KD 83S . S2S 19 0: Olorn^U Ham ^rlinnl Hthrarg iiaral|aU lEquttg (HoIlMttnti (Sift of IE. i. iiaralraU. IC.E. 1. 1034 CORNELL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY 3 1924 085 505 018 Cornell University Library The original of tiiis book is in tine Cornell University Library. There are no known copyright restrictions in the United States on the use of the text. http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924085505018 N° 66, Vol. XVII., April 1902 The English Historical Review EDITED BY REGINALD L. POOLE, M.A., Ph.D. riCLLOW OF UAQDAI^N OOLLBSE AND LECTCREIl IN DIPLOMATIC IN THE DNIVBBBITY QF OXFORD CONTENTS Articles page The Later RuleM of Sliirpurla or Lagash. By Sir Henry H. Howorth, K.C.I.E,, F.E.S. Part II. . . . 209 TirechAn's Memoir of St. Patrick. By Professor Bury, LiL.D. . . 235 The Authorship of Iiord Durham's Canada Bepbrt. By B. Gamett, O.B., LL.D, . . 268 Samuel Kawson Gardiner. By Professor York Powell, LIi.D. . . 276 Notes and Documents ~' ' Iiarge Hides and Small Hides. By James Tait 280 The Earliest Plea Rolls. By Major E. M. Poynton ... 282 The Creation of Boyoughs. By Miss Maiy Bateson . . . . . 1284 •,/ Copyhold Cases in the Early Chancery Proceedings. By Alexander Savine . . . . . . . . 296 Dean Colet and Archbishop Warham. By P. S. Allen . . . 303 The Dialogue on Richelieu and his Policy; By J. H. Clapham . . . 306 ' Killing no Murder.' By C. H. Firth, LL.D. 308 The Funeral of Napoleon and his Last Papers. By J. Holland Rose 311 The Convention of September 1864. By Bolton King 316 Reviews of Books (see List on next page) < . . .321 Notices of Periodical Publications ... . . 410 TO BE CONTINUED QUARTERLY LONGMANS, GEEEN, AND CO. 39. PATBRNOSTEE KOW, LONDON NEW YOBK AND BOMBAY Price Five Shillings] [All Right» Reserved REVIEWS OF BOOKS Hall, TTie Oldest Civilisation of Greece: by J. L. Myres . . .- . . . . 321 , Hicks and Hill, G^eek Historical Mscriplions : by G. E. Underbill . . . . . 326 i See, Les Classes Rurales en France au Moyen Age: by P. Viflogradoff . ' . . . 328 Lane-Poole, A History of Egypt in the Midd'e Ages : by S. A. Cook , . . . 332 Earle, The Alfred Jewel : by W. H. Stevenson. 335 -Draper, Alfred the Great : by W. H. Stevenson 335 Beazley, The , Dawn of Modern Geography, W: . ^ by G. r.e Strange . . . . . 3385= 'Wickham Legg, Three Coronation Orders : by the Rev. F. E. Brightman . . 339 Belgrano and Imperiale, Annali Genov^si di Caffaro, i, ii : by E. Barker .- . -341 •Le Grand, Siatuts d' Hdtels-Bieu et de Lipro- series : by Miss Bateson . : • , • 34.'' Mandonnet, Siger de Brabant ,et PAiierroisme > : Jatin au xiii"" Sihie : Ijy the- Rev. H. Rashdall, D.Litl. . . , . . -347 Bateson, Records of the Borough of Leicester, ii [1327-1509] : by J. Tait . ,., . .349 Horstman, Nova Legenda Anglie : by the Rev. D. Macieane . . . . . . 350 Bickley, The Little g'ed, Book oj Bristol : by Miss Toulmin Smith .' . . . . 353 Pelissier, Sur les Dates de trois Lettres ini\ : by the Rev. W. Webster . . . ,. 366' Horric de Beaucaire, Recueil des Instruclidns ' donnSes aux Ambassadeurs de France depuis les traith de Westphalie jusqu^A, la Revohi- tion; Savoie-Sardaigne et Manfoue, i, ii: by E. Armstrong . ... . . "},(>%. Fea, King Monmouth: by C. H. Firth, LL.D. 375- Berner, Aus dem Briefmechsel Konig Friedrichs /., i : by the Roaster of Peterhouse, Cambridge 376 Shaw, Calendar of Treasury Books and Papers ^ ' [1739-174I]: l^y B- WiUiams . . J78 Mautouchet, Le Conventionnel Philifpeaux ; by ', P. F. WiUert . , . . . .381 Levy-Schneider,, Z« Conventionnel Jeanhon ' ' Saint -Andre : by P. F. WiUert . . 381/ Stephen, The English Utilitarians : by W. G. Pogson Sinith . .'.',/ .■ 385 \\&\evy. La Formation du Radicalisme Philoso- p/iiguf,x, ii : by W. G. Pogson Smith .385 Dedehi de Gelder, General Baron de, Memoires [1-774- 1 825] = by J. Holland Rose . -391 Healey, The History of the Part of West Somer-\ set comprising the Parishes of Luccombe, Selworthy, &'c. ; by the Rev. W. Hunt . 394 SHORT NOTICE^ r Archiv fiir Papyrusfors'hung, \ . . . 396, Bibliotheca Hagiographica L^atina Antiquae et Mediae A etatis . ... . 398 \ Gbdel, Katalog ofver iongl. Bibliotekets fornis- 1', • Idndska och fornnorska handskrifter . 398 ptelmolt, Weltgeschichte, iii, 2 . ... . 399 , Helmolt, The Worlds' History, Engl, transl,, i. 399 Lindner, Weltgeschichte seit der Volker- . wanderung, i ' • • 4°° Edwatds, Wales 401 , E-vanSj A Popular. History of the Ancient Britons . 402 Maclaurin, On the Nature and Evidence of Title to Realty . . . '■ . . . 402 Lloyd, Wales and the Coming of the Normans [1039-1093] . .-,.'■. . . -403 Tozer, English Commentary on Dante's ^ Divina Commedia ' , . . ■ - • • • 4^3 Toynhee, Dante Studies a>id Researches . . . 404 Calendar of Close Rolls, Edward IH [1337-9, - 1339-41] ■ • . . • : . . 404 firandij Die Renaissance in Florenz und Rom . 405 Spitik, Gunpowder Plot and Lord Moanleagle's Letter , . . 1 '\ . . 406 Falkiner, Studies in Irish History, mainly of the Eighteenth Century ..... 407 Giraud, Essai sur Taine ..... 40JJ Lucas, Historical Geography of the British Colonies, v . '- , . . . . 408 Hart, American History told by Contetn- poraries, iv . . . . . . ^joS . A&B.-aa, Before and After the Treaty of Washing- ■ ,• ; • • " ■ ■ • 409 ten Books sent for review should be addressed either to the care of Messrs. Longmans & Co., at 39 Paternoster Row, London, or to the Edii OR, at Mansel House, Oxford. The Editor cannot undertake' to notice Educational Works., The English Historical Review NO. LXVI.— APRIL 1902 The Later Rtilers of Shirpurla or Lagash PART II. THE excavations of the Americans at Nippur have shown that whatever the actual date of Sargon and Naram Sin they un- questionably preceded a certain king of Ur whose name has been very variously written. Hilprecht, who calls him Urgur, has shown how the important buildings he put up at Nippur overlie the remains of Sargon and Naram Sin, and that consequently he must have reigned after them. No remains of other kings intervene between these two series of deposits at Nippur. We cannot in consequence say whether or not the ruler called Urgur immediately succeeded Sargon and Naram Sin at Nippur or not, but, on the other hand, we know of no good evidence against this supposition, and as at present advised we think it probable. The circumstance that the name of this king has been variously read is due to the fact that it is represented everywhere by ideographs and not phoneti- cally, so that each writer has selected what he considered to be the most probable of several possible readings of the characters. Sir Henry Eawlinson read it as Urukh, but he is careful to assure us that • the least possible dependence can be placed on this reading of the name, which is merely given for convenience of reference and according to the ordinary phonetic value of the characters employed.' He further compares the n9,me with the Orchamus of Ovid. Rexit Achaemenias urbes pater Orchamus, isque Septimus a prisco numeratur origine Belo,' ' Metam, iv. 212-3. VOL. XVII. — NO. LXVI. P 210 THE LATER RULERS OF April Oppert, who was also attracted by this analogy with the old king mentioned by Ovid, styled him Urkham or Orkham.^ Hincks, who fancied he recognised in the name the counterpart of the Biblical Arioch, read it Huriyak.' Schrader and Haupt, treating it as a Semitic word, read it Amil apsi.^ Eduard Meyer,'^ Delitzsch- Murdter,'' and Hilpreeht read it Urgur. On the other hand Lenormant ' gives as possible variants Urbagas, Urbagus, Likbagas, Eabagas, Urbabi, Likbabi, and Ta.stabi. Some of these forms approach that given by Hommel — namely, Ur Bau.* Hommel has discussed the name with considerable learning, and has shown that the second character, which has been recently read gur, ought to be read Bau. He says — Letzterer Name wurde, da dieser Konig von Ur seinen Namensbe- standtheil Ba'u stets ideographisch schreibt, haufig falsch gelesen (Ur Gur, Urcham etc.), wahrend as doch durch Vergleichung der verschiedenen Epitheta und Funktionen der Gottinnen Ba'u (bez w. Gur) und (phonetisch) Bau (Genitiv Ba hi gi, d.i. Bavi gi, Dativ Ba bur, d.i. Bavu-r, aus Bavu ru) klar erhellt, das beide identisch sind, bezw. das eben Ba-u nur die phonetische Schreibung des in Frage stehenden Ideogrammes dieser Urwassergottheit ist. Die Lesung Gur (verlangert Gur-ra) liegt nur vor, wenn keine Personifikation als Gottin in Aussicht genommen ist, sondern das Urwasser schlechthin als Theil des Weltganzen bezeichnet werden soll.9 This makes it more than probable that the king's name with whom we are dealing was in fact Ur Bau, ' the Man of the goddess Bau,' a name constructed on the same plan and principle as the earlier rulers of Shirpurla, Ur Nina &c., and that he belonged to the same royal stock as they did, which was temporarily displaced by Semitic princes. The next point which we have to settle is whether there were two princes of this name or one. It seems to me that it is very unlikely that there were two. Such a thing would be a rare and unexpected phenomenon at this date, and I see no good reason for separating Ur Bau the patesi of Shirpurla from Ur Bau the king (lugal) of Ur, as has been done by Hommel, Hilpreeht, and others. They seem to me to be distinctly the same personage. Hommel in fact, speaking of the name of Ur Bau, king of Ur, says, Es ist unbedenklich der Name dieses Konig s von Ur, Ur Ba 'u . . . gleich dem Namcn des (phonetisch geschriehenen) Patisi von Sirgulla {Ur- Ba-u) zu lesen.^" Ur Bau and Gudea probably succeeded each ' Exped. en Misqp. i. 290, n. 2, and Sist. des Empires de Ohaldie, &o. p. 16, &a. " Journ. Soc. Lit. and Bib. BAord, 1862. ' Die Keilimschr. und das Alte Testament, 2nd ed. p. 94, n. 129. ^ Gbsch. des Altert. i. 164. » Oesch. 2nd ed. pp. 77, 78. ■ Tre Monwnenti, &a. pp. 11-13. s Gesch. p. 331 et seq. " Ibid. p. 383, n. 2 ; cf. p. 337 u. 1. '" Ibid. p. 333, note 2. 1902 SHIRPURLA OR LAG ASH 211 other as patesis of Shirpurla, the latter becoming patesi there when Ur Bau became king of Ur. There is a great resemblance between the phraseology and also the references to buildings in the inscriptions of Uru Kagina and those of these two patesis of Shirpm-la, which also suggests bringing them together. Ur Bau was clearly an earlier ruler at Shirpurla than Gudea, since the bricks of his constructions underlie those of Gudea in the palace at Tell Loh. Among the discoveries made by M. de Sarzec there was none more interesting than the finding in one room often statues of the two rulers Ur Bau and Gudea. They are all carved in a kind of diorite called dolerite by mineralogists. It is a hard stone of a dark greenish black colour, but not so difficult to work as either marble or porphyry, and is susceptible of a fine polish. The same stone was employed for making gate sockets, steps, and other things. It was imported from the country of Magan — that is to say, the Arabian coast near Bahrein and Oman — and, as we can tell from unfinished pieces, was imported in its rough state and worked and completed on the ground." The ten statues were all decapitated, and we can only recover what their faces were like from two detached heads found close by and ap- parently belonging either to them or to similar statues. The intro- duction of hard stone as his material naturally affected the methods and style of the sculptor. The style may also have been affected by distant echoes of Egyptian work in similar material. At all events there is a great advance in technical skill in the case of these statues upon that of the earlier kings who worked in lime- stone. The material, however, was too tough and hard to enable the artists to indulge in much detail, so that the effects are produced by broad treatment, especially in the robes in which the statues are decked. In the nude parts the treatment, without being accurate, is, as M. Heuzey says, full of force and truth. This is especially the case in the modelling of the cheeks, the back, and the right shoulder and arm, which are bare. The too pointed elbows and the bony and flat wrists are exaggerations characteristic of this early school of sculpture ; but the feet are well designed and modelled, and beautifully worked. The slender hands with large palms and fingers delicately shaped, with fine nails, point to a highly cultured class accustomed to use their hands for writing, " I ought to add here that a passage I recently found in Ainsworth's Euphrates Expedition suggests that the source of this dolerite may have been nearer Babylonia than has sometimes been thought. He says that Captain Lynch found that the so- called Jebel Sinam, near Bussora, instead of being a mound of dihris, as had been supposed, is a basaltic rook, and he adds in a note, ' It appears from Mr. Taylor's researches that beyond the mounds of Mu kayir there is a region known as the Ha zem, which is composed of sandstones and gravel ; while beyond it again is the Hejerra, so called from the numerous blocks of black granite (Dolerites ? ) with which it abounds ' (vol. ii. 90, note). P 2 212 THE LATER RULERS OF April &c., and not for labour merely. The attitudes, however, are rigid, symmetrical, and monotonous, confined to one or two types, which were probably decided by the intractability of the material. Thus the two hands are represented crossed, the right one in the left, an attitude in the east representing passive obedience. In the present case it meant, no doubt, one of deference to the god to whom the statues are dedicated. The figures are short and stumpy, with heavy shoulders, and this seems to have represented a reality in the men themselves, and was not a mere canon of the sculptural school. The dress of the ten statues is almost precisely alike, and represents the fringed robe which became the fashion for many generations in Babylonia, and which is probably the garment of pure white wool {x^aviBiov \svk6v) mentioned as the mantle of the Babylonians of his time by Herodotus. The early Chaldeans, how- ever, do not seem to have known a made-up tunic, but contented themselves with this rectangular sheet, which they fastened and adjusted in an ingenious fashion of their own. They passed it under the right arm, leaving it bare, then folding it round them passed one edge over the other, and so fastened it, thus giving a very solid aspect to the dress. The simple fringe and folds into which the costume falls are neatly represented on the statues. The statues of Ur Bau and Gudea are of different sizes, one colossal, others only half-size ; some are represented standing and some sitting. In order to .give stability to their standing statues the Egyptians employed a pilaster behind them, while the Greeks carved a tree, &c. The early Chaldeans attained their purpose in another way. They did not finish off their statues below, but cut out a cavity like a small grotto, in the interior of which they carved the front of the feet, leaving the heels and the lower part of the robe imbedded in the mass of the stone. This curious de- tail, says M. Heuzey, may be added to the other proofs of the complete originality of the Chaldean sculpture. In the sitting figures there was not the same necessity, so that the feet and bottom of the robe are shown free. The heels, however, are enclosed in the cubic seat on which the figures are seated. This seat is merely a low wooden stool whose feet resemble a letter A. The rustic form of this stool is a feature hitherto unknown else- where than at Tell Loh. A long inscription is engraved in each case on the statue itself, and shows that the statues were dedicated in different temples. M. Heuzey suggests that it was during the Parthian domination they were brought together -into one room as they were found, and they seem to have been then first arranged in two series in the principal court or room ; the four standing statues ornamenting the door of the great hall at the eastern angle, and the four seated ones being put in front of the small ante-room to the Selamlik. 1902 SHIRPURLA Oli LAG ASH 213 Only one of the statues here referred to belonged to the ruler Ur Bau. This deserves special study.'^ The figure is standing up in the attitude of deferential respect. Its head and feet are broken off. The robe differs from those of the statues of Gudea, to be presently mentioned, in not having its fringes distinctly marked. The figure is very squat, with a very broad back in comparison with its height ; in fact it almost resembles a dwarf, and has a head too big for its body, like M. de Clercq's statue of Uru Kagina. This kind of rather bizarre representation M. Heuzey attributes to the fact that the statue was carved out of a boulder, and its shape had to be accommodated to that of the matrix from which it was cut. The stone from which it is carved is a beautiful dark green diorite, which has taken a fine polish. Ur Bau nowhere mentions his father, who may possibly, however, have been Uru Kagina. The statue bears an inscription that has been published by Amiaud, Jensen, and others. It reads, ' To the god Nin girsu, the powerful warrior of the god Inlil, Urban, patesi of Shirpurla, offspring of the god Nin-gal' {i.e. 'Great Lord,' the name given to the god Ea as the god of metal- work), 'chosen by the unchangeable heart of the goddess Nina, endowed with strength by the god Nin girsu. Given a good name by the goddess Bau, endowed with intelligence by the god En ki ' {i.e. Ea). ' Given speech by the goddess Inanna ' {i.e. Ishtar). ' The beloved slave of Lugal erim ' (i.e. the god of Erim), ' the beloved of the god Dumuzi abzu ' (' Tam muz of the Abyss ' "). ' I am Ur Bau. The god Nin girsu is my king ' (at this point the narrative changes to the third person). Ur Bau goes on to tell us he had dug out a foundation or cellar ten cubits in extent. Its earth he measured and weighed and piled it up (?). He then put in some foundations, on which he built a kisu (? ' a platform ') ten cubits high, on which again he built the temple of E nin nu, or ' the Fifty,' which was called Im gig (mi) gu bar bar, and which was thirty cubits high. He also built a temple for the goddess Nin Kharsag, the mother of the gods, at Girsu, and another at Uru azagga for the goddess Bau, ' the good woman, the daughter of the god Anna.' For Inanna or Ishtar, ' the shining one,' he built her temple at Erim, and a temple for En ki, king of Uru duga {i.e. for Ea), at Girsu. For Nin dar (called Nin sia by Jensen), the king and lord, and for Ninagal, his king, he built their temples, and for Nin Mar (the Lady of Mar), the good woman, the first-born of the goddess Nina, he built the temple of her constant choice, which was called Ish-gu-tur. For the god the shepherd of Girsu he built a stable for his asses {i.c. ' sumpter beasts'?) and for the goddess Ku, (?) Anna,'^ the lady who brings the rain (?), he built '^ It is figured on plates 7 and 8 of the first part ot Heuzey's great work '" So explained by Mr. Pinches in a letter. " According to a cylinder belonging to M. de Clercq (114) she was the wife of the god Martu or Kimmon ; c£. IK. A. I. iii. CT.b.Sg. See Records of the Past, N.S. i. 75-7. 214 THE LATER RULERS OF April her temple in Girsu. Lastly for Dumuzi abzu, the lord of Kinunir (? Borsippa), he built his temple at Girsu.^^ On a threshold stone for a door, published by M. de Sarzec,"^ Ur Bau, who here styles himself the offspring of the god Nin gal, mentions the dedication of a temple to the god En ki {i.e. Ba), and on some large bricks he refers to the building of a temple to Nin girsu." In these inscriptions, which are both published by Amiaud, Ur ■ Bau calls himself patesi of Shirpurla. On some cones, the inscription on one of which is figured by Radau, Ur Bau as patesi of Shirpurla commemorates the building of the temple of E nin nu Imgig gu bar bar, above mentioned, for Nin girsu. ^' Two hundred of these clay cones with his name have been found at Tell Loh. Bearing the name of Ur Bau we also have a series of figures made in copper, and showing a skill in the modelling and work- ing very superior to that of the earlier dynasty of Shirpurla, and resembling, as M. Heuzey says, more closely that of the more mature art of the reign of Sargon and his son Naram Sin. Each of these figures is bearded and wears a tiara with four pairs of horns on its head, and is therefore probably a god. He is bare to the waist, and kneels on the ground with one knee. Between his knees he holds with both hands an object which is conical in shape and pointed at the bottom, and which he seems to be working. M. Heuzey suggests that it resembles a kind of pile or stake with which he is punishing the subterranean demons. By others it has been explained with some probability as the god making fire with the fire-stick. The figures are dedicated to Nin girsu, and mention his temple of E nin nu, and doubtless represent that god himself. With each of them was found a large tablet in white marble with an epitome of the inscription on the dioi:ite statue of Ur Bau already named. They were found together in a grey earthen vessel with an ovoid handle, and pierced with three holes in the bottom, apparently, as M. Heuzey says, to allow the magical influence to permeate freely into the ground below. On a small object of white stone an inscription, translated by Amiaud, tells us that Ur Inlil consecrated this ' da ' for the life of Ur Bau, paetsi of Shirpurla, and for the life of the wife of his son.'"' This inscription is curious, because the name Ur Inlil occurs on certain remains found at Nippur, assigned by Hilprecht to a considerably earlier date.^"^ The infrequency of the repetition of the same name at this time among royal persons makes it probable that the Ur Inlil just referred to was in fact the same person as the Ur Inlil who dedi- '* Jensen, in Keilinschr. Bibl. iii. 19-24 ; Amiaud, in Becm-ds of the Past, N.S. i. 75. " Dicouvertes, pi. 27, fig. 2. '■ Ibid. pi. 37, figs. 1 and 2 ; Recwds of the Past, N.S. ii. 73. '^ See Badan, pp. 183-5. " Records of the Past, N.S. ii. 73, 74. ™ Ante, vol. xiii. (] 898), p. 18. 1902 SHIRPUBLA OB LAGASH 215 cated the ' da ' above mentioned. The two names of Ur Bau and Ur InHl are built up very similarly, and they may have been brothers. Ur Inlil, who dedicates objects at Nippur, calls himself patesi of Nippur, which is a very rare style. From his inscriptions as lyatesi of Shirpurla Ur Bau seems to have been a prosperous person and a great builder ; he appears indeed to have rebuilt most of the temples in his dominion (some from their foundations), a fact which points to their having been previously injured or destroyed. We have not, however, hitherto discovered a single inscription relating to any warlike and external adventure. In an inscription published by Heuzey^' and translated by Jensen ^^ we have a very interesting dedication to Nin girsu by Nin Kandu {i.e. the Lady Kandu), the daughter of Ur Bau, for the life of Nam maghani, patesi of Shirpurla, and also for her own life. Nam maghani was read Nam lugh ni and also Nam kin ni by Ledrain. Hommel read it Nam uru (?) ni and Mr. Pinches Ei nita ni. On a threshold stone we have an inscription, published by M. de Sarzec,^^ in which Nam maghani, who on it calls himself patesi of Shirpurla, dedicates the stone to the goddess Bau, daughter of Anna and mistress of Uru azagga.^ On another inscription Nin kagina,^'^ daughter of Ka azagge, dedicates a gag-gis (which has been translated ' a mace ') to the god Urduzi, her king, for the life of Nam maghani, patesi of Shirpurla.^^ The god Urduzi here mentioned is not otherwise known to me. Eadau, without the slightest evidence, postulates that Ur Bau had a son, that this son succeeded him and was in turn succeeded by Nam maghani as patesi of Shirpurla. I see just as little reason for accepting his theory, which is also that of Hommel, that there was a gap of about 200 years between Ur Bau and Gudea. To my mind the way in which their remains occur, the fact that they alone apparently made diorite statues of a certain type, and other reasons combine to make it very probable that, if not contemporaries, they lived very near to each other. Gudea is made a son of Ur Bau by Maspero,^^ but of this there is no evidence and it is surely founded on some mistake. It is not impossible that, like Nam maghani, he was his son-in-law. As I have tried to show above, I look upon Ur Bau, the patesi of Shii'purla, as the same person as Ur Bau, the king of Ur. How he 2' Bev. Assyr. ii. 79. '- K. B. iii. 75 ; and Eadau, p. 19. '^ Dicouverfes, pi. 27, 1. "' Records of the Past, N.S. ii. 107. ^^ This name is formed like Uru Kagina, Kagina being apparently a synonym for the god Inlil ; so that the name would mean ' lady of the god Inlil.' Eadau reads the phrase ' dumu ka azag ga,' not as a proper name, but translates it 'his glorious granddaughter.' '" See Cuneiform Texts, i. 96, 6, 15, 1 ; adau, p. 18G. ^'- Dawn of Civilisation, p. 610. ■216 THE LATER RULERS OF April enlarged his dominion, and thus changed his status, I do not know, but it seems to me that on doing so he appointed his relatives to be patesis of Shirpurla, and possibly also of Nippur, and it was pro- bably as his subordinate that Gudea ruled at Shirpurla. The characters representing the latter's name read Ka-mum-a, but in ' W. A. I.' ii. 20, 24 and 30, 49, we have two glosses which seem to authorise the reading of the name as Gudea.^* In Assyrian it is explained by Xa bu u (i.e. the preacher or prophet) .^^ Gudea nowhere in his inscriptions gives us the name of his father, and hence it would seem he was not of royal birth. On the other hand it would be a very improbable thing in these early days for a mere nobody to become a sovereign with such power as he had, especially since he appears not to have been a warrior.^ In tMs connexion it may be noticed that he is one of the very few early kings whose wife's name has been recorded. It occurs on an agate seal preserved at the Hague, which was first explained by Hommel, and which reads, ' Gudea, patesi of Shirpurla, and Gin umun pa ud du (?), his wife.' The latter name means ' ^Maiden of Marduk,' or of the planet Jupiter.^^ Hommel and Eadau read the name simply Gin-Dun pa ud du.^'- This mention of his wife points to her having been a personage of some consequence. It may be that it was through her he secured the throne, and she may have been the daughter of ITr Bau. The most remarkable inscription of Gudea, and in fact the most important of any of the records of the early kings of Chaldea, is inscribed on one of the great clay cylinders in the Louvre, the texts of which have been published, but largely await translation and illustration. Zimmern, with wonderful insight, divined the general meaning of one of these inscriptions — namely, that on the so-called cylinder A. The more important part of this inscription has quite recently been partially translated by M. Thureau Dangin in the Comptes Rendus of the Academy for 1901. According to this most competent witness it commences with a kind of prologue in which we are transported into the midst of an assembly of the gods, who, under the presidency of In lil, were deUberating on the settling of fates and fortunes in the temple of Ba ga. The condition of ' the city of Xin girsu ' was the chief object of their solicitude, and we are told that In hi turned a favourable regard towards it. It evidently -' See ilenant. Cat. de Clercq, ii. 1, note. Mr. C. J. Ball says the name may mean ' speaker,' ' orator ' (Gnde = shasu, ' to speak ') : Light from the East, p. 56, note. ^ Transactions of the Soc. of Blhl. Arch. vi. 282 ; Jensen, in K.B. iii. 27, n. 3. " Hommel read a phrase in one of the cylinder inscriptions of Gudea, ' A mother I had not and a father I had not,' and inferred that, like Sargon, he was a foundling ; but the meaning of the phrase, which is contained in an address to the goddess Ga tmn dug, is, as shown by Zimmern, Zcitschr. f. Assyr. iii. 230, ' Thou art mv mother ; ' ' Thou art my father.' " Jensen, in K. B. iii. 1. p. 65, note. ^- Kadau, p. 210. 1902 SHIRPURLA OR LAGASH 217 needed help and was in a bad plight, for a great drought had dried ap the canals and the sands were advancing upon them. In order to secure a better time the patesi Gudea, a man, we read, of great knowledge, made some offerings, including an adult ox and a kid. He put the stone of destiny on his head, and in preparation for the building, or rather rebuilding, of the temple he carried the stone in question in the day time and the middle of the night to Nin girsu, and apparently sought his counsel. He then refers to a dream : ' May I speak ? ' he said. ' I am the shepherd to whom the sovereignty has been given. Something came to me in the middle of the night. I could not understand its meaning. May I explain my dream to my mother ? "Will the goddess Nina, the sister of Ud ma Nina-shurit-ta, show me its meaning ? ' Apparently she did not respond to his prayer, because her image, which was in her boat, was stranded, and could not sail, as the canal was dry. Gudea then addressed himself directly to Nin girsu, in whose temple he offered sacrifices and libations, and appealed to him as the warrior and impetuous lion who had no rival, who held highest rank in the abyss . . . and also at Nippur, and declared to him his wish to obey his words and to rebuild his temple if only his sister, the daughter of Ea of Eridu, she who decided what should happen, the divining queen of the gods, would aid him. Gudea next had recourse to the goddess Ga tum dug, to whom he also offered victims and libations, and whom he addressed as his father and mother, as the creator of Shirpurla, who held the first rank among the gods. He told her how, when he was asleep, with his lance, hafted with the wood of Ne gi bar, by his side, he had a dream, and he begged her to send the winged genii Utukku and Lamassu to accompany him to the city of Nina, that he might see that goddess and tell her his dream in person, in order that she might interpret it to him. ' The goddess Ga tum dug listened to his prayer, but the goddess Nina did not enter into her boat, which remained stranded at her city of Nina.' Gudea then made offerings at the temple of Kisal-ud-ma Nina-shurit-ta, and addressed a prayer to Nina as the sovereign queen who with the god In lil fixed the fate and fortunes of things. He told her how in the midst of his dream there appeared a man as high as heaven and as big as the earth, on whose head was a divine tiara, by whose side was the divine bird Im-gig, at whose feet was the hurricane, on whose right and left a lion lay down. He ordered him, he said, to buUd his house. He did not, however, recognise the apparition, which shone with a brilliant light. A woman was by his side. ' Who was she? who was she ? ' he cried. She held in her hand the sacred kalama. She carried the tablet of the good star of the heavens, and she communed with herself. There was a second hero. He had with him a tablet of lapis lazuh, on which was inscribed the •218 THE LATER RULERS OF April plan of a temple. 'Before me the sabred cushion was put, the sacred basket was placed; the tablet or brick of destiny was in the basket. The right a am (?) was placed before me; a man Ughted the ti bii hit. An ass lay on the ground to the right of my king.' Nina replied to Gudea and said — 'My shepherd, I will interpret thy dream. The fignre as big as heaven, &c., whom thou deseribest, was my brother Nia girsu. He ordered thee to budd his temple of E nin nu. The hght that shone so brilliantly was thy special god Nin-gish-zi-da. The young woman who bore the sacred balama was my sister Ni sa ba. The second hero who bore the lapis lazuh tablet was Nin dub. The brick of destiny in the basket was the foundation brick of the temple of E nin nu. The a am and the ti bu hu were the propitious images. The ass who reclined beside the god, that was thyself.' She now bade him bmld the temple of E nin nu, but before doing so told him to go to Girsu, which lay over against Shirpurla, and out of the wood in his treasure house there to make a chariot for Xin girsu, and to yoke a young ass to it. She then told him to prepare some things whose names convey no me anin g to us — namely, the ti mar uru, the an gar, the shunir on which he was to inscribe his name, the balag called ush-umgal-kalama (which was perhaps a musical instrument). These he was to offer to the hero who loved presents, the god Nin girsu, who would then listen to his prayer, would grant him peace, and reveal to him the plan of the temple, and would bless- him. ' The faithful shepherd Gudea ' inclined his head. He went to his treasure house, and thence he selected the wood of esalim, of meshu, and of Ichahippu, and used them in making the chariot, and he yoked to it the young ass uggir. He made the shunir so much liked by Nin girsu, on which he put his name, the balag, and other presents, and placed them in the temple of E-nin-nu-imgiggu babbara. In the same temple he caused a fire or hght to be Ughted, and he entered it in the daytime and at night. He purified its courts and drove out the evildoers and the sorcerers. In the shu ga lam, the glorious place, the place of judgment whence Nin girsu observed the countries, he flayed a fat sheep, a gukhallu (■?!, a kid of his own herds, a female kid which had never known a male. These, with cypress, the arzulla of the mountains, and the cedar, whose scent is sweet to the gods, he threw on the fire. He addressed a prayer to the god in the upshuhennakti. He prostrated himself and declared that he had been wishful to build his temple, but had received no command or order to do so from Nin girsu, and he still awaited one. The god repHed that he wished him to build the temple, and would give him a sign to signify his wish in that behalf, and declared that the temple of E nin nu should have a glorious destiny, and be renowned everywh^e, including Magan and Milukha, and he further spoke of the temple of E nin nu as his special shrine, and of his own divine weapons, the shar ur, the ige khusli, and the da bat. The god went on to urge that the Ti ra ash, like the abyss, with magnificence should be buUt, so should his splendid abode of E khush, and E babbar, the place of his decrees, which, with the god Ka di, secured peace to the country ; and 1902 SHIEPUBLA OB LAGASH '219 also the temple of Baga, where was his table of offerings where the great gods of Shirpurla were gathered round. 'When the shepherd Gndea,' said the god, 'shall have begun my temple of E nin nu, which was specially named " the divine bird Imgig shines in the vault of heaven," on that day a hurricane shall bring abundant rain, and the land shall again prosper. I will make the fields fertile again, and will refill the canals. I will cause Ki en gi (or Kengi) to flow with oil abundantly, and also to abound in wool. ' On the day when the foundation {tevicnnu) shall be laid I will hasten to the mountain where dwells the hurricane, and will myself bring a gale down. The work must proceed without delay, and continue day and night. Prom the low country the wood hhaluppio and the wood nekhan shall be brought; from the mountain, cedar wood, Shnrime wood, and zabanu wood shall be carried to embellish it. Prom the country of Ushu shall be brought the wood iishit. From the country of stone shall be brought great blocks of dressed stone. On that day thy side shall be touched with fire. It shall be my sign, and thou wilt recognise it. Gudea heard the words of Nin girsu, and bowed his head.' '^ Next to this inscription on the so-called cylinder A, and the corresponding one on cylinder B, the most important records of Gudea are those on his statues. These consist in the main of dedications to various gods, but they contain a good deal of other matter, some of which is full of suggestiveness. I will take each of them in tui'n. On statue A in the Louvre he tells us he had built the temple E nin nu, the Temple of ' the Fifty,' for the god Nin girsu, and also that of the goddess Nin kharzag at Girsu, of which she was called the mother and protector. He adds that he had also made her a dup pisait (? an altar). He had brought a hard stone {i.e. dolerite) from the mountains of Magan to be made into her statue, and he implored the aid of Nin tu (i.e. a synonym of the same goddess), the goddess who fixes the destinies of heaven and earth, the mother of the gods, with whose name he had named her statue and put it in the temple to protect the life of him — Gudea — the builder of her temple.'^ On statue B we have a much longer and more important inscription. On it Gudea is represented as an architect, with a plan on his knees. The inscription refers to his placmg this his own statue in the temple of E nin nu, which he had built, and to his having at the same time offered one ka of fermented drink, one A-(7 of food (Uterally of the cooked) — namely, half a ka of meal and half a ka of some other food not vet identified. The king goes on to say, ' If a patesi of Shirpiu-la shall subsequently rew)ke this gift (which was apparently, therefore, an annual one) may his own similar offerings and his commands be annulled." To the god Nin girsu, *■ Comptes Re lis, xxix. 112-28 (1901). The rest of the iusoriptiou contains an iiccount of the building of the temple, and has not yet been translated. " Amiand, in Records of the Past, X.S. ii. 75, 76 ; Eadau, 197-9. 220 THE LATER RULERS OF April the powerful warrior of the god In lil, Gudea, the distributor of his treasures, the patesi of Shirpurla ; the shepherd chosen by the unchangeable heart of the god Nin girsu, regarded with a favourable eye by the goddess Nina, endowed with power by the god Xin dara,'* filled with eloquence by the goddess Bau, the offspring of the goddess Ga turn dug,^ dowered with sovereignty by the god Gal alim, who gave Gudea a lofty sceptre — he (Gudea), who was given courage in his heart, and whose power was established by Dun sha ga, who was made to excel in war by the god Ningish zida, his king, when Nin girsu had turned a favourable glance upon his city, and had selected him as the good shepherd of the land and had let his power be felt among men.'' Then did I purify the city and cleanse it with fire ; I have built the wooden (?) foundation ; bricks have I deposited, and I have exorcised the dreaded spirits (?). The purifiers (?), the necromancers (?), the prophetesses I have driven out of the city.^* Those who have behaved ill with women my officers threw into the canaL The temple of the god Nin girsu I have made a pure place hke Eridu.'^ I have not broken into any tomb (?) or sepulchral urn (?). No son has disturbed his mother's rest. The pro- vincial governors, the burgomasters, the officials, and the overseers have worn woollen garments during the construction of the work. [They pro- bably were clothed in the stately garments called kaunakis by the Greeks.] In the cemetery of the town no pyre has been constructed, no corpse has been laid under the ground, no singing priest has chanted his lamentations over the dead, nor has a female mourner caused her wailing to be heard. In the territory of Shirpurla no man having a lawsuit has been taken to the place of oath-taking [? court of justice], nor has a draughtsman planned a new house. For Nin girsu, his king, he (i.e. Gudea) has completed the appurtenances of and has built and restored the temple of E nin nu-imgig-gu babbara {i.e. E nin nu, which illumines the darkness ?). In it he has placed the gi gu nu of cedar wood, which he loves. Eadau translates this ' his judgment seat,' *" but Hommel *' calls it a burial place. After Gudea had built the temple of Nin girsu the god opened the way for him from the Upper Sea {i.e. the Mediterranean, the tdmtu iliniti of the Assyrians) ^^ to the Lower Sea {i.e. the Persian Gulf). From Amanum, the mountain of cedars {i.e. the Amanus '■' Kead ' Nin sia ' by Jensen. ^« Bead ' Ga sig dugj by Jensen. According to Bawl. ii. 59, 27 she was a form of Bau (see Jensen, in K. B. iii. 29). ■'■ Here the person changes from the third to the first. " Mr. Ball speaks of these evildoers as the Sodomites and Catamites, and compares the passage mth 2 Kings xxiii. 7 (see Light from the East, p. 56). " Badau says ' like Erech.' ™ Op. cit. p. 195. " Die Astrom. d. alt. Chald. Ami. 1891. '- See Jensen, op. cit. p. 33, note. 1902 SHIRPUELA OR LAGASH 221 range), he brought logs of cedar 70 cubits long and others of 50 cubits, and joists 25 cubits long of some other wood.^' These trees he caused to be cut down and to be brought from the mountains. He made the sharui- (which Mr. Ball translates ' the dykes against floods '), and also the shargaz. The latter were made of copper and were apparently some kind of ceremonial weapons. Eadau translates the word by ' halberds with seven pinnacles ' (literally 'eyes')- Mr. Ball reads the phrase as '7,000 shining weapons.' He also made cisterns and water pipes of copper. The cedar beams he made into gates which were decorated with rich designs and used in the temples of E nin nu and E magh kia sig di da (the lofty house into which the rich were carried [to be healed]). Prom Ursu, in the mountains of Ibla (? Lebanon), he brought zabanum trees, great shaku trees (compare the Assyrian ashukku, apparently a kind of cedar), and tuhibu or tudibbum trees to be used as rafters in the temple of E nin nu. These logs were, no doubt, brought down the Tigris in rafts. From Shamanum, in the mountains of Menua (i.e. Ai-menia), and from Subsala, in the mountains of Martu {i.e. the west country of the Amorites),** he brought great hewn stones and had them cut and sculptured, and with them he built the platform of the temple of E nin nu. From Tidanum *^ he brought Shii-gal-ghabbia stones. He had them wrought into ur pad da {i.e. possibly door-posts or lintels). He brought copper from the land of Kagal ad ki, in the mountains of Ki Mash {i.e., as Professor Sayce surmised, the land of Mash, in northern Arabia, mentioned in Genesis x. 23 and the equivalent of Arabia Petraea. Copper was called kimassi in Assyrian).'*^ From this copper he made weapons and utensils, &c., for the temples. From the mountains of MUukkha (in north- west Arabia) he brought hard wood, which has been supposed to be ebony, and also gold dust and khulalii stone. From the mountains of Ghagum or Khakum (identified by Hommel with Khakh, south-east of Medina) he also brought gold dust and used it in adorning the E Martu, or temple of the Storm God. Hence he also brought lid ri (?) ; from the country of Gubin, the land of the Khalup trees {i.e. the Khalupa of the Syrians, the persea or lebbakh tree).'" Firom the land of Madga, from the mountains of the river Galu " This, Mr. Ball {Proceedings of the Soc. of Bibl. Arch. xi. 143) identifies with box; but, as Jensen says, we do not know of box trees from which logs could be out of such a length as this. " Hommel reads the name Kasalla, and compares the Kazalla of W. A. I. iv. 34, 3133. '' The Biblical Dedan (?), near Moab, identified with Akhara (i.e. the west land) in Rawl. ii. 48, 12, c, d. " W. A. I. ii. 18, 54 ; iv. 28, 13. " Hommel, Anc. Hebr. Trad. p. 35. •222 THE LATER RULERS OF April ru da, he brought Gw- ciu.'" With it he made the platform of the temple of E nin nu. Im gha urn he also imported. From the mountain of Bar sip he brought Naliia stones in great boats and encircled the foundations of the temple of E nin nu with them. He conquered with arms Anshan Nimaki {i.e. Anshan. in the land of Elam), and its booty he brought to Nin girsu in E nin nu. The narrative is now renewed again in the first person. When I, Gudea, the patesi of Shirpurla, had built the temple of E nin nu I made a treasure house, a building adorned with sculptures, such as no other patesi had built for the god Xin girsu that I built, ajid have put a name there. What is pleasing to him I have done. The orders of Nin girsu I have faithfully obeyed. From the mountains of Magan I have brought dolerite and carved it into a statue. My king, whose house I have built, may a fortunate life be my reward. I have given it {i.e. the statue] a name and put it in the temple of E nin nu. Do thou, statue, speak what Gudea commands thee to the statue of my king. Since I have built the temple of E nin nu I have enfranchised debtors and cleared aU Uabilities. During seven days com was notground into flour ; the handmaid has been on a level with her mistress ; the slave has been equal to his master. In my city the strong and the weak have been put on an equaUty. I have expelled aU evil men from the temple. The well-doers I have put under the shelter of the goddess Nina and the god Nin girsu. The rich did no wrong and the strong did no wrong. Where there was a house that had no son it was the daughter who brought offerings and put them before the statue. The statue was not made of precious metal, nor of lapis lazuli, nor of copper nor tin, nor of bronze. By my order it was made of dolerite. It will stand where men go to drink water \i.e. in a place of pubhc resort], but it will not easily be broken [i.e. he had made it of very hard stone]. This is the statue of Gudea which stands before thee, Nin girsu. The man who from the temple of E nin nu shall remove it [i.e. the statue] or shaU deface its inscription, who shall, on the fortunate beginning of a new year, invoke his god in the place of my god Nin girsu in my land, who shall disregard my commands, revoke my gifts, who shall erase my name from my tablets and monuments and replace it by his own, who in the very shrine of my god Nin girsu, my king, shall dis- regard his commands and lose sight of him, or who shaU alter the judg- ments or deface the monuments of the patesis of Shirpurla who have in former times renewed the temple of E nin nu, may the gods Anna, Inlil, Nin Kharsag, En ki, whose word is unchangeable. En zu, whose name no man pronounces, Nin girsu, the king of weapons, Nina, the lady of interpretations (?), Nin dara [called Nin sia by Jensen], the warrior ruler, the mother of Shirpurla, the august Ga turn dug [written Ga sig dug by Jensen], Bau the lady, the firstborn of Anna, Inanna [i.e. Ishtar, called Nm ni by Amiaud], the lady of battle, Utu [called Babbar by Amiaud], the king who is fiUed with hght [i.e. the sun] ; may Pasag [eaUed Ishum by Mr. BaU], the leader of the land, Galalim, Dunshaga, ^' Amiaud translates it 'bitumen,' but this is very unlikely; bitumen was a very common product much nearer at hand 1902 SHIRPURLA OR LAGASH 223 may Nin marki [i.e. the lady of Mar], the eldest daughter of Nina ; may the god Dumuzi abzu, the lord of Ki nu nir ; may my god Ningish zida change his destiny ; like an ox may he be slain before his time. Like a wild bull may he be felled in the plenitude of his strength. May his throne be levelled with the dust. May men strive to overthrow it and to efface its name. May his name also be effaced from the tablets in the house of his god. May his god who shall have had no pity on my land overwhelm his with rain from heaven and with the waters of the earth. May he go forth nameless, and may his royal race be subjected to another. May he be as a man who has acted wickedly towards his chief and who can nowhere find a dwelling. !May the people ever pro- claim [the glory] of the great glory of the god Nin girsu.^^ On statue C we have a dedication by Gudea to the god Nin- gish-zida. On it he claims to have built the temple of E anna for the goddess Inanna, his lady, as well as the temple of E nin nu for Xin gii"su. He had made a plan of it and had also con- structed its U7'u of kaal (?) . In this inscription he tells us how he had taken the clay for the bricks with which to build the temple from a pure place, and had had them moulded in a sanctified place. He had purified and levelled the site, and firmly established the foundations. This temple of E anna, he tells us, he had built at Girsu. He had imported dolerite from Magan with which to make the statue, which he had caused to be carved, and to which he gave its name, and he asks the goddess to prolong his life. His own statue he had placed in her temple of E anna, and he prays that Inanna will destroy any one, annihilate his race, and overturn his thi-one, who shall remove or break it or deface its inscription.'" Statue D is also dedicated to Nin girsu. On it Gudea styles himself patesi of Shirpurla, the dispenser of the treasures, and the captain of the ship of In hi, the shepherd chosen by the immutable heart of Nin gu-su, the powerful minister of the goddess Nina. Filled with renown by the goddess Ban, the offspring of the goddess Gatumdug, who had given Gudea a lofty sceptre, who had been adjudged a firm heart and a strong hand by the god Galalim, and constituted a well-doing man who loves his city by the god Dunshaga. He (Gudea) had built the temple E nin nu, which illumines the darkness, and also its appurtenances. There he had placed the mysterious structure (gig unu) made of cedar wood. He had built the temple of Eghud (called Ipa by Jensen), with its seven stages, and therein he had placed his loving gifts for the goddess Bau, his mistress. He had had made her beloved bark called Ear nunata ud dua, and buUt the karza gina (Amiaud reads it kar nun ta ea) at the gate Ka su ra. Mr. Sayce translates the former phrase ' the quay which comes forth from the " Jensen, in K. B. iii. 1. pp. ■26-49 ; Amiaud, in Records of tM Past, N.S. ii. 76-87 ; Ball, on. cit. pp. 56-9. '" Amiaud, op. cit. pp. 87-9. 224 THE LATER RULERS OF April lord : ' '' it was probably the building where the boat was housed. Amiaud transcribes the last phi-ase kar za^in ka surra, which Mr. Sayce translates ' the quay which runs from the white stone of the gate.' ^^ The crew and captain of this ship he had selected and made them over as a gift to the temple of the goddess, the good lady, the daughter of Anna, for whom he had built her temple of Uru azagga. By the aid of the goddess Nina and the god Nin girsu, he tells us, the countries of Magan, MHukhka, Gubi, and Nituk, which possessed all kinds of trees, sent him ships laden with them to Shirpurla. From the mountains of Magan he also brought dolerite, with which he made his statue. The inscription concludes, ' king, whose great power overshadows the land, Nin girsu, whose temple Gudea has built, do thou bring him good fortune. Let thy name attach to the statue which he has placed in thy temple of E nin nu.' '^ Statue E is dedicated to Bau, who is called on it the daughter of Anna and mistress of Uru azagga, the mistress of abundance, who rules the destinies of the city of Girsu. In this inscription Gudea tells us he had built the temple of E sil sir sera (Eadau calls it E-sil-gid-gid) at Uru azagga for the goddess, having first purified and straightened the site, drawn a plan of it, made its uru to shine, and erected its temen or platform. In it he put up her throne and her dup pe san (? shrine, or perhaps statue). He claims to have built the altar of Nin an da gal (an appellative of Bau meaning the mistress of the great heaven and earth). Then foUows a list of offerings which the king had made to her at the new year, which include an ox, sheep of different kinds — i.e. fat sheep, rams, &c., lambs — dates, cream, palm shoots (literally palm brains), cranes, flamingoes (or peHcans), and other birds with their eggs, fish, wooUen garments, &c. In the same temple he also put a subsidiary shrine, or perhaps a representation or figure of his own special god, Xin gish zida, and he brought dolerite from Magan and made his own statue with it, to which he gave a name, and which he dedicated to the goddess Bau and put it in her temple. '^ Statue F is dedicated to the goddess Ga turn dug (called Ga sig dug by Jensen), who is styled by Gudea the mother of Shirpurla, his mistress. Of her he seems to have made a model or image, and he says that he had also made a plan of her temple and constructed her shining kaal (? tabernacle). As in previous inscriptions he tells us how he had got the clay from a pure place and had caused the bricks to be moulded in a holy place. He had purified and straightened the foundations, which he had planted deep down where the water rises. When he had built her temple he had '• Records of the Past, 2nd series, ii. 90, note 2. " jjj^ mjjg g '^ Jensen, op. cit. pp. 51-5 ; Amiaud, op. dt. pp. 89-92. ' ' Amiaud, op. dt. pp. 92 7 ; Eadau, pp. 202-9. 1902 SHIRPUBLA OR LAG ASH 225 offered gifts ; inter alia he had provided a herdsman for her sacred oxen, and for her sacred cattle and their calves he also appointed a herdsman;'*' for her faultless (or sacred) sheep and lambs he named a shepherd, and also for her goats and kids. For her asses and their foals he had done the same.''"' The inscription on statue G was first published by Amiaud in the Zeitschriftfiir Assyriologic, iii. 23. It was dedicated to Nin girsu, for whom Gudea says he had built the temple of E nin nu, for whom he now built a second temple, named that of Eghud, i.e. the Temple of Light (called Ipa by Jensen) , or the temple of seven stages, which was possibly the ziggurat attached to the former building. From its summit, we are told, Nin girsu dispensed good fortune. Besides the gifts he made to Nin girsu and Bau he also refers to others he had made for his special god Nin gish zida. He further tells us he had proclaimed peace from Girsu to Uru azagga, which therefore probably marked the boundaries of his realm. He had caused dolerite to be brought from Magan to make a statue with. Here there occurs a gap of ten lines where a bare space had been left to be afterwards filled in with the name of the statue, which was never filled in at all. The inscription then says that on the festival day of the goddess Bau, Gudea had dedicated presents — namely, an ox, sheep of various sorts and lambs, baskets of dates, bowls of cream, palm shoots ... an eagle, seven flamingoes (or perhaps pelicans), fifteen cranes, a turtle dove (?) with its seven eggs, fish, thirty woollen garments (?) &c. These were his love gifts to the goddess Bau. He then enumerates a further set of gifts of a rarer kind, made apparently at the dedication of the two temples of E nin nu and E Sir sir sera to Nin girsu and Bau respectively .'' On statue H is a short inscription relating the dedication of this, a statue of himself, in the temple of Bau called E Sir sir sera in Uru Azagga by Gudea and the bringing of dolerite with which to make it, from Magan.'^ This concludes the inscriptions on the statues. In an inscription published by Heuzey '^ Gudea tells us he brought shirgal stones from the mountain Ur-in-gi of the city of Az, on the Upper Sea, from which he made a gag-gis {i.e. a mace), which he dedicated to the god Nin girsu. In another inscription on a small tablet of dolerite {na kal) which he brought from the mountain of Magan he again commemorates the building of the great temple of E nin nu and the placing of some structure of cedar in its midst for the god Nin girsu."" On other inscriptions we " Jensen translates this by ' wild oxen.' ^^ Jensen, op. cit. pp. 55-9 ; Amiaud, in Becords of tlie Past, 2nd ser. ii. pp. 97-9. " Jensen, op. cit. pp. 59-65 ; Amiand, op. cit. pp. 99-102. " Amiaud, op. cit. p. 103 ; Badau, pp. 209-10. " D,!.couvertes, 25 bis, 16, and Rev. Arch. vol. xvii. (1891), p, 153 ; Badau,. p. 191. ■» Badau, p. 195. VOL. XVII. — NO. LXVI. Q 226 THE LATER RULERS OF April learn of Gudea's other works. Thus on a votive tablet we are told how he bmlt the temple of E anna at Girsu for the goddess Ninni or Inanna,^' and on a second he refers to the temple of E me ghush gal an ki, which he built for the god Gal aUm, the favourite son of the god Nin girsu.^^ On a brick ^ from Tell Loh we read of his building the temple of E ud ma Nina (ki) tag (the house of light which illumines the home of the goddess Nina), which was planted on the kur (?) at Nina ki, her favourite city. Her great ship he also built." On a third tablet published by Heuzey ^ we read of Gudea building a temple for the god Dvmshaga, son of Xin girsu, which was known as Ki ak kil. He elsewhere dedicated a mace to the same god. On a brick ^ he teUs us he built a temple for the god Nin dara, also called Nin-si a (lord of destinies ?), at Girsu. Bricks with his name on them also exist from Tell Loh,^' and an inscription of his from the Bowaireh mound at Warka is pub- Ushed in ' W. A. I.' 1, 6, and we also have a cone from Zirghul ; ^* there are others again referring to a dedication to his own special god Nin ghish zida by Gudea of a fine hbation vase or ' sea.' On an inedited brick he dedicates some structures to the god Shid- lamtu ena. Among the inscribed objects from his reign a notable series are the clay cones of which a great number — three hundred at least — have been found by M. de Sarzec. These cones are made of a light-coloured, finely levigated clay. At the summit each one has a head hke that of a nail. Several of them are in the British Museum. Two hundred similar cones of Ur Bau were also found at Tell Loh. M. de Sarzec, speaking of them, says — Along the whole of the excavation which I made to isolate the great palace were found a large number of cones in baked clay. They occurred sporadically elsewhere, but nowhere in such numbers as here. Some- times they were inserted among the bricks of the pavement. They were (hke the copper figures) employed to destroy the influence of the demons. They all bear the same inscription — i.e. ' To the god Nin gu-su, the powerful warrior of In hi. Our ruler the patesi Gudea, pontiff (of the Temple) of the Fifty, E nin nu, has built the Temple of the World for his god Nin girsu.' ^' The cult of Gudea as a god, which was also practised in the case of at least one of his predecessors, Naram sin,™ by whom I sug- •' Amiand, op. at. p. 104. « Ibid. " Dicouvertes, pi. 37, 3. « Comp. an inscription from Ziighul, W. A. I. 1, 5, no. xxui. 2. See Amiand op. dt. p. 105 ; also Proceedings Soc. Bibl. Arch. (November 1890), p. 63 ; Ditxm- vertes, plate 37, 3 ; Eadau, p. 193. « Dicouvertes, pi. 29 ; Badau, p. 196. « Ddcouvertes, pi. 37, no. 4. " ^^- Pl- 37. 5. « Trans. Soc. Bibl. Arch. vi. 279-82 " Menant, Cat. Le CUrcq, ii. 80. '" Ante, toI. xvi. p. 31. 1902 SHIRPURLA OR LAGASB 227 gested it may have been imported from Egypt, has been discussed by Scheil. He tells us that in placing his own statue in the temple of Nin girsu Gudea endowed it with certain regular offerings, consisting of a ka of some kind of drink, a ka of some kind of food, a half-ka of flour, and a ka of some other food. It would thus appear that even in the lifetime of the king himself his statue was treated like that of a god, and was deemed, like the Egyptian statues, to be possessed or inhabited by a double of the king, which double became virtually immortal by dwelling in an indestructible body. As Scheil says, of all the patesis of Shirpurla or Lagash the reign of Gudea was probably marked by the greatest prosperity and wealth, by its long duration and wisdom, and it is not wonderful that he should have been treated by his people as a kind of god. Among the tablets recently found at Tell Loh a great many relate to offerings made to Gudea, whose name is qualified by the determinative of divinity. When he was deified a class of priests were appointed to per- form the services to him. This is shown from the impressions of seals attached to several contracts. On these Gudea, dressed, like a god, in a flounced robe with a fringe passing from the left shoulder below the right arm, is seated, and has in his right hand a long baton, as the Egyptian grandees have in their tombs. His head is covered with a headdress like that figured in a plate by M. de Sarzec.'^' Before him is a priest wearing a long robe and holding one hand in the other over his breast. Behind the priest a worshipper raises his hands to the level of his eyes in the attitude of prayer. In the field is a spread eagle, apparently the symbol of the god Nin girsu. The names of some of these priests of Gudea are recorded as Ur-Dumuzi son of Mani, Lu Dumuzi son of Mani, Lu Kuduz, scribe, son of Mani, Amil Dumuzi son of Mani. This looks as if a whole family were dedicated to the service of Gudea, and were probably the officials who made the special offerings to him. Each one is qualified as zti shu gab of Gudea.'^ Like those of other gods the name of Gudea as a deified personage, and with the determinative of god, was afterwards used in combination to form personal names, e.g. Lu Gudea, Gur Gudea, &c. I have given the contents of the inscriptions on the statues of Gudea, but the statues themselves are sufficiently remarkable to deserve a special notice. Five of them are standing. The first of these is what M. Heuzey calls the statue with large shoulders. It is in the same attitude as the statue of Ur Bau already named, but the robe in which it is dressed has its fringe distinctly marked. On the upper part of the right arm it bears the simple inscription, ' Gudea, king of Shirpurla.' The statue is remarkable for the exaggerated breadth of the shoulders, while the angular disposition " Dicouvertes, pi. 12, n. 1. " See Remieil des Trav. xviii. 71 ; xxi. '2(5. a li 228 THE LATER RULERS OF April of the elbow, the thickness of the forearm, and the size of the hands and fingers are remarkable. The feet are well modelled and small. ' The execution,' says ^L Heuzey, ' is sober and severe, but excellent. The height of the figure is a metre and a fourth.' The second statue is what Heuzey calls the statue with the small shoulders. It is of the natural size, and, Uke the previous one, has lost its head. Its contours are finer, and not so heavy and squat, but it has not the same monumental gravity. The execution too is not so good as in the previous statue. The third statue has a broken shoulder, is of life size, and in its proportions is very like the preceding one. It is probably to this statue that belongs a detached head,'' and if so the latter represents the patesi Gudea. It represents the head and face as shorn — a custom which seems to have prevailed very generally in Chaldea, and which was retained by the sacerdotal classes. The face is round and fat, and shows small signs of cheek bones, &c. The eyes are large and prominent, but show no sign of the Mongolian slant, while the eyebrows are represented by lines, as if drawn with a compass. The head is a homely one, and full of bonhomie and simplicity, and, as M. Heuzey says, there is nothing of the proud imperious- ness of the royal busts of a later age.''* The fourth statue is much mutilated, its shoulders and feet being broken, which is a pity, since both the material and workmanship are very good. The broken parts of the statue show that its deeper recesses were worked with a drill, while the surface was pohshed with a powder from some similar stone. The fifth statue is of less than life size. It is in the same attitude as the others, is also decapitated, and is the finest of all the Tell Loh statues as a work of art. Its hands are almost feminine in their delicate modelling, but the feet are less well modelled. The toes decrease in regular order from the big toe to the little one, as in the statues of Buddha in India. Of the seated statues the first is colossal. It has lost its two hands as well as its head. It has a fine monumental pose, and is well modelled. This is the only statue of this period hitherto found which is larger than life. It has a fine prominent chest, a strong back, roimd and strong shoulders, with delicately modelled feet. The ancient schools of archaic art, says M. Heuzey, have rarely produced a more imposing and soUdly composed statue. The head was apparently not merely detached, but purposely smashed to pieces. A second seated statue is half the size of the preeedmg one. Its general forms are too short, especially below the knees, but its extremities, like those of the previous statues, are skilfully modelled. " Diiouverles, pi. 12, fig. 2. u q^ ^j^_ j ^44, 1902 SHIRPURLA OB LAG ASH 229 A third statue also seated is rather less than life size. Instead of having its hands crossed over each other it has on its knees a rectangular tablet, on which is figured in relief a graduated measure and a stylus to write with. This would at first make it appear as if the statue belonged to some functionary, like an architect or builder, but with the rest it bears the name of Gudea. The tablet looks as if it were meant to represent a plaque covered with soft clay, such as architects still use. The graduated measure has been discussed among metrologists. It is 265 millimetres long, and represents, doubtless, the empan, or half-cubit, of the Chaldeans. It is di^'ided into equal parts. Six of these divisions are again divided into fractions, thirds, fourths, fifths, and sixths, while on the other side of the rule the sixths are again divided into halves and thirds. According to Phny (as M. Heuzey reminds us) the Babylonian foot was three fingers longer than the Eoman one (pedes ternis digitis mensura ampliore quam nostra). The Eoman foot = 0'3945 m. ; hence the Babylonian foot was 0'3497, and the Babylonian empan, three-quarters of a Eoman foot, was 0'2622. The last of the statues of Gudea is still more remarkable. In some respects it is like the previous one ; it bears on its knees, however, a beautifully constructed ground plan of a fortified building. On the edge of the plan is a scale similar to the preceding one, and it also has a stylus figured on it. The building represented is an oblong one, with rectangular corners, and the walls have a continuous frontage, except on one side, where they form three successive recessed lines of front. The facade is pierced by three gates, while there is a single gateway on each of the other sides. Each gateway is fortified by a double quadrangular tower. Other apparently solid towers occur at the corners, and two supplementary towers seem more or less detached. The interior is marked by straight lines without recesses. The plan, no doubt, represents a fortress, and not a palace or a temple. Like the preceding statue this one also is remarkable for the delicacy of the details and the artistic arrangement of the figure. I have described a head {ante, p. 228) which belonged to one of the statues of Gudea ; another head of similar size was also discovered by JI. de Sarzec. This is unique in that it wears a sort of turban, apparently made by roUing a piece of cloth about the temples. The conventional treatment of the surface both of the cap which covers the skull and of the rolled edge represents what looks like little curls, and it perhaps was made of some Idnd of embroidered tissue. This recalls the fjLiTpa which Herodotus tells us was the head-dress of the Babylonians in his time.^' From one of the cylinders figm-ed by Menant (iv. fig. 2) it would seem that such a turban was also the " Hist. i. 195, vii. 62 ; Strabo, 734 230 THE LATER EULERS OF April head-dress of the god Sin. It occurs also on other figures on the cylinders. The face of the bust just named has been clean shaved ; its eyes are large and very open and not oblique. The nose, now broken, was not flat and negroid, but separated the orbits by a decided ridge. The eyebrows are represented by curved lines, with the hair marked by a double row of lines, like the pinnules of a feather. The lower margin of the eyebrows was apparently trimmed, so as to form a continuous curve. The two eyebrows meet on the bridge of the nose, a feature that persisted, says M. Heuzey, aU through the history of the Chaldeo -Assyrian art and stiU exists in that of Persia. The face is less conventionally treated than is usually the case with those in Chaldean figures, the cheeks being modelled, but there is nothing Mongolian about it. The head is very well carved and shows much artistic sense. It is like the one above described, also made of dark green diorite, and probably belonged to one of the other statues. Another head made of the same material is figured by M. de Sarzec on pi. 21, fig. 1. It belonged to a statue of half life-size and sculptured in a superb manner. The head is gone, but the eyes, which still remain, are represented very large, the mouth small and beautifully modelled with rounded outlines, giving a kindly expression to the face. In contradistinction to the heads already named this one is represented with its hair and beard intact, the curls of the beard being represented with great precision. M. Heuzey notices that the same bearded type occurs also on the cylinders alongside of the closely shaven one, and distinguishes the gods, the heroes, and perhaps also the kings, and is also the fashion with certain figures apparently of a military or pastoral type and a certain class of worshippers whose character is difficult to determine. Among the Jews the preservation of the hair and beard was especially enjoined.^^ The Assyrians seem to have had the same taste, as appears from their bas-reliefs, and in the time of Hero- dotus (i. 195) the custom of letting the hair and beard grow had become quite the fashion at Babylon itself. Is it not possible that the custom was in fact the mark of the Semitic races as contrasted with the Cushites ? The head above described seems to have been that of a god, but in the portraits of Naram Sin and of Khammurabi which are preserved these very early kings, both of whom were Semites, are represented with beards and hair. M. Heuzey discusses at some length a form of robe represented on various early fragments of small statues made of limestone and on bas-reliefs, of which several examples exist in the British Museum, though they are for the most part put almost out of sight there. He has identified the robes in question with those given the name of KawaKrts by the Greeks and representing apparently bunches of wool fastened in tiers one above '« See Leviticus xxi. 5, xix. 27 ; Ezekiel xliv. 20 ; Judges xiii. 5. 1902 SHIRPURLA OR LAGASH 231 the other and overlapping each other. The Greeks attributed the manufacture of this stuif, formed of long bunches of wool, and, like the floccata of the modern Greeks, imitating fur, to the Babylonians.'^ From Hesychius we learn that it only had this long wool or hair on one of its faces and not on the other. He calls it iT£poiJ,d\Xr)sJ^ The stuff was made into a kind of square shawl, which was fastened over the left shoulder, leaving the right arm free, as in the case of the ordinary fringed robes. In the case of women it was sewn and worn as a tunic. In the Assyrian times it was appar- ently reserved for the gods. It occurs again among the Persians, on the cylinders from Asia Minor, and ia Greece, where it was specially used for covering festival couches. Of the reign of Gudea we also have a number of copper statuettes and figures. Berthelot's analysis shows them to be made of pure copper. They were all found enclosed in small subterranean cubicles made of brick, and were apparently meant to protect the buildings from the demons. Each figure was accompanied by a tablet in soft white or black stone, containing a replica of that on the metal object (which might easily decay). These tablets are of a curved outline, like the very early bricks and clay tablets, and were generally placed on pieces of white talc. The verdigris on some of the figures has preserved the impression of the cloth in which they were wrapped. The cubicles in which these figures occur are oriented according to their angular points, and are generally arranged in sets of four, similarly oriented. In rebuilding the edifices in which the figures occur it was the fashion apparently to replace them. The copper figures inscribed with the name of Gudea are of several types. One is precisely like that of the figure inscribed with the name of Ur Bau already named, only of smaller size. For the most part they are ruder than those of Ur Bau ; one figured by Heuzey (pi. 28, fig. 3) is, however, particularly graceful. Alto- gether nine specimens of this type of figure occur in the Louvre and several in the British Museum. Of those in the Louvre dedicated by Gudea two are dedicated to Nin girsu and refer to his temple of E nin nu. The tablets accompanying them are made of a dark green steatite. Three others with white limestone tablets were dedicated to the god Galalim, the eldest son of Nin girsu, and refer to his temple of E me ghush gal an ki. A sixth figure of the same type was dedicated to the god Dun sha ga, another son of Nin girsu, for his temple of E akkil. The cubicle in which this last statuette was found formed part of a group containing the statuettes dedicated to Galalim. The second type of Gudea's copper figures represents a man " Julius Pollux, Onomasticon, vii. 59. Ai'istophanes refers to this stuff in his Wasps, 1137, 1147. " See Dicouvertes, ii. 180. 232 THE LATER RULERS OF April standing with the upper part of his body bare and the lower part covered with a kind of petticoat looped about his waist, and bearing on his head a basket, held with both hands and not with one only, as in the figures of Ur Nina on his plaques, described in a previous paper. The head and the face are both shaved and represent a strong but vulgar type with somewhat of an African look. M. Heuzey compares the figure to a canephoros, but rejects the analogy. He would rather identify it with an usliabti figure, which among the Egyptians was buried with the dead to represent a slave or servant who waited on the defunct person in the next world. I am disposed to think the figures rather represent the king as a humble worker for the gods. To show the magical use of such figures M. Heuzey points to their unstable and pointed bases. One of the figures of this type discovered by M. de Sarzec was dedicated to Xin girsu and another to Dun sha ga. The third type of these figures represents a reclining buU, a kind of votive animal. The bulls are beautifully modelled, with grace and repose. They are represented facing and lying down on a sort of oblong plaquette which forms the head of what is in effect a nail. They are cast in one piece. ^I. de Sarzec found two specimens, both of them dedicated by Gudea to the goddess Inanna, the daughter of Anna, or the sky, for her temple of E Anna."" One of the monuments of Gudea showing special artistic force and spirit is a mace-head ornamented with three lions' heads, or rather composed out of them. It is made of a hard marble or alabaster, white, with violet spots. It is figured in M. de Sarzee's great work, pi. 25, and il. Heuzey, who described it at some length, compares the animals' heads with those of the great lions at Susa, described by '^. Dieulafoy. It enables us to know what the Babylonians meant by shirgal stone, that being the name by which the stone in this particular instance is called, and we are told further it came from the city of the country of Az, in the mountains Ur in ghi, on the Sea of Elam. The mace is called ' the arm with three ur sags,' i.e. hons' heads.'" Ursags are mentioned in another of Gudea's inscriptions as having been dedicated by him to Nin girsu. Fragments of similar lions' heads dedicated by Gudea were found at Tell Loh. A head and fragments of other lions in limestone show that detached figures of these beasts were employed by Gudea as decorations to his buildings or furniture. One piece of such a Hon contains a dedication to the goddess Gatumdug, mother of Shhpurla, and was a decoration for the gate of the temen of her sanctuary. Another is dedicated to Xin girsu. Lions' heads were also used as ornaments to other thmgs, e.r/. a great rectangular basin dedicated by Gudea in the temple of Nin girsu is so ornamented.*' '» Decouvertes. ii. 241-5. so cf. ante, p. 7. " Dicouvertes, pi. 24, fig. 3. 1902 SHIRPURLA OR LAG ASH 233 A stone libation vase dedicated by Gudea to Nin ghish zi da is made of a dark green steatite. The vase is in the shape of a tall narrow tumbler. On it are representations in high relief. This relief consists first of two well-designed snakes twined about each other and standing on their tails, forming a kind of primitive caduceus. On some Chaldean cylinders a similar object is put m the hand of a divinity. Here it apparently, as M. Heuzey supposes, represents some sacred emblem, a kind of achera planted in the ground for purposes of adoration. On each side of the intertwined snakes stands Uke a sentinel a bizarre figure whose body seems also modelled on that of a serpent, with a head like a serpent's and a flexible body. The figures have tails ending in the recurved stings of scorpions. The scales were once probably represented in colour by enamel. The claws of the curious reptiles are prominent. These bizai're ophidian or reptilian figures no doubt represent demons. They wear the double-horned cap reserved for di^-inities, with two antennae standing up above. Each one holds a curious weapon or staff with a semicircular kind of handle at the summit, which seems tied on. A similar object to these latter occurs on cylinders, and M. de Sarzec has discovered a gigantic specimen made of copper and in a somewhat ruinous condition. M. Heuzey suggests that a banner may have been attached to the semicircular handle, and that the mysterious objects are emblematic staves or halberds peculiar to heroic persons or gods.'^ Among the ruins of Gudea's palace at Tell Loh there was also found an interesting bas-relief sculptured in good style. It con- tains two tiers of figures. In the upper tier are four figures ; the first one carries a cymbal and a kind of hammer with which to strike it, while another holds a pipe or flute. They are separated by two figures with their hands on their breasts, who are probably attendants. In the lower tier a figure is playing on a very large harp, the foot of which is decorated with a bull, while a second figure stands in the same attitude of adoration as the two figures in the upper tier. The relief is good evidence of the advance which had been made in the sculptor's art at this time. It is figured in M. de Sarzec's work. As we saw in an earlier page the wife of Gudea was called Dun pa ud du.'^ He had a son called Ur Xin girsu, or ' the Man of Xin girsu,' who became patesi of Shirpurla and inter alia added some structure called a gi f/ii nu, made of cedar wood, to the temple of E nin nu which had been built by his father, Gudea. This he dedicated to Xin girsu.*'' In other inscriptions Ur Nin girsu styles himself priest ; thus Jensen translates one of them found on a brick at TeU Loh : ' Ur Xin girsu, the priest (in mi zi) of the '- Dicouvertes, pt. iv. pp. 234-6. " AnU, p. 216. '* Amiaud, in Becords of the Past, N.S. ii. 106 ; Jensen, in E. B. iii. 66, 67. 234 THE LATER RULERS OF SHIRPURLA April god Anna, the priest (mi gad azag) of the god EnM, the &vourite priest, or perhaps lord, of the goddess Xina.' ** On a small stone wig for a statue, in the British Museum, we read, ' For the powerful ruler Dungi, king of Ur, Bau ninan, the zabardiu (? the lady or wife) of Ur Nin girsu, the heloved of the goddess Xina, had this made for the goddess XinliL' ** Eadau, for reasons not very clear to me, will have it that the Ur Nin girsu of the first of these inscriptions and the Ur Xin girsu of the other were not the same man, and falls foul of Winckler and Lehmann for identifying them. His notion seems to he purely arbitrary and invented to sustain an a priori theory that there were several generations between Ur Bau and Gudea. The inscriptions in fact prove that those two rulers must have been contemporaries, since the son of Gudea was patesi of Shirpurla, whUe Dungi the son of Ur Bau, who is the only Dungi known from the inscriptions, was the king of Ur. I ought to add here that in later Babylonian Kterature, as was pointed out by Hommel, the name Ur Nin girsu occurs as the equivalent of farmer or rustic {ikkam), which he explains by some tradition that his reign was a peaceable one and devoted to a country hfe.*' Ur Nin girsu was not the only patesi of Shirpurla during Dungi' s reign at Ur. We have inscriptions of at least two others, father and son; the former was named Galukani. He styles himself patesi of Shirpurla and dedicates an object to Nin girsu for the hfe of Dungi, king of Ur.'* Utua the son of Ur . . . . scribe of Galukani, patesi of Shirpula, is also mentioned on a seal attached to a receipt for grain published by ScheU.'' On another tablet*" we read how Galalama, the son of Galukani, the patesi of Shirpurla (who did not apparently fill that office him- self, the phrase referring to his father), dedicated an object to the goddess Bau for the Kfe of Dungi, the king of Ur, king of Kergi and Urdn.'^ Jensen puts after Galalama a certain Ur Nin gul (or, as Scheil and Eadau agree, the name should be written Ur Nin sun), who dedicated a vase to Nin girsu for his own life. He styles himself patesi of Shirpurla.^- Nin gul or Nin sun was the wife of the god Lugal banda.*' This, so far as we know, closes the recorded list of rulers of Shirpurla, which seems to have faUen into decay and to have been superseded as a centre of power in Babylonia by Ur and other towns. Hekbt H. Howoeth. *^ Jensen, op. cit. pp. 66-9. See Decouiertes, pi. 37. 9. " Jensen, op. cit. pp. 68, 69 ; Badan, p. .37. « Gesch. p. 330. " Henzey, iv. 90 ; Eadau, p. 22. » Bee. des Trav. xviii. 74. " Decouiertes, pi. 21, no. 4 ; Badan, p. 21. " Jensen, op. cit. pp. 70_1. " Ibid. p. 7 7 ; Heuzey, Rev. Ass. ii. 79. ^ Ibid. p. 76, n. 1. 1902 235 Tirechdns Memoir of St. Patrick ri'^HE scope of this paper is restricied to Tii-echan's work,' and no .1- conclusions are drawn in regard to disputed questions con- nected -with St. Patrick's life. Those questions cannot be satisfac- torily discussed until the material with which the investigation has to deal has been methodically examined. Such an examination must proceed on the preliminary assumption that the documents are what they profess to be ; it is only if they fail to stand the test of analysis that their origin becomes an open question. Perhaps it ought to be superfluous to add that the fact of Patrick's existence is inexpugnable until the ' Confession ' has been proved spurious, and all attempts to shake its authenticity have signally failed. 1. Bishop Tirechan ^ was an alumnus or disciple of Ultan of Ardbraccan, bishop of the Dal-Conchobar. He put together his work on the life and acts of Patrick after the death of Ultan,^ and Ultan died a.d. 657.* We can, however, assign, with probability, ' The work of B. Eobert, Etzide Critique sur la Vic et VCEiirre de Saint Patrick, 1883, deals slightly with Tirechan. I have not found it helpful ; nor have I gained light on the subject from the slight remarks in Skene's Celtic Scotland, ii. 427 sqq. I have used the manuscript of Armagh in studying the Patrician documents contained in it ; and Dr. Gwynn, whose complete ' diplomatic ' edition will soon appear, has been good enough to let me use his proof sheets. There is much to be done for the critical study of the text of these documents. Here is an example. In Muirchu (p. 273,4, ed. Stokes) we read : ' Loiguire nomine filius Neill, origo stirpis regiae huius pene insolae.' No editor seems to have stumbled ; but the stupidest writer would not describe Ireland as a peninsula. The correction is obvious, ' huius pene totius insolae ' (cp. 'pene totam insolam,' Tirechdn, p. 312^). All the existing editions are very inaccurate. I refer, for the sake of convenience, to the edition by Dr. W. Stokes in the EoUs series {Tripartite Life of St. Patrick, 1887), which I cite as ' Trip.' ^ See the lemma to his memoir cited below in § 2. There seems to be no record of him independent of the Armagh manuscript. » Trip. p. 311„s. ' See 'Annals of Tigernach ' (ed. Stokes, in Bevue Ccltique, xvii. 1896, p. 194) = Annals of Ulster (BoUs series), under the year- corresponding to a.d. 657. [In referring to dates in the A7mals of Ulster (Ann. Ult.) after .4.D. 486 it saves trouble to cite the true A.D. — the a.d. which was really meant. The cause of the antedating by one year (down to 1013 A.D.) in these annals was the numbering of the blank year 486 as 487, so that the misdating begins at 486. This, obviously the true solution, was first pointed out by Dr. MacCarthy in his Introduction to the Rolls ed., vol. iv.] Cp. also Martyrolog. Dungallense, ed. Todd, sub 4 Sept. 236 TIRECHAX'S MEMOIR OF ST. PATRICK April a slightly later limit. The recent plague (mortalitates novissimae) which the Avriter mentions is most naturally identified vrith the YeUow Pestilence which devastated Ireland, according to the Annals, in A.D. 664.' If the date is right — and there seems no reason to question it— Tirechan wrote, or was engaged in writing, his work after a.d. 664. We shall probahly not be far astray in regarding it as having been compiled in the sixties or seventies of the seventh century. ■2. Tirechan's work has no title. The scribe, who before the middle of the ninth century ^ copied it into the ' Codex Armachanus,' introduced it with the explanatory statement — Tirechan episcopus haec seripsit ex ore vel libro Ultani episeopi cuius ipse alumpnus vel discipulus fait. The wording shows that this is a lemma of the copyist and not due to Tirechan, who writes in the first person. The work is not a regular biography, like Muirchu's, and its abrupt opening contrasts with Muirchu's elaborate introduction. It may rather be described as a collection of memoranda concerning the missionary acts of the saint in Ireland, and, though a brief summary of his early life is prefixed, nothing is said of his death. We shaU see that the work was never completed. It is divided, in the manuscript, into two books. Book i. begins with a concise account of the origin of Patrick and the chief events of the pre-episcopal period of his life. This is only a preliminary intro- duction. The book reaUy opens with his journey along the coast of Meath, after which there is inserted a list of bishops and presbyters whom he ordained. Then follow an enumeration of churches which he founded in Bregia ; an account of his triumph over Loegaire's magicians ; other events in Meath ; the meeting with the sons of Amolngid ; the setting forth on a journey to the west. This journey is described as far as the Shannon. Book ii. relates the continuation of St. Patrick's journey, in Connaught, and all he did there, and also describes how he travelled through Ulaidh iHW, Jinito circulo,^ he returned to Meath. The book closes with an excursion to Leinster and a visit to Cashel. The question whether the division into two books was made by = Trip. p. 314^ ; Ann. Ut. sub a. 664 (date confirmed by the eclipse of 1 May in the same year ; ep. Bede, H. E. m. 21). The pestilence conturaed during the foDowing years (cp. sub 66-5. 667. 66S|. Tirechan's ' no-rissimas ' seems to distinguish this plague £rom the visitations of the previous century, which were not long subsequent to the great pestilence that devastated southern Europe, a-o. 542 {Ann. Vlt. sub 549, 556). Perhaps this earlier mortality is meant in p. 306,. « After 807 a.d. and before 846 a.d., the year of the scribe Ferdomnach's death {Ann. Vnt. sub a.) See Graves, Proceedings B. Irish Acad. jii. 316 sqq.; Stokes, Trip. i. xc-i. ' Trip. p. 380^. 1902 TIIiECHAN'S MEMOIR OF ST. PATRICK 237 Tirechan himself must be postponed to a later stage of the mvestigation.* 3. The end of Tirechan's memoranda is not expresslj' indicated in the manuscript, and before proceeding further we must fix the point of termination. The common assumption seems to be that it ends at the words adunata atque collecta sunt,^ immediately before the so-called ' Addi- tions to Tirechan's Collections.' But this assumption can be dis- proved. The preceding paragraph, beginning Finit hoc hreviarium,^" cannot be Tirechan's summary of his own work, for his work does not contain any notice of Patrick's gens, or genelogia, or two captivities.'^ The index does not correspond to Tirechan's work. To what then is it an index? Clearly to the whole foregoing portion of the manuscript, including both Muirchu and Tirechan. The gens, the genelogia, the two captivities are in Muirchu. It foUows that, in order to determine where Tirechan's work stops, we must have recourse to internal evidence — the apparent external evidence being fallacious. Now the chronological table of Patrick's life '^ is inconsistent with Tirechan's statements at the beginning of his work," and therefore we are justified in inferring that this table dees not belong to his book. This is confirmed, perhaps, by an external indication : the insertion of the name Dairenne in a darker ink and different script" just before the chronological table indicates a break, though the meaning of the insertion is obscure. The only question that remains is whether the statement of the three petitions of Patrick ^' belongs to Tii-echan's work or not. The answer can hardly be doubtful. It seems, on any supposition, in- credible that Tirechan should suddenly break off his record of journeys, church foundations, and conversions, and, without a word about Patrick's death, wind up his memoir with the three petitions. The probabilities of the case point irresistibly to the conclusion that Tirechan left his memoranda of Patrick's ecclesiastical activity un- finished, and that the last record he set down was the baptism of the sons of Nia Friuch super petram Coithrigi Id Caissiul. Having been led to this conclusion by the arguments which I have stated, I tm-ned to the manuscript, and there found an external con- firmation. There is an interspace of two hnes in fol. 15 v. B between « See below, § 13. ' Trip. p. 333.>4. " Ibid. p. 333i5_:j. " LI. 16, 18, 20. '■ Trip. p. 331ia-o7. '» IbUl. p. 302ia-25. " The same ink and script reappear (Dr. Gwynn points out to me) in a marginal note {ymnus colmdn alo) on f. 16 r. A, and in the text of f. IS v. B ; and the whole of f. 19 r. is written in this fashion. For reasons which need not be given here Dr. Gwynn ia inclined to think that these portions were additions made not by another scribe, bat by Ferdomnach himself. " Trip. p. 33110-20. '238 TiRECHAN'S MEMOIR OF ST. PATRICK April the paragraph ending hi Caissiul and that beginning Hae sunt}^ There is no such mark of division throughout the whole text of Tirechan, which runs on continuously without any interspaces — not even between books i. and ii. 4. The general scheme of Tirechan's unfinished memoranda was geographical. Patrick's acts are arranged in the framework of a long circular journey through Meath, Connaught, and Ulster. At the end, after his return to Meath, is recorded his going into Leinster and Munster, but the memoranda deal mainly with his doings in Meath and Connaught. Tirechan addressed his book to men in Meath,^' and he speaks of the acts of Patrick, which he describes in book i. as well known to them. Unfortunately he does not tell us who these men were ; but he alleges a particular motive for his own interest in Patrick, and seems to imply that it partly impelled him to compose his memoranda. He complains that ' deserters and archichei and milites Hiberniae ' hate Patrick, having taken away from him what was his, and are afraid that if Patrick's heir were to seek his Paruchia he could claim almost the whole island, ' for God gave him the whole island, with the men thereof.' '* This is an important passage, and will claim particular attention presently. We might infer from it that Tirechan and his community belonged to the Paruchia of Patrick, but elsewhere there is a clear indication that this was the case." There are some other personal references in Tirechan. He had visited ruined Tara, for he saw with his own eyes ^° the stone on which Lochlethan was said to have been dashed to pieces — perhaps the old phallic stone which we see there to-day. He had visited Armagh and several places in Connaught, as we shall subsequently learn. Moreover he refers to his personal relations to Bishop Ultan, and this brings us to the question of his sources. 5. Sources : Written. — A. Sources exjdicitly mentioned. — The only written sources to which Tirechan refers are a book which belonged to Bishop Ultan and the ' Confession ' of St. Patrick. Bishop Ultan's book ^' was a collection of ' Acta ' based partly upon the ' Confession,' and was the source of Tirechan for his pre- liminary sketch of Patrick's early life. In drawing up this sketch IS The gap at tHs point in the manuscript is reproduced in Dr. Gwynn's forth- coming edition. It is to be observed that there are similar gaps after ' in die iudicii ' (p. 332i8) and after ' in honore ' (p. 333i4). It may be conjectured that these para- graphs were notes entered (in the course of the eighth century) in the manuscript from which Ferdomnach copied the Memoir of Tirechan, but clearly distinguished from that work. '- ' In •vestris regionibus,' Trip. p. Slla,. is Ibid. pp. 311j„-3i2g '= Ibid. p. 30981. See below, < 9. -' Ibid. p. 307, " Ibid. p. 302." 1902 TIREC HAN'S MEMOIR OF ST. PATRICK 239 Tirechan, it is tolerably clear, had before him only this book of ' Acta,' and did not consult the ' Confession,' although he refers to it as the saint's own commemoratio laborum.^^ In another place ^' he quotes Patrick's statement ^^ that he gave money presents to tribal chiefs to secure a safe passage in the districts which he was in the habit of visiting. We have no indication whether Tirechan, when he wrote this, had the ' Confession ' before him or quoted it at secondhand. B. Chronological Notices. — At the end of the introduction, immediately after the statements derived from Bishop Ultan's book, Tirechan has inserted a chronological notice as to the dates of Patrick's death and Loegaire's reign.^'' This notice was evidently derived from a written source, as Todd rightly inferred ^'^ from the author's doubt as to whether a numeral was ii or u. The most obvious conjecture is that the document which supplied Tirechan with this chronological record was the same book, belonging to Bishop Ultan, from which he had drawn the preceding sketch of Patrick's early life.^' But this is only a conjecture, and may be quite wrong. In connexion with this chronological notice, although it is not my intention to discuss any question of fact concerning Patrick's life, it is within my scope to determine what year Tirechan assigns as the date of the saint's death. The manuscript gives : ' a passione hautem Christi coUeguiitur anni cccc xxx ui.' This date might mean four distinct years according to the Passion era presumed. It might mean a.d. (I) 463 {ann. Pass. = 28, Victorian reckoning); (2)464 {ann. Pass. ==29) ; (3) 467 (ann. Pass. = 32) ; (4) 468 {ann. Pass. — 33^'). Now it maybe shown that none of these years can have been intended by Tirechan or his source. For Tirechan states that King Loegaire survived Patrick duobus uel u annis. Consequently Loegaire's death would have to fall A.D. (1) a, 465, or b, 468 ; or (2) a, 466, or b, 469 ; or (3) a, 469, or b, 472 ; or (4) a, 470, or b, 473. But, on the other hand, he likewise states that King Loegaire reigned 36 years (that is, 35 years + a; months), a statement which agrees perfectly with the chronology of the Annals. Loegaire came ^ I have shown elsewhere that this need not be interpreted of some lost work of Patrick. See the Guardian, 27 Nov. 1901. " Trip. p. 3106. ^* ' Confession,' ibid. p. 3723i_i. « Trip. p. 30227 sgg. "« Todd, St. Patrick, p. 395, n. 1. 2' Zimmer thinks that this sketch was originally contained in Patrick's Confes- sion, assuming that our text of that document as contained in the fuller manuscripts is imperfect (' Keltische Kirohe,' in Hauck's ReahncyklopUdie f. protestantische Theologie u. Kirche, x. 220). This is only a guess, and I cannot think it probable. Zimmer does not indeed suggest that the ' liber apud Ultanum ' was the Confession itself, only ' dass Ultan eine vollstandige Hs. der Confessio gekannt hat.' '' Todd curiously assumed this era without discussion as a matter of course, and then reduced the date falsely to 469 a.d. (op. cit. p. 395). 240 TIREC nix's MEMOIR OF ST. PATRICK April to the throne in 428-9 a.d.,^^ was killed in 463 a.d. ; '» Oilill Molt succeeded him in 463 a.d..'^ reigned twenty years,^ and was slain at the hattle of Ocha in 482 a.d. There is no doubt that this was the authentic tradition of the Annals. Here I must make a short digression. It has been shown (in my judgment convincingly) by Dr. MacCarthy that the form to which all the existing Irish annals ultimately go back was derived from Paschal tables.^' The Paschal data were omitted as irrelevant ; but the final and the lunar incidence of 1 Jan. were employed to distinguish the years. Into such a framework the old annalists (not to be confounded with later compilers, like Tigemach) endeavoured to fit foreign dates derived from foreign chronicles, such as MarceUinus, Isidore, and Bede ; and they frequently went wrong in the process of equating the consular years with their own years, marked by moons and week days. But they had also to date and synchronise the events of their native land ; and the question arises, what material or what landmarks were at their disposal for arranging those events '? Xo certain answer can be given ; but it seems probable that, before the synchronising process began, profane events were dated by the years of the kings of Ireland. In any case there can be no doubt that there was a definite — and ^ ' Annals o£ Inisfallen ' (in Rer. Hib. Script, vol. ii.), the first entry ; a.m. (Vic- torian) 5630 = A.M. (' Hebrew ') 4381 {sic legendum, as Dr. MacCarthy has shown) = A.D. 429. See MacCarthy, op. cif. infra, p. 363. The date is confirmed by the equa- tion A.D. 432 = fourth year of Locgaire, in the third entry of the same Annals. " Ann. Tit. sub a. 462, and in Ann. Inisf. the same entry, wrongly equated by the editor with 464 a.I). " -inn. Ult. sub a., and in Ann. Inisf. (wrongly equated with 46.5 A.D.) " Compare the tract (date, second half of twelfth century) published by Dr. MacCarthy from the Book of Ballymote (p. 48 b) in his Todd Lecture IT. on the Codex Palatino-Vaticanus 830, p. 396: ■ Ailill molt mac yathi [i.e. n-Dathi] fiehe bUadhan' ( = twenty years). In the same place there is an entry about Loegaire's reign which deserves attention, because it helps to expose an argument which Todd adduced in support of his unconvincing reconstruction of Patrician chronology. The entry is, ' Laegaire macJf eiU triginta annis regnum Hibemiae post adventum Patrieii tenuit.' This disposes of Todd's explanation of the parallel passage in the ' Book of Lecan ' (Todd, op. cit. p. 397), which he interpreted to mean that the whole duration of Loegaire's reign was thirty years. It may be suspected that Todd himself was not quite happy about his argument, as it is disproved by a notice in the tract on the 'Beigns and Times of Ireland after the Faith,' in the ' Book of Leinster,' which he cites (p. 184) and is unable to explain away except by an assertion (p. 398, n. 2). In quoting the entry he omits the date, which will be found in Stokes's edition of the tract, in Trip. p. 512 : ■ [a.m.] iiii m. ccc. Ixxx iiii,' which is a.d. 432. This, combined with the date given for Oihll Molt's accession (a.d. 463), shows that the compiler of the tract meant what he said. Todd's criticism in the same connexion on the chronology in Gilla Coemain's poem is from the purpose, as has been shown by Dr. MacCarthy. " Dr. MacCarthy's investigations, which seem to me to be ' grundlegend,' have been published in the Todd Lectures (cited in preceding note) and in the introduction to the Annals of Ulster, vol. iv. (Bolls series). His view that historical entries were made (at the time) in actual Paschal tables is plausible and possibly right, but is not proved. 1902 TIRECHAX'S MEMOIR OF ST. PATRICK 241 probabty, for some time back, perfectly correct— record of the number of regnal years of the kings. Such records could be preserved by memory ; it does not matter, for our present purpose, ■whether thej- wore committed to writing or not before Christian literati began the work of synchronising. It is clear that the most meagre chronicle of this kind would involve the dates of certain events — such as that of a battle in which an drcl-ri was slain. The regnal years would doubtless have been remembered in round numbers ; a king, for example, who died after his 29th year was completed would be remembered as having reigned 30 years. Now the synchronisers adopted the convention of recording the death of a king or pope in one year and the accession of his successor in the next. Hence, when it is recorded that Loegaire succeeded Dathi in 429 A.D., and died in 462 a.d., we have to determine whether the first regnal change occurred in 429 or in 428, and whether the second occurred in 462 or in 463. The circumstance that the regnal years of Loegaire's are handed down as 36, and those of Oilill Molt as 20, decides for the dates a.d. 428 and 468. Xow the dating of the battle of Ocha in the ' Ultonian Annals ' throws an interesting light on this subject. Two dates are given : 482 A.D. and 483 a.d. The first date was recognised by that annalistic tradition, which was the main ultimate source of the compilation, as is proved (1) by the appearance of the entry (in a mutilated form) under the corresponding year in the ' Annals of Inisfallen,' and (2) by the fact that the entry is made in categorical form, while the entry under 483 a.d. is (a) qualified by irl in hoc anno secundum alios, [b) is in Irish, cath Ocha instead of helium Oclw, (c) does not mention the death of Oilill. The second date, therefore, was drawn from another source. Now it might be argued that this second date deserves the preference, on the follow- ing ground : If Oilill Molt was slain in 482 a.d. we should expect to find the accession of his successor Lugaid entered under the next year, 488 a.d., in accordance with the conventional practice of the Annals ; and then we should expect to find it repeated (with secundum alios or a similar formula) under 484 a.d., to suit the alternative dating of the battle of Ocha ; whereas we find Lugaid's accession recorded only under 484 a.d. and without any expression of doubt. Therefore it might be said : Lugaid's conventional accession year being 484 a.d., his actucal accession and his pre- decessor's death must have fallen in 488 a.d. Such reasoning would miss the point. The cii'cumstance that the Annals set Oilill Molt's death in 482 a.d. and Lugaid's accession in 484 A.D. is historically significant. It proves that there was an interregnum of more than a year after the battle of Ocha before Lugaid was recognised as over-king. This is the true inference, and it explains at once the double dating of the battle. For VOL. xni. — NO. LX^^. R 242 TIRECHAN'S MEMOIR OF ST. PATRICK April Lugaid's accession being fixed to 484 a.d., the chronological pre- sumption might seem to be that his predecessor must have died in 483 A.D. Exactly the same thing happened in regard to this king Lugaid's death. He died in 508 a.d. ; there was an interregnum of five years ; and Muirchertach became king of Ireland in 513 a.d.. That was the genuine tradition. But some hasty chronologist seeing Muirchertach's accession in 513 a.d., inferred that Lugaid's death must have fallen in 512 a.d. ; and this alternative date is quoted in the ' Ultonian Annals ' from a mysterious source called the ' Liber Monachorum.' I have made this digression for the purpose of illustrating what seems to be an assured fact, that the Christian chronologists of the. sixth and seventh centuries had to do with a perfectly definite — and there is no reason why we should not suppose a perfectly authentic — tradition as to the regnal years of the Irish kings. Now it is highly improbable that Tirechan had any other tradition before him/* or that his source agreed with the annalistic tradition in ^' Another date for the accession of Loegaire is suggested (not stated) in the Annals of Ultonia and Inisfallen, but manifestly rests on a mere mistake. The death of King Dathi, who preceded Loegaire, is entered under a.d. 445 in the ' Ultonian Annals,' and (in a mutilated form) in the 'Annals of Inisfallen.' The former entry is in Irish with the addition in Latin, ' et obiit xx° [sic] tribus annis regnavit in Hibernia,' which exactly corresponds with the traditional limits of his reign — a.d. 405 (? 406)-428 = twenty-three years. We may conclude that this entry has crept in here simply by accident — an accident which must have happened to the common source of the two chronicles, and for which neither the Inisfallen nor the Ultonian compiler is responsible. The original entry (expanded in Ann. TJlt.) was doubtless in Latin, 'Dathi obiit et xxiii annis regnaidt in Hibernia,' and was meant to appear under the year corresponding to a.d. 428. Now if in a list of years distinguished by lunar incidence this entry had been inserted under the year Iwn. uii ( = a.d. 426), instead of under lun. xxiiii ( = a.d. 428), it is conceivable that it might have been inadvertently inserted, in the course of compilation, under lun. uii of the following decemnovennal cycle ( = A.D. 445). I suggest this as a possible source of the mistake. In connexion with Loegaire I must point out another error which might mislead. There is a statement in Ann. Ult. (under a.d. 432) that Patrick arrived in the thir- teenth (xji is clearly an error for xiii) or in the fourteenth year of Loegaire, and the editor suggests that this may be taken seriously as a possibly authentic tradition assigning Patrick's arrival in Ireland to a.d. 443. He quotes the corresponding passage in the ' Annals of Inisfallen.' But this passage should have saved him from drawing such a deduction. The statement there (at least according to 'Conor's text : a necessary reserve) is that Patrick arrived in the thirteenth or fourteenth year, not of Loegaire, but of Theodosius. Here is the text : ' PaUadius vero hie uno anno mansit xiimo aimo Teothosii minoris, Patricius vero xiiio vel ut alii dicunt xivto anno eiusdem venit ad Scotos Patricius quo PaUadius ad Bomam rediit,' &c. (the text after ' venit ' is corrupt -perhaps ' [venit ;] venit ad Scotos Patricius [anno] quo,' Ac.) It is evident from this that the statement in the ' Ultonian Annals ' was due to a mis- understanding, and does not represent a divergent tradition as to Patrick's coming. How the mistake as to the years of Theodosius occurred does not, in itself, much matter, but it is not difficult to discover. 433 a.d. was the consular year ' Theodosii xiiii et Maximi : ' so it was distinguished in the chronicle of Mareellinus, which was largely used by the Irish synchronisers, xiiii was mistaken for the regnal year of 1902 TIRECBAN'S MEMOIR OE ST. PATltlCK 243 regard to the regnal years of Loegaire and disagreed with it as to the regnal years of Oilill Molt. Tirechan's date for the death of Patrick involves, as we have seen, dates for Loegaire's death varying from 464 to 473 a.d., all of which necessitate lesser or greater curtailments of the reign of Oilill Molt. The inference is that the date which the text of Tirechan presents for St. Patrick's death is inaccurate. On this supposition we find a perfectly simple solution. The same palaeographieal source of error which caused Tirechan's doubt whether Loegaire survived Patrick by two or only five years — namely, the confusion of the numerals ii and u — has produced a cor- ruption in the date assigned for Patrick's death. Both iu and iii ran the risk of being taken for ui. Thus in the present case ccccxxxui might have been a misreading of either ecccxxxiii or ccccxxxiu. And either of these readings would give us a date con- sistent with the rest of the passage. (1) Ann. Pass. 433 means A.D. 461, reckoned on the a.d. 29 era, while (2) ami. Pass. 434 gives A.D. 461 on the Victorian system. Either number therefore might accord with the statement that Loegaire survived Patrick by two years. Now there is an external consideration of sufficient weight to lead us to decide for the first emendation : ecccxxxiii. In the Armagh MS. the numbers 4 and 9 are denoted not by iu and ix but by iiii and uiiii. The presumption is that the same notation was used in the manuscripts from which it was copied. This considera- tion weighs against the emendation ccccxxxiu. Our conclusion agrees with the entry in the ' Ultonian Annals ' under a.d. 461 : ' Hie alii quietem Patrici dicunt.' ''^ We are justified in assuming that the same year was intended by Tirechan, and that the ami. Pass. 433, which we have restored to his text, was calculated on the a.d. 29 era. Now there is an important entry in the ' Annals of Inisf alien ' Theodosius, and then a.d. 432 and 431 were equated with his regnal years xiii and xii. Thus the point of the entry is no more than this : Some people held the opinion that Patrick's coming should be placed not in a.d. 432 but in, a.d. 433. ^' It must be insisted that this date is an alternative to the a.d. 493 date. It has been sometimes referred to (for instance in Mr. Olden's History of the Church of Ireland) as if it were an alternative to the entry under a.d. 457, ' Quies senis Patricii ' (cp. Chron. Scot, under the same year). This is an unwarranted assumption. That portion of Mr. Olden's book relating to Patrick— the pnly part I have glanced at— is distinguished by slipshod quotations and references at secondhand. As an illustra- tion of the manner in which unfounded opinions are adopted and exaggerated by uncritical writers, it is worth noticing that Mr. Olden states categorically (p. 30) that Patrick's death 'took place in a.d. 463,' for which assertion his only authority is the opinion of Dr. W. Stokes {Trip, intr., p. cxliii) that the saint died ' probably in or about the year 463 '-confessedly a mere opinion, unsupported by historical proofs. k2 244 TtREGHAN'S MEMOIR OF ST. PATRICK April placing Patrick's death anno ccccxxxii aimssione Domini.^^ It is incon- gruously inserted under the year corresponding to a.d. 493, in which, according to the standard annalistic tradition, Patrick died ; and this very incongruity, without any indication that the compiler was conscious of it, tells a tale. The date has to be corrected, by the addition of one stroke, to ccccxxxiii. In the ' Annals of Ulster ' this date was rightly equated with a.d. 461 and entered under that year as an alternative to the dating a.d. 493, while in the ' Annals of Inisfallen ' it was simply inserted, without any note of inconsistency, under the latter year. It seems obvious that the a.p. date of Patrick's death in Tirechan, the a.p. date in the southern chronicle, and the a.d. 461 date in the northern chronicle represent one original datum, ^ow in the annahstic tradition which forms the framework of the Annals the obituary year of the saint was a.d. 493. This is the date which the compiler of the Inisfallen and the compiler of the Ultonian Annals and Tigernach '^ alike found in the framework on which they constructed their compilations. This is shown by the agreement of the recensions and also by the fact that, while the Ultonian Annalist gives the date a.d. 493 categorically, he gives the date a.d. 461 with the qualification hie alii dicunt. On the other hand Tirechan, our earliest source, gives the a.d. 461 date, without any alternative or any expression of doubt. We may infer that the chronological framework which is the basis of the early post-Christian portion of our existing Annals had not been fully constructed, or assumed its final form, or been generally accepted in the second half of the seventh century. But before that time learned men had been engaged in arranging the chronology of Irish history. This fact is disclosed in another chronological notice (in book ii.) which must now be considered.'* Tirechan appeals to the authority oi peritissimi numerorum, 'tech- nical chronologists,' ^^ for the date which he assigns for the birth of ^ Under the year equated by O'Conor with a.d. 488. Collation with the Ann. Vlt. shows the years that are really meant in the corrupt manuscript of the ' Inisfallen Annals.' The years a.d. 429-455 have been rightly equated by Dr. MacCarthy (Cod. Pal-Vat. 830, p. 352 sqq.) '" See the entry in ed. Stokes, Rsv. Celt. xvii. 122. The year corresponds to A.D. 493. ^ Trip. p. 318i7 (very inaccurately printed). The text should run : ' Interest autem inter mortem Patricii et [Ciar]aui natiuitatem, [ut] peritissimi numerorum aestimant, cxl [an]norum, et baptizatus est Ceranus a [pueiro Patricii a diacono lusto pop[uU] eonspectu.' The reading 'populi,' which makes good sense, is the result of Dr. Gwynn's careful examination of the traces in the manuscript, and there is no doubt about it. The number is indistinct, but the ex is legible, and CXL is borne out by the derivative passage in the Tripartite Life (p. IO429), though the writer of that passage misunderstood his source and toot 140 to be the age of Justus. »" The Irish in the sixth century prided themselves on their skill in Paschal calcu- lations ; cp. Columbanus, Letter to Pope Gregory (Migne, P. L. Ixxx. 261). 1902 TIRECHAN'S MEMOIR OF ST. PATRICK 245 St. Ciaran, the carpenter's son. At a first glance it would seem possible that his information here was oral, that he personally consulted experts with whom he was acquainted. But an examin- ation of the notice itself will decide us to conclude that his source was a written document. According to this notice 140 years elapsed between the death of Patrick and the birth of Ciaran. This is obviously false. St. Ciaran belongs to the first half of the sixth century ; his death is assigned to a.d. 549. The date which Tirechan assigns would make him a contemporary of Ultan and an elder contemporary of Tirechan himself. There is, therefore, an error. It might occur to one that cxl is a textual mistake for xl. Since Tirechan's date for Patrick's death is, as we have seen, a.d. 461, an interval of 40 years would place Ciaran's birth in a.d. 501 — a date which is physically possible. If there were any record alleging this date we might consider the suggested emendation highly probable ; but, as the records which exist point to other dates, it would be only a useless guess, for which nothing could be said. In the ' Ultonian Annals ' three dates appear to be assigned for St. Ciaran's birth — a.d. 512, 517, and 516. The first two dates are given under the respective years ; the third is indicated under A.D. 649 (the year of his death) by the statement that he died in the thirty-fourth year of his age, which implies that he was born in A.D. 516. There can, however, be no doubt that the second and third dates really represent the same tradition, a.d. 617, the dis- crepancy being due to a numerical error.*" Now if Tirechan's chronological authority approved of the date a.d. 512 the interval from Patrick's death to Ciaran's birth would have been assigned as 51 years. If, on the other hand, a.d. 517 was adopted the interval would have been 56 years. This puts the solution in our hands — 140-56 = 84. In other words the chronologists, to whom Tirechan refers, operated with the Paschal 84 cycle"" which was employed in Ireland before the conciliation with Eoman usage — and in their copy of the chronological table which Tirechan (or his authority) con- sulted a whole cycle had been accidentally skipped in entering Ciaran's birth. The 56th and 140th years (reckoned exclusively) after Patrick's death were each the 53rd year in an 84 cycle.*^ Thus the text of the Armagh MS. is sound, and the error was due to an inadvertency in Tirechan's chronological source.''* " xxxiii (Ciaran's age) may have been misread as xxxiu. " That is, they distinguished each year by its cyclic number in the 84 cycle. " See Dr. MacCarthy's table N {Annals of Ulster, vol. iv.) He has shown that the initial year of the 84 cycle was a.d. 381, and has calculated fully the Paschal table. I ought to say that but for his Paschal investigations the solution of the Ciar4n passage would hardly have occurred to me. " Of course it is also possible that Tirechan himself was the culprit, and that in counting the interval of years between the two entries he added a whole cycle un- wittingly. 246 TiBECHAN'S MEMOIR OF ST. PATRICK AprU The inadvertency is fortunate, for it gives us a glimpse behind the scene. It follows that the date of Ciaran's birth, according to the chronological specialists who enjoyed credit in the seventh century, was A.D. 517 ; and that according to the same authorities the date of Patrick's death was a.d. 461. We might now be inclined to conjecture that the other dates of Tirechan, as to Loegaire's reign and Patrick's death, were derived not from Ultan's book but from the same document in which he found Ciaran's birth, or else that the notice of Ciaran's birth was in Ultan's book. But we must not try to know too much. . In illustration of the foregoing criticism of the chronological passages in Tirechan it is appropriate to point out here the import of a passage in the ' Historia Brittonum.' This passage ** supplies its own date — a.d. 858 — and furnishes three dates for St. Patrick. 1". a nativitate domini usque ad adventum Patricii ad Scottos ccccv anni sunt. 2°. viginti tres cycli deeemnovennales ab incarnatione domini usque ad adventum Patricii in Hiberniam et ipsi annos effioiunt numero ccccxxxviii. 3°. a morte Patricii usque ad obitum sanctae Brigidae sexaginta anni. The first and second of these statements are inconsistent with each other. It has indeed been supposed that they refer to two distinct advents — the second to the chief advent of which the traditional date is a.d. 432, and the first to some earlier visit.''* But this is not a permissible explanation. For the writer is not concerned here with Patrick's biography ; he is concerned only with leading epochs, such as the coming of Patrick, and it is impossible to suppose that he would mention in this context, as an epoch, the date of a minor event, such as Patrick's captivity (the only earher visit for which there is evidence). It is perfectly clear that the adventus Patricii in 1° is the same as the adventus Patricii in 2°- And the number ccccv is perfectly sound ; it is the Passion date (on the Victorian reckoning) "^ corresponding to a.d. 432 (= 405 + 27). The error lies in nativitate, which is simply a slip of the pen for passione. We have not to seek far for an instance of this particular inadvertency ; we find one in the Irish version of this very work.*^ Thus 1° gives the received date a.d. 432 for the coming of " Ed. Mommsen, pp. 158-9 (Chron. Mm. vol. iii.) *= Mommsen seems tacitly to adopt this view (p. 117). « The same Passion date occurs in the document (A) edited by Dr. MaoCarthy from the 'Book of Ballymote ' (see supra). The manuscript gives a.p. 401, 402 { = A.M. 5632, 5633 = A.D. 431, 432), which he has corrected to 404, 405. " Ed. Mommsen, p. 172: 'l^erinma, armo ccxxlvUjpost passwmm Qhristi-, Nenn, interpretatus, a nativitate Christi cccxhii annos.' 1902 TIRECHAN'S MEMOIR OF ST. PATRICK 247 Patrick. But in 2° we find the same event dated a.d. 437 {=Ann. Incam. '438, the first year of an Alexandrine decemnovennal cycle). It is obvious that the writer was unconscious of the incongruity, and thought that the two dates coincided. The explanation of his error is simple. The Passion year, 405, was his datum ; and, being inexperienced in chronological systems and not knowing that it was calculated on the a.d. 28 era of Victorius, he proceeded to reduce it to an Incarnation year by adding 33. This gave him 438, which he recognised as the first year of a decemnovennal cycle. It is not un- important to clear this up, for one is not yet quite sure that the spectre of Todd's Patrician chronology is laid. In 3° the date of Patrick's death is not given, a.d. 493 is obviously out of the question, a.d. 457, which seems to be the obituary year of Patrick in the ' Annales Cambriae,' has been adduced as relevant ; *^ but no date has been handed down for the death of St. Brigit which combined with a.d. 457 will give an interval of sixty years. We must fall back on a.d. 461, and perhaps the simplest explanation might seem to be that the date implied for St. Brigit's death was a.d. 521, which has the authority of the ' An- nales Cambriae.' But there is a serious objection. The author of the passage under our consideration states that ' four ' years elapsed between the birth of Columcille and the death of Brigit. But there is no authority for a.d. 517 as the date of Columcille's birth ; and the fact that the ' Annales Cambriae ' place both events in the same year, 521, shows that the author was not following a tradition preserved in that compilation.'*' If we consider that the date of Patrick's death might have been known to him in the form of a Passion year, 434 (Victorian), and would have been reduced, by the same process to which he submitted the advent date, to the Incar- nation year 467= a.d. 466; and if we suppose that a.d. 526 — one of the dates assigned for Brigit's death in the ' Ultonian Annals ' '" — was given to him not as a Passion year, but in another form, we <" Mommsen, p. 159, n. 1. "• It may be questioned whether the date for Brigit's death in the Ann. Cambr. represents an independent tradition. It is a suggestive fact that these annals give the date of St. Ciardn's death as {ann. 100 = ) a.d. 544, whereas the accepted date (as to which there is exceptional unanimity) in the Irish records is a.d. 549. It is much more likely in this case that there was a mistake of five years in the entry than that there was a different tradition. The Irish dates in the early portion of the Cambrian Annals ought not to be lightly invoked ; it is more probable that some of them are misadjustments of dates calculated on different eras than that they represent a distinct tradition. =° The alternative dates 524 and 526 for Brigit's death (both given in Ann. Ult.) are probably due to the alternative dates 491 and 493 for Patrick's death. If, for instance, a.d. 524 was the actual year of her death it was noted that thirty-three years elapsed since Patrick's death in 491 ; then on the hypothesis that Patrick died in 493 it was argued back that Brigit died in 526. Or the process may have been the reverse. 248 TIRECHAN'S MEMOIR OF ST. PATRICK April can see how he counted exactly (526 — 466) sixty years between the two events/^ My purpose in discussing this passage is to show that the date A.P. 433 (= Victorian 434)=a.d. 461 was current in the ninth century as the year of St. Patrick's death. C. Tirechdn and Muirchu: Common Sources. — I have still to mention a passage in book ii. which may have been transcribed from an older document. It is the legend of Patrick breathing fire upon the son of Miliucc in the time of his captivity.*^ The circumstance that Patrick is here called Succetus suggests that this may be a transcription. And the suspicion is strengthened by the probability that the following passage, about the angel's footstep at Scirte and his command to Patrick, comes from a written source. One might indeed, at first sight, gather from an expression that Tirechan had himself visited Skerry. He says that the footstep of the angel usque nunc penb adest. This sounds as if the alleged trace of the angel's foot had been pointed out to him and he had required an effort of faith to convince his eyes that it was visible. But the inference would be hasty. If it can be shown that Tirechan was here using a document we may be practically sure that the words pene adest are transcribed, and are not the record of his own personal impression. Now compare this passage with two passages in Muirchu's 'Life.' TiEECHAN (p. 330„-,9). (Et exiit ad Mon- tem Scirte ad locum) petrae super quam vidit anguelum Domini stantem, et vestigium pedis iUius usque nunc pene adest, cum asoendisset in caelum pedibus extensis de monte ad montem, dix- itque : Ecce navis tua parata est ; surge et ambula. MUIBCHU (p. 276„-,4). De quo monte multo ante . . . preso vestigio in pet7-a alterius mentis expe- dite gradu uidit anguelum Victoricum in conspecfcu eius as- cendisse in caelum. MulECHtl (p. 300,„-,3). anguelus . . . pedem supra petram ponens in Scirit in [sic] montem Mis coram se ascendit ; vestigia pedis angueli in petra hue usque manentia cemuntur. " A.D. 526 is the fifth year after the date for Columcille's birth given by Tigemach (Rev. Celt. 1896, p. 128; kal. Yii = ), a.d. 522, and this might explain the anther's ' quattuor anni.' If a.d. 523 {Ann. Vlt), which has more claim to be regarded as the true date of St. Columba's birth (since it satisfies the particular statement in Lebar Breo, 31 a, 1. 49, that he was born on 7 Dec. = Thursday), were intended we should expect ' tres anni.' a.d. 523 is itself inconsistent with the recorded age (seventy-six years) of Columba at the time of his death, the year of his death being as Dr MacCarthy has shown, a.d. 596 (op. Cod. Pal-Vat. 830, p. 22) ; and the seventy-six years of the Annals is borne out by the statements in Adamnan's Life (cp Beeves Adamnan, p. Ixix). This is not the place to discuss the vexed question of St' 1902 TlBECHAN'S MEMOIR OF ST. PATRICK 249 It is clear that these three passages go back ultimately to an original written account ; the use of petra is significant. But on the other hand it does not seem probable that Tirechan and Muirchu consulted copies of the same document. It is to be observed at least that, in regard to Miliucc, Muirchu seems to know nothing of Tirechan's story of Patrick breathing fire," while Tirechan makes no reference to the death of Miliucc, recorded by Muirchu. The probable conclusion is that the document used by Tirechan (Ultan's book?) and the document used by Muirchu derived the record of the angel's footstep on the petra from a common original. In this connexion it may be noticed that while Muirchu takes Patrick straight from Inbher Dea to Dalaradia — first to Saul and then to the scene of his captivity — Tirechan omits all mention of the visit to southern Dalaradia and transfers the visit to Scirte to a later stage. There is another point at which Tirechan and Muirchu touch — the legend of the conflicts of Patrick with the magicians of Loegaire. Their versions of the incidents which caused the deaths of the two magicians correspond accurately ; but they relate the incidents in different order, and they name the magicians differently. Muirchu calls the magician who was burnt to death in the ordeal Lucetmael (alias Eonal) ; the other, who was flung upwards into the air and dashed to pieces on the ground, he calls Lochru (alias Lothroch). Tirechan speaks of three magicians, but his text gives the names of only two — Cruth and Lochlethlanu. Of these Lochlethlanu corresponds to Lochru. He does not designate by name the other magician who was burnt in the cassula of Benignus ; so that it remains uncertain whether he is to be identified with Cruth or the anonymous third. It is quite possible that Lucet has fallen out of the text between the other two names. But even if the two writers agreed in this name the other divergency is sufficient to show that Tirechan did not depend on the document used by Muirchu. It is also to be noticed that Muirchu places the destruction of Lochru on the night of Easter Eve, and the ordeal of Lucetmael on Easter Day, while Tirechan reverses the order of the incidents and does not distinguish the occasions. Columba's birth-date, but it may be observed that the data could be reconciled by supposing that the true year is a.d. 520, and the birthday 7 Dec. = Monday, ' feria ii,' Thursday in the ieior Brec arising from the common confusion of ii with u. On this hypothesis the entry of the event under 519 in Ann. TJlt. may be merely a mistake, 520 being intended. '^ ' Sed alia noote — excelsi,' Trip. p. 33O2.14. *' Nor of his instructing Miliucc's son and daughters (Tirechan, pp. 3292o- 33O2). 250 TIRECHAN'S memoir OF ST. PATRICK April Observe how the two accounts of the former incident tally. TiBECHAN MumcHu (pp. 3O625-3075). (P- 28I7--16). et elevavit Patricius manus suas hunc autem intuens turvo Deo circa magum Lochletheum =^ oculo talia promentem sanctua et dixit : Domine mi, iece a me Patricius, ut quondam Petrus de canem qui ohlatrat faciem tuam et Simone, cum quadam potentia et me; eat in mortem. Et intende- magno clamore confidenter ad runt ** omnes magum elevatum per Dominum dixit : Dormne, qui tenebras nocturnales^oeree Msgweof^ omnia potes et in tua potestate caelum, sed re versMS^* cadaver illi us consistunt quique me missisti hue, congluttinatum grandinibus et hie impius qui blasfemat nom^n nivibus commixtum scintilhs igneis tuum elevetur nunc foras et cito in terram ante faciem omnium moriatur. Et his dictis elivatus cecidit. Et est lapis iUius in oris est in aethera magus et iterum, di- austraHbus orientalibusque usque missus foras desv/per verso a4 in praesentem diem et conspexi lapidem cerebro comminutus et ilium oouUs meis. mortuus fuerat coram eis. These two accounts correspond closely. Tlrechan's is the more vigorous and picturesque ; he adds the touch that the body in its passage through the air became conglutinatum grandinibus et nivibus and commixtum scintillis igneis. Muirchu has clearly transformed the language of his source in accordance with his own ideas of style ; instead of the vigorous canem qui ohlatrat of Tirechan he gives the tame impius qui blasphemat ; instead of the simple ad caehim he has in aethera. But both accounts go back to a common source, which is probably reproduced pretty closely in Tirechan. The proof that they do not represent independent versions of the legend is the fact that in both Patrick appeals to God in speeches not only of the same intent but closely similar in form. It is worthy of note that Tirechan's abrupt lapis illius is not quite intelligible ; or rather it would suggest a gravestone, if we had not Muirchu's version, which shows that it was the stone on which the body was dashed to pieces. We may infer that in his source there was a clause (which he omitted to transcribe) corre- sponding to Muirchu's verso ad lapidem cerebro comminutus. Another point to be observed is the implied note of time in per tenebras noctvrnales, which shows that Tirechan's source agreed with the tradition of Muirchu, who placed the incident on the night of Easter Eve. In general this comparison illustrates the difference between Muirchu the stylist and Tirechan, who was probably content, when '' Scribal error for ' Loehlethaneum.' " ' Heard ' (cp. Fr. ' entendre ')— a graphic touch. ^' Apparently adverbial, on analogy of the prepositions ' versus,' ' adversus.' 1902 TIRECHAN'S MEMOIR OF ST. PATRICK 251 he used a -written source, to reproduce it simply, or if he altered it, only to abbreviate it." 6. Sources: Oral. — (1) In his ^reZimwiarj/ sketch of St. Patrick's early life Tirechan derived one statement from the mouth of Bishop Ultan. 'Patrick was thirty years in the island which is called Aralanensis ; mihi testante Ultano episcopo.' '* (2) As to book i., the author professes that most of his story is well known to those whom he addresses in the land of the Hiii Neill, but adds that he derived some useful information for it from many seniors and from Ultan.^^ One scrap of information that he obtained from ' seniors ' he permits us to know. He gives the names of three brothers and their sister who were established by Patrick in a church which he founded at Vadum Molae (near Kells), on the authority of old men.^" (3) As to the sources of book ii., the longest and most important part of the memoir, no indication is supplied. 7. A grave question therefore arises as to the authenticity of Tirechan's copious, though for the most part concise, memoranda concerning the acts of St. Patrick in the regions of Connaught. Now we must suppose one of two things. Either Tii-echan copied from one or more written documents or else he collected the material (himself or by the help of another) from oral sources in Connaught. We may reject, at least provisionally, the former alternative. If Tirechan had used a liber enumerating the Connaught foundations and the proceedings of Patrick in that kingdom, the presumption is that he would have mentioned it or alluded to it ; and it will appear hereafter that this consideration is weightier than it might seem to be at first sight. We will, accordingly, assume for the present that his sources were oral, as in book i. Now his memoranda by no means resemble biographical ' Acta ' which are written to glorify the memory of a saint and edify the faithful. Miracles and legendary anecdotes are introduced when occasion demands, but the miraculous is not prominent. Tirechan's work is virtually an enumeration of the ecclesiastical foundations of Patrick, with a description of the circumstances in which each was '' The story of the ordeal of fire, to which Lucetmael and Benignus were sub- mitted, is told so very briefly by Tireohfa (p. 3O617.24) that it is not possible to compare it with the long relation of Muirchu (pp. 28425-285i5). But observe that Tirechin (who may have simply written down the well-known tale from memory, without a book before him) adds that- Patrick said, ' In hac hora consumpta est gentilitas Hiberniae tota.' , 69 Trip, p. 30224. " Ibid. p. 3II28, ' a senioribus multis ao ab illo Ultano.' *• roM. p. 30783, ' ut senes mihi indicaverunt.' 252 TIRECHAN'S MEMOIR OF ST. PATRICK April founded. This is the thread on which all other details are strung or hung. And, so far as one can judge, the information must in many or most cases have been gained on the spot. Now the gathering together of this material was a work of considerable trouble and research, a work which no ordinary hagiographer would have been in the least likely even to think of undertaking. The original compiler, whether Tirechan or another, must have travelled about for the purpose ; and we may, I think, set it down as highly improbable that any ecclesiastic — in Ireland or anywhere else — in the sixth or in the seventh century, made a systematic tour from a purely literary motive, to obtain material for a historical work. What then was the motive which prompted the collection of this material ? To enable us to judge the work of Tirechan this is a problem that demands solution. 8. We must turn to a passage (already briefly referred to) which, if not intended to assign a reason for Tirechan's special interest in the acts of St. Patrick, seems to be irrelevant. Cor autem meum cogitat in me de Patricii dilectione quia uideo dissertores et archiclocos et milites Hibemiae quod odio habent paruchiam Patricii, quia substraxerunt ab eo quod ipsius erat, timentque quoniam si quaereret heres Patricii paruchiam illius potest pene totam insolam reddere in paruchiam, quia deus dedit illi totam insolam cum hominibus per anguelum domini, &c.^' The ixiruchia of Patrick has suffered and is in danger : this is the cry of Tirechan. It is better not to translate paruchia by diocese, because diocese suggests a different conception, quite alien from the institutions of the early Irish church. A paruchia was not a geographical division ; it meant all the communities founded by one founder, wherever situated. The lands of the paruchia Patricii were the property of Patrick and passed to his heirs. Todd explains thus : — The land granted in fee to St. Patrick, or any other ecclesiastic, by its original owner, conveyed to the clerical society of which it became the endowment all the rights of a chieftain or head of a clan ; and these rights, like the rights of the secular chieftains, descended in hereditary succession. The com-arb or co-arb — that is to say, the heir or successor of the original saint who was the founder of the reUgious society, whether bishop or abbat— became the inheritor of his spiritual and official influence in religious matters. The descendants in blood, or ' founder's kin,' were inheritors of the temporal rights of property and chieftainship, although bound to exercise those rights in subjection or subordination to the ecclesiastical co-arb.''^ Thus in each clerical community which he founded Patrick had " Trip. pp. 311so-3127. «2 St. Patrick, p. 149. 1902 TIEECHAN'S MEMOIR OF ST. PATRICK 253 an heir or heirs ; "^ but his chief heir was at Armagh, his principal church. His successors at Armagh were regarded as his co-arbs in an eminent sense ; and in the seventh century, when Tirechan wrote, they claimed a certain authority over the other churches which he had founded — over the -vfYiole fainiUa or ' muinntir ' of Patrick. It is unknown to us at what time and in wha,t form this claim, as asserted by Tirechan, was first urged, but it seems probable that the general line of development is correctly suggested in the ' Catalogus Sanctorum Hiberniae,' which has been elucidated at great length by Todd. For two generations or so after the death of Patrick the monastic communities of Ireland, founded by himself, his companions, and hia disciples, formed a sort of confederacy, with common recognised principles ; and in this confederacy, real, though perhaps not formally organised, Armagh enjoyed a certain pre-eminence and dignity, but without any rights of jurisdiction.''* Other communities, perhaps, would accept the excommunication pronounced by Armagh ; ' but Armagh was equally bound to obey the excommunication pronounced by any other church of the confederacy.' "'^ The situation was changed by the rise of a new school of ecclesiastical founders in the second quarter of the sixth century — such as the two Finnians and Columba. These men were inno- vators and introduced stricter monastic rules than those of the Patrician communities ; but the movement which thej'' represent was, so far as we can see, a natural development within the Irish church towards a more rigid system. An utterly unwarranted inference in regard to this question has been drawn from the ' Catalogus.' The ideas of development and continuity in history are comparatively modern, and were utterly foreign to the author of that document, who, recognising that a new period is ushered in by Finnian, Ciaran, and their fellows — whom he calls saints of the second order — emphasises the break and does not seek to account "' The ecclesiastical and the temporal succession were sometimes combined in the same hands (cp. Todd, op. cit. pp. 154-6) ; but this does not concern us here. The account of the Paruchia Patrioii which I have given, partly following Todd, is based on the actual, fragmentary evidence. It is at variance with the view of Zimmer (sketched in his Keltischs Kirche), a view closely connected with his remarkable re- construction of Patrick's life and work. "' It is probable that the (few) Patrician foundations in Leinster did not belong to this confederacy. Christianity had been introduced into Leinster many years before Patrick's arrival ; and the ecclesiastical history of the seventh century shows that it went its own way (cp. Bede, H. E. iii. 3), and that the cleavage between the northern and southern halves of Ireland affected the church. What we know of that history principally regards the Easter controversy, the best account of which will be found in Dr. MacCarthy's introd. to the Annals of Ulster, vol. iv. p. cxxxv sqg^. ^' Todd, op. cit. p. 94. The authority is the Catalogus, but, as the writer may have transferred later practice to the end of the fifth century, the statement ought not to be pressed. The date of the Catalogus seems to be the eighth century, or possibly the end of the seventh. 254 TIrECHAN'S MEMOtU OF ST. PAtMCK April for it.«^ But he makes the statement (which has Uttle to do with the main matter) that ' they received a mass from Bishop David and Gildas and Doous, the Britons.' On the strength of this, coupled with the fact that Gildas visited Ireland, modern writers have constructed the theory that the new movement of the sixth century was due to British influence. The grounds of the theory are in any case insufficient, but it breaks down chronologically.^^ Finnian of Clonard and Ciaran of Clonmacnois died in 549 a.d., while David's death seems fixed to 601 a.d., and the visit of Gildas to Ireland was in the reign of Ainmire (568-70 a.d.) .^' To substantiate the theory we should require proof of strong British influence on Ireland, say between 530 and 545 a.d., and no such proof exists. That there was constant intercourse between the British and Irish churches we need not doubt ; but if Britain had exerted any decisive influence we should rather expect it to have been in the direction of making the Irish church episcopal.*' For the present purpose, however, it only concerns us to note that the communities of the new founders stood independent of and aloof from that confederacy of which Armagh was the most conspicuous member. The rise of these new communities in different parts of Ireland necessarily reacted upon the confederate Patrician communities ; and we may feel some uncertainty whether it was due to the upgrowth of these new foundations, and to the need of a term of contradistinction, that the phrase paruchia Patricii first came into use, or whether that phrase originated at an earlier date, to distinguish Patrician from pre-Patrician foun- dations. In these circumstances, in the presence of an opposition, we can easily conceive that the co-arbs of Armagh would have been anxious to draw closer the ties which bound together the Patrician communities, and that, while they worked to establish a stricter organisation of the paruchia, they used the favourable opportunity to attempt to convert their recognised pre-eminence into definite rights of jurisdiction. Something of this kind would be likely to happen in any similar situation. I have spoken of an opposition. It is expressed in the theory, which may have been formulated at Armagh in the course of the sixth century, that all Ireland was spiritually subject to Patrick and his co-arbs by the direct donation of God. This theory is announced in the passage of Tirechan which is under consideration, •« Cp. Todd, op. cit. p. 95 ; Fowler, introd. to Adamnani Vita S. Columbae, pp. xxxvi and 1 sqq. It seems hypercritical to say, as Zimmer says {Keltische Kirche, p. 209), that the author of the Catalogus brought the age of Patrick down to the death of Tuathal, 544 a.d. He merely regarded the first order as continuing after Patrick's death. *' This has been well shown by Zimmer, ibid. p. 224. ™ Vita Gildae, ed. Mommsen, pp. 94-5. '" Cp. Zimmer, Keltische Kirche, ibid. 1902 TMECHAN'S memoir OE ST. PATEtTCK 255 and it is expressed as follows in the ' Liber Angueli,' a document which was drawn up at Armagh, probably in the eighth century,'" for the purpose of defining the privileges and rights of the see :— Ac deinde donauit tibi Dominus Deus uniuersas Sootorum gentes in modum paruchiae, et huic urbi tuae quae cognominatur Scotorum lingua Ardd machae.^' Though the 'Liber AngueH ' cannot be older than at most the beginning of the eighth century the legend that the donation of Ireland was conveyed to Patrick by an angel was known to Tirechan {per anguelum Domini),''^ and may have taken shape in the sixth century. But we must distinguish between this theoretical claim to the whole island on the strength of a divine donation and the practical claim of the chief co-arb of Patrick over all the communities which Patrick actually founded. Now in the passage which we are con- sidering Tirechan dwells upon the conceptions of the familia Patricii and the paruchia Patticii ; and I understand him to argue that in theory the paruchia of the saint should embrace all Ireland, but that practically there is a narrower claim which ought to be admitted without hesitation or dispute. This is shown by the hypothetical form of the clause si qiiaej-eret heres Patricii paruchiam Ulius, implying that the heir does not claim all that whereto he has a divine right. 9. It is a certain inference from this passage that the bishop Tirechan was himself associated with some community belonging to the paruchia of Patrick. But there is another passage in which he leaves us in no doubt on this point. When he relates how Endeus, son of Amolngid, sacrificed his son and a part of his in- heritance ' to Patrick's God and Patrick ' he adds the remark — Per hoc dicunt alii quia serui sumus Patricii usque in praesentem diem.'^ There can be no question that this implies that Tirechan's com- munity was established in Connaught,''' and belonged to the ™ Zimmer identifies the ' Liber Angueli ' with the ' Lex Patricii ' of the Annals {Ann. int. A.D. 734, 737, &c.), and dates it between a.d. 701 and 733 [734J {Zeitsch. f. Deutsches AUertum, xxxv. 78-9, 1891). " Trip. p. 85283 = ' Cod. Armaoh.' fol. 20 v B. " It might be held, but I do not see how it could be proved, that these words are an intei-polation. " Trip. p. 30981. " Todd {St. Patrick, p. 444, n. 2) needlessly hesitates because Tireohdn is supposed to have belonged to the same family aa Ultan, who reared him — namely, the Dal Con- chobar of Meath. That may be so or not ; but whatever his family, whatever his birthplace, there is no reason to doubt that his work, when he wrote his memoir, lay not in Meath, but in Connaugbt. 256 TIEECHAN'S MEMOIR OF ST. PATRICK April paruchia of which the co-arbs of Armagh claimed to be the heads. An incidental phrase in another passage agrees with the inference that the community to which he was attached was not in Meath. It is the phrase in uestris regionibus, by which the author designates Meath. If he had been himself a bishop in Meath he would naturally have written in nostris regionibus. A difficulty is presented by the words per hoc dicunt alii quia, which require explanation. ' Through this grant some say that we are the servants of Patrick ' might be taken to imply that Tirechan either disagreed with the view that his community owed loyalty to Armagh, or at least considered it an open question. This, however, cannot possibly be the meaning, as the longer passage which has been discussed sets in the clearest light his allegiance to St. Patrick's chosen seat. Serui sumiis Patricii is evidently a statement of fact, not of opinion ; and therefore the emphasis in the sentence rests on per hoc. The question touching which there might be two opinions was whether this act of Endeus was the act which conveyed to Patrick the ownership of the land of Tirechan's community. Others may have thought that Patrick acquired possession of it by a subsequent and particular grant. We are at liberty to infer that Tirechan's community was in the land of Amolngid, in northern Mayo.'^ 10. The claims of the co-arbs of Armagh naturally encountered resistance within the paruchia itself. A document in the Armagh MS., relating the foundation of the church of Trim and the original proprietor's grant of territory to Lomman, Patrick, and Fortchern, particularly observes that the spiritual successors of Fortchern, who was the first bishop, were all uenerantes sanctum Patricium et successores eins.'"^ We may infer, Todd remarks, that this allegiance to Armagh was not universally given, ' or else it would not have been here so particularly mentioned in especial praise of these bishops.' "'' As a member of the familia Patricii, and a loyal respecter of the rights of Armagh, Tirechan saw with dismay that these rights were being disregarded and infringed. ' I see,' he says, ' deserters and archicloci and armed men of Ireland hating the paruchia of Patrick, because they have taken from him that which was his. They are afraid, since they know that if the heir of Patrick should seek to claim his paruchia he could claim almost the whole island.' f« The expression milites Hiberniae can hardly admit of any natural interpretation but armed bands in the service of the kings of Ireland. If it meant generally the armed men of other kings " Cp. Todd, op. Cit. p. 445. ,. T,.i ggg " Todd, op. cit. p. 153. " " For the original see above, § 8 ad init. (p. 252). 1902 TIRECHAN'S MEMOIR OF ST. PATRICK 257 and sub-kings, Hiberniae would have no point. The strange word archiclocus has been explained as derived from dpj^jt/cXw'x/f ,'' meaning * archthief ; ' but, if so, it is clear that the writer must have had some motive for employing such a curious word. Arclndocos must by its very form have suggested the persons whom it was intended to designate. The collocation of milites Hiberniae suggests that the archthieves in question were the archkings of Ireland. Archi- was the Graeco-Latin equivalent for the Irish ard in such a connexion (ard-epscop = archiepiscopus).^'^ Dissertores has still to be explained. At first sight it might be thought that it meant apostatae, deserters of the Christian faith, and betokened a recrudescence of paganism. But it need not bear such an extreme significance. It need mean nothing more than men who, though bound by their position to uphold the pancchia Patricii, have been untrue to it — who, instead of supporting, have joined its enemies in injuring it. It may refer to communities founded, or alleged to have been founded, by Patrick, which repudiated the claims of the Armagh church and maintained their own independence. As a special reason for disfavour shown towards the familia Patricii Tirechan assigns non licet iurare contra eum et super eum et de eo, et non lignum licet contra eum mitti quia ipsius sunt omnia primitiuae aeclessiae Hiberniae. ^^ ' It is not lawful that wood shall be set against him.' Another passage in the memoir gives a clue to the meaning, though it does not furnish an explanation, of the curious phrase. It occurs in the account of the dispute of two men at Drummut Cerrigi, who wished to divide their father's inheritance. We are told ' that the wood of contention was set.' ^^ The phrase may signify that the claimants fought in a wooden enclosure. But we may infer that to ' set wood against ' Patrick meant to claim his inheritance. Claims on the church lands belonging to communities founded by Patrick might conceivably be made by the descendants of the chiefs who had originally granted the lands. Claims might also be put forward by co-arbs of other founders. Tirechan notes elsewhere an instance of monastic '" By Windiaoh ; see Trip. p. 312, n. 1. '" Even this may not be the full explanation. It may be thought that, if this was all, a plainer word, such as ' archilatrones,' would have served the writer's purpose, and that his far-sought choice of ' archicloci ' must have been made to give some more definite point to his allusion. It is remarkable that the one ' 4rd-ri ' of Ireland to whose name ' archiclocus ' might be intended to allude reigned in the days of Tirechan. This was Cellach (of the line of the northern Hui N^ill), whose date is given as a.d. 643-658 (see Ann. TJlt. ; an alternative obituary date is given under A.n. 664). Is it possible that the word was specially selected to suggest Cellach's name, and to brand him as a violater of St. Patrick's rights ? »' Trip. p. 312ii.i7. '^ Ibid. p. 320io, ' lignum contensionis.' It should be recognised that the clause ' quod defunctum ' [' definitum,' Stokes] ' est in terra more campi ' is a gloss on ' caam,' with the etymological suggestion that ' caam ' is connected with ' campus.' VOL. XYII. — NO. LXYI. S 258 TtREGHAn'S MEMOIR OF ST. PATRICK April aggression. He mentions that the familia Clono, which means Clonmacnois, ' holds many places of Patrick by violence.' «^ He records how different monastic communities disputed over the bones of Assicus, who was really a ' monk of Patrick.' ** The situation then, though the details are hidden, is clear enough in its general aspect for our present purpose. In the days of Tirechdn there was active antagonism to the paruchia Patricii, and antagonism apparently from several quarters. The kings of Ireland seem to have looked with little favour on the pretensions of Armagh. Perhaps they conceived that those pretensions, if fully successful, would lead to the growth of an ecclesiastical state dangerous to the secular power. It may have seemed to them a wise policy to discountenance the idea of a paruchia Patricii and prevent union and organisation in the church. They may have thought that it was more to the interest of the royal power that the religious communities of the kingdom should be independent and isolated. All this is conjecture. We know nothing of the details of the struggle, which was doubtless complicated by disputes between clerics and laymen on such matters as rights of sanctuary, territorial boundaries, dues. We must be content to recognise that the paruchia Patricii had to contend with hostile forces, with the policy of the secular power, with the aversion of many communities for any form of subordination or dependence, and with the coun- ter-claims of other monastic communities. 11. Tirechan was deeply interested in upholding and consoli- dating the paruchia Patricii. And the important point to observe is that not only is the special passage, in which he signalises this in so many words, an evidence of his solicitous interest in the question, but that his whole book is a practical service to the cause of the claims of Armagh. It is virtually a list of the churches which claimed to have been founded by Patrick. If it had been completed it would have exhibited the full extent of the paruchia Patricii. And it is to be observed that the incidents, whether legendary or not, with which Tirechan has enlivened his narrative of Patrick's foundations do not detract from the businesslike character of his work. On the contrary these anecdotes would rather have seemed to Tirechan and to his contemporaries circumstantial proofs of the saint's visits to the places with which they were associated. We need have no hesitation, I think, in going a step further and saying that Tirechan meant his book to be what it is, and " Tryp. p. 314i7. " ' Bed contenderunt eum familia Columbae cille et familia Airdd sratha,' ibid. p. 314,. The quarrels of religious societies are illustrated by that between Durrow and Clonmacnois, which led to a battle, a.d. 764 (see Ann. Ult. sub a. ; Todd, op. cit. p. 158), and that between Clonmacnois and Birr (Biror) in a.d. 760 {Ann. Ult.' ad a.) 190^ TIREChIn'S memoir of ST. PATRICK 259 composed it in the interests of the parvchia Patricii. He was not a hagiographer, like Cogitosus and Muirchu, from whose Lives his work totally differs in character, but rather a practical churchman, writing a historical work with the special design of supporting a practical interest. It is to be noted that we find in Tirechan no reference to the Eoman controversy which agitated the Celtic church during his life- time. The churches of southern Ireland had adopted the Paschal reckoning of the ' universal church ' in the thirties of the seventh century ; northern Ireland *^ did not yield till the very end of the same century. This accentuated the division between north and south during the intervening sixty years ; and the situation may have seemed favourable for tightening the bonds connecting the Patrician churches which still held to the old usage. On the other hand it would seem that the way was prepared for the submission of 697 A.D. (or whatever the date was) by overtures from the south to the north. This is suggested by the notice that Bishop Aed of Sleibte visited Armagh before 688 a.d. and ' offered his kin and his church to Patrick for ever.' ^^ The influence of this connexion may per- haps be detected in the work of Muirchu. 12. We have now reached the solution of the problem with which we started. We have found a motive sufficiently power- ful to induce Tirechan to undertake tjie task of collecting the scattered material which he embodied in his work — a task involving considerable travel and labour. It seemed incredible that such a task should have been undertaken ' platonically ' by a hagiographer ; its accomplishment becomes comprehensible when we see that there was a practical object in view. We can now assert with confidence what before we provisionally assumed, that Tirechan did not tran- scribe his narrative of St. Patrick's journey from older documents ; for if older documents, in which all these acts were set down, had existed they would have possessed an authority to which Tirechan would have eagerly appealed. It would have been in the interest of his cause to name them, and he could not have omitted to do so. Tirechan then collected the material himself. There is an alternative possibility — for the criticism of his work it would make little difference — that some one else gathered the information and Tirechan cast it into the form of a book. This, however, would be a useless hypothesis, suggested by no evidence, whereas there is evidence which supports the most natural and simple supposition that Tirechan went about and collected his material for himself. Besides his visit to Armagh, already mentioned,^'' we know that he 85 Except the Columbau communitieB. »« Trip. p. 34628 ( = ' Cod. Arm.' f. 18 r B). Seg6ne, then abbot, died in a.d. 688. (Ann. UU. ad a.) " Above, § 4 ; Trip. p. SlSay. s -i 260 TIRSCHAN'S memoir of ST. PATRICK April visited Alofind.** We know that he visited the great church of SaeoH, on the banks of a Galway lake.*' He saw inscribed stones in Selce.'° It would be natural to infer that he had also seen the Basilica Sanctorum, or Baslick — to the west of Selce — from the words ' ignoro nisi unuvi [locuvi] in quo est bassilica sanctorum.' ^^ These incidental intimations confirm the conclusion that Tireehan himself visited the various places in which Patrick was said to have planted religious foundations, and set down all that he could learn from the seniors of the communities. His work shows that he pursued his investigation very thoroughly for Connaught ; it was in north Connaught, as we saw, that his own place seems to have been situated. He had also done the same for Meath, though not completely, and if he had finished his work he would have had more to do for Ulster, and something for Leinster, which are only slightly touched. We are now in a position to appreciate more fully the truth of the conclusion that Tirechan's memoir is an unfinished work. It is inconceivable that, being what it is, it should have been wound up, as complete, without a word about the foundation of Armagh itself, to say nothing of Ath-Truimm and other important places. Of the information thus locally collected by Tireehan the greater part probably came to him by word of mouth. We have already dealt (in § 5) with those passages which could be referred on tangible evideijce to written sources. Excepting these, there are not more than one or two passages which might be singled out as heterogeneous and presuming sources in writing. I refer to the list of bishops, presbyters, deacons, and exorcists ; ^^ and to the story of the two daughters of King Loegaire at Cruachan.^' As to the former, however, it would be difficult to show that it was not compiled by Tireehan himself out of material collected from various sources.'* The story of the maidens was doubtless preserved in the neighbourhood of their grave. There is nothing to hinder us from supposing that it was Tireehan who put the tale in writing for the first time, taking it down from the mouth of one of the religious community which had been established near the ferta?' There is, indeed, in the sequel, which describes the conversion of '8 Elphin [p>ici. p. 313.2,). *' Ibid. p. 31328-9. The Tripa/rtite Life (p. 96) renders Tirechan's words by 'Domnaoh mor Maigi Seolai,' and the place has been identified (by O'Donovan) with Domnach Patruig at L. Hackett. »" Trijp. p. 3193. Duma Selce (Tripwrt. Life, p. 106) was near Tulsk, in Eos- common. "' Trip. p. 31825. "^ Ibid. pp. 304, 305. »» Ibid. pp. 31480-317. "* It might be argued that many of the clergy of this list are not mentioned elsewhere in Th-echan's memoir; but this argument cannot be pressed, as the memoir is incomplete. =' Trip. p. 817]s. The text should read, ' Et i[mmolata] est ferta . . . Patricio cum sanctarum os[sibuB] et heredibus eius post [eum in] saeeula et aeolessiam terrenam fecit in eo loco.' 1902 TIBECHAN'S MEMOIR OF ST. PATRICK 261 the two magicians, an obscurity which almost looks as if Tirechan had transcribed from a document something which he did not quite understand. "When one magician had been converted the other said — ' Frater meus credidit Patricio .... sedrevertam eumin gentilitatem. Et ad Mathoum [et] ad Patricium verba dura dixit. This is clearly the right punctuation, but Mathoum is mysterious. The sense requires a proper name, designating some one associated with Patricius. It may, therefore, be suggested that the true vesbd- ing ■vf as Mathonu in. Mathonus may have been the pre-Christian name of Benignus since the name of his sister was Mathona.'^ So we find a brother and sister named Catneus and Catnea.'"' The magician might appropriately rail against Benignus, who had played a leading part in the contest which was fatal to Lucetmael. 13. We have seen that Tirechan's memoir has no title, and that the introductory words, which state the authorship, were prefixed by his editor. We might be inclined to suspect that the editor was also responsible for the division into two books ; and we might support the suspicion by the fact that at the beginning of book ii. Tirechan speaks of his work as a single liber.^^ This, however, proves nothing, as liber is ambiguous, and the principle of the division seems to forbid our imputing it to the scribe. If the subscription of book i. had been, finit liber primus cle Patricii gestis in regionibus nepotum Neill, and the superscription of book ii. incipit liber ii. de Patricii gestis in regionibus Connacht, we might entertain the idea that the division, which roughly suits the incomplete work, was due to the editor. But the actual subscription and super- scription define the sphere not of Patrick's but of the author's work : Finit liber primus in regionibus nepotum Neill peractus ; incipit ii. in ref/ionibus Connacht peractus. At one time I suspected that by a grammatical looseness peractus might be intended to express de rebus peractis. But that would be a daring and gratuitous assumption, which we should have no right to make, unless there were strong special reasons to demand it. As a matter of fact the results of this investigation justify us in taking the words in their literal and grammatical meaning. The first book was compiled in regionibus nepotum Neill ; the second was composed in Connaught. This is in accordance with our conclusion that Tirechan gathered his material on the spot ; and such a division of his work must have been signalised by the author himself. 14. The expression in regionibus nepotum Neill is ambiguous. "' ' Mathonam ' occurred to me first, but Tirechan's narrative does not suggest that Mathona was with Patrick at Clebach (cp. p. 314i8), and the corruption is not so Ukely. »' Trip. p. 30731. °' j^^jf^- PP- 311jo, 312i,|. 262 TiRECHAN'S MEMOIR OF ST. PATRICK April Strictly it should mean Meath and the greater part of Ulaidh— the regions of both the southern and the northern Hui Neill-^but here we can hardly be \yrong in supposing that it refers specially to the kingdom of Meath, inasmuch as the material which the book con- tains relates entirely to Meath and was collected there. If Tirechan had finished his work he would have had more to say about Patrick's activity in Ulster, and perhaps he would have marked out a liber tertius. In any case the unfinished state of the work may account for the fact that the last two pages are concerned with acts of Patrick in Ulster, Meath,^^ Leinster,i™ and Munster.!"' There is indeed no objection to supposing that these paragraphs were composed in Connaught, at the author's headquarters. But he must certainly have contemplated, as I have already insisted, a fuller account of the saint's work in Ulster. Apart from the abrupt termination the incompleteness of this last portion of the work is pressed upon us in another way. We are told that Patrick relicta Macldauenit in Mangdornu.^"^ Patrick ' left Machia,' or Armagh ; and the continuousness of Tirechan's narrative from Patrick's arrival in Ireland shows that this was the first time he visited the place. Not a word is said of the founda- tion of the Armagh church, not a word of Daire. The following words, ordinauit Victoricum Machinenseni episcopum, mean ' he ordained Victorious bishop of Domnach Maigen ; i°' Machinensem is a mistake for Maginensem, due to the preceding Machia. 15. It may be matter for a moment's speculation whether Tirechan undertook the investigations which led to the composition of his memoir at the express instance of a co-arb of Armagh. It is at all events to be noted that subsequently some of the co-arbs took pains to supplement his incomplete work, and to gather information of the same kind concerning other Patrician foundations which he had omitted. These disjointed supplementary notices, including a very full account of the founding of Trim, were transcribed by Ferdomnaeh into the Armagh MS. ; and the scribe's obscure Latin intimates that they were collected nniossitate heredum,^"* through the politic curiosity of the co-arbs. Some of these notices are in Irish, or in a mixture of Latin and Irish ; and we may conjecture that Tirechan himself made notes, just like these, in the places which he =" Trip. p. 330a3.29. '«» Ibid. pp. 33080-331,. '"' Ibid. p. 3318, 9. The observation of Zimmer {Keltiscke Kirche, p. 21O39), 'Ebenso haben wir in den Noten Tirechans den Versueh, Patricks Thatiglceit iri Nordirland (Connaoht, Ulster, Meath) ausfuhrlich zu schildern, und nur ein Satz meldet dass er auch naoh Miinster kam,' is not precise, for he omits to mention the visit to Leinster (see last note); and, as I have shown, he has not described ' ausfiihrhch ' Patrick's activity in Ulster (or probably in Meath) as it was known to him. But if it be true, as I have sought to prove, that TirechAn's work is incom- plete, Zimmer'e remark loses its point. '"■' Trip. p. 330,1. ''" Cp. Tripartite Life, p. 182. >»' Trip. p. 335. . 1902 TIRECHAN'S MEMOIR OF ST. PATRICK 263 visited, and afterwards worked them up into his continuous narrative in Latin. 16. It has been assumed throughout this paper that Tirechan's memoir is what it professes to be, the work of an alumnus of Bishop Ultan, and therefore composed in the seventh century. Its genuineness, however, was questioned by Professor Zimmer ten years ago,^"' and his strongest argument was the passage (beginning, Tertio decimo anno Teothosii) ^°^ recording that Patrick was sent by Celestine. This argument is no longer valid, as I have shown above that the passage in question has nothing to do with the memoir of Tlrechan. Professor Zimmer has, indeed, in the mean- time changed his opinions as to the genuineness of the Patrician documents in the ' Book of Armagh.' He now admits the genuineness of the 'Confession,' which he denied in 1891,'°^ and he accepts Tirechan's memoir as a work of Ultan's pupil, though he regards it as having been augmented by mancherlei Zusatze und Erweite- rungen between the date of its composition and the beginning of the ninth century.^"' That the text of Tirechan has suffered interpolation is quite possible. There is, in particular, one obscure passage which Zimmer urged against the genuineness of the whole work, but which now he would regard as a Zusatz. It occurs in the story of the resurrection of the corpse in Dichuil. The dead man whom Patrick has raised says — Ego sum mace maicc Cais male Glais qui fui subulcus rig Lugir rig Hirotae. lugulavit me fian maicc maicc Con in regno Coirpri Niothfer anno . c . usque hodie.'"^ In the brilliant article in which he maintains that the Fianna are really the vikings translated into the third century a.d., and that the prototype of the legendary Finn was a Scandinavian chief of the ninth century, Zimmer treats this passage and concludes ihaXfian, along with the reference to a king of Hirota or Norway, stamps it as having been composed after 795 a.d. as the higher limit.''" Now, though Zimmer's general theory may have much truth in it, his philological explanation of the words fian and fiann is highly problematical ; and, until he has demonstrated that fiun is not a Gaelic word, it cannot be admitted that the passage '°* 'Keltische Beitrage,' iii. 77, 79, in Zft. f. deutsches Altertum, xxxv. 1891. 106 2yjp_ p_ 332u,_28. '"' Loc. cit. p. 79, note. '™ Keltische Ki/rche, p. 23786 SSS- As Zimmer now identifies Patrick with Palladiua he admits his ordination by Celestine. 109 3Vjp_ p_ 32434. See the Sanas Cormaic, p. 29, ed. Stokes, s.v. ' mogheime.' In the version of the story in the Tripartite Life (p. I2224) the swineherd is called ' Cass ' instead of the ' grandson of Cass.' Probably this is simply an error. "° ' Keltische Beitrage,' loe. cit. p. 53, note, p. 77, note. Hiruath { = Horotaland, on the Hardanger-f jord) was the old Irish name for Norway (Todd, War of the Gaedhill with the OaAll, p. xxxiv, note ; op. Zimmer, Z. f. d. A. xxxii. 205). 264 TIEECHlN'S MEMOIR OF ST. PATRICK April under consideration must necessarily date from the ninth century. Moreover there is a chronological difficulty. Can we esteem it probable that within a generation from the first viking settlements —before 846 a.d.,"' the latest year in which we can place any part of the manuscript written by Ferdomnach— the vikings were already brought into connexion by popular imagination with heroes of the Cuchullin cycle? Cairbre Niafer, son of Boss Euad, belonged to that cycle ; he was slain by Cuchullin, and his son Ere cut off Cuchullin's head."^ So far as our present evidence goes there is no real proof of an interpolation — even if a Norwegian king is mentioned.^'' It is this apparent mention of a Scandinavian king that lends to Zimmer's view a superficial plausibility. But that there was in fact any reference to Scandinavia in this passage I could not bring myself to believe. Mr. E. J. Gwynn, to whom I went with my difficulty, discovered the true solution in one of the ' Dindsenchas,' in which Hiruait, or Hirot, occurs, designating not Scandinavia, but part of South Connaught. The context sets the meaning beyond all doubt.'i* This meaning of Hirot being estabhshed, it is evident that Lugair in our passage was an under-king in Connaught and '" Zimmer {ibid. pp. 94-5) suggests that Forannan, the co-arb of Armagh, who, driven out by Turgeis, spent some years in Munster (before his return to Armagh in A.D. 846), heard there of the F6na of Fid Mor (who are mentioned in a brief sentence. Trip. p. 342215), and infers that ' Cod. Arm.' f. 162 B-18 v B was written after a.d. 841. Zimmer has also suggested that Lugair, king of Hirota, should be brought into con- nexion with a certain Lugair, son of Lugaid, who called in the Fomori ; see ' Annals of the Four Masters,' a.m. 4169 (b.c. 1023). He showed that the vikings of the ninth century were made into Fomori (Z. f. d. A. xxxii. 242), and alleges this fact as a confirmation of his view of the passage in Tirechan. The argument is far-fetched. "2 See ' Annals of Tigernach,' ed. Stokes, in Bev. CM. xvi. 1895, p. 405 (ep. p. 407) ; the A tract, ed. by MacCarthy from the ' Book of Ballymote,' in Codex Pal.-Vat. 830, p. 286, and the B tract, ibid. p. 304, for the received chronology of Cairpre's reign. Scandinavian allies of the Ultonians are mentioned in the Cath Buis na Bigh for Bdinn (ed. Hogan, p. 10 sgq.) This is a genuine instance of viking influence. "" Zimmer has shown {Z. f. d. A. xxxii. 230 sq.) that the acquaintance of the Irish with Scandinavia goes back to the beginning of the eighth century ; it was probably much older. "* Stokes, ' The Bennes Dindsenchas,' in Bev. Celt. 1894 p. 301 : 'Bladma, son of Cii, son of Cas Clothmin, son of Uachall, killed Bregmael, the smith of Cuirce, son of Snithe, king of Iruaith (rig Erota).' This does not enable us to identify Iruaith. The identification is supplied, as Mr. Gwynn has shown me, in the poetical version (' Book of Leinster,' 192) : ' Curchi cendmar ba ri rot for Medraige is for Herot.' Curchi was king over Medraige (in Galway) and Herot. But the association of Herot with Galway is put beyond controversy by another verse of the same poem, which is not contained in the ' Book of Leinster,' but in the Trinity College MS. H 83 and the Stowe MS. B 22 : ' 6 Ath cliath in Herut uill cosin n Ath cliath i Cualaind ' — that is, from Ath-cliath, in Herot ( = Galway) to Ath-oliath in Cualand ( = Dublin). It is a curious coincidence that in this story Blad mac Con mio Cais is the hero, and 1902 TIRECHAN'S MEMOIR OF ST. PATRICK 265 had nothing whatever to do with Norway or the vikings. The geographical position of Hirot (whatever its hmits were, and what- ever relation it bore to Medraige) suits the story ; for the sepulchre of the grandson of Cas was in the country of Mace Erce, in regionibus Maicc Hercae, in east Eoscommon.^"' The passage presents another difficulty — namely, the note of time volunteered by the grandson of Cas as to his death : anno . c . usque hodie, ' a hundred years ago.' This would place the reign of Cairbre Niafer about the middle of the fourth century. But in the legendary chronology of later days Cairbre and Cuchullin belong to the time of the Christian era. We should therefore have to infer that in the time of Tirechan the figures of Cairbre and the contem- porary heroes had not yet been placed in their final chronological setting. This supposition might protect the reading amio c, if it were merely a question of the dating of Cairbre Niafer. But more than the problematical date of this mythico-hiatorical person is involved. It is a question of the fourth-century kings of Ireland. There cannot be much serious doubt that the names of the high kings of the fourth century are correctly preserved, and were perfectly well known in the seventh century ; so that it would have been impossible for any one to conceive Cairbre Niafer as king of Ireland a hundred years before Patrick. We may regard it as certain that the numeral is corrupt. It also occurs to one that there is a curious incongruity in representing the man just risen from the tomb as knowing how many years he had lain under earth. It may be suspected that the words aniio f c usque hodie were not intended to be part of the speech of the swineherd,'^^ but were added (in the margin, perhaps) by the author, to define the date of Cairbre — hodie meaning not St. Patrick's lifetime but his own. Such an emendation as del would suit the vulgar chronology but would not carry any convictibn. Until the mythico-historical annals of pre-Christian Ireland have been critically sifted the question can hardly be treated. that in the passage of Tireohdn we have to do with a grandson of another Cas and with a mac Con ; further, that Bregmael, whom Blad slew, was a herd (' buaooill ') of the smith of King Cuirche. "' This country was once designated by a name which seems afterwards to have fallen entirely out of use — Tir Brotha. It is preserved in a legend (recorded in the Tripartite Life, p. 94i4.27) to the effect that Patrick found a mass of gold (' bruth noir '), and gave it to the wizard Houo as a price for the land ; hence the land was called the land of the mass (' tir in brotha '). The motive of the story is clearly etymological, to account for the old name of the region which it presupposes — Bruaith or Broth. The relative antiquity of the legend is proved by an entry in the Armagh MS., among those brief jottings which indicate events connected with Patrick's work. There we find the entry (ibid. p. 348i!)) ' b. genus maicc Eire,' which indicates this story: ' b.' stands for 'bruth,' and 'genus maicc Eire' corresponds to ' cenel maicc Erce ' in the passage in the Tripartite Life. '" As they are translated in Trip. Life, pt. ii. p. 122, ' Isin c^tmad bliadain atau cosindin.' 266 TfRECHAN'S MEMOIR OF ST. PATRICK April There is no evidence, that does not assume the unproven, to convict this passage as an interpolation ; nor can I find any other passages which invite suspicion, except on the ground of some a priori theory. But I must refer to Zimmer's comment on the passage concerning the sepulture of Patrick in fol. 15 ve7-so of the Armagh MS. Supposing this to be part of Tirechan's memoir he says, ' Tirechan testifies that the tomb of Patrick was not known in the seventh century,' and logically infers that the fol- lowing account of the discovery of the grave at Saul by Columba (Spiritu Sancto instigante) is a later Zwsate.'"' The man who wrote ubi sunt ossa eius nemo novit could not have immediately proceeded to describe the identification of the tomb. Only the inference must now be stated in another form — namely, that the paragraph In quatuor — novit '" and the next paragraph ^'^ are from two different sources, neither having anything to do with Tirechan. 17. We have reached definite conclusions as to what Tirechan's memoir represents, as to its scope, motive, and sources. We have discovered nothing which would force us to conclude that the document is not what it professes to be, the work of a writer of the seventh century. The criticism of the particular statements which he wrote down, the discussion of their credibility as objective history, cannot be undertaken without a preliminary investigation like that which has been attempted in the present paper. It is not proposed to enter upon such a detailed discussion here, but there is a general observation which it is important to make. Tirechan's descriptions of the acts of Patrick at the places which he visited must be carefully distinguished from his descrip- tion of Patrick's route. This will be clear if we consider the nature of his information. There is no difficulty in supposing that an ecclesiastical community might correctly preserve in its memory not only the fact that it was founded by Patrick, but also circum- stances connected with its foundation, through a period of two hun- dred years. But it is a different thing to suppose that at each place which Patrick visited Tirechan could have discovered what had been the previous stage of his journey and what would be the next stage. It is impossible to see how any accurate or certain know- ledge of Patrick's route could have been preserved except by means of a diary composed by Patrick himself or by one of his companions. And the hypothesis that any such document existed is, for reasons already urged, entirely out of the question. A document of such transcendent authority and import for the claims of Patrick's co-arbs, had it existed in the seventh century, could not have escaped mention. Tirechan would not have failed to appeal to it and indicate that he was following its statements. We must, there- fore, regard the order of Patrick's acts, and the route along which '" KeltiscJie Kirche, p. 208.;,. "» Trip. p. 332i., n" Ibid. p. 3328_i8. 1902 tIrECHAN'S memoir of ST. PATRICK 267 Tirechan conducts him, as largely Tirechan's own reconstruction, enabling him to use the narrative form. We can have no certitude that the foundations of churches were made in the order of his record, or that they were made in the course of a single circular journey. St. Patrick himself speaks — and his words are important — of frequent visits to various regions ; ^^^ and we may be sure that all his establishments in any region were not accomplished on the occasion of his first visit. Tirechan indeed apprehended this to some extent. It is to be observed that when he has Patrick in the district of Calrige ^^^ he says nothing of his work there or of the grant of land which he obtained from Caichan.'^^ If he had continued his memoir he might have introduced this incident at some later stage, and we might have heard more of Druim Lias.'^ Again, he takes Patrick through Armagh, as we have seen, but the fact that Armagh church was founded at a far later stage of Patrick's career was, we must suppose, so well known and universally ad- mitted that he could not introduce it here. It is particularly notable that in the account of the foundations in Meath Trim is ignored. Now Trim was peculiarly important for Tirechan's purpose, because it was one of those cases in which Patrick was not the sole ' grantee,' and consequently there was special danger of separation from the paruchia Patricii and of disputes between rival heirs. According to the story preserved through the ' curiosity ' of the heads of the Armagh church Trim was founded on the very morrow, so to speak, of Patrick's arrival in Ireland. ^^'' That it was founded at an early period of his mission '^■' may well be true. But the interesting story, though based on fact, is suspicious in regard to some of its circumstances, and from Tirechan's remarkable silence we shall be disposed to infer that he had different information, according to which the religious establishment of Trim did not follow quite so quickly upon the landing of Patrick in Ireland, and that it would have been noticed by him, if he had finished his memoir, at a later stage. But, with certain exceptions, we have no good reason to suppose that any accurate knowledge of the order of Patrick's foundations was preserved in the seventh century. On the other hand we may acknowledge that, as a general rule, it was not only possible but highly probable that the founder should be remembered, and some of the circumstances of the foundation correctly handed down, often, of course, augmented by legend. As the rights of a com- munity depended upon the original grant to its founder it was hardly possible that he should be forgotten. J. B. Bury. 120 y^jp, p, 372g2 (' Confession '), ' omnes regiones quas [sic corrigendrtm] ego frequentius uisitabam.' '■" Ibid. p. 3283, '2^ IHd. p. 338i sqq^. ™ Ibid. p. 338m; cp. Trip. Life, p. U4. '-'' Trip. p. 334, sqg^. 125 Twenty-five years before the foundation of Armagh (ibid. p. 335io, which is at variance with the notice in Atvu. UU. sub a. 444). 268 THE AUTHORSHIP OF April The Authorship of Lord Durham s Canada Report THE important questions of law and policy which the South African troubles have forced upon the attention of the nation have naturally revived interest in the famous report in which, more than sixty years ago, Lord Durham discussed a somewhat similar situation in Canada. The report has been exhumed, reprinted, and made the subject of numerous essays describing it as, which it really is, a kind of Magna Charta or palladium of colonial freedom, and manual of the principles which should govern the relations between the mother country and her English-speaking dependencies. The curious point is that whereas in Lord Durham's own time hardly any one believed him to be the author, it has never, so far as we have observed, been mentioned of late with the accompani- ment of the slightest hint that any one but Lord Durham could have had the least concern either in its composition or its sugges- tion. Epigrams, as a rule, live longer than epics, but on this occasion it would almost seem as though the celebrated epigram, 'Wakefield thought it, Buller wrote it, Durham signed it,' had been uttered in vain. In our opinion Durham and his coadjutors have in this respect suffered nearly equal injustice, the former from his contemporaries and the latter from posterity. The questions of the true authorship and the main inspiration of the report are of great hterary and political interest, and will repay the brief ex- amination which we propose to devote to them. In the first place it will be advisable to remove the prejudice, so disadvantageous to Durham's claims in his own day, and which, though ignored by modern journaUsts, still weighs with historians, that he was deficient in the literary abiUty requisite for the production of such a document as his report. Whether he was capable of originating and elaborating the ideas which it embodies is another question, but there should be no doubt of his ability to clothe these in fitting language when they had found an entrance into his mind. His few acknowledged compositions are chiefly 1902 LOUD DURHAM'S CANADA REPORT 269 speeches, some in all probability prepared carefully for the house of lords, others delivered on the spur of the moment. All are ad- mirable, weighty in subject, stringent and masculine in expression, glowing with true oratorical fire. Of one of the impromptu class Albany Fonblanque, quoting from it in ' England under Seven Administrations,' says, ' This is lion's marrow,' and the eulogy is borne out by the extract. This rhetorical quality in Lord Durham's talent may afford considerable aid in determining his share in the authorship of the ' Canada Eeport.' It is all the more strange that in his own day literary ability should have been universally denied to him. No contemporary seems to have credited him with a larger share in the report than his signature. ' Garth did not write his own Dispensary.' The first serious claim on his behalf seems to have been preferred by Mr. H. E. Egerton in his ' Short History of British Colonial Policy,' 1897. Mr. Egerton seems to consider that Lord Durham wrote the entire document, and reinforces his view by pointing out with justice the dissimilarity of the style from that of the elaborate report on crown lands in the appendix, signed, but not therefore necessarily written, by Charles Buller, Durham's secretary and the generally reputed author of the ' Canada Eeport.' The same view was put forth about the same time in a Canadian periodical. The external evidence for Buller's authorship, and even his sole authorship, is nevertheless very strong. John Stuart Mill was in- timately acquainted and politically allied with every one who could possibly have had a hand in the report, and he deposes unequivo- cally, ' Written by Charles Buller, partly under the inspiration of Wakefield.' Miss Martineau is Lord Durham's especial champion and panegyrist, yet she too credits Buller with the main share in the authorship. Sir Eichard Hanson, assistant commissioner under Durham, and afterwards chief justice of South Australia, told Greville that Buller had written the entire report except two ' paragraphs ' on clergy reserves and crown lands, contributed by himself and "Wakefield. If, however, Wakefield, as Hanson affirmed, had been induced to take his memorable step of sending the report to the Tiines for premature pubhcation by the fear that his part of it would be tampered with, this must have been more extensive and important than a mere paragraph on a minor topic. If, on the other hand, as is not impossible, Hanson drafted the report on crown lands in the appendix, to which Buller put his name, the objection to his authorship from the dissimilarity of style falls to the ground. There are, nevertheless, two powerful objestions to Buller's authorship of the report in its entirety, founded upon statements of his own. The difficulty is to determine how far these were meant to extend. 270 THE AVTHORsmP OF April In the Edinbv/rgh Revieiv for April 1847 there is a most important article in the guise of a review of Sir Francis Head's 'Emigrant.' It is clearly the production of some one much in Lord Durham's confidence, and who had been with him in Canada, and we are enabled to state on unquestionable authority that it was written by BuUer. It contains much matter with a bearing upon the authorship of the report, which for the present we pass over, and confine our attention to the positive declaration that Lord Durham had at least a share in it. Sir Francis Head's assertion, or rather assumption, of the contrary is stigmatised as ' groundless.' Loyalty to a chief, even when the chief has been dead for seven years, will carry a generous man like Buller very far, but we cannot believe that he would have written thus if the report had in fact proceeded entirely from his own pen. A remarkable article on Wakefield's ' Art of Colonisation ' appeared in the British Quarterly Review for November 1849. The writer, who is exceedingly favourable to Wakefield, but dififers too widely from him on an important point to be identified with him, expressly states that Buller had publicly disclaimed the leading share in the ' Canada Report,' and avowed that it was principally the work of Wakefield. When, where, and to whom was this state- ment made ? Was it meant to cover anything more than the acknowledgment of the pervading influence of Wakefield's ideas, so felicitously summed up in the epigrammatic phrase, ' Wakefield thought it ' ? Until these questions are answered we cannot accord implicit credit to the reviewer's assertion, which nevertheless well deserves to be taken note of. The external evidence of Wakefield's authorship of any con- siderable portion of the Durham report is slight, and, singularly enough, proceeds from his enemies, who thought in their blindness that they were thus discrediting him as well as it. His early offence had not been universally condoned, his abilities were as yet insufSciently appreciated ; to connect his name with the report was to impair its authority. The Quarterly Eeviewer of 1839 — in all probability Croker— says with this object, ' We suspect, that in Lord Durham's execrable report Mr. Buller had as little hand as Lord Durham himself.' He must therefore have believed, or wished others to beheve, that Wakefield was the principal writer. In his ' Emigrant ' Sir Francis Head reiterates this view, together with particulars proving, in his opinion, that the report could not be the work of Durham, and plainly, though without mentioning names, attributes it to Wakefield and to Lord Durham's legal adviser, the still more unpopular Turton. These random con- jectures deserve at most to be registered. Head can have had no actual knowledge. More weight is due to the assertion of an anonymous and rancorous Canadian pamphleteer, for he at least 1902 LORt) DURHAM* S CANADA REPORT 2?1 indicates with precision what he supposes Wakefield's share to have been. His animosity is especially excited by the proposal for the union of the provinces, and he accuses Wakefield of having ' put the jewel into the report.' We may find reason to conclude that this was not very far from the truth. We now pass to consider how far the authorship of this famous state paper can be elucidated by the style of particular portions, and by the harmony of the views expressed in it with those known to have been entertained by its reputed writers. It has been remarked that the principal materials for judging Lord Durham's literary style are afforded by his speeches. He seems to have felt little impulse towards literary composition, but he must have delighted in oratory. It might, therefore, be expected that when he took the pen in hand his style would be more or less coloured by rhetoric. It is often difficult to determine which among the official documents professedly proceeding from a pubhc man are actually composed by himself, but among Durham's there is one especially remarkable, which we may feel confident proceeded almost entirely from his own pen. It is the proclamation to the people of Canada, issued on 9 Oct. 1838, announcing his resignation upon the disallowance by the home government of the ordinance by which he had banished political delinquents without legal trial. He felt himself deserted and betrayed, and his feelings were those of bitter resentment and indignant disdain. It can hardly be thought that he would have entrusted the expression of such emotions to others, and in truth the proclamation breathes in every Une the spirit of the haughty patrician, who feels himself on a level with the men against whose behaviour he is protesting. It was moreover a highly injudicious utterance, with which his counsellors could hardly have concurred, and which they would probably have endeavoured to soften in the drafting. We are there- fore warranted in accepting it as in the main his composition, and in using it as a criterion of the authorship of the famous report. As aheady intimated, its special note is the rhetorical character of the style. This is the style of an orator, and moreover of a patrician orator who speaks from an elevated rostrum, and rather dictates than persuades. It has more assertion than argument ; the strength of the writer's conviction is indubitable ; the soundness of his reasoning remains for examination. The sentences are in general long and sonorous, with a rhythmical swing fitting them for delivery ore rotundo. All these peculiarities, only with that diminution of intensity to be looked for in a document more professedly argumentative, are reproduced in the opening section of the Durham report, much of which might have been delivered as a speech without being suspected for a state paper. Nor is it for a long time possible to discover any apparent break 272 THE AUTHORSHIP OF April in the flow of composition, unless for a few occasional para- graphs, such as the narrative of the failure of the jury system at pp. 38-39 of Messrs. Methuen's recent reprint, which may well have been supplied by a subordinate for the sake of illustration. At p. 94 this animated style of composition ceases as we encounter a number of minor details which Durham can hardly have mastered. When these have been disposed of the style, though still vigorous, is rather that of an author than an orator. It so continues until p. 190, where the general conclusions derived from the circumstances set forth in the report are to be summed up, and, as was to be expected, the pen is resumed by the original writer. But this is only the case so long as general principles are in question. When (p. 212) particular remedial measures are discussed we become conscious of a change. The moral and intellectual atmosphere are different ; on the one hand we miss the patrician air of instinctive superiority, on the other the orator has yielded to the thinker. The style, too, has varied ; less rhetorical and sonorous than that of the exordium of the report, it is more so than that of the continuation ; it has less individuality than the former and more than the latter. This continues until p. 239, when the writer of the exordium appears to resume the pen for a general summary. We are, therefore, disposed to recognise the hands of three writers in the report, and, disregarding minor interpolations, to assign to Lord Durham himself pp. 1-94, 190-212, 239-246. The portion from p. 94 to p. 190 appears to us to proceed from a subordinate, and that from p. 212 to p. 238 to be the production of yet another hand. This latter portion is especially momentous, for not only does it treat of the important question of the legisla- tive union of Upper and Lower Canada, but its conclusions underlie the entire fabric of the first part of the report, and Durham, if the author of this, has done little more than give them rhetorical ex- pression. There were only two of his suite in Canada who could have had any important share in drafting his report, Charles Duller and Edward Gibbon Wakefield. It would be highly interesting to ascertain their respective contributions. An important clue is afforded by a passage in a letter from Wakefield to Sir William Molesworth, printed in Mrs. Fawcett's recent biography of the latter, taken in connexion with statements in Charles BuUer's article in the Edinburgh Review, already ad- verted to. Wakefield writes from Quebec on 29 Sept. 1838 — Buller has been true to his avowed principles. He has ever been the advocate of mercy and justice against policy. Not so I, who have had deeply impressed on me the opinion first suggested by you — that the Canadians are a miserable race, and that the country must be made Eng- lish by one means or another. 1902 LORD DURHAM'S CANADA REPORT 273 Wakefield probably revised his opinion of the French Canadians ■when, after he had taken an active part in procuring for them a share in the administration, they elected him to the parliament of Canada in November 1842. In any case he would not have ex- pressed his view so broadly in a state paper. The passage never- theless indicates a divergence of opinion between him and Buller, Buller aiming to make the French Canadians good citizens by con- ciliating them, Wakefield by Anglicising them. To this end he devised the fusion between the French legislature of Lower Canada and the English legislature of Upper Canada. The whole of the section of the report from p. 212 to p. 238, into the author- ship of which we are now inquiring, is a commentary upon the last lines of the first paragraph. Without effecting the change so rapidly or roughly as to shock the feelings and trample on the welfare of the existing generation, it must henceforth be the first and steady purpose of the British Government to establish an English population, with English laws and language, in this proviace, and to trust its government to none but a decidedly English legislature. The writer then proceeds to put the other side of the case. ' It may be said that this is a hard measure to a conquered people,' pursuing the argument at greater length than we can follow, but throughout writing as one whose views have been opposed as un- fair to the French Canadians, and thus maintaining an attitude which could never have been assumed by their advocate, as Buller appears to have been. It may be added that, even should this portion of the report be at any time shown to have proceeded from the pen of Durham, it certainly emanated from the brain of Wakefield. The proof of this will be found in the curious particulars commu- nicated in BuUer's Edinburgh Revieiv article mentioned above. As we have seen. Sir Francis Head's confident assertion that Durham had no hand in his own report is declared by the reviewer to be groundless. Sir Francis thought he had proved his point by producing (with more cogency than chivalry) ' three conversa- tions and one private letter ' establishing that, a month before his departure from Canada, Durham was unfavourable to the union of the provinces, which came to be the most important feature of the scheme ultimately recommended. Buller replies that this is true of Durham's frame of mind so long as he remained in Canada, but not of the opinion at which he ultimately arrived. He did for a long time object to the union, but only because, with a prescience which the future was to justify, he had formed the idea of a more extensive federation embracing all the North American colonies. His views were modified by the logic of facts, in the shape of the insurrection which broke out immediately after his departure, and which convinced him that the time necessary to mature a more VOL. XVII. NO. LXVI. T 274 THB AUTHORSHIP OF April comprehensive scheme could not be afforded. Provision was never- theless proposed to be made for the admission of the other colonies into the Canadian union, should they at any time desire it. It is, rightly considered, equally to Lord Durham's honour that he should have formed, or adopted from the suggestions of others, a generous and comprehensive scheme of policy destined to be ulti- mately realised, and that he should have consented to subordinate the ideally desirable to the immediately practicable. It is nevertheless certain that he did not agree to this hmitation until the necessity for immediate action had become apparent ; and, when we consider that the motive of the proposition he ultimately made was the brid- ling of the French element by the English, and that on 29 Sept. Wakefield sums up his own view in the words, ' This country must be made English,' no doubt can remain who it was that, as the Canadian pamphleteer says in fancied derision, but in sober truth, ' put the jewel into Lord Durham's report.' As already said, the style almost convinces us that Wakefield not merely inspired ' the jewel ' but wrote it. In any case his influence breathes through the most vital portions of the document, which are but the corol- lary of the views expressed in the portion which we believe him to have written. It is enough for an epigram to be half true. The celebrated saying on the report which we began by citing is strictly correct as regards the first clause, ' Wakefield thought it.' The second, ' Buller wrote it,' can only be admitted with much quaUfication, although, after every deduction, Buller's share remains very con- siderable. The third, ' Durham signed it,' does Lord Durham great injustice. To recapitulate, we attribute to Lord Durham the early part of the report down to p. 94, and the concluding portion from p. 190 to the end, except pp. 212-238, which we ascribe to Wakefield. To Buller we attribute the entire middle portion of the report, except a passage from the bottom of p. 146 to the head of p. 152, which appears to be Wakefield's. The external evidence for Buller's having had a considerable share in the redaction is so strong that, should the style of the report on crown lands in the appendix appear inconsistent with this view, we should be ready to attribute this document to Sir Eichard Hanson. It will be interesting to see whether these opinions are at any time confirmed or con- futed by the production of contemporary correspondence or of original manuscripts. Two observations remain to be made. One is that the character of Lord Durham's report has been much misrepresented in England, and especially of late. It has been depicted as a complete surrender to the French Canadians, and framed with the sole motive of conciliating them. It is true that with regard to its 1902 LORD DURHAM'S CAl^ADA REPORT 215 highly important recommendation of responsible government it was a concession to their wishes, and that it implicitly contained and prescribed the principles which have ever since regulated the political relations between the mother country and colonies mainly peopled by settlers of her own blood. But it is clear that Durham and his advisers would never have trusted a purely French- Canadian parliament, and would have made no such recommenda- tion if it could not have been leavened by an ample infusion of the English element. The second remark is that, howsoever the political merits of the report may be distributed, all its authors are entitled to equal credit for their perfect union and their generous unselfish- ness. In this point of view the words of John Stuart Mill in a letter to Molesworth, printed by Mrs. Fawcett, are fully justified : ' Buller and Wakefield appear to be acting as one man, speaking to Lord Durham with the utmost plainness, giving him the most courageous and judicious advice, which he receives both generously and wisely.' E. Gaenbtt. T 2 276 April Smmiel Rawsojt Gardiner (B. 4 Maech 1829 : d. 23 Feb. 1902) IN the fulness of years, with the great book he had planned all but finished, the historian of the Puritan Eevolution has suddenly passed away from us. He long ago secured the respect of all scholars, and won the affection of all that knew him, and he has left behind him the remembrance of a most honourable, laborious, and well-spent life, devoted wisely and ungrudgingly to the service of history. The readers of this Review owe him a special debt. When in 1891 Dr. Creighton, our first editor-in-chief, was obliged to give up his office, his place was taken by Mr. Gardiner, and to the task he then assumed he gave much of his scanty leisure for ten years. No trouble was too great, no particular too small, for him when the welfare of the Eevibw was in question. He recognised that in helping his fellow scholars he was fulfilling an important part of the duty of an historian as he conceived it. His wide reading covering the whole of his own period at home and abroad, his unruffled judgment, and his scrupulous observance of equity were placed at the service of all English historical students as long as he was able to give us his editorial care. Of the work of his life, the history of James I, Charles I, and the Commonwealth, it is not easy to speak in cool words, when one considers the gigantic difficulty of the undertaking and the success with which it was carried out. Drawn to the subject by a con- viction that prejudice had too deeply coloured the minds of those that had already dealt with it for their M'ork to be in any respect final or satisfactory, and armed with a determination to be above all things open-minded and fair, he made up his mind to grapple with the whole material accessible, and to spend his days in the study of this mass of evidences and in giving the results of his investigation to the world. He was well prepared for his task : he had a careful classical training; he was of sound health of enormous perseverance and determination ; he had the faculty (which he developed to a wonderful extent) of getting rapidly and surely at the contents of a book or paper ; his eyesight was good ; his 1902 SAMUEL RAWSON GARDINER 277 temper even and contented ; he desired neither wealth nor fame, but was satisfied if he could make time enough to permit of daily and constant application to his studies ; he had the gift of concentra- tion, so that he was able not only to read and make notes, but even to write his book in the busy reading-room of the British Museum. He enjoyed his quiet family life and the society of a few close friends and fellow-workers. His brief holidays were turned to useful purpose, being frequently employed in visiting foreign archives or Enghsh sites of imprortance, for he knew the value of exact geo- graphical knowledge, and did not decline the rather uncongenial labour of mastering the military minutiae of the civil war, and testing varying accounts by a close examination of the ground. He learnt Dutch, Danish, and Spanish (being already acquainted with French, German, and Italian), in order to be able to deal at first hand with the state papers of the Hague and Simancas and Copenhagen. He went regularly to his business at the Museum every morning Uke a good city man. At home after dinner he would often occupy himself with such work as did not bear on his main task. He did a good deal of teaching, and he wrote a number of school books, amongst them the masterly little sketch of ' The Thirty Years' War,' a model of concise arrangement and clearness of ex- position. It is evident that this additional work must often have been done at the cost of great exertion, but he believed that it was not useless to him, since it enabled him to get into the habit of classifying and bringing out facts, and clarifying theories and views. He lectured out of the fulness of his knowledge, without an effort at rhetoric, but with the vivid conviction that is sure to interest and stimulate. His Ford lectures were given without notes or syllabus, and were acknowledged to be remarkable and convincing pieces of exposition, delivered with a kind of eloquence of simplicity and conviction that delighted his hearers. Of his monographs, his ' Cromwell ' (in which he paid much attention to the manner as well as to the matter) is perhaps the best, and it proves that he had made himself master of a plain nervous style admirably fitted to the subjects he was treating. His editions of original documents are exact, straightforward, and busi- nesslike, without parade of learning or pomp of useless annotation. In his big book he had to choose between giving time to style or to research, and he (wisely, as I think) determined that his first duty was to get at his results and set them forth as plainly and clearly as he could, knowing that he would not be able to furnish his book forth with a bravery meant to attract save at the cost of much pains better spent on investigation. He found difficulty in his earUer volumes in getting his results down vividly, but he learnt much of the art of writing by continual practice, and there are not a few pages in his later volumes that deserve selection among the 278 SAMUEL RAWSON GARDINER April best typical pieces of English historical prose. Like Polybios he was ever greatly desirous to get at the knowledge of things he held to be important and to give that knowledge as he got it to his readers, but he sought only an audience that would be content with an accurate statement and could dispense with rhetoric. It is not too much to say that Gardiner found the story of the first Stewarts and Cromwell legend, and has left it history. The reign of James was untilled ground, the reign of Charles a plot choked with warring weeds, the Commonwealth unexplored country till he came. James's policy and theories, Charles's character and aims, the position of Buckingham and Pym and Strafford, the foreign influences operating upon court, church, and people, the financial position from year to year (which Gardiner was the first to investigate), the varying fortunes of the war and the causes that determined the changes, the exact political meaning that the religious question assumed from year to year, the precise con- stitutional or unconstitutional attitude of the different parties and their ideals, the aims and achievements and incomplete enterprises of Cromwell, the Scottish difficulties (never dealt with so broadly and impartially before), the Irish i7nbroglios and the Settlement, even the military and naval history of the period, as far as we now know them on good evidence— we know from evidence collected, marshalled, and weighed by Gardiner. He was sometimes surprised at the unforeseen results that gradually worked out under his eyes as he proceeded with his orderly and minute investigation of the evidence for each succes- sive year of the period, and he could test every step forward as thoroughly as the material admitted, his fine memory and his aptitude for chronology standing him in good stead and helping him to make the best use of his full notes. That he was by blood connected with the puritan party was a source of satisfaction to him personally ; but, I know also, that it put him on his guard lest he should by natural partiahty be led to press unduly against the other side. The immense care he took to try to understand the men of the sixteenth century gave him, as he went on, a fine historic instinct, and enabled him to grasp facts at once that earlier he could only have understood with difficulty, for he was by nature a man of singleness of mind and disposition, and it was a cunning and complex world, in many ways different from the world of his own experience, that he had undertaken to explore. But his good common sense upheld him, and his grasp of character and theory of motive became keen and searching long before he reached the end of his labours. No man that I have known worked more unflinchingly up to his highest ideals. And it has been given to him to write the history of those dark years of struggle and unrest that have largely moulded British history— years in which many 1902 SAMUEL RAWSON GARDINER 279 mighty men went down to the Unseen fighting for the portion of truth that they had managed to get a ghmpse of — years of costly sacrifice, but sacrifice not to be accounted wholly vain. Charles died as honourably and usefully as Hampden, Strafford and Montrose as nobly and unselfishly as Falkland ; Herbert's ideals were as true as Milton's, though not so splendid ; and the mystic Vaughan was as near to the verities as the homely Bunyan. Hobbes and Filmer (unequal pair) alike shared in the ' making of England ; ' even Cromwell's work as it fell from his dying hand was taken up by the ministers of his royal suc- cessor. It is possible to take a broader and wider view now that Gardiner has cleared the path up the heights to which he himself painfully but surely won his way in half a century's steady toil. Magna est veritus et praevalehit, and Gardiner no less than Green had the firmest faith in the old Oxford device they both admired. He has been our Master Interpreter ; he has toiled year after year that his countrymen might understand what their forebears really thought and did, when they failed, where they succeeded. He has made it possible for us to understand the curious warp or twist in the regular development of this nation that has made it different from other European nations in its political and social life — a warp of a strange, possibly not wholly beneficial, kind, but a warp the conditions of which can now to some extent be made out. He has done for us as to Cromwell's day what Stubbs has done for us as to the days of Henry FitzEmpress and Earl Simon and Edward I, and he has done it by enormous toil, and by a well- devised and consistent method. Knowledge can only be achieved by rightly directed and unselfish effort. Gardiner knew this, and in the security and helpfulness of his results he had the sole reward he sought or valued. Personally, as a friend of a score of years, I cannot but here record my abiding sense of gratitude to the man that has gone, as I remember his patient and gentle kindness, his friendly help and ready counsel, the simplicity and sincerity of his life, the unflagging enthusiasm that lightened the drudgery of perusing thousands and thousands of the dullest of pages in print and manuscript that he was bound to go through in tis self-imposed task, the scrupulous care with which he formed and examined his own conclusions, and the unfeigned and brotherly delight with which he welcomed every fresh recruit to the small army of English historians. These things dwell in one's memory, and must dwell as long as memory remains. ' It is no light thing to have known wise and good men,' and certainly this man was both wise and good. F, YoEK Powell. 280 April Notes and Documents Large Hides and Small Hides. Between the advocates of big hides of 120 acres or thereabouts and the advocates of little hides of 30 acres or thereabouts there should be no peace. In the construction of early English history we shall adopt one style of architecture if we are supplied with small hides, while if our materials consist of big hides an entirely different ' plan and elevation ' must be chosen. In this exordium to his famous essay on the hide ' Professor Maitland foreshadows his conclusion that the typical ' land of one householder ' in early England contained 120 arable acres, a tenement too large for a serf, too small for a manorial lord. That conclusion is partly based upon a ' cheerful belief ' that the fiscal hide (and carucate) of Domesday is always composed of 120 acres. This is proved in the case of Cambridgeshire. But the evidence for the rest of England, especially the southern counties, is admittedly less satisfactory. Professor Maitland falls back ' upon the presumption that the treasury has but one mode of reckoning for the whole of England.' Kemble indeed produced a case from the Exeter Domesday (D.B. iv. 42) which complies with his theory that only 40 (Norman) acres were reckoned to the fiscal hide. The description of the manor of Poleham gives us (the virgate being a quarter of a hide) the following equation : 4 H. + l V. + 6 A. + 5i H. + 4 A. = 10 H. But in view of the possibility of error in the figures his critic refuses to accept this single instance as decisive, pointing out that the very next entry gives an obviously absurd equation. I believe that I can furnish him with an instance in which no such error is possible. It occurs in the geld inquest for Wiltshire (printed with the Exeter Domesday in the fourth volume of ' Domesday Book '), a study of which I hope to publish shortly. Three versions of the record, which is drawn up by hundreds, have fortunately been preserved. These we may respectively designate A, B, and C. ' Domesday Book and Beyond, p. 357. 1902 LARGE HIDES AND SMALL HIDES 281 A seems to be the first form of the document ; in B it is roughly corrected, largely by interlineation ; and C apparently represents the final revision. In all three versions the hundred of Calne is credited with 91 hides. This total is made up according to A and B as follows : — 26| H. + 7 A. of exempt demesne (items given). 50| H. + 3 A. which paid geld. 3^ H. whose geld was retained by the collectors of Chippenham Hundred. 10 H.^ of Harold's land held by royal villeins, and from which the king had no geld. Now these items will only make 91 hides if 10 acres are equal to 1 virgate. But it would be dangerous to conclude from this alone that the virgate in this case contained not 30 but 10 acres, and that the hide was a hide of 40 acres, not 120 acres. For in some other hundreds we find acres disregarded in reckoning the total number of hides, and the total 91 might possibly be an error. Here, however, C comes to our help and clinches the proof. It gives the following details and total : — 265 H. + f V. {ii partes 1 virge) exempt demesne. 50| H.+^ V. (tertiapars 1 virge) paid geld.' 3| H. paid in Chippenham H. 10" H. Harold's land. gl Thus, comparing C's figures with those of A and B, we have, ex- pressly stated, the equations 7 acres = f of a virgate, and 3 acres = ^ of a virgate.* Ten acres therefore go to the virgate. It is true that 7 acres are not exactly two-thirds of ten, nor 3 exactly a third, but they are the nearest round numbers in each case. This is the only instance in the inquest where a clear equation between acres and hides can be established.' But Professor ' In A this 10 hides is added to the exempt demesne. ^ The amount of geld paid is 151. 5s. in all three versions. From this a further proof of the equivalence of the 5 V. here with the 3 acres of A and B may be deduced. At 6s. on the hide the geld for 50f hides would be 151. is. 6d., and for J- of a virgate 6d. (i of i of 6s.) * The virgate thus split up can, I think, be traced. Among the items of exempt demesne Gunfrid Maledoctus (Malduit) is credited with 2 hides and 7 acres (D. B. iv. 13). It is tempting to conjecture that the odd 3 acres which paid geld made up his estate to 2 hides and a virgate. Turning to the Exchequer Domesday (i. 73a) we find that this was actually the assessment of Gunfrid's estate at Calston, in this hundred. ■'' The nearest approach to such an equation outside the hundred of Calne is furnished by Brencesberge hundred (D. B. iv. 17). The items are : 83 H. + 3 A. of exempt demesne. 71JH. + IV. paid geld. 1| H. withheld geld. I feel pretty sure that the 3 acres are here again reckoned as one-third of a virgate ; 282 LARGE HIDES AND SMALL HIDES April Maitland would be' the first to admit the improbability that the fiscal hide should contain fewer acres in one Wiltshire hundred than it did in the remaining 39. The bearing of the new fact upon the content of the geld hide in other counties cannot be stated dogmatically at present, except in so far as it tends to confirm the correctness of the figures in the Poleha.m case. I would point out, however, that the infrequent mention of acres in the Domesday of the southern counties and their small numbers when mentioned is much more easily explicable on the assumption of a 10-acre virgate, where acres could in most cases be stated in simple fractions of a virgate, than if we suppose that as many as thirty acres went to the virgate. In the Cambridgeshire inquest, on the other hand, acres occur frequently, and often in multiples of ten. Mr. Eyton's re- construction of the quotas of the Dorsetshire hundreds, checked as it is by the totals supplied by the geld inquest, seems to me fatal to the theory that the fiscal hide of that county contained 120 acres, whether he was right or wrong in deducing a 12-acre virgate from the Domesday figures. I have reworked such of his additions as contain acres on the assumption of a 10-acre virgate, but only one of my totals is nearer to the inquest figure. The inquest gives the total for Celberga Hundred as 51 H. + 2 V. Its details, how- ever, make exactly 52 hides. Mr. Eyton's addition of the Domesday items is 51 H. + 3 V. + 8 A. Mine is exactly 52 hides. But the obvious margin of error in these reconstructed totals makes it unlikely that in most cases they will be so accurate as to reveal whether the calculations are based upon a 10 or a 12 acre virgate. The important point is that they are sufficiently accurate to throw more than doubt upon the hypothesis that the Dorset- shire geld hide contained 120 acres. If, however, in two southern counties, Wiltshire and Dorsetshire, there is strong evidence of the use of a little hide, and in others a probability, what becomes of the inferences which Professor Maitland draws from the assump- tion that the Domesday hide (except in Lancashire and Leicester- shire) is invariably the large hide of 120 acres ? James Tait. TAe Earliest Plea Rolls. In vol. xi. pp. 102-8 of this Eeview Mr. J. H. Eound drew attention to the fact that more than one of the Plea EoUs of the reign of Eichard I, which Eyton, in his ' Antiquities of Shrop- but as there seems to be some error in the total given— which is 108J hides or one eighth of a virgate more than the sum of the details on the above assumption- one cannot speak with certainty. Yet unless the 3 acres complete a full virgate the sum of the items falls still further below the total supplied. 1902 THE EARLIEST PL'EA ROLLS 283 shire ' claimed to have dated, still remained to be identified by the Pipe Eoll Society. The Plea Eoll printed in the last volume issued by that Society ' is described in the ' List of Plea Eolls' (1894) as 'No. 5 [6 Eic. I],' but unfortunately it is pub- lished without introduction and without the year being ascer- tained. Yet in this instance the internal evidence it contains is conclusive, and establishes beyond a doubt that it is the Eoll of Hilary Term, 7 Eic. I, 1196. That it is later than 1195 is proved by the mention (p. 216) of the eyre of Simon de PateshuU, Oger fitz-Oger, and Henry de Castellon at Bedford, which took place in the autumn of 1195.^ Another entry (p. 218) fixes the precise year, since Thomas de Tinneston appears in court on a Wednesday which was St. Valentine's Day. This must have been in 1196, so that the date of the Bedfordshire Eyre is further confirmed. The membranes of the Eoll are not now in their proper sequence, but the discovery of the date enables another membrane at present known as ' No. 7 [7 Eic. I],' and which is inscribed ' Eotui de festo Sci Yllarii Anno vij,' to be restored to its proper place ; and perhaps it may be well to note that on p. 219 a very faded In V is omitted from the text before Sept Capta Placitorum. Eyton refers also to another roll in vol. i. p. 202 of his history, and adds in a note that it is ' " Placita incerti temporis Regis Johannis " (No. 60) ; but, as I believe, of Easter term, 6 Eic. I (1195) ; ' and on turning to vol. ix. p. 311 we find a full extract from the Eoll of a case relating to Eobert Fiz-Aer, by which he determines the date. This case, I find on m. 3d. of the Eoll now ' No. 6 [6 Eic. I],' but an examination of the five membranes of which the Eoll at present consists leads me to conclude that the last two belong to the reign of King John, the first three to that of Eichard I. What membranes composed the Eoll when Eyton saw it we do not now know, but he says in his preface (26 Sept. 1853) that the Eolls were at that time unarranged ; I have, however, been unable to identify the old number as 60, though it was at one time 8. Here is an instance of the unfortunate confusion which must arise from the alteration of old references, unless former designations are recorded in modern calendars. It is much to be desired on historical grounds that these valuable Eolls should be transcribed membrane by membrane, and the date tested, when doubtful, by all available contemporary evidence. E. M. POYNTON. ' Feet of Fines, 10 Eic. I, Roll of the King's Court, Eic. I (1900), p. 214. ^ See Professor Maitland's introd. to Three Bolls of the King's Court, 1194-1195 (1891). 284 THE CREATION OF BOROUGHS April The Creation of Boroughs. Charters of Degamvy, Dimster, Higham Ferrers, Bolton, Warton, and Roby. In illustration of the Laws of Breteuil I brought together in previous numbers of this Eeview (Jan. 1900-April 1901) some charters creating seignorial boroughs. I now add to them six further charters that have not been printed before and are of interest as forming part of the story of burghal development. I. Deganwy (Denbighshire), the English Gannock, was made a borough after the pattern of Montgomery by Henry III, 21 Feb. 1252. The charter is from the charter roll of 36 Henry III, m. 19. The charter is not of an unusual type, but it is interesting to find in a royal grant that the size of the burgage is fixed. The rent, 2s. for a half-acre, is higher than usual. The castle of Deganwy (near Eglys Ehos), which figures so largely in the history of Henry Ill's Welsh troubles, as told by Matthew Paris, was a stronghold that balanced Aberconway, on the opposite side of the estuary. Ealph de Blundeville, earl of Chester, rebuilt it in 1210, and, as he was an active founder of boroughs, it might have been expected that Henry Ill's charter would be one of confirmation only. Henry's charter is dated seven years after the rebuilding in 1245, when he fared so ill, and five years before the siege by Llewelyn. In 1260 the castle was dis- mantled. In 1277 the patent roll of Edward I contains the king's order to Koger de Mortimer to enfeoff in the king's name the men of the king's lands pertaining to his castles of Gannock, Ehuddlan, and Flint, at fee-farm rents, which should be remitted for from one to three years if applied to the repair of houses or the tilling of lands. The creation of the borough and this supplementary patent are of interest as filling a gap in the story of the colonisation of Wales by English burgesses. II. The charter of Dunster (Somerset) I owe to the kindness of Sir Henry Maxwell-Lyte, K.C.B. A summary of it is given in his book on Dunster. It is taken from a copy of the deeds formerly in the Dunster Church chest, made in 1716, and unfortunately the copy is in parts far from intelligent. The original deeds were given away by a too generous vicar to antiquarian friends, and are now not forthcoming. The charter was granted between 1254 and 1267, the year of Eeginald de Mohun, the donor's, death. He alludes to the death of his son, which took place in 1254.' It is evident that a borough had been created at Dunster, the -Domesday Torre, where was the castle of William de Moion or Moiun.^ The importance of the castle is made known in memorable words by the author of the ' Gesta ' Diet, of Nat. Biogr. xxxviii. 111. 2 p -g j gg ^ 1902 THE CREATION OF BOROUGHS 285 Stephani.' ' It was the stronghold from which William de Moiun swept out like a whirlwind, scouring the country far and near. The charter forms one of the large group * characterised by a limitation of the lord's ' mercy.' Here the exception made is in the case of assault on the lord, the lady, or any of the castle house- hold. A remarkably large number of clauses are given to brewing questions, and the ale caption was still all-important in 1324, when the lord's claim was greatly reduced. The clause § 10, treating of the lord's right of pre-emption, is in peculiar form, if indeed it has been properly copied. § 11, as emended, grants the burgesses liberty to kill rabbits doing damage on their property, provided the lord gets the skins. Mr. G. J. Turner tells me that the lord must have had a cunigeria or aimcularia — a place where rabbits bred, or, as we should say, a rabbit warren. He had also the franchise of warren in his demesnes, and subjected the burgesses of his borough to his franchise ; but, as the rabbit warren was a nuisance to them, he agreed to let the burgesses kill rabbits that were caught doing damage. III. The fact that Hie/ham Ferrers was a borough is known from Leland. The charter roll of 36 Henry III, m. 25, shows that William de Ferrers, earl of Derby, on St. Gregory's Day (12 March) 1251, made 88 of his tenants there, with their offspring, lands, tenements, and chattels, free against him and his heirs for ever, so that he and his heirs might have no service of them or of any of their offspring. These 88 persons, men and women, all named, are to have their lands and tenements, which they had hitherto held at will, in free burgage, ' as in our charter making Higham (Hecham) a borough.' The form of the charter, naming the in- dividuals who are to be the burgesses, is peculiar, and the record is one of great interest in the history of status and tenure. The villagers raised to burgherhood are not called villeins, but no doubt such in fact they had been. It is customary to lay much stress on the sprinkling of manumissions distributed by the religious houses : too little attention has been given to the wholesale enfranchisement that was going forward when the lords made their villages into boroughs. IV. The charter of Bolton (Great Bolton, or Bolton-le-Moors, Lancashire), like the preceding charter, is also from William de Ferrers, earl of Derby, and dated 14 Jan. 1253. It is interesting as another version of the Salford and Stockport charters of Ealph de Blundeville's model.' Ealph de Blundeville's great inheritance was divided by his daughters ; the third, Agnes, man-ied William de Ferrers, and brought him the lands between Kibble and Mersey.'' ' Gesta StepJmni, ed. Hewlett, ii. 51. * Discussed in Engl. Hist. Rev. xvi. 92-110 (1901). ' Ibid. pp. 96-101. ' Baines, Lancashire (1836), iii. 53. 'M TtiE CliEATlOiSl Ot^ BOttOUGttS April In 86 Henry III their son William obtained a grant of a market and fair for Bolton, a preliminary to making it a borough, like Salford, in the same wapentake. Although the variants between the two charters are but slight it seems desirable to print the whole charter as a help to the establishment of the text for Salford, Stockport, and Manchester. The Bolton charter alone contains the statement that the burgage is measured by the long perch of 24 feet, believed to be common in Lancashire. In the second clause, where Bolton reads 'le halmote,' Salford has ' Laghemote,' and Stockport ' le Portmanimote.' Bolton is peculiar in the lord's order (§ 8) that the burgess must wait for two days at one of his mills, and then fail to get his corn ground, before he may go elsewhere. The existence of a medieval borough at Bolton seems to have hitherto escaped the notice of the careful Lancashire topographers. V. The charter of Warton (Lancashire) has been briefly referred to in Baines-Croston's ' Lancashire,' v. 514, where a translation of the first paragraph alone is given. The date must be after 1246 and before 1271.' The charter here printed shows that it belongs to one group with Ulverston and Kendal, on which inheritance Gilbert Fitz Eeinfred entered by marrying Helwisia, daughter of William de Lancaster II. The charters of Ulverston and Kendal are now unfortunately not forthcoming.* Whitaker says that he had seen a late copy of Gilbert Fitz Eeinfred's charter to the Ulverston burgesses, giving them liberty to take and hold as many homesteads as they like at a rent of ^d. for every toft, and reserv- ing to himself a dyeing house and a fulling mill. This throws light on § 6 of the Warton charter. The inheritance of Warton came to William de Lindsay's son Walter, by William's marriage with Alicia, who shared with two sisters the De Lancaster inherit- ance on the death of William de Lancaster III.^ The charter contains the limitation of the lord's power to claim forfeiture (§ 4) and the limitation of the lord's credit to forty days (§ 7). In discussing this limitation in my ' Laws of Breteuil ' I omitted to point out that the rule passed into statute law by 9 Hen. Ill, c. 19, and 3 Ed. I, c. 7, wherever purveyance was made for a castle. The size of the burgage at Warton is to be a rood and four ' falls ' (§ 11). The meaning must be that the burgage is to be built on a rood, and to the burgage are to be attached four roods or ' falls ' in the borough fields, as at Stockport and many other places.i" The claim that the lord should have his ale cheaper ' Cockersaiid Chartulary, ed. Farrer, p. 301. ' Whitaker, Bichmondshire, ii. 391. On the vexed question whether the heiresses were sisters or daughters of William de Lancaster III see Whitaker, Bichmondshire, ii. 290, 391, and Oockersand Char tiilary, ed. Farrer, pp. 301, 306. '° Engl. Hist. Bev. xvi. 336-7 (1901). 196'^ TtiE CM A f ION OF noROVdltS ^87 than other people (§ 13) is often recorded in seignorial charters. The four gallons for a penny at Dunster (§ 5) is probably an exact parallel. The price, if the sextary be four gallons, would be M. as a rule. VI. The fourteenth-century borough at Eoby, between Liverpool and Manchester, has escaped the notice of Lancashire historians. In 1842 there was only a village of some 493 inha- bitants, who retained no memory of their more brilliant past. The burgage is fixed at one rood, the rent \2d., the lods et rentes at id. Mary Bateson. I. Gannoce oe Dbganwy. [Charter EoU, 36 Hen. Ill, m. 19.] 1. Eex Archiepiscopis etc. salutem. Sciatis quod concessimus et uol(u)imus quod villa nostra de Gannoc sit liber burgus in perpetuum : et quod singuli burgensium eiusdem ville habeant infra burgum ilium dimidiam acram terre ad edificandum et curtillagium faciendum et duas acras terre arabilis extra eundem burgum pro duobus solidis singulis annis reddendis balliuo nostro qui pro tempore fuerit ibidem ad opus nostrum, videlicet xii d. ad pascha et xii d. ad featum S. Michaelis pro omni seruicio. 2. Concessimus eciam eisdem burgensibus nostris eiusdem burgi et heredibus eorum quod villam de Gannoc elaudant fossato et muro. 3. Et quod habeant gildam mercator(i)am cumhansa etaliis consuetu- dinibus et libertatibus ad gildam iUam pertinentibus, et quod nullus qui non sit de gilda ilia mercandisam aliquam faciei in predicto burgo nisi de voluntate eorundem burgensium. 4. Concessimus eciam eis et eorum heredibus quod si aliquis natiuus alicuius in prefato burgo manserit et terram in eo tenuerit et fuerit in prefata gilda et hansa et loth et s(c)oth cum eisdem burgensibus per vnum annum et vnum diem sine calumpnia, deinceps non possit repeti a domino suo set in eodem burgo liber permaneat. 5. Preterea concessimus prefatis burgensibus nostris de Gannoc et heredibus eorum quod habeant soc et sac et thol et tbeam et infangene- thef et quod quieti sint per totam terram nostram de theolonio, lestagio, passagio, pontagio, et stallagio, et de leue, et de stanegeld, et de gay- wyte, et omnibus aliis consuetudinibus et exaccionibus per totam potestatem nostram tarn in Anglia quam in omnibus aliis terris nostris. 6. Et concedimus quod predicti burgenses nostri de Gannoc habeant inperpetuum omnes alias libertates et quietancias per totam terram nostram quas habent burgenses nostri de Mungumery. 7. Volumus eciam et concedimus predictis burgensibus nostris de Gannoc quod habeant singulis annis inperpetuum vnam feriam in predicto burgo scilicet in vigilia, in die, et in crastino Sancti Martini et per sex dies sequentes, et vnum mercatum ibidem singulis septimanis per diem Martis cum omnibus libertatibus et liberis consuetudinibus ad huiusmodi mercatum et feriam pertinentibus. 8. Volumus insuper quod omnes mercatores terrarum nostrarum et mercatores aliarum terrarum qui sunt ad pacem nostram et eorundem 288 THE CREATION OF BOROUGHS April mercandise ad predictum burgum venientes et ibidem morantes et inde reeedentes habeant libertatem venire, stare, et recedere tarn per aquas quam per terrain, et quod habeant liberos introitus in terram nostram et liberos exitus a terra nostra sine omni impedimento balliuorum nostrorum et alioruni, faciendo debitas et rectas consuetudines. 9. Quare volumus et firmiter precipimus quod predicta villa de Gannoc sit liber burgus et quod predicti burgenses habeant et teneant predictam terram ad edificandum et curtillagium faciendum et excolendum per predictum seruicium, et quod iidem burgenses habeant predictam gildam mercatoriam cum hansa et aliis libertatibus et liberis consuetudinibus ad gildam illam pertinentibus, et quod habeant predictam feriam et mercatum cum omnibus libertatibus et quietanciis predietis inperpetuum bene et in pace, libere et quiete, honorifice, plenarie, integre,. sicut predictum est, salua libertate ciuitatis nostre London'. Hiis testibus venerabilibus patribus: Adomaro Wintoniensi electo fratre nostro, Willelmo Wellensi et Bathoniensi, Waltero Norwycensi et Ricardo Cicestrensi, episeopis, Johanne Maunsel preposito B'feuerlacensi, Magistro Willelmo de Kilkenny archidiacono Couentrensi, Bertramio de CrioU, Alano la Zuche lusticiario Cestrie, Eoberto Waleran, Gilberto de Segraue, Stephano Bauzan, Eadulpho de Bakepuz, Nicholao de Sancto Mauro, lobanne de Geres et aliis. Datum per manum nostram apud Westmonasterium, xxi die Februarii. II. DUNSTEE. [An eighteenth-century copy. Penes Sir Henry Maxwell-Lyte.] 1. Omnibus Christi fidelibus ad quos praesens scriptum pervenerit Eeginaldus de Mohun salutem. Noverit universitas vestra me concessisce relaxasse et quietum ' ' clamasse in perpetuum pro me et heredibus meis et omnibus aliis qui post me quocunque mode domini vel custodes aut Ballivi de Dunesterre fuerint quod Burgenses illius villae aut haeredes sui nuUo modo de cetero contra voluntatem suam fiant praepositi vel firmarii " de portu maris aut tholoneto ipsius Burgi vel de molendinis eiusdem villae. 2. Concessi etiam eisdem Burgensibus et eorum haeredibus quod quieti sint de annuo taillagio ita quod ab eisdem .(n)ullum exigant taillagium secundum consuetudinem aliorum Burgorum Angliae nisi rationabili causa et debita possit exigi ab eisdem. 3. Volo insuper et ooncedo pro me et haeredibus et omnibus qui fuerint domini vel ballivi seu custodes de Dunesterre quod dicti Burgenses et eorum haeredes habeant super Crawedon '^ communionem ''' sine aliqua calumpnia vel impedimento, quale ad opus suum memoriae tempore alicuius praedecessorum habere consueverunt. 4. Et quod emptores vel venditores in foro de Dunesterre siut quieti de tholoneto nisi eorum emptio vel venditio contingat duodecim denarios. Similiter piscatores et mercatores [qui] sint in eodem foro quieti sint de tholonetto in perpetuum. 5. Volo etiam et concede ^■' pro me et haeredibus meis dominis " Manuscript ' quiete.' '^ Manuscript ' firmarum.' '" Now Croydon. " Perhaps for ' eommunem pasturam.' '-' ' Et concede ; ' manuscript ' concedens.' 1902 THE CREATION OF BOROUGHS 289 custodibus et ballivis de Dunesterre quod de cetero non possumus captionem de bracino alicujus in eadem villa percipere praeter viginti quatuor lagenas ballivo, quatuor lagenas pro denario.'" 6. Si vero plus cervisiae de bracino illo habuerit, volumus ut illud emat secundum quod emptores praedieti de eadem emant cervisia. 7. Et quod nullus de cetero faciat in villa de Dunesterre cervisiam illam quae vocatur cervisia praepositi.^^ 8. Si vero ita feeerint pandoxatores eiusdem villae non cessant propter hoc quod '* pandoxatorium faciant, ac vendant prout facere debuerunt, si cervisia ilia non [fujerit pandoxata. 9. Et si ceciderint ^^ in misericordiam pro aliquo delicto ut sint quieti per sex denarios '" excepta manuum iniectione in dominum aut dominam vel aliquem de familia castri. 10. Et quando -^ comparaciones ^^ domini ad portum maris ^^ vel in praedicto foro facti sunt, licentiati postmodum ^'' possint comparare sine ^^ querela vel impedimento ea que comparare uoluerint, nee aliter ^^ de pena antenos suam faciant compositionem . 11. Et si coniculum ^^ in dampnis suis invenerint, oceidant ipsum et pellem ferat ^^ ad eastrum et sic ^' sint inde quieti. 12. Et etiam quod plene maneant eisdem consuetudinibus ad Hun- dredum ^^ et alibi quibns tempore alicuius praedecessorum meorum uti consueverunt. Haec autem omnia dictisBurgensibus et haeredibus eorum in perpetuum concessi pro "^ anima bonae memoriae lohannis de Mohun mei primo- geniti et pro vjginti marcis quas [ijidem burgenses mihi dederunt. Quare volo et concedo pro me et heredibus meis dominis custodibus et ballivis omnibus de Dunesterre prout mea concessio, relaxatio, quieta- clamantia, rata et inconcussa permaneat in perpetuum. Et ne ego Eeginaldus aut haeredes mei vel aliquis alius dominus custos vel ballivus de Dunesterre contra hoc in aliquo venire possimus, ad meliorem istius rei securitatem praesenti scripto sigillum meum apposui. Hiis testibus Domino Symoni de Eael [?], Domino Eogon '^ de Porllok, Domino lohanne Buresh, Domino Wilielmo le Bret, Philippo de Lucumb, Eichardo Everad, Eiehardo de Cludeshem, Hugone de Avele, Eiehardo de Line', ^' et multis aliis. '" Compare above, p. 287 ; the usual price was probably a halfpenny a gallon. '■ Manuscript ' vocata cervisia praeponi.' Sir H. Maxwell-Lyte suggested to me that the correct reading must be 'praepositi.' On the reeve's and bailiifs' scotale compare Henry Ill's Lincoln charter, lith Be;p. Hist. MSS. Comm. app. viii. p. 4. " Manuscript ' quin.' '° Manuscript ' ceociderunt.' ™ Manuscript ' denariis.' " Manuscript ' quod.' '^^ Manuscript ' comparatoribus.' ^' Dunster was then close to the sea, as the description in the Qesta Stephani shows. ^' Manuscript 'factis ut licentiati post.' -' Manuscript ' sua.' ™ Manuscript ' ne et alii.' *' Manuscript 'comtulum,' and in the margin ' inptulum.' ^' Manuscript ' pellery foras.' '" Manuscript ' sint.' ^° The borough court. " Manuscript ' quod,' '- Perhaps for ' Bogero ' ^' Perhaps for ' Linton.' VOL. XVII. — NO. LXVI. U 290 THBl CREATION OF BOROUGtiS April III. HiGHAM FbEEBES. [Charter Eoll, 36 Hen. Ill, m. 25.] Rex Arohiepiscopis etc. salutem. Ingpeximus cartam quam dilectus et fidelis noster Willelmus de Ferrars comes Dereby fecit hominibus suis (de) Heoham in hec verba . Omnibus hoc presens scriptum uisuris vel audituris Willelmus de Ferrars Comes Dereby salutem. Noueritis nos die S. Gregorii anno regni Regis Henrici filii Regis lohannis tricesimo quinto ooncessisse et hac presenti carta nostra confirmasse pro nobis et heredibns nostris quod omnes isti subscripti homines de Hecham scilicet Pulco Lust, Adelina filia Laurk, Rogerus Berker, Ricardus Purme, Will, filing Fromundi, Milo carnifex, Will, filius Radulfi, Simon Muschet, Reg. Pruet, Elyas Pedefer, Margareta in Lane, Will. Weyte, Bart, de Stanwigg, Rog. filius Andree, Will. Stocker, Rob. filius Stephani, Matilda relicta Ade, Emma relicta Nicholai filii Hamundi, Will, de Norfolch, Tho. Cocus, Ranulfus Sutor, Alicia filia Thome Puinne, Rog. Hende, Rad. filius Hugonis, Adelina Drye, Ric. Grundcert, Walt. Kiggel, Rad. Cocus, Will, de Wittlewode, Will, de Wolfheg, Hugo ad portam ecclesie. And. filius Willelmi, Adam Grey, loh. Grey, Rad. filius Walteri, Walt, filius Milonis, Simon Sely, Will. Acer, And. Acer, Hugo de Holm, Halnotus elericus, Beatrix Kisse, Rob. Tugeys, Simon Burel, Petrus Ingeram, Hemfredus Leues, Ric. filius Henrici, And. filius Joscelini, Simon Halpeny, Ric. de Horsholm, Bart, filius Warini, Golda et Alicia Hasting, Mnriell Persona, Bart, de Rotelond, And. Grey, Ric. filius Alani, Matheus Clericus, And. filius Andree, And. Sweyn, Ric. Piscator, Ric. Fritun, Nic. Bunting, Walt. Pelliparius, Walt. Kiggel, Rob. Acer, Fromundus, Rad. de Irtlingburc, Cristina de Holm, Will, de Bernewell, Rob. filius Willelmi, Rob. Wafrur, Will, filius Galfridi, Thomas Tredebalk, Hugo Grinde, Walt. Grey, Will. Brun, Rob. de Raundes, loh. Pistor, Alicia la Weyte, Rob. Molendinarius, Hugo filius Alicie, Ingrida uidua. Will. Tailur, Phil. Faber, loh. Haket, Muriell Bones, Hugo Ruffus, Rad. de Rysle, Tho. filius Galfridi, Tho. filius Godwini, Phil. Faukes, cum eorum sequela, terris, et tenementis, et omnibus eorum catallis, liberi sint erga nos et heredes nostros in perpetuum ; Ita quod nos et heredes nostri de cetero nullam poteriinus habere vel exigere servitutem sive de aliquibus de eisdem exeuntibus, et quod terras et cataUa et tenementa sua cum perti- nenciis infra villam de Hecham et extra que prius tenuerunt ad voluntatem nostram habeant et teneant de nobis et heredibus nostris in libera burgagia de cetero, sicut continetur in carta nostra quam eisdem fieri fecimus de libero burgo in Hecham habendo. In cuius rei testi- monium hoc presens scriptum sigilli nostri munimine pro nobis et heredibus nostris roboravimus. Hiis testibus Hugone de Meynil tunc temporis senescallo, Petro de Gatesden, Pagano de Sancto Philiberto, lohanne Bassard, Thoma de Euerus, Ricardo de Neueton, Roberto de Mercinton, Roberto clerico tunc temporis domini comitis c&meia/rio, Willelmo de Rolueston, Henrico de Huntesdon tune de Hecham senescallo, Henrico de Raundes, Ricardo de Gatesden, Waltero Cnostone, Roberto de Floribus, Galfrido de Norman vill, Simone de Neuill, Rogero de Ringstede, Matheo de Hariegraue, Willelmo Malemele, Galfrido Ruffo, Andrea filio 1902 THE CREATION OF BOROUGHS 291 eius, Thoma Chappe, Orberto '^ de Eussinden fuleon' ''de eadem, Gilberto de Eaundes, Reginaldo meroatore, lohanne Marescallo, lohanne filio Willelmi de Stanwigg', Roberto filio Warini de Hecham, et aliis. Nos autem predictam libertatum concessionem predictis hominibus de Hecham factam, ut predictum est, ratam habentes et gratam earn pro nobis et heredibus nostris coneedimus et eonfirmamus. Hiis testibus venerabili patre Adomaro Wintoniensi electo, Willelmo de Valencia, fratribus nostris, lohanne Maunsel, preposito Beuerlacensi, Eadulfo filio Nicholai, Eoberto de Mueegros, Nicholao de Molis, Bartholomeo Peche, Magistro Willelmo de Kilkenny archidiacono Couentrensi, Petro de Riuallis, Eoberto le Norreis, Eadulfo de Wauncy, Eogero de LoHnton, Ea- dulfo de Bakepuz, et aliis. Data per manum nostram apud Notingham xii die Decembris. IV. Bolton. [Among E. St. George Norroy's heraldic collections. Lansdowne MS. 863, f. 67 b. (c. 1613.)] ' A charter granted by William de Ferrariis Erie of Derby for the enfranchising of the towne of Bolton in the countie of Lancaster a.r.r. Henrici filhi regis lohannis 37.' Omnibus hoe presens scriptum visuris vel audituris Willelmus de Ferrariis comes de Derby salutem in domino. Soiatis nos dedisse et hao presenti charta nostra confirmasse pro nobis et heredibus nostris quod villa de Bolton sit liber burgus et quod burgenses in ilia habitantes habeant et teneant omnes istas libertates subscriptas. 1. Inprimis quod quilibet burgensium habeat ^^ unam acram ad burgagium suum mensuratum perperticam viginti quatuor pedum et reddet pro quoUbet burgagio suo xii d. pro omnibus firmis que ^^ ad illud burgagium pertinent. 2. Si vero propositus ville aliquem burgensem calumniaverit de aliquo placito et ealumniatus non uenerit ad diem nee aliquis pro eo infra le halmote in forisfaotura sit nostra xii d. 3. Item ^* si aliquis burgensis aliquem burgensem implacitauerit ^' de ahquo debito et debitor cognouerit debitum, propositus ei ponat diem octauumetsinon uenerit ad diemreddat nobis xii d. pro forisf actura illius diei et reddat debitum et similiter preposito iiii denarios. 4. Si aHquis '"' burgensis in burgo aliquem burgensem per iram per- cusserit veil verberauerit absque sanguinis effusione per visum burgensium si[bi] pacem faciat saluo nostro iure similiter xii d. 5. Et si aliquis implacitatus *^ fuerit in burgo de aliquo placito, non respondeat nee burgensi nee villano nee alicui aHo, nisi in suo portemonemot, scilicet ''^ de placito quod [pertinet] ad burgum. 6. Si aliquis burgensis veil alius aliquem burgensem implacitaverit ""^ de suspicione latrocinii, propositus attachiet eum ad respondendum et stare in iudicio in portemonemot saluo iure nostro. ^* Sic, perhaps for ' Osberto.' '* Perhaps for ' falconario.' '" Manuscript ' habeant.' '' Manuscript 'qua.' "' Manuscript 'Iterum.' '" Manuscript 'implicauerit.' " Manuscript ' quis alii.' *' Manuscript ' implicatus.' " Manuscript ' similiter.' *' Manuscript 'implicaverit.' n 2 292 THE CREATION OF BOROUGHS April 7. Etsi aliquis implaoitatus " fuerit de vicino suo veil de aliquo alio de aliquibus que ^' ad burgum pertinet et per tres dies secutus fuerit, si tes- timonium habuerit de preposito et de vicinis quod aduersarius suus defecerit ad hos tres dies, nuUam postea det ei responsionem ^^ de illo placito et alter ^' cadat in miserecordia. 8. Item nuUus burgensis debet furnare panem qui *" sit ad vendendum nisi ad furnum nostrum per rationabiles consuetudines. 9. Si mollendina veil moUendinum ibi habuerimus que molare possint dicti burgenses expectabunt per duos dies continuos et ibi molent ad vicessimum granum. Et si infra dictum spacium molari non possLat molent ubicunque voluerint. 10. Item predict! burgenses possint eligere prepositum de se ipsis quem voluerint ''^ et in fine anni remouere eundem. 11. Item quilibet burgensis potest ■'" burgagium suum dare, impignorare veil vendere cuicunque voluerit,''^ exceptis viris religiosis et ludaismo, nisi heres illud emere voluerit. Sed ^^ heres propinquior erit ad illud emendum saluo seruicio nostro. 12. Item burgenses possint namiare °^ debitores suos pro debitis suis in burgo si debitor cognouerit debitum nisi sunt tenentes de burgo. Catalla burgensium non debent namiari pro alicuius debitis nisi pro suis propriis. 13. Item predicti burgenses et omnes sui de quocunque emerint veil venderint, ubicunque fuerint in dominicis nostris, sive in nundinis, sive in foris, sive in omnibus terris nostris, erunt *'' quieti de tolneto saluis libertatibus nostris per cartas nostras prius datas et usitatas. 14. Quicunque fregerit assisam sine de pane siue de ceruicia remanebit in forisfactura nostra ^' xii d. tribus vicibus, et ad quartam vicem faciet assisam ville pertinentem ad tale delictum secundum consuetudinem aliorum burgorum. 15. I(i)dem autem burgenses habeant '^ comunem pasturam in planis et pascuis et pasturis omnibus viUe de Bolton, erunt ^^ etiam quieti de pannagio de propriis porcis infra metas de Bolton. 16. Concessimus eciam eisdem comunia ad fodendum et ardendum in turbaria ^' ville de Bolton. 17. Volumus etiam quod predicti burgenses possint eapere in quadam graua nostra quod est inter magnam Loue et terram ecclesie *^ de Bolton necessaria ad ardendum et edificandum, ita tamen quod liceat (nobis) et heredibus nostris de predictis boscis, planis, pascuis, pasturis, et turbariis assartare,**" colere, asce[n]dere ^^ et ad comodum nostrum de illia facere, saluis predictis burgensibus omnibus antedictis secundum quod ad eorum tenementa infra villam de Bolton pertinet ''^ sufficienter. 18. Item quilibet burgensis potest esse ad placitum pro sponsa sua et " Manuscript ' implioatus.' " Manuscript ' qua.' " Manuscript ' nullum . . . rursum.' " Manuscript ' aliter.' ■•» Manuscript ' furniare panem que.' <» Manuscript ' voluerunt.' ™ Manuscript 'preter.' si Manuscript ' voluerunt.' 5= Manuscript ' similiter.' ss Manuscript ' namuare.' " Manuscript 'erint.' " Manuscript ' f orisf acturam ncstiam.' " Manuscript ' et.' " Manuscript ' erint.' =» Manuscript ' tibaria.' ^ Manuscript ' ecclesiasticam.' «° Manuscript ' assoroari.' si j^ . g^^g^. ^^-jj^ animals.' "2 Manuscript ' pertinent.' 1902 THE CREATION OF BOROUGHS 293 familia sua. Et sponsa cuiuslibet potest firmam reddere preposito, faciendo quod facere debeat, et placitum sequi pro sponso suo si ipse "^ forsitan alibi fuerit. 19. Item burgensis quando moritur si non habuerit heredem poterit burgagium suum pro voluntate sua aliis legare exceptis viris religiosis et ludeis saluis iure nostro et heredibus nostris. 20. Catalla etiam sua poterit cuiounque voluerit dare saluo similiter iure nostro. 21. Ita cum burgensis moritur, sponsa manebit in domo cum herede et habebit necessaria ibidem per ipsum quamdiu sine marito fuerit, efc ex quo maritari voluerit, discedat libere siae dote et heres ut dominus manebit in domo. 22. Item cum burgensis moritur, heres eius nullum aliud ^* [releuium] nobis dabit seu heredibus nostris nisi huiusmodi arma scilicet unum ^^ gladium arcum vel lanceam. 23. NuUus infra wapentake de Salford ut sutor, pelliparis, fullo veil aliquis (alius) exerceat officium suum nisi sit in burgo saluis libertatibus.^'' 24. Prefati vero burgenses dabunt firmam suam de burgo ad quatuor anni terminos scilicet ad natale domini pro quolibet burgagio iii d., ad mediam quadragesimam iii d., ad festum S. lohannis Baptiste iii d., et ad festum S. Michaelis archangeli iii d. 25. Omnia predicta placita que ad burgum pertinent erunt determinata coram baliuis nostris per visum burgensium. 26. Quicunque burgagium suum vendere voluerit extra religionem et ludaismum et a villa discedere, dabit nobis iiii d. et libere ibit quocunque voluerit cum omnibus catallis suis. Ego vero Willelmus antedictus et heredes mei omnes predictas Ubertates et consuetudines predictis burgensibus et heredibus suis contra omnes gentes warantizabimus imperpetuum saluo nobis et heredibus nostris tallagio de predictis burgensibus quando dominus rex burgos suos talliari fecerit per Angliam. In cuius rei testimonium huic presenti pagine sigillum nostrum pro nobis et heredibus nostris apposuimus. Hiis testibus Alano lusticiario Cestrie, Willielmo fratre suo,''^ Simone de Montfort,*^ Pagano de Chaworth,''^ Thoma Crester, Eoberto de Lathun, Adam de Bury, Galfrido de Chetham, Hugone de Menill, Eadulpho de Merciaton, Dauid de Hulton, lordano de Hulton, 'Willelmo de BreiteshaU et aliis. Datum apud Tuttesbury in crastino Sancti Hillarii a.r.r. Henrici fillii regis lohannis 37.^' V. Waeton. [From Lansdowne MS. 559, f. 140. A fifteenth-century copy.] Omnibus presentes litteras visuris vel audituris Walterus filius Willelmi de Lyndesay salutem in domino. 1. Noueritis (me) dedisse concessisse et presenti carta mea sigillo meo impressa confirmasse liberis burgensibus ^^ meis de Warton' habere burgagia sua libera quanta sibi de iure adquirere poterunt in eadem villa "' Manuscript ' ipsi.' °' Manuscript ' alium.' °* Struck out in manuscript "« ' Baronie ' added at end in the Salford charter. *' Signed the Salford charter. "' 14 Jan. 1253. ™ Manuscript ' burgensis.' 294 THE CREATION OF BOROUGHS April de Warton' : habend' et tenend' sibi et heredibus suis vel suis assignatis vel eorum heredibus, exceptis viris religiosis '"' clericis et ludeis, de me et heredibus meis libere et quiete integre et pacifice ^' cum omnibus perti- nenciis suis et libertatibus infra villam de Warton' et extra pertinentibus, exceptis separalibus meis, boscis, pratis, pasturis et dominicis videlicet bosco de Staynhusslac per semitam que ducit de Lyndehede vsque Warton' ex occidentali parte quamdiu durat bosous versus Barraht : Et excepto bosco et pastura de Ellerholm infra fossatum cum pertinenciis : Et excepto parco de Morholm per metas oompositas die confeccionis preseneium : Et exoepta pastura de Southou a Southhou per le sedyk usque ad Quytesandpole et ad Quitsandpole ex transverso vsque Lynd- hede, et de Lyndhede totum separale usque le Blakdyke, et ascendendo le BIa(k)dyke usque ad rupem ultra le Bla(k)well, et sic per rupem '^ usque ad primum locum de Southehou. 2. Et capient de bosco in communi de Warton estoueria sua per visum forestarii mei ad e[di]ficandum. Et de mortuo bosco ad arden- dum et spinis ad ardendum : salvis michi corulo,^^ glandia,^'' nucibus, et pannagio per totum boscum dicte ville de Warton. 3. Et eciam concessi eisdem liberis burgensibus " meis quod possint habere communam cum catallis suis ex orientali parte dicte ville, post bladaetprata asportata, exceptis bladis seminatis et pratis quandodefendi debent. Et ex occidentali parte dicte ville cum eisdem catallis, exceptis porois, a festo 8. Martini in yeme usque ad purificacionem beate Marie. 4. Concessi eciam eisdem quod forisfactura ligne sit ^^ eis in quatuor denariis. Et aliter forisfacture secundum consuetudinem vicinorum burgorum. 5. Concessi eciam eisdem quod non exigam ab eis aliud auxilium quam alii^^ burgenses domini Regis et vicinorum faciunt et quod presint placitare in curia mea pro debitis suis sine forisfactura. 6. Et quod habeant easdem convenciones cum fuUonibus et tinctori- bus meis quas vicini burgenses in vicinis burgis cum talibus ministeriis habent. 7. Et si aliquid michi crediderint, si quadraginta dies transierint et debitum eis solutum non fuerit, amplius non credent michi sua antequam debitum prediotum eis fuerit solutum. 8. Concessi eciam quod nullus burgensis se invito capiet[ur] ad molen- dina mea siue furnos meos '* custodiendos. 9. Et quod nullus burgensis capiet[ur] nee inprisonet[ur] aliqua " de causa dum plegios possint *" et velint invenire. 10. Concessi eciam quod sint quieti de multura de blado crescente in toftis eOrundem burgensium. 11. Concessi eciam quod de aliis leuibus vsibus habeant et teneant " secundum usus et consuetudines burgorum de Kyrkeby Kendal et Ulueri- ston: reddend'aunuatimpro quolibet burgagio in se contenente vnam rodam et quatuor faUas duodeoim denarios, medietatem scilicet ad ™ Manuscript Telegosis.' " Manuscript ' in pacifice.' " Warton Crag. Hazel.' 74 . Mast,' manuscript ' glandie.' " Manuscript ' burgensis.' " Manuscript ' fit ' " Manuscript • alia.' ' '» Manuscript ' furnis meis.' '• Manuscript ' aliqualem ' Manuscript ' possunt.' »> Manuscript • perteneant ' 1902 THE CREATION OF BOROUGHS 295 Pentecosten *^ et aliam medietatem ad festum S. Miehaelis pro omni servicio et demanda ; salvis domino amerciamentis et plaeitis dicti burgi. 12. Et si quis burgensis implacitetur in curia mea capitali de manerio et feodo de Warton', dicti burgenses '^ curiam burgi de eo habebunt, si '^ curiam hora competente postulauerint. 13. Vendent autem mihi et heredibus meis sexterium cervisie minus *^ vno denario quam aliis. Hiis testibus Domino lohanne de Cansfeld, domino Willelmo Boyuill, Henrico de Eedemane, Thoma de Cawpmanwra,*^ Ada de Kellet, Willelmo de Coupmanwra,*^ Ada de Hoton, lohanne de Wrswyk, Gilberto de Whitby et aliis. VI. ROBY. [Harl. MS. 7017, f. 360. An eighteenth-oentury copy.] Omnibus Christi fidelibus has litteras inspecturis vel audituris Thomas de Lathom Chivaler salutem in domino sempiternam. 1. Noueritis me dedisse et concessisse pro me et heredibus meis quod villa mea de Eoby liber sit burgus '^ imperpetuum. 2. Et dedi etiam et concessi euilibet burgensi *' eiusdem burgi vnam rodam terre pro burgagio suo in eodem burgo. 3. Et quod omnes predicti burgenses in eodem burgo manentea sive residentes liberi et quieti sint in eodem burgo imperpetuum de quoeunque theolonio, terragio, et stallagio, ita tamen quod omnes predicti burgenses et eorum heredes et omnes in eodem burgo manentes sive residentes molent omnimoda blada sua ad molendinum vel molendina mea et heredum meorum, si molendinum vel molendina in eadem villa fuerint, ad sextumdecimum granum. 4. Et quod predicti burgenses et heredes sui reddant mihi heredibus et assignatis meis imperpetuum pro quolibet burgagio duodecim denarios argenti per annum ad festa nativitatis S. lohannis baptiste et natalis domini per equales porciones. 6. Et predicti burgenses et heredes sui et omnes in eodem burgo manentes sive residentes facient mihi heredibus et assignatis meis imper- petuum omnimoda alia servicia sicut tenentes eiusdem ville mihi fecerint ante diem confeccionis presentium. 6. Et quod bene liceat predictis burgensibus et eorum heredibus pre- dicta burgagia sua vendere, dare, et assignare voluntarie, salvo semper mihi heredibus et assignatis meis in quolibet recessu cuiuscunque bur- gensis quatuor denarios argenti. 7. Et quod omnes predicti burgenses et eorum heredes sive in eodem burgo manentes sive residentes habeant communia pasture ad omnimoda aueria *^ et pecora sua in predicta villa de Eoby omni tempore anni, salvis semper mihi heredibus et assignatis meis omnimodis assartis '" et appro- uiamentis inde factis et imposterum I'aciendis sive assartandis. ^' 8. Et dedi etiam et concessi predictis burgensibus heredibus et assig- natis suis in eodem manentibus ^^ communia turbarie in omnibus moris et « Manuscript ' Pentenc' "' Manuscript 'burgensis.' '* Manuscript 'et.' °* Manuscript ' servesie vnius.' " Chapman row. " Manuscript ' burgo.' '" Manuscript ' ouiuslibet burgencii.' '" Manuscript ' oueria.' ™ Manuscript ' assertis.' ■" Manuscript 'asserland.' "'•' Manuscript ' manentes.' 296 COPYHOLD CASES IN April mossis de Knowslegh ad fodendum, siceandum, et carriandum pro voluntate sua et heredum suorum quolibet annoimperpetuumduodecimcarectatas'* turbarum ad quodlibet ^^ astrum ^^ super dicta burgagia edificandum, cum libero introitu et exitu ad dictas moras et mossas de Knowslegh omni ""^ tempore anni sine inlpedimento mei vel assignatorum meorum. In cuius rei testimonium huic presenti carte mee sigillum meum apposui. Hiis testibus Willelmo de Atherton, Eicardo de Bolde, Thoma de Sotheworth, militibus, lohanne de Eccleston, Henrico de Scaresbreck et aliis. Datum apud Knowslegh die Lune proxima post festum invencionis sancte crucis a. r. r. Edwardi tertii post conquestum xlvi.'"^ Copyhold Cases in the Early Chancery Proceedings. As early as the sixteenth century an opinion was established in the legal world that Danby and Brian, by their respective judgments in 7 E. IV and 21 E. IV, laid the foundation of the security of copy- holders at the common law, and that before this time a customary tenant, when wronged by a stranger or even by his lord, could apply for a remedy in the chancery. Without entering now into the vexed question of the copyholders' protection by the courts of common law I propose to report some fifteenth-century copy- hold cases in the chancery. The point is of considerable import- ance, as we probably here meet with the first stage of the process by which copyhold tenure passed out of the strict confines of manorial custom into the open field of common law. My cases are taken from the calendared part of the Early Chancery Proceedings. The latest of them, therefore, are of the reign of Edward IV. As far as I know nobody has ever written on them. It is to be regretted that there is no single copyhold case in Mr. Baildon's ' Select Cases in Chancery.' But Mr. Gay tells me that he has used the proceedings for the work he is preparing on the agrarian history of the Tudor period. I think Mr. Leadam is the only scholar who has dealt with the subject.' But it is difficult to write on chancery jurisdiction with- out consulting the proceedings. Mr. Leadam is of opinion that the customary tenants were efficiently protected by the chancery as early as the fourteenth century. His authorities are three petitions of the commons, an anonymous Elizabethan commentator on Littleton, and one of Coke's reports.^ 1. The Commons pray in 2 E. II that all suits concerning freehold may be determmed at the common law without compelling anybody to I M^»"f<="Pt ; carettacas .■ », Manuscript ' qnolibed.' U. hearth.' »= Manuscript ' omne.' « lo May 1372 ' Transactions of the B. Sist. Soc. (N.S.), vi. 236-8 4 Kep^^l h!"''' '"' ^*' ^^^' ^^^ ' *^°°^'"^"*^'^y °" ^'*'1«'°°. «d- by Gary, 1879, p. 185 ; 1902 _ THE EARLY CHANCERY PROCEEDINGS 297 appear before the king's council by a chancery writ. The king answers that in all cases concerning freehold the final decision will remain with the common law courts ; but in all cases of oppression, where the common law cannot have its proper course, the oppressors will be summoned to appear before the Council and to give assurance that they will not disturb the course of common law. It is perfectly clear that both the petition and the answer relate to cases determinable at common law, and to nothing else. The oppression of the people does not mean the oppression of the customary tenants, as Mr. Leadam infers. The oppressed persons spoken of have the right to sue at the common law, but cannot realise it owing to the high social position of the oppressors. The whole aim of the government is to secure the usual course of the common law and not to develop the chancery jurisdiction. The Commons' petition in 13 E. II is of quite the same purport, but is laid down in more general terms. It speaks of aU matters determinable at common law, not of freehold only. The royal answer is evasive : the king wishes to maintain his privilege, as his ancestors have done before him. The Commons repeat their petition in 17 E. II with an additional demand : the chancellor, in all suits determinable in the chancery, ought to require suflBcient pledges for the prosecution from the complainants and to assess the damages for the defendant in case of false complaint. The royal answer grants to the chancellor the powers required. The answer is embodied in two subsequent statutes.^ An important feature is common to all three petitions. They do not protest against equity jurisdiction in general; they complain of its en- croachments on the common law courts. Granted that the chancellors of the fourteenth century tried to protect the customary tenants remaining without remedy at common law, the petitions do not contain a single word of protest (except the demand of sufficient pledges) against the new development of the chancery jurisdiction. 2. It is perfectly true that the Elizabethan commentator on Littleton quotes the two statutes above mentioned under ' tenant by copy,' but this is no evidence of repute as to their relevance. In the section ' tenant by copy ' the commentator inserts a long digression on the plegii de jnvsequendo in general, and it is in this connexion that he quotes the statutes. 3. The Coke's report contains a very interesting case indeed. Coke takes it from Fitzherbert's ' Abridgment,' where the exposition is much clearer.'' The appellant, a tenant at the will of the lord according to the custom of the manor of Stepney, applied to the common pleas for a writ of false judgment against the decision in the bishop's court of Stepney, where his suit was in the nature of the assize of vioj-t d'anccstor. The court refused to grant such a writ, on the ground that the freehold was with the lord. Nevertheless the case is very important. As far as I know we have here the earliest instance of the protection of the customary tenant by the common bench. The protection is yet very moderate. ' 17 E. II, c. 6, 15 H. VI, c. 4. * Fitzherbert, Abr. ' Faux jug.' 7. Fitzherbert himself quotes the unprinted Year Book, 13 B. II. 298 COPYHOLD CASES IN April Two justices agree that the lord may be compelled by the court to do justice between two of his customary tenants when he refuses to do so.* But the case has absolutely nothing to do with the chancery jurisdic- tion. My inference is not that the customary tenants were unpro- tected in the fourteenth century. I only wish to point out that Mr. Leadam's quotations are irrelevant to copyhold tenure. Not a single chancery copyhold case is known to me from the fourteenth century. I do not in the least deny the existence of such cases. On the contrary it is probable that such cases did occur in the equity jurisdiction. If the king's bench could compel the lord to do justice between two customary tenants of his previously to 13 E. II, why could not the chancellor protect them even in a more eEBcient manner ? I fear our only hope of dis- covering such cases lies in the unwieldy and innumerable plea rolls. At least I have not been able to find them either in the printed Year Books or in the few chancery proceedings preserved from the fourteenth century. But in the fifteenth century such suits are not very rare. Fitzherbert mentions one, but he gives no details. Another instance is referred to in the Year Books, in the famous case where Danby is supposed to have given a judgment for the copyholder.* I have found eleven cases, though my methods were far from being perfect. I took the list of Early Chancery Proceedings, and went through all the cases that are stated there to relate to copyhold tenure. There may be more, provided any- body can examine all the cases of land tenure where the nature of the tenure is not specified in the list ; but I was not able to do this. The cases are arranged in chronological order as far as it can be established. 1. Bundle 9 n. 139 a-b. There are two bills relating to the same case. The entry on the 'plegii de prosequendo in 139 a gives the exact date, 4 Feb. 17 H. VI. I think that 139 a is the first bill. The two plaintiffs, daughters of Tho. Stowell, claim a copyhold tenement in the manor of Dulwich. They say that Margery Loxle had held the land and surrendered it into the hands of Tho. Ingolf, then bailiff of the manor, to the use of Tho. Stowell and his heirs. After the death of Tho. Stowell the plaintiffs demanded to be admitted, but the abbot of Bermondsey, lord of the manor, seised the tenement in his hands and refused the admission. The application is made for a writ of subpoena to be sent to the abbot. The plaintiffs add a very important statement about their legal position : " TUrn : ' Je vey en bank le roy ou plee f uit pendant en court le snr entre deux que fuer' al volunte que brief fuit grauntz al snr a distreindre le snr de faire droit entre eux, etc' Caund : ' Et ceo ne fuit semble a oeo cas, oar le siir puit estre constrein de faire droit.' " Fitzherbert, Abr. ' Subpena ' 21, 32 H. VI. The case is quoted by Mr Leadam Year Books, Mich. 7 E. IV, 19. ' 1.902 THE EARLY CHANCERY PROCEEDINGS 299 howe your seid suppliauntz be withoute remedie at the commone lawe because the seide mees and lande be helde by copie. Probably the abbot or his steward was able to adduce many particulars not mentioned in 139 a, so that the plaintiffs were obliged to bring in a second bill, 139 b, with further details. The abbot is no longer the defendant. The plaintiffs ask for a writ of subpoena against the steward of the manor and one John Colcok. It is now alleged that the steward refused to enter in the court rolls the said surrender of Margery Loxle, and supports the claims of John Colcok to the same tenement. Colcok pretends to have a joint estate in the land by a foot of fine. But the plaintiffs afBrm that Colcok's name is not to be found either in the copy or in the court rolls. Colcok ought to be examined about the matter, and the steward ought to bring the court rolls. We hear no more about the suit. No chancery decrees are preserved before 35 H. VIII. All the same the case is of great importance, as it proves two things. Two copyholders affirm in 17 H. VI that they are still without remedy at the common law, but they believe in the efficiency of the chancery protection ; as early as 17 H. VI a customary tenant could commence a chancery suit against his lord. 2. Bundle 9 n. 353. We have in 19 H. VI another case where two copyholders, husband and wife, bring a bill of complaint against their lord, the master of Arundel College, in Sussex. The manor is called Bury. The bill is in a bad state and not all particulars are legible. The com- plainants say that the lord granted them a cottage and a yardland to hold according to the custom of the manor, and that an entry thereof was made in the court rolls. The nature of the subsequent offence is not clear. Apparently the lord has either refused the actual seisin or evicted the complainants, as they beg for a writ of subpoena against him. The entry is dated 7 Nov. 19 H. VI. 3. Bundle 9 n. 77. The second case of 19 H. VI reveals the abuses of the feoffees to uses. It shows, together with other similar cases, that the chancery protected the interests of cestuy que use in copyholders' suits, just in the same manner as when he was a freeholder. The defendant, John Adthelwolde, was seised of a messuage and 27J acres of copyhold at Geest, in Norfolk, jointly with W. Lutton, to the use of W. Lutton and his heirs, to the intent that he should release the land to W. Lutton or his son. W. Lutton died, and his son, the supplicant, required the defendant to surrender the copyhold to the use of the supplicant. But John Adthelwolde utterly refused to do so. Th. Lutton begs to direct a writ of subpoena to John Adthelwolde. There is, again, an entry on the plegii deprosequendo. They appeared before the king in the chancery on 3 Nov. of 19 H. VI. As in the former case it is clear that the bill was not refused consideration, and that the matter was not looked upon as lying outside the sphere of equity jurisdiction. In 19 H. VI the copyholder could apply to the chancery when wronged by the lord or the feoffee to his use. 4. In two cases the title of the chancellor (lord cardinall of York) enables us to fix the date within the limit of three years — 28-31 H. VI. These cases are therefore next in time. One of the pleas (Bundle 19 n. 162) relates to the manor of Melksham, Wilts. The bill is instructive in so far 300 COPYHOLD CASES IN April as it shows that a copyholder did not hesitate to bring a bill in chancery even when his claim was of a highly controversial nature. The matter in dispute is a messuage and a ploughland of copyhold. The plaintiff calls himself heir to the late tenant, but, as he is only cousin, his rights are extremely doubtful. The reversion of the tenement was bought by N. Eodeway, who entered the holding with the permission of the steward. The bill contains interesting details on the customs of the manor. The usual fine is one year's rent. But N. Eodeway was obliged to pay 31. for his fine in order to get the reversion. If the plaintiff is right in his asser- tion this is a striking example of changing the custom to the disad- vantage of the tenant. 5. Bundle 19 n. 237. The second case of the same date reveals abuses in a manorial court. A copyholder of the abbot of St. Albans brings a complaint against the clerk of the manor, John Spygon. His mother died seised of a customary tenement, that was surrendered to the lord to her use. The homage acknowledged the complainant to be the next heir. But the clerk of the court did not enter the admittance of his mother in the court rolls ; thus the complainant is threatened with dis- inheritance. The clerk answers in an evasive manner. He entered the surrender of the tenement in the rolls without any malice. If the com- plainant be able to find the particular entry he will be admitted to the tenement. The plaintiff insists on his assertion : the clerk did not make the entry. A v/rit must be directed to the abbot to certify the truth by examination of the court rolls. The court rolls were the foundation of copyhold estates. The proper manner of keeping the records was of vital importance for the copy- holders, and even small abuses of manorial officers could disinherit the customary tenant. The case proves that chancery controls the book- keeping of manorial clerks under H. VI and can claim the court rolls for inspection. The clerk does not question the controlling rights of chancery ; he does not say that he is responsible only to the lord of the manor. 6. Bundle 16 n. 376 a. The name of the chancellor, the archbishop of Canterbury, gives no clue to fix the date ; but the terminus ante quern is estabhshed by it, 35 H. VI. The manor is Michell Hormed, Herts. Three copyholders of the name of Baroun complain of the fermor of the manor for unlawful seisin of their copyhold (7 acres), forcible entry, and threats of murder. They apply to the chancellor, because they have no remedy at common law. The answer of the fermor is very interesting, because it states the land to be a bond tenancy. But the defendant does not bring forward the exception of villeinage. Perhaps I may infer from this that already in the fifteenth century the chancery drew no distinction between bond tenure and customary tenure. There can be no doubt that no such distinction was acknowledged by the law courts in the sixteenth century. Personal bondage is to be traced late in the Tudor period ; the number of the bondmen is considerable oven under Elizabeth, and their disabihties cannot always be treated as insignificant survivals. But bond tenure early loses its servile character and attains the level of 'customary' copyhold, even receiving the name of bond copyhold in some Tudor 1902 THE EARLY CHANCERY PROCEEDINGS SOI surveys/ The case is an important proof that this state of things -was probably developed before the.Tudors. The plea of the fermor is that the barons have forfeited their copyhold by their denial of a customary service called common fine. The lord ordered him to seise the tenement. He now holds the land by lease. The accusations of forcible entry and of threat are determinable at common law, but he denies them both. 7. The remaining cases belong to the reign of Edward IV. The most important case took place between 1465 and 1471 (Bundle 31 n. 342-345). The manor is Toyfield, in Middlesex. There are four documents preserved of this lawsuit. As we learn from the bill, John Kyngesden, father of the plaintiff, died seised of a messuage and 5^ acres of customary land, when his son was in helmet with the king in the field at Sherburn. It was ' noised ' in the country that the plaintiff was slain, and his sister Amy entered the tene- ment. But when N. Kyngesden returned to his place the jurors found in the court that he was the next heir. He paid to John Gybon, lord of the manor, 20s. for fine and 10s. 2d. for arrears of the rent, and demanded admission. But John Gybon being his own steward and holding the court would not give judgment of the verdict, and since then held no court for this purpose, intending to have the profits of the tenement to his own use. The plaintiff is without remedy at common law and begs for a writ of suhioocna against John Gybon. The lord of the manor avails himself of special pleading in his answer. It has not yet been found by the homage whether the father of the plaintiff died seised of the said land. If they will find it at the next court the plaintiff will receive all that right and conscience require. The plaintiff paid to him neither fine nor arrerages. The defendant seised the tenement during the suit between N. Kyngesden and his sister. The money the plaintiff is speaking of was paid by a third person for the grass of the meadow. The defendant never was his own steward ; his steward is Eobert Shipden of Purnyvales Inne. N. Kyngesden in his replication tries to prove that his father died seised of the tenement : (a) John Gybon alleges no surrender of the land ; (&) the admittance of John Kyngesden's daughter is an evident proof that he died seised of the land. Then follow some curious remarks on Gybon's behaviour as steward of the manor. The plaintiff begs for a judgment to restore the land ; but he is ready to submit to an inquiry by an indifferent learned man. The lord has then to refute both the reasonings and allegations of the plaintiff. The land ought to be forfeited to the lord even in the lifetime of John Kyngesden, as he alienated it by free charter in prejudice of the lord of the manor. There was also a surrender of the tenement : John Kyngesden surrendered it to his daughter and her husband on the condition that they would feed him. We have no decree. We do not know whether the ingenious soldier ' See, for instance, Duchy of Lancaster, Rentals and Surveys, Miscell. Books, vol. 117, 33 Eliz., manors of Eussenden, Higham Ferrers, Eaundes, Northants ; ibid. vol. 109, 1 Eliz., manors of Tutbury and EoUeston, Staffordshire ; ibid. Spec. Conim. 13, 1 Eliz., soke of Knaresborough and manor of Aldeburgh, Yorks ; Eentals and Surveys, Portf. 'v* , 2 E. VI, manor of Ormesby, Norfolk. 802 COPYttOLD CASES W April was able to recover the meadow out of the firm grasp of the landlord. But the pleadings throw a curious hght on the legal status of copyholders under Edward IV. They are still unprotected by common law ; they are obliged to apply to equity. The chancery does not refuse protection. On the contrary, the pleadings bear witness that fair play took place between the lord and his customary tenant. This does not mean that the result was favourable to the plaintiff. The lord had so many ways by which to evade the allegations, and the custom of the manor was by no means an easy thing to ascertain. The copyholder speaks of an inquiry by an impartial lawyer. The intimation raises grave suspicions. Issuing of special commissions in copyhold cases was a favourite pro- cedure with the privy council, the star chamber, and the court of requests under the Tudors. The commissioners were almost exclusively gentlemen. They might be learned ; but it was very difficult for them to be indifferent when, according to the usual formula of the commission, they tried to bring the parties to a peaceful agreement. I fear much more stress is laid in the rejoinder on the qualification of indifference than on that of legal knowledge. 8. Bundle 31 n. 157. Addressed to George, archbishop of York, the bill relates, as the preceding case, to 1465-1471. The place is Navestoke, in Essex. The claims of the plaintiff look very controversial. He claims the charter land and the copyhold of his brother, who lately died. The brother alienated the land during his hfetime to the defendants. But the plaintiff pretends that the matter was determined otherwise by the last will of his brother, by which he instituted the plaintiff to be his heir. We know nothing more of the case. 9. The three last cases belong to the period 5 Edward IV-23 Ed- ward IV. The first (Bundle 32 n. 324) relates to the manor of Langham, in Essex. The case is very complicated. The plaintiff brought a complaint against an executor of a copyholder, who desired his executors to sell his copyhold and give the money for charitable uses. The widow, the other executor, sold the land to the plaintiff, but the defendant refuses to acknowledge the bargain and takes the profits to his own use. 10. Bundle 36 n. 57. The place is Ailsham, in Norfolk. The curious feature of the case is that the plantiff does not mention the character of the tenure. We learn only from the answer that it is a customary tenure. The plaintiff alleges that he enfeoffed the defendants to his own use, but they refuse to re-enfeoff him according to the agreement. Probably the nature of tenure was not considered at all in such complaints against feoffees to uses. The chancery enforced the agreement in all cases alike. One of the defendants explains his behaviour in the answer. The allegations of the plaintiff are true, but not complete ; after the enfeoffment he sold the land to one John Howard, who received it from the defendants. 11. Bundle 32 n. 264-7. The manor is Kyngeshall, in Suffolk. The plaintiff is a widow : her late husband enfeoffed one W. Basse of a copyhold to her use ; but W. Basse, by the procuring and maintenance of W. Lewger, the fermor of the manor, refuses to give her the land. The defendants say in their answer that the plaintiff lost her right to the copyhold. One of the conditions of the use was that she ought not to 1902 TttE EARLY CHANCEnr PtiOCEEoWGS 803 bring any action of dower in the freehold of her husband against W. Basse ; but she did so and made void her claim to the copyhold. The widow avers in her replication that the feoffment to her use was not subject to any condition whatever. The defendants in the rejoinder insist on their former statement. They add that W. Lewger has nothing to do with the matter. It is a particularly obscure period in the legal history of the customary tenants which stretches from Henry III to Edward IV. Professor Vinogradoff and Professor Maitland have explained the thirteenth-century cases of Martin Bestenover and of William son of Henry, where the common law courts protect the tenant in villeinage. Professor Vinogradoff saw there the germs of copyhold tenure ; Professor Maitland considered that it was possible to regard the cases as ' belated rather than premature.' Mr. Leadam tried to explain the cases of Danby and Brian, which are supposed to have established the security of copyholders.^ 1 fear they remain and must remain very dark until anybody will have the courage and good luck to find the original entries in the De Banco Eoils. But under Henry VII we have in the Year Books very clear instances proving that copyhold cases became determinable at the common law ; and, besides, the star chamber and the court of requests come to our rescue. It is the gap between Henry III and Henry VII that needs to be filled. I hope the above reported cases will help in this direction, and here lies their significance. They bring back the legal history of the copyhold to 17 H. VI ; they show copyhold to have been unprotected by the common law courts under Henry VI and even under Edward IV. But they show also the equity jurisdiction firmly estabhshed. Copyholders, perhaps copyholders of bond tenure, bring in com- plaints even against their lord. Their aim is not simple recovery of damages, as in the Danby and Brian cases, but recovery of tenure. The judgments are lost. But the procedure was no mere joke; even the lords of the manor felt obliged to prepare elaborate answers and declared themselves ready to submit to the judgment of the court. Alexander Savinb. Dean Co let and Archbishop War ham. A POINT in one of Erasmus's letters has escaped the notice of the biographers of Colet. In Ep. 158, viii. 5,^ written from St. Omer on 5 June 1516 to his friend and frequent correspondent Andreas Ammonius, Latin secretary to Henry VIII, Erasmus says — " Villeimage in England, pp. 78-81 ; History of English Law, i. 359 (2nd ed.) ; Transactims of the B. Hist. Soc. (N.S.), vi. 238-45. ' In quoting Erasmus's letters I give the reference first to the Leyden edition o£ 1703, and then to the London edition of 1642. 304 DEAN COLET AND ARCHBISHOP WABHAM April Gaudeo N. ereptum e carcere regio, id si tuo quoque bono factum est, duplici nomine gaudeo. Amo Coleti tam Christianum animum : nam eius unius opera liberatum audio, cum is semper a Coleto inter amicissimos habitus, cum urgeretur episcoporum calumniis, ab illius adversariis steterit. This has been taken by Mr. Lupton and by Mr. Seebohm to refer to some unknown royal prisoner ; and Dr. Knight even hazards a conjecture that the man may have been imprisoned for Lollardy. But if this letter is put in its right place in Erasmus's correspondence it becomes quite plain that the ' N.' so myste- riously spoken of is Archbishop Warham, and the ' royal prison ' from which he is released is the office of chancellor, in which he was long retained against his will. From internal evidence it is clear that Ep. 158, viii. 5, was written in reply to a letter from Ammonius,^ dated 17 Feb. 1516, London, in which Erasmus was informed that tuus Cantuaricnsis cum bona Regis venia niagistratu se ahdicavit. Warham' s resignation took place on 22 Dec. 1515, and was also announced to Erasmus by More in an undated letter which clearly belongs to this period.' Archiepiscopus Cantuariensis officio cancellarii, cuius onus iam aliquot (ut scis) annos mirum qiiam lahorahat excutere, tandem exolutus est, ac desideratum iamdiu secretum nactus gratissimo inter literas ocio ao negociorum bene ab se gestorum recordatione perfruitur. Erasmus answered this letter from Brussels on 2 June 1516,* but makes no allusion to Warham in writing to More. The omission does not, however, weaken the identification, when we consider the circumstances under which Erasmus wrote. He was returning from Basle, where he had been residing since July 1515, hard at work on the 'Novum Instrumentum,' which had just been brought to a conclusion. He had left Basle in the middle of May, and reached Antwerp on 31 May or 1 June 1516. There he found More's letter awaiting him, and presumably a large number of other letters from England, including Ammonius's, to judge from the budget he despatched to London from St. Omer on 5 June. There are letters surviving addressed to Linacre,'* Ammo- nius, Latimer," Urswick,^ and Fisher,* and he also mentions that he wrote to Warham, Colet, Sixtin, Euthall, Lupset, and Watson. Those that survive are only short notes to announce his return, and in addition to his evident haste he was attacked by a fever, for which he asks Linacre for a prescription. Ep. 364 was written at Brussels during a short halt on the journey from Antwerp to St. Omer, whence he intended to cross at once to England. The omis- sion of a single point, therefore, in answering More does not give any ground for questioning the identification above suggested. 2 Ep. 236, ii. 7. ' Ep. 227, ii. 16. ' Ep. 364, vii. 23. =■ Ep. 157 x 7 " Ep. 254, xii. 19. ' Ep. 255, viii. 35. » Ep. 256, vii. 9. ' 1902 DEAN COLET AND ARCHBISHOP WARHAM 305 The interest of this lies in the fact that it throws light on War- ham's attitude towards Colet in the obscure episode of the attack made on Colet by his bishop, Fitzjames, probably in 1518, and also on Colet's position and influence with the king, who seems from this to have attached great importance to Colet's advice in the choice of his ministers. The exact circumstances of the action brought against Colet are not quite certain. Erasmus " in a memoir of Colet written in 1521, after his death, describes how Fitzjames, with two other bishops, charged Colet before Warham on three counts, culled from his sermons ; and adds that the arch- bishop, cui Coleti dotes erant egregie cognitae, patrocinium inno- centis siiscej)it, e iudice factus patromis, cum ipse Coletus ad haec aliaque stultiora respondere dedignaretuv. Tyndale, writing in 1530, says that Fitzjames ' would have made the old Dean Colet of Paul's a heretic .... had not the bishop of Canterbury holp the dean ; ' and Latimer, preaching in 1552, says that he heard in a Cambridge lecture of an event happening ' at that time when Dr. Colet was in trouble, and should have been burnt, if God had not turned the king's heart to the contrary.' That Colet should ever have been in danger of being burnt for heresy seems very im- probable when we remember the high respect in which he was held by Henry VIII in 1512 and 1513." That his enemies would have liked to burn him is, however, quite probable ; and Latimer's reminiscence is no doubt coloured by the virulence of the outcry which he must have heard from the conservative party in Cam- bridge, the place where Erasmus found obscurantism so strong and where his ' Novum Instrumentum ' was damned with such detailed completeness. Of the date of the episode and of what actually happened to Colet there is little trace. Erasmus, writing on 11 July 1513, comments on a remark of Colet's, quum scribis molestia negociorum te solito gravius vexari. Equidem cupiam te quantum potest longissime a mundanis negociis semoveri, non quod verear ne mundus hie, ut est hamatus, te sibi vindicet ac manus iniiciat, sed quod malim istud ingenium ... in solidum impend! Christo. Quod si non potes explicare te, cavendum tamen ne indies altius atque altius immergaris. Vinci fortasse praestiterit, quam tanti emere victoriam. Maximum enim bonum mentis tranquillitas. Atque has sunt spinae, divitiarum comites. Interim malevolorum blateramentis oppone rectam at synceram conscientiam, in unum ilium et simplicem Christum te coliige, et minus turbabit multiplex mundus.^' This may mark the beginning of Colet's troubles with the bishop. Erasmus's words certainly imply that he regarded Colet's difficulties as in some way connected with his wealth, and that it was open to him to escape from them by giving way on some = Ep. 435, XV. 14. " Ibid. " Ep. 115, xii. 21 VOL. XVII. — NO. LXVI. X 306 r)EAN COLUT Al^D AliCItBlSItOP fTARBAM April point. But it is possible that he misunderstood the first news he received of the attack on Colet, and that the malevolorum Hater amenta, to which he pays httle heed, were really the kernel of the matter. We have no other letters from him to Colet till 31 Oct. 1513,'^ by which time the affair seems to have been con- cluded. He says — De reddita quiete dici non potest quam tibi gratuler [at opening : and again at the end he adds] gratulatus sum proximis Uteris et iterum gratulor, quod ad sanctissimos illos ae saluberrimos concionandi labores redieris. Arbitror enim cessatiunculam illam in bonum etiam versum iri, dum avidius audient cuius vocem aliquamdiu desyderarunt. Colet's biographers agree in explaining this as a temporary suspension from preaching pronounced by Fitzjames, and they are probably right, though there is nothing in the words quoted from the end of Ep. 107 which could not apply to an interruption caused by illness. The account given by Erasmus in Ep. 435 may be taken as substantially correct ; and it is quite possible that Fitzjames suspended Colet from preaching, perhaps for three months {cessatiuncula ilia), while the case was being tried. The identification suggested in this note indicates that Colet's friends were not pleased with Warham's action in the matter, and regarded him as having sided with the adversary. Probably they expected an entire acquittal and a triumphant removal of the sus- pension. Warham, though he sympathised with Colet's intellectual position, and had a warm affection for him,. perhaps, while acquit- ting him, allowed the suspension to stand for the sake of ecclesiastical order, till it expired, thereby saving the bishop from an awkward position, but incurring the indignation of Erasmus, who was an ardent partisan of Colet. Of this indignation no trace remains in the letter of 1521, either because Erasmus was not writing with the freedom permitted by the mysterious cloak of ' N.,' or perhaps we may conjecture that he was induced to take a more dispassionate view of the matter by Colet himself, whose relations with Warham remained quite unclouded by the episode. It may be worthy of remark, in illustration of the caution with which Erasmus's correspondence must be used in its present form, that of the ten letters here quoted not one stands with its date correct and complete in either of the editions referred to. P. S. Allen. TAe Dialogue on Richdieu and his Policy. In the very interesting dialogue which Dr. Hodgkin published in the last number of the English Historical Review {ante, p. 20) there occur a number of French names— of people and places— woefully misspelt '" Ep. 107, vi. 9. 1902 THE DIALOGUE OA^ ItlCHELlEV S07 by the Italian scribe whose manuscript Dr. Hodgkin translates. In some cases the translator has suggested emendations or pointed out that the word as it stands cannot be correct. For the convenience of those who refer to the dialogue in the future a few more explanations and comments may be attempted. On p. 29 we have a list of the fortresses which Eichelieu had under his control. The first name on the list is Brouage. Dr. Hodgkin suggests that we should read Bourges. But here the Italian is in the right : Eichelieu became governor of the port of Brouage, over against Oleron, in 1629. Next we are told how Eichelieu ' artfully got possession of Granvelte, Havre, il Ponte deir Area, and Pontioche [ ? Ponthieu], in France. In Brittany and Normandy he held Brest, Sanmaur, Angers, Amboise, the islands, and Olerui [ ? Oleron].' The suggestion of Oleron for ' Olerui ' is certainly correct ; but ' Pontioche ' can hardly be Ponthieu, a district which Eichelieu never held. More probably it is Pontoise. In his will (printed at the end of Aubery's life) the cardinal bequeathed his rights over this place to his nephew. ' Sanmaur ' should no doubt be Saumur, another of the towns mentioned in the will. ' II Ponte dell' Area ' is of course Pont de I'Arche, on the Seine above Elboeuf; and Granvelle must be Granville, in the Cotentin, also mentioned in the will. On p. 30 the ' duchess of Ognana ' is the duchess of Ornano, who was disgraced with the princess of Conti, as the Italian says. I cannot improve on Dr. Hodgkin's suggestion that ' M. de Tudeschin ' is in reality M. de Tron9on, though the identification is not quite certain. On the same page we are told how ' the seigneurs Chaudebonne, Monde wie [ ? Montaigu], and Ornano, brother of Marshal Ornano,' were imprisoned after the marshal's fall in 1626. ' Mondewie ' cannot, I think, be Montaigu. The only person of that name whom the cardinal imprisoned was Walter Montague, son of the earl of Manchester, who was arrested in Lorraine at the very end of 1627 and sent to the Bastille. The person arrested with Chaudebonne is called in the Memoirs of Eichelieu (iii. 72) and of Bassompierre (iii. 50) Modene. As the text calls this ' Mondewie ' an ' adherent ' of Ornano and couples him with Chaudebonne it seems probable that he is Modene. Finally on p. 45 we read how the king offered his mother ' the government of Angers, by means of Marshal Schomberg and the lord of Eoysi [?], who were sent to her for this express purpose. ' There is no difficulty about the name of Schomberg's companion. He was Jean Jacques de Mesme, sieur de Eoissy, the father of the count d'Avaux. J. H. Clapham. 308 KILLING NO MURDER' April ' Killing No Murder.' The authorship of ' Killing No Murder ' has been claimed by two different persons, and critics have doubted to whom to assign it. Usually Colonel Silius Titus is described as being its author, but sometimes Lieut.-Colonel Edward Sexby is credited with produc- ing it. There is some evidence on behalf of both claimants. The pamphlet appeared in May 1657. I have seen here (wrote Hyde to Nicholas on 30 May) a printed paper of some two or three sheets, entitled ' Killing No Murder,' and is only to show the lawfulness and conveniency that he be presently killed, and is dedicated to Cromwell himself with as witty an epistle as I have seen, and in truth the whole piece is so full of wit that I cannot imagine who could write it ; it seems to me to be written on this side the sea by the paper and the letter.' In the latter part of May the pamphlet appeared in England. 'Between you and me,' wrote Morland to Pell on 4 June, there has been the most dangerous pamphlet lately thrown about the streets that ever has been printed in these times. I have sent you the preface, which is more light, but, believe me, the body of it is more solid ; I mean as to showing the author's learning, though the greatest rancour, malice, and wickedness that ever man could show — nay, I think the devil himself could not have shown more.^ Three hundred copies of the book had been seized in London on 25 May, and about 1,400 more on the 27th.' About June Sexby went over to England to carry on the plot against the Protector, and on 24 July he was arrested in disguise just as he was about to return to the Low Countries. He was imprisoned in the Tower, where on 14 Oct., before three witnesses, he avowed the authorship of the pamphlet in question. As touching the books entitled ' Kilhng No Murder,' &c., he owned them as his own work, and was still of that judgment ; and said he might have destroyed the Protector, because he was not chosen nor set up by the people, but thai now the case was altered, the parliament having settled the government on him.'' ... As to that passage in the said books charging Sir John Barkstead with having smothered Synderoomb in his pillow and sheets, he said it was foolishly and knavishly done by him in so writing. He said further that he hath some of those books in London which he understands are burnt ; and he hath 250 of them in Holland.^ ' Clarendon State Papers, iii. 343. ' Vaughan, Ths Protectorate of Oliver Crcmwell, ii. 184 ; cp. ii. 199. » Thurloe, vi. 315-320. * Eeferring to the Petition and Advice by which parliament had given Cromwell's government a constitutional basis, ' Thurloe, vi. 560. 1902 'KILLING NO MURDER' 309 The substance of Sexby's confession was published, after his death, in Mercurius Politims for 14-21 Jan. 1658. His claim was therefore publicly known before the close of the Protectorate. On the other hand the claim of Colonel Titus is not heard of till some years later. In a letter to Hyde dated 17 Dec. 1657 he speaks of the publication of Hawke's answer to ' Killing No Murder,' saying that the author of the contrary pamphlet is there formally endited of high treason, and brought under the statute 25 Ed. Ill, but I doe not heare they have yet taken him. Titus, it is observable, makes no claim to the authorship, and though he knew that Sexby was a prisoner evidently knew nothing of his confession on this point.'^ When Titus first declared himself to be the author is uncertain. Evelyn in his ' Diary,' under 2 April 1669, speaks of meeting at dinner in the Treasurer's house Col. Titus of the bedchamber, author of the famous piece against Crom- well, ' Killing No Murder.' Apparently therefore his claim was by this time generally known and admitted. A new piece of evidence in the shape of an explicit statement made by Titus himself has lately come to hand. In a copy of the reprint of the famous pamphlet ^ which was published in 1689 there is the following inscription : — Mem. June 17, 1697. CoH : Titus told me at his house in Bushey in Hertfordshire, on Tues- day June 15, 1697 (as he had done y'= same thing some yeares before) That he writ this pamphlet at Breda ; and one Saxbie seeing it, under- tooke and effected its printing ; thus fathering it on W™ Allen ; who, it seemes, was a great man for Oliver till he tooke upon him y^ Protector- ship, and y'' was as much ags* him.* Upon y<^ bookes eomeing out, Oliver sent for W" AUen, and ask'd him if he was y== author. Allen desired to see y^ booke, w"'^ Oliver lent him to read ; and y" Allen told him, y' he knew well enough y' he had not capacity enough to be y^ author ; but y' if he had been able to have writ it, he would with all his heart have done it. Pet : Newcome. It is clear from this note that Titus did not merely allow the pamphlet to be attributed to him, but openly announced that he was its author. To decide between the two claimants it is necessary to seek for corroborating testimony, and to examine the internal evidence which the pamphlet itself affords. It is certain that the two men were intimately connected during the period when it was written. Titus was at Breda in October 1656, and was visited there ° Cal. Clarendon State Papers, iii. 398. ' This copy is at present in my possession. It was given me by Mr. C. Davis of Eew, who bought it from a bookseller. * William Allen, like Sexby, had been a trooper in Cromwell's own regiment, was one of the agitators elected in 1C47, and became finally a captain and adjutant- general of the horse in Ireland. For a life of him see Clarke Papers, i. 432. 310 'KILLING NO MURDEE' April by Sexby in December. He describes himself as endeavouring to persuade Sexby to procure the assassination of Cromwell rather than to seek to overthrow him by contriving an insurrection, and appa- rently he succeeded in converting him to this view. From the end of March to the beginning of April 1657 Sexby and Titus were to- gether in Holland, just at the time when the pamphlet must have been passing through the press.' The close association of the two during the period naturally suggests the hypothesis that the pamphlet was the joint work of the two. Nor is it very difficult to determine the relative part of the two in the work. They were men of different pohtical opinions temporarily associated by their common hostility to Cromwell. Sexby was a republican of the extremest type. Titus was a presbyterian who had fought for the parliament and was subsequently converted to royalism. Now so far as the pamphlet embodies any political principles (apart from its apology for tyrannicide) republicanism, not royalism, is the creed set forth, and set forth with a fiery sincerity which precludes the supposition that it is merely assumed for the purposes of argument. In the next place the pamphlet both begins and ends with a reference to the case of Sexby's friend and agent Sindercombe. At the begin- ning (and this helps to fix the date of its composition) the author mentions Sindercombe's arrest, which took place on 9 Jan. 1657, and at the end he refers to Sindercombe's death, which took place on 13 Feb. ' The brave Sindercombe,' he says, speaking of his attempt to assassinate Cromwell, ' hath shewed as great a mind as any old Rome could boast of,' and he goes on to accuse Cromwell of having had him secretly murdered by the lieutenant of the Tower. All this praise of Sexby's friend naturally suggests that Sexby was the author. On the other hand there are certain passages in the pamphlet which seem to come from another hand. Sexby was not a learned man, but when the question what constitutes a tyrant comes to be discussed the pages are full of quotations from Aristotle, Plato, Cicero, MachiaveUi, Grotius, and other writers on pohtics. It is true that most of the references and quotations might have been borrowed from other pamphlets ; some certainly are derived from Milton's. As Titus was a man of education, who had been an undergraduate of Christ Church and a student of the Middle Temple, it seems reasonable to suppose that he furnished the learning exhibited. The two prefatory epistles prefixed to the pamphlet seem to afford further evidence of its dual authorship. The first is the address ' To his Highness OHver Cromwell,' which Hyde so much admired for its wit. This I should attribute to Titus, for Titus was, as his speeches in parliament show, both a wit and a humourist. ' Cal Clarendon Papers, iii. 208, 220, 230, 236, 269, 289. 1902 'KILLING NO MURDER' 311 The polished irony of this composition finds no parallel in any of the speeches or manifestoes of Sexby. On the other hand the second epistle prefixed, 'To all those Officers and Soldiers of the. Army that remember their engagements and dare be honest,' must certainly be by Sexby. Instead of humour there is the fervid passion which marked Sexby' s speeches in the council of the army in 1647, and it is also expressly stated to be written by ' one that was once one amongst you.' I conclude, therefore, that the pamphlet was the joint work of Sexby and Titus ; that the conception and substance of the pamphlet were due to Sexby, and that Titus wrote the dedication to the Protector, supplied the learned quotations and the scientific disquisitions on the nature of tyrants and the right of tyrannicide, and probably corrected the style of the whole. Sexby was, there- fore, justified in claiming the authorship of the pamphlet, and he had nothing to gain by the avowal. He did not mention his con- federate, either because he regarded his part in the composition as purely subordinate or because he did not wish to expose him to the vengeance of the Protector's government. On the other hand Titus, when he laid claim to be the author of ' Killing No Murder,' stood to gain fame and rewards by it, and did gain both, so that in his case there was a motive for the avowal which was absent in Sexby's case. Fearing no contradiction now that Sexby was dead, he asserted that he was the author of the whole and not merely of certain parts, and represented Sexby as merely an agent charged to print and circulate another man's work.^" C. H. Firth. TAe Funeral of Napoleon and his Last Papers. So little is known about the closing scenes of the life of Napoleon except through the prejudiced statements of Montholon and of others of the suite that it may be of interest to publish here some details, drawn from our Colonial Office archives, that bear on these questions. In view of the later assertions of Bertrand and Montholon that the emperor was the victim of liver disease, which was aggravated by the climate of St. Helena and the character of his detention, it is of some importance to note that Montholon's letter of 6 May 1821, written to his countess, then in Europe, contains the following decisive sentences : — .... L'ouverture de son Corps a eu lieu ce matin : elle a prouv6 qu'il etoit mort de la meme maladie que son p^re, un squirre ulcdreux a restomac pr^s le pylore ; les \ de la face de I'estomae ^toient ulc6r6es : il '" It will be observed that I have somewhat modified the conclusions stated in the articles on Sexby and Titus in the Dictionary of National Biography, crediting Titus with a share in the pamphlet instead of attributing it solely to Sexby, and defining more exactly what the share of Titus was instead of merely suggesting that he may have had a hand in it. 312 THE FUNERAL OF NAPOLEON April est probable que depuis 4 ^ 5 ans I'ulcere avoifc commence : c'est dans notre malheur une grande consolation pour nous que d'avoir acquis la preuve que sa mort n'est, at n'a pu etre, en aucune manike le r^sultat de sa captivite ni de la privation de tous les soins que I'Europe eut pu offrir a I'esp^rance.' The official account of the post mortem examination has been given by Forsyth ; and further details on that topic also appeared in Surgeon Henry's ' Passages of a Military Life,' and in the letters of Major Harrison and Colonel Gorrequer, published in the Corn- hill Magazine of February 1901. We therefore proceed to give a paper which has not yet been published — namely, Sir Hudson Low^e's report to Lord Bathurst concerning the funeral. May 12, 1821. My Lord, — Pursuant to what I had the honor to inform your Lord- ship in my Dispatch of the 6''' ins* of my intention to cause the Body of Napoleon Bonaparte to be interred with the Honors due to a General Officer of the Highest Bank, I fixed upon Wednesday the 9* as the day for the Funeral to take place. The accompanying Copy of a General Order given out on the occasion states the form that was observed. The Corpse, after a funeral service had been performed over it, according to the rites of the Eoman Catholic religion, in a small Chapel fitted up for the occasion in Longwood House, was carried by a party of Grenadiers of the Eegiment which had been last doing duty over Napoleon Bonaparte's person, to a funeral Car drawn by four of his own carriage horses : — & the horse he usually rode, fully caparisoned, followed in its rear ; his sword, and a mantle which he had worn as General in Chief at the Battle of Marengo, were placed over the Coffin. The funeral car, followed by the persons who had composed his family as chief mourners, and by the principal officers, civil, naval, and military, on the Island, including the Commissioner of the King of France (charged also with the same duty on the part of the Emperor of Austria), the Naval Commander in Chief, & myself, passed slowly along the line of Troops, which extended from the entrance of Longwood Grounds, nearly half-way to the place of interment. The Troops remained with their arms reversed, the several Bands playing a solemn dirge, until the pro- cession had passed them ; and when it had reached the extremity of the line, the several Corps filed off from the ground they had taken up in the first instance, and followed in its rear.^ ' Colonial Office, St. Helena, no. 32. ^ The general order referred to above shows that the Royal Artillery, with eleven pieces of cannon, were drawn up on the left of the line, the 20th Regiment, a detach- ment of Eoyal Marines, the 66th Eegiment, the St. Helena Artillery and Eegiment and island volunteers successively followed at intervals. The bearers were to be in turn 3 gunners of the Royal Artillery. 6 grenadiers of the 20th Eegiment. 3 „ „ Royal Marines. 6 „ „ 66th Regiment. 3 mattrosses {sic) of St. Helena Artillery. 3 grenadiers of the St. Helena Regiment. The officers were to wear black crape on their left arms, and the drums were to be muffled. 1902 AND HIS LAST PAPERS 313 On the arrival at that part of the road where the path descended towards the place of burial, the Body was removed from the funeral car, to be borne alternately by the Grenadiers of the several Corps doing duty in this Island, including a party of the Eoyal Marines, to the spot where the last service was to be performed. The Procession had moved on horseback until it arrived at this Spot, when the whole of the Persons attending dismounted. The Pall was supported, at their own desire, by the principal persons of Napoleon Bonaparte's Family — the others following the corpse as chief mourners ; on the arrival of the Body at the Ground, the usual funeral Ceremony was performed by Signer Vignali, and the Corpse deposited in the Grave. Three rounds of cannon were immediately thereupon fired over it : the Coffin was then covered in, when the Troops and the whole of the Persons who had attended the funeral retired. The Spot, in which the Body is interred, had been designated to me as that in which it had been Napoleon Bonaparte's desire he should be buried if his Eemains were left on this Island — close to a small fountain in the middle of a ravine under the shade of two willow trees, in a garden belonging to an Inhabitant of the Island. I have caused the grave to be covered in with masonry and the trees to be inclosed with a rail. I have also placed a guard over it. I have the honor to be &c. Hudson Lowe. In a later despatch Sir H. Lowe adds a list entitled ' L'Etat de I'Argenterie au 15 Avril 1821,' of which the following were the chief items : — 99 Assiettes a palmettes h, couteaux, 17 Assiettes a palmettes a soupe, 96 Assiettes de campagne a couteaux (hors de service), 23 Assiettes a soupe (hors de service), 6 plats ovales, 6 plats d'entrees, 20 plats d'entre- mets, 2 plats de retire, 3 boules ovales, 8 boules d'entremets, 50 cou- teaux, 93 cuillers, 88 fourchettes, 84 cuillers a cafe, &c. This list is far from complete, but the particulars here given will suffice to show that the ostentatious sales of plate, which Montholon and O'Meara represented as necessary to enable the exiles to pro- cure the little comforts denied them, were very far from depleting the stores of plate at Longwood. Lowe's reports also show that after the funeral his relations with Bertrand and Montholon were cordial enough ; and it seems likely that this was in accordance with one of Napoleon's last injunctions to his followers. At any rate they conferred with the governor on all the details concerning the will and the disposal of the property in a spirit far different from the artificial heat of the earlier years. But the paper that possesses the chief interest is that sent to Lord Bathurst by Major Gorrequer, who had long been on duty at Longwood. In a despatch of 14 May he describes the conversa- 314 THE FUNERAL OF NAPOLEON April tions that he had with Bertrand and Montholon on two previous days. T cite here the passages that are of chief interest. .... Having begged Count Montholon he would show me in the first instance those [papers] which he considered to belong to General Bonaparte himself, he went into his room and brought out a bundle with him. They were prmcipally notes on the Concordat, a rough copy of the letters from the Cape of Good Hope, published as a reply to the book of Mr. Warden, an answer to the 'Manuscrit de Ste. Helene,' and various loose papers which it would have required an immense time, from the indistinct manner in which many of them were written, simply in pencil, to have deciphered. The heads and subjects of none of them appeared to relate to any object of paramount interest, and upon asking Count Montholon whether nothing more existed he said that I might consider all papers of any kind of consequence as having been already trans- mitted in one way or another to Europe. He added, Vous en avez mime vu de publiis, referring to the ninth book of the ' Memoires.' They had advertised (he said) the publication of the seventh, eighth, and tenth books, but they had not appeared : these had been sent to Mr. O'Meara, but not for publication. He had published what he did without any authority, and they were extremely angry with him for it. He (Count Montholon) would compel Mr. O'Meara to surrender up to him the re- mainder of the manuscript he had in his possession. General Bonaparte, he said, had been extremely surprised and incensed at the publication of any part of them, as well as of the account of the battle of Waterloo by General Gourgaud, who was desired to deUver up the notes he was possessed of upon that subject previous to his departure from hence ; and though he had given up one copy, he had retained, or rather had pur- loined, the other : that this circumstance had irritated General Bonaparte agaiust General Gourgaud more than anything else in his conduct, and he had never forgiven it. I asked Count Montholon what had become of the first books of the ' Memoires.' He said they had been sent home, but he did not mention to whom. He reiterated that every paper which might be considered of any consequence had been sent to Europe a long time since ; that General Bonaparte had dictated nothing of any interest since July or August last. [On the next day, at Sir H. Lowe's request, the papers were arranged, and, as well as the rooms of Longwood, were submitted to inspection of the officers of the garrison. On 12 May Bertrand and Montholon described some of the works begun but not finished by Napoleon.] .... a collection of materials for a work in progress on the Arch- duke Charles's campaigns, which, when he saw that published by the archduke himself, Count Bertrand said, he threw aside, saying, Mais je ii'ai 6crit que des betises ioi ; je travaiUais en supposant que I'ennemi avait 80,000 ou 100,000 hommes, et je trouve qu'il n'en avoit qu' environ cinquante mille. He had in this manner relinquished several works in contemplation, and others even begun, in consequence of the want of books from which he might have obtained the information which he found necessary as a ground-work to proceed upon — such, for instance, as the strength of armies, their exact positions at particular times, &c. 1902 AND HIS LAST PAPERS 315 Geci I'avait heaucoup degoHU de ces ouvrages, parce qu'il n'avoit que sa tite pour travailler — et cela ne lui suffisoit point.* A great many papers were on the Egyptian campaign. Bertrand mentioned that he had particularly urged him to write on the Eussian campaign, and that in Saxony, as there was no individual sufficiently acquainted with his plans and objects (during the latter campaign in particular) to write a good account of them, no one but himself being able to explain his dispositions, the multitude of combinations which were put in action, nor the object of many of them. He would not, however, undertake it, but replied they would speak for themselves. The most bulky parcel of papers which Count Bertrand opened was, he said, on the defensive operations of a division by field works and the depth of the formations of troops. The French always formed their line three deep, but, as the rear rank could not fire over the two others in its front, he most approved the English plan of forming two deep only, so long as you could not give effect to the fire of the third rank. This point. Count Bertrand said, had occupied his mind with a particular degree of intenseness. He would get up several times in the middle of the night to write notes upon it, and he frequently sent billets to Count Bertrand on the subject even at night. The whole of that parcel of papers had been prepared during the time he was busied in making his little garden. He there traced out all his plans and field works on the ground, having them all (his followers) about him, and pointing out to them his ideas. He there described the mode in which he could give effect to the fire of a line drawn up in ranks even as far as ten deep, by placing the ranks on advantageous inclined positions, or drawing them up with the men of lowest stature in front rank and the tallest in the rear. With his ranks eight or ten deep he thought himself perfectly inabordable, and he would hear of no objection to his plans. He would even propose, when the ground did not offer a slope, to make the men dig away a little of the earth, where they were to stand, like steps, which would give sufficient elevation to the rear ranks to fire over those in front ; and this he would have done in a minute. When Count Bertrand asked for another minute he said, ' No : in war half a minute is too much to lose ; you would have the cavalry upon you and be cut to pieces.' To prove the practicability of such, depths of formation in the little garden he would call out, 'Allans, Noverraz, viens id; tu es le plus grand, plante-toi Id. Vous autres, approchez ; and having arranged them according to size on a declivity he went on, ' £!t moi, qui suis le plus petit, je serai au dernier rang ; ' puis il couchait en joue avec un bdton par-dessus nos t&tes, exclaiming in triumph, ' Eh bien, ne voyez-vous pas que je tire par-dessus la tete de Noverraz ? ' Count Bertrand added that these papers were kept by him mostly ' This fact shows the need of great caution in accepting Napoleon's ' dictSes ' on military matters to Montholon. He had to rely on his memory, on the books of his library (2,700 in number), on files of the Times, and on French newspapers. This was an obviously iusuificient basis on which to rear the history of complex campaigns. The British government has been blamed for not supplying Napoleon with the neces- sary facts. But these facts were buried deep in the archives of Paris, Vienna, Berlin, and St. Petersburg. On these governments lay the chief responsibility in this matter. 316 THE CONVENTION OF SEPTEMBER 1864 April from curiosity. There were, however, a number of interesting things among them, which he intended to put in order, as they would be useful to his sons. As far as I know, these details have never been fully made known. It is clear from the above account that Bertrand rather than Montholon was the confidant of the ex-emperor in these interesting tactical experiments, which were carried on apparently in the early part of 1820. At that time the British officer on duty reported (1 Feb. 1820), 'I saw General Bonaparte to-day often at his favourite amusement, viz. gardening. He was himself employed placing sods on a bank. In short, his sole amusement at present seems to be building sod walls, making reservoirs to hold water, &c., and pulling down to-day that which he had reared the day before.''' In view of Bertrand's statement to Gorrequer, cited above, we may doubt whether this piling up of sods had anything to do with gardening, and whether the construction of ' reservoirs ' was not really the heaping up of banks to show how a squad of infantry might be arranged so as to double its gun power. The reference to the campaign of 1813 is also curious. I have always considered the latter half of the Saxon campaign to be the most defective of all the great captain's enterprises ; and his refusal to enter into any explanation respecting his plans at that time seems to show that he himself was aware that they were faulty. On none other of his campaigns was he so reticent as on that of 1813. J. Holland Eosb. The Convention of September 1864. A GOOD deal of matter has been recently published on the September convention. Minghetti's memoir on it, which has long been known to exist, but which apparently he stipulated should not be published till some years after his death, has now appeared.' In addition to his statement of his own position, given here much more fully than in his address A% stioi elettori, published in 1865, we have a most valuable collection of documents, most of which had not seen the light before. In the Niiova Antologia for 1 March 1899 we have further extracts from Minghetti's correspondence with La Marmora some of which Minghetti, for good reasons of his own, had omitted! Lastly we have in the second volume of Signor Chiala's Hfe of Dina ^ the greater part of Pepoli's report on the negotiations (of which only short extracts have previously appeared), extracts from the ' Forsyth, iii. 210. ' Minghetti, Za Convenzione di Settembre. Bologna : Zanichelli, 1899. ^ Giacomo Dina e V opera sua mile vicende del Bisorgimento Italiano Turin Koux, 1899. 1902 THE CONVENTION OF SEPTEMBER 1864 317 unpublished correspondence between La Marmora and Petitti, and notes taken from La Marmora's own mouth by the author. It cannot be said that these new documents change earlier conclusions on the convention in any material particular, but they throw a great deal of light on it, and they give certainty to several details which before had been matter of conjecture. The position of the Eoman question in the spring of 1864 was this : The French were still in occupation of the small bit of papal territory which the Italians had not been allowed to annex in 1860. The Italians were as determined as ever that Eome should sooner or later be their capital, but they were divided as to the means of gaining it. The more impatient section, of whom Garibaldi was a not very willing leader, wished to defy the French and occupy Eome by force. The Moderates, who realised the perils of a conflict with France, hoped to persuade the French to withdraw their army of occupation, believing that sooner or later European complications or a rising of the Eomans against the pope would enable them to go to Eome without a war. Meanwhile, even should Venetia be won, it was impossible for Italy to settle down or reduce her army. At any moment the Garibaldians might make a raid into papal territory and force the government into civil war or a conflict with France. These documents bring out very clearly how imminent this seemed in 1864. Pio Nono was very ill, and nobody expected that he could live many months. His death would precipitate the crisis, and it was natural that the Minghetti ministry should try to find some solution which would anticipate the danger. They picked up the last of Cavour's schemes, which only his death had prevented from being carried out in 1861. Under it the French had promised to evacuate at once, on condition that the Italian government guaranteed the pope's existing territory from attack. It was understood that if after a few months' interval the Eomans could overthrow the papal government, and annex them- selves to Italy by plebiscite, the French would not object to an Italian occupation of the city. Even in Cavour's time there were serious objections to the scheme, and when it reappeared in 1864 it was altered for the worse by the proposal to couple with it a stipulation that the Italians should move their capital from Turin to Florence or Naples. This was partly to satisfy the animus of the central and southern Italians against Piedmont, partly to smooth the way for Louis Napoleon's acceptance of the scheme by enabling him to represent the change of capital as proof that the Italians had abandoned their claims to Eome, and thus reconcile the French catholics to the withdrawal of the garrison. It is now, however, quite clear (if indeed additional evidence were required) that the suggestion did not come from the emperor, however readily he Sl8 The COMPENTIOI^ op SEPTeMBEH ISU April caught at it when made. At Pepoli'a first interview with him it is shown that he was hoping to persuade the pope to allow the Italians to annex Rome ' by administrative bonds,' if they on their part would acknowledge papal suzerainty over not only his existing territory but Umbria.^ The unhappy idea of moving the capital came from Marquis Pepoli, then Italian minister at St. Petersburg, a vain, restless man, who hated the Piedmontese and thought that his relationship to the emperor made him the natural go-between for France and Italy."* It is not quite clear whether Minghetti knew of the suggestion before it was made to the emperor. Minghetti himself says that the change of capital was inevitable, but does not state whether he had thought of it in connexion with the French treaty. According to Signer Chiala, who generally has chapter and verse for his statements, Minghetti was distressed that it was suggested to and approved by the emperor. But at a very early stage of the negotiations Nigra quoted Minghetti to the emperor as desiring the change of capital,' and unluckily we can never be sure that Minghetti has told the whole truth. We have abundant evidence in these books that the Minghetti government, or rather those few members of it who were in the secret, foresaw how unpopular the removal of the capital would be, at least in Piedmont. The king was only told of the negotiations at a late stage ; this was known before, but Minghetti's memoir shows us how bitterly he felt about leaving Turin, how it was only by dint of constant pressure that his consent to the treaty was obtained. Minghetti and Visconti-Venosta are seen making pitiful and futile attempts to make it appear that the transference of the capital was an administrative and strategic question, extraneous to the French treaty and not part of the bargain with France.'^ ' The emperor, I hope, will understand,' wrote Minghetti to Nigra and Pepoli, ' the reasons of convenience which make us wish to defend this important step before parliament and the country on purely strategic grounds.' ^ The fiction that it was advised by the Italian generals is finally exploded. Cialdini, it is true, was in its favour, but Menabrea and Delia Eovere were opposed ; and La Marmora's comparative indifference was due to other than military considerations. On 11 Sept., when the convention was practically settled, Pepoli writes — I advised Minghetti to summon the military council, and make it appear as if the choice of Florence was a strategic necessity. Minghetti promised to carry out my idea. It was intended to do this before the treaty was known to the public, but, owing to the news leaking out prematurely, the military council did not meet till 19 Sept., when everything was known. ^ Giaamio Dina e I' opera sua nelle vicende del Bisorgimento Italiano, ii. 738. ' Minghetti, p. 100 ; Chiala, ii. 264, note. . » ibid_ jj. 738. " Minghetti, pp. 91, 177 ; Chiala, ii. 282. » Minghetti, p. 169. I90>i THE C0N]'ENTI0N OP SEPTEMBER 1864 ^10 Even then, as we knew already from Delia Eocca's autobiography, a vote in favour of moving the capital was only extracted by putting the question in an unfair form. These memoirs throw more light on the insincerity of the whole business. Louis Napoleon wanted the French catholics to think that it meant a renunciation of Italian claims to Eome ; he knew, and let the Italian statesmen know, that it meant nothing of the kind. You will end by going to Eome (he told Nigra) ; the force of circum- stances will take you there ; but I don't want to seem to be handing the pope over, tied hand and foot.' ' Forget Eome for two years,' he said to Pepoli." It is clear too now that Drouyn de Lhuys took the same view. If the irregular bands succeed in crossing the frontier (he said), and if the papal troops are defeated, and for this or any other reason the pope leaves Eome, it would prove that le hon Dieu has had enough of the pope's temporal government, and arrivera ce qui arrivera.^'^ There was the same duplicity on the part of the Italians. The plain meaning of the treaty bound them to desist from any effort or connivance at any effort to bring about the annexation of Eome. But this was the last thing that they intended. It was evident (writes Minghetti in his memoir) that on our side this convention was a step to the desired end that parliament had indicated by its vote [acclaiming Eome as the capital]. So far (he adds) was our idea from any renunciation of Eome that when we had loyally done what we could to prevent armed bands from entering papal territory we had done all that duty required, -whatever the result might be. . . . There were all the contingencies that might occur in the pope's relations with his subjects ; there was the inevitable influence that a great kingdom was bound to exercise on a little territory ; everything, in short, pointed out that this was not a definite solution ; so far from hindering the solution it helped it and smoothed the way for it in the future. We may be allowed to doubt whether it was intended to carry out very strictly the proviso of the convention that required the Italian government to protect the pope's dominions from attack. We find La Marmora writing to Minghetti as late as May 1864 — If the pope dies everything is ready and organised by the care and with the money of the Italian government, and in the probable case that they have not told you everything I enclose a copy of the instructions sent by the Boman committee on both sides of the frontier. ... I am assured too here [at Naples] that there are at the police office more than 2,000 names enrolled to invade the papal states at the first hint."^ Minghetti, in quoting the same letter, omits this passage, but, alluding to it, says La Marmora's facts were ' inexact ; ' he owns » Chiala, ii. 233. » Ibid. ii. 750. "> Minghetti, p. 113, and see ibid. p. 80. " Ntiova Antologia, ubi aupra. 320 THE CONVENTION OF SEPTEMBER 1864 April however that he was cognisant of a plan to encourage the Eoman patriots to proclaim the annexation of papal territories to Italy on the pope's death, anjJ this design was in the hands of the same men who three years later connected it with a scheme of invasion. Eecognising what ' moral forces ' meant at the time, it is suspicious to find Yisconti-Yenosta writing — In order to strengthen the action of moral forces we want to move the seat of government to a place from which our influence will more easily radiate towards Eome.^- It was generally recognised that, whatever may have been the case in 1860, there was at this time no hope of a successful rising at Eome without help from outside. The Minghetti government stands in this dilemma : Either they meant to abide loyally by the convention, and prevent any irruption of troops, in which case they indefinitely postponed the winning of Eome and lost more than they gained by the treaty ; or else they meant to connive at plots to upset the pope's authority and stand morally condemned. One last word as to the light thrown by these documents on Minghetti's and La Marmora's personal character. Minghetti's fickleness and disingenuousness stand in unpleasant relief. The ease with which he abandoned his opinion of less than two years before that ' a nation cannot move its capital twice,' the want of courage which made him flinch from breaking the news to the king, the futility of his belief that he could blind the country to the fact that the move to Florence was a bribe to France, the downright falsity with which he assured Giacomo Dina ' on his word of honour ' that no one thought of moving the capital — at a time when the negotiations with France were in full swing — all these condemn him as a man and as a statesman. La Marmora on the other hand gains from closer knowledge of his words and actions. His letters to Minghetti prove how hateful to him was a treaty that he knew could not be executed, how bitter the thought that Italy was changing her capital to please another power, how the disingenuousness of the whole business revolted him. And we have unexpected evidence of the warmth with which he shared the national aspirations for Eome. Other passages from his pen seemed to show that his sympathies were rather cold, but he could sometimes, at all events, feel as strongly as any patriot. If the convention came to mean a real renunciation of Eome, and therefore an act of treachery towards Italy, I would blow my brains out rather than execute it. A month later he was the only possible premier, and be had to choose between executing it or abandoning the country to some- thing bordering on anarchy. Such was the evil heritage that Minghetti left to his successors. Bolton King. '= Minghetti, p. 88. 1902 321 Reviews of Books The Oldest Civilisation of Greece. By H. E. Hall, M.A. (London: Nutt. 1901.) This is a disappointing book. A summary of the prehistoric origins of Greek civilisation, and of current views about them, is badly wanted ; and the relations between the Aegean and the East form so large a part of the problem that one might well expect an orientalist to produce something of value. The Egyptological part of Mr. Hall's book, it is true, does present the evidence on this side in a fuller and more connected form than has been attempted before, and should convince the few surviving adherents of the view that the Mycenaean age belongs to the eighth or ninth century e.g. that their position is untenable ; but the rest of the book is not at all up to this level ; it is frequently ill-informed, and inconsistent with itself ; and its dogmatic tone is the more misleading for the repeated professions of reserve. Mr. Hall sets himself to examine what he calls the ' current hypothesis ' in regard to prehistoric Greece. But, as ho has refrained fromgiving a systematic account of the data, or of the history of the questions which are involved, his summaries of this ' current hypothesis ' leave the reader somewhat in perplexity. Sometimes the ' current hypothesis ' can be identified as an opinion which can be found in print ; sometimes it is a ' hypothesis ' in the sense that, if such opinions were entertained, Mr. Hall's criticisms would be valid ; sometimes it looks like mere archieo- logical gossip, or half-remembered lecture-notes. Mr. Hall's mode of writing, also, and a habit of suppressing names and references often make it difficult to see at what he is driving [e.g. pp. 13, 122, 184, 224, 308). He frequently makes important statements without refer- ence to evidence or authority : e.g. p. 17 (late date of ' Priam's Treasure'); p. 110 (marble idols from Cyprus) ; p. 155 (libation tables of other than Xllth Dynasty date) ; p. 157 (Cretan seal stones from Egypt ; on p. 183 Le implies that they do not occur) ; p. 180 n. (Egyptian types of weapons in Crete) ; p. 235 (Phoenician influence on Italian art of the eighth century). He is also apt to misquote : a bad case is on p. 87, where Mr. Evains, of all people, is cited as authority for a Semitic interpretation of the Praesos inscription ; Mr. Edgar's meaning also is distorted on p. 313, through ignorance of the subject matter. On a number of important points both of fact and of reasoning the author does not seem to know his own mind, and plain contradictions VOL. XVII. — NO. LXVI. Y 322 REVIEWS OF BOOKS April ensue. On p. 36 n. (of. p. 41 ff.) the cultures of Mycenae and the Dipylon are described as overlapping ; yet on p. 37 ' the same people did not at the same time manufacture objects of both Mycenaean and geometrical style.' On p. 45 proto- Corinthian art is ' Ionic,' and on p. 251 it has ' no special connexion with Corinth ; ' yet on p. 260 the discovery of proto-Corinthian pots in Sicily proves a Corinthian settlement. On p. 80 there is no trace at Mycenae of the decadent stage of Mycenaean civilisation, for (p. 64) the Dorian invasion, and iron -using culture, cut it off short ; and this happened, according to the table at the end, about 1000 B.C. ; yet the ' shaft graves ' are dated to the ninth century (p. 299) and a mirror handle from Mycenae is described as of the ' Cyprian late Mycenaean ' style, which 'cannot be much older than the eighth century.' The lonians are assumed throughout to be Aryan immigrants into Asia ; yet on p. 126 they were on the Asiatic coast ' from the first.' On p. 224 Mr. Hall censures the idea that StSovioi avSp« can mean ' men going to Sidon ; ' yet on p. 170 he himself argues that ' Keftiu ships ' must mean ' ships going to the Keftiu.' On p. 232 it is argued that Kadmos cannot be conceived as originally a Phoenician, because he is not a Phoenician for Homer ; yet on p. 261 the ' Phoenician Kinyras ' is quoted, in a Homeric passage, though Kinyras, like Kadm'os, is nowhere called a Phoenician in Homer. More serious inconsistencies occur in fundamental matters. On p. 104 ' the Mycenaean culture belonged primarily to Hellenes,' and on p. 281 ' the whole of Greek culture, from the solid rock of the Athenian acropolis up, is one ; ' but on p. 85 there is ' no very violent break between Myce- naean and prae-Mycenaean ; ' and on pp. 105, 202 the Mycenaean civilisation had ' well begun before the arrival of the Aryan Hellenes.' Similarly on p. 108 Mr. Hall, speaking of ' Greek civilisation,' quotes the Second City at Troy ; yet on p. 96 he falls foul of Kretschmer for asserting the ' Aryan ' character of the civilisation of Troy, and contends that, like that of the rest of the Aegean and that of Cyprus, it belongs to a prae- Aryan people. Again, one of his most vigorous contentions is that the route from Crete to Egypt via North Africa was not open in Mycenaean times (p. 15) ; yet if the name of the Libyan Mashauasha reached Egypt (p. 179) ' through a hleinasiatisch medium,' there must have been intercourse between Libya and Asia Minor otherwise than by the Levant. Moreover he states (p. 180 n.), though without giving reference or examples, that the bronze weapons from Crete are Egyptian in type ; yet those of Cyprus, the ' mediator in chief,' on his theory, between Egypt and the Aegean, part company with Egyptian types in predynastio times. How then did these Egyptian types reach Crete ? In the same connexion Mr. Hall exhibits a woeful ignorance of Mediterranean geography. On p. 109 he describes how ' Crete turned its back upon the south,' and fenced in the Hellenic world ' with its mighty barrier of Mount Ida.' Mount Ida, at a hberal estimate, is thirty miles long ; the distance from Crete to Kythera alone is wider than that ; and the interval between Malea and Knidos is fully 200. What about the sites at Hyrtakos, Pharangas, Dibaki, Arvi, Mallaes, and Zakro ; about Odyssey, iii. 295-6; or about the Hellenic ports of Phalasarna, Lissos, Suia, Phoenice, Phaestos, Pair Havens, Hierapytna, and Itanos ? Oaxogi 1902 heviews off books 823 •which Mr. Hall identifies with the piratical Uashasha, is not a maritime town (p. 177) at aU. ' Praistos ' (p. 89) is a printer's error ; but the ' Diotaean cave on Mount Ida,' p. 147, is a bad blunder. The ' geographi- cal objections ' to intercourse between Crete and Libya which are advanced on p. 145 are nowhere stated, and every sponge-fisher in the Levant knows that none exist. The only difficulty, either sailing or drifting, is to get from Crete to Cyprus, which Mr. Hall ordains to be the right road to the Nile. There are other amazing expressions of the same kind. Mr. Hall speaks (p. 127) of the ' Central Asiatic shores of the Aegean ; ' of Bin Tepe, near Sardis (p. 124), as a specimen of ' Inner Asia Minor,' and of the early sites in Cyprus (p. 97) as ' radiating in the shape of a fan from Larnaka.' The difficulty which is raised on p. 96 as to the peculiarities of the early culture of the Troad rests on elementary ignorance of the geography of the Hellespontine area. On p. 107 the statement that the floor of tha Aegean is merely a part of Greece which is covered by a sea ' is mislead- ing, and inverts the relation of the two areas, unless ' Greece ' means ' Greek lands,' in which case the phrase errs widely on the other side. Similar looseness of expression leads to the statement (p. 64) that ' Cyprus is always a century behind the rest of Greece.' Considering how important the evidence from Cyprus seems to be at all periods, and how much more important than ever it becomes, on Mr. Hall's view of the island as ' mediator in chief ' between Egypt and the Aegean, it is strange to find his acquaintance with Cypriote antiquities as frag- mentary and inaccurate as it is. This is partly accounted for by his almost unqualified adherence to that most inadequate and misleading book, the British Museum ' Excavations in Cyprus ; ' but when this fails him, as it does for the prae-Mycenaean and for a large part of the sub- Mycenaean periods (which do not yield pretty enough things for the national collection), he is liable to go astray altogether. He figures a Cypriote vase, in a most misleading way, to illustrate a description of the primitive Aegean (p. 9) ; he shares (see table) the British Museum view that the necropolis of Agia Paraskevi is typical of the earliest period, whereas it represents equally all stages down to the Mycenaean ; he regards as ' prae-Mycenaean ' a series of pottery which, as at Laksha-tu- Eiu (p. 131), seems hardly to occur except in tombs of Mycenaean date, and which in Egypt does not seem to go up much above the XVIIIth Dynasty ; and he ignores the large series of terracottas which precedes those which he discusses on p. 111. By combining the British Museum dates with those of the ' current hypothesis ' he makes the Mycenaean period in Cyprus last for 800 years, without a word to show how it main- tained its character over this enormous period of time. The ' concentric circle ' ornament, which he describes as ' derived from Mycenaean ornament, but peculiar to Cyprus ' (p. 265), is represented not only in prae- Mycenaean Cyprus (see his own fig. 8) but also in prae-Mycenaean Crete and in the Cycladie area ; and, in the sub-Mycenaean period, to which he is referring, is a commonplace of geometrical vase painting from Nineveh to Etruria, ubiquitous in Crete, and characteristic of certain types of that Aegean geometrical style which Mr. Hall believes (in spite of actual cases of importation) to have been wholly disconnected with the geometrical of Cyprus. The vigorous statements of p. 113 as to the non-occurrence Y 2 324 REVIEWS OF BOOKS April of early Babjlonian cylinders in Cyprus is misleading, for it ignores the cylinder ' Cypr. Mus. Cat.' 4601, which, though its early date was questioned by Bezold on its first publication in 1855,' was at all events discovered in an otherwise uncontaminated tomb of early Myceinaean, if not prae-Mycenaean, character," and has a gold setting of a type ^ which is not known to have been in use in Cyprus after Mycenaean times. The more valuable part of the book, as has been hinted already, is the Egyptological ; but even here a few points suggest themselves for criticism. Mr. Hall, as an orientalist, naturally sees oriental similarities where Aegean archseologists find parallels to Aegean style ; and his criticism of Mr. Evans's comparisons between Egyptian or Cretan seal stones hardly seems to take sufiScient account of this personal equation on his own side. Mere rudeness, of course, proves nothing ; and it is more than likely that both views are tenable together. And when Mr. Hall describes Mycenaean fresco painting as ' entirely on the Egyptian model ' (p. 168), and as ' owing its whole inspiration to Egyptian frescoes ' (p. 187), he too seems to exaggerate points of resemblance and to ignore essential differences of style. In his criticism of the view that naturalism in Egyptian art is a symptom of Mediterranean influence, Mr. Hall makes an undesigned point which tells against rather than in favour of his own view. The case of XVIIIth Dynasty naturalism by itself proves little, but the parallel which he adduces of the naturalism of the Xllth Dynasty more than doubles the force of the argument ; for he himself admits in chapter iii. that it is under the Xllth Dynasty, next after the XVIIIth, that Mediterranean contact is most clearly perceptible in Egypt. If he had added the proto-dynastic period (with the new ' Aegean fragments ' from Abydos) and the XXVIth Dynasty (with Naukratis and Daphnae) he would have only been completing the record of naturalistic movements in Egyptian art, without which his own argument rests equally on one instance only. Again, Mr. Hall is silent in the matter of the tomb group of the grandson of Pinetchem, which is a corner stone in the argument for a late prolongation of Mycenaean culture in the Levant. Mr. Hall must know that the genuineness of this tomb group has been flatly denied ; for he quotes on the same page (p. 62), as well as on p. 51, the very paper "i in which the charge is made. He must also know that this charge has hitherto remained unanswered. Yet he prints this tomb-group in heavy type in the table on p. 76, as a piece of 'good evidence.' Surely his own express caution as to the possibility of reburials (p. 16), and the ingenious romance of the under- taker and the tomb robber (p. 51), by which he seeks to invalidate one of the evidences for early date, ought to have warned him in the interest of his argument that an isolated find, nearly two centuries later than the next latest of the group to which it is attributed, must be submitted to the fullest criticism before it is ranked as good evidence. Mr. Hall figures the Mycenaean vase from the tomb in question, whose existence nobody denies, but which proves nothing without the other objects ; he would have contributed much to form an opinion on the goodness of the > Zft.f. Keilinsehr. iii, 191-3. ' Ohnefalsch Eichter, Kypros, pi. clxx'" p 14 ^ Cf. Exc. in Cyprus, pi. xi. pp. 726, 744. ' ■• Trans. Boyal Soc. Lit. xix. 69. 1902 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 325 evidence, if he had merely figured the tomb group entire. If it is genuine, it would have refuted the charge without another word. In his discussion of Xllth Dynasty date-marks in chapter iii. Mr. Hall makes no mention of the peculiar blue-glazed beads which occur in early tombs in Cyprus, and are sometimes associated with the punctuated black ware which he discusses on p. 68 ff. As these beads have been compared with Egyptian beads of Xllth Dynasty date, and are almost the only evidence in Cyprus of a culture-loan from Egypt before the Mycenaean age, Mr. Hall should have said something about them, either to accept or to reject, in his discussion of Cyprus as a vehicle of Egyptian influences. WhUe, however, Mr. Hall's treatment of the eastward relations of Aegean culture is on the whole adequate to the scale of his book, and, in fact; by far the best part of it, he practically ignores the correlative questions as to the relations of the Aegean to the West and the North. After taking up the position that Mycenaean culture is ' simply the Greek phase of the general European civilisation of the Bronze Age,' p. 191, we should have expected him to give us something more detailed in support of this view than the ten lines on pp. 31-2 and a single paragraph on p. 192. To Mr. Hall, however, ' the relation of the prehistoric civilisation of Greece to this general European culture is quite clear ' (p. 192). We wish it were as clear to ourselves. On a number of other points, also, the book is hardly up to date or abreast of the literature of the subject, and internal evidence points to a period of stagnation somewhere about 1898. The old fallacy of argument from similarity of culture to identity of race crops up without disguise on p. 96, and implicitly throughout chapter iv. (especially p. 207). The non- Semitic character of Asia Minor has been ' current hypothesis ' for some while, and needs no such elaborate establishment as that on p. 92 ff. ; and the term ' Armenoid ' (p. 104) dates a good deal further back than Mr. Crow- foot's paper. A good deal has been done since Helbig's ' Italiker in der Poebene ' for the pre-history of the Etruscans, to modify the opinions quoted on p. 103 ; and the statement that Mycenaean traces are ' apparently late in the west ' (p. 258) ignores the prae-Mj'cenaean vases from Marseilles, South Italy, and Sicily. The view (pp. 136-7) that the shaft graves of Mycenae are late and tumultuary interments has had few supporters in recent years, and needs fresh argument if it is to be revived. Of Philistia a good deal more is known than would appear from p. 134 ; Tell-el-Hesy should have been quoted at all events ; and the statement that ' not a single object of Mycenaean origin has been found in Phoenicia ' is refuted by the published ' bugelkanne ' of the Musee Guimet. In the confession of ignorance about Libyan pottery, p. 152, the phrase ' we possess no Libyan vase ' must refer only to the British Museum collection, unless it is an unacknowledged loan from an anony- mous review {Nature, Ixi. 196). A strange phrase in the Addenda, p. 313, argues Mr. Hall unacquainted with all the investigations of pot clays from Dumont's time onwards. A similar unfamiliarity with Aegean pot fabrics makes him speak indifferently of ' varnish or glaze ' on p. 28. In dealing with the sources of Aegean metals there is no word on the tin question at all ; Mr. Hall assumes, without question or proof, that bronze 326 REVIEWS OF BOOKS April (which he regards as an ' amalgam ' !) was introduced from the east (pp. 196-7) ; and his foot-note on p. 195 is answered by anticipation in Jour7i. Anthr. Inst, xxvii. 171 ff. As to post-Mycenaean times, there is no hint that the ascription of the Hiram bowl (p. 237) to the tenth century has been repeatedly called in question ; no discussion of Brunn's interpretation of the Idaean bronzes ; no reference to Boehlau's work on early Ionic pottery. Mr. Hall still speaks, for instance, not only of a ' Ehodian ' style (pp. 45, 250) but even of Ehodes, side by side with Melos, as a centre of artistic ' inspiration.' With its comprehensive title and popular appearance, the ' Oldest Civihsation of Greece ' will probably be read widely. It seems, therefore, worth while to note, even at some length, some of the poiuts on which the author's learning, and accuracy, and logic seem to be at fault. He has chosen to write a general treatise on a subject of which he has not mastered the details ; suggestive, therefore, as some of his hypotheses are, they rest on insecure foundations, and beyond these it is hardly necessary to follow them. J. L. Mtees. Greek Historical Inscriptions. Edited by E. L. Hicks and G. F. Hill. (Oxford: Clarendon Press. 1901.) EvEEY student of Greek history will welcome the appearance of a second edition of Canon Hicks's useful collection of ' Greek Inscriptions.' The editor has been fortunate enough to secure the assistance of Mr. G. F. Hill, whose well-known work on the ' Sources for Greek History ' of the Pentekontaety is a sufficient guarantee for his acquaintance with all the most recent discoveries. During the nineteen years' interval which has elapsed between the two editions excavations have been prosecuted most actively in many parts of the old Greek world, but more especially in Athens, Delos, and Delphi, and the mass of inscriptions thereby recovered has added considerably to our knowledge of the facts of Greek history. So much is this the case that the editors have been able to gain space for their new materials in a single volume only by omitting parts vi.-ix. of the old edition, which contained the inscriptions from the death of Alexander the Great to the Roman Sulla ; and in parts i.-v. they now give us 165 inscriptions in place of the old 132— not to mention 8 inscriptions of the previous edition, which for various reasons they have omitted. Nor is the new edition a mere augmentation of the old : the whole has been revised and corrected. The text has been entirely reprinted ; new and improved readings have been inserted ; old notes have been altered and enlarged ; new notes have been added. Not only has the general bibhography been greatly augmented, but the bibliography to each separate inscription has been rendered much more complete and carefully brought up to date, though the general introduction remains the same. The Notanda have increased from two to five pages, wherein not only are the method of printing, the alphabet, and spelling of the inscriptions explained, but the numerical and monetary signs, the value of money, the divisions of the Athenian civil year, and the arrangements of the Athenian council and assembly, to which might well have been added a paragraph on the more common formulas found in inscriptions, which often prove so puzzling to the begianer. By way of appendix a 1902 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 327 useful list of the Athenian archons has been inserted, with a summary of the authorities for their dates ; and the old general index has been divided into two — a general index and a Greek index, both, however, rather meagre. Amid such a mass of new material space allows us to cite only a few of the most interesting additions. Inscription no. 4 gives us the oldest extant decree of the Athenian people — unfortunately very much mutilated — relating to the settlement of affairs in Salamis in the earlier halt of the sixth century. No. 13 comes from the Athenian treasury at Delphi, telhng of the aKpoOtvia t-^s Mapa6u>vL jj.o.xq'i offered to Apollo. In no. 14 we have inscribed pebbles given for the ostracism of Xan- thippus and Themisfcocles. No. 18 records the epitaph of the Corin- thians slain at Salamis, who were, according to Plutarch, allowed by the Athenians to be buried on the island, thus effectually refuting the charges of cowardice brought against them by Herodotus at a later date. No. 20 is a letter from Darius to his satrap Gadates in West Asia Minor, containing curious details about the satrap's attempt to acclimatise certain crops or fruit trees in his district. Naturally part of the famous Gortyna inscription — it is too long to print in full — finds a place in the new edition (no. 35) ; it seems to need rather more elaborate a note than has been assigned to it, to emphasise its importance in the history of Greek private law. The notes on nos. 43, 48, 64, lists of the quota of Athenian tribute paid to Athena, have been thoroughly revised and brought into harmony with the researches of Professor Pedroli. No. 56 is a record of the disastrous expedition of the Athenian Melesandros against the Lycians ' from the Lycian point of view. The identification of no. 58 by Kirchhoff with some decree relating to the Athenian expedition against Lesbos (429, 428 e.g.) seems so doubtful as hardly to justify its inclusion in a manual. No. 61, it is to be noted, proves that the Athenian cleruchs sent to Lesbos after the suppression of the revolt were resident and not absentee landlords, as had been supposed. No. 73 gives an interesting proposal of Alcibiades on behalf of certain Clazomenians (411-408 b.c.) No. 76 tells us much that is new about the relations of Athens to the sacred isle of Delos in the time of her old confederacy, as no. 104 tells us much about her similar relations under the new confederacy. No. 79 (from Delphi) records the names of some of the Spartan allies at the battle of Aegospotami. Nos. 80 and 81 are interesting, the former as relating to the return of the democratic exiles from Phyle in 404, the latter as recording the honours paid by the Athenians to the loyalty of Samos at the time of their deepest distress. No. 90 tells of the refortification of the Piraeus, which preceded the rebuilding of the Long Walls by Conon. It seems a pity that the editors could not find room for two other inscriptions which record the latter event. No. 94 is of peculiar interest to numis- matists. It deals with a monetary union subsisting between Mytilene and Phocaea early in the fourth century. No. 96 is a good instance of the successful reading of mutilated fragments, in this ease chiefly due to Swoboda and Dittenberger : the old version gave but six lines ; the new edition gives twenty-five ; and tbe whole inscription is of great impor- ' Thue. iii. 69. 328 REVIEWS OF BOOKS April tanee for determining more exactly the date of the peace of Antalcidas. The new notes to nos. 98 and 100 recognise the efiforts of Athens to form a new confederacy before the year 377, with which the new inscriptions, nos. 103, 106, also deal. The editors follow A. Wilhelm in assigning no. 120 to 362-1 B.C. : if this be correct it gives much fresh information about the attitude of the Greeks to Persia just after the battle of Man- tinea. From no. 129 we learn much about the restoration of the temple at Delphi, which had been destroyed, perhaps, by the earthquake of 373 B.C. ; and no. 141 is a specimen of several inscriptions recording the payments of the Phocians in and after 346 B.C. in compensation for the treasures which they had plundered from the shrine. No. 150 tells us how the little states of Melos and Cimolos resorted to Argos (c. 338 b.c.) to a»bitrate between them in some dispute about territory. Wilhelm has shown the importance of no. 154 by proving that it refers not to the Lamian war, as formerly supposed, but to the Hellenic peace with Alexander in 336 B.C. Such instances might easily have been multiplied, but these are sufficient to show how much new material has been put in easily accessible form before the student of Greek history. Very little calls for adverse criticism ; but it is surprising to find in a manual so well brought up to date the old myth of 6,000 Athenian dicasts with 1,000 in reserve repeated from the earlier edition, and this though a reference is actually given to Gilbert's ' Constitutional Antiquities,' which states at length the information derived from Aristotle's 'AOrjuaiiDv iroXiTeca. In fact Athenian constitutional history in general is rather a weak point : e.g. in no. 4 we look in vain for a note on tSoxcrev to! Srj/jLia, and ' C. I. Att.' iv. 2, p. 7, which is important as illus- trating the powers of the (TTpa.Trjyoi at the beginning of the fourth century, does not find a place in the manual at all. The Clarendon Press is to be congratulated on the excellence of a most difficult piece of printing : we have noticed only two misprints, 100 for 10 on p. xxxiii and 365 for 364 on p. 228. It is to be hoped that the editors will soon see their way to republish the omitted parts vi.-ix. in a separate volume, improved, like the present instalment, with similar additions and corrections. G. E. Undeehill. Les Classes Burales et le Bigime Domanial en France au Moyen Age. Par Henei StE. (Paris : Giard et Briere. 1901.) The author of this substantial volume has undoubtedly chosen his subject well. Everybody will agree with his statement that it is time the condition of the French peasantry and the rural economy of France during the middle ages should be treated in a comprehensive manner. Modern French work on these questions, though excellent, is broken up into special studies. The latest general surveys are some fifty years old, and the monumental productions of Fustel de Coulanges are restricted to the earlier medieval period. Let us say at once that something more than a generalisation of French learning is required. What one should like to see would be such a treatment of French evidence as would bring the results to the level of what has been done and is being done in other countries, especially in Germany and in England. French scholarship is so highly appreciated abroad, and its 1902 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 329 influence is so distinctly felt in the history of foreign thought and research, that it seems only fair that a French scholar approaching a subject of common interest, and one in which the different western countries have followed very similar lines, should keep his eyes open to the way in which problems have been stated and solved in neighbouring countries. The general impression left by M. See's book is that it gives a vast amount of useful information about medieval France, that it marks a great progress in the collection of the results of French research, but that it is distinctly ' insular ' in its treatment of the subject and out of touch with general literature. It is the work of one who has trusted entirely to the guidance of Guerard, Fustel de Coulanges, and Luchaire. This is saying a great deal, but it is not all that is wanted even for a study of French history. Such a personality as Fustel de Coulanges could afford to disregard other people's work, because he made up by originality of conception, subtle analysis, creative imagination, and a vivid sense of the reality of life for deficiencies in other respects. But for lesser lights a fair acquaintance with the development of ideas and the possibilities of combination may turn out to be a safe- guard against narrowness of purpose and barrenness of thought. It is in this sense and not with a view to wide-reaching comparisons that one would have wished M. See well read in foreign literature. As it is, I do not think he quotes a single English work, and exceedingly few are the German books mentioned by him. To make an end of this point, I cannot help thinking that, for instance, a study of Mr. Seebohm's ' Tribal Community in Wales ' would have enlightened our author on many puzzhng questions, even in the realm of rural arrangements in Brittany, of which he has made a special study, and that Meitzen's methods ought not to be disregarded even by those who do not quite agree with his results. Turning to the subject matter discussed, we must notice, to begin with, that as to the Roman and the Merovingian periods our author entirely accepts Fustel de Coulanges' theory without discussing the evidence in detail. He assumes, on the strength of his celebrated countryman's researches, two ideas, which form the starting points of his own investigations — first, that the manorial system, if we may use this English term to render the French rigime domanial, was formed in substance during the Eoman period ; secondly, that it was adopted and developed in Merovingian France. It is no use discussing here how far these fundamental positions are right, and whether they square with the documents, as the responsi- bility for theni does not rest primarily with M. S6e. Still one would think that, at least for the Carolingian age, our author ought to have paid more attention to the discussion of conflicting evidence, ought to have shown, for instance, in what way one can reconcile the descriptions of great estates given by the ' Polyptique d'Irminon ' and the ' Capitulare de Villis ' with the evidence as to the existence of a still powerful class of free landowners of medium and small size, if I may venture to call them so, to which the Carolingian laws and cartularies testify. It is hardly right to consider the mansus, the German Hufe, merely from the point of view of the contrast between mansus indominicatus and mansus servilis, of 380 REVIEWS OF BOOKS April which last the mansus ingenuilis appears as a mere variety. We are led to ask, for example, what the mansi were, to which the well-known precepts as to military service applied, and whether they can be con- veniently understood as mere tributary holdings. The feudal period is, no doubt, that which the author has studied with greatest care and profit. He has seemingly mastered the be- wildering complexity of numberless cartularies and coutumes, and this chief part of his book will be useful even to those who do not accept the main lines of his arguments and would wish for a sharper analysis of facts. To begin with, the personal condition of the peasantry is set forth, and in the very first chapter it is stated, as a general conclusion, that in those parts of France where feudalism was most strongly developed personal freedom had most completely dis- appeared ; as a matter of fact, such was the case chiefly in the north, the centre, and the east, whereas the west and the south enjoyed a much greater infusion of freedom and a more rapid progress towards liberty.^ The facts are interesting and well worth notice, but it may be asked whether what is described as the effect was not in some cases the cause, and whether the seeming analogies presented by such widely different provinces as Normandy, Brittany, and Languedoc are not to be ex- plained as a coincidence produced by different causes — say by survivals of tribal custom in Brittany, an early rise of ducal power in Normandy, and an exceptional economic prosperity in Languedoc. Next follows a description of the cadres territoriaux, of the groupings of rural population, and of the divisions of territory. The author touches on the very important problem of the concentration of rural life in villages and separate farms, and mentions some interesting facts as to these last — the so-called h&bergements, borderies ''■ — but declares that it is out of the question to treat this subject in a comprehensive manner. This is probably true, and very much to be regretted ; but one does not find even the slightest attempt to approach the subject through the study of maps and field divisions — in fact from the point of view from which Meitzen has approached it. Before this is done all mere discus- sion as to terms must needs remain fruitless. The detailed information as to the gradual passage from slavery to serfdom and the gradual rise of serfdom itself is very acceptable, as well as the remarks on the development of free tenantry through the spread of hospitalitas—oi the practice of arranging with free settlers in order to reclaim waste land. The only observation I have here to make applies to the line of distinction between the serf class and the villain class as drawn by our author. The fact of the broad distinction in French custom is by itself very important, especially if one bears in mind the fusion of both in English law. But then the question arises. What was there to uphold the distinction, which had to be given up in England mainly on account of the ' P. 137 : ' Dans les regions ou (le regime ffeodal) est moins iortement organist la separation entre nobles et non-nobles est moins marquee, la condition des paysans tend k s'amSliorer plus rapidement. L4 ou les seigneurs f^odaux sont moins puissants, moins riches, le morcellement de la propriety noble s'op^re plus ais^ment, et ce ph^nomtoe est certainement favorable a T^mancipation des classes rurales.' ' Thence probably the 'bordarius,' so well known to the students of English an- tiquities. 1902 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 331 impossibility of enforcing it legally? If we may trust M. See, the moral force of custom and the lord's fear of calhng forth a spirit of discontent, which might turn out to be inconvenient in many ways, were sufficient to protect the villains as a privileged class. It may be so, but in this case, surely, these checks ought to have operated primarily in regard to services, precluding their arbitrary increase. Nevertheless our author holds that by custom the lord could increase the services. What he quotes in support of this assertion does not apply anyhow ; the passage from the ' Coutumes d'Anjou et du Maine ' speaks only of an augmentation of payments in case it was found that the tenant held more than what he paid for (p. 219). As to the importance of free settlers (hdtes), nobody wiU be inclined to dispute MM. Luchaire and S^e, who follows M. Luchaire on this point, but there is nothing to show that it was the predominant element of free villainage, whereas the francales homines, the descendants of free peasants of old standing, were an exception. It squares with the author's construction of social history, but it can hardly be proved. The third book is taken up with the description of the manor and its rural economy. After a chapter dealing with the agents of the lord, the duties, payments, and services imposed on the peasantry are discussed, and then the question of commercial rights and usages is treated. All these points are examined simply and entirely from the point of view of the lord's will and power. M. S6e does not admit of any other basis for the arrangement of rural life. The details he gives are instructive, but his inferences as to the growth of institutions do not seem to be either new or convincing. Just to point out a few objections, I may challenge his notions as to the distribution of agricultural services, his explanation of the development of rights of jurisdiction, and his view of rights of common. I select these points because they seem to disclose characteristic weaknesses in our author's modes of reasoning. He very rightly points out how difiScult it is to form an exact estimate of the burden which lay on the particular peasant, as any general enumeration of rents and services will include incidents belong- ing to different eases. But this observation does not guard him against the utterance in regard to Carolingian custom that it is hardly con- ceivable how people could be obliged in some cases to work six days in the week for the lord. What time was left them to till their own fields ? (p. 87.) A more vivid sense of the real facts underlying enumerations of services would probably have enlightened our author. He would have perceived that it is not the single peasant that is burdened with six days' work a week, but the holding, to which several peasants belong, so that the six days would get worked off, not by one but perhaps by two or three villagers. Speaking of rights of jurisdiction attached to the manor, M. S6e chooses to derive them from the power of the lord over his personal de- scendants and over people living in some kind of dependence on his land. A delegation of jurisdictional power from the public authorities or a seizure of such powers by the landed aristocracy does not seem to him either material or distinctly proved (p. 435). Feudal jurisdiction turns out to be patrimonial jurisdiction. Now, nobody ever thought of denying 332 REVIEWS OF BOOKS April the importance of a patrimonial element in feudal jurisdiction, but to cut off all bond between this last and public power is hardly less than gross exaggeration. In fact it is impossible by the help of such a simplified notion to disentangle the intricacies of haute justice and of the treatment of what in England would have been called crown cases.' The element of public interest and public delegation stands out clearly in these cases, even if it be more latent in others. Of course this obser- vation will lead us to inferences as to the popular courts which are not very consistent with Eomanistic theories, but the facts can be hardly explained away, least of all by an appeal to the profits of jurisdiction. Whatever interest might be attached to the proceeds of a court it was not created primarily in order to secure these proceeds, but to provide for a requirement of social intercourse. The chapters on rights of common are full of contemptuous references to vague communistic theories lacking historical support. One could expect our author's own views to be the very reverse of vague and self- assuming. But then, surely, we ought to find in his book at least an exhaustive classification and description of those disputed usages ; what is really given hardly amounts to such a classification and description. It would be impossible on the strength of M. S^e's remarks to answer, for instance, the following questions : Did there exist in France the prac- tices described as Feldegememschaft by the German scholars, and as the ' open field system ' by the English ? If they did, how was the partition of the fields regulated ? To what extent was the intermixture of strips carried ? Did the lord's strips lie intermixed with the rest or apart from the rest ? How were the services of the hommage performed in the first case ? To what extent was the rotation of crops enforced by regulations formed by the whole village ? How were meadows treated, &c. &c. ? We cannot expect answers to such questions to be always very clear and full, but if there existed or sprang up rights of common in any way and at any time these questions ought to have been put. Before they are put and answered every speculation as to the origin of rights of common in the lord's grants and in the villagers' encroach- ments will simply resolve itself into what is termed in logic petitio principii — begging the question. Let us add that the three books treating of such disputed matters are followed by a fourth, which deals with the dissolution of the manorial arrangement. It is as replete with interesting facts as the former three, but naturally does not call forth so many objections. Considered as a whole M. See's book will certainly be indispensable in the present state of our knowledge to every student of the social history of France, but its value will probably lie more in the facts it sets forth than in the argu- ments to which these facts give rise. Paul Vinogeadoff. A History of Egypt. Vol. VI. ' The Middle Ages.' By Stanley Lanb- PooLE, M.A., Litt.D. (London: Methuen. 1901.) Pbofbssoe Peteie's edition of the ' History of Egypt, from the Earliest Times to the Present Day,' provides a series of text-books which fill a vacant place in our literature. In this, the sixth volume. Professor Lane- ■* Cf. p. 446 ff., a very confused account of ' haute justice.' 1902 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 333 Poole deals with Arabic Egypt, the Egypt of the middle ages, covering a period of nearly nine centuries, from the Saracen conquest of 640 to its annexation by the Ottoman Turks in 1517. It is not easy, within the space of 350 small pages, to deal with the rise and fall of medieval Egypt in a way that would satisfy all his readers, but the author has already cleared the way, to a large extent, in his ' History of Saladin,' and the full list of authorities which he provides will enable the Arabic student to specialise to his heart's content. This is the first time that the subject has been treated in a continuous narrative independently of the general history of Islam. Dr. Lane-Poole brings to bear upon it his wide acquaintance with Mohammadan literature, epi- graphy, and numismatics, and has made a judicious and critical selection of the almost unlimited material which he has had at his disposal. Apart from the attention which is paid throughout to the evidence of coins, we have noted as particularly instructive his lucid account of the Fatimid administration, the admirable summing up at the close of each dynasty, and the useful information supplied from time to time regarding the process of taxation and the literary activity which ever and again dis- tinguished Egypt's rulers. Professor Lane-Poole writes with a genuine enthusiasm for the east, which he would fain impart to his readers. We are all familiar with the Christian point of view ; he would have us read — and it is a not unwelcome change — from the point of view of the Crescent. No writer — no reader even — of oriental history can fail to be struck with the twofold character of the Arab. Frequently in the pages before us the author has to record the curious blend of savagery and the love of nature, the co-existence of the grossest barbarity and an innate appreciation of the arts. A small number of characters, Saladin among them, certainly survive the criticism of our modern standards, but how are we to understand such types as Ahmad ibn fulun, the virtuous Turk who was ' hasty with the sword,' or the wanton and cruel el-Amir, the Fatimid, who cherished a love for rose- culture, or the hopelessly perfidious Beybars, who, along with Saladin, became the hero of the story-tellers, or even the pious savage Hakim, whom, despite his atrocities, some communities of the present day anxiously await as their Messiah or Mahdi ? To what extent such men as these were the victims of their age, or how often their architectural triumphs were intended to be marks of penitence, we cannot always determine, nor can we decide offhand whether the veneer of culture was a sign of degeneracy and decadence, or was merely a foreign shoot grafted upon a race which had scarcely emerged from primitive bar- barism. What Egypt would have become had she not been infused with fresh blood is a subject which might repay consideration. In spite of the binding power of Islam she could hardly have withstood the allied Cru- saders (the weakness of the 'European concert' notwithstanding), the onrush of the Mongols, or the internal troubles of a much harassed people. The history of Egypt during the middle ages is essentially the history of the ruling classes. Of the life of the common people we know little ; the ' Thousand and One Nights ' presents a faithful picture of domestic life, at all events under the Mamluks, and what can be ascertained of 334 REVIEWS OF BOOKS April their status from other sources is here duly recapitulated. The people received ■with indifference the invading ' desert dwellers ' (if that be the true meaning of the name ' Saracen ' — the author offers no explanation). These, in their turn, being ' a conspicuously adaptive folk,' were ready to take over the system of government which the Eomans had instituted, and which has lasted practically down to the British occupation The people's lot underwent little if any change. They suffered periodically from famine and plague. They were useful when recruits were needed, indispensable victims of taxation, and the governors were generally alive to the importance of furthering their agricultural interests. The senti- ments of the Christians were not often taken into account, and the ' lion ' proselytes of Hakim, who were trampled to death in the general rush to become Muslims, illustrate the usual attitude of the rulers. Still, there were times when even the Christian was favoured to the detriment of the Muslim, and there were rulers like Yazurl and en-Nasir who honestly tried to lighten the burdens of the fellahln. For long the humbler classes retained a certain amount of indepen- dence, and it was not until the middle of the eighth century that national movements ceased ; after a futile rebellion of the Copts and a bloody revenge, their spirit was broken. Many of them apostatised to Islam, and from this date [a.d. 832] begins the numerical preponderance of the Muslims over the Christians in Egypt, and the settlement of the Arabs in the villages and on the land, instead of, as here- tofore, only in the great cities. Egypt now became, for the first time, an essentially Mohammadan country. By the middle of the tenth century the blend was complete. Strangely enough the mixture failed to produce any men of conspicuous ability. Indeed, Egypt's greatest men were often not even pure Arabs, but either wholly or partly of foreign blood, whether Kurdish, Turkish, Armenian, or Circassian. It was under the son of a Turk and a Mongol princess that Egypt reached her apogee in the fourteenth century. The reign of Nasir ibn Kala'iin was one 'of extraordinary brilliance in almost every respect.' His reign was the climax of Egypt's culture and civilisation, and, like that of Kait-Bey, the most famous of his successors, was prolific in matchless buildings and the minor arts. With KaitBey Egypt enters upon the last stage. The rising power of the 'Othmanlis caused an anxiety which could not be allayed, and when at the close of the fifteenth century Egypt was visited by an unusually severe plague, and when, a few years later, the country was distracted by a triumph of iniquitous taxation, the way was clear, and the Turkish sultan had an easy victory. Mutawekkil, the last caliph of Egypt, on his deathbed bequeathed his title and rights to the Turkish sultan. Stanley A. Cook. 1902 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 835 The Alfred Jewel : an Historical Essay. By John Baele, M.A., LL.D. (Oxford : Clarendon Press. 1901.) Alfred the Great : a Sketch and Seven Studies. By Wabwick A. Dbapbe, M.A. (London : Elliot Stock. 1901.) The object of Professor Earle'sbook is to establish the purpose for which the famous Alfred jewel was intended. All the old theories, we are told, ' have come to nothing ; there was not one of them that could seriously be advocated as resting upon evidence in history or in common sense and the natural reason of things.' Unfortunately this criticism applies with equal force to the professor's theory, or rather chain of theories. They are that the jewel, which he thinks undoubtedly belonged to King Alfred, was the chief ornament of his crowned war helmet and of his regalia ; that it is of Celtic workmanship, although inspired by the masterly mind of Alfred ; that it was made between 860 and 866, because he is not called king in the inscription ; that Alfred meant it ' to enshrine the frontispiece of his profession and the ensign of his creed ecclesiastical, political, and personal ; ' that the figure on it is ' a symbol of religion in its ecclesiasti- cal and political aspect ; ' that the ornament at the back is not a mere conventional floral design, but a sword buried in a human heart, which is also provided with a far-fetched allegorical meaning. In a chapter of undisguised fiction Alfred in Athelney, after a long soliloquy, decides to hide the jewel, ' lest peradventure it make me known unaware.' It is suggested that after his successes he could not find time to dig up this important emblem of royalty. The author's theory seems to have largely grown out of the use of cynehelm to render corona, but he is in error in stating that this is the only rendering known in Old English. The word beah, literally ' bracelet,' is an older term, and its use is probably to be explained as referring to the diadem (using that word in its original sense) which Alfred and the earlier kings are depicted as wearing on their coins, the rayed crown not appearing until later times. The evidence of the coins is not unimpeachable, since they may repeat the details of the diadem from the coins of Constantine the Great and the later emperors, from which they are copied. Edgar is described in the contemporary ' Vita Oswaldi ' as being crowned with a golden diadema, so that the word had lost its original sense by that time. There is no evi- dence that Alfred and the earlier kings wore rayed crowns of gold, and there is not even a presumption that they wore golden coronets round their helmets. William of Poitiers describes Harold's body at Hastings as bearing no insignia of his rank. There is a passage in Aldhelm, ' De Laudibus Virginitatis,' c. 60, that has not, we believe, been considered in connexion with the Alfred jewel. He states that he has limned the features of virginity in various colours quemadmodum solent nobiliiam artifices imaginum et regalium personarum pic- tores deauratis petallis thoraoidas [v. I. thoraoiclas ' ] ornare, et pulcherrima membrorum liniamenta fabrefactis vultibus decorare ; cum tamen iidem opifices plerunque turpi natura corporis deformes et contemptibiles existant, magisque ' The word ' thoraoiclas ' (from Bdpa^ and KvKAds ?) is glossed in the Aldhelm MSS. by ' imago ' (see Napier, Old English Glossaries) and by ' seluptae [sic] imagines ' in the eighth century Corpns glossary, which also derived the word from Aldhelm. The explanation seems to be a guess from the context. 336 REVIEWS OF BOOKS April iconisma regale compto stemmate depiotum laudatur, quam despicabilis persona pictoris veneratur. The purpose of Mr. Draper's book is not very clear. He calls it a ' sketch, which does not pretend to refer to all the events and incidents which history has recorded, and legend added to history.' The author speaks of himself as a ' layman,' as distinguished from specialists in history, and he is heretical enough to wish that the story of Alfred and the cakes ' may long remain in our history books,' despite the specialists. His work is not distinguished for accuracy. History knows nothing of a ' swoop ' of the Northmen upon Iceland so early as the eighth century, and when they did people that island their migration can hardly be said to have been due to the disturbing effects of ' the civilising advances of Christianity and feudalism ' (p. 3). The invention of the shire (which is not derived from ' share ' ) is ascribed to Alfred (p. 40), and he is even said to have anticipated by it ' the principles of the county council legis- lation of ten centuries later ' (p. 12). Jilthelflaed, the Lady of the Mercians, is said to have died in 919, ' leaving no descendants ' (p. 19). Florence of Worcester, whose death is correctly ascribed to 1118 at p. 27, is called the ' contemporary biographer ' of Edward the Confessor, ' a.d. 1042-1051,' at p. 128, and ^thelweard is described as living ' late in the same century.' Asser's ' Life of Alfred ' was composed in the forty-fifth, not the fortieth, year of Alfred's life (p. 29). On the strength of a mis- understood reference in the translation of Pauli's ' Life of Alfred,' edited by Thorpe, p. 189, note 3, where a quotation from Asser immediately follows a reference to ' Wanley, Catal. praef.,' an unfortunately non- existent edition of Asser by that scholar is cited (p. 84). This very in- accurate translation of Pauli's work (which is 7iot by Thorpe) is recom- mended to the student at p. 138 as ' reliable and instructive.' At p. 184 Sir John Spelman's ' Life of Alfred,' a really creditable work for the time, is very unjustly said to be ' equally unreliable ' with Eobert Powel's jejune production. Eichard of Cirencester was not the author of the dissertation on the regalia that he embodied in his work (p. 181), and the epitaph quoted from him is really the panegyric of Henry of Huntingdon upon Alfred. At p. 102 it is stated that the table of regnal years in the Hyde ' Liber Vitae ' assigns thirty years as the duration of Alfred's reign, but Mr. Draper has picked out the Roman numerals without regarding the Old English context, which says that the length of the reign was thirty years minus one and a half year. The volume lays special stress upon archaological evidence, but the evidence is exceedingly slight, even if the British Museum antiquities at p. 34 could be shown with anything like certainty to date from Alfred's time. The author's own sketches are evidences of his enthusiasm and skill, but we cannot congratulate him upon the illustrations from paintings by modern artists. In the picture of Alfred and the neatherd's wife by Johannot a strongly built stone oven of an un-English pattern is depicted. The frontispiece of the volume reproduces the portrait of Alfred from Burghers' engraving in the Latin version of Spelman's ' Life of Alfred,' published by Obadiah Walker in 1678. It is described as being ex antiqua tabella in Collegio Universitatis, and Mr. Draper vaguely states that it ' simply connects the images on the coins and early manuscripts 1902 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 337 with the modem examples,' and that the picture is not now to be found. From it or from the engraving by Vertue, prefixed to Wise's edition of Asser, pubHshed in 1722, is derived the portrait of Alfred rendered so famihar by popular illustrated histories of England. Vertue's plate is stated to be taken from an antiquissima tahella in aedihus Magistri Coll. Univ. 0x011. There are differences of detail in the two plates, and the expression of the face is not the same in both. The variations may possibly be due to the engravers, but it is noteworthy that there were two paintings of Alfred at University College. William Smith, a fellow of the college, which he entered in 1668, records that the society bought a portrait of Alfred in 1662 for three pounds, and states that ' there is, I think, an older picture of him [Alfred] in the [master's] lodgings, but of very small dimensions.' ^ This is clearly the original of Vertue's plate. Hearne succeeded in seeing the painting in the master's dining-room in 1714, and he describes it as 'painted a pretty many years agoe. But it is nothing near as good as that I have printed from the draught in Sir John Spelman's MS. The beard is also wrong, and it makes him look too old. There is not that briskness neither in the face as should be.' ^ As he makes no reference to the identity of the painting with Burghers' plate it is probable that the latter was not derived from the painting in the master's lodge, but from the picture purchased in 1662. It would be quite in accord with the credulity and dishonesty of the Oxford antiquaries of that date to find a painting a few years old described as ' old ' because it supported the mythical connexion of the university and the college with King Alfred. We have a good example of this vrilful closing of the eyes to truth in Hearne's obstinate prefer- ence for the Spelman portrait, which is nothing more than a very rough, conventional, and obviously imaginary sketch of a king with a rayed crown,"* which Hearne's engraver, Burghers, developed considerably. It ' The Annals of Vniversity College, by William Smith (Newcastle-upon-Tyne, 1728), p. 251. Although this book supports Hearne's assertion that Smith's 'great unhappiness is that he cannot express himself well ' (Collections, i. 201) it proves that he was not ' a man of little judgment ' (ibid. p. 38), for he clearly exposed the myth of the foundation of University College by Alfred, thus showing that he was much more critical than Hearne, who swallowed all these silly fabrications, and even believed with Wood that John of Beverley was proved by a non-existent glass window to have been master of University College (Spelman's Life of JElfred, p. 180, note). ' Hearne's Collections, ed. Doble, iv. 314. He vaunts the superiority of the Spelman portrait in ii. 206. In the unpublished portion of his diary he writes, under 1 Feb. 1722-3, that the picture of Alfred in the recently published edition of Asser by Wise is ' nothing near so good as that I gave at the beginning of Spelman's Life of Alfred, tho' this be design'd against it, and I believe was the chief motive that incited Charlett [the master of University College] to put Wise upon this edition, Charlett having for some time got Spelman suppressed, because he was not pleased with King jElfred's beard.' Hearne omits to tell us that by prefixing the words ' To the Prince ' to Spelman's dedication — which was clearly intended for Charles I, as stated by Obadiah Walker in his own dedication — he had converted Spelman's language into a Jacobite manifesto in favour of the Pretender. He alleges that the dedication was Spelman's (Collections, ii. 131), a piece of casuistry that throws an unpleasant light upon his character. It was probably this dedication, and not the details of Alfred's beard, that led to Charlett's action. ■* It occurs at the beginning of Spelman's manuscript in the Bodleian Library (' MS. e Museo 75 '). VOL. XVII.— NO. LXVI. Z 338 REVIEWS OF BOOKS April might serve as the portrait of a king of any period or race, whereas the author of the University College portrait must have consulted some fourteenth-century regal image for the crown. If any portrait had been in existence at University College in the early part of the seventeenth century it would hardly have escaped the knowledge of so diligent an inquirer as Sir John Spelman, who was in Oxford some time before his death during the siege in 1643. It would therefore seem that both these University College portraits were fabrications of the seventeenth century, and that the larger one was copied from the other, no doubt for the hall. Hence the JElfrediis Fundator at the back of the picture in Burghers' plate. In any case there can be no doubt that the portraits are apocryphal, and it is to be regretted that Mr. Draper has given them further currency. W. H. Stevenson. The Dawn of Modern Geography. Part II. A History of Exploration and Geographical Science from the Close of the Ninth to the Middle of the Thirteenth Century. By C. Eaymond Beazley, M.A., F.E.G.S. (London : John Murray. 1901.) In the present instalment Mr. Beazley brings his history down to the close of the central medieval period, and deals chiefly with three widely different branches of exploration — namely that of the northmen from Iceland to Vinland and to the north-east ; that of the later Palestine pilgrims who immediately preceded and were contemporary with the crusaders ; and lastly the missionary monks who, in traversing Asia, which had recently been opened to Christian folk by the conquests of the Mongols, led the way for the more purely commercial explorations of the Polos. The main interest in the Norse voyages centres, of course, in the discovery of Vinland, to the discussion of which Mr. Beazley devotes many pages. That America was reached by the northmen five centuries before the age of Columbus is beyond dispute, while ' against all other medieval voyages to the western continent one verdict only can stand, a verdict of " not proven." ' There is much, however, that is incomprehensible in the saga of Eric the Bed. Where, for instance, could it have been on the shores of New England, in the springtide, when the eider ducks were just laying, that the country side was then already producing ripe grapes ? The situation of Vinland is indeed a problem that apparently eludes solution ; but there is evidence of a considerable change of climate having taken place since these early times, for on Ascension Day 1135 the entrance of Baffin's Bay was quite free of ice and navigable, which is never now the case so soon in the year. Mr. Beazley points out that the Norsemen who sailed from Iceland to Greenland pushed on down to Vinland, chiefly for the sake of cutting timber for ship-building, this being found very plentifully in the new west, while it was a scarce product in Iceland and the north. The astonishing fact of these Vinland voyages, however, will ever be that, having gone so far, they went no further. These Scandinavians, who had coasted down to Gibraltar, and, passing the Straits, had made raids into the Narbonnese lands and even as far eastward as Greece — having on the other quarter come from the north as far down as Nova Scotia and probably even to Massachusetts Bay— how came it that they there turned back ? From 1112 to 1409 we have aregular succession 1902 mvmWS OP BOOKS 8d9 of bishops of Greenland ; but why not also of Massachusetts ? In truth, a mystery hangs over the abandonment of Leith'a Booths and Thorfinn's colony which the sagas fail to explain. The record of the almost numberless pilgrim voyages to the Holy Land during the crusading age forms a long chapter in the present volume ; piety replaced common sense for the most part with these worthies, and observation was entirely reserved for miraculous sites ; hence geography is not much indebted to the Palestine pilgrims ; they are, however, the precursors of the missionary monks who, when the crusades had come to naught, went far afield to visit the court of the great Mongol Kaan, now become the overlord of all eastern Moslem lands. With the travels of Carpini and Eubruquis through central and further Asia the narrative part of the present volume closes ; to which Mr. Beazley appends an interesting chapter on medieval maps, giving many facsimiles. This, the second volume of his work, is full of inter- esting matter and makes us look forward to the next, which will deal with Marco Polo and the golden age of geographical discovery. In view of a second edition, which doubtless will be called for when all the volumes are published, a few errors in oriental names require correction, Thus Mr. Beazlev has the name of the Mongol conqueror consistently misspelt. There is, it is true, a diversity in our Moslem authorities. It may be Chingiz or Jinghiz (and there are other spellings) but in no case can it be Ghenghiz, as Mr. Beazley always spells it, with identical initial letters to both the first and the second syllables. There is no such personage in history as 'the caliph Mozaffer ' (p. 129); doubtless the Fatimid Zahir is the potentate referred to. 'Moktafi's successor, Mostanshed or Mostanieh ' (p. 226), and again ' Mostanieh-abul-Modhaffer ' (p. 252), has not a double name, but is the sufficiently well known Abbasid Caliph Mustanjid. Then on p. 269 ' the Turkish Hisu-Kapha ' stands for Hisn Kayfa, which is Arabic. These are small matters, but to be avoided in a work which is Ukely to take rank as an authority, being the best general summary of geographical discovery that has yet appeared. G. Lb Strange. Three Coronation Orders. Edited by J. Wickham Legg. (London: Henry Bradshaw Society. 1901.) De. Legg here makes accessible three more documents illustrating the history of English coronations. He has already elsewhere more than once pointed out that there are four recensions of the Order of Corona- tion, marking stages in the development of the rite ; and the present documents can best be ' placed ' in relation to this classification. The earliest stage, perhaps already reached by the eighth century, is represented by the Pontifical of Egbert, and on the continent by the rite of that part of the Missal of Leofric which was written in Lotharingia. ■ It consists mainly of a series of eight benedictory prayers, the fourth to the seventh accompanying the unction and the several investitures with sceptre, staff, and crown. The second stage is represented by the Benedictional of Eobert of Jumieges, of the eleventh century, and on the continent by the Sacramenta/ry of Ratold of Corbie, and the imperial coronation at Milan z 2 340 REVIEWS OF BOOKS April as contained in Martene's Ordo V, and, in structure at least, by the coronations of the kingdom of Jerusalem. It retains the eight benedic- tions, but there is an infusion of new elements, largely derived from a form of the Ordo Bomanus, and the order of the investitures is changed. The third recension belongs to the twelfth century, and is represented by several manuscripts in various English libraries, and is parallel to the order of the coronation of Louis VIII of Prance and the imperial coronation at Aachen as given in Martene's Ordo IV. It is marked by the elimination of all but two of the original eight benedictions and the further infusion of ' Eoman ' forms. The fourth recension is that of the Liber Begalis of the fourteenth century ; and the order of the coronation book of Charles V of France is approximately of the same type. It is characterised by the reinsertion of all but one of the original eight benedictions ; and by the further development of a tendency, already discernible from the second recension onwards, to assimilate the conse- cration of the sovereign to that of a bishop. This rite continued in use till the coronation of Charles II, having been translated into English for James I ; and from it have been derived the modified orders for subse- quent coronations down to the present. Of the three orders contained in the present volume the third belongs to the second recension, being the consecration of an Anglo-Saxon king as given in manuscript C.C.C.C. 44 of the eleventh century. But it is of a peculiar variety, otherwise unexampled, the contents of nearly all the prayers having been changed, with the retention of only the opening, or the opening and closing, words ; and it has new elements of its own in the investiture with the pallium and accompanying formulae, and an increased number of anthems throughout. The second of the three orders is an Anglo-French version of the rite of the fourth recension, derived from manuscript C.C.C.C. 20, of the early fourteenth century, once belonging to St. Augustine's at Canterbury. It throws some light on what is left obscure in the Latin of the Liber Begalis, and it is otherwise interesting for a picture of a point, not quite certainly definable, in the coronation ceremonies, here reproduced in collotype and carefully described and dis- cussed by the editor. The first of the orders is that of the coronation of William and Mary, edited from manuscript L. 19 of the Heralds' College ; and to this Dr. Legg has added in appendices a number of subsidiary documents bearing upon and illustrating this coronation, while in the introduction he discusses in detail the modifications of the traditional rite made by Sancroft for the coronation of James II, chiefly in conse- quence of the king's refusal to communicate and of Sancroft's own opinions as to the consecration of things ; and the changes, partly by way of rever- sion, conscious or unconscious, to older use, partly by way of further modification, made by Compton of London for the coronation of William and Mary. It scarcely needs saying that Dr. Legg's editing is excellent and laborious. Besides the general discussions in the introduction he has copiously annotated the orders in detail and added an index. F. E. Beightman. 1902 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 341 Annali Genovesi di Gajfaro e da' suoi continuatori. A cura di Luigi ToMMAso Belgeano 6 di Cesaee Impbeialb. I., II. (' Ponti per la Sfcoria d' Italia.') (Eome : Istituto Storico Italiano. 1890, 1901.) These volumes are very well printed on excellent paper ; the text is good, and variae lectiones and explanatory notes accompany and elucidate it. There are excellent photographs of specimen pages of the best manuscripts, and in one volume by the side of the pages the pen and ink sketches of the old annalist still illustrate his text in print. The intro- ductions are full and good; they give all the necessary informatioh in regard to the parentage and history of the manuscripts ; they furnish an account of the career of the annalist and a critical apprecia- tion of his value ; and, in the second volume more particularly, they give a summary of the period of history covered by the annalist. The explanatory notes show great knowledge of all the documentary evidence that can illustrate the text ; of topography, nomenclature, and local customs ; and of all the best work done by French and German writers of late years. Signor Imperiale, it may be added, both in his references and in his able introductions, proves that he is a worthy successor to Signor Belgrano. The history of the text of these volumes is very interesting. There are three main manuscripts for the annals of Genoa, all preserved in foreign countries. One, N, is in the Bibliotheque Nationale ; another, E, is in the Ministere des Affaires Etrangeres ; a third, B, is in the British Museum. None of these did Muratori know when he printed Caffarus and his con- tinuators. E was still in Genoa (from which it was ' conveyed ' by Napoleon), but the suspicious policy of the municipality refused him access to its archives, a refusal which moved to some wrath the great antiquary. It is hard to speak with anything save reverence of Muratori ; but the gigantic character of his work could not but involve defects in detail, while indeed the want of good manuscripts was of itself fatal to good editing. His text of the Genoese annals shows omissions, transpositions, and additions. Some even accused him of a Ghibelline leaning, which had excised from the text all that tended to prove the independence of Genoa. We may be sure that Muratori edited the text as faithfully as he could, but the progress of modern research has been such that a reprint, or even a revision, of Muratori 's text — at any rate for these Genoese annals — is hardly desirable. There are other cases (e.g. parts of Otto Morena) where Muratori's text is almost unreadable, so that one is the more grateful for these new texts. But the volumes issued by the Istituto are necessarily somewhat expensive, and their production is, again necessarily, somewhat slow, as a result of the great pains expended on each volume, and it is natural to wish for quicker and cheaper publica- tion. But quicker and cheaper publication might be bad publication, in view of the amount of work that has to be done, and the would-be historian of medieval Italy must be content to wait. The present edition well illustrates how good a work is being done by the Istituto. The text is based on N, the official copy made for the municipality of Genoa, on B, a copy of N made before N was damaged, 342 REVIEWS OF BOOKS AprU and on E, apparently an official duplicate of N. Pertz indeed had used N and B, but he was not acquainted with E, which was not discovered in the foreign office at Paris till 1880. The text published by the Istituto therefore marks an advance even upon Pertz. The annals of Genoa extend from 1099 to 1287, and fall into thirteen different divisions, according to their various authors. The story of their beginning is of some interest, and it is connected with the career of Caffarus, who was their ' only begetter.' He was descended from Ido, viscount of Genoa about 950. The family of Ido became independent of the count of the Ligurian march about 1050, a fact which materially contributed to the rise of Genoese independence. They continued titular viscounts, and received lands and tithes from the Genoese church, while the consulate became a sort of heirloom in the family. Caffarus was one of the Genoese who went to the relief of the crusaders in 1100. It was under the impulse of this expedition that he began, upon his return to Genoa in 1101, to write his ' Annales.' He lived till 1166, and continued his ' Annals ' (which begin in 1099) till 1163. During the sixty years and more between the expedition of 1100 and his death he was five times one of the consuls of the commune — for the first time in 1122, for the last in 1149 — and he was twice consul de placitis. On two most important occasions he was ambassador to Barbarossa, in 1154 and in 1158. In 1158 he went to the diet of Eoncaglia to claim exemption for Genoa from Frederick's financial poUcy of reclaiming the regalia, on the plea that Genoa did what the empire could not do for 10,000 marks a year in keeping the coasts from Eome to Barcelona free from Saracens.' His ' Annals ' are important for various reasons. They give what is perhaps the first contribution to history made by a layman in West Europe during the middle ages. They are distinguished from other annals of the time by the fact that they are written by one who was himself a ' great part ' of aU. he tells — of one who wrote, like Thucydides, ots T£ avTOS ■TTO.prjv Koi Trapa tu>v SXkuiv ocroy Svvarov aKpi/ieCa Trepi CKacrTou iireieXdiiv, and who besides can vouch for his narrative in the phrase ut in registro habetur. Like Thucydides he wrote with a plan, not indeed that of throwing hght on what was likely to happen in the future, but rather of stimulating the Genoese to do in the future as they had done of old, by recounting their past glory. This lends a certain proportion to his work, uncommon in his day. He is distinguished too by the tolerance of his tone in religious matters ; and he has a good word even for the infidels he met in Palestine. The history of his ' Annals ' has one remarkable feature. In 1152 he presented them to the consuls, who ordered the public scribe to copy and set in the public archives the book he had written, that the victories of Genoa might be known hereafter at all times to posterity. Caffarus continued his work after 1152, dictating it to Macrobius, and widening his narrative with facts and deepening it with reflexions. Year by year it was still read to the consuls, to receive public approval, until in 1163 he ceased, owing to civil dissensions. There are other works of Caffarus in this volume, especially the ' De Liberatione civitatum Orientis,' a work ' Vol. i. p. 50, 11. 15-21, 1902 REVIEWS OF BOOKS Si9 meant to show the part played by Genoa in the first orusade, but inci- dentally throwing light on its general character. The 'Annals' of Caffarus were continued in 1169 by Obertus, the chancellor, at the request of the consuls. He was a person of importance in Genoa, seven times consul de placitis, and an able diplomatist. He tells the history of Genoa from 1163 to 1173, with some verbosity, and a tendency to the cursus Leoninus and occasional versification, but also with some power of sketching characters and with a good use of original documents. The first volume gave the annals of Cafifarus himself, and of the first of his continuators ; the second volume contains the text of the next three continuators, and a third is shortly to follow. The con- tinuators here printed are not so important as Caffarus himself, for two reasons. In the first place Caffarus wrote for his own pleasure and for his own use ; conversant with events, he was yet no official annalist, and his work has some independent value. But the decree of 1152, ordering the ' Annals ' to be read in council and transcribed in the public registers, altered their character. They became the minutes, as it were, of the town council of Genoa, and the compilation fell naturally into the hands of clerks — of the soriba communis — a position which was held by each of the three continuators in vol. ii. The ' Annals ' thus lost in various ways ; diplomatic omissions became necessary ; the jejune record of events left no place for a description of motives or of character ; and the credibility of some parts of the narrative became at best no more than that of the inspired journal, like the Moniteur under Napoleon. On the other hand the semi-ofScial character of the narrative gives it a peculiar interest ; and it results in a record of the public business, great and small, which Genoa had in the Levant, Spain, Provence, and the north of Africa — a record which gives a vivid sense of the wide commercial interests and the many political connexions of a great trading town of medieval Italy. In the second place the period covered by these three continuators, which extends from 1174 to 1224, is, in some ways, not so important as the period covered by Caffarus. The information which Cafi'arus gives us with regard to the rise of the Genoese ' com- panies,' formed for a period of years, and governed by a number of consuls, about the beginning of the twelfth century, is precious because of the light it throws on an important variation from the Lombard type of commune. The constitutional interest of the period covered by the second volume is not so great ; the main event was the substitution of a podest^ for the consuls. It was in 1216 that the consules de placitis went ; in 1217 came the final abolition of the consulatus communis. But this was a movement common to the whole of northern Italy, and only peculiar to Genoa in the later epoch at which it took place. The political history of the fifty years from 1174 to 1224 is, however, of considerable importance. There are no such records of crusading zeal or of expan- sion in the western Mediterranean at the Saracen expense as Caffarus has to give : but there is much that is of European importance. It is on the whole a period in which the sympathies of Genoa are consistently Ghibelline. On three occasions the city lent her aid to the imperial cause. The first of these was the war of the Lombard cities 344 REVIEWS OF BOOKS AprU against Barbarossa. But on the part Genoa played in the war the writer of the ' Annals ' is diplomatically silent : he wrote at a time of temporary estrangement from the empire ; and it is from the ' Annales Plaeentini ' that we learn of the aid given by the Genoese at the siege of Alessandria. The second occasion was the conquest of Sicily by Henry VI. The failure of a first expedition by land in 1191 convinced the emperor of the utility of the Genoese fleet, and he ' stretched out bounteous hands full of cities, and towns, and villages to the men of Genoa, (but they were handfuls of wind) ' — if they would but give him ships. The ships were given ; the emperor confessed with his own mouth, when the Sicilian towns ail bowed before the triumphal procession of the Genoese fleet, that its gift had been the gift to him of his kingdom, but 'by the diaboHcal suggestion of certain citizens ' of Genoa, he not only did not keep his promises, verum etiam in cuncta asperrime erga civitatem Genuae . . . nerozavit.^ The third occasion was the visit of Frederic 11 to Genoa in 1212, upon his way to Germany in quest of the imperial crown. He made lavish promises to the Genoese ia return for ready money : and Ogerius Panis, the second of these continuators, swore upon Frederic's soul, as his legal representative, that he would observe all he had promised. But in 1220, upon his coronation, Frederic broke every promise he had made, revoked his privileges and gifts, and arrested an interesting chapter in history. This was a certain curious result of the fourth crusade. Annoyed at the success of their Venetian rivals, the Genoese consuls countenanced the raids of some buccaneering tovrasmen, who, making Syracuse and Malta their base of operations (as they could easily do during Frederic's minority), infested the Mediterranean and harassed the traders of the Levant for long years afterwards — indeed, until this same year 1220, when Frederic, not only out of enmity to the Genoese, as their annalist says, but also because he was asserting his authority in Sicily for the first time, cleared his dominions of Genoese freebooters, just as he cleared them of the Saracen banditti of the hills, who were in league with them. But natural as was the poHcy which was pursued by Frederic it had the sad result, from the imperial point of view, of making Genoa a Guelf city for the future ; and it was from her ports, and under the conduct of her fleet, that the prelates of western Europe sailed to the council summoned by Gregory IX in 1241, only to be ignominiously captured by the Pisan fleet in Frederic's service. The three annahsts whose work is contained in this volume are Ottobon, Ogerius Panis, and Marchisius. The narrative of Ottobon begins in 1174 and extends to 1196. Apparently he did not begin to write until 1194, when he was stimulated by the SiciUan expedition above mentioned, in which he had taken part, to expose the emperor's breach of his promises. Writing from this point of view, he is too thin in the earlier and too diffuse in the later part of his work, and allows himself to be carried away by his bias into refusing to notice the Genoese aid given to the empire at the siege of Alessandria. He omits other important CA'ents — e.g. the destruction of the Genoese colony at Constantinople by the plague of 1182, and the part played by the Genoese in the siege of Acre — influenced in the latter case by political prepossessions, the main 2 Ottoboni Scribae Ann., p. 52, D. 12-16. 1902 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 845 figures among the Genoese at the siege of Acre having subsequently rebelled, though in vain, against the introduction of a podesttl. The best part of Ottobon's annals is perhaps its illustrations. Seven fine pages of miniatures are reproduced as chromolithographs in this edition. These are of different sizes, some being small sketches on the side of the page, some whole-page drawings. The art is childish ; but the light which the drawings throw on the dress, the ships, and the fortifications of the period is valuable. Ottobon was a mere clerk : his successor, Ogerius Panis, was a person of some authority and of good birth, often entrusted with embassies. His view is wide ; the battles of Las Navas, Muret, and Bouvines are all mentioned in his pages ; but his main interest lies in the expansion of Genoa to the Apennines, and in her rivalry with Venice. Perhaps the best of the annahsts in this volume, Ogerius is, however, inferior to Caffarus. His narrative extends from 1196 to 1219 ; the five years from 1219 to 1224 are narrated by Marchisius, a clerk full of the importance of his oifice and of respect for his superiors, bombastic in style, and a lover of quotations. Nevertheless his citations of original documents and the fact that he was a witness on many important occasions give his account some value. E. Baekee. Statuts d'Hotels-Dieu et de Leproseries. Par Leon Lb Geand. (Paris : Picard. 1901.) To collect the rules for hospitals from the twelfth to the fourteenth century was an excellent idea, and this edition, made for the ' Collection de Textes pour servir a I'Etude et k I'Enseignement de I'Histoire,' has been admirably executed. There is no branch of its work to which the Augustinian section of the monastic world can point with greater pride than to the hospitals. Perhaps the vague generalities of St. Augustine's letter, to which, in their love of an ancient and distinguished parentage, the regular canons and their kindred always pointed as the origin of their rule, would not alone have sufficed to raise the Augustinian tree, one branch of which covered all the hospitals and lazarhouses, had not the Hospitallers and the Dominicans put new life into that very aged stock. Yet long before the Hospitallers had been heard of in England Lanfranc and Gundulph had introduced the hospital system as a novelty from the continent. The writing out of elaborate rules no doubt owed much to the stimulus and guidance of the Knights of St. John, and it is with written rules that M. Le Grand is concerned. He therefore begins with the statutes of the Hospital of Jerusalem. He has made extracts from a version that is an improvement on that of M. Delaville le Roulx. In the rules of the French hospitals that follow, the debt to these statutes, and to the several other sources that were drawn upon, has been carefully worked out. The impression left after reading these rules is an extraordinarily pleasing one. In good sense, in the care to avoid hard and fast rules, in the spirit of genuine charity, they have something to teach that governors of hospitals in the twentieth century might read with profit. In the medieval social system there was a lordship founded on the grace of illness. The sick who in health are servi, when visited by the 346 REVIEWS OF BOOKS April chastening band of the Almighty, become domini if fortunate enough to gain admission to a hospital. This idea is continually dwelt upon in the rules, and the Hospitallers of Jerusalem made it their duty to satisfy aU the wishes of the sick, so that no asceticism was pressed upon them, only on their attendants. In the fifteenth century a rule had to be made that the doctor's orders, and not the appetite of the individual, should decide the nature of the sick man's food. There are fewer evidences of tender care for the nurses, though these are not wanting. Toutes les sereurs, s'elles ne sunt malades ou elles n'ont veilliet ceUe nuit pour wardeir les malades, ou elles ne sunt venues d'aucune voie de fors le jour devant, ou eUes ne sunt travillies trop pour aucune grief labeur, doivent oir matines chascua jour, messe et viespres, s'il n'est ensi qu'elles soient enson- niies 4 I'heure de viespres pour aucune neoessite des malades. At St. Pol the rule was that the women (nurses) must be strong and clever, such as know how to — and can — Uft the poor people and put them to bed, and minister properly to the sick ; otherwise they will not be taken. Another house (Angers) refused to admit young and pretty women as nurses or servants ; Lille would not have any under twenty or over fifty. The plain nurse's dress is described as of Stamford cloth, at Angers in the early thirteenth century. Beyond the division between houses for lepers and houses for other sick there was no tendency to specialise. Men and women, foundlings, pregnant women might all be taken in, in most houses. The dis- membered, thieves recently mutilated or branded, the blind, deformed, and paralysed were in several cases shut out, qvia debilitas membrorum non est infirmitas in uno impotenti. The sick should be such as cannot, because of their sickness, beg from door to door. Foundling babes were reared tiU their seventh year in some cases, but Troyes did not take them : ad nos non pertinet, sed ad parrochiales ecclesias. At Angers the brethren were ordered to teach children in the cloister, who were foundlings, perhaps, or convalescents. One hospital orders a week's stay after convalescence, in case of any relapse. The fact that some houses specially note that lepers would not be received may show that exclusion was not a universal rule. But the rules for the lazarhouses show that these were organised as a rule on a distinct plan . In the ordinary hospital the sick were not members of the hospital, but came and went freely. The written rule was for the brethren and sisters, who, for the most part, were under vows of religion. The lepers, on the contrary, were permanent inmates, and formed with their attendants a single community of which they were members, brethren and sisters. M. Le Grand gives an example of a lazarhouse under municipal control, that of the burgesses of Andelys. An interest- ing group of medieval manuscripts relating to municipal hospitals might be coUeeted in England. Mr. Stevenson's account of the Nottingham hospitals, for instance, shows that a good deal may still lie buried in municipal archives that would enable us to enlarge considerably what the ' Monasticon ' has to tell on this subject. Maky Bateson. 1902 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 347 Siger de Brabant et VAverrmsme latin au XIIF"" Si&cle : Etude critique et Docuinents inidits. Par Pierre Mandonnet, 0. P. (' Collectanea Friburgensia,' VIII.) (Fribourg (Suisse) : Librairie de I'Univer- site. 1899.) EssA e la luce eterna di Sigieri Che, leggendo nel vico degli strami, Sillogizz6 invidiosi veri.' To these lines of Dante Siger of Brabant owes such fame as he possesses for the world of modern culture. It was known, indeed, before the appearance of Father Mandonnet's elaborate work that Siger was con- demned for heresy in 1277 by the Inquisition of Paris, and that he died in prison at Orvieto some years afterwards. But there was little knowledge, or at least Uttle appreciation, of the nature of his heresies, and even about the scanty facts of his life there was much uncertainty and dispute. One of Siger's writings alone had been printed, his ' Impossibilia,' recently edited by Baeumker. Father Mandonnet now publishes five other works, ' Quaestiones Logicales,' ' Quaestio utrum haec sit vera : Homo est animal nuUo homine existente ? ' ' Quaestiones Naturales,' ' De Aeternitate Mundi,' ' Quaestiones de Anima Intel lectiva,' and (also for a further illustration of his subject) a portion of the treatise of Aegidius Eomanus, ' De Erroribus PhUosophorum,' and the ' De quindecim problematibus ' of Albert the Great. Prefixed to these texts is an elaborate discussion in 320 quarto pages of the events leading up to and connected with the condemnation of Siger, of his life and death, of the whole Averroistic movement in which he was the principal figure, and of the troubles in the university of Paris which that movement brought with it. This work is of the highest importance from many points of view. Taken in connexion with the great ' Cartularium ' of the university, edited by Father Denifle and M. Chatelain, it brings out the true significance of many of the external and constitutional events in its history during the second half of the thirteenth century, and is also a very important contribution to our knowledge of medieval thought, constantly correcting the hasty generalisations of Eenan, Haur^au, and other writers upon the Averroistic movement. Father Mandonnet writes with taste, insight, and good sense. A slight disposition to depreciate the rival Franciscan philosophy is the only indication of ' tendency ' which we are able to detect in this very learned work. As with most of the less known medieval writers, the ground is some- what encumbered by questions of disputed identity and attribution. Our author makes it plain that Siger of Brabant is not identical with Siger of Courtrai, who really belongs to the following century, and brushes away a whole mass of misconceptions which have arisen from the confusion of these two persons. It now becomes clear that Siger of Brabant was really the leader of the Averroistic movement which divided the university of Paris, or rather the faculty of arts, into two halves, which actually in 1266 elected separate rectors. It was against him that St. Thomas Aquinas directed his own treatise on the characteristic Averroist tenet the ' unity of the active intellect.' It was against him and his teaching that the first condemnation of Averroistic theses was aimed in 1270. ' Paradiso, x. 136-8. 348 REVIEWS OF BOOKS April From that time the Averroists seem to have carried on their teaching in secret. In 1277 came another condemnation. The two leaders, Siger and Boethius de Daeia, appealed to the pope, and died as prisoners in the Eoman court at Orvieto. The manner of their death has been matter of great controversy, turning upon a point of Tuscan philology. In the poem ' II Fiore,' by Durante, a Florentine physician who died in 1305, we read — Mastro Sighier non and6 guari lieto ; A ghiado il fe' morire a gran dolore, Nella corte di Eoma, ad Orbivieto. Ghkodo has been held to mean a ' sword : ' its real meaning appears to be detresse, tourment. Siger died not by a formal sentence, but in prison— a victim of disease or neglect or ill-treatment ; it may be (this Father Mandonnet does not suggest), from the effects of torture. The writings now published make it quite clear that Siger was a typical Averroist, i.e. a pure Aristotelian who taught the doctrine of Aristotle as to the eternity of the world, the unity of intellect, the mortality of the individual soul, and the like without the compromises, accommodations, and corrections adopted by the orthodox Aristotelians like St. Thomas. Siger and his followers always professed that they accepted the catholic faith as Christians, but, as they also asserted that that feith was contrary to reason, it is natural enough that they failed to satisfy the inquisitors as to the sincerity of their professions or the harm- lessness of their teaching. The most curious thing about this condemna- tion of 1277 is that along with Siger several tenets of his great rival St. Thomas were condemned also both by the bishop of Paris and by the Dominican archbishop Kilwardby at Oxford. Father Mandonnet makes it plain that this was the result of a temporary triumph of the old- fashioned Platonic-Augustinian party, who availed themselves of this outburst of scarcely disguised Naturalism to score a victory over the new orthodox and Aristotelian school founded by the great Dominicans, Albert and Thomas. Why was such a man as Siger placed in Paradise by the Thomist Dante ? Our author shatters the pretty little romance which makes Dante a pupil of Siger by pointing out that when Siger left Paris Dante was only seven years old, and under eighteen when the master died (in 1283 or 1284). Siger, Father Mandonnet thinks, was introduced as the typical representative of the faculty of arts to balance the theo- logians and the representatives of the other faculties with whom he is grouped, and the poet possibly knew little of the precise character of his doctrine. Dante may possibly have taken seriously his professions of orthodoxy, and it is possible that though the political teaching of Siger, based on Aristotle, seems harmless enough, political sympathies may have had something to do with Dante's immortalisation of the now forgotten schoolman. At all events the position assigned to him shows the importance and reputation of the man. Father Mandonnet's work wiU be invaluable to future historians, whether of the medieval universities or of medieval thought. This brief summary of his conclusions altogether fails to suggest either the amount of interesting information which is here collected or the immense labour and varied research by which these results have been reached. H. Eashdall. 1902 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 349 Becords of the Borough of Leicester. Vol. II. 1327-1509. Edited by Maey Bateson. (London : C. J. Clay & Sons. 1901.) In a notice of the first volume of the 'Leicester Records' in this Review' we drew attention to the important bearing of the material which it contained upon the moot question as to the position of the merchant gild in the early constitution of English municipalities. Leicester was too exceptional a borough to provide a safe basis for generalisation, but here at all events the real governing body of the town in the thirteenth century was the merchant gild, with which the older port- moot organisation had, to a great extent, coalesced. In the period covered by the present volume gild and portmoot alike drop into the background. The old town court gradually loses what remained of its administrative functions, while the institution of the mayor's sessions in 1464 cuts short its judicial work. The gild becomes a mere ante-chamber to citizenship. There is a steady elimination of the un- organised, and often disorderly, share of the ' commonalty ' in elections and town business. The common executive of the gild and portmoot, the twenty-four jurats of the thirteenth century, have long ceased to be popularly elected, and their new name of the (mayor's) ' brethren of the bench ' still further emphasises their independence. In the middle of the fifteenth century all inhabitants not on the gild roll are excluded from ' common hall ' as ' unenfranchised.' Finally an act of parlia- ment in 1489 substitutes for the enfranchised commonalty a body of forty-eight, chosen not by them, but by the twenty-four. Thus the close town council of Leicester, which monopolised for three centuries the government of the town, came into existence. This development, which had of course been going on all over England, used to be represented as an 'oligarchic revolution,' in which a selfish class of 'magnates' succeeded in suppressing for three centuries an originally popular system of government in the towns. Mrs. Green, in her ' Town Life in the Fifteenth Century,' strongly traversed the view which regards the town council phase of municipal government as purely reactionary. In an elaborate section of her introduction to the present volume Miss Bateson strengthens the proof of the unhistorical character of this conception. The error arose partly from ignoring the gradual way in which the change came about, and still more from a misleading use of political terms. To apply the term ' democracy ' to the town government of the thirteenth century without carefully guarding its employment was bound to give a false impression. It is true that the ' commonalty ' as a whole then enjoyed a direct voice in the elections and in taxation, which two centuries later they had ceased to possess. But the select body upon which the government of the town was devolved, the twelve or the twenty-four, were invariably chosen from the ' magnates,' and at Leicester at all events the community's right to elect thera seems to have been allowed to fall into disuse before the fourteenth century opened. Here, then, there was already a close ' town council,' though it did not yet bear that name. By the middle of the fifteenth century the choice of one of the town's' two members of parliament ^ had come into the ' Vol. XV. p. 356 (April 1900). ' The mayor's aooounts show that the members were not invariably paid at the rate of two shillings a day. 350 REVIEWS OE hOOKS Iprll hands of this small non-elective body. The truth is that, as Miss Bateson points out, the medieval commons had no clear grasp of the principles of democratic government. They let slip their ancient rights of express- ing assent or dissent by their failure to devise some orderly machinery for carrying them into effect. In the troublous times at the close of the middle ages their tumultuary intervention became a public danger, and it was in the interests of peace and good order that Henry VII put an end to it at Leicester. The addition of forty-eight ' wise and sad ' com- moners to the governing body is evidence that there was no intention of excluding the popular element altogether. The forty-eight were about a fifth of the whole number of householders then paying to the subsidy, and if the commons had been capable at an earlier date of devising such a system of representation for themselves they might have kept the choice of the forty-eight in their own hands, instead of having it left to the twenty-four. In that case no Municipal Corporations Act would have been necessary ; but things being as they were, the ' town council period ' was as necessary a stage in the progress of municipal government as the Tudor absolutism was in that of the country at large. Among many other interesting features of the growth of Leicester during the years covered by this volume which are brought out by Miss Bateson in her analysis of its contents the late introduction of aldermen deserves mention. With the exception of the early aldermen of the gild merchant Leicester had no officers of this name until 1484, when the town was divided into twelve wards for the purpose of borough rate and police, each imder an alderman. It is another illustration of the variety of English municipal growth, and an additional warning against hasty generalisation. The laborious task of transcribing, and, in most cases, translating, the 277 documents printed here has been executed with all the editor's accustomed skill and care. Even if the work is carried no further Miss Bateson will have earned the lasting gratitude of all students of British municipal history by her accurate reproduction of original documents, her admirably full indices, and her learned and luminous introductions. James Tait. Nova Legenda Anglie. Ee-edited, with Fresh Material from Manuscripts and Printed Sources, by Gael Hoestman, Ph.D. Two vols. (Oxford : Clarendon Press. 1901.) To his previous contributions to our knowledge of medieval writers Dr. Horstman has now added this laborious edition of the collection usually known as Capgrave's. John Capgrave, a Norfolk man and provincial of the Austin Friars, was in his day (1393-1464) a painstaking hagiologist and chronicler, as well as philosopher and theologian. Laud described him as ' learned for those times.' But he can have had at the most a slender connexion with the present compilation, which we owe rather to Benedictine learning and the patriotic piety of the St. Alban's chrono- grapher, John of Tynemouth. The latter was bom at Tynemouth in the last years of the thirteenth century, and, as it appears, was priest or perpetual vicar under the Black priory there. His serving a cure of souls would be compatible with membership of the Benedictine fraternity. The 1902 REVIEWS OP BOOKS S51 works of the Venerable Bede, whose convent had stood on the other side of the river, no doubt influenced a clerkly and devout imagination, and the future hagiographer might be expected to bestow especially loving attention on the life of St. Oswin, king of Deira, who after his martyrdom in A.D. 651 was interred in the oratory of the Blessed Virgin at Tyne- mouth, and whose reliques, discovered in 1065, were translated a genera- tion later to a splendid shrine in the new church. The king's life was written on that occasion by one of the monks, and a psalter which had belonged to Oswin himself, the charred pages of which are still extant, was in the conventual library when John studied there. Tynemouth Priory, powerful, rich, and strongly defended, was a cell of St. Alban's Abbey, with which it maintained constant intercourse. Monks of St. Alban's not unfrequently became priors of Tynemouth, and priors of Tynemouth (such as Whethamstede) sometimes became abbats of St. Alban's. One of these, Thomas de la Mare (prior 1841-9, abbat 1349-96), gave to God and to the church of Blessed Amphibalus of Redburn (a cell of St. Alban's), for the instruction and edification of the monks placed there by course, the finely written vellum folio from whose pages, greatly damaged by the fire in the Cotton library of 1731, Dr. Horstman has patiently reconstructed the present text. Boston of Bury gives 1366 as the date of John of Tynemouth's floruit. If this were correct we might suppose that John accompanied Thomas de la Mare, a generous patron of learning, from Tynemouth to St. Alban's — happier than the cellarer, John de Trokelowe (to whose labours as chronographer of St. Alban's he himself shortly succeeded), who with his prior was dragged south in fetters by Abbat John of Berkhamstede, on a charge of conspiring to transfer the advowson of Tynemouth to Edward I, a frequent visitor to the priory. Dr. Horstman, however, points out that our author's ' Golden History ' and its continuation just fill the gap, from 1327 to 1877, in the composition of chronicles by monks of St. Alban's. The vicarage of Tynemouth is found vacant in 1325, and the post of chronographer at St. Alban's was then waiting to be filled. It seems clear that John of Tynemouth was summoned to fill it. His unpublished ' Historia Aurea ' on the other hand breaks off rather abruptly at June 1347. Internal evidence points to the ' Sanctilogium ' having been finished before the middle of the century. Dr. Horstman then suggests with probability that our compiler was one of the forty or more St. Alban's religious, out of sixty, who were carried off by the great plague of 1348-9. The great abbey was the principal seat of English historiography, and in its scriptorium, established by Lanfranc's aid, a number of scribes were constantly engaged in copying manuscripts and registering events. Not only was it rich in books (of which some fragments remain in the Bodleian), but it was a convenient centre for the collection of materials for the great works which John set before his eyes — a martyrology of the catholic church, a national legendary of saints, and a history of the world. He visited Ely, Canterbury, London, Glastonbury, Hereford, and Wales, searching the libraries of convent and cathedral church, and, since the manuscripts were too precious to be borrowed, making large excerpts on the spot. Fortunately for us he does not deal with his materials critically. He calls himself relator simplex, and frankly 352 REVIEWS OF BOOKS April leaves ardua peritis ventilanda, giving documents rather than opinions, and allowing his authorities to speak for themselves. Had he been a greater genius, or more fastidious about Latin style, he might have been a less exemplary compiler. He abridges, but does not alter. How Capgrave's name came to be attached to the collection of Lives is uncertain. He rearranged them in alphabetical order rather than in that of the kalendar, but can have done little else. His arrangement, with some omissions and the addition of a prologue and fifteen new Uves of ' English ' saints — beginning with St. Joseph of Arimathea and ending, in point of date, with St. Osmund, canonised in 1456 — was printed in 1516 by Wynkyn de Worde. The unknown reviser styles himself • collector sive, ut ita dicam, auctor huius operis, and boldly takes credit for the work as a compilation of his own, though giving no evidence of erudition or of scholarship. An English epitome of the work was printed by Pynson in the same twelvemonth, under the title of ' The Kalendre of the newe Legende of Englande,' the lives thus abridged being ' shortly touched more lyke to a Kalendre than a Legende ' — i.e. they were not intended to be read in church as part of the divine ofiSce, Wynkyn de Worde's edition appeared under the title 'Nova Legenda Anglie ; ' but John of Tynemouth's original work was entitled ' Sanctilogium Angliae, Walliae, Scotiae, et Hiberniae.' It was particu- larly rich in Welsh saints ; and if John of Tynemouth is to be identified, as seems probable, with Johannes Anglicus, seuforsan Gamhrohritanus of Pits's appendix, he first compiled a book of British lives and then embodied this in a larger collection. The anonymous Tudor reviser justifies the short title of his edition by the consideration that most of the saints contained in it belonged to the ' country now called England,' and that to this realm of England Ireland, Scotland, and Wales ought of right to be subject and obedient. This edition, of which there are eight copies known, has been patiently collated by Dr. Horstman with the damaged pages of Thomas de la Mare's gift to Eedburn. The Cotton MS. Tiberius E i. is not impossibly the actual original manuscript written under the direction of John of Tynemouth himself. With the further help of the primitive 'Vitae,' wherever obtainable. Dr. Horstman has reconstructed as true a text as can be looked for of this valuable hagiography. In the foot notes he traces as far as possible John of Tynemouth's sources and authorities, and though an apology is offered for the unfinished condition of his in- troduction, which occupies sixty pages of small type, it embodies the results of much research and ingenuity. Some day he may be able to rewrite it in a rather less intricate shape, and cleared of repetition. For example the contents of note 1 on p. xvii are repeated on p. xxi, and those of p. xvi, note 3, are found again in p. xxi, note 1, and a third time on pp. xxii, xxiii. The statement about the ' Vita S. Oswini ' on p. xxxix is repeated overleaf; and there are other redundancies. There is some want of literary form in printing names side by side in Latin and Saxon shape, as Laurentius and Paulin. ' Everything is water to his mill ' (p. xxxi) should surely be ' grist.' That old outlaw and enemy of educated men ' reliable ' ought not to appear. Again, we are hardly pre- pared for a vividly purple patch of eloquence like that on p. xxix by 1902 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 853 severe abbreviations and symbols. But these tokens of wearied haste are trifling specks on the fair fruit of Dr. Horstman's operose and conscien- tious scholarship. He has been blamed for not indexing these volumes ; but the enormous labour this would have entailed was scarcely called for, The lives, with their appended narrations, are, as has been said, in alpha- betical, not in chronological or kalendarial order. John of Tynemouth had arranged them by the anniversaries of death. St. Edward Confessor, e.g., was commemorated on 5 Jan., and his double translation on 13 Oct. (as in our present kalendar) is not noticed. The church of Eng- land at the Reformation retained the commemorations of the West Saxon king Edward's martyrdom and translation. Only the former appears in the ' Sanctilogium.' St. Alban's name has since 1662 been placed against 17 June instead of 22 June. The late Eev. J. E. Lunn suggested that this was due to a misreading of the numeral xxii for xvii, and a statement of Prebendary Wordsworth in his recent ' Sarum Processional ' (p. xvi) that St. Alban appears on the 17th in the Sarum ' Missale ' of 1508, in a Bangor MS., in the ' Preces Privatae ' of 1568, and in a psalter of 1617 has since {Church Times, 6 Dec. 1901, p. 664) been withdrawn by him as regards the Missal and the Bangor MS. John of Tynemouth brings his roll down to St. Thomas of Dover, murdered in 1295. The latest name in the AngUcan kalendar (not counting King Charles) is St. Eichard of Chichester, ob. 1253, translated 1276. Students must feel very much in- debted to Dr. Horstman for his labours, and to the Clarendon Press for the admirable way in which they are printed. Douglas Macleans. TJie Little Bed Book of Bristol. Published under the authority of the Council of the City and County of Bristol. Edited by Feanois B. BiCKLEY. Two vols. (Bristol, Hemmons ; London, Sotheran, 1900.) The city which was for centuries of second importance to London only in the kingdom as a trading port, Bristol, ' the queen's chamber,' is rich in old records of its history, and the corporation have done honour to them- selves by the publication of the contents of the oldest and most important among them. The ' Little Eed Book ' is an example of the volumes set up by many a municipal corporation in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries for the purpose of registering documents touching the town and its internal jurisdiction, to be used for reference and as books of record. The name was taken from the colour of its stained deer-skin cover ; they had a century later in Bristol also a ' Great Eed Book ' and a ' Great White Book,' and similar names are found among other corporation books. A book of this kind in York, begun in 1376, is called ' Liber diversorum memorandorum Civitatem Ebor. tangentium' (a precious volume much injured by water a few years ago, and the publication of which by the late Canon Eaine was unfortunately never brought to fruition) . The obj ect of the ' Little Eed Book ' is declared by the first entry made in it, dated 1344, by William de Colford, then recorder of Bristol, viz. to set down the ordinances and customs of the town and other things necessary to be kept in perpetual remembrance. It was in this year that forty-eight burgesses, whose names are given, were elected to aid the mayor in better governing the town ; and the record of the fact by Colford appears to be the first mention VOL. XVII. — NO. LXVI. A A 354 ttEVlEtVS OF BOOK^ April of the common council so constituted, though their institution was eon- firmed by royal charter in 1373. The early part of the century was a period of reform in the affairs of the town ; the citizens had obtained a charter in 1381 confirming certain liberties and customs, but now, thirteen years later, Colford says that many good customs ' having been abused and some almost forgotten,' the old customs and ordinances were considered and amended, and new ones were made by the forty-eight and others of the commonalty. He then gives the charter of 1331 itself. The thirty- five revised ordinances, presumed to be those of 1844, are copied into the middle of the book (fol. 100) ; but the editor, who prints them directly after Colford's first entries, does not explain why they should be there, nor his reasons for identifying them. However the general character of the customs, resembling those of other towns about this period, and the mention of the forty-eight in one of them, showing that the date must be earlier than 1373, when the common council were reduced to forty, leave little doubt that the identification is correct, and this conclusion is probably confirmed by the style of handwriting. It may be remarked also that in the manuscript they immediately precede the ordinances of some of the crafts of the town, which were also amended and confirmed by the mayor and forty-eight councillors, W. Colford still being recorder, in 1346. Towards the end of the volume are found ' Proclamationes Ville BristoUie,' another set of forty short town ordinances of the fourteenth century, perhaps reafSrmed and issued a little later than those of 1844. Colford's name is not found in connexion with these. It may thus be surmised that the recorder having put his prefatory memorandum, the recent charter, and perhaps the oaths of officials near the beginning, left a division of the book blank for future miscellaneous entries, and placed further on (about the middle) first the customs or con- stitutions of the town, then the regulations of several crafts, leaving here and there small blanks which were utiUsed later. And this plan was continued; so that we get the ordinaries (or sets of ordinances) of seventeen different crafts, not all of one date, but as amended, confirmed by the mayor's court, and then entered here at different times between 1344 and 1445. Fresh amendments and new clauses were inserted as occasion arose, this book being acknowledged as the authentic and legal record. These town constitutions and gild ordinances together occupy about the third quarter of the original volume. The book being established for consultation and practical use, before printing had brought statutes and books of practice into the town clerk's office, it contains a mass of miscellaneous documents, some of local power and record, others of national authority. Among the first, besides the two kinds of ordinances, are oaths of officials, Usts of the common council, renewal of the mayor's seal in 1359, appointment of commissioners and of chaplains to chantries, foundation deeds of chantries, settlement of disputes, claims by men of other places for freedom from tolls and dues in Bristol, with acknowledgment of their royal charters. It was of importance in a great commercial centre to have note of ' foreigners ' whom they must allow to pass free of custom, when the imposing of these local dues entered so largely into the fiscal system of the age. Among the matters of public authority here inscribed are ' Lex Mercatoria,' 1902 tttlVmWS OP BOOKS sss the laws of OMron, and two other old laws relating to the sea, abstract of statutes against admirals, ordinance of the staple, extracts from several statutes, the assize of bread, ale, and wine, &c. In like manner the fourteenth-century Leicester 'Vellum Book ' contains extracts from two statutes of the bakers and of the pillory, the assizes of weights and measures, and of bread and ale, with a table of prices of wool ; ' and in similar ' memorandum ' books of other towns such copies of old laws are found. The original book, which covers the dates 1344 to 1422, was full, but more leaves were added at the beginning and end, on which many interesting items have been written from time to time, and of all of these the editor has wisely taken account. The old book itself is an early example of paper of foreign manufacture, with a water mark which is found also on paper among the archives of Genoa of 1336 ; while the outer cover (shown in the frontispiece to vol. ii.) bears a descriptive title of the contents signed by Eobert Eicart, town clerk of Bristol from 1479 to 1506, whose handiwork is also found inside. To avoid useless repetition all matter already printed elsewhere has been omitted in this edition, merely a note of each piece, with a reference to the publication, being given. The editor, in a short historical introduc- tion, endeavours to classify the contents. Documents and entries concern- ing the town as a whole are printed (except the charter of 1331, printed by Seyer) ; the ordinances of gilds and the ' compositions ' of chantries (classified together, although very different) are also printed entire. The charters and privileges of other towns and places entered in evidence of exemptions to their traders entering Bristol, which occupy many pages of the fourth quarter of the volume, are calendared in abstract, the facts so given sufficiently testifying to -the attraction of commerce to the town from afar. Such a register as this may thus preserve a charter or other document, the original of which is lost, as occasionally happens. These abstracts would serve as indication to the searcher. The miscel- laneous entries beyond these are printed in full when they are of any im- portance. The collection of ancient oaths, in Old French, probably entered in or about the time of Recorder Colford, is particularly interesting from its completeness, indicating not only who were the principal officials of an important municipality in the time of Edward III, but several of minor degree, and other persons under allegiance to the town. The list comprises mayor, bailiffs, stewards, recorder, common (or town) clerk, clerk of the hundred (clericus tundere or tundredi), mayor's sergeant, king's sergeant, constable of the peace, coroner, marine sergeant, freeman of the town, gaoler, gate-keeper, chantry priest, the wardens of several crafts, the surveyor of common works, and two or three more. It will be observed that among these is no alderman (excepTi as head of the weavers' gild) nor common councillor ; the oath for the latter was perhaps not yet composed. But though no special oath is entered we know that alder- men were elected at this period in Bristol, and that the mayor must previously have served in that office, from two clauses of the old constitu- tions mentioned above. The origin of aldermen in municipal corpora- tions is obscure ; as the head of craft and merchant gilds the title is ' See Miss Bateson's note, Engl. Hist. Rev. xiv. 502, 1899. A A 2 356 REVIEWS OF BOOKS April common. May it be that the aldermen of certain important gUds, being, in virtue of that position, the burgesses of tried worth, became gradually recognised as chiefs of the town Hable for certain municipal duties, one of which was to take the office of mayor when called on ? Light on this and similar problems wiU come from the study of early oaths and customs like those preserved in the ' Little Eed Book.' No mention is here found of the ancient gild merchant, though the editor quotes the inquisition of 1872, recorded in the ' Great Eed Book,' and printed at length by Dr. Gross, which shows that Bristol had its libera gilda mercatoria with its liberties long before the date of this ' Book.' Among the gUds enrolled in its pages, however, two call upon our attention, the first being that of the kalendars, well known as a feature in old Bristol. Two early capital documents relating to this, although copied so late as the fifteenth century, are welcome, printed in their entirety, while a bishop's mandate to the fraternity in 1374 to desist from neglecting the duties of divine service, and the presentation of a chantry priest in 1491, attested by the mayor's seal, show the double position of this interesting body. The second is a fraternity established by the ' crafte off maryners ' in 1445, with ordinances for the purpose of maintaining a priest and twelve poor mariners in a hospital under the management of two wardens annually chosen by the craft ; the whole was put under the authority of the corporation, the names of fifteen sworn ships' masters being added, no doubt as members. For a place of such maritime importance as Bristol it is not surprising to find entries touching the jurisdiction of the admiralty and other matters of the sea. Bristol had its own court of admiralty ; a list of twenty neigh- bouring towns within its jurisdiction is enumerated, dated 1462, a grant of 1446 having exempted the burgesses from the power and interference of the admiralty of England. Early in the volume is a fourteenth-century copie des Boules de Oleroun des jugemenU et des estatutz de la myer, the early code of sea laws in use along our coasts, most necessary for the guidance of a community of merchant adventurers. As it has been long printed this text is omitted, but Mr. Biekley omits to men- tion that it is found in the ' Black Book of the Admiralty,' edited by Sir T. Twiss, who refers to this very copy at Bristol (introd. p. Ixi). But the greatest rarity in the ' Little Eed Book,' also set down about the same period for the benefit of a trading community, is a treatise on merchant law entitled ' Lex Mercatoria, que, quando, ubi, inter quos et de quibus sit,' comprised in twenty-one chapters. Siace the work was printed off Mr. Biekley has found from other sources that this tract must have been composed about 1300, and that it is referred to as an authority in 1344 ; but it seems to have remained hitherto unknown. Otherwise it would have formed a useful adjunct to Messrs. Elton & Costelloe's valuable ' Eeport on Market Eights and Tolls ; ' for it can hardly be doubted that it embodied the experience and practice regulating the travelling merchants, especially at fairs, no less than the traditional laws formed by the necessities of the early traders in their gilda mercatoria within the towns. The two first chapters, ' Quo modo lex mercatoria differt a lege communi ' and ' De plegiis ad prosequendum et preceptis ad attachiandum,' indicate traces of this, both in principle and example. 1902 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 357 The work is enriched by several plates reproducing Smith's view of Bristol, 1568, local buildings, and facsimiles of pages, charter, &c. ; and fine engravings are given of the seals of Bristol, mayoral and communal, together with those of the staple and the admiralty. L. TouLMiN Smith. Swr les Dates de trois Lettres inedites de Jean Lascaris, Ambassadeur de France d Venise (1504-1509). Par L. G. P^lissibk. (Paris: Imprimerie Nationale. 1901.) M. P]ELissiBE has done well to publish these three highly interesting and valuable letters, hitherto inedited. He has correctly fixed their dates. They are unfortunately all that remains to us of the diplomatic corre- spondence of that great scholar Jean Lascaris while employed by Lewis XII of France on a mission to the republic of Venice. The loss is to be deplored for two special reasons : the period covered by Lascaris's mission, the period preceding the League of Cambray, is one of the most complicated in Venetian history ; the emperor Maximilian and the French king had virtually come to a secret agreement as to the dismemberment of the republic. But France had no desire to see the emperor in North Italy. Maximilian was demanding from Venice the free passage of the Alps ; the French king wished his allies, the Venetians, to refuse. The republic, warned as to possible French treachery, was in doubt whether to throw in her lot with the emperor or with the king. Lascaris was sent to Venice to endeavour to persuade the senate of the danger from the empire and of the king of France's good faith. The second special reason for regret for the loss of Lascaris's letters is the admirable quality of the three now published by M. P^Ussier. Although the key to French policy was in the hands of Amboise and the essential negotia- tions were carried on at Paris rather than in Venice, Lascaris's despatches contain many interesting appreciations of persons and of situations — for example, his opinion on Alviano's Tuscan campaign and his warning to the republic against permitting Maximilian's troops to make the passage of the Alps, ' sachans quel droyt ledit roi des Eomains se dit avoir siu touttes vous (vos) villes de la Lombardie et qu'il a promis de les distribuer a oeulx qu'ilz a aveoques luy.' 'Vous desliberez, Messeigneurs ' (he says) ' de hii denyer le passaige, maiz il ne souffist pas desliberer, il fault aussi veoir comment vous voulez cecy faire.' ' Vous dittez que ledit passaige est fort estroict : il ne se fault pas fier des fortresses et estroits passaiges, car les Allemans les cognoissent bien.' 'Vous dittez que maintenant est le froyt et I'yvert: lesdits Allemans Bont nez et nourris entre le froyt et la glace, et ou temps de pluye et maulvais temps les larrons font mieulx leur cas qu'en autre temps.' This is excellent sense clearly expressed, and it is interesting to observe that the note is not the official note of diplomatic correspondence. The balance of the sentences betrays the man of letters. The same quality is discernible when Lascaris — in order to illustrate the probable action of the Germans, who, finding France fully armed, will, ' like the river Po, leave the bank where the dykes are strong, and flood the bank where the dykes are weak ' — takes this vivid image from the geography of the country so well known to his audience. 358 REVIEWS OF BOOKS April The loss of Lascaris's despatches would not have been so deplorable had it not been for losses in the Venetian archives. The series ' Esposizioni Principi,' where we should have found the envoy's communications to the government and the doge's replies, is wanting for the years of Lascaris's embassy, and we are left with some few passages in ' Senato, Deliberazioni Secrete,' where instructions as to those rephes are issued by the Senate. M. P61issier's documents deal with the mission of 1604^9. But Lascaris had been in Venice on another mission the year before : a di 6 (zugno) in questi zorni vene a Veniexia uno orator del re di Franza, di nations greco, nomiruito domino Zuan Laschari} He was charged to propose a new treaty with France, but the government replied that the existing treaty seemed sufficient. The envoy on this occasion was lodged in the Palazzo Correr. In August he was joined by another French envoy, Accursio Maynier. In October of the same year Lascaris was in Eome, and in January 1504 he was at Lyons. On 23 Oct. 1504 the Venetian ambassador in France announced the arrival shortly in Venice of the ruyvo legato, Zuan Laschari ; and on 21 Nov. the senate ^ issued orders to provide lodging, boats, and one hundred ducats a month for the coming envoy. Lascaris meantime had fallen ill at Milan,^ and this slightly delayed his arrival, but on the 22nd he reached Venice in a downpour of rain and was conducted to his lodging in the Palazzo Morosini, in the Campo San Polo.' On the 24th he was received in the Collegio and presented his letters ; on the 26th he bad another audience, and on the 28th the doge received instructions from the Senate as to the reply he should give to both. M. Pelissier justly remarks that our sources for a study of Lascaris's diplomatic career are extremely scanty, but with the help of Sanudo and the archives at Venice something might be done. The letters published by M. Pehssier would form a valuable contribution towards an interesting monograph. Hobatio F. Bkown. English Law and the Renaissance (the Eede Lecture for 1901) ; with some Notes. By Feedebic W. Maitland, LL.D., Hon. D.C.L., Downing Professor of the Laws of England in Cambridge University. (Cambridge : University Press. 1901.) Before reading Professor Maitland's lecture one may perhaps, from its title, be in doubt as to what period is intended to be covered by the author. The term ' Eenaissance,' like ' middle ages,' is an indefinite one, especially when used in connexion with law. There was a renaissance of law earlier than that of art or letters. There may be said to be, indeed, two periods of renaissance of jurisprudence — the first in the twelfth century, marking the rise of the glossarists and profoundly influencing EngHsh law (as Bracton's writings, inter alia, testify), and the second, which connects with the Eeformation in the sixteenth century and marks the ' reception ' of Eoman law in Germany, Holland, and other countries of Western Europe. It is with the second of these that Professor Maitland deals. Short though the volume be, it is full of good matter ; and by no means the least of its merits is that it is expressed in a lively and incisive ' Sanudo, Diarii, v. 53. ' Archivio di Stato, ^enato, S^creta. Beg. 40, c. 64. » Sanudo, vi. 98. « Ibid. vi. 801. 1902 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 359 style ; nor is the quality of ' airy fancy,' so essential to a good historian, absent from its pages. Epigrammatic remarks meet one on nearly every page, as, for instance, ' a man may be disorderly without being a jurist ' (p. 12) ; ' national character, the genius of a people, is a wonder-working spirit which stands at the beck and call of every historian ' (p. 23) ; ' law schools make tough law ' (p. 25). No one can speak with higher authority than Professor Maitland on a topic of English legal history, for, in addition to a thorough knowledge of the early common law, he has made fruitful incursions into the fields of the civil and the canon law. Our author's view seems to be that England was saved from the ' reception ' of Roman law, which took place in Germany, Scotland, &o., in the sixteenth century, mainly by its established common law courts and its system of legal education at the Inns of Court. We venture to think, however, that nearly as important as either of these was the considerable infusion of Eoman law into the English system, which had already taken place in the thirteenth century, if not earlier. Dr. Brunner seems to hit the nail on the head when he says, in a passage cited by Professor Maitland (p. 85), that the early inoculation of England and France with the prophylactic (would Professor Maitland prefer to say virus ?) of Eoman law saved them from that wholesale importation of the corpus iuris which took place in Germany. At any rate it is pretty certain that the several factors above mentioned made any general adoption of Roman law in England in the sixteenth century (and especially as regards -land tenures) almost an impossibility. Our author seems to think that it would have been a misfortune attended with constitutional dangers if there had been any further infusion of Roman law into English. That is a matter on which opinions may differ. Does Pro- fessor Maitland think that Scotland suffered from the considerable ' reception ' which marks its history ? If he contends that the English law during the seventeenth and following centuries has been superior to that of its neighbour, I am afraid that he will find it hard to get any Scotch lawyer to agree with him. Would not an early fusion of common law and equity have been an unmixed benefit for England, and saved much confusion and injustice ? On one matter, however, it must, I think, in fairness be conceded that the influence of the Roman law reception in Scotland produced an injurious result which England escaped, and Professor Maitland, with great acuteness (though without adverting to Scotland), has called attention to it. On p. 84 he says, ' It is a serious question what would have become of our English copyholders if in the sixteenth century Roman law had been received.' Yes, that is a pregnant question. It seems to me that the kindly tenants or rentallers, who were pretty numerous in the Lowlands before the Reformation and corresponded to the English copyholders, were to a great extent deprived of their rights because the judges applied to them the Roman doctrines of locatio and ususfructus} Unfortunately this subject has not been fully ' Some of them were compelled to accept feus. I have now before me a book of rentals of the Knights Hospitallers of St. John, attested by Sir James Sandilands, the last preceptor of the order, in the sixteenth century, which shows how extensive were the lands and how numerous the tenants of that body in Scotland. It is probable that a large proportion of their tenants were rentallers. 360 REVIEWS OF BOOKS April examined by any writer, though Walter Eoss has made some valuable remarks upon it.^ Only a few relies of the ancient Scottish viUeins are now to be found, such as the king's kindly tenants of Lochmaben, whose tenure has become practically freehold. A remark, however, which Pro- fessor Maitland makes at the end of the note on p. 84, viz. ' The true Eomanist, I take it, can know but one dominium and is likely to give that one to the lord,' can hardly be accepted. Gaius indeed hazards the remark that early Eoman law knew only one kind of dominium, but in his time and long before it and down to Justinian the distinction between Quiritarian and what Theophilus calls bonitarian ownership was esta- blished, nearly aU the iura dominii being given to the equitable owner. So emphyteusis in the later empire became almost equivalent to dominium, and the relationship between the lord's estate and the emphy- teuta's was apparently in the middle ages developed into the dominium directum and dominium utile of the glossarists and feudalists. Our author is too learned a lawyer to belittle indiscriminately, as some do, the influence that Eoman law has had upon the development of English. I venture, however, to demur to the description (p. 31) of the corpus iuris SbS 'dead.' I should prefer to say that it has become in large measure transformed ; the principles and rules enunciated by Ulpian and the other classical jurists are, many of them, not only not dead, but they can never die. The fundamental notions of contract, dehct or tort, property, marriage, suretyship, fraud, mistake, &c., are surely expressed in pretty much the same language to-day as they were by Labeo and his successors, and the more a nation advances in civilisa- tion the more likely it is to reaUse and appreciate them. We need not but rejoice that we are the inheritors of the best ideas of the best civili- sations of the past. Professor Maitland observes that in the new German code a good deal of the Eoman element in German law, and practically all Latin words, have been discarded, and he quotes (p. 97) from a speech dehvered in the Eeichstag (which suggests, however, somewhat of a rhetorical floiurish) to that effect. There can be no doubt that the second commission made considerable changes upon the Entwurf of its predecessor by substituting German doctrines for Eoman, but the first commission (largely influenced by Windscheid) had gone too far in the opposite direction. One of the most distinguished of the Germanists, FeUx Dahn, observed in 1892 of the first draft code, 'It is a victory of the " Eomanists " over the " Germanists." ' " Nevertheless in the final edition no less than in the first the fundamental principles of the whole system (the allgemeiner Theil) and the whole law of obligations are essentially of Eoman origin. Allowing for adjustment of local differ- ences a code must necessarily be declaratory of existing and not creative of new law. The change of Latin legal terms into corresponding German ones in the code is, I presume, due to purely patriotic, or perhaps one should say sentimental, motives, just as French and English words (not excepting lawn tennis) have been recently subjected to a process of elimination from the German language. Even writers on ° Lectures, ii. 479-81 ; see also Erskine, Institutes, ii. 6, 38. '' Juridical Review, ii. 24. 1902 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 861 pure Roman law, like Mommaen, follow this movement (e.g. Borer for clieiis, GcscMuorenencollegium for reouperatores), with dubious advantage, as it appears to me.'' It has been well remarked by Mr. Bryce,' referring to the Eoman character of the French and German codes — Just as the character and genius of a language are determined by its grammar, irrespective of tlie number of foreign words it may have picked up, so the Koman law remains Eoman, despite the accretion of the new elements which the needs of modern civilisation have required it to accept. H. GOUDY. Act Book of the Ecclesiastical Court of Whalley, 1510-1538. Edited by Alice M. Cooke, M.A. (Chetham Society. 1901.) This is a very curious book indeed. We have few enough records of the social life of England before the Eeformation, and it is difficult even for the most judicial mind to appreciate fully the extent and nature of the change which that great movement brought about. Inquiry, moreover, is apt to be prejudiced by the desire to make out a case one way or other, either to justify or to impugn the great revolution of the sixteenth century. But the real problem is simply to account for it and see what it involved. Miss Cooke does not claim for the record she has edited that it furnishes much additional information on the life of the period. And no doubt the extent of the information supplied is limited enough ; for it is only a register of the cases that came before an ecclesiastical court in a central district of what was then the out of the way county of Lancashire. The period covered, moreover, is little more than a quarter of a century, but it extends down to the very year (1538) in which the great Abbey of Whalley was dissolved by the attainder of Abbot Paslew. This, then, is a monastic record ; but it is not the life of the monks that is illustrated ; it is that of the people at large. The Cistercian Abbey of Whalley was exempt from the visitation either of bishops or of abbots of its own order. It had a jurisdiction of its own over the royal forests of Pendle, Trawden, Eossendale, Bowland, and Blackburnshire, formerly attached to the honour of Clitheroe ; and the cases here recorded as coming before the abbey court are cases arising within these and other districts. In some ways, especially as to what they do iiot contain, they are suggestive of the rather torpid life of primitive Lancashire. Miss Cooke remarks truly in her introduction — No hint of approaching cliange breaks the quiet monotony of tlie record of the abbey court. The great cardinal fell, and the English church was legally severed from the church of Rome. Not a suggestion even of heresy disturbs the even tenour of its entries, with their ceaseless tale of petty human faults and vulgar sins. The deep calm of loyal Lancashire was only broken up when the systematic attack on the monasteries began in 1535-6. The great protest of the north against the sweeping character of Henry VIII's changes — the Pilgrimage of Grace — found support in Lancashire, and the movement a centre in the famous Abbey of Whalley, under the guidance of its last abbot, * See note by the present writer in the current number of the Law Quarterly Review, April 1902. * Studies in History and Jurisprvdence, i. 108. 362 REVIEWS OF BOOKS April John Paslew, The closing entries in the manuscript bear the king's name — for the abbey was ab-eady in his hands through attainder in August 1536 — and the record breaks off abruptly in the spring of 1538, at the time of the dissolution of the greater houses. The cases which come before the court are of great variety. Some are cases of testamentary jurisdiction, some of non-payment of tithes. Some men are presented for working on Sundays or festival days; a woman is noted to have absented herself from church on such days. Most of the offenders confess their faults and are adjudged to offer a penny or twopenny candle at mass. Then there are oases of libel. Margaret Tatersall complains of Joan Verley for defaming her, calling her ' a false qwen of hyr tonge,' and Joan confesses she had used the expression. But apparently it was only a bit of temper and the parties are reconciled in court. Another case of libel is adjourned in hope of the parties coming to agreement of themselves. Then there are matrimonial differences to be settled. A couple live separately against the laws of matrimony, and their differences are referred to three arbiters, who apparently arrange matters between them, and the court takes no fee. In another case a separation is decreed on account of the husband's violence ; but the decree is afterwards revoked at the suit of both parties, who wish to live together again. In another case a wife has run off to Yorkshire and is recalled by citations, but cannot be got to live with her husband, and at length proves by six witnesses that she has been forced under age into a marriage that she had all along disliked. Of common immoralities of course there are plenty, and some cases of adultery. The penances enjoined are of the usual character. The offender is commonly ordered to walk barefoot and bare-headed before the procession in chapel with a penny candle to be delivered to the priest after the gospel ; and sometimes he (or she) is to have nothing on but a shirt with a gown over it. Thus it was that morality was preserved or vindicated in those days by decrees of church tribunals. Miss Cooke has done her editing very well ; but what is ' medium farme ' at p. 16 ? Surely the reading in the manuscript must be modium farinae. James Gaiednbe. The Early History of'English Poor Belief. By E. M. Leonaed. (Cambridge : University Press. 1900.) Miss Leonaed has produced a monograph which usefully fills up some of the gaps in the wider surveys of Eden, Nicholls, Aschrott, and others. A good deal was already known of the early history of poor relief, and prior to the reign of Edward VI there is not much that is new in Miss Leonard's volume. Its value hes first in its exhaustive analysis of the methods of relief immediately preceding and following the great act of 1601, and next in the insight afforded into the temper and aims of Charles I and the advisers of his personal government. In this respect Miss Leonard may be said to have added a new chapter not less to the political than to the social history of England. The relief of the poor ceased to be an exercise of edification and became a care of secular government during the social cataclysm that followed the great pestilences of the fourteenth century. It is much to 1902 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 363 be regretted that there is as yet no collection of accessible records (like that of the Domestic State Papers of Henry VIII) embracing the subse- quent century and a half. They would do much to clear up the question, on which Miss Leonard's book throws no new light, of the character and extent of pauperism before the Eeformation. It is a common delusion, which thrives in the dearth of evidence, that pauperism was a consequence of the dissolution of the monasteries. Miss Leonard justly recognises that the act of 1388 was the first English poor law, distinguishing as it did between the impotent poor and able-bodied beggars — a distinction unwarranted by the teaching of the church — imposing the responsibility of poor relief upon localities, and framing a law of settlement. But she omits to point out how this law of settlement differed from that subse- quently adopted, nor does she mention the important fact that the machinery by which the poor laws have been enforced from that day to this — quarter sessions — was set in motion at the same time. Miss Leonard suggests that the act of Eichard II probably ' had little effect, because it was too stringent to be enforced.' But we learn from the latter portion of her book that the enforcement of poor law acts depended upon the energy of the central authority. If that experience may be applied to the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries another cause than that of its stringency may be assigned for the failure, if failure there were, of Eichard II's experiment. The subject of ecclesiastical poor relief is excluded from the book, but its extent and effect might not have been unworthy of a slight sketch, in view of the secular controversy as to the consequences of the dissolution of the monasteries. On the one hand Dr. Gasquet enumerates even inclosures and the consequent migration of agricultural labourers to the towns as among ' some results of the suppression ' over and above the mere cessation of almsgiving ; on the other Fuller declares that those abbeys ' did but maintain the poor which they made,' and that to his day the former existence of ecclesiastical endowments had left its traces in the shape of a population of hereditary mendicants. Miss Leonard mentions the hospital of the Savoy under Mary as a type of this malad- ministration. She also reminds us that there is evidence of a general increase of beggars in western Europe early in the sixteenth century, attributable to the dismissal of retainers, and in England to the inclosures, which long preceded the dissolution of the monasteries. There were two other factors from time to time productive of distress Manufacturers had increased in England, and a flourishing export trade in cloth had come into existence. Of these interests the combinations of statesmen scarcely deigned to take account. Their view, both during the crisis in the cloth trade in 1528 and again in 1622, was that employers should be compelled to find employment for their workmen, and in 1629 that merchants should be compelled to lake the goods off the hands of the employers. Lastly, Miss Leonard attributes the increase of beggars to the rise of prices ' after the alteration of the coinage in 1527.' It is true that there was an alteration of the coinage in 1527, and that a rise in the prices of food followed. But Thorold Eogers expressly says that 'the slight rise which occurs at and after 1527 does not indicate any relation to the change from 1-55 to 1-378, the difference between the 364 EEVIEWS OF BOOKS AprU intrinsic value of Edward IV's coinage and Henry VIII's.' Had Miss Leonard scrutinised Eogers's prices she would have come to the same conclusion. For example, of the seven classes of textile fabrics of which he gives the prices between 1521 and 1530 three have risen in price, three have fallen, and one is stationary. The cause of the rise in food- stuffs after 1527 is to be found in Baker's ' Eecords of the Seasons ' and in the corroborative accounts of the ruinous consequences to be gleaned from the Domestic State Papers. Omitting the legislation of Eichard II Miss Leonard points out that the action of municipalities in the matter of poor rehef preceded and directed the action of parliament. The provision of corn and the fixing of ' reasonable ' prices were precautions sometimes undertaken by a municipality, sometimes by parliament. Apart from these measures the earliest legislation, that of 1531, was a purely repressive measure directed against beggars. The city of London organised collections for the poor in 1531, and distributed the funds by the co-operation of the mayor and the churchwardens. In 1536 an act of parliament extended the system to the entire country. During the reign of Edward VI the city rulers organised the ' royal hospitals,' which enforced distinctions between children, sturdy beggars, and the impotent poor, distinctions which have permeated the whole subsequent history of the poor law. The act of 1547 providing that a ' sturdy beggar ' might be enslaved for two years, and if he ran away, for life, is, as Miss Leonard observes, ' often condemned as being the most severe act of a savage series.' But she points out that in reality it was an act making for mercy, which was far more consonant with Somerset's character than excessive severity. ' An " incorrigible rogue " was punishable with death ; and this very punishment of servitude is suggested in More's "Utopia" as a much milder and better punishment than death for both petty thieves and vagrants ' (p. 57). Examples of the rigour of the act of 1572 attest the truth of this view (p. 70, n. 2). The attention of parliament to the relief of the poor was from time to time quickened by scarcity. The dearth of com which began in 1594, and had become a famine in 1597, led to the appointment of a committee of the house of commons which included Bacon and Coke. They con- sidered the state of the poor from every aspect, and Miss Leonard gives a list of twelve of the bills discussed by them (p. 75). The result was a series of acts for the reUef of the poor, for the punishment of rogues in houses of correction, for the administration of charities, and for the reUef of distressed soldiers and sailors. Of these the first was the most important. It made the churchwardens and overseers the responsible agents of poor relief, and imposed the initiative upon the overseers. It is less negative than its precedents, its main object being rather the organisation of rehef than the suppression of the demand for it. Houses of correction, which were not merely prisons but places where the poor were employed and the young trained to industry, of which the London Bridewell was the model, had been estabhshed in some places since the reign of Edward VI. Justices in sessions were now empowered to take measures for their erection. By an act of 1610 they were ordered to be erected in every county. 1902 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 365 The legislation of 1597 is of fundamental importance in the history of the poor law. In the first place, as Miss Leonard points out, the act of 1601, to -which we are accustomed to trace back, was really httle more than a re-enactment with alterations of minor import. Miss Leonard illustrates this by printing the provisions of the two acts side by side. In the second place, from this time dates the systematic interven- tion of the privy council in quickening and regulating the administra- tive machinery of poor relief. Miss Leonard insists with justice on the point that the action of the privy council in the matter of poor relief was not because it considered itself primarily concerned for the poor. The poor law was originally part of a paternal system of government. Gentle- men were ordered home to their estates ; farmers were required to bring their corn to market ; cloth manufacturers had to carry on their trade under well- defined regulations ; and merchants were obliged to trade in the manner which was thought to conduce most to the good order and to the power of the nation (p. 140). The activity of the council came to a head under the personal govern- ment of Charles I between 1628 and 1644. As before it was stimulated by dearth, which rose to famine in 1631. In January of that year the privy council issued a Book of Orders and also one of Directions. They commanded the enforcement by the justices of the peace of the various statutes affecting the poor, regulated their sessions, put them under the supervision of the sheriifs and judges, who were to report to the king, and ordered returns to be regularly made to the council. Miss Leonard has made diligent use of various county records in ascertaining the effect of this activity on the part of the privy council, and she is warm in its praises. These eleven years (1629-40) are remarkable for more continuous effort to enforce socialistic measures than has been made by the central government of any other great European country . . . Charles I and his advisers . . . infringers of individual Uberties were also, in intention at least, the protectors of the poor (p. 164). Since so much turns upon the Books of Orders and Directions it is to be regretted that Miss Leonard did not, after the example of Eden, find room for them, at least in her appendix. The concluding chapters of her book are a detailed examination from municipal documents and the returns of the justices of the peace of the working of the whole poor law system under this rbgime. For this period her work exhibits the highest industry and research. Miss Leonard can afford to pardon the criticism that her style reminds the reader of a teacher before a blackboard. There is an incessant repetition of such phrases as ' We will now see,' ' We will endeavour to see,' ' We have now to see,' ' We will now examine,' 'We will first in- vestigate ... we will then examine . . . and we will lastly try ' (p. 254). In her note to p. 6 she speaks of a 'living impropriated by a monastery,' yet in the text she has the correct word ' appropriated ; ' she introduces us (p. 89) to a ' philanthropic duke of Rutland ' in 1686, more than a century too soon ; Bassetlaw, in a legal connexion, is not a ' district,' but a wapentake (p. 257). We have ' Elizabethan measures of scarcity,' 366 MEVIEWS of books April meaning measures for preventing scarcity. But these are minor blemishes. Miss Leonard's book, taken as a whole, is an admirable piece of work and a valuable contribution to English history. I. S. Leadam. Archives Munioipales de Bayonne. 'Eegistres Fran9ais.' Tome I'''' (1565- 1580). (Bayonne : Lamaign^re. 1901.) The municipality of Bayonne has already published two volumes of its archives, ' Le Livre des Etablissements,' in 1892, and the ' Eegistres Gascons' (1474-1514), in 1896. It now puts forth the first tome of the ' Eegistres Fran9ais.' There is a gap in the registers from 1530 to 1565, while Bayonne was in a state of prostration ; but from 1565 to 1789 the series is practically complete in forty-seven large registers. It is impossible for the municipality to publish all these in extenso. It therefore prints the most important documents, and gives such details as throw most light on local history and customs, and on the administration of a frontier fortress city. This foho is admirably edited by MM. E. Duc6r6, C. Yturbide, and the late C. Bernadou. The principal external events connected with the history of the town during this period were the visit of Charles IX and Catherine de M^dicis and her daughter, the queen of Spain, the celebrated interview at Bayonne ; and the massacre of St. Bartholomew. On neither of these do the archives give anything new. The celebrated letter of the vioomte d'Orthez is declared to be apocryphal. The municipality and the governor acted with moderation towards the protestants, who were evidently under surveillance ; but there is no massacre, only one or two are banished from the town after refusal to take the oath of office as catholics. What the vicomte wrote to the king, 31 Aug. 1572, was — J'espoire vous randre si bon et fidel compte de ceulx que m'avez bailie en charge que de les faire vivre en tel poinct qu'il ne se attamptera chose quelconque i vostre descomte. And this he did, in spite of alarms from Montgomery and other partisans from Beam ; in spite too of sharp quarrels with the municipality, caused generally by his own overbearing conduct. The municipality, however, are always courteous to the ladies ; in 1577 they offer refuge to the countess de Gramont, when Bidache is unsafe; and in 1566 they lend her le maistre des haultes ceuvres pour faire quelque ex&cution, but only en haillant pleges et cautions for his safe return. In local matters the great event of these years is the making the new harbour and outlet for the Adour. The city was fortunate in finding an engineer of genius, Louis de Foix, and had the wisdom to trust him entirely ; so that, notwithstanding great difiSculty in raising funds, the new {i.e. the present) entrance of the Adour was opened, 28 Oct. 1578 ; and not only was Bayonne made accessible to shipping, but large tracts of half-submerged land along the Adour and the Gave de Pau were restored to agriculture. The matter of next importance was the repair of the ramparts, which had fallen in several places. The Bayonnais were proud of forming their own garrison, except in the two castles ; but the service of guard and garrison duty were by no means enthusiastically 1902 MVIEWS OF BOOKS 367 performed. In times of danger other troops were absolutely required. At one time two hundred Spaniards are proposed to be admitted ; at another time of alarm the Labourdins (Basques), who are usually in bad odour, are suddenly addressed as lesqxielz ilz estiment vaillans et en qui ilz sefient le plus, and are asked to furnish three or four hundred men. The relations between the city and the see are very curious. The cathedral body seem to be partly responsible for garrisoning the castle near them ; the town pays the Lent preacher, and claims a voice in his appoint- ment. It also demands from the cathedral a regent or schoolmaster to give instruction gratuitously, and to render it obligatory on all. On these points there is considerable friction. On the other hand the great event of the year is the 'procession du sacre,' i.e. the fete- Dieu, and the town strictly enforces the observance of Sunday. Pirates are more than once mentioned as keeping away Spanish and English vessels from Bayonne. Whales were still caught by the fishermen of Biarritz. These and other facts made up a lively picture of a frontier fortress city, whose chief burghers considered themselves noble, and claimed and exercised the right of corresponding directly with the king, several of whose letters are given in these pages. Wentwobth Wbbsteb. Becueil des Instructions donnees aux Ambassadeurs et Ministres de France depuis les Traitis de Westphalie jusqu'd la Bivolution Frangaise. ' Savoie-Sardaigne et Mantoue.' Avec 'Introductions et Notes par le Comte Hoeeic de Beaucaiee. Tomes I, II. (Paris : Alcan. 1899.) The comte Horric de Beaucaire's introduction to the ' Instructions ' of the French envoys at Turin is pleasant reading, but it begins, perhaps, un- necessarily early. Those who have sufSoient interest in Savoyard history to read these documents would surely have a general knowledge of the preliminary outlines. The introduction, moreover, after it has reached the opening date of 1648 seems too general in character, and scarcely bears a sufficiently close relation to the texts. This defect is, however, made good by the valuable prefatory notices on each of the ' Instructions.' The division of the period into three sections, characterised as (1) French influence, (2) active balance, (3) enforced neutrality, is very helpful, although the two former had better, perhaps, be divided, not by the date 1690, but by Vittore Amedeo's majority in 1680. From that moment the relation of the French and Savoyard courts really under- went a fundamental change. It is, indeed, in the career of this remarkable personality that the interest of these volumes centres, even if it be admitted that the sense of incompleteness in that of his successor is due rather to circumstances than character. There is httle to be said of the reign of Carlo Emmanuele II. This grandson of Henri IV was completely under his French mother's influence, and the standing ambassador, the president Servien, had a comfortable sleeping berth from 1648 to 1676. The three years' mission of Villars changed all that, and provoked the feeling of wounded pride which has never been entirely healed. The note was at once sounded. ' If the king,' he wrote in his first year, ' commanded me to speak strongly to Madame 368 REVIEWS OF BOOKS April Eoyale ' (the duchess dowager), ' and threaten her, we should soon make her change her manner . . . Servien's method was too mild and creeping.' Then followed the attempt to make Savoy combine in an attack upon Milan, and the insistence that four Piedmontese regiments should be absolutely incorporated in the French service. The hectoring, bullying Villars inflicted an irremediable injury on French interests, and scarcely less mischievous was his meddlesome wife, who forced her unwelcome society upon the ducal family circle. The young duke's majority was closely followed by the French occupation of Casale, in the Montferrat, an unforgivable offence to the Piedmontese, who witnessed the French troops tramping across their territory. If Estrades could not remedy, he could at least recognise the mischief. He confessed that there were few countries where the French were less popular, and where Louis XIV's power caused more apprehension and mistrust. This mis- trust was not diminished by the intrigues of the French court with the duchess dowager to marry Vittore Amedeo to the heiress of Portugal, and so remove him from his duchy. From 1685 the French began seriously to suspect the duke, and D'Arcy was instructed to give the late regent his protection, and concert measures with her for the maintenance of French influence. Her son, although not yet eighteen, had undertaken the entire administration and shown strong aversion to his mother. He could not, indeed, with impunity seriously oppose France, gripped as he was byPignerol and Casale. Neanmoins I'inclination qu'il a 4 la retraite, son humeur severe et dis- simulee et son aversion toute publique pour les conseils de sa mere et des ministres qui ont le plus d'inclination pour la France peuvent donner quelque sujet de croire qu'il n'auroit pas toujours toute la deference qu'il doit avoir pour ce q^li lui sera dit de la part de sa majeste, et que, s'il pouvoit, il prendroit quelques mesures avec I'Espagne dans I'esperance de pouvoir gouvemer plus absolument et plus independamment de sa majesty. Henceforth it was certain that the traditional French alliance would coimt for nothing unless it served the interest of the moment. Except in so far that France checked the ambitions of the duke on Genoa, Geneva, and the Montferrat, she was, in each diplomatic encounter, worsted by the pigmy state. A minor instance of this was the abortive mission of Anfossy, whom Fleury sent in the disguise of a merchant in 1726. It only proved how completely the cardinal misunderstood the character of the prince whose confidence he hoped to gain. Yet the ' Instructions ' again and again contain teUing passages on the duke's peculiar quahties. Thus in 1700 Ph^lipeaux was informed that he never consulted anyone outside himself, that he never entrusted the execution of his plans to more than a single minister, that he had no certain alliance, no fixed principle save that of a desire for aggrandise- ment, that the perpetual reserve and distrust which characterised his utterances made it difficult to penetrate his views. Thirteen years later the marquis de Prie was given no flattering picture of the prince with whom he was to reside. Son interet sera toujours le premier motif de ses demarches. Personne ne cormoit mieux que lui en quoi cet interet consiste et n'est plus applique &, le suivre. Nul engagement ne Ten a jamais detoume, et lorsqu'il a cru le 1902 HE VIEWS OF BOOKS 369 trouver dans un parti plutot que dans uii autre les liaisons les plus fortes ont ^te trop foibles pour le retenir. Si sa reputation en a souffert ses etats en sent considerablement augment^s. A fuller and juster estimate is contained in the 'Instruction ' ofCambis in 1725. This is, unfortunately, too long to quote. It characterises the king of Sardinia as one of the cleverest princes of Europe, the result at once of natural qualities and the knowledge acquired by necessity and experience in very difficult circumstances. Prudence acted as a cheek upon the temper to which he would willingly give vent. He owed nothing to education or study, everything to his own inner self and his practice in diplomacy. He devoted himself exclusively to utility; his political principles were drawn from the founthead of his own ideas, and sacrificed everything to the views of aggrandisement which he held, and probably always would hold. His was a one-man government, for in him were combined the most capable of princes and the cleverest and most experienced of ministers. His plans and negotiations were often carried to their conclusion before his most trusted ministers had had the slightest hand in them. He had a peculiar talent of leading those with whom he conversed to talk of what he wanted, and of sounding their characters. There was nothing of which he did not know the details, were it war, finance, or trade. Such was his dislike to flattery that none would dare pay him any compliments to his face, while his devoutness was sincere and consistent, though free from ostentation. These appreciations are of more interest than the negotiations relating to the wars of Vittore Amedeo's time, to the knowledge of which the ' Instructions ' add little. While France was being step by step pushed back from Italy she had this consolation, that the new Italian power was becoming insufferable to its weaker neighbours. Ph^lipeaux was in- formed in 1700 that the Milanese, who formerly were well disposed towards the house of Savoy, and who before the late war would have gladly entered into a scheme for making the duke their ruler, would now gladly submit to the emperor, or any other person, rather than to him. This was no mere expression of bad temper, for it finds ample illustration during the next half-century. Connected with this subject is the un- popularity of the Piedmontese government in Sicily. The French government did full justice to the measures taken by the new king for developing the resources of the island, and for insuring the affection of his subjects. Yet he clearly failed, as later members of the dynasty have failed thereafter. II est difficile d'apprivoiser une nation disposee i murmurer et 4. se plaindre, quelques traitements qu'eUe re9oive, bons ou mauvais . . . L'antipatliie de tous les Siciliens pour les Piemontais est generale, et I'attention que le roi, leur maltre, donne 4 reprimer ces derniers et &, les punir ^ la moindre faute qu'ils commettent rend les autres plus insolents, persuades qu'il ne tient qu'A eux de se faire craindre. The ' Instructions ' throw little light upon the events which led to the cession of Sicily and the acquisition of Sardinia. This was Vittore Amedeo's first failure, and amid the shifting alliances and counter- alliances of the following years he maintained a somewhat sulky reserve VOL. XVII. — NO. LXYI. B B 370 MEVmWS OP BOOKS April until his abdication. Cambis was the last French ambassador at his court (1725-8). He was instructed that it would be difficult to persuade the king that he ought to be content with Sardinia in compensation for Sicily, and, indeed, the utmost he could dp was to prevent him from Coquetting with the new Austro- Spanish combination. From 1728 to 1732 there was only a charge d'affavres at Turin, but, two letters of Chauvelin relate. to the king's abdication and imprisonment. The French government at once utilised the accession of Carlo Emmanuele for the restoration of its influence, at Turin. This was the object" of Vaulgrenant's mission. He was to uirge especially that France was not weakened by the cessation of the English alliance, but that her friendship was never so desirable as when she'wa's free from all engage- ments to other powers, and could therefore follow her own generous intentions towards such an ally as the king of Sardinia. Vaulgrenant and his successor, Saint-Neetaire, so far succeeded that Sardinia joined France in the war of Polish succession, but nO efforts could induce the king to. include Spain in the common friendship.' Two interesting letters of Chauvelin relate to the vain attempt to convert the two dual alliances against the emperor into a single triple alliance. Ever since the Spanish Bourbons had set foot in Italy, the Sardinian kings had' been more jealous of the new Italian poweror powers than they were afraid of the emperor's pretensions. A new turn had thus "been given to Franco- Sardinian relations. The desire of France to manufacture a state for the infant Philip drove Sardinia in the war of Austrian succession into alliance with Maria Theresa. The first of these volumes concludes with the disastrous attempt of D'Argenson to win Carlo Emmanuele back to France. The ' Instructions ' of Champeaux and Maillebois on this subject will be read with interest, as also the scheme for the partition of the Milanese and Mantuan territories. The ' Instruction ' of La Ch^tardie (6 Nov. 1749) is valuable as showing how closely French ambitions clung^ to Italy in spite of the peace of Aix-la-ChapRlle. It began by stating that, if there could have been any doubt, the event had proved conclusively the necessity of Savoyard alliance to France and Spain, and then continued — C'est aujourd'hui une v^rit^ k peu prfes d^montr^e que ce seroit vouloir B'exposer de nouveau aux plus enarmes depenses et aiix. plus grands dangers que de pr^tendre d^aormais faire passer de France en Italie des armees par terre, sans le concours ou du moins sans le oonsentement de ce prince. . . . La position dii roi de Sardaigne fait qu'il est trfes difficile, pour ne pas dire im- possible, de se passer de lui, lorsqu'il est question de porter la guerre au deU desAlpes. Bt comme les ^yenements ont prouve qu'il est le maitre de faire pencher la balance en Italie du c6te auquel il donnera la preference il voudra tpujours se vendre fort cher. Mais il est trop habile pour ne pas sacrifler un int^ret douteux, quelque sp^cieux qu'il puisse 6tre, 4 des avantages moins con- siderables qu'il croira pouvoir obtenir sftrement. This may be to modern readers a commonplace, but it is pleasant to find it so uncompromisingly stated by the power which had suffered most from Savoyard ability. How different is this frank admission of impotence from the insolent brow-beating of the days of Richelieu and Louis XIV, which after all was responsible for the mischief. Louis XV'a 190^ tiEvmws OP soaits 371 government was not without reasonable- hopes. Carlo Bmmanuele had indeed at the treaty of Worms sold himself very dear," but that of Aix-la- Chapelle had deducted a considerable discount from the price. The consistent policy of the court of Turin had now become a proverb, much as had once been that of the Venetian senate. II n'y a peut-Stre pas de oour plus eonstante que eelle de Turin ^ se conduire suivant des principes invariablea. Lea souverains et les ministres y changent ; mais I'esprit et les maximes y sont toujours lea CiSmes. On n'y oroit pas devoir adopter d'autre systfeme que celui qu'on y suit depuis longtemps, et I'on se eontente d'ajouter i. ce que les predecesseurs^ ont ^bauoh^, et de perfeo- tionner leurs idees et leur ouvrage. Stress is more than once laid on the peculiar qualities of the Sardinian ministers. As late as 1766 the ' Instruction ' of Choiaeul shows how constant these were. Les Piemontais sont habiles dans I'art de la dissimulation, et les ministres surtout,' qui ont en main I'administration des affaires, y ont contract^ depuis longtemps I'habitude de cacher sous les dehors specie'ttx de franchise les v^ritables sentiments dout ils sont int^rieurement affect^s. This valuable art was, perhaps, less the heritage of Vittore Amedeo than of Carlo Emmanuele, whose dissimulation is in 1749 described as being all the more dangerous as being covered by a veil of confiding sim- plicity. The alliance of 1756 between Prance and Austria deprived the little buffer state of her opportunities, reducing her to a neutraliti forcAe sans issue et fatale. Henceforth the embassy at Turin was only a post of observation. Carlo Emmanuele, talented and unscrupulous as he was, could take no part in the Seven Years' war. It was not then foreseen that the Savoyard would devour the two last leaves of the coveted arti- choke by the aid of Prussia and in despite of France. For the present one anxiety alone remained. England was credited with an unceasing ambition to secure command of a port on the Eiviera which would bring her into direct connexion with the Sardinian government, and assure to her naval and commercial control in the Gul| of Lyons. Already her trade was developing in Piedmont at the expense of France. Originally, indeed, the Flying Dutchman had been the spe6tre, and Louis XIV had in 1672 ordered the duke not to allow the Dutch to ply their trade under the Savoyard flag. But since 1690 England became the bugbear. This was the main reason for the protection of Genoa, and more especially of the prince of Monaco, against Savoyard ambition.: with this object Finale, which had been ceded to Carlo Emmanuele by the treaty of Worms, was again detached in that of Aix-la-ChapeUe. The only mission of import- ance after 1756 — that of Choiseul in 1766— had the aim of preventing the king of Sardinia from building a port at Nice, intended, as it was believed, for English use. The interest of the Mantuan 'Instructions:' attaches itself to two very strong fortresses and one very weak prince. The occupation of Cagale was the objective of France in the earlier, that of Mantua ia the later years to which these documents relate. Of the two dukes who B B 2 372 REVIEWS OF BOOKS April tread the boards Carlo III was a commonplace provincial actor, but his son was so completely a comic opera king as to be entertaining, while his imbecility made him the tool of others, and thus indirectly a political personality of some importance. The editor rightly makes the treaty of Cherasco in 1631 the starting point for his introduction, since the treaties of Miinster and the Pyrenees did but confirm this. The line of Gonzaga-Nevers was then recognised as the ruling house of Mantua and the Montferrat. Trino and Alba were, however, detached from the latter and bestowed on Savoy, the one in compensation for its claims on Montferrat, the other for Pignerol, which was ceded to France. For these losses the French king's promise of a money equivalent was poor consolation. The dynasty never recognised nor forgavethis dismemberment ; itnursed a grudge against France and had a cause for continual bickering with Savoy. The dukes, however French their natural inchnations, were forced to caress the Spanish government of Milan, for this state separated Mantua from the Montferrat. Austria, moreover, had readier access to Mantua than had France, while the Habsburgs rarely failed to immesh the Gonzagas in their matrimonial net. Thus it was that in 1652 the French garrison, which had hitherto occupied Casale, was replaced by Mantuans and Germans, paid by Spain, and holding the fortress under the guarantee of the empresses dowager and consort, the latter of whom was Carlo Ill's sister and the former his great-aunt, while he himself was wedded to Clara Isabella of Austria^ So also the duke's last unfriendly act towards France was to induce the emperor to urge upon Venice the withdrawal of her troops, which had, by virtue of previous treaties, garrisoned Mantua for thirty years. There was, indeed, no regular French envoy at Mantua from 1659 to 1679, the ambassador at Venice usually watching over his government's interests when they required attention. Upon the duke's sudden death Aubeville was sent professedly to condole with the duchess on her loss, but really to threaten that the introduction of any foreigners into the garrison of Casale would be followed by the invasion of the French king in person at the head of 43,000 men. He was authorised to add to his threats the argument that Luis de Haro had proposed to Mazarin the demolition of the fortress, and that therefore if the Spaniards gained control they might execute this scheme. In the ' Instruction ' great stress is laid upon the importance of Casale, ' as being, by reason of its situation, the chief object on which the majority of European powers have always fixed their eyes, some from desire to obtain it, the others to prevent them and to uphold the authority of its sovereign prince.' France, it was naively added, had never had any but this latter aim. The commentary upon this expression of disinterested- ness was the intrigue with Mattioli in 1677, which has left so enduring a mark on history, though probably not one m a hundred of those who have talked of the Man in the Iron Mask could say in what state Casale lay, or what was the cause of its importance. The negotiations with Mattioh are described in the ' Instruction ' of the abbe D'Estrades, who was charged with a secret mission, in the letters of the king and Pomponne to the abb6, in a memoir addressed to Mattioli himself, and in letters of Pomponne to Pinchesne, which latter dwell on the betrayal to the Spaniards of the secret of the proposed 1902 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 373 French occupation of Casale, and on the consequent arrest of Mattioli by French agents. Although the duke entirely disavowed his minister's engagements to France he was soon persuaded to give effect to them, and a French column, crossing Savoy in time of peace, occupied Casale on 30 September, the very day on which, in no dissimilar manner, the French forces entered Strassburg. The French success was due in great measure to the scandals of the Mantuan court. The duchess dowager even after her son's majority had controlled the administration, and had given her confidence, and probably something more, to the secretary Bulgarini. The emperor and empress had insisted on his dismissal, and the pope induced the secretary and the duchess to enter religious orders. In spite of her vows the duchess remained in her Mantuan palace, and, in her irritation against her own family, turned her eyes towards France. This was, indeed, the first step in the MattioH intrigue. The final success was due to the diplomatic qualifications of the abbe Morel, ami de la table etdu plaisir. Son passe de Ubertin, writes the editor, itait un stir garant qu'il saiorait excrcer sur le duo la seduction d laquelle celui-ci 6tait peut-Stre le plus sensible. Morel moreover was authorised to bribe the duke by a sum which would enable him to lead the extravagant life which he affected. Henceforth Louis XIV kept a resident at Mantua, and to this we owe the missions of Breteuil and Gombaud from 1682 to 1688. Their objects were to hasten the fortification of the capital and the reorganisation of the army, composed of criminals from every part of Europe, officered by valets, lackeys, and worse, to combat the ill-disposed ministers, to encourage the duke's vices and caprices, his passion for his singers and his stables, his absurd dress and theatrical pose, to follow him everywhere, ' for he was one of those who always find themselves better elsewhere than at home.' To this last duty Gombaud sacrificed his life, while accompanying the prince to visit the Austrian camp before Belgrad. The formation of the grand alliance in 1689 and the secession of Savoy from France in 1690 put Louis XIV on the defensive in North Italy, and enabled imperialists and Spaniards to bully Carlo IV at pleasure. Deeply wounded by the treaty of Gazzuolo, which forced him to neutrality, he professed to give all his heart to Louis, and in 1692 made a secret engagement with Eebenac to admit French troops to Mantua. When in April 1694 the Austriaus insisted on the withdrawal of the reside;it Du Pre the duke accorded him a heart-rending farewell, vowing that he remained un corps sans dme. By the evacuation of Casale and the abandonment of Pignerol Italy seemed closed to France, and the policy of Eichelieu to have finally failed : henceforth it appeared that Mantua must gravitate towards the two Habsburg powers. The acceptance, however, of the Spanish succession placed the French in Milan between the Montferrat and Mantua, and" thus Carlo could return to the alliance of his heart. The mission of the cardinal D'Estr^es resulted in the articles between France, Spain, and Mantua for the garrisoning of the capital by French troops. Hence the succeeding and final mission, that of Gergy (1702-8), is, perhaps, the most important of the series. The ' Instructions ' show with all lucidity the estimation in which the French court held its faithful 374 REVIEWS OF BOOKS April ally-. Gergy was told that there was no need for negotiation, as the duke's capital and states depended entirely on the king's protection. He must only take care that the enemy did not find the means of blinding him and turning him from the line of conduct hitherto pursued — the result of natural inclination and the instinct of self-preservation. Carlo, it was admitted, had given all his strong places to France, had witnessed without a murmur his own and his subjects' losses, had seemed more absorbed in the common welfare than in his personal interests : yetall this did not prevent his being naturally changeable, full of suspicion, easy to govern by the swarm of women and musicians with whom he surrounded himself, and who caused frequent changes in his court, so that those who seemed most in his confidence were often the nearest to losing it com- pletely. The French government made no secret to Gergy that its popularity in Mantua was confined to the duke. II est necessaire que le sieur de Grergy sache que le duo est presque le seul de son pays dont les intentions soient bonnes pour le service du roi et pour celui dti roi d'Espagne. La noblesse et le peuple ont toujpiirs ^t^ portes pour la maison d'Autriche, et comme tons les religieux d'ltalie sont attaches k I'empereur oeux du Mantouan sont aussi dans les tnemes dispositions ; cette inclination paralt encore plus forte dans les Gonzagues ; et ils ont aussi paru plus opposes que personne au due de Mantoue, leur souverain et chef de leur maison. This plain confession should modify the view sometimes held by patriotic French writers that Italy looked to the Bourbon as its Hberator. The occupation of Mantua by French troops brought thither the marquis de Tess6, whose letter to his wife of 7 April 1701 describes his ridiculous reception. The duke carried under his arm a sword of some seven feet and a half in length, the guard of which would hold the con- tents of Madame de Tessd's toilette table less the mirror, for in it lay the ducal gloves, two handkerchiefs, several snuff boxes, watches, boxes, enfin una boutique enti&re. But this absurd figure was, continued the writer, the most civil and obliging prjnce in the world, and, embracing the marquis, assured him that he had faith in two people only in the world — the Holy Virgin and the king. The duke suffered for his devotion to France. Driven from Mantua, he retired to Casale, whither, wrote Liesse to Torcy on 11 Sept. 1702, he took his carriages, his confidants, his musical twupe, masculine and feminine, together with his poet to compose an opera. It was small compensation that he was made French generalissimo in' Italy. His natural cowardice was ill at ease with his fancy for playing the general a;nd the knight errant. Les passions dominantes en lui, wrote Tess6 to Torcy, sont la peur et I'amour, and the search for a new wife at Paris was a more congenial employment. The French victories of Cassano and Galcinato enabled him to return to Mantua, but the defeat of Turin drove him into exile at Padua, and here on 5 July 1708 h^ died. The treaties of Utrecht -and Eastadt pronounced the extinction of the duchy of Mantua and the marquisate of the Montferrat, thus giving a formal sanction to the fait accompli. Carlo IV, the last duke of Mantua, was a Codrus in caricature. No prince could have been found sufficiently ridiculous to be worthy to succeed him, E. Abmstrqnu. 1902 REVIEWS OE BOOKS 375 King Monmouth ; being a History of the Ca/reer of Thomas Scott, ' the Protestant Duke.' By Allan Fba. (London : John Lane. 1902.) The author modestly ohserves in his preface that the original portraits reproduced in this volume will constitute its chief attraction. It contains fourteen photogravure portraits of great heauty, and about a hundred views of places, facsimiles of letters, reproductions of medals and relics, and engraved portraits. Certainly these illustrations will render it in- dispensable to any historian of Monmouth's times. Mr. Pea seta an example of thoroughness in the care with which he traces the history of the portraits he gives, and indicates where others which he does not repro- duce are to be found. As to the biographical part of the book, the author's original intention was to re-edit Eoberts's life of Monmouth, published in 1844. This plan he wisely abandoned; and instead of annotating and supplementing the earlier biography undertook a fresh treatment of the whole subject. The ' Beports of the Historical Manuscripts Commission ' have been thoroughly ransacked for new matter, and the additional manuscripts in the British Museum utilised to the full. Much has also been derived from correspon- dence in private hands. But while a large amount of new information is thus collected it is not put together with much skill, and the result is a book which, with aU its merits, is somewhat scrappy and disjointed. Monmouth's movements are carefully followed and his progress through England minutely described. Throughout, as might be expected from the author of ' The Fhght of the King,' Mr. Fea takes the greatest pains with the topography of his subject. Many new details about his hero's career are for the first time brought together in his pages. But Mr. Fea is not much at home in the party politics of the period of which he treats, and Monmouth's relation to the political intrigues of Charles II's time is not very clearly or very adequately stated. At the same time he omits to make use of several important printed sources. He relates at some length Halifax's attempt to reconcile Charles and Monmouth in 1683, but does not refer to Miss Foxoroft's valuable life of Halifax, in which the same incident is also treated at length. Miss Foxcroft points out that the mysterious ' L ' of Monmouth's notes is undoubtedly Halifax. Mr. Fea seems to hesitate between that view and the opinion that a certain Major Long was designated. Another source which m.ight have been utilised with great advantage is the publications of the Ballad Society. The fifth volume of Mr. Ebsworth's edition of the ' Roxburgh Ballads ' is mainly devoted to the subject of Monmouth, and the second volume of the ' Bagford Ballads ' contains several ballads about him. Neither of these, however, contains the song entitled ' The glory of the West ; or, the Virgins of Taunton Dean,' of which Mr. Fea laments the loss (p. 246). There is a copy of it, however, in Lord Crawford's collection.' Though ' King Monmouth' as a biography leaves something to be desired it is not a mere picture book, but a work of substantial naerits and one which any historian of the seventeenth century will find it necessary to consult. The appendix contains some unpublished letters of interest relating to the Sedgmoor campaign, and there are others scattered through thie text, C. H. Fieth. '.Catalogue of Ballads, no 659. 376 REVIEWS OF BOOKS April Aus dem Briefwechsel Eonig Friedrichs I. von Preussen und seiner Familie. (' Quellen und Untersuchungen zur Geschicbte des Hauses Hohenzollern,' I.) Herausgegeben von Eekst Beenek. (Berlin : A. Duncker. 1901.) The opening volume of the apparently well-planned new series of ' Monumenta ZoUerana ' is appropriately enough devoted by the editor, Professor Berner, to the family correspondence of the first Prussian king, and thus fits the august occasion, as the title-page reminds us, ' of the bicentenary jubilee of the Prussian monarchy.' Unfortunately it was impossible to include in this correspondence more than a meagre half- dozen of notes addressed to King Frederick I by a person very much more interesting than himself, his second wife and first queen, Sophia Charlotte, one of Leibniz's trifoHum of superior feminine intelligences, and perhaps in some respects the most original of the three. En revanche nearly three-fourths of this volume are made up of the king's correspon- dence with his mother-in-law, the electress Sophia, one of the best letter-writers and diarists who ever put pen to paper (and she put it to a good deal in her time). The exchange of letters between them printed here begins about eleven years after the marriage of the electress's beloved daughter, which, like that of her granddaughter the younger Sophia Dorothea, another eleven years later, was intended to assuage, if it could not remove, the perennial jealousies between the Hanoverian and Prussian governments. After the death of Sophia Charlotte, in 1705, which was sincerely mourned by her husband and almost passionately by her mother, and even after his less propitious second remarriage, the correspondence continued, and came to an end only a day or two before his death in Feburary 1713. This correspondence one would not wish shorter by a single letter ; for the old electress, though generally on her best behaviour and prepared to let no occasion pass of extolling everything done or intended to be done by her son-in-law as rflanific et de bon goust, is always delightful, because she is always herself ; and as for the king, though guiltless of wit, he piques himself on his brevity. The remaining letters in this volume are from the correspondence of Frederick I and from that of Sophia Charlotte with their son the crown prince, who appears here and elsewhere in this book in a far from unamiable character, and with their daughter the hereditary princess of Hesse-Cassel ; together with a few letters exchanged between the queen and her mother, and others from the former to Margrave George Frederick of Brandenburg- Ansbach, whose sister, afterwards our Queen Carohne, was her special favourite, and is here repeatedly mentioned as a charming princess. Finally, we have a few letters from Sophia Charlotte to the minister von Fuchs, who at an earlier date had played so important a part in connexion with the EngUsh expedition of William of Orange ; and one or two from Leibniz to Besser, the grand master of the ceremonies at Hanover under a regime when (as the electress Sophia complains) ceremonies ran danger of being neglected at that court. But though the correspondence with the Brandenburg-Prussian statesmen touches on two subjects which frequently reappear in these pages — the personality of Peter the Great and the question of the Orange inheritance — both it and the newly published letters by Leibniz are of only secondary interest. 1902 EEVIEWS OF BOOKS 377 In his very judicious introduction Professor Earner has taken care to refrain from any attempt to cast a glamour round the central figure of this volume, the actual founder of the Prussian monarchy. His acquisi- tion of a royal crown was the single great achievement of his life ; no military laurels twine round his sceptre ; the chief political design of his later years he was unable to accomplish, and at Utrecht he had to accept the upper quarter of Gueldres in lieu of the principality of Orange. ' How painful it is to me,' he tells his mother-in-law, ' to see my poor subjects in catholic hands, you may well guess, but for the sake of the common interest it is necessary to sacrifice one's own.' A perusal of this corre- spondence is suflicient to show how genuine was the protestant feeling which added bitterness to the king's disappointruent. Indeed, as Professor Berner reminds us, no feature was more marked in Frederick I than the sturdy and consistent ' evangelicalism ' of his opinions and sentiments, in times when the frequent princely conversions to Catholicism gave rise to so varied a crop of hopes and fears. He preferred the Bible to all other books, and expressed the opinion that in the hour of death it would prove a better consolation than Collerus, a name which he else- where spells Tollerus, and by which he is conjectured by Professor Berner to signify Tauler. In this connexion it may be mentioned that in his bargain with the emperor previously to his assumption of a royal crown Frederick refused to include a promise of concessions to the catholics in his dominions, thus proving less pliant on this head than Ernest Augustus of Hanover had been, when negotiating with the same potentate as to the establishment of a ninth electorate. But though a pronounced protestant the king was anxious not to be reckoned among the pietists ; their enthusiasm was as foreign to his nature as to that of his correspon- dent the electress Sophia, and though his personal tastes were not at all in that line he kept up a theatre at Berlin, in order not to be suspected of condemning plays on pietistic principles. On the other hand he looked with a very favourable eye upon the church of England, applauded Prince George of Denmark's adoption of his bride's form of faith, and expressed himself much inclined towards introducing the Anglican ritual into his own monarchy, so as to hasten the union of the ' the two evangelical religions.' Not that he entertained the slightest doubt as to his own right of nomi- nating bishops, appertaining to him as summus episcopus in his own land ; as is known, he actually created a couple on the occasion of his corona- tion, and he expressed himself quite indifferent as to whether 'his Ursinus ' were recognised as a bishop by his Anglican brethren ; ' for he will never in his life be seen in England, and here he is acknowledged both by catholics and others.' Leibniz, on the contrary, in one of the letters here for the first time printed regrets that Ursinus (Bar) had not been consecrated according to the Anghcan rite ; car quoyque cela ne soit point de n^cessite, neanmoins c'est une practique fort raisonable de toute Eglise Chrestienne, dopuis les temps au moins fort proches des Apostres jusqu'au nostra, d'en avoir, et I'occasion auroit est6 fort plausible d'en retablir quelque chose ; jusqu'icy il n'y a point eu de Key Chrestien sans Eveque — the historical converse, clearly, of the principle ' no bishop no king.' Loyal to the religious traditions of his dynasty, Frederick I was not 378 REVIEWS OF BOOKS April less faithful to his obligations as a prince of the empire, and to that Austrian alliance from which, unlike his father before and hia son after him, he at least contrived to gain one enduring advantage. By this alliance he held out even after his interests had been altogether ignored in the Gertruydenberg negotiations, and after, in 1712, it had become manifest that Great Britain was resolved to abandon her allies. The prophecy of the electress Sophia, in a letter dated 12 July, was speedily fulfilled ; and the British government made no ado about threatening to leave unpaid the arrears due from it to the Prussian troops, when their commander, Prince Leopold of Anhalt, refused to allow them to desert Prince Eugene. For the rest King Frederick I, who has often been supposed to have taken the roi soleil for his model, and to have striven to reproduce to the best of his power French Miquette and manners at Berlin, was a true German at heart, and in these letters repeatedly expresses his determination to uphold German as against French usage even in the sphere of action —the regulation of court life — which was most congenial to him. Incidentally it appears that he w&a, not less than his son Frederick William after him, a lover of tobacco and a victim to its fascinations ; he extracts from the eleptress Sophia the confession that, Uke his third wife, she had once been in the habit of filling her husband's pipes — ' and,' she tragicomically adds, ' it was the best time I ever had.' The phonetic spelling adopted by nearly all the contributors to this correspondence must have considerably added to the labours of its editor. He might, however, in his notes have diverted some of the English names from such disguises as ' Mackfield,' ' Kappel,' ' Witworth,' ' St. Jean,' and ' . . , chingbrook.' As a rule his notes are alike correct and useful ; but one is inclined to append his favourite ' So ! ' to the statement, in a note to p. 154, that the abbess of Maubuisson (Louisa HoUandina) was a sister of the electress Sophia by the marriage of her father with- Fraulein von Degenfeld. The index appended to this volume is far from complete, a grave defect — one is almost tempted to say, the gravest of defects — in a work of the kind. A. W. Waed. Calendar of Treasury Books and Papers, 1739-1741. Prepared by William A. Shaw, Litt.D. (London : H.M. Stationery Office. 1901.) This is a specially interesting volume of Dr. Shaw's publication, as it introduces us to the beginnings of the war with Spain and of that of the Austrian succession. As regards material for the history of the war with Spain, among the useful contents of this volume is the information afforded as to the methods adopted for manning the fleet by means of an embargo on all shipping. Although war with Spain was not formally declared till 19 Oct. 1739, as early as 15 June it appears that a general embargo was laid on ' all ships and vessels except such as are employed by the ofiScers of the navy, ordnance, victualling or customs which are hot cleared at Gravesend,' and on 1 Feb. 17|^ this order was extended to Irish shipping. Naturally this order caused considerable dissatisfaction among merchants, and very soon certain exemptions were allowed. Thus East India ships were exempted, and on & representation from the West 190a REVIEWS OF BOOKS S79' India Islands, that they depended "largely for subsistence on imports from England, ships engaged in that trade were allowed to sail. The ships that remained under the embargo were utilised for manning the fleet by being deprived of a third of their crews fot the use of the royal navy before being allowed to sail. On p. 349 Dr. Shaw has compiled a useful table giving the names of all ships so dealt with, and other particulars. Finally this embargo was removed in June 1740. Again, however, on 27 Nov. 1740 another embargo was laid on all ships laden with corn, beef, &o., for export, and not removed till March 1741, but in this case also certain exemptions were made, which are tabulated on p. 562. Other items of interest, in regard to the war, are to be found in abundance in this ' Calendar,' though naturally one has to know the history of the period pretty closely to be able to pick out the gems of infor- mation. Thus the attack on Fort Augustine and the fortifying of Frederica, in Georgia, by General Oglethorpe, operations which saved our southern colonies at any rate from invasion, were carried out for the very moderate expense of 12,394Z. 12s. The danger averted was great, for South Carolina, it appears, was still in a sparsely populated condition, with an excessive preponderance of negroes, which had been one of the chief motives for settling Georgia ten years earlier, and it was proposed, by the special commissioner sent out, to remedy this defect by enacting a fixed proportion between negroes and white men on the land. As to the continental war, there are some interesting details about the subsidies paid, to the queen of Hungary of 300,000Z., ' granted by parlia- ment to support her said majesty, to prevent the subversion of the house of Austria, and for maintaining the pragmatic sanction and supporting the liberties and balance of power in Europe ; ' to the king of Deninark, and to the king of Sweden as landgrave of Hesse-Cassel. The last two subsidies were payable in crowns, and there was a little difficulty about calculating the exchange ; however, the agent for the landgrave showed himself so accommodating as to forego the 2 per cent, for charges, amounting to &771. 8s. 2d., which, as he says, ' wiU entail a loss to us, but Sir Eobert may some day return the favour, when the occasion is more opportune.' These indications will perhaps suffice to show how valuable this ' Calendar ' may be to a student of any branch of history of this time. A word may be said about the editing. As we have suggested before In re- vievnng former volumes of this ' Calendar,' the most serviceable part of Dr. Shaw's work to the student is the exhaustive index. But there is always - a danger that an index may be too exhaustive, if it is not very carefully looked after, by giving references to trivialities which only waste the student's iime. Dr. Shaw's index, if it errs at all, errs on the side of being too exhaustive. For example, references like one to the duke of Newcastle's ' office,' which proves only to be an entry of the fact that a paper was delivered into that office, or one to the South Sea ' House,' which simply refers to a ' statement dated South Sea House,' seem so trivial as to be not worth inserting, besides being rather annoying to any one who, for example, might eagerly look up the reference to the duke of Newcastle's office in order to find some particulars about it. Of Course Dr. Shaw's defence will be that it is not for him to Say what facta 380 REVIEWS OF BOOKS April will be useful ; all he has to do is to set out the materials ; and it is a good defence up to a certain point. Nevertheless the mass of materials for the student is so enormous, and hfe so short, that we should be inclined to trust an editor of Dr. Shaw's knowledge and ability if he would exercise his power of selection and excision, at any rate in the index, in such examples as we have given. While on the subject of the index we should like to suggest what might be an improvement and a help. The most valuable parts of these calendars are the detailed extracts of treasury minute books, treasury board papers, and so on, printed at the beginning of each year. If the references in the index to this more important part were given in different type, say in italics, from the references which refer to other parts, which are merely tabular, the saving in time to the student would be very great. There is a misprint in the index of Sir Edward Fawkener for Sir Everard Fawkener, the name being given correctly in the text. As to the accuracy of the ' Calendar ' itself, it is really impossible for a reviewer to judge, except accidentally. I, however, happened to come across a point which at any rate seemed to require elucidation. On looking up the references to Arthur Stert, a commissary to treat with Spain, I found on p. 598 the following entry : — Date Payee Amount The Account on which the Order or Warrant is made Reference 1741, 12 Aug. Arthur Stert £ s. d. 485 1740, Michaelmas quarter's ordinary Money Boole XL. p. 390 and on p. 616 the following entry : — Date Payee Amount The Account on which the Order or Warrant is made Reference 1741, 2 July Arthur Stert £ s. d. 485 1740, Michaelmas quarter's ordinary Order Book XVI. p. 163 The peculiarity of these two entries is not merely the fact that there are two, for though there are always at least three entries relating to each payment in the treasury records it is the practice of this 'Calendar' only to record one of them ; there is the still further singularity that the date in the order book is prior to that in the money book. Owing to the great courtesy of Dr. Shaw, whom I asked for an explanation, I am enabled, if not to solve the difficulty, at any rate to explain more clearly what it is. For every public payment there is a record, first in the 'King's Warrant Book,' of the sign manual, or privy seal, authorising it, then in the ' Money Book ' of the treasury warrant for it, and finally in the ' Order Book ' of the auditor's order for the issue of the money. Naturally the auditor had no business to issue his order until the treasury warrant, as recorded in the ' Money Book,' had been made out. Here, however, as wiU be seen from the extracts given above, the auditor appears to have issued the money nearly a month before he had been authorised to do so. On looking further at all the items from the middle of p. 515 and on p. 516 one sees that they are entries ranging from 1735 to 1741, which 1902 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 381 were entered at the end of the records of 1741, having apparently been accidentally omitted from their proper place, and it is just possible that the date 2 July may be a mistake in the original entry. But whatever may be the reason of this inexplicable entry it seems in the first place that, since it is the usual practice of the editor only to record one of the three entries of the same payment, he should, to avoid confusion, make some sort of note to indicate that there is a duplicate entry whenever he thinks it necessary to make a second entry ; and secondly that in an extraordinary case like the present one, where no one could be better qualified than Dr. Shaw to observe the singularity, he should make some special allusion to it, either in his preface or in a foot note. The detachment of an editor may be carried too far even in the editing of records. Basil Williams. Le Conventiomicl Philippeaux. Par Paul Mautouchet, Docteur es Lettres. (Paris : Socidt^ Nouvelle de Librairie et d'Edition. 1900.) Le Conventionnel Jeanhon Saint-Andre, Membre du Comite de Salut Public, OrgMiisatetir de la Marine de la Terreur. 1749-1813. Par L. L6vx-ScHNEiDEE, Docteur es Lettres. (Paris : Alcan. 1901.) Sainte-Beuvk somewhere remarks that we should abominate and dread seasons of revolution, not from fear of dangers and vicissitudes which might befall us, but lest the influence of such times should work some fatal change in our character. We cannot, he says, but wonder whether we are not cherishing in ourselves some perverse bent, some erroneous conviction or malignant passion, some secret fanaticism, some inner vileness, which, fostered and expanded by such changed conditions, would burst forth into light, to our shame and humiliation. A similar thought cannot but occur to the reader of the lives of the two Terrorists whose names stand at the head of this article. Had there been no Eevolution Philippeaux would have lived and died at Le Mans, a not very successful member of the provincial bar, admired by his less educated clients for his sentimental verbosity and generally respected for his humanity and honesty ; while Jeanbon Saint-Andr6 would have continued a protestant minister, quarrelling at times with his consistory and his colleagues, and preaching sermons, sometimes sensible, but more often a farrago of windy rhetoric. He would not have been an amiable character, for he was sourly opinionative and combined the suspicious irritability of a nonconformist with the illogical dogmatism of an intolerant liberal who insists that all shall advance as far as and no further than the point at which he happens himself to have halted for the moment, but no one probably would have suspected his sincerity or humanity. Book after book is produced by a certain school of French historians, the object of which is to extenuate the crimes of the scoundrels, and to exaggerate the capacity of the mediocrities, who rode like scum and froth on the surface of the waves stirred by the revolutionary tempest ; and it is to this category that the works before us belong. They are of un- equal merit, and it so happens that the better book is devoted to the worse man. Yet it is well that this should be so, for the life of Jeanbon Saint-Andr6 is in itself more interesting, and suggests to his biographer, 382 REVIEWS OF ^OOKS April or rather requires from him, more instructive digressions than that of PhiUppeaux. Professor L6vy- Schneider's book — 1,100 large and closely printed pages^s a solid addition to the materials of any student of the Revolu- tion ; it contains much information not otherwise readily accessible. The account of the conditions of the protestants in the south on the eve of the Revolution shows how modest were the expectations of the leading Huguenots, and how desirous the government was to treat them fairly. Shortly before 1788 Saint- Andre wrote some 'Considerations on' the Civil Organisations of the Protestant Churches,' a tract the modera- tion of which is remarkable, and all the more so as moderation was not generally his characteristic. It is his opinion that the edict of Nantes made too great concessions to the Huguenots. Their privileges had enabled ambitious nobles to use them as the tools of poUtical intrigue, and the ostentation of their pubUc worship was a challenge to their opponents.. Hence the suppression of their privileges, a justifiable measure, and the persecutions they unjustly endured during the reigns of Lewis XIV and XV. Since the accession of Lewis XVI the penal statutes had not been en- forced, and all that they could reasonably ask was that the toleration they now enjoyed in spite of the law should be secured to them by the law. M. Levy- Schneider points out that this moderation is to be explained by the decay of the miUtant spirit of the old Calvinists. What would they have thought of the advice given by Saint- Andre to avoid even the shadow of controversy with the catholics on points of doctrine ? He denounces fanaticism as the worst disease by which a state can be infected. No doubt rehgious dogma sat lightly on the admirer and follower of Rousseau, the future votary of the goddess Reason, but Jeanbon was not singular. Many of the Huguenot ministers and of the more educated niembers of their congregations had, to some extent, fallen under the influence of the prevailing ' philosophy,' and almost all of them were more or less under the spell of Rousseau. Their rigid Calvinism was rapidly dissolving into the nebulous deism of the Savoyard vicar. A large part of these volumes is taken up by a detailed account of the part played by Jeanbon Saint- Andre as organiser of the republican navy, and is a valuable contribution to naval history (pp. 476-1020). Saint- Andre, who had been a sailor before he was a preacher, had technical knowledge, energy, and untiring industry and did much to rescue the fleet from the deplorable condition into which it had fallen. The only attention shown to the navy so far, by the party into whose hands power had passed, was to encourage the insubordination of the men and to give commissions to those commanders and mates of merchant ships who were the loudest pot-house patriots, the most zealous frequenters of the Jacobin clubs. This part of Jeanbon's career gives M. Levy-Schneider the best opportunity to raise the reader's opinion of his client. He might have done so with more success had his historical conscience been more accommodating. He will not consciously suppress or misstate the facts, even though conclusions other than those he wishes to enforce can be drawn from them, and so it comes that we lay down his book knowing a great deal more about Jeanbon Saint-Andr6 than when we took it up, but little disposed to judge him more leniently. 190^ REVIEWS Op BOOKS 38^ It is possible that, like many of his eontetnporaries, the panegyrist of Lewis XVI may gradually and honestly have acquired the conviction that liberty and inonarchy were incompatible ; and a democrat might not unreasonably believe that, since the upper and middle classes were at heart royalist, and since it was necessary that power should be con- centrated and councils undivided during a crisis of foreign war and internal anarchy, some sort of dictatorship resting on the support of the populace was the only possible form of administration. Nor does it convict Saint-Andre of dishonesty that the latitudinarian preacher, the disciple of Rousseau, should proclaim his belief ' that the kingdom of Reason is at hand ; the people are weary of the coarse impostures which have so long imposed on their credulity ; they will henceforth tolerate no master but the law, no guide but morality, no priesthood but that of the magistrates,' or that he should believe ' philosophy, the mother of all social virtues, to have made the French a nation of brothers.' But after all Saint-Andr6 had been a Christian minister, and the philosopher, whom he professed to revere beyond all others, had proclaimed the maxim that the government may sacrifice an innocent person for the safety of the multitude to be as dangerous to the state as it is execrable. What then are we to think of him when he defends the murderers of September because their intentions were pure (p. 232), when he urges the people to rid themselves of their enemies and to make the public safety the only law of their actions (p. 259), when he organises the terror at Montauban, his native town, and employs the 'revolutionary army,' a band of hireling cutthroats and robbers, to oppress his fellow citizens, ' the aristocrat shopkeepers ' (p. 205), when at Brest, at Toulon, wherever he goes, he stimulates the activity of the revolutionary tribunals (pp. 709, 877, 887) ; when he supports and praises that abominable and contemptible brute Rossignol, when he proclaims that every true republican must love the ' volunteers ' led by that ruffian, a mob of cowardly and blood-stained brigands, and praises the ' virtuous poor ' of Toulon, who had just proved their patriotism by outrage and murder ? We cannot suppose that Saint- Andr6 wished to destroy all discipline and subordination, yet he was determined at every cost to carry on the Jacobinical propaganda, and distributed the obscene and atrocious ravings of the execrable Hebert among the sailors of the fleet (p. 652). Nor can it be pleaded in his defence that he was blinded by fanaticism. Much may be pardoned to a man like Saint-Just, however narrow-minded, hard-hearted, and mistaken, who is prepared ruthlessly to sacrifice himself and others to an ideal. Jeanbon, so far as we can judge by his conduct, was no fanatic. His motives appear to have been a bilious discontent and the desire of a restless and energetic man to hold a position in which he was able to satisfy his love of action and of authority. He was the friend of the Girondins while they were in power, and afterwards their implacable enemy. He flattered Marat and eulogised the H^bertists till they became intolerable to Robespierre, his idol so long as he seemed omnipotent. No sooner had Robespierre fallen than Saint- Andr6 was convinced that he, like Danton, had plotted to restore the monarchy and that the Thermidorians had saved the republic. It was not inconsistent with such a past that he should become a prefect and a 384 REVIEWS OF BOOKS April baron under the empire. A man with no good qualities is the rarest of monsters, and something that may justly be praised is, no doubt, to be found in Saint-Andre. His hands were blood-stained, but he had no itehuig palm, and appears to have been an honest, and, where unbiassed by pohtics, a capable administrator. He was a useful public servant under Napoleon. He did not, like so many of the Terrorists, abuse his opportunities to indulge in licentious excesses and in a luxury strangely at variance with their commonplaces about republican virtue and frugaUty. However much we may differ from M. Levy- Schneider in our estimate of Jeanbon and of the Terror generally we must thank him for a book which shows both industry and a minute knowledge of the period with which it deals, and which, though it may omit or pass lightly over some facts which teU against the views of the author, places those which are recorded honestly before the reader. M. Mautouchet's book is much slighter, bpt his task is easier. Philippeaux, according to Michelet, had the great heart of Danton and the virtues in which Danton was wanting : he was a patriot of antique stamp. He was hardly all this ; but he was an honest man and well- meaning, though he wanted the ability and the strength of character which might have enabled him to steer a perfectly straight and safe course through such troubled waters. He was more sincere than Danton, because he had not the capacity to see through the sophisms and verbiage with which he imposed upon himself as well as upon others. Although naturally just and humane he proposed a revolutionary tribunal without a jury, ' because jurymen are apt to presume the innocence of the accused ' (p. 126). He approved of the Terror, though he condemned and deplored the massacres of September. He was active in enlisting the ruffians who murdered, robbed, and ran away in the Vendean war (p. 158), but he did not shrink from denouncing their misconduct and the criminal incom- petence and shameless orgies of Eossignol and other rascally com- manders. For doing this he was traduced and hounded down, not only by their friends aiid allies the Hebertists, but also by Robespierre himself, who brought charges which he must have known to be false against Philippeaux. It was unpardonable in him to have suggested that the incorruptible was not also infallible. M. Mautouchet proves without difficulty the loyalty of Philippeaux to revolutionary principles. When he was brought before Fouquier-Tinville axid his accomplices, not to be tried but to be condemned, in the company of his friend Camille Desmoulins and the Dantonists, the most serious crimes that could be imputed to him were that he had defended the Girondins and had libelled and sought to bring contempt upon the government. The first charge was palpably false ; we should think better of Philippeaux if it were true. As to the second, he replied that nothing could be alleged to support it, except that he had denounced the misconduct of republican generals and soldiers in the Vendue. He died with unaffected courage, lamenting only the wife and child for whom he left but a slender provision ; for it was his boast that he was one of the few members of the Convention who had not used his public position for private profit. P. F. Willeet. 1902 nmtEWS OF BOOKS 385 The EnglisJi Utilitarians. By Leslie Stephen. Three vols. Vol. I. ' Jeremy Bentham." Vol. II. ' James Mill.' Vol. III. ' John Stuart Mill.' (London: Duckworth. 1900.) La Formation du Badicalisme Philosophique. Par Elib Hal^ivy. Vol. I. 'La Jeunesse de Bentham.' Vol. II. 'L'Evolution du Doctrine UtiUtaire de 1789 a 1815.' (Paris : Alcan. 1901.) The neglect and disrepute into which utilitarianism and its prophets have fallen is not altogether deserved. The historical method has sapped the fabric of its system, and its spirit may seem to have gone to the limbo of obsolete attitudes of mind. Sir Henry Maine met the confident appeal to experience by a novel interpretation of experience. Instead of employing axioms to control and criticise history he extracted from history a criticism of axioms. The ardour of a pioneer sometimes betrayed him into paradox, and even his sincere gratitude to his old master, John Austin, did not always prevent him from using language of the severest censure. Now the wheel has come round full circle. Mr. Leslie Stephen, the foremost living exponent in England of the historical method in the interpretation of the history of ideas, has intervened to save the credit and endorse the value of the utilitarian doctrine at the expense of its cecumenical validity. The student of the English utilitarians has reason to be thankful for the almost synchronous publication of the two works here reviewed. Quite independent in point of view, they are each indispensable, because they are mutually complementary. Mr. Stephen writes with the personal intimacy of a disciple, and with a unique insight into the historical antecedents and the formative condition of eighteenth- century thought in England. M. Hal^vy's work is fortified by careful and minute documentary research, and advantaged by the attitude of detachment which a foreigner enjoys. Mr. Stephen has clothed the utilitarian doctrine in circumstances. M. Halevy has analysed and pursued its essential constituents with admirable lucidity. His first volume contains nothing to correspond to the masterly review of political, social, and economic conditions which fills the first half of Mr. Stephen's ; but, to compensate, the spiritual affiliation of Bentham has been worked out^much more exactly. To the list of writers the youthful Bentham had studied enumerated by Mr. LesUe Stephen — Locke, Hume, Montesquieu, Helvetius, Beccaria, Blackstone, and Barrington — there are to be added Maupertuis, Harrington, and Filmer. And Mr. Stephen is in error in adventuring the conjecture that he had probably not read Hartley (i. 269). That he certainly had read him — and early — in Priestley's abbreviated edition is clear from a foot note to his ' Intro- duction.' ' No. 27 of the University College MSS. (printed as an appendix to his first volume by M. Halevy) contains an interesting confession. The idea of considering happiness as resolvable into a number of individual pleasures I took from Helvetius . . . The idea of estimating the value of each sensation by analysing it into these four ingredients (i.e. intensity, duration, proximity, and certainty) from Beccaria ... To Mr. Harris, author of the ' Hermes ' [I owe] the idea of attempting to analyse a subject upon an exhaxxstive plan. Bentham was not of the stuff of which youthful saviours of society are ' Works, i. 57, ed. Bowring. VOL. XVII. NO. LXVI. C 386 kE VIEWS OF BOOKS April made. He saw no visions, was inspired by no tumultuous passion for humanity. The rhetoric of Rousseau left him contemptuous and analytic, just as the philosophy of Locke and Blackstone stimulated him to the detection and exposure of their fictions. He dispensed an impartially hearty aversion to ' sentimentalism ' and to ' vague generalities.' He was never skilled in the pathology of the heart. Though (if one is to believe his own averment) he vowed unending war against the ' Demon of Chicane ' at the precocious age of eleven, it took him a lifetime to learn how deeply the views of ' sinister interests ' had penetrated the frame of the body poUtic. He could not understand the cold reception of his ' Fragment on Government.' ' I was a great reformist, but never suspected that the " people in power " were against reform. I supposed they only wanted to know what was good in order to embrace it.' Not until an age when most men have ceased to take an active interest in politics was his conversion to radicalism completed. Disgust at the organised system of pedantry, plunder, and unreason, which was the boast of EngUsh lawyers, the slow growth of the conviction that no redress was to be expected from the landed interest of those in high places, the rejection of his cherished Panopticon scheme to ' grind rogues honest,' ultimately drove him to extend the application of his greatest happiness principle to the constitution of political society. He became a political reformer because he -was rejected by ' Judge & Co.' as a law reformer. On all this Mr. Stephen lays a very proper emphasis. The ' Rationale of Evidence,' on which Bentham was at work for ten years (1802-1812), illustrates the critical period of transition. He became a radical because he was in search of ' a fulcrum for the machinery which was to overthrow Lord Eldon.' Nor was theoretical justification for the step wanting. The thorough logical application of his principles was bound to lead to practical deductions identical with those of the Jacobins, however vigorously he might protest against the ideas of 1789. ' Whether the individual be taken as a unit of constant properties, or as the subject of absolute rights, we reach equally absolute conclusions.' It would be impossible to demonstrate more convincingly than Mr. Stephen has done the entire consistency of Bentham's final political point of view with his postulates and method. Whether, however, he would, in his declining years, have devoted his logical artillery to the conquest of the province of politics without a personal stimulus and direction may well be doubted. The history of his conversion to the cause of electoral reform, which Mr. Stephen has treated very slightly, has been submitted by M. Halevy to a minute and precise investigation. Bred in a tory atmosphere, ' his infant affections were listed on the side of despotism ; ' he supported the government agamst the American colonists ; his close friendship with Shelbume (from 1781) never became that of political client and patron ; he preferred, and continued to prefer, the arguments of Fihner to those of Locke. In 1782 he declared the English constitution perfect 'in its leading principles,' and advocated the then fashionable theory of the division of powers. It would be a mistake to regard the ' Essay on Representation ' (1789), now printed at length by M. Halevy as appendix iv. to his first volume, as a recantation of his earlier beliefs. His real anxiety was to codify for the new French democracy ; democracy 1902 kEVIEWS OF BOOK^ 887 was therefore entertained aa a working hypothesis. Only two years later he was busy with his ' Anarchical Fallacies.' Even so late as 1807, when Bentham was living in Queen Square Place, there is no evidence that the great Westminster election contest excited in him the least interest. But when, in the next year (1808), Bentham met James Mill, and the acquaintance rapidly ripened into a close intimacy, a change began to work. The strength and devotion of James Mill's character do indeed find in Mr. Stephen a warm and discriminating advocate. ' No prophet could have had a more zealous, uncompromising, and vigorous disciple.' Mill was, in fact, an ideal disciple ; that is to say, he was something more than a disciple. He taught and spurred his master. An avowed Benthamite, he was besides a man of wide and independent reading. Especially well versed in the doctrines and methods of the French economists from Quesnay to Leon Say, he transmitted their influence to Ricardo. This Mr. Stephen has rather unaccountably neglected. It was through him that Bentham was brought into contact with the zealous and astute political propagandism of Francis Place. His unflagging energy gathered together and stimulated a small school of Benthamite disciples. It would perhaps be an exaggeration to say that from the time that Mill established himself in Bentham's confidence the leadership passed into his hands, and that the voice of Mill speaks through the pen of Bentham. The mental attitudes of the two men were in sufficiently hearty accord to render such an assertion invidious and superficial. But it is difficult not to connect the ascendency which political speculations slowly win over Bentham as his life draws to its close with Mill's persistent influence ; it is difficult to compare the ' Discourse on Government ' with the intro- duction to Bentham's ' Constitutional Code ' without feeling how much the latter is indebted to the essay of the younger and closer thinker. The acquaintance with Mill began in 1808. In 1809 Bentham attacked the question of parliamentary reform, a question in which he had previously shown Uttle or no interest. In January of the same year Mill in an Edinburgh Bevieiu article applied the principle of utility to the problem of constituting representative governments in the South American republics. Mill will not allow the people to frame the constitu- tion under which they are to live, nor will he, granting universal suffrage, expose the state ' to the ignorant and rash passions of the vulgar.' Neither does Bentham demand any extension of suffrage. His proposals are strictly in the interests of 'business '—to save time, expense, friction, and temptation to immorality. When the ' Catechism of Parliamentary Eeform ' was actually published in 1817 a lengthy introduction claimed a virtually universal suffrage and annual parliaments, and pronounced with truculent emphasis against all nostrums of moderate reform. Mill's ' Encyclopaedia ' article on government (1820), if not ' a masterpiece of political wisdom,' marked at any rate the finality of poHtical logic and the frank acceptance of democracy. Acceptance of democracy, but not faith in demos. Mill and Bentham founded their belief in the rifeoessity of democratic institutions on a somewhat sordid view of human nature. They can be shown to be the corollary of a theory of all-powerful self-interest, just as easily as the appropriate milieu of natural virtue. The representative democracy of c c 2 388 REVIEJrS OF BOOKS ■ April the utilitarians was only a magnified Panopticon — a Panopticon in which the rogues ground each other honest. Or, to vary the comparison, it ■was only the extension of the old whig doctrine that the principle of a healthy constitution is to be found in government by hostile equilibrium. That was why the utilitarians would never see any connexion between democracy and anarchy. To them democracy was the necessary means to efficient, pure, and vigorous government; to Godwin and his followers, the emancipation of mankind from the shackles of all government whatsoever. When Bentham wrote, ' Government is a necessary evil,' he meant government is a necessary good to counteract the self-preference interest in human nature. Godwin asserted that all government was an evil, in order to draw the inference that all government should be abolished. The orthodox utilitarians placed their hopes of progress in the indefinite plasticity of character, and called upon government to undertake the task of education. Godwin, who held that he was the only logical utilitarian, appealed to an unalterable faith in the essential goodness of human nature, which political institutions have temporarily corrupted. The gulf between the two schools was really impassable. Each was destined to suffer disillusionment, for neither the heart nor the head of the people responded promptly and heartily to their self-constituted leaders. The philosophic radicals laboured zealously in the popular cause, but their severe philosophy kept them aloof from the people's point of view. They undertook a vigorous propaganda of salutary doctrines ; but the doctrines carried in them to the popular stomach a bitterly medicinal flavour. Nor was the logical creed of democracy which Mill and Bentham formulated likely to pass for long uncriticised within the utilitarian ranks. The hopeful Westminster Eeviewers, whUe they worked in the interest of the masses, directed their arguments to the middle classes, who they trusted might understand them. The triumph of the Eeform Bill really left them stranded. The whigs repudiated the too outspoken left wing as wild and visionary ; the people, who looked with impatience for the natural benefits of the bill, viewed with anger the adoption of the new poor law. One by one the small band dwindled. Genuine utilitarians ceased to be radicals. George Comewall Lewis became a whig ; John Austin made his palinode in the ' Plea for the Constitution ; ' even Grote withdrew from parliament to nourish his faith in democracy on the study of an antique model. The younger Mill's sympathies and tenets were and remained painfully distracted. His sensitive temperament felt, probably more acutely than the rest, the brataUty, ignorance, and unreason of the mob. He learned that the diffusion of science must at any rate be painfully tedious. Yet he continued to give his vote, as heartily as the blindest enthusiast, for measures which established democracy. He had put his hand to the plough, and he ploughed his furrow straight, but he could not keep looking back and around with curious questionings. He had, it would seem — though this finds little direct expression in his writings— a hidden faith in democracy. Certainly the conviction of the perplexing and mysterious relations of social phenomena and social growth grew on him with years. The vein of mysticism in him, which Carlyle had discovered, showed itself first in a profound faith in the indispensable hero, and ultimately 1902 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 389 perhaps in a belief — hard to formulate — in the will of the people. Somehow Mr. Stephen, throughout the volume devoted to him, never seems quite willing enough to admit how far J. S. Mill travelled in his exodus from utilitarian orthodoxy. Mr. Stephen's final criticism on him and the whole utilitarian school is founded on their ' general conception, which recognises nothing but the individual as an ultimate unit, though capable of combining and grouping in various ways ' (iii. 242). This is strictly true of Bentham ; strictly true of James Mill ; hardly true at all of John Stuart Mill. If the last never quite attained Mr. Stephen's own critical attitude he was within measurable distance of it, would have sympathetically appreciated it, and probably have passed upon it a salutary criticism. This is not the place to attempt an adequate examination of Mill's philosophical position, but a reference to the tract on ' Liberty ' may serve to illustrate the writer's thesis. Here at any rate Mill avows himself an individualist and pleads the cause of individualism. Here then Mill might seem to be defending the obsolescent tenets of the school from which he was descended. Liberty to the earlier utilitarians was not an object of worship, but simply valued as a means to an end — the greatest happiness of the greatest number. Liberty connotes pleasure ; interference with liberty gives pain. Therefore, without sufficient reason to the contrary, leave people alone. Economic liberty can be shown to be the essential condition of the maximum production' of wealth : so thought Adam Smith. Intel- lectual liberty is the necessary condition of scientific progress : so argued Buckle. Eeligious liberty is the necessary condition of honesty, truth- seeking, and political prosperity. Political liberty — the franchise — is the necessary condition of sweet and wholesome government. But to Mill none of these arguments went to the root of the matter. The value of liberty is not to be estimated by any external or material result, but by its work in the soul of man. Without liberty there can be no individu- ality, no character. It is the spiritual, not the material aspect of civilis- ation which appeals to Mill. Buckle asks for an accumulation of truths, Mill that they shall be operant. A belief must be quick and quivering to satisfy him ; a dead faith is a narcotic to the conscience and becomes a positive nuisance when embodied in institutions. Thus then indivi- dualism is not the starting point of Mill's speculation, but its goal. To the bottom of his heart he was an individualist, but the assumption of an abstract constant individual as the basis of his speculation comes to have singularly little significance. What, asks Mr. Stephen, was the true significance of the utihtarian paradox — the indifference to history combined with the appeal to experi- ence ? The very statement of the paradox provokes a train of reflexion and inquiry which the writer has stimulated rather than satisfied. In spite of much valuable and suggestive criticism the changing attitude of the utilitarians to history is neither consistently nor adequately worked out. Bentham's, indeed, is easy to understand. His taste for the logical disposition of consequences left him no time or ambition for research into the past. He profoundly distrusted the historian, who was usually engaged in the defence of a sinister interest. The antiquarian temper was always languid in the pursuit of reform, and the appeal to history 390 REVIEWS OF BOOKS April was usually the resort of the ohscurantist — a Paley, a Burke, or a Black- stone. A wise man will indeed find profit in the study, but ' it is from the folly, not from the wisdom, of our ancestors that we have so much to learn.' Of a philosophy of history Bentham never dreamt ; to James Mill the need was a fundamental one. An equally vigorous and much profounder thinker, his education had been very different from Bentham's. From the belief in the essential constancy and plasticity of human nature he had gone on to discover the value of the close study of history — not for its own sake, but as it reveals and verifies the working or the frustration of those laws on which the progress of humanity depends. The crude essays of Godwin and Condorcet set Malthus, Mill, and Eicardo on a more rigorous investigation by a more scientific method. When Mill made Bentham's acquaintance he was already engaged on his ' History of British India.' Mr. Stephen does not know what were the reasons which prompted the selection of a subject of which he could have no first-hand knowledge. But surely it is a highly probable conjecture that the task was suggested by a passage in the ' Trait^s de la Legisla- tion.' ^ Bentham, one sees, was always obsessed with the idea of legis- lating for India.' James Mill was in search of a theory of civilisation, and his ' History of British India ' is an attempt to define through the medium of a particular instance the conception of civilisation and pro- gress. The fundamental thesis of the work is to demonstrate that civilisation varies directly and precisely with the recognition and application of the cause of utility. It was designed as a criticg,] history and some- thing more — the authentication of philosophical principles: Mill neither understands nor thinks it necessary to understand the Indian nature. Local experience, philological study have neither use nor attraction for him. Human nature is constant, and calls for no special and local study. Circumstances, however, are all-powerful, and in this case the element of circumstance is a new method of government. Now a government conducted by Englishmen MUl can understand, and is in a fair position to unravel its motives and prejudices. The problem, then, for him reduces itself to this : What has been, and is likely to be, the effect of a series of experiments in government upon Indian raw material carried on by English rulers ? From this point of view it becomes a valuable and instructive utilitarian document, and certainly deserves more than the casual mention Mr. Stephen has deigned to bestow on it. Not Grote but Mill deserves to be singled out as the typical utilitarian historian. Mill was deliberately applying a theory of psychology and government to a striking historical episode. Grote's aim was to display the evolution of the genius of a people. Mill dismissed the Hindu legends with bitter contempt ; ' they present a maze of unnatural fictions, in which a series can by no artifice be traced.' Nor was Grote any more confident as to historical residuum contained in the myths of the Greeks. ' The curtain is the picture.' But Grote lingered over the picture, because he read in it ' the preface and the germ of the positive history and philosophy, the dogmatic theology and the professed romance, which we shall hereafter trace each in its separate development.' It is a familiar criticism that Grote's democratic sympathies and parliamentary experience were invaluable to ' Works, i. 172, ed. Bowring. » gee ibid. x. 292, 482. 1902- REVIEWS OF BOOKS 391 the historian of Athens ; it is not so often recognised that his life-long interest in Greek philosophy was equally responsible for the spirit in ■which he laid down the problems and confronted the data of Greek history. Mr. Stephen, it may be submitted, is not quite happy ia his character- isation of Grote's merits. ' If Grote wrote a model history it was because he thoroughly embodied the utilitarian spirit. His history seems to prove that the utilitarian who was faithful to his most vital principles was especially quaUfied to be a historian.' He stuck close to the facts and studied them exhaustively ; so did James Mill. That is a matter of character and temperament, not of philosophic creed. James Mill did so because he was grimly conscientious, and whatever he did he did thoroughly ; Grote because he was intensely interested in the evidence to boot. ' He resembled an ideal judge investigating evidence in a trial.' That was MiU's claim too ; and Mill perhaps even more nearly attained to the standard he set before himself. He (Grote) resisted the temptation to construct artistic history on the one hand and philosophic history (in the form in which it merges into a philosophy of history) on the other. 'If Grote's history be really such a model it was because he virtually accepted such limitations.' His history was positive, without being positivist ; vigorous, without rhetoric. So far he may have drawn some negative canons of composition from the utilitarian school. But the acceptance of limitations does not constitute a great historian. To know how not to write history is not the only qualification for writing it. A positive purpose is a better guarantee against errors than the soundest prohibitive rules. Grote wrote a history of permanent value, not because he was a disciple of utihtarianism, but because he forgot it ; not because he wished to apply a scientific method and thereby elicit conclusions valuable for example, practice, and prediction, but because, convinced of the debt mankind owed to Greece, he surrendered himself unreservedly to the history of Greece as the progressive revelation of the Greek mind. It was in the choice of his guiding clue to Greek history that the excellence of his performance depended in the first instance ; his massive common sense and knowledge of human nature (these certainly not learnt at the feet of his masters) toned enthusiasm with judgment and propriety ; his utUitarian training, however much responsible for his positive handling of material, was hardly calculated to foster historical insight. The typical utilitarian, as Mr. Leslie Stephen has taught us to conceive him, was distinguished by downrightness and concentration, but hardly by sympathy and breadth of view. That Grote as an historian should have succeeded in freeing himself from the cramping influence of his creed is hardly to be accepted as proof ' that he thoroughly embodied the utili- tarian spirit.' W. G. Pogson Smith. M6moires du G6n&ral Baron de Dedem de Gelder (1774-1825). (Paris: Plon. 1900.) The subject of these memoirs, who was born in 1774, was son of the Dutch diplomatist who was for twenty-seven years ambassador at Constantinople. He gives us some curious sketches of life of the city where he was brought up. Thus (pp. 58-9) he describes the Greek 392 REVIEWS OF BOOKS April population as ' intellectual, amiable, but turbulent, false, supple, insolent, and superstitious,' and, while pitying their slavish lot, he believed that they entirely needed the treatment they received ; for they abused the least sign of lenience. As for the Armenians, they were better speculators and less turbulent. After a brief mission to Egypt, where he saw Murad Bey, and other travels, he returned to Holland. There he found French influence uppermost, and (writing after 1815) remarks — La revolution de HoUande en 1795 ne m'a point plu, sirrtout paxce qu'elle etait operee par des etrangers, et j'avais alors deji assez d'experience politique pour savoir d'avance que les Fran^ais nous feraient payer cher cette pretendue delivrance. He admits, however, that ambition led him to enter their employment, and then falls back on the platitudes, common at the time of the Eestoration, that any constitution is good provided that you can make it work ; he also quotes with approval the mot of Cardinal Maury, uttered in Napoleon's salon, that the worst thing about the old royalty was the kings. The value of the memoirs is impaired not only by the lateness of their composition but by their incompleteness ; there is a huge lacuna for the years 1793-1808, which of itself is suspicious. The editor fills in this period by a few notes taken from Dedem's papers, whence we see that he threw in his lot wholly with the repubhcans, and was employed by them on a mission to Paris. After taking an active part against the Anglo-Eussian forces in 1799 he entered the Dutch diplomatic service and undertook various missions, finally to King Jerome Bonaparte. He describes him as having beaucoup d'esprit natural, peu d'instmction, de I'entetement et de la violence, avec une conception facile et une grande perspicacite. II saisissait a merveiUe tous les cotes d'une affaire quand il voulait se donner la peine de s'en occuper, ce &, quoi sa paresse naturelle lui donnait une grande aversion. Les ministres qui lui resistaient etaient disgracies. II imaginait que sa volonte devait ©tre la loi supreme, et U me dit iin jour, en me parlant d'une loi de finances, dont il reconnaissait les suites funestes pour le credit public : ' J'aime mieux perdre deux miUions que de revenir sur un de mes decrets.' H craignait I'empereur Xapoleon. We then foUow Dedem to Murat's court at Naples, and catch a rather novel gUmpse of the jealous anxiety which the king felt lest men should say that he gained the Neapolitan crown because he had married Napoleon's sister. As soon as this was known there arose two parties at court, the king's and the queen's, with mutual exasperation. Incidentally Dedem pays a rather exaggerated tribute to Salicetti, and equally hotly decries Joseph Bonaparte and his ' friend,' Eoederer. The latter was certainly not the inept creature that Dedem paints him. In his reference to the defence of Capri by Colonel Hudson Lowe, Dedem is fairer to that officer than many of his own countrymen have been, and admits that he had a great inferiority of force (pp. 173-4) ; he, however, underrates the numbers on both sides. Lowe's garrison was not 800 but 1,862 ; the assailants were not 2,000 but about 8,000. Eeturning to the north of Europe, Dedem witnessed the annexation of Holland and the events that made for war with Eussia. He here figures 1902 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 893 as the would-be moderator of fatuous guides like the due de Bassano, to whom he ascribes the saying that Eussia must follow the continental system to its extremity and allow France to place her douaniers at Bevel and Cronstadt, and that he would tell Nesselrode as much. We beg leave to doubt whether even Bassano would have said anything of the sort. In the ensuing war Dedem served as brigadier-general under Davout and Friant. His descriptions vary in value ; at best they are those of an in- telligent witness of the subsidiary movements. Thus he admits that at Yalutina (Lubino) the Russian position should have been turned, not forced, and that the French loss was very heavy, owing to the temerity of Murat ; but he assigns to Napoleon none of the blame which is justly his over that affair. At his worst, Dedem is the grossest of blunderers. Thus in his account of Borodino he makes the emperor at the beginning sit sur les ruines de la grande redoute. Now every one knows that that redoubt was taken only after long and desperate fighting, and that its ■capture virtually decided the day. Bausset's memoirs show that Napo- leon took his stand near a small redoubt which had been taken from the Eussians the evening before. Dedem also gives the ridiculous story of Napoleon repeatedly fondling the portrait of the king of Eome and refus- ing to pay attention to the battle. This story, in its various contradictory forms, together with Segur's dithyrambic account of Napoleon's illness, pro- bably represents nothing more tangible than the resentment of the soldiery at Napoleon's withholding his guard — a caution which Clausewitz has fully justified. Dedem's statement that, had Napoleon put in the young guard, it would have been all over with the Eussians, sufficiently shows the worth of his mihtary judgments. Equally reckless are his assertions on political affairs — e.g. (p. 257) that it was Davout who had decided Napoleon to press on to Moscow, in the hope that he (Davout), or Murat, would become king of Poland. Then again (p. 273) he declares that Alexander really did wish to arrange terms of peace with Napoleon at Moscow, but that his will counted for little compared with that of Bernadotte, Stein, Madame de Stael, the ambition of Kutusoff ' and Panin, and the haughti- ness of certain Eussian nobles soutenus et alimenUs par Vor de V Angleterre. Indeed, assumptions are constantly made to figure as facts. In referring to the retreat from Moscow Dedem states (p. 264) that Napoleon foresaw that he would deliver battle at Malojaroslavitz, where the Eussians were known to have thrown up earthworks. But Napoleon's movements were directed to the task of keeping the enemy on the more northerly road, while he made a dash sideways and southwards at that town ; we need hardly add that there were no earthworks, and that if there had been Napoleon would have adopted any expedient, on his retreat, rather than fight a pitched battle there. There are a few new details in Dedem's account of the retreat, such as his description of Napoleon bearing him- self like a chess-player, who saw that the game was lost but held himself back for another ; or the carelessness of the French in not rough- shoeing their horses, as the Poles did ; or the lax discipline of the French officers when contrasted with those of the German contingents. On these last points Dedem supplies a much needed corrective to Thiers ' Yet on p. 284 Dedem writes, ' Kutusof tenait au systeme d'alliance entre la France et ]a Eussie.' 394 REVIEWS OF BOOKS April and Marbot, the latter of whom compares the French troops with rich wine and the foreigners with water. We have no space for an adequate notice of Dedem's account of the later campaigns, He rightly remarks that if, after Bautzen, Napoleon had come to terms with his foes he would have been received in France like a god. He, however, repeats the popular but wholly mistaken story that Jomiai, on his desertion, took over with him Napoleon's plan of operations ; he also ascribes to Xey (p. 336) the defeat of Gross-Beeren by mistake for Dennewitz, and says (p. 888) that Napoleon showed a fatal irresolution after the afEair of Kuim — ' il etait revenu a Dresde apres avoir vu de ses yeux la defaite de Vandamme ' ! Again, he asserts (p. 404, note) that Alexander, on hearing of Napoleon's landing ia 1815, said, II a raison. Pourquoi veut-on qu'il tienne sa parole, puisqu'on ne la tient pas eiivers lui ? On ne le paye point ; and (p. 406) that England in all probabUity allowed Xapoleon to escape from Elba in order to cause civil war in France and further weaken her. We know now that Alexander- made no such remark, and that the creduhty of the French Bourbon cruisers was no less at fault than the laxness of Sir Neil Campbell and of the captain of H.M.S. ! Partridge.' We have said enough to show the untrustworthiness of these memoirs : they are the belated reminiscences of a man who describes himself {ad init.) as bold, dashing, and in- dependent. It is clear that these qualities impaired his success as a diplo- matist. Had he been early trained to arms he might, perhaps, have figured as a lesser Murat or Junot. As it was, the change in his career came too late to carry him above subordinate positions, in which his fougueux temperament chafed his superiors. Above all it is clear that such a man should not have trusted his faded impressions for the drafting of historical sketches, which, as often as not, came out as blurred and distorted caricatures. J. Hollaud Eose. ThA History of the Part of West Somerset comprising the Parishes of Luccombe, Selworthy, Stoke Pero, Culbone, and Dare. By Chables E. H. Chadwyck Healey, E.G., F.S.A. (London : Sotheran. 1901.) Local history is unfortunately seldom written by so capable a man as Mr. Chadwyck Healey. The labour of such work as his has no adequate reward save that which comes from the work itself. Yet that reward is great to one who loves the land he writes of, and who understands the value of his Luvestigations as adding to the store of materials for the con- struction of a history of the life of the nation. Such reward at least the writer of this volume must certainly have received. He has chosen for his field of labour the part of Somerset in which he has made his home, a district of rare beauty, lying between Minehead and the border of Devon, between Dunkery Beacon and the Bristol Channel, and he has brought to his work a scholarly mind, accustomed to sift evidence and thoroughly exercised in legal matters ; he has prosecuted it with diligence and has presented its results in a very readable form. Nothing has been accepted without indisputable authority, and his foot-notes contain countless references to patent and close rolls, inquisitions post mortem, fines, wills, and other original documents. In an introductory chapter he 1902 REVIEWS OF BOOKS S9'6 deals with the history ot the district generally, and among other matters makes some noteworthy remarks on the decay of manorial courts and customs, the irregular method of assessment to subsidies, and the extent to which means of worship were diminished during the Reformation period. In pre- Reformation times there were numerous chapels in the diskict, and of these only two now remain as places of worship. Towards the end of the eighteenth century a labourer's wages were a shilling a day, with beer, though even then much work was done by contract and brought in more money. With these wages a labourer was not badly off for food, for the best meat was sold at 3^d. to id. a pound ; but fuel, both coal and wood, was scarce and dear. His condition was bettered by the existence of other village industries besides agriculture, such as cloth-making and tanning. His dwelUng was less comfortable than in these days, and Mr. Chadwyck Healey, who notes the peculiar characteristics of the cottage architecture of the west country, complains with reason that landlords in making necessary improvements in their cottages have too often ruthlessly destroyed their distinctive and beautiful features. The book contains much family history arranged under the manors or other estates in his six parishes. The family of Arundell of Trerice, which for many generations held the manor of East Lucpombe, was represented in 1534 by John Arundell, a hard man, if we may judge by his dealings with one of his neighbours, Walter Steynings, of Holnicote, in the parish of Selworthy, whom he caused to be imprisoned for debt. Some letters which Steynings and his wife wrote to Cromwell and others, seeking help from the king, are not without interest. The debt was 84Z., and after Steynings had been imprisoned for some six months in the Compter, a ' place meeter to shorten life than to preserve it,' his wife wrote to her aunt. Lady Lisle, ' Lying in prison and rewards to people to speak to Cromwell and expenses in prison have cost more than 100^.' Another ot the family was John Arundell, who so gallantly held Pendennis Castle for Charles I ; his elder son joined Sir Nicholas Slanning in raising troops for the king, and his daughter was the wife of John Trevanion, who fell at the attack on Bristol in 1643. Colonel Arundell died before the Restoration, and his son Richard was created Baron Arundell of Trerice by Charles II. The principal event in the history of the manor of West Luccombe is a violent quarrel of the time of Queen Elizabeth which was carried on at once in the court of chancery and on the spot, with swords and bucklers, one ' Ned the Fencer ' and other professional fighting men being imported into the district for the purpose. Some blood was shed, though no lives were lost. The plaintiff in the suit, one Bowyer, ' a common barrator & of longetyme a very sedycyous, unquiet, quarrellous, and troblesome parsonne, a great molester, vexer, disquyeter, & trobler of his neighbors & the in- habitauntes dwellynge nighe aboute hym by wrongfulle & uniuste sutes & vexacious in tbe lawe without juste cause,' sought the pro- tection of the queen through the Court of Star Chamber. At Porlock the manor came by marriage to one of the Mohuns of Dunster, who not long afterwards, in 1332, was murdered by John de Luccombe, apparently by the contrivance of his wife and her mother ; it was a mysterious affair on which some new light has been thrpwi} here. In the fifteenth century the 396 REVIEWS OF BOOKS April manor passed to the third Lord Harington, and descended to the wealthy heiress Cecily, Baroness Bonvile and Harington, who married Thomas Grey, first marquis of Dorset, and was the great-grandmother of Lady Jane Grey. The accounts of the bailiff of the manor during four years between 1419 and 1426 afford some valuable illustrations of economic matters. Mr. Chadwyck Healey has, I think, made a mistake in not giving his readers an account of Sel worthy Church, a very interesting building, as may be guessed from the pretty engraving of it here, and there is much inside also which calls for remark. The history of the parish has, he observes, lately been written by a former rector, and, as he sees no good in going over the same ground again, he has only tried to supple- ment what has already been printed. A book of this importance, however, should have been made complete, for it may fairly be expected to remain accessible in many libraries when a smaller book, however good it may be, on & single parish, will probably have become scarce. Of the other churches in his district he tells us much. At Porlock, where the church certainly stood in sore need of repair, it is unfortunate that a late restoration should have altered the external effect of a re- markable feature, the Uttle quadrangular building of the fifteenth century attached to the east wall of the chancel. The purpose of the building is not clear, but Mr. Chadwyck Healey is probably right in speaking of it as 'the priest's vestry.' The foundation deed of the Harington chantry, which made provision for two chaplains, an assistant clerk, and two bedemen, is for the first time printed here, and from it Mr. Chadwyck Healey has been able to confirm the opinion of the late Mrs. Halliday that the alabaster figures of the fine monument in Porlock Church represent John, fourth Lord Harington, and Elizabeth his wife. At Luccombe and Porlock the parochial registers and other records contain many curious entries, of which he has made good use. Lists of incumbents have been attempted with much success. A few of the clergy were men of some mark. Luccombe Eectory was for a time held by John Bridgwater, rector of Lincoln College, Oxford, who became a Eoman catholic in 1574, and wrote under the name of Aquepontanus. One of his successors was Henry Byam, who raised a party of horse for Charles I, and was with Charles II in exile. The tiny parish of Stoke Pero, which in 1891 contained eleven houses and fifty-five inhabitants, had no incumbent from 1675 to 1604, when the crown presented by lapse. Of its early rectors no one seems to have done anything worthy of record save a certain Robert who, in 1369, was found by a jury to have abducted the wife of a Luccombe man, together with goods of the value of 20L This book is in all respects worthy of the pains which the author has bestowed upon it ; the printing is excellent ; it has a few finely executed portraits, a vast number of engravings, armorial bearings, some of them coloured, maps, plans, and several pedigrees printed on sheets separate from the text. William Hunt. The Archiv fur Papyrusforschimg unci verwandte Gebiete, instituted by Professor Ulrich Wilcken for the promotion of the study of papyri and the hterature which is growing up round them, has amply justified its existence. Its first volume (Leipzig : Teubner, 1900-1), containing 572 1902 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 397 pages and issued in three (nominally four) parts, has appeared in the course of eighteen months, and is full of useful matter, not only for the student of papyri, but for workers in the various spheres — history, law, economics, linguistics, palaeography, numismatics, literature — upon which the papyri touch. Perhaps it is even more for this latter class that such a periodical is useful than for those who are bound in any case to keep au courant with all publications relating to papyri, since they are enabled to see readily whether anything has come to light which affects their own province. This purpose is served by the admirable bibliographies which appear in each part, in which Christian texts are described by C. Schmidt, other literary texts by W. Cronert, and non-literary documents by Wilcken. These bibliographies, which are often of the nature of reviews, begin with 1898 ; for previous publications the student can refer to the excellent articles by P. Viereck in the Jahrcsbericht ilber die Fortschritte der classischen Alterthumsivissenschaft in 1898 and 1899. By the aid of these laborious compilations the student can easily learn what is going forward in this domain of active discovery. Of strictly historical matter there is not much in the present volume. A. Bauer discusses three papyri which narrate trials of persons (some Greeks, others Jews) before the emperors, regarding them as pagan acta martyrum, analogous to the early Christian acta of the same description. H. Willrich publishes an inscription at Berlin containing a decree in honour of Chelkias, the Jewish general of Cleopatra, mother of Ptolemy Lathyrus, and discusses in connexion with it the status of Jews in Ptolemaic Egypt. Strack edits a number of Ptolemaic inscriptions from various sources, as a contribu- tion to a future ' Corpus ' of such inscriptions. Mommsen contributes a discussion of Egyptian numismatics, but our materials are still inadequate for positive conclusions on several of the most important points. The next volume of the Egypt Exploration Fund, to be published by Drs. Grenfell and Hunt, is likely to add considerably to our knowledge in this respect. Wilcken edits some papyrus fragments of Polybius, now at Berlin, of the beginning of the third century, containing portions of the eleventh book, and also discusses the evidence for the continuance of the cult of Isis at Philae after the general establishment of Christianity in Egypt. Procopius states definitely that it lasted until his own day ; on the other hand Wilcken shows (from the Leyden Papyrus Z) that Christian churches existed on the island in a.d. 425-50. Consequently the two religions must have existed side by side for at least a century, the tolerance of the heathen cult being presumably a political step to conciliate the border peoples of Nubia. He also publishes a papyrus from Oxyrhynchus, dated A.D. 426, in which TrayaviKoi cruiTeAtiai, Or heathen clubs, are mentioned as still existing, with some other documents bearing upon the religious history of Christian Egypt. The contributions to history furnished by papyri are chiefly indirect. Only here and there do we get express historical records ; but a continually increasing multitude of small data is bein" brought to light, which the historian must co-ordinate and build up into a picture of social and economic life in Ptolemaic and imperial Egypt, just as elsewhere he must use inscriptions for the same object. Law is more directly provided for by the existence of a large number of legal texts ; and various aspects of these are dealt with in the Archiv by Reviews of books April Mitteis, Gradenwitz, Collinet and Jouguet, Naber, Muller, and Stein. Palaeography is represented chiefly by portions of Wileken's bibliographical articles which deal with publications by the writer of this notice. Literary texts are few, but unfortunately literary texts bear but a small proportion to the total number of papyri which have come to light. As a whole the volume is one which every student of ancient history or literature whose work may be aifected by the products of Egyptian excavations should have accessible to him, either in his own study or in a neighbouring library. F. G. K. The Bollandist fathers are to be congratulated on the completion of their important Bibliotheca Hagiographica Latina Antiquae et Mediae Aetatis (Brussels : 14 Rue des Ursulines, 1898-1901), of which the first fasciculus was noticed in this Review at the time of its appearance (vol. xiv. p. 189). The book is distinguished from the catalogue of Lives of saints in Potthast's ' Bibliotheca Historica Medii Aevi ' by its limitation to Latin works written earlier than the sixteenth century, though of course modem editions and explanatory monographs are included, and by its omission, as a rule, of lists of the manuscripts of any particular Life. On the other hand it includes — a most valuable feature — the incipit and desinit of each work, and it attempts, as far as possible, to arrange the various Lives of the same saint in proper order, according to the time of composition and the dependence of one upon another. The entire number of articles is 9,028, and when it is remembered how large a proportion of the saints commemorated have been the subject of several biographies it is possible to form some conception of the magnitude of the task now successfully brought to accomphshment in the moderate com- pass of a little more than 1,400 pages. E. Dr. Vilhelm Godel's catalogue of the old Icelandic and old Norwegian manuscripts in the Royal Library at Stockholm, Eatalog ofver kongl. Bib- liotehets fornislandsha och fornnorsha handskrifter (Stockholm : Norstedt, 1897-1900), contains particulars of a number of valuable documents which are further described in another work of the editor on Old Nor- wegian and Icelandic Literature in Sweden {Fornnorsk-isld7idsk Litte- ratur i Sverige ; Stockholm, 1897). The method and execution of the present catalogue are admirable ; hardly anything relevant appears to have been left out, and everything admitted is efl^ective and useful. There does not appear to be much in the collection that has not been used by scholars. The texts of the laws, the saints' lives, the very old (twelfth-century) book of Icelandic homilies, the Norwegian versions of French romance, have all been studied and made accessible, and the catalogue, ha. its notes on printed editions, is a testimony to the dihgence of students such as Rask, Munch, Unger, Vigfusson, Wisen, Cederschiold, Storm, Gering, and many more. The name of Svend Grundtvig ought to 'have been mentioned in connexion with the Icelandic ballads of the paper MS. (fol. nr. 57) which was used for the edition of ballads published by the Nordiske Litteratur-Samfund, 18S4-1885. Omissions such as this are, however, not easy to find. Among the chief imprinted matters in the Stockholm Library are the large stock of Bimur, described by Kolbing 1S02 REVIEWS OE BOOKS 399 and J6n Thorkelsson, and a number of miscellaneous articles. No library is without its sorrows ; and there is at least one painful sentence in this description, noting the absence of part of the ' Heath-Slayings ' narrative, an Icelandic saga, of which a section was lent to Copenhagen and perished there in the fire of 1728. The contents of the missing pages are only imperfectly known ; there was no complete transcript, and though an attentive reader who remembered much of it was able to write down the substance, that does not make up for the loss. Dr. Godel's list, though not discursive, is full in its details, and, apart from its obvious use to those who go to the Library for research, contains much information for more general readers. W. P. K. The latest instalment of Dr. H. F. Helmolt's Weltgeschichte, now before us, is the second part of the third volume (Leipzig : Biblio- graphisches Institut, 1901), and consists of two sections — ' Africa,' by Dr. Heinrich Schurtz, and ' Egypt,' by Karl Niebuhr. The section on Africa gives an account of a good many of the aboriginal races of Africa, with abundant and most interesting illustrations of African art and very useful maps. It traces, as far as possible, the history and movements of these races before the advent of Europeans into the ' Dark Continent,' and narrates briefly the progress of colonists of all nations in establishing protectorates and dominions, down to the present day. In treating of Egypt Mr. Niebuhr brings to his task a practical familiarity with monuments and inscriptions and an acquaintance with the views of many recent explorers. Especially to be noted are his translations of many inscriptions which throw light on the religious and ethical ideas of the peoples of the early dynasties. As his task requires him to go down to July 1901, it is necessary that some portions of Egyptian history should be left untouched. Thus the Egypt of the great Alexandrian patriarchate, the home of monasticism and the hot-bed of sectaries, is almost crowded out of the picture. We have also received the first volume of the English translation of the work {Tki World's History. London : Heinemann, 1901), with a very interesting introduction by Mr. James Bryce. In this intro- duction a good case is made out for the study of universal history. One of the arguments, however, by which Mr. Bryce would advocate such study at the present day —the vast increase in the material at the historian's disposal — might seem to tend in the opposite direction. For when we have masses of undigested material to deal with, the historian, who cannot be a specialist all round, is more or less at the mercy of the ' man of views,' as is shown on more than one occasion in this great work. Even the most general outlines have had to be traced and retraced in the light of the new theories which new discoveries must ever call forth. The fact that our partial or national histories are apt to leave out of sight the less important peoples and states gives us certainly a good reason for taking wide surveys, though it is difficult to see how stationary races, or such as are quite incapable of civilisation, can be in- cluded within the scope of history, except in so far as they help to form the background of the stage whereon the more progressive peoples play their part. Mr. Bryce forcibly deprecates the notion that a universal or 400 REVIEWS OF BOOKS April scientific conception of history is a new invention or an importation from natural science. Most of what is true and helpful m that doctrine [of evolution] was known- long ago, and applied long ago by historical and political thinlcers. You can find it in Aristotle, perhaps before Aristotle. . . . The influence of the natural sciences on histoey is rather to be traced in the efforts we now see to accumu- late a vast mass of facts relating to the social, economic, and political life of man, for the sake of discovering general laws running through them and imparting to them order and unity. Although the most philosophic and diligent historians have always aimed at and striven for this, still the general diffusion of the method in our time, and the greatly increased scale on which it is applied, together with the higher standard of accuracy which is exacted by the opinion of competent judges, may be in some measure ascribed to the example which those who work in the spheres of physics and biology and natural history have so effectively set. ' Since a universal history will generally take a special line, .which shall give prominence to some one leading idea or principle,' and the principle chosen by Dr. Helmolt and his colleagues is the relation of man to his physical environment, Mr. Bryce goes on to make some very suggestive remarks on this subject, somewhat after the fashion of Buckle, though, of course, marked by insight superior to that of Buckle, into the complexity of historical problems, and consequently a greater unwillingness to con- fide in broad generalisations. ' The doctrine of a steady law of progress is one to which no historian ought to commit himself.' But quotations are superfluous when so suggestive and temperate an inquiry into the subject of universal history can be read in so perspicuously and pleasant a form. A. G. Professor Theodor Lindner's Weltgeschiohte seit der Volherwanderung, of which the first volume is now before us (Stuttgart : J. G. Gotta, 1901), differs in several respects from that edited by Dr. Helmolt. In the first place it does not attempt to comprise all peoples. Eine Weltgeschiohte kann und soil nicht eine Geschichto der gesamten Mensohheit sein. Denn es hat bisher nie eine Einheit der Menschen gegeben, und viele der jetzt lebenden Volker sind an sioh nicht ungeschichtlioh, aber historisch unwirkbar. True this volume gives sketches of the early history of China and of India, but these have their place, by reason of the influence which in later times the lands of the far east came to exercise on the world generally, as well as of the contrasts they afford to western lines of pro- gress. In the second place it is the work of one hand, and therefore more coherent in plan than the other. Thirdly, it lays more stress on political and social and less on physical conditions, following a natural order of development. Fourthly, it leaves out the history of the ancient world, as a leaf torn out of the book of human progress, of which it contains merely the introduction. And, fifthly, it gives a hst of the best modern books on each subject, for the direction of the reader in further studies. On the whole the outline is drawn clearly and surely. A good many series of events in states, churches, and societies are shown in their mutual relations, without a congestion of details. The author seems most 1902 IIEVIEWS OF BOOKS 401 at home in treating of the early Franks and of the Byzantine empire. Considering that he is obliged to make a good many general statements, his caution is admirable. If he believes a good deal in consciousness of ethnic difficulties and in the ' individualismus ' of the barbaric Germans, and if he retains some discarded hypotheses as to the early English, he does not offend us by over- confidence nor emphasise unduly any one aspect of things. This volume takes us down from the reforms of Diocletian to the reign of Charles the Bald and to the conquest of Sicily by the Saracens. The chapter on China includes an account of Con- fucianism and that on India a sketch of Buddhism. A. G. Mr. Owen M. Edwards's Wales (' The Story of the Nations.' London : Fisher Unwin, 1901) claims with reason to be the first attempt at writing a popular history of Wales on anything approaching modern lines. In carrying out this work Mr. Edwards has the advantage of a good literary style, which, if sometimes a little too highly and monotonously strung, rises in the more imaginative parts of the book to a distinctly high level. He also has the merits of enthusiasm for his subject, acquaintance with Welsh literature, and intimate knowledge of the Wales of the present day. His historical equipment is less conspicuously complete, though his grasp of the broad general lines of development of both English and Welsh history has proved of signal service to him in co-ordinating his facts and avoiding frequent or serious error. But his special knowledge of Welsh history seems, to put it frankly, rather that of a capable populariser than that of a well- equipped scholar. It would hardly be necessary to emphasise this in a professedly popular work, save that Mr. Edwards in his preface speaks rather grandly about ' monastic annalists ' and even refers to the ' invaluable guidance afforded by Mr. Gwenogvryn Evans's transcripts and catalogues to the vast mass of unpublished material.' Mr. Edwards has no doubt dipped a little into his ' monastic annalists,' but it would be hard to discover many details of his work which are derived from manu- script sources. In truth the mass of Mr. Edwards's facts come from quite ordinary books. What these are we are nowhere told, but the instructed reader can very easily guess. Sometimes Mr. Edwards's details are wanting in scholarly precision, but for the most part they are accurate enough for his purpose. More serious blemishes of the work are the tendency towards unsatisfying generalisations and strangely ill-balanced judgments. We get weary of cheap though eloquent dicta about race, soil, nationality, mountains, the Celtic spirit, and the contrast of bard and friar. We resent even more the want of proportion that hurries over the history both of the early Celtic and of the medieval church, and rashly glorifies a Robert of Belleme and an Edward II, while slurring over with vague phrases most of the more difficult problems of the subject. In particular we regret the want of detail and method shown in treating that part of the subject which is later than the early Tudors. In short the spirit of the book is hardly that of calm history, while the useful work of popularising an imperfectly known field would have been better done by a writer who himself gave some evidence of original investigation in, at any rate, some sections of the subject on which he does not fail to dogmatise. But, though disappointing in several directions, Mr. Edwards VOL. XVII. NO. LXVI. D D 402 HEVIEWS op hOOKS April has accomplisted a task that was worth doing, in such a fashion that his book will probably be widely read. T. F. T. A Popular History of the Ancient Britons, or the Welsh People, by the Eev. John Evans, B.A. (London : Elliot Stock, 1901), is a work of considerable labour, and deserves commendation for the pains which the writer has clearly bestowed upon it, and also for its kindly, tolerant, and fair spirit. But it is from beginning to end curiously uncritical, and would have obtained a better chance of a hearing if it had been published fifty years ago. Mr. Evans tells us that he ' had not heard of any other work in preparation by other writers before he had finished his own work ; otherwise he might not have entered upon his task.' He will foi|;ive us for saying that it would have been better if his book had never seen the light, though it is only fair to add that he has succeeded in avoiding many of the grosser forms of error. T. F. T. Professor E. C. Maclaurin's essay On the Nature and Evidence of Title to Realty (Cambridge: University Press, 1901) opens with seven historical chapters. The history which they contain is taken from well-known sources, and is, on the whole, accurate. We notice, however (p. 15), a passage which looks as though our author still clung to the exploded theory of the universality of royal justice in the early middle ages. It seems also rather odd to describe the feodum as ' essentially a heritable estate ' (p. 46). That it became heritable is not to be denied ; but that it was originally or naturally heritable few historians would care to argue. We are glad that Mr. Maclaurin has not confined himself to printed evidence. On pp. 101-105 we presume he has been at work amongst the King's College muniments. But it would have been better to say so in express terms. Professional lawyers will be disposed to criticise more severely certain passages in which the writer appears to have failed to see the real point of a legal issue. Thus, ' folkland ' and ' bookland ' are treated (p. 15) as though they were geographically distinct areas. Again, Mr. Maclaurin insists, quite properly, upon the importance of seisin as a root of title. But when he quotes, in support of his proposition, cases which, on examination, turn out to be simply disputes about seisin, he does not (as it seems to us) do more than prove the extreme importance, in dealing with a formulary system, of observing the formulce. To show (pp. 77-8) that a plaintiff in an assise of novel disseisin could not succeed without proving seisin is not to prove that he could not have succeeded by some other form of action. The summary of the famous ' Quia Emptores ' statute (p. 109) is gravely defective. Mr. Maclaurin treats it purely as a r«straining Act, apparently forgetting that it put an end for ever to a legal question of the utmost importance by sanctioning freedom of alienation. We should have liked (on p. 113) to see a little clearer recognition of the distinction between a common law and a statutory Fine ; and we take leave to question whether Bracton ever endowed a widow with one-third of the freehold of which the husband was seised on the day of espousal (p. 128). Moreover Mr. Maclaurin should not say that a ' deed of grant is now by far the most important means of convey- 1^02 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 403 ance of land inter vivos,' for his own chosen illustration (p. 232), as well as the forms in any good book of precedents, would show him that the statement is incorrect. A similar instance of carelessness occurs somewhat later, where Mr. Maclaurin asserts that the motive of a tenant for life in effecting a sale (under the Settled Land Acts) is immaterial (p. 286). He should have added, ' if its existence is not known to the purchaser,' according to ' Chandler v. Bradley ' (1897, 1 Ch. 315). The gravest fault, however, of the book is the unnecessary repetition caused by the method of the last two chapters. In chapter viii. the legislation of the Victorian era is treated ' historically.' In chapter ix. its effect is stated in analytical form. At the end of the analytical account appears a sketch of the ' principal changes since the last period within the domain of equity.' The result is that the reader has to do his work three times over, on each occasion feeling that he gets only a part of what is due to him. No doubt it would have been more difficult for Mr. Maclaurin to put his materials together than to leave them lying about ; but his readers would have been thankful if he had sacrificed himself rather than them. F. In his paper on Wales and the Coming of the Normans (1089-1093), read before the Honourable Society of Cymmrodorion, and printed in its Transactions (session 1899-1900, pp. 188-789), Professor J. E. Lloyd, of Bangor, gives a clear, scholarly, and careful account of the course of Welsh history during the period that immediately preceded and that which followed the conquest of England by William I, in which he lays special emphasis on the importance of the reign of Gruffydd ap Llywelyn and the anomalous fact that during the first twenty years of the Con- quest the Normans, while making considerable progress with the conquest of North Wales, failed to make much impression upon the south, a state of things which was afterwards completely reversed. Special praise should be given to the care with which Professor Lloyd has printed in parallel columns the two texts of the Latin ' Annales Cambriae,' which were denominated B and C respectively by Ab Ithel, the editor of the Rolls Series edition. This most useful piece of work worthily sup- plements the excellent edition of the older A text, which Mr. Egerton Phillimore published several years ago in the Cymmrodorion Transac- tions [Y Cymmrodor, xi. 142-8]. Until we get the whole of these texts edited separately we shall never know where we are in studying Welsh history. It is a pity that Professor Lloyd's scheme only includes the annals of the years with which his paper is concerned. He would be doing a good service were he to continue his editorial work still further. It is time that we had done with the uncritical jumble of the Rolls editor. T. F. T. The English Commentary on Dante's ' Divina Gommedia,' by the Rev. H. F. Tozer (Oxford : Clarendon Press, 1901), is specially to be com- mended, because, unlike, we think, all other English commentaries, it is not attached to any particular text or version. It does not, indeed, aim at originality, but it is throughout sober and scholarly. The pains taken by 404 REVIEWS OF BOOKS April the author in tracing the sources of Dante's facts and references make the book particularly serviceable to students of history and of the history of learning and ideas. G. Dr. Paget Toynbee's Dante Studies Mid Besearches (London : Methuen, 1902) consist of a collection of articles and notes published in English and foreign periodicals. Compensation is made for the inevitable lack of unity by an invaluable index of the passages quoted or referred to, and the volume may therefore serve as a running commentary for any one who may be reading the ' Commedia,' the ' Convito,' or the 'De Vulgari Eloquentia.' The notes which will chiefly appeal to the historian pur sang are those on II Ee Giovane/ Tartar Cloths,^ II Vecchio Alardo,^ II semplice Lombardo/ Guizzante or Wissant,' the use of Trinacria for SicUy,^ the claim of the count of Anjou to Jerusalem/ Hugh Capet in the 'De Monarchia ' and the ' Satyre Menippee,' the identification of Sigieri.* Some of Dr. Toynbee's conclusions may be the subject of argument, but if Dante, Minerva oscura, had always been intelligible he might never have been immortal. The above list excludes most of the longer articles, such as those on Dante and the Lancelot romance, on his obligations to Alfraganus, Albertus Magnus, and Orosius, on Eajna's text of the ■ De Vulgari Eloquentia,' and on Benvenuto's commentary. The most illiterate historian will not, however, waste his time if he accompanies Dr. Toynbee when he escorts Queen Guenever to the meadows full of bushes, or goes a- star-gazing with Alfraganus, for he always takes his historical method with him. Even the writer of text-books may console himself with the thought that his little Weltgeschichte may become, like that of Orosius, one of the sources of undying epic. H. The merits of the Calendars of Close Bolls of the Beign of Edward III, prepared by Mr. A. B. Hinds, have been dealt with so fully in this Eeview that we need do little more than record the appearance of two further volumes, covering the years 1337-9 and 1839-41 respectively (London : H.M. Stationery Office, 1900-1). It is a pity, by the way, that the volumes of these calendars are only numbered by the years they cover. The historian has either to overload his references with figures or leave his readers to find the particular volume from the date in his text, which means some loss of time. For many reigns it is now too late to remedy this omission, but in the case of those whose calendars are not yet published it is well worth consideration whether the volumes ought not to be numbered consecutively in the usual way. We may mention here too that the substitution of two strokes for a date in the second of two successive entries is likely to give trouble. It is natural to conclude that the date is the same as in the preceding entry, but when in other cases documents of identical date following each other both have the date printed in full a doubt arises. The main interest of the present volumes lies, as before, in the light they throw on Edward Ill's finance. The 1 Infemo, xxviii. 135. 2 i^id. xvii. 14-7. ' -f^- xxviii. 18. 1 Purgatorio, xvi. 126. ' Inferm, xv. 4. ' c Paradiso, viii. 67. ' -^^"2- xix. 127. » Hid. X. 136. 1902 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 405 Leopardi appear along with the Bardi and Peruzzi as financial agents of the king. His relations with German merchants are also fully illustrated. Much is learnt about the machinery by which taxation was raised and the crown pre-emption of wool worked. But many other sides of the national life are incidentally touched upon. Thus a fortunate and, as far as we are aware, unknown entry preserves an interesting series of articles made by the king with the advice of his council in 1339, with a view to amending the state of North Wales. These articles are very properly printed in full and in the original French. Great labour has, again, been expended on the indexes, and the result is excellent. Here and there only do we see cause to quarrel with the identification of a place name. Morgannwy (more correctly Morgannwg) is by a slip defined as in Glamorgan a?id Merioneth. The system of identifying French places by the department is once or twice departed from. Thus Bayonne is explained as being in Guienne. Personally we have no doubt that the method of identification by modern administrative divisions is the correct one, but it might be well to insert a note at the beginning of the preface stating that this is the system followed. Such a note would prevent any one from drawing the conclusion from the mention of such Welsh counties as Denbigh that they existed in the fourteenth century. Foreign local names outside France are not yet dealt with on any scientific system. The entry, for instance, ' Kampen, Camp in Almain,' is much too vague. J. T. It is not easy to put the Eenai-ssance into one volume, or even as much of it as forms the subject of Dr. Brandi's interesting essay, which is con- cerned with Florence and Eome {Die Benaissance in Florenz und Bom. Leipzig : Teubner, 1900). The author, who is professor of auxiliary historical sciences at Marburg, is well equipped for a larger scale of work than this. In the present book he is cramped ; there is a want of ease in his style, and he appears to have been distracted, not unnaturally, by the variety of tempting objects within his range. There is too much detail for so short a book. One is reminded by contrast of the late Mr. Gardiner's ' Introduction to English History,' where the proportions are right and the same general point of view is observed throughout. Here there is no want of clever generalisation, but it is applied to too many parallel lines of history — political, literary, artistic, religious — and in each department there are too many biographical details : too many, that is, for a general sketch. The effect is, no doubt, to stir up curiosity. One wishes to know more ; but at the same time the rapid changing of focus, from general summary to particular lives, is apt to be fatiguing, like the information of a cicerone whose time is limited. The appendix of notes and references is useful. Dr. Brandi, it may be remarked, calls attention to a German edition of Francesco d'Olanda's Portuguese dialogues, containing Michael Angelo's theory of the art of painting, so long left uncopied in the Lisbon MS. and then published at Oporto only in a limited edition. Of the historical view taken by Dr. Brandi of the middle ages, scholasticism, humanism, and the Renaissance gene- rally, something might be said in criticism, were it not that his i^lan of exposition almost necessarily requires dogmatic statement of half-truths : 406 REVIEWS OF BOOKS April all such generalities are at the best provocative and open to challenge. It is, perhaps, one of the chief uses of abstract history like this to serve for debate and provide matter for discussion among students. The weakest points seem to be, as is commonly the case where Eenaissance is the watchword, in the judgment on the middle ages. Though Dr. Brandi is far from extreme he makes rather too much play with the old-fashioned formulas about asceticism, exclusive devotion to the other world [das Jenseits), and so forth. His sympathies are bewrayed when he thinks of Dante's group of kings and sages, where Aristotle and Caesar are, as a picture to be rendered in the manner of Raphael's School of Athens. Sometimes the formulas lead him, as is their way, into rhetoric and too much emphasis. In bringing out the humanism of Florence he premises, rather solemnly, that before the Eenaissance the Florentines had known what earthly life meant {das irdische Leben hatte filr sie des Wertes nie entbehrt). This concession is followed by the statement that all the best thought of Florence had in the former age gone to the service of the other world, as is chiefly shown in Dante. The Jenseits, it is clear, has come to be one of the idols of the theatre for Dr. Brandi, and has made him too peremptory in his summing up. I. The making of historical discoveries is a legitimate and a comparatively innocent amusement so long as those discoveries, real or imaginary, are offered to the world suggestively and modestly ; but when they are pro- pounded as ' proofs, with moral certitude,' and when their discoverers claim for them ' the high white star of truth,' they are unjustifiable unless accompanied by the clearest credentials. Mr. H. H. Spink, in his Gunpowder Plot and Lord Mounteagle's Letter (London : Simpkin. York : Sampson, 1902), professes to have discovered that the Gunpowder Plot was revealed to Father Oldoorne by Christopher Wright, that Father Oldcorne wrote the famous letter to Mounteagle, and that Mounteagle's servant, or secretary, Thomas Ward, was in the secret. ' In short,' says Mr. Spink, ' the revelation was a curvilinear triangular movement.' As to whether the movement was curvilinear and triangular we will express no opinion, but we may just observe that we have examined the evidence adduced by Mr. Spink without succeeding in finding one iota in support of his boasted discovery. Mr. Spink's powers of inferring what he wishes to infer from any evidence are simply amazing. In short, his Christopher Wright and Oldcorne theory proves on examination to be nothing more than an historical hobby of the most amateurish and eccentric character. Mr. Spink writes that Lingard 'woodenly says that Tresham himself revealed the dread secret respecting the mine to Mounteagle.' Well, the late Mr. Gardiner inclined to the same wooden opinion, and Jardine imphes it. Yet not one of these authorities defines that theory with anything like the tone of ex cathedra infallibility assumed by Mr. Spink in defining his theory. One of Mr. Spink's reasons for believing Christopher Wright to have been the informer is that he was a relation of Mounteagle's ; but he was only a distant relation, whereas Tresham was Mounteagle's brother-in-law. Another of his reasons for so beheving is Christopher Wright's conduct after Mounteagle had received the letter. But Christopher Wright remained with the other conspirator? 1902 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 407 in London, as if nothing had happened, until the last moment, then fled with , them to the rendez-vous at Dunchurch, and finally accompanied them in their endeavours to raise the catholic country-gentry in rebellion. Tresham, on the contrary, warned his fellow conspirators that by some means the plot had been communicated to the government, and urged them to abandon the project and to fly to Flanders. It is needless to say whether the conduct of Tresham or that of Christopher Wright was most Uke that of a man who had contrived that the conspiracy should be known to the authorities. As to Father Oldcorne's knowledge of the plot and his authorship of the letter to Mounteagle in relation to it, we have the evidence of Oldcorne's own contemporary and brother Jesuit, Father Gerard, that at Oldcorne's execution, ' being asked again about the treason and taking part with the conspirators, he protested there again that he never had the least knowledge of the treason.' Mr. Spink's reply to this is ' that we have no exact — that is, no scientific — proof that Father Oldcorne, as a fact, employed these precise words.' This is a con- venient method of rejecting the evidence of an unimpeachable witness when that evidence is absolutely fatal to the rejector's theory. What Mr. Spink may mean by ' scientific proof ' we do not pretend to under- stand. This book contains sixty-three chapters within 232 pages. The appendix fills nearly half the volume. Altogether, owing to its style, its arrangement, and the astounding inferences of its author, this work is quite a literary curiosity. J. Mr. C. Litton Falkiner's Studies in Irish History and Biography, mainly of the Eighteenth Century (London : Longmans, 1902), have been revised, and in part rewritten, since they first appeared in the pages of various reviews. Though originally appearing in this independent way they are connected by the fact that they nearly all deal with the important period of Irish history embraced by Grattan's parliament. The author claims for them — and we think the claim justified — that ' in every instance they represent a careful investiga- tion at first hand of the available authorities,' a useful list of which is added as an appendix. The first essay, that on the Grattan parliament and Ulster, deals mainly with the apparent contrast between the political aims and aspirations of Ulster during the period named and her aims and aspirations in more recent times, and the analysis of the forces at work serves to dissipate some common but erroneous ideas on the subject. Of the biographical essajs, that on Lord Clare seeks to do justice to a character in general mercilessly abused ; that on the earl- bishop of Bristol adds many details to the picture of an eccentric character drawn by Mr. Lecky, without quite explaining its anomalies ; but that on Castlereagh is disappointing and ends with strange incompleteness. Perhaps the most readable essay is the story of Humbert's invasion. Bishop Stock's narrative of what passed at Killala must always remain the principal authority for this episode, but some additional hght is thrown on it by the recent publication under the direction of the historical section of the French army staff of certain documents preserved in the French admiralty and war office. Mr. Falkiner's stjle, though not 408 REVIEWS OF BOOKS April wanting in clearness, is often cumbersome, but his statements show a welcome moderation and sobriety of judgment. G. H. 0. ' For forty years,' wrote Taine a little before his death, ' I have worked at nothing but psychology, apphed or pure.' If the book upon ' Intelh- gence ' was pure psychology the ' History of English Literature ' and the ' Origins of Contemporary France ' were specimens of psychology appUed. A famous triad of forces, the moment, the race, the environment, explains ' In Memoriam ' and Robespierre, a Dutch picture and the ' Manage de Figaro.' Few men have been able to press the fluid of experience into so close a mould, and none have combined so much of poetry with so much of logical formalism. He would have preferred to be ranked with the philosophers rather than with the historians, and it is as a philosopher mainly that M. Victor Gu-aud treats him in a study which is both able and enthusiastic {Essai sur Taine, son CEuvre et son Influence. Paris : Hachette, 1901). M. Giraud begins with a short history of Taine's thought and books. Then he proceeds to discuss in turn the logician, the poet, and the influence. In the appendices he gives extracts from forty articles which were contributed by Taine to various journals and have not been repubhshed. M. Giraud touches very slightly upon Taine's historical work proper, except in so far as it affords an illustration of his mind and method, and this must stand as an excuse for the brevity of our notice. An extract from a letter written by M. Taine in 1891 and quoted in M. Giraud's preface is, however, so interesting, as throwing light upon Taine's intellectual position, that it is worth citing here. Je le remercie [he is talking of M. Giraud] aussi de ne m'avoir pas range, comme I'a fait il. Bonrget, parmi les pessimistes. Etre pessimists ou optimisfce cela est permis aux poetes et aux artistes, non aux homines qui oni I'esprit scientifique. Pour la religion, ce qui me semble incompatible avec la science moderne ce n'est pas le christianisme mais le catholicisme actuel et remain ; au contraire, avec le protestantisme large et liberal la conciliation est possible. Quant au detenninisme, M. Giraud a grandement raison de dire qu'a mes yeux U n'exclut pas la responsabUite morale ; bien au contraire, 11 la fonde. E. The successive volumes of Mr. C. P. Lucas's Historical Geography of the British Colonies have been noticed from time to time in this Review. The fifth volume (Oxford : Clarendon Press, 1901) is concerned with the earlier history of Canada (' Canada,' part i. ' Xew France '), and shows the laborious care, the mastery of the fubject, and the judicial impartiality which we have learned to expect from its author. The index, as in previous volumes, would be improved by being made fuller. Several lines of references to the numbers of pages, without explanation, are nearly as useless as no references at all. L. Professor A. B. Hart is to be congratulated on the completion of his useful American History told by Contemporaries. This fourth volume (London: ilacmillan, 1901) brings the work of selection down to the present time, and, as it includes the period of the civil war and the sub- 1902 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 409 sequent events which led up to existing problems and conditions, it will probably be read with even keener interest than its predecessors. The inclusion of extracts from the ' Biglow Papers ' and ' Mr. Dooley's Philo- sophy ' strikes one as a little incongruous, but on such matters Professor Hart is the best judge, and of the general value and interest of his selec- tions there can be no doubt whatever. E. J. P. Following a precedent set by English writers, Mr. Charles Francis Adams, in his address Before and After the Treaty of Washington (New York : Pritited for the New York Historical Society, 1902), endeavours to draw a parallel between the situation of the United States during the civil war of 1861-5 and that of Great Britain during the Transvaal war, with special reference to the attitude, or possible attitude, of neutral nations not in sympathy with the objects of those wars. The treaty of Washington, he argues, by establishing once for all the principle that private property, not contraband of war, is as much entitled to immunity from destruction or capture on water as on land, prevented the Boers from using the ports of neutrals — he refers by name to the United States — as a basis for maritime operations such as those of the ' Alabama,' and thus extricated Great Britain from what might have proved to her a veritable ' slough of despond.' Apparently Mr. Adams does not see that his argument postulates a capacity on the part of the belligerent Boers to take charge of cruisers on the other side of the ocean, as was done by the Confederates, and to use them effectively as destroyers of the enemy's commerce, a capacity which will scarcely be claimed for them by their warmest admirers. Mr. Adams admits that ' in view of the enormous strides made by science during the last third of a century it cannot be assumed that, as respects warfare on land or on sea, what was possible in 1863 would be possible now : the entire globe was not then interlaced with electric wires.' The comparison which he institutes will not bear close examination, but it serves its purpose, that of introducing his own version of the story of the ' Alabama ' claims. E. J. P. 410 Notices of Periodical Publicatiohs [Contribntions to these Notices, whether regular or occasional, are invited. They should be drawn up on the pattern of those printed below, and addressed to the Editor, at Oxford, by the first week in March, June, September, and December.] Catahgue of Latin hagiographical manuscripts at Douai, with excerpts [including new collections of Miraoula s. Thomae Cantuariensis, a Vita a. KilUani, and a Translatio s. Neoti]. — Anal. BoUand. xx. 4. The will of Dagoberl I: by W. Levison [who considers that, in the form in which the text has come down to us, it is impossible to decide whether the ' testamentum ' is genuine or spurious, but inclines to accept it because it agrees with the facts of the later possession of the lands dealt with, and with the diction of the time, although it stands quite by itself and contains elements proper to private docu- ments]. — N. Arch, xxvii. 2. The Vision of the emperor Charles III : by W. Levison [who thinks it was written in 900 by some one in the entourage of abbat Fulco of St. Bertin, archbishop of Eheims. An excursus is added on the relations of the manuscripts.] — N. Arch, xxvii. 2. Letter of Rihkarius scholasticus to bishop Abraham of Freising [966-989] containing his confession of faith : printed from a manuscript at Munich by E. DtJmmleb. — N. Arch, xxvii. 2. The letters of Erasmus. — Church Qu. Kev. 106. Jan. Letters and documents relative to Philibert of Chalon, prince of Orange [i 502-1 530] : by U. Bobekt. — Boletin R. Acad. Hist, xxxix. 6, xl. 1, 2. Ludwig von Affry's account of the winter campaign [at the Confederates in Italy] in 151 1 : printed from a manuscript at Pribourg by A. BOchi. — Anz. Schweiz. Gesoh. 1901. 3, 4. Memoir by Rennward Cysat, town-clerk of Lucerne, on the relations between Switzerland and France in the time of Henry III : extract by T. von Liebenau.— Anz. Schweizer. Gesch. 1901. 3, 4. The formation of states and constitutional development : by 0. Hintze.— Hist. Zft. Ixxxviii. 1. The astronomical knowledge of the Babylonians and its importance in the history of civilisation: by F. K. Ginzel [dealing with the Babylonian conception of the stellar sky and the Babylonian origin of the phases of the moon. The results arrived at are (i.) that the brighter stars were known to the Babylonians in very early times, and that their astronomical knowledge and nomenclature was very complete in the time of the Arsacidae ; (li.) that the zodiac and its division into twelve is of Babylonian origin and probably goes back to 3000 b.c, and that pictorial representations of all twelve signs of the zodiac are found on boundary stones of the twelfth century b.c. ; (iii.) that a number of stations of planets and of the moon can be proved to have been known to the Babylonians of very early times, the number lying between the known minimum of 24 and the possible 1902 NOTICES OF PERIODICAL PUBLICATIONS 411 maximum of 36 ; (iv.) that the Babylonian stations of the moon are of astrological origin, and have spread to China, India, and Arabia, where they have been main- tained in differently modified forms]. — Beitr. zur alten Gesch. i. 1. The Mycenaean age [chiefly in criticism of W. Eidgeway's theory].— Church Qu. Eev. 106. Jan. Greek history and archaeological research. — Quart. Eev. 389. Jan. The formation of towns, states, confederations, and leagvss in ancient Greece : by H. Fkancotte.— Bull. Acad. roy. Belg. 1901. 9, 10. The first years of Darius son of Hystaspes and the old-Persian Calendar : by J. v. Peasek [a detailed investigation of the chronology of the early part of Darius's reign, based on a comparison of the data furnished by the BehistAn inscription with those supplied by the Babylonian contract-tables. Incidentally the Babylonian equivalents for the Persian months are considered, and it is shown that the ' first year ' of a Persian king by Babylonian reckoning is not the year of his accession, but the year following his inauguration as king of Babylon. The writer places (i.) Darius's accession to the throne of Persia in Sept.-Oot. 522 B.C., (ii.) Cambyses' death and the death of Bardes in the same year, (iii.) the revolt of the provinces from 522 to 514 B.C. A reconstruction of the old-Persian calendar follows, the known months of this calendar being interpreted by their Babylonian equivalents]. — Beitr. zur alten Gesch. i. 1. The credibility of early Roman history : by S. B. Plainer [largely an account of the views of Pais]. — Amer. Hist. Eev. vii. 2. Jan. On the history of the deification of riders [from the hero-worship of historical times in Greece to the close of Caesar-worship at Eome] : by E. Koenemann. [The deifi- cation of the Diadoohi originally followed the Greek model of the worship of the dead, and, with some exceptions, this continued to be the form preserved in the kingdom of the Ptolemies. The empire of the Seleucidae, follow- ing, perhaps, a Babylonian model, adopted more readily the oriental idea of the incarnate godhead of the living king. Eome is the heir of the Hellenistic monarchies, but follows the Greek model, deifies only the deceased emperor, and even then calls him, not deus but divus. The godhead of the living emperor does not appear until the end of the third century after Christ. The religious and political effects of the centuries of ruler-worship were the weakening of religious belief as exemplified in Euhemerism, the indissoluble connexion of church and state, and the inevitable rise from this connexion of such sharp conflicts of religious belief as those between Judaism and the cult of the Seleucidae, and between Christianity and the worship of the Caesars]. — Beitr. zur alten Gesch. i. 1. Decemprimatus and iixairpwrla : by 0. Seeck. [The decem,primatus and its varieties were borrowed by Eome from Massilia. Adopted first for Italy, the institution was gradually extended to the provinces, with the object of securing a representa- tion of the forms more definite than that supplied by the local councils. The ofiice was never annual, but retirement was sometimes permitted to decemprimi after several years' service. The album of Canusium (223 a.d.) shows that these persons were chosen from those who had held the local censorship (quinguennalicii), and they seem finally to have taken the place of the guinquennales. Their existence is attested until the time of Justinian. Although finally their responsibility for the collection of imperial taxes became their most important function, they had in the course of their history performed many other duties : e.g. as advisers to the local magistrates, in their police duties, their audit of retiring magistrates, and their supervision of the property of their state and of its administration].— Beitr. zur alten Gesch. i. 1. Etwharistic belief in the secotid and third centuries : by H. B. Swete.— Journ. Theol. Stud. 10. Jan. On tJie ordination of the early bishops of Alexandria : by bishop C. Gobe. — Journ. Theol. Stud. 10. Jan. The history of the idea of the state [from the fifth century of the Christian era to the present day] : by E. Nys.— Bull. Acad. roy. Belg. 1901. 9, 10. The medieval Fran,kish monarchy.— Chmch Qu. Eev. 106. Jan. 412 NOTICES OF PERIODICAL PUBLICATIONS April On the chronology of the later Merovingian kings : by W. Levison [who fixes within narrower limits than previous writers the dates of the kings from Theoderio III to Theoderic IV, 673-737].— N. Arch, xxvii. 2. Pope Adrian IV: by L. C. Casaetelli. — Dublin Kev., N.S., 41. Jan. Otto IVs first promises to Innocent III: by H. Keaebo [who argues they were made only once in 1201, and not also earlier in 1198]. — N. Arch, xxvii. 2. Tlie elevation of William of Baux to the kingdom of Aries [1215] : by the late P. ScHEFFEB-BoicHOKST [who holds that Kichard I was never crowned king of Bur- gundy, and doubts whether even the promised infeoffment was carried out. Savarie, bishop of Bath, was the Burgundian chanceDor of the emperor Henry III, not of Kichard I].— SB. Akad. Wiss. Berlin. 1901. p. 1232. TJie negotiations of Perpignan and the battle of Aginconrt [1415] : by B. Bess. — Hist. Jahrb. xxii. 4. The treaty of Canterbury [1416] : by B. Bess. — Mitth. Oesterreich. Gesch. xxii. 4. Bussia and the papacy: by P. Pieelino [in connexion with the false Demetrius], concluded. — Eussk. Star. Dec. Alberto Vimiyia ; the relations between Venice, the Ukraine, and Moscow : by P. Pieeling [between the years 1650 and 1663, during the Cossack rebellion]. — Eussk. Star. Jan. On the correspondence of an English diplomatic agent in Paris [1669-1677] : by Miss II. B. CuKRAN [who treats of one William Perwich]. — Trans. E. Hist. Soc., NS., XV. Tlu secret declaration (4) attached to the treaty of 5 Jan. 1719 between Austria, Saxony, and Hanover [in which St. Saphorin pledged George I, as king of Great Britain, to maintain the execution of the treaty, and to defend Danzig and Elbing in case of need with his fleet] : by W. Michael.— Hist. Zft. Ixxxviii. 1. Tlie question of the Bohemian vote at the election of the emperor Charles VII in 1 740- 1 742 : by Job. Euzicka [was the imperial crown to be recognised as heredi- tary in the Habsburg family ?].— Cesky Cas. Histor. Jan. The French clergy in the States of tlie Church [1789-1803] : by V. Pierre.— Rev. Quest, hist. Ixxi. 1. Jan. The negotiations preceding tlie peace of Luniville : by Miss L. M. Eoberts [partly from the Foreign Office papers in the Public Eecord Office].— Trans. E. Hist. Soc, N.S., XV. The French in Poland in 1806-1808 [from the memoirs of J. Szymanowski]. — Eussk. Star. Feb. Tlie concordat of 1817 : by P. Feeet.- Eev. Quest, hist. Ixxi. 1. Jan. France Paganism in Brittany in tlie sixth century : by G. Guenin [contending that Armorica was still preponderatingly pagan before its conversion in the course of the sixth century by British and Irish monks]. — Ann. deBretagne, xvii. 2. St. Ouen, bishop of Bouen : by E. Vacandard. I. : St. Ouen and the monastic foun- dations of his diocese. II. : St. Ouen and the Merovingian palace. — Eev. Quest, hist. Ixxi. 1. Jan. The abbey of St. Calais in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries : by L. Feogee. — Eev. Quest, hist. Ixxi. 1. Jan. On a register of the faculty of theology of Paris in materia fidei et morum [1384-1524], now designated Nouv. acq. Lat. 1826 in the Biblioth^que Nationale : by A. Lefeaxc— Bull. Soc. Hist. Protest. Fran?, li. 1. Jan. The name ' Huguenot : ' by C. de Geandmaison [who argues against its being of German origin, and gives examples of its appearance as a French surname from the fourteenth century onwards; but how it came to be apphed to the French reformers he is unable to show].— Bull. Soc. Hist. Protest. Fraui;. li. 1. Jan. The protestants of Paris between 1564 and 1569: by N. Weiss.— Bull. Soc. Hist. Protest. Franp. 1. 12. Dec. The shipping and commerce of Nantes, 1661-1715 : by E. Gabory [illustrating, largely from unpublished documents, the commerce of the Nantais with the kingdom of 1902 NOTICES OF PERIODICAL PUBLICATIONS 413 France, with foreign powers, and with the colonies during the later seventeenth century, with a special study of the commercial position of Nantes at the be- ginning of the eighteenth century], — Ann. de Bretagne, xvii. 2 (continued from 1). Madame d'Epinay and her circle. — Edinb. Eev. 399. Jan. A)i unpublished fragment of Condorcet: by L. Cahen [on a republican tract pro- bably written in youth]. — E6vol. Fran?, xxi. 8. Feb. The political questions before the assembly of the clergy in 1788 : by P. Mantouchet [maintaining that the clergy were mainly actuated by class interests in. their opposition to the government]. — R^vol. Fran?, xxi. 7. Jan. Foucli4.—Chm-ch Qu. Eev. 106. Jan. Tlis lack of discipline in one of tlu revolutionary armies [in Morbihan, 1793-1800] : by P. Bliakd.— Eev. Quest, hist. Ixxi. 1. Jan. Reports of the Prefecture of Police under the Consulate : by A. Aul.aed [illustrating the trend of public opinion in Paris]. — E6vol. Fran?, xxi. 6. Dec. The conspiracy of 1804: by G. Caudeillier. III. : Meh6e de la Touche at London.^ Eev. hist. Ixxviii. 1. Jan. (continued from Ixxv. 2). Tlie inhabitants of tJie left bank of the Rhine under the First Empire : by L. Levy- SoHNEiDEK [largely based upon the unpublished correspondence of Jeanbon St. Andr^]. — Eevol. Fran?, xxi. 8, 9. Feb., March. Germany and Austria German historical manuscripts in tJte British Museum: by W. Eberhaed. — N. Arch. xxvii. 2. The charters of the Alsatian count Eberhard [t747] and the ' Vita Desiderii Alse- gaudiensis : ' by W. Levison. — N. Arch, xxvii. 2. The early royal charters for tlu bishopric of Worms and the establishment of the bishop's princely power: by J. Lechxee. II.: Suspicious diplomas of the tenth century. III. : The establishment of the bishop's princely power [with a calendar of documents]. — Mitth. Oesterreich. Gesch. xxii. 4 (continued from 3). Ore the lost Cronica Saxonum [used by Henry of Hervord] : by H. von Heinesianx [who prints a fragment, written c. 1300, which he has discovered in the leaves of the binding of a volume at Wolfenbtittel]. — N. Arch, xxvii. 2. Conrad of Megenberg's Chronicle and his ' Planctus Ecclesiae in Gennaniam : ' by H. Geaueet [who furnishes new evidence for the fact that Conrad wrote a Chronicle, now lost, and gives a full account of the ' Planctus ' from the Paris MS. Lat. 3197], with remarks on the persecution of the Jews [1336-1338], on the genealogy of the house of Wittelsbach, and on the personality of Lewis the Bavarian. — Hist. Jahrb. xxii. 4. Conrad of Megenberg's treatise ' de limitibus parochiarum clvitatis Ratisbonensis : ' by P. SoHNEiDEE [from a Eatisbon manuscript of the year 1400]. — Hist. Jahrb. xxii. 4. Ethnography and the study of dialects : by F. Weede [in criticism of 0. Bremer's 'Ethnographic der Germanischen Stamme']. — Hist. Zft. Ixxxviii. 1. On the Germany of Ptolemy and the question of the seats of the Cherusci and Hermunduri : by L. Schsiidt. — Hist. Vierteljahrschr. v. 1. Gottsclialk, the preacher and poet [claimed as a monk of Klingenmiinster] : by P. von WiNTEHFELD [with notcs on his writings].— N. Areh. xxvii. 2. An anti-Habsburg league of princes in 1292: by A. Dopsoh [with an appendix of documents]. — Mitth. Oesterreich. Gesch. xxii. 4. The Hohemollern and the nobility of the Mark : by P. Peiebatsch [with an introduc- tion on the early history of the settlement of the Mark].— Hist. Zft. Ixxxviii. 2. Johanius Geiler and his contemporaries: by Miss J. M. Stone. — Dublin Rev., N.S., 41. Jan. The twelve articles of the peasants, 1525 : by A. Gotze. — Hist. Vierteljahrschr. v. 1. The first years of Federick William, the Great Elector [1640-1643] : by W. F. Eedda- WAY. — Trans. E. Hist. Soc, N.S., xv. 414 NOTlCtlS OP PERIODIC AL PUBLICATIONS April An vmpuhlished memoir on the court of Berlin in 1688 [by FranQois de Pas, comte de E^benac] : printed by A. Waddinoton. — Bev. hist. Ixxviii. 1. Jan. The courtship of margrave Lewis William of Baden and of prince Eiigene of Savoy [for the hands of the daughters of the last duke of Saxe-Lauenburg, 1689-1690] : by K. T. VON Heigel [who shows from unpublished records how the suit of prince Eugene was unsuccessful]. — SB, Akad. Wiss. Miinchen (phil. CI.) 1901. 5. The suppression of the monasteries in Austria under the emperor Joseph II: by J. Vebbes. — Dublin Rev., N.S., 41. Jan. The siege of Mainz in 1794-5 • by G. Caudkilliek. — R6vol. FranQ. xxi. 6, 7. Dec., Jan. Papers of Kilpfer dealing with the German question in 1849 and 1850:' by H. von PoscHiNGEE. — Hist. Vierfceljahrschr. v. 1. August Beichensperger : by H. Oncken.— Hist. Zft. Ixxxviii. 2. Some gu^stions arising out of Bismarck's memoirs : by H. Ulmann.— Hist. Viertel- jahrschr. v. 1. Karl von Hegel [t 5 Dee. 1901]. — N. Arch, xxvii. 2. Great Britain and Ireland Mercian origins [studied in connexion with Bede, the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, and the ' Tribal Hidage 'J.^Notes and Queries, Jan. 4, 18. The denarius sancti Petri in England : by 0. Jensen. I. : The relations between the papacy and England in the seventh and eighth century. II. : The origin of Peter's pence in England [traced to ^thelwulf as a royal grant, and to Alfred as a national payment]. HI. : Peter's pence in the twelfth and following centuries. IV. : The tribute in the fourteenth century [with appendices on Eomfeoh or Eomeseot in the Anglo-Saxon laws and in legal compilations of the Norman period, and on the introduction of Peter's pence into Norway and Sweden [by Nicolas, cardinal of Albano (afterwards pope Hadrian IV)], and a collection of documents [chiefly of the fourteenth century] from Vatican manuscripts]. — Trans. R. Hist. Soc, N.S., XV. English coronations down to that of James I. — Church. Qu. Rev. 106. Jan. Coronation peerages [from Richard II onwards] : by J. H. Round. — Monthly Rev. 17. Feb. On the authorities for the social revolt of 1381 : by G. Kkiehn [discussing the value of the narratives given by Froissart, the monk of Evesham, and the anonymous French chronicle published in the ' English Historical Review,' xiii. 509 ff.; and concluding with an account of the articles granted by Richard II to the insur- gents]. — Amer. Hist. Rev. vii. 2. Jan. The history of Habeas Corpus : by E. Jenks [who maintains that the writ was primarily intended to effect the imprisonment of the person named in it, so as to secure his being brought to trial ; its purpose became changed in consequence of the legal restrictions on granting baU, suing out the writ of Certiorari and claiming Privilege]. - Law Qu. Rev. 69. Jan. New lights on Mary, gueen of Scots [a discussion of the fresh evidence recently pub- lished concerning Mary's dealings with religious affairs, and the murder of Darnley]. — Quart. Eev. 389. Jan. Two Jews before the Privy Council in 1614-15 : by L, Abkahams [extracts from the Acts of the Privy CouncO relating to a foreign Jew charged with piracy]. — Jew. Qu. Review, 54. Jan. Tlie later history of the Ironsides [from the spring of 1645] : by C. H. Fieth. Trans. E. Hist. Soc, N.S., XV. The king's and queen's corporation for the linen manufacture in Ireland [established in 1690] : by W. R. Scott.— Proc. R. Soc. Antiq. of Ireland, xxxi. 4. Boli/ngbroke and his times. — Edinb. Rev. 399. Jan. John Wesley' s journal. — Church Qu. Rev. 106. Jan. Lady Sarah Lennox. — Quart. Rev. 389. Jan. The food supply of England in the Napoleonic war : by J. Holland Rose.— Monthly Rev. 18. March. 190^ NOTICES OF PERIODICAL PUBLICATIONS 415 Italy Bibliography of inedieval Italian history : by C. Cipolla, continued. — N. Arch. Ven., N.S., ii. 1. The government of Theodoric and the rule of the Ostrogoths in Italy, from the writings of Ennodius: by M. Dumoulin. I.— Rev. hist. Ixxviii. 1. Jan. The materials for the life of Patilus Diaconus : by G. Calmgakis [correcting and completing his article in the Archivio for 1900]. — Arch. stor. Lomb. 3rd ser. xxxii. The chronicle of Falco of Benevento: by K. A. Kehr [who finds in the chronicle of the unknown Cistercian of St. Mary of Ferrara (published by A. Gaudenzi, 1888) a means of supplementing this fragmentary record]. — N. Arch, xxvii. 2. Tlie commune of Treviso and its oldest statutes [down to 1218J: by G. Biscako. — N. Arch. Yen., N.S., ii. 1. Two letters of Rainald, archbishop elect of Capua [1201-1202] : printed with an introduction by K. Hampe. — Mitth. Oesterreich. Gesoh. xxii. 4. The company of the Biumsignori of Siena [financiers for the popes in the thirteenth century] : by A. Gottlob [with a list of recorded members]. — Hist. Jahrb. xxii. 4. The name of Dante's Beatrice : by J. Haller [who maintains, against Scartazzini, that it was the real name, and designated Bice dei Portinari ; and emends the famous passage, ' Vita nuova,' i. (§ 2), i qtuili iwn sapeano che si chiamare into sia chiamare]. — Hist. Zft. Ixxxviii. 1. The last public office of Baiamonte Tiepolo : by A. Battistella [on the strange election of the exiled doge as captain of war by Bologna in 1325 ; the vain attempts of the Bolognese envoys to find him in Slavonia ; and the measures of Venice to prevent his acceptance of the ofSee]. — N. Arch. Ven., N.S., ii. 1. Niccold Spinelli da Giovinazeo : by G. Eomano. IX. : [1392-1396], concluded. — Arch. stor. Napol. xxvi. 4. Executions at Florence : by G. Eondoni [mainly from the records of the Compagnia di S. Maria della Croce al Tempio : giving an account of this confraternity, whose members visited the condemned ; with notes on those executed from 1423 to 1 759]. — Arch. stor. Ital. 1901. 4. Matteo Franco, a domestic chaplain of the Medici : by Janet Boss [1447- 1494, with translations from letters]. — Monthly Eev. 18. March. The peace and alliance between Venice and Sixtus IV [1479-1480] : by E. PrvA [giving the text of the treaty, with an article to explain the causes of the sudden revolution in the policy of the two powers]. — N. Arch. Ven., N.S., ii. 1. Burlamacchi and his ' Vita del Savonarola : ' by G. ScHNiTZEit [who endeavours to prove that the Dominican tradition was correct in attributing the ' Vita ' to Burla- macchi, and that the ' Vita Italiana ' is earlier than the 'Vita Latina,' which P. Villari regards as its source]. — Arch. stor. Ital. 1901. 4. Liazzaro Bonamico and the university of Padua : by G. Marangoni [continued till his death in 1552]. -N. Arch. Ven., N.S:, ii. 1. Pier Luigi Famese : by F. de Navenne. II, concluded. — Eev. hist. Ixxviii. 1. Jan. Muratori and the cultivated society of Naples in his time : by M. Schipa. — Arch. stor. Napol. xxvi. 4. Russia The question of the False Demetrius : by J. Caro.— Hist. Zft. Ixxxviii. 2. Panteleimon Ligarides, from the papal archives : by P. Pieblino [contributions to the study of papal influences in Russia in the seventeenth century]. — Eussk. Star. Feb. The origin of Catherine I : by N. Bielozerskaya [from documents preserved in the university library at Upsala]. — Istorich. Viestn. Jan. The Emperor Paul, concluded. — Eussk. Star. Dec. Contributions to the biography of M. Speranski : by I. Bichkov [the progressive minister of Alexander I]. — Eussk. Star. Feb. Five autographic letters of Alexander I in 1812 [to Eostopchin, Chichagov, &c.] — Eussk. Star. Jan. 416 NOTICES OF PERIODICAL PUBLICATIONS April Spain The chronology of the Visigothic kings of Toledo [531-710] : by K. Zeumek.— N. Arch. xxvii. 2. Unpublished documents of Benallo gramdtico [relating to the conquest of Majorca by Eamun Berenguer III, count of Barcelona] : by F. Fita. — Boletin R. Acad. Hist. xl. 1. Three unpuhlislied documents from Valencia relating to the marriage of Ferdinand and Isabella [1468, 1469, and 1470] : by M. Danvila. — Boletin E. Acad. Hist. xl. 2. The rebellion of Puente Obejuna against the grand master of Calatrava in 1476 [an article-, amply illustrated by documents, showing that the revolt was prompted by Cordoba, from the domains of which the town had been alienated under Henry IV, and that it was in close connexion with the dynastic conflict between Isabella the Catholic and Juana] Boletin K. Acad. Hist, xxxix. 6. A new document relating to Beatrix Enriquez de Arana : by E. EAinKEz de Aeellaxo [of interest as proving that this object of Columbus's affections was never married to him]. — Boletin E. Acad. Hist. xl. 1. Switzerland Notes on tlie routes in Antonine's Itinerary [in what is now Switzerland and in countries leading to it] : by F. P. Gabopai,o. — Anz. Schweiz. Gesch. 1901. 3, 4. 0)1 tlie interpolated ch. xl. of tlie ' Vita s. Fridolini ' [in its bearing on Glarus and Sackingen] : by G. Caro.— Anz. Schweiz. Gesch. 1901. 3,4. The fall of tlie Helvetic director, Ochs : by T. von Liebexau. — Anz. Schweiz. Gesch. 1901. 8, 4. America and Colonies Life of commissary James Blair, founder of William and Mary College [1656-1743' : by D. E. MoTLET. — Johns Hopkins Univ. Studies in Hist, and Polit. Science, xix. 10. A British privateer in the American revolution: by H. E. Howiand [on the story of the ' Vengeance,' fitted out by a Xew York loyalist in 1779]. — Amer. Hist. Eev. vii. 2. Jan. The papers of Sir Cliarles Vaughan : by J. A. Doyle. [Prefixed is an account of Vaughan, who was appointed British minister at Washington in 1825. The letters printed deal principally with the interoceanie canal and Mexico]. — Amer. Hist. Eev. vii. 2. Jan. Governor Thomas H. Hicks of Maryland and the civil war : by G. L. P. EABCLiFrE. — Johns Hopkins Univ. Studies in Hist, and Polit. Science, xix. 11-12. Tlie questions at issue in presidential electiojis of the United States during the past forty years : by C. F. Adams. — Amer. Hist. Eev. vii. 2. Jan. Corrections in ' Tlie British Forces in the Peninsula.' P. 113, 18 hnes from foot, after ■•'/o2nd add 'l&Oth. P. 114, 1. 13, for 2/43rd read '/43rd. P. 115, 1. 10, for =/60th read ^ ^/BOth. P. 119, 1. 18, for place. 23 May at Vittoria read place, 23 May. At Yittoria. P. 119, 1. 4 from foot, for 14th Dragoons read 14th Light Dragoons. P. 120. According to Beamish's ' History of the King's German Legion ' Bock was drowned off Brittany in February ; the monthly return for 25 April is positive as to his having died 17 March. P. 122. It is possible that the King's German Legion was again separated into a line brigade and a light brigade for 1814; some accounts of the siege of Bayonneseem to point to this. P. 125, 1. 7, for by 1 March on Pioton's arrival read by 1 March : on Picton's arrival. P, 130, 13 lines from foot, for 20 July read 28 July. P. 131, 1. 24, for VI. B. read VII. B.