales at the latter part of the twelfth century,” and we can only regret that a subsequent chapter has not been devoted to the period of the Charter (1213-1223), when these fortresses played so large and important a part in the struggle. These chapters are succeeded by more than one hundred papers on various castles and works, not confined to England alone, as could be gathered from the title, but including many in Wales, Borthwick Tower in Scotland, and, beyond the Channel, the typical strongholds of Arques and Coucy, together with the famous Château-Gaillard. The plans and diagrams, so all-essential in a work dealing with these subjects, are bestowed with no sparing hand, and there are not a few illustrations of a less severe character.

The drawback incident to such a work as this is the great area which it has to cover. Not only a very wide knowledge of history, but also much special local knowledge is needed to secure a satisfactory result. It must be confessed that Mr. Clark has been more successful in the structural than in the historical portion of his theme. Nor have his views on the former always escaped challenge. His statements as to Pevensey were questioned at the time, and his account of Colchester, both of the structure and of its history, has been very gravely impugned. It is somewhat strange that, in this case, Mr. Clark has repeated, without correction, his statements, as he has inserted, in his account of the Tower, the important discovery of two fireplaces on the second stage, since the paper was originally written. We may also note that, notwithstanding the admiration which Messrs. Freeman and Clark profess for one another, their views are often very contradictory, as, for instance, on Norwich Castle, on the character of pre-Conquest keeps, on the earthworks at Lincoln, and on Richard’s Castle.

But while it is necessary to sound a note of warning, it is almost ungrateful to criticise a work which will be recognised as indispensable to every student of English history in the middle ages. Few studies could throw more light on the social life of the two centuries succeeding the Norman Conquest. When we learn that, of the papers reprinted in these volumes, that on Caerphilly was originally issued no less than half a century ago, we may form some idea of the duration of Mr. Clark’s labours, and may congratulate him on being not only the worthy successor of the painstaking and indefatigable Mr. King, but the greatest authority we have ever had on Mediæval Military Architecture.

Cowdray: the History of a Great English House. By Mrs. Charles Roundell. Bickers & Son. 1884.

This handsome quarto volume possesses something more than local interest; it is the history of a house which was one of the most characteristic examples of Tudor architecture, and of a family which for several generations was conspicuous in the history of the times. Cowdray House stood close to Midhurst, in West Sussex; but it was burned down towards the end of the last century, and little now remains of the once magnificent pile but ivy-clad walls. With the mansion perished several invaluable historical treasures—among them the sword of William the Conqueror, his coronation robe, and the oft-disputed Roll of Battle Abbey. The house was full of rare and curious things, and contained a large number of family portraits of the Lords of Cowdray, whose fortunes were founded by Sir Anthony Browne, the friend and confidant of Henry VIII., and whose son, on the marriage of Queen Mary with Philip of Spain, was created Viscount Montague, a title which became extinct on the death of the ninth Lord in 1797. According to tradition, it was at Battle Abbey, where Sir Anthony Browne and his family were established within three months of its surrender to the Crown, that the famous “curse of Cowdray” was invoked. The story runs that while Sir Anthony was holding his first great feast in the Abbots’ Hall, “a monk made his way through the crowd of guests, and, striding up to the daïs on which Sir Anthony sat, cursed him to his face. He concluded with the words, ‘By fire and water thy line shall come to an end, and it shall perish out of the land.’ ” Two hundred and fifty years afterwards the curse was fulfilled, for Cowdray was burned down, and the eighth Lord Montague and his two nephews were all drowned. Misfortune seems to have been the lot of Lord Montague’s family from the first to the last, and the climax came with the burning of Cowdray; the last Viscount was a monk, who obtained the Papal dispensation to marry and continue the line; but he, too, died childless, and the male line of the Brownes of Cowdray became extinct. Mrs. Roundell thus describes the present appearance of the ruins of Cowdray: “Above the great gateway the face of the clock still remains, with its hands still pointing to the hour at which it stopped; by the door is the old bell, and the original staples which held the doors to the gateway. The kitchen still contains the enormous dripping-pan, five feet long and four feet wide, and the great meat-screen and meat-block. Among these relics of old Cowdray are lying a fine mirror-frame, a chandelier, and Lady Montague’s harp, on which are the words, ‘H. Naderman, à Paris.’ ”

It only remains to add that Mrs. Roundell has treated her subject exhaustively, but in a plain, unvarnished manner, and that the book is illustrated with reproductions, by a photographic process, of some old views of Cowdray.

Life and Times of William IV. By Percy FitzGerald, M.A., F.S.A.

This is rather a sample of book-making by a gentleman who can do better work, and has done it. The account of King William’s early years is dull and heavy; and that of the first Reform Bill contains nothing that has not been told before. His accounts of Holland House and its “set” (where he has had Macaulay to draw upon), and of the French emigrés in London after the Revolution of 1830, and of the chief dandies and ladies of fashion who hung about Lady Blessington, are the most interesting parts of the book.

1. Luther and the Cardinal. Translated by Julie Sutter. 2. Homes and Haunts of Luther. By John Stoughton, D.D. 3. Luther Anecdotes. By Dr. Macaulay. Religious Tract Society. 1883.

Certainly the enterprising publishers who call themselves the Religious Tract Society were not behindhand in contributing to the Luther Festival last year. The story of one of the bravest men in history (let us not hesitate to call him so) has seldom been more worthily enshrined than in the books now lying on our table. The “anecdotes” are an unambitious attempt to unite in a connected form the various stories told of Luther at various periods of his life. “Homes and Haunts of Martin Luther” is evidently written in the true spirit of the loving and faithful chronicler. We follow the great Reformer from the mines of Eisènach to the princely castle of the Wartburg; from the quiet of the Wittenberg monastery to the fierce conflict of the Diet of Worms. Everywhere Mr. Stoughton describes the life and doings of his hero with the tender reverence of an ardent admirer. A noticeable feature of the book is the elegance of the illustrations, which are artistically drawn and carefully engraved. The foregoing treat of the general story of Luther’s life; in the work entitled “Luther and the Cardinal,” we have a graphic historical picture of the memorable struggle between the Reformer and one of the greatest of the Papal adherents, Cardinal Albrecht, Elector and Archbishop of Mainz. It is written almost in the style of an historical novel, except that no imaginary personage or event is introduced. Pastor Metschmann thoroughly warms to his task when he describes in the latter part of the book the fierce retribution wreaked upon the Cardinal by Luther for the judicial murder of poor Hans von Schömtz, and he is appreciatively and carefully interpreted by his translator.

Hanley and the House of Lechmere, by the late Mr. E. P. Shirley (Pickering), is a book to which much interest attaches, as the last (and indeed posthumous) work of one of the most noble and worthy of scholars and gentlemen. It is partly topographical, as giving an account of the parish of Hanley Castle; it is also partly architectural, and partly genealogical; and in all these three qualifications Mr. Shirley shone pre-eminent. The old seat of the Lechmere family, now known as Severn End, is one of those fine old timbered mansions which are scattered so thickly up and down the western and north-western counties from Gloucester to Lancaster; and it appears that the mansion must have ranked a century ago high among the houses of its class. Its general structure, its tapestries, its pictures, its painted glass, all serve to show this. The greater part of the volume is taken up with the diary of Sir Nicholas Les Lechmere, recording the history of the family from the days of the first two Edwards down to the reign of William and Mary, in fact to within a year of his own death in 1701. The entries exhibit to us the domestic pursuits,—pleasures, as well as the public duties of a worthy man and upright judge. A manuscript of Dr. Thomas, quoted by Nash, in his “History of Worcestershire,” observes of the Lechmeres: “This family came out of the Low Countries, served under William the Conqueror, and obtained lands in Hanley, called from them Lechmere’s Place, and Lechmere’s Fields. Lech is a branch of the Rhine, which parts from it at Wyke, in the province of Utrecht, and running westward falls into the Maes before you come to Rotterdam.” “Some foundation for the supposed foreign origin of the name,” remarks Mr. Shirley, “is derived from the fact that all the earlier ancestors of the Lechmeres used the prefix de, which was afterwards dropped; and as, with the exception of Lechmere Heath in Hertfordshire, there is no place of that name in England, we may, perhaps, conclude that Dr. Thomas’s theory is the right one. There can be no reasonable doubt that the progenitor of the venerable House of Lechmere was seated in the parish of Hanley not long after the Conquest, and, after all, it may not be impossible that he was the Roger who held under Gislebert, at the time of the Domesday survey.” Mr. Shirley’s work, we may add, is illustrated with a view of the western front of Severn End, as it appeared in 1803, taken from a sketch by the late Sir Edmund Lechmere; whilst the pages of the volume are enriched with numerous carefully-executed coats of arms of the Lechmeres, and their several impalements through marriage. The arms of Lechmere, Gules, a fess, and in chief two pelicans vulning themselves, or—“may be taken as an early instance of what is called canting heraldry, Lech, in old Breton, meaning love, and mere, of course, mother,—a play upon the name symbolised by the pelican wounding herself and feeding her young with her blood.”

The History of Newcastle and Gateshead in the 14th and 15th Centuries., by Mr. R. Welford (Scott, 14, Paternoster-square), introduces us to a district which in the course of the present summer will be visited by the Archæological Institute of Great Britain; its appearance, therefore, is well timed. Mr. Welford has brought together and has arranged with considerable skill a mass of extracts from the records of “the King’s Town of the New Castle upon the Tyne,” founded by a son of the Conqueror; and in his introductory chapter he has given a sketch of the early growth of the town, with its charters, its commerce, and its pageants. The only fault that we can find is that this chapter is far too brief; for we should have been pleased to see more of Mr. Welford’s own handiwork, and of his comments on the most interesting materials which he has brought together, and which extend from A.D. 1301 down to the close of A.D. 1500. For a record of local annals the book strikes us as coming very nearly up to the standard of perfection.

Gwilt’s Encyclopædia of Architecture (Longmans) is a work so thoroughly established as an authority that it needs no commendation of ours. If any proof of its value, and the public appreciation of that value be needed, it will be enough to say that it has reached its seventh edition. Thus, as to the two previous impressions, many amendments have been made, which the progress of time had rendered necessary. But for the present edition “The Tables of the English Cathedrals have been compiled; many chapters on public and private buildings have been re-written, and new ones have been inserted: the list of architects and their principal works has been removed from the glossary and re-compiled, the list of architectural publications has been enlarged, and formed into a separate list, while the glossary itself has received numerous additional terms and illustrations, together with such other amendments as appeared desirable.” Though the work is styled an “Encyclopædia,” the only portion of it which is alphabetically arranged is the “Glossary” at the end; the rest of the book is really an elaborate history of architecture, from the earliest period of a semi-barbaric age. In it Mr. Gwilt carries his readers through the annals of architecture, Druidical and Celtic, Pelasgic or Cyclopean, Babylonian, Persian, Jewish and Phœnician, Indian, Egyptian, Chinese, Mexican, Arabian, Moorish, or Saracenic, Grecian, Etruscan, Roman, Byzantine, and so on to the rise of that Pointed Style to which the name of Gothic has clung so strongly. He devotes sections also to a general view of the Italian, French, German, Spanish, Portuguese, and Russian styles; and then occupies the bulk of the work with the successive styles of architecture which have prevailed in this country, and the Pointed Architecture of France, Italy, Spain, Belgium, and other continental countries. The second and third parts of the work treat in great detail of the theory and the practice of architecture respectively: the fourth part concerns mainly the working builder, and the land agent. The work is illustrated by woodcuts, giving views, elevations, and ground-plans of the principal public and private buildings both at home and abroad. The short memoir of Mr. Gwilt, himself, prefixed to the work, is the record of a man whose name the present race of Englishmen would not wish to die.

Lincolnshire and the Danes. By the Rev. G. S. Streatfeild. Kegan Paul & Co. 1884.

The Great Fen District and the Danish occupation of this part of our country, together form an interesting episode in English History; and this Mr. Streatfeild has undertaken to illustrate. He is not without, at all events, one great qualification for his task, for he has long been a resident in the south of Lincolnshire; and besides that he has other merits, for he is a man of honest research, and he writes with the pen of a scholar and a gentleman. Perhaps the best chapter in the volume is the third, which treats of the Dane in his English home; though other readers will be inclined to bestow equal praise on the chapter on Danish Mythology, and on the influence which has been exerted by it upon our language and people. It should be added that the book is dedicated to the Princess of Wales, who can see almost from her windows at Sandringham the tower of Boston Church, which marks the district on which the Danes of old have left their stamp.

Historic Sites of Lancashire and Cheshire. By James Croston, Esq., F.S.A. Manchester: John Heywood. 1883.

The author of this work says, rather grandiloquently, in his preface, that, without any pretension to the dignity of history, his aim has been “to combine with topographical description, personal narrative and local legend, and to snatch from Oblivion’s spoils the shadowy fragments of tradition that have floated down through centuries of time.” Certainly a worthy and admirable aim, not wanting, despite the writer’s disclaimer, in ‘dignity.’ He has contrived to clothe his descriptions of persons and places in a mantle of poetical beauty, which renders them exceedingly charming to the general reader, as they are also of pre-eminent interest to the antiquary. One of the chapters, that devoted to Alderley and the Stanleys, will be especially attractive to admirers of perhaps the most universally admired Churchmen of the century. Mr. Croston has wisely summarised in a few words the later and best-known part of his history, and paid most attention to the early years of Arthur Stanley in the pretty home at Alderley.

We must give an especial meed of praise to the spirited style in which the story of Sir William Brereton, who was such an excellent type of the higher class of the Parliamentarian soldier, is told. As the author remarks, to tell the history of his life is to write the record of the Civil war in the north-west of England. This he has told impartially and excellently, and in a style of narrative which can scarcely be too highly commended for its clearness and freedom from inflation. The pages of the work are enlivened by apt poetical quotations, many of them from little known old English poets, which show that Mr. Croston’s reading has been various and extensive. The book should find favour with more than local readers; old Moreton Hall, for instance, is one of those “stately homes of England” in which a national interest is felt; and none who love the quaintly venerable, albeit decayed, mansions of our forefathers, can fail to be grateful to the writer for his graphic and appreciative chapter on one of the most ancient and interesting of them.

Moreton Hall[12] is almost peculiar for its wealth of rich carving and mouldings, from the entrance, with its two side-posts, each carved to represent a soldier bearing a partisan, to the beautiful little chapel, now, alas! degraded to the service of a cattle-shed, lumber, storehouse, and such base uses. In the “long gallery,” which our author compares to the banquetting-room at Haddon Hall, are two draped figures of Fate and Fortune, admirably illustrating the difference between two terms frequently confounded with each other. Fate bears a sword, with which she pierces a globe above her head, and the inscription beneath is: “The speare of destinye whose ruler is knowledge;” while opposite to her is Fortune, blindfolded, pointing to her wheel, and her motto is: “The wheele of Fortune whose rule is ignorance.” This part of the mansion also gathers additional interest from the tradition that “Good Queen Bess” condescended to dance in the gallery, while on a visit to Moreton Hall during one of her royal progresses. If this be true, it is very possible that her visit may have contributed to the decline rather than to the exaltation of the family; for to have a Tudor sovereign as a guest was, in those days, much the same kind of undesirable honour as the gift of a sacred white elephant from the Burmese king to some subject whom he delights to honour—and to ruin. Witness the clean sweep which the royal Dame contrived to make of the riches of Kenilworth, when Leicester’s Earl paid so dearly for a glance from royal eyes.

“Between architecture and history there exists a closer connection than is commonly supposed,” remarks Mr. Croston, and this may almost be called the key-note of his book. When the author stands before a relic of the past, visions of past chivalry fill his imagination and, consequently, his narrative; and he is never happier than when following the fortunes of some old knight who lived by his sword.