Mr. Nicolas on "The Siege of Carlaverock." a capital, for example-guillames de vavasours," "robert le fiz roger, langcastre," "odelstane," "claveringe, "thomas de fourneval," "es'karlaverock," "carduel," "in66 esmon de"fitz mermenduc," "bre coce," " gleterre," ""dureaume," incourt," taigne," &c. &c. The following lines will tend still further to shew that no inference can be drawn from the use of capitals in the contemporary copy, "His merlos et, &c. "Le ot vermeile a jaunes Merlos, «Le Engleterre au label de france." Having, I hope, said enough to prove that the suggestions that the passage refers to a poem on Guy of Warwick, and that there was cause to believe it was written by the author of the "Siege of Carlaverock," were neither made by my friend, nor adopted by me, to the extent to which I did adopt them, without sufficient reason, it is necessary that I should say a few words as to each being the production of Walter of Exeter. I am contented to take the "Clerk's" statement, that Bale is the authority on which all subsequent writers have said that Walter of Exeter wrote a Life of Guy of Warwick, a fact of which I was before aware; and, supposing Bale's assertion to be correct, I would ask whether the circumstance of there being but one work on the subject ever heard of 2, and that work having been indisputably written about the period when that person flourished, does not raise a fair presumption that the "Life" of Guy assigned to Walter of Exeter, was that of which copies are preserved? I did not require to be told that we have no positive evidence of the fact; but what are the "Clerk's" grounds for thinking they were not the same? that Bale 2 I believe there is an early MS. translation in English of the "Romance of Guy," but admitting that it was of the same age as the French Romance it is not impossible that Walter of Exeter wrote both. My remarks apply however to the French copy, and which it can scarcely be doubted was the original. It is suggested in the Preface to the "Siege of Carlaverock," that the laboured eulogium on the Bishop of Durham justifies the opinion that the author was a priest, and which agrees with the idea that it was written by Walter of Exeter, who was a monk. [Jan. does not specify in what form and language Walter of Exeter's work was composed; that Warton was evidently ignorant on the subject; and that Carew throws no light on it. All this amounts to nothing; and though it may be very convincing to him, I confess it has not that effect on me. The "CLERK" seems, however, to doubt that Walter of Exeter ever did write the work attributed to him by Bale, simply because the Bishop cites no other authority for his assertion than "Ex Bibliothecis,"-Collections from libraries. If libraries, by which Bale manifestly meant manuscripts in libraries, be not the source whence such information is to be derived, I must beg the "Clerk" to instruct me where it is to be found. I feel no difficulty in believing that Bale had seen a copy of the "Romance of Guy," in which the name of the person to whom he assigns it occurred; because I cannot persuade myself that a learned prelate or any other man would invent such an assertion, without any possible motive. It seems infinitely more probable, even from the state of some libraries, at "Oxenforde," at the present hour, that numerous MSS. have perished since Bale wrote; and that, unless some improvement takes place, the "Clerk " may himself, within less than fifty years, be exposed to a similar suspicion of having`imagined what had no foundation, if he alludes in any work to MSS. which are at this moment in one or two Colleges I could name. I am therefore satisfied with oppos ing the positive assertion of a writer two hundred and seventy years since, for whose labours, whatever may be their imperfections, I have the bad taste to feel great respect, to the mere conjecture, a conjecture unsupported by a shadow of evidence, of, I might say, an anonymous writer. I will not, however, avail myself of such an advantage, and will readily observe, that I know that anonymous writer to be intimately acquainted with early manuscripts, and well informed on the subject on which he writes, and that he is consequently highly deserving of the official situation which he holds; but conceding this, I cannot attribute more weight to his unsupported hypothesis, than to the ipse dixit of a person who, it is but fair to conclude, had evidence for his statement which no 1829.] Siege of Carlaverock.-Dr. Meyrick. longer exists; or which may still be hid in the unexplored recesses of some library, but to which the worms and spiders may have acquired a prescriptive right. Before the subject is concluded, it is just to observe, that on reference to the manner in which I have suggested that Walter of Exeter wrote the Romance of Guy, it will be seen that I have done so hypothetically, leaving it to the reader who is put in possession of the whole data, to form his own opinion; and if, under all the circumstances, I had not said what I have done, I should not, bave fulfilled the duty of an editor. Agreeing as I do with the "Clerk," that since the publication of "Roquefort's Glossaire de la Langue Romaine," the knowledge of early French is much facilitated, I might appeal to him whether I overrated the difficulties of translating the poem in my observations in the Preface; and I might ask him too, whether he himself was not on one occasion, at least, unable, though then fully disposed, to assist me? The charge of having mistaken the word "Emlam," a closer inspection of the MS. has proved to be just; and, though unwilling to extenuate an error, I may be permitted to observe, that the mistake, owing to the peculiar manner in which the interlineation is made, is one which even a person whose exclusive metier it may have been to collate MSS. might have committed, especially when he found the word so spelt in another copy. It is a subject for regret, and perhaps of surprise, that the trustees of the British Museum do not cause even one of the numerous librarians of the establishment to attend in the reading-room, to whom reference might be made on doubtful points, and from whom, even if they were not better judges generally than the applicant, information might be obtained, because the direction of a mind and sight undisturbed by previous attention to a particular MS. would in many instances remove the difficulties and prevent errors. Had this been the case, the Clerk himself would possibly have prevented Guylam from being printed Emlam; but whilst I agree with him in thinking that William Touchet was the Sir William Touchet mentioned in the Roll of Arms which I lately published from the Cottonian MS. 29 Caligula, A. xvii. there is great difficulty in distinguishing him from the William Touchet who was summoned to Parliament from the 28th to the 34th Edw. I. whose arms were very different.3 Your readers Mr. Urban, will, I trust, pardon so long a letter on a subject in which not many of them will feel interested; and I sincerely lament that neither my genius nor my taste allow of my imitating your learned correspondent by enlivening the discussion with a series of puns. NICHOLAS HARRIS NICOLAS. "Thou shall not bear false witness against thy neighbour." Mr. URBAN, Cadogan-pl. Jan. 2. RECOMMEND the above Commandment to the serious study of your Correspondent who calls himself "A CLERK OF OXENFORDE." If his object was to injure whatever literary reputation I may have acquired, he should have availed himself of some of the many errors I doubtless commit, instead of fabricating a false charge in order to show that Mr. Nicolas paid too great a deference to my opinion. As often as that gentleman was pleased to adopt any remark of mine, he very respectfully acknowledged it by printing against it my name. When the "CLERK of Oxenforde" says, that from "the misconception of a passage in the poem, Dr. Meyrick has founded a conjecture," he asserts a falsehood. If, therefore, "in a reprint of this curious document in the present day, we have reason to look for greater accuracy, particularly since the Dictionary of Roquefort," "the CLERK" must settle the question with Mr. Nicolas, who, though accused of too hastily admitting this conjecture on my authority, has probably the means and certainly the ability for repelling such a censure. All that I have to do is, to request this "CLERK," whom I presume to be a divine, to read the quotation prefixed to this letter more attentively than he has done "the Preface to the Siege of Carlaverock," and not again to use my name in the unwarrantable manner he has done. Yours, &c. S. R. MEYRICK. 3 See Siege of Carlaverock, p. 209. 80 I On the Disinterment of Hampden. Mr. URBAN, Bath, Jan. 12. HAVE read with much interest the several accounts inserted in your Magazine of the death and the disinterment of Hampden. Of the former I cannot yet satisfy myself that the particulars stated can be exactly depended upon. Of the latter I cannot allow myself to think, without some degree of disgust. Your Correspondent ALTA RIPA has clearly exposed some inconsistency in the narrative, and I must confess that the several accounts delivered by Lord Clareudon, and so many other historians, of the death's wound said to have been inflicted by the enemy, having remained uncontroverted during so many years, makes me still incredulous in regard to the revived story of Sir Robert Pye's pistols. As TRUTH, however, is or should be the great object of all literary researches, may I take the liberty of asking, whether it is this same narrative of Sir Robert Pye, the Walpoles and Foleys, to which allusion is made in Almon's Preface to Wilkes's Correspondence, in which amongst the literary productions of that celebrated man, an account of Hampden's death is mentioned, in which he (Mr. W.)" differs from Lord Clarendon and all the other historians, in describing his wound as not coming from the enemy." If the affair had rested upon the authority of Mr. Wilkes only, perhaps there might have been less difficulty about it. It will, however, be a great satisfaction, if some ingenious Correspondent of Mr. Urban can supply the particulars of the narrative alluded to, so as to ascertain how much or how little of it is to be ascribed to Mr. Wilkes; and upon what authority that gentleman made his statement? I think that it is extraordinary a fact so important as that of the manner of Mr. Hampden's death should have been handed down from generation to generation with an implicit confidence in the correctness of the history; without any attempt at contradiction from the time of Lord Clarendon to that of Mr. Britton, in his Delineations of the several Counties: in which last, by the bye, the agreeable and ingenious author, without any suspicion, as is evident, of being incorrect in his statement, mentions "the shot entering the shoulder, and breaking the bone: [Jan. and Mr. Hampden's suffering great pain for six days," p. 355. Strange, very strange it is, that one of the most correct and attentive readers of history, himself also a patriot, and a true friend of liberty and of his country, should have been induced to perpetuate as a fact that which it seems is now positively contradicted as a falsehood: I mean the inscription set up by Richard Earl Temple in Stowe Gardens, in which John Hampden is expressly recorded to have "supported the liberties of his country in Parliament, and died for them in the field." Now, Mr. Urban, if Hampden's wound were the cause of his death, and that wound occasioned by the accidentally bursting of his pistol, with what propriety could this sonorous expression have been adopted, as a record of his patriotism. The immortal Nelson fell gloriously in the moment of victory. The gallant Captain Grenville, fatally wounded by a fragment of his shattered ship, afforded an illustrious example of calm and dignified submission to his fate: but if the one or the other had died from a cause similar to that which is asserted to have destroyed Hampden, the just tribute of applause which has been paid to them both, would have been mere bombast. I would ask whether Sir Robert Pye concealed the knowledge of the true cause of his son-inlaw's death in order to enhance the value of his services in the cause in which he was engaged? Where then was his honour? I would ask to what principle of human feeling can it be attributed that the Royalists should have been permitted, without contradiction, to allow to Hampden all the credit of his having been actually engaged with the enemy, if he were known to have been disabled without having fired a shot? And why the Royalists themselves should have been permitted to enjoy the credit of killing the most heroic of their opponents, if his death were purely accidental? The fatalists on both sides were numerous. It has not escaped remark that Chal grave-field, where Hampden mustered his rebellious followers, was the scene of his mortal wound, and figuratively of his death. If, indeed, his wound were what is called accidental, how much might have been added to the pathos of the narrative! Yours, &c. J. W. 1829.] HAVI 31 Roman Inscription at Bath.-Wansdike. Mr. URBAN, Salisbury, Jan. 8. AVING before described Tanhill as the Hill sacred to the Zeus Borraios of the Celts, Tanarus, it being adjoining to the monument of Teutates at Avebury, and having spoken of the great monument at Abury being raised to the greatest of the popular Celtic Deities, Teutates,-or Teut the Celtic Mercury, I send you a most singular corroboration of the veneration in which that Deity was held in Britain, furnished by that justly-esteemed antiquary Mr. Hunter. myself differ in views upon this subject, I must have a few parting words with him. In his last letter he says, that I have "nibbled" at his arguments! Negatur major. I have taken them by the throat, and pinn'd them down! Extract of a Letter of the Rev. Joseph Hunter, to the Rev. W. L. Bowles. "DEAR SIR, Bath, Dec. 31, 1828. "Your inquiries give an importance to an inscription found here in 1809 (the last, except one, that this famous station has produced), which it did not before, at least in my estimation, possess. And, as it may possibly combine with other facts, or other opinions, in the mind of the writer of "Hermes," and at all events as it is desirable on every account that it should be in your possession, I shall take the liberty to offer a copy of it from the stone itself in the crypt of our Institution : "The inscription is perfect, the blanks being left in the original. "If the inscription is to be read MERCURII MAGNI ALUMNA, it would appear to be of considerable importance in relation to the religious usages of the Romans generally; as, although the term Alumna' often occurs in Gruter, I cannot find that it is ever coupled with the name of a Divinity. This led me to think that MERC. might be an abbreviation of Mercurialis or Mercatius, and that the MAGNII (where the duplex iota is very evident) might be a part of the name of some private person whose Alumna thus untimely fell. "It was found near the North Gate. The character resembles that of the inscription by Tiberinus engraved in Lysons." Upon the subject of the Celtic Mercury, I think your readers will agree that Mr. Hunter's communication is very valuable; and, as Mr. Duke and Ad hoc probandum, sic proceditur, as the schoolmen say. Syllogistically thus: A Foss, on which two wheel-barrows cannot pass, could not have been a great, public, ancient road! Two wheel-barrows cannot pass in the Foss of Wansdike over the downs, from the junction with the Roman road, the only part of which I spoke. Ergo,-This part of Wansdike never was, and never could be, a great an cient Road! Does Mr. Duke call this "nibbling?" I call it pinning; but some parts of the Foss are more level than other parts, it will appear that the immense mound because, upon the slightest inspection, has, at the top, been dug down, and thrown into the hollow. I will not say a word more about "hazy weather," as I fear it might for, unless he had been so, I think he make my friend somewhat sensitive; would not have used such words as he has used, and which shew his modesty rather than strengthen his arguments; for I can only attribute it to modesty, that, gifted as he is with that instructive intuition, which enables him so confidently to pronounce; and master of those arguments which indisputably convince himself, whilst they appear so inconclusive to others;-I can only attribute to modesty, and the want of a proper opinion of himself, that, in speaking of an officer who has had long practical experience on the subject of defences in war, and fortification, though this might be nothing in comparison of Mr. Duke's own experience,-he only presumes that such an officer ought to be "CASHIERED" for his ignorance, when he might have said he ought to be "drummed, like Parolles," out of the army, for not agreeing, on a military subject, with the Rev. Mr. Duke! But I must be allowed to say, I am still inclined to think that an experienced officer may know almost as much of these things as himself! Nay, I am tempted to think further, that, should that gallant gentleman hear of this decision of Mr. Duke, he 32 Queen Elizabeth's Visit to Portsmouth, 1591. might reply, "If I deserve to be 'cashered' for thinking an immense Vallum, agreeably to all I have seen, to have been raised as a line of defence, what does He deserve, who cannot account for that immense mound otherwise than by supposing it was raised to shelter the travellers on a road scarcely wide enough for a mule, from the rain, when, it being nearly forty feet high, it would be thirty feet above the head of a man (going ten miles out of his way) on that mule!" As to arguments, Mr. Duke tells us he has yet more. Diique Deæque omnes! but I have "nibbled" instead of "grappling with his "series!" Grapple with them? Why, seriously, I should as soon think of grappling with a " Series " of-sand! A" series" of arguments depends upon this-whether the first link of the chain is a datum. So far from it, the first and most essential point of Mr. Duke's series is a nullity; and, if so, all the links of his " series" fall to the ground of their own accord. He must, therefore, allow me to leave them, till he has proved the first position; which, as he can never do, I shall not trouble myself with his series. But one word on my "pretended wit." Į meant not the slightest disrespect; I spoke in good humour, not with unkindness; and he ought to make some allowance, for he himself suggested the "wit," such as it is, by first saying that the sun and moon went together on the pannels of a particular carriage. But I have done. I part with my correspondent, who VOLUNTARILY became so, with regard, and would willingly refer the remaining discussion to my dining-room. I leave him in full possession of his full-moon at Abury, which, as they are both round, even his intuition cannot distinguish from the Sun. When a person, in argument, is reduced-I will not say, to an absurdity -but to an IMPOSSIBILE," it is nseless to contend. My friend, upon the questions between us, is as much bound and tied up, as Promotheus Vinctus-one on Tan-hill, as the other on Caucasus! He may kick with his legs, but his head is fast:-and I here retire, conscious that nothing will convince him; and equally conscious that all who have paid the least attention to the arguments, are already convinced. [Jan. I ought to make an apology to you and your readers for having said so much; and I leave them to determine whether he or I most deserve the motto "Ex omni ligno non fit MERCURIUS.” Yours, &c. W. L. BOWLES. Mr. URBAN, IN N the new edition of the "Progresses of Queen Elizabeth," Mr. Nichols notices, that in 1591 the Queen was at Portsmouth," to which place, it appears, ale was sent from Guildford for her Majesty's use;" and then adds, "no particulars occur of the Queen's visit to Portsmouth, though there is no doubt of her having visited that noble fortress; to which at a great expense she added many new works. She also placed a garrison there, of which some part were to keep watch there night and day at the town gates, and others are set at the top of the Church tower, where, by ringing of a bell, they can give notice what horse and foot are advancing towards the town, and, by waving colours, signify from what quarter they come.' I have now to request you to insert a positive confirmation of the Queen's Visit to Portsmouth, extracted from the Records of that Corporation; which no doubt Mr. Nichols would have inserted in his valuable work, had he known of its existence. "Memorandum. That on Monday, the 30th day of August, 1591, at an assemblie in the house of Mr. Ric. Leonard, Mayor of the Towne of Portesmouth, then beinge p'sent ye said Mr. Richard Leonard, Mayor, Owin Tottie, Richard Jarvis, John Humfry, Thomas Vaust, Thomas Tridles, and divers other Burgess's of ye said Towne, John Rider, Clarke, Chaplyn to the Right Ho. the Earle of Sussex, was made and admitt'd a Burges of the said Towne, and sworne ac cordinglie, as well in consideration that the said John Rider was then Orator for the said Towne at the cominge of the Queenes Matie to Portesmouth aforesaid, as also for that he hath likewise p'mised to supplie the same place at any other tyme when occasion shall serve." Doubtless many interesting Historical Memoranda are interspersed among the Records of this Corporation, which it is hoped may one day see the light. N. R. S. Yours, &c. |