« ZurückWeiter »
journess, through all its powers, yet inheriting no flame. us from heaven, proceeding only in an equal and even thinking, judicious but not vigorous, steady but not
i even leaving his readers to Number where they Thouli ke the most. Such an author must seem incompetent nighty task before him, to infuse life into the dead mat." let the dull mass in motion, and to make the jarring inite into a world of beauty. Even his fober faculty of ent, however predominating, can hardly be expected to nually wakeful at her station, through so long and tirecombination of extraneous incidents into one system. find this to be actually the cale. introductory remarks we find Mr. King asserting, that lands, and most northerly parts of Scotland, there was not, ne of Ptolemy, in the middle of the second centựry, so much irith town among nine nations."* : nine are the Epidii, the Cerones, the Carnonacce, the
and the Cornabii, ihe Caledonii, the Cantæ, the nd the Mentæ. These, indeed, have no towns affign
by Ptolemy, because they had no Roman or regular ke the others. But that they had “ British towns," t from Mr. King's own confefficn afterwards, when s " some clusters of artient dwellings were, by.de. onftructed in deep woods, and morallès; and near 1 when he acknowledges among these, “ we may, m one to have been even the first origin of London :") n concerning “ the capital of Čaflivellaunus” he æfar as saying, “The Britons call a place a town, -y have fortified thick impassable woods, by means of and folle. If the Britons in general had towns, mine nations in particular had them. Only, these
fuch towns as the Romanized Britons had. They ly " British towns.” They were merely forts in the Yet even these Mr. King afterwards recognizes ex
of the north. The towns of the unconquered were mere forts still; and the forts of the conquered had become stations of Roman soldiery, with regular towns of Britons, at the side of them. Nor were the houses of the Britons what Mr. King avers them to have been, “ small hovels formed of loose stones, with sticks, and boughs; and covered with grass, or reeds; nearly like those described by many of our navigators and travellers in the South-Sea islands in Africa, and in America,” * When the fancy is let loose to float in air, without any restraint from historical authority, it flies at once from Polę to Pole, and unites the North with the South in an instant. The buildings of the Britons, we know, from the first Roman who viewed them, were " very numerous” in themselves, " and very nearly similar to those of the Gauls,” who had regular towns among them, and who, therefore, built not their private houses like those of the roving lavages in America, Africa, or the isles of the Southern Sea. The conceit, indeed, that they did, would be as unworthy of Mr. King as it would be contradictory to Cæsar; and Mr. King therefore says, with a tacit reference to Cæsar, “ that, though of the saine form" with the Gallic houses, " they (the British houses] were in general of still lels dimensions, and of less nice construction, than those of the Gauls.” I Mr. King will find a great difference between the houses, though Cæsar says there was little. We have actually an account of a Gallic houfe from Cæsar, which shews the Gallic nobles to have resided in houses like our own, with a village of cottages, adjoining. When a detachment of Romans was sent secretly to seize Ambiorix at his manfion-house, they first " seized many of his men suda denly in the fields, by their information they pushed on for Ambiorix himself, at a place in which he was reported to be with a few horsemen. By great good-fortune it happened, that they caine upon him before he was aware of them and prepared against them; yet by great ill-luck, when the Romans secured all the implements of warfare, which he had with him," a regular kind of a moury in his house ! « and took possession of his chariots and horses," that must have been lodged in the stables and sheds belonging to the house," he himself escaped the death designed for him; and his escape was effected by this circumstance, that, the edifice being surrounded with a wood, as are almost all the houses of the Gauls; (this people for the sake of avoiding the heats generally seeking the vicinity of woods
- towns; as “ even their best towns,” he tells us, “we
univerlally, 'mere afsemblages of-huts.” II. Thus are reported at first to have no one British town, c nations,”' are acknowledged, indirectly, at last, to - equally with the other nations of Britain, and to owns now as the other nations had originally. The confounded himself, for want of distinguishing he. onquered nations of the south and the unconquered
* P. 11. .t Cæsar de Bell, Gall. v. 12. “ Creberrima-ædi. ficia, fere Gallicis confimilia.”
and rivers), his attendants and menials,” who lodged in the fante house with him, “ took post at a narrow pass, and for a time fustained the charge of our cavalry.”* So ample in dimensions, so provided with rooms, so furnished with outhouses, and so attended by villages, were the houses of the Gallic nobles ! and the British in general, we know, were “ very nearly fimilar to those of the Gauls” in general.t.
After this unfortunate trip at the commencement of his course, Mr. King proceeds to “ aboriginal British fortresses ;" of these he speciñes many. Only, the first appears in his delineation of it, to be such a fortress as no Briton in his senses could have made; a number of concentric circles, crossed from side to side by a long kind of projecting loop, and having no pasage into it, no avenue out of it. Nor does his description speak of either avenue or passage. I He notices also a camp “ distinguished by the name of Caer Caradoc, near Longnor in Shropihire;”'when the real name is Quer dock without the prefixed Caer, derived from a long range of hills, that has three paps or hummocks on it, called Lawly-Hill, Little Quordock-Hill, and Great Quordock-Hill. The last has this camp upon its summit, as the area," there being not merely (as Mr. King describes it,) « irregular,” but a strangely. irregular space of ground, a mere mass of hillocks and hollows; being too, not (as Mr. King adds) “ of pretty confiderable extent,” but only about three acres within the exterior trench, and only two within the interior. Yet it has, what is very extraordinary, though not noticed by Mr. King, a well of water within it. The whole, however, is so rude in its form and features, that the judgement of every antiquary must readily concur with us, in attributing it still, with Mr. King, to the Britons; but in attributing it to the earliest of them, and in showing Mr. King from it the necessity of claffing his British fortreffes, the
* De Bell. Gall. vi. 30. “ Multos in agris inopinantes deprehen. .. dit : eorum indicio ad ipfum Ambiorigem contendit, quo in loco cum
paucis equitibus effe dicebatur.--Sicut magno accidit casu, ut in ipsum incautum atque imparatum incideret,- lic magnæ fuit fortunæ, omni militari instrumento, quod circum fe habebat, erepto, rhedis equil. que comprehensis, ipsum effugere mortem ; fed hoc eo factum eft, quod ædificio circumdato filvâ (ut sunt fere domicilia Gallorum, qui vitan. di æitùs causâ, plerumque filvarum ac fluminum petunt propinquitates) comites familiaresque ejus angufto in loco, equitum noftrorum vim paulisper fuftinuerunt."
† King, P. 10, speaks of the Britons " fishing.” He forgets they
rivers), his attendants and menials,” who lodged in the fut se with him, “ took post at a narrow pass, and for a ti vined the charge of our cavalry."* So ample in dimensions rovided with rooms, so furnished with outhouses, and i ided by villages, were the houses of the Gallic noble. the British in general, we know, were very nearly fin, o those of the Gauls” in general.t Fier this unfortunate trip at the commencement of hi e, Mr. King proceeds to “ aboriginal British fortresses tse he speciñes many. Only, the first appears in his di ion of it, to be such a fortress as no Briton in his senka have made; a number of concentric circles, crossed from ) fide by a long kind of projecting loop, and having a 9 into it, no avenue out of it. Nor does his description of either avenue or pasláge. I He notices also a camp , inguished by the name of Caer Caradoc, near Longnor opthire ;'s when the real name is Quer dock without the d Caer, derived from a long range of hills, that he aps or hummocks on it, called Lawly-Hill, Little QuorHill, and Great Quordock-Hill. The laft has this camp 's fummit, “ the area," there being not merely (as Mr. describes it,) « irregular," but a strangely. irregular
ground, a mere mass of hillocks and hollows; being t (as Mr. King adds) “ of pretty considerable extent," y about three acres within the exterior trench, and only hin the interior. Yet it has, what is very extraordinary, not noticed by Mr. King, a well of water within it. ole, however, is so rude in its form and features, that rement of every antiquary must readily concur with Etributing it still, with Mr. King, to the Britons ; but uting it to the earliest of them, and in showing Mr.
uled bed with the greatude in such a folabour of erelihat
King's Munimenta Antique. túdeft, as first; the finest, as last. * Mr. King proceeds to mention the vitrified castles of Scotland ; and ingeniously accounts for the appearance of vitrification upon them, from the wood originally laid in the banks to bind them, and from an acci. dental fire affecting the earthy iron ore of a vitrecible nature, with which the country about it abounds, and of which the earth of the banks had perhaps been composed. But when he includes Maiden Castle, in Dorsetshire, among his British fortresses, he goes equally against all authority, all probability, all evidence.
« It is not easily to be imagined,” he cries, that the Roman's would have been at the inconceivable labour of erecting mud walls of fo astonishing a magnitude in such a spot, when they were so well ac. quainted with the great preference (preferableness) of stone ramparts, used by them in so many other places.”
This objection is powerless from its very violence, as it would equally take from the Romans all the other encampments of theirs in the island; these being equally formed, of what Mr. King most improperly calls, mud walls,"? but what are really banks of earth. These are the ramparts of their encampments, while the stone ramparts” are confined entirely to their stations. And Mr. King reasons only from confounding these with thofe. It is no less unaccountable," he adds, however, " that they should, contrary to their usual mode, prefer such a barbarous and irregular form.” The Romans could have no "usual mode” in actual warfare. They must make their camps conform to their ground. They did so here, « Maiden Castle," says Stukeley, " takes in the whole fummit of a great hill, I” and. fo is configurated by the very figure of the hill. “ Neither can any satisfactory reason be alligned,” as Mr. King persists in saying, “why, no Roman bricks, or coins, have been found here, when so many are found at Maumbury, a much inferior work, near Dorchester.” Maumbury is the famous amphitheatre, and has no Roman bricks," any more than Maiden Castle has even only one fo.
m it the neceflity of claffing his British fortresses, the
Bell. Gall. vi. 30. “ Multos in agris inopinantes deprehenm indicio ad ipfum Ambiorigem contendit, quo in loco cum itibus effe dicebatur.--Sicut magno accidit casu, ut in ipum atque imparatum incideret,- lic magnæ fuit fortunæ, ri instrumento, quod circum fe habebat, erepto, rhedis equis. henfis, ipsum effugere mortem ; sed hoc eo factum est, quod cumdato silvâ (ut funt fere domicilia Gallorum, qui vitan. sâ, plerumque silvarum ac fluminum petunt propinquitates) iliaresque ejus angufto in loco, equitum nostrorum vim tinuerunt." P. 10, speaks of the Britons " fishing.” He forgets they Dio. Ixxvi. 12). - Fig, s. Pp. 20, 21. § P. 22.
* Mr. King, P. 25. on the authority of " Rowland” (Rowlands, deduces Dinas a town from ~ Dinefu ; i. e. from mens associating and bandying together." He thus takes the derivative for the primitive meaning. Dinas, a town in Welsh, means, originally, a hill only ; as Dina still means in Irish, and Dinas in Cornish. It thence came to signify a fort on a hill, a town, or a city, as in Cambo. dunum, Camulo-dunum, &c. &ci &c. And from this idea were de. rived Dinefig belonging to a city, Dinafwr or Dinesydd a citizen.Of Dinesu we know nothing. Revi
+ Pp. 30340' i It. Cur. 163. edit. zd.
unlike was e mult, in kinti Yet Mr. Than fword, was adeqı
litary “coin,” though “ so many” are mentioned by Mr. King.* The objection, indeed, even if founded on fact, is absolutely frivolous in its nature; as Maiden Castle was merely a camp for a few inonths, or a few weeks, or a few days; and Maumbury was a place of games to the whole town of Dorchefter for ages. And, after all, an evidence fully adequate to that of the coin, even a broad Roman sword, was found at Maiden Castle, in 1688.+ Yet Mr. King still persists in his error, and we mult, in kindness, attend to deliver him. “How unlike was the whole of the construction here,” he exclaims at last, " to that at Richborough? which latter must have been one of their first establishments on this island; and which gives us decidedly their general plan. I” Mr. King thus confounds again the station and the encampment, though so totally different in themselves. Richborough Castle was a station, or (as Mr. King chooses to call it, deceiving himself by the ambiguity of the word) an “establishment;" though Mr. King has no other reason for calling it " one of their first establishments in this island,” than that, as the port of passage into Britain, it is mentioned first in the Roman Itineraries. Nor, even if it was one of the first, if it was actually the very first, would it "give us decidedly their general plan;" as it would even then give us only their plan for a station, and as there are, in fact, many stations within this island upon a plan very different from that.
After a specification, surely too ample, of these “ aboriginal British fortresses ;” Mr. King goes on to notice “certain subterraneous rude pits and caverns,” as equal monuments of “ British forecast and cunning.” These, however, even if British, ought, in judiciousness, to have preceded the fortresses, as much less plainly British, and much less monuments of architecture. But those which he notes at Royston, in Hertfordshire, at Crayford, or Faversham, in Kent, and at Tilbury, ir Efex, are all made in the native chalk, and are plainly, therefore, nothing more than chalk-pits. They are all “ at the mouth, and thence downwards, like the tunnel or paffage of a well, but, at the bottom, they are large.” Ş They cannot be, what Mr. King supposes them, the subterranean repositories for corn which Diodorus says the Britons had; because the Britons of Essex, and the Britons of Hertfordshire, had no corn in the days of Diodorus. || They were merely, indeed, the pits,
* Mr. Gough, 1–50. says this was found “ near it ;' but, his author, Stukely, 175, says this was found " in the very place.”
+ Stukeley, 163. I Pp. 39, 40. Ś Pp. 47, 48. || Cæfar de Bell. Gall. v. 14. “Cantium-regio est maritima omnis, interiores plerique frumenta non ferunt."
ORIGINAL CRITICISM. “coin,” though “so many" are mentioned by Mr.
The objection, indeed, even if founded on fact, is cly frivolous in its nature; as Maiden Castle was merely
for a few inonths, or a few wecks, or a few days; and sury was a place of games to the whole town of Dorfor ages. And, after all, an evidence fully adequate of the coin, even a broad Roman sword, was found at Ciltle, in 1688.7 Yer Mr. King still persists in his id we mult, in kindness, attend to deliver him. “How as the whole of the construction here,” he exclaims at ) that at Richborough? which latter must have been leir first establishments on this island; and which gives dly their general plan. I” Mr. King thus confounds
Pation and the encampment, though so totally different ·lves. Richborough Castle was a station, or (as Mr. . oses to call it, deceiving himself by the ambiguity of an “establishment;" though Mr. King has no other calling it “one of their first establishments in this van that, as the port of paffage into Britain, it is
first in the Roman Itineraries. Nor, even if it was first, if it was actually the very first, would it “ gives?
King's Munimenta Antiqua. from which London has, in all ages of its buildings, been supplied with chalk for lime. That chalk composed the lime of vur ancestors, as it even composes (we believe) the lime of London at present ; is plain from the derivation of our name of chalk from the Calx of the Romans, those first introducers of lime into our buildings; froin the calcaria of the Romans, Tadcaster, in Yorkshire, so denominated by them from the lime there dug up becoming the cealca-ceaster of the Saxons; and from the Saxòn cealc for chalk, or cealc-fian for a chalk. stone. Having thus turned Mr. King's repositories for corn into mere pits of lime, we must leave him to scoop out his " conical deep pits” on hills and heaths, as strange hidingplaces for the Britons, while they are all open to the sky above. They are all, apparently, what he acknowledges some of them may possibly be, “ mere sand pits,” * mere chalk-pits, mere earth-pits. And the others, which Mr. King mentions, are merely the caverns of nature, improved at times by art, but wholly unworthy of his notice, especially after he has noticed the hill-fortresses, which are so much more illustrious proofs of British architecture. From those, however, Mr. King winds round again to these, even to such as are denominated raths in Ireland ; “ the word itself, rath, signifying properly a surety; and the rath being uniformly allowed to have been the ancient abode, or castle of the old Irish chief.” † The etymon is not true in itself, and the application of it is contradictory to what he had said before. Rath, in Irish, is a surety, as it is also profperity, fern, or wages; but then these meanings are all equally wide of every mark of propriety here. Rath likewise signifies a village, a mount, a fortress, or a garrison; as rath is the Irish appellation of Charleville, in the county of Cork, as Riaghrath imports the Prince's fortress, and Rath-cuirc is the Irish denomination of Cashel, from Cuirc the son of a king of Munster, Hence it is, that “the rath is uniformly allowed to have been the antient castle of the old Irish chief; directly contrary to Mr. King's account of the British houses before, and exactly correspondent with Cæsar's, concerning the Gallic. " They are entrenchments,” notes Mr. King, " thrown up on the very tops of the hills, sometimes with two or three, but more frequently with a single ditch.t” Mr. King, like the Egyptian hieroglyphic for the year, thus circles round into himself, and holds his tail in his teeth. But, as rath imports a mount · equally with a fortress, there are also still remaining," we
find from Mr. King, “ in several parts of Ireland, fmall mounts, on plains, and near rivers, surrounded with iwo or
y their general plan;" as it would even then give leir plan for a slation, and as there are, in fact, ons within this island upon a plan very different
pecification, surely too ample, of these "aboriginal efles ;” Mr. King goes on to notice "certain fub. rude pits and caverns," as equal monuments of recast and cunning.” These, however, even if ht, in judiciousness, to have preceded the fortresses, - plainly Britilh, and much less monuments of ar
But those which he notes at Royston, in HertCrayford, or Faversham, in Kent, and at Tilbury, e all made in the native chalk, and are plainly, othing more than chalk-pits. They are all “ at nd thence downwards, like the tunnel or paffage E, at the bottom, they are large.” They cannot King supposes them, the subterranean repositories h Diodorus says the Britons had; because the 2x, and the Britons of Hertfordshire, had no corn Diodorus. || They were merely, indeed, the pits,
1, 1~-50. says this was found “ near it ;” but, his . 175, says this was found " in the very place." 63.
I Pp. 39, 40. Ś Pp. 47, 48. 11. Gall. v. 14. “Cantium-regio est maritima omnis, e frumenta non ferunt.”