To exhibit the writer's own account (though the extract may be deemed a long one,) of his conduct in this great undertaking, appeared to be the most unexceptionable as to him, as well as moft fatisfactory to our readers; and there can be no doubt that fo ingenuous and candid a reprefentation of his labours will be fuitably received by the judicious among thofe lovers of British antiquities, for whofe ufe they were undertaken. We are only forry to fee the writer fall into so testy a mood, as to give a retort, fo hafty and uncourteous, to the fuppofed authors of injuries not yet in exiftence. That unprovoked defiance to critics, which minor writers fo often throw out, was unworthy of Mr. Gough. Is he to be told, that however arduous are the labours, and however exalted is the merit, of any man, this boafted fuperiority can only be afferted over trifling or unjuft cavils.-Criticifm, when jutt, is not to be parried by a bravado, let it come from what hand it may ; a circumftance of which every writer must be more confcious than he may chufe to own; and fuch affected contempt only betrays what it is affumed to conceal. This writer will fubmit only to the correction of the liberal-minded and communicative antiquary.' Mr. G. may be all this himfelf, yet he entertains very crude ideas of criticifm. Every fchool-boy can repeatne futor ultra crepidam; and will Mr. G. carry an obfcure infcription, or a doubtful medal, to a liberal-minded and communicative' navigator, lawyer, botanift, or Newmarket jockey, for expofition? Yet it feems the ftudy of antiquities qualifies a man to determine the merits of literary compofition! Let Mr. Gough, however, enjoy his own notions on this subject, without farther moleftation from critics by profeffion.'

When we confider how much time has elapfed fince Camden wrote, and when we contemplate the fimilar large ftore of materials accumulated by Mr. Gough, to bring the whole down to the prefent ftate of things, we cannot avoid wishing that he had blended all together, fo as to have produced one connected, uniform work; rather than have prefented each county in a disjointed form, for the purpose of preferving all that Camden wrote, feparately from his own additions. The grand object in view was, to produce a good topographical defcription, including the antiquities, of our own country; it is of much less importance to the reader, to whom the respective articles belong; and of this the notes might have informed him. No difrefpect would have been fhewn to Camden by making this free use of him, for his works are till to be had feparate, both in the original, and in tranflations. Had Mr. Gough proceeded on the plan of making the work his own, he would have found his pen more at liberty; he might have extended

I

tended his information by the affiftance of Dr. Campbell; and he would probably have comprized the whole in lefs compafs.

As it is, though the ftyle of the performance is not intitled to very great commendation, Camden certainly uíes more eafy familiar language in this modern tranflation, than through the medium of Bishop Gibfon; and the additions furnished by the prefent editor, befide their intrinfic merit, are accompanied with a recommendation indifpenfable in all works that lay claim to confidence as hiftoric authority: the author produces his vouchers for all that he relates; and what he affirms from his own knowlege, ftands afluredly on equal ground of credibility. The maps are neat, and have the appearance of being correct; the plates of antiquities, including thofe defcribed both by Camden and his editor, amount to above ninety, and are well executed: we wish we could add, that the references to them were always correct: but fuch errors are more probably chargeable on the engravers, than either on the author or the printer. The table of diftances between cities and towns, might have been much improved, with no great trouble, by correction from Paterfon's Road-book.

We wish not to degrade the ftudy of antiquities: but, when we confider the pofitive and extenfive utility of fuch a table as that above mentioned, which would have been deemed ineftimable, had it been found on an old marble, (and which, as it is given, ought to have been given in measured, instead of computed miles,) compared with many of the infcriptions here recorded, fome of which, like that on the font at Bridekirk, (vol. iii. p. 183.) fet all the powers of conjecture at defiance, we are fometimes tempted to regret that the thirst for antiquities, like Aaron's rod, is fo ftrong in fome men, as to fwallow up every modern confideration. Might we be indulged in paufing for a moment, with this idea in our minds, we would add, that it feems ftrange, that while monuments of Roman architecture fhould have come down to us so correct, as to be accepted as models to copy for prefent ufe, and while our alphabet is derived from the fame people, their infcriptions, in this country, fhould generally be fo rude and barbarous, that thofe fcrawled on our village fign-pofts are better formed and more easily comprehended! The moft obvious inference is, that the clearer an infcription is cut, the more attention does it claim; for as the love of fame has ever been congenial with man, it is more than probable, that thofe infcriptions which are moft coarfely cut, and prove the moft difficult to make out, fhould be thofe of the moft vulgar and illiterate, and the most useless when underftood. No one, perhaps, is more able to judge of the validity of this criterion of Roman antiquities,

than

than Mr. Gough; if the freedom of our remarks may not have destroyed all amicable community of fentiment between us.

Recovering, then, from this digreffion, and having enabled. our readers to form a general idea of this laborious and ufeful performance, we fhall only add a few of thofe incidental and promifcuous remarks, that occurred on turning over the volumes.

There was ample caufe of alarm for the credit of our country in fanctity, when by an error of the prefs*, in Camden's cautious mention of St. Urfula, her virgin companions are reduced from 11,000 to 1100, barely the tithe of the original number!-but what is this reduction to that of the editor, who, in his note, allows her only one folitary companion?

The whole legend took its rife from an infcription, Ursula & Undecimilla, virgines; proper names being mistaken for numbers.' A perfon of fcrupulous orthodoxy would have funk this difcovery in his own breaft, and not have made fuch a drawback from the noble army of martyrs! By a fcrutiny of fuch a nature, even the Lives of the Saints, in ten quartos, might shrink to an octavo volume.

We are pleased when Mr. G. gratifies us with descriptions. of natural curiofities, and works of art, refpecting which we fometimes with he had been rather more explanatory; being inclined to think that fuch objects as the Giant's Causeway in Ireland, the fimilar productions at Staffa, the peculiar nature of foils and fprings, the manufactures cultivated in different places, the ftupendous undertakings to promote internal navigations, Edward's bridge at Ponty y pridd, the iron bridge at Colebrook-dale, with every other object, in fhort, which diftinguishes one place from another, are at leaft as important as tracing the dubious vestiges of a military way, determining what legion occupied any particular station, or even difcovering the name of the potter on the fragment of an urn! The editor briefly touches the former, but he is evidently more agreeably engaged in the latter; and allows his imagination more fcope in fuch difcuffions than in thofe of a philofophical complexion. On this head, we wish it were poffible to fcreen Mr. Camden from the harfh cenfure of his editor. In the defcription of the county of Fermanagh, in Ireland, Mr. Camden reports the tradition of the natives refpecting the origin of Logh Erne, which tradition correfponds with the hiftory of Sodom and Gomorrha. His editor is greatly difpleafed that he fhould fo gravely deliver this foolish hearfay, about the current report of this lake having once been firm ground t;' and yet Mr. G. could afterward + Vol. iii. p. 607.

Vol. i. p. 7.

as

as gravely retail a much longer legend concerning St. Patrick's Purgatory*. It is not clear that Camden credited the report which he tranfcribed, and yet there is nothing fo improbable in a lake having once been firm ground: but it seems as if neither pious tradition nor philofophical reafoning are agreeable to Mr. Gough for after including the Bishop of Down in the cenfure of Camden, for his partiality to the Irish annals, he difmifles the fubject in a very fummary manner, which we think it beft to deliver in his own words: It was formerly the fashion to account for any fingular phoenomenon in this terraqueous globe by a general deluge; now it is the ton to philofophize them into volcanic eruptions. But Wifdom is juftified in all her children; and we may, without fatire, fay with Cicero, that there was never an opinion fo abfurd which has not been patronized by fome eminent philofopher +.' True: but it will not follow that abfurd opinions are evidences of philofophical abilities.

Mr. G. might have executed his own tafk without depreciating his predeceffors: but having fixed his charge of credulity on Camden, he extends the fame charge to Bifhop Gibfon; yet however they may be liable to fuch imputations on other accounts, it is to their credit that the inftances produced do not juftify it. Under Bedfordshire, Mr. G. obferves, on the Circumcifion 1399, the very deep water near Bedford, which runs between the village of Sullifton and Harewood, fuddenly stopped and parted, leaving its channel dry for three miles; which was interpreted by many to prefage the divifion of the nation, and their revolt from the king. Dr. Childrey endeavours to account for this by a fudden frost. Bishop Gibfon gravely tells us the same thing happened, as he was informed, January 18, or 28, 1648, and refers it to the king's death. Had the remarker been as gravely cautious as the churchman, the remark would not have appeared. His lordfhip clofes the fimple relation of these two reports by adding,

and as the first was looked upon to be a prognoftic of the civil war that enfued, fo may this be as well thought a prognoftic of the death of King Charles the Firft." His own opinion, whatever it might be, is artfully concealed: if his reader was weak enough to believe in omens, the Bishop was right; if wicked enough to laugh at them, ftill the reverend editor was not wrong. Mr. G. can relate fome odd ftories as gravely, and without any fvmptom of diftruft: of a few that came under our eye, we fnall only felect one. After menVol. iii. p. 641. + Id. p.607. + Vol. i. p. 326. Gibfon, zd ed. vol. i. p. 336.

tioning

tioning the famous dropping well at Knaresborough, the author adds, it falls, however, fhort of that extraordinary fpring at Clermont in Auvergne, whofe lapidescent quality is fo ftrong, that it turns all its fubftance into ftone, and will change into a mass of stone, in the fhape and fize of the veffet it is put into and Petrus John Faber reports, that they make bridges of it over its ftream into their gardens, for by pumping water over timber placed on purpose, they have a complete ftone bridge in twenty-four hours*." The very circumftances of this wonderful ftory, fo like an Arabian tale, fuperfede all occafion for remark, nor do we wish to proceed in this ftyle; having nothing farther in view, than barely to illuftrate an old proverb often quoted, which tells us, that if a man's houfe be made of glass, he fhould be cautious of finging ftones at his neighbours.

We have neither the leifure, the ability, nor the wish, to form a table of errata to Mr. Gough's edition of the Britannia. No work of that extent, can be exempt from erroneous information, prefs errors, and even fometimes errors in judg ment. The correction of thefe muft reft on the liberality of communication from the places to which they relate, which is not always to be had, nor to be implicitly believed when procured. Two or three flips, which we have casually noted in turning over the numerous pages of this voluminous publication, are at Mr. G.'s fervice, thould he deem them worthy of his regard, when occafionally correcting for a new edition.

Vol. ii. p. 27. 2d col. the number of wards into which the city of London is divided, is faid to be 26: but this is a mistake; the 26th ward, Bridge-without, is the borough of Southwark, a nominal finecure appointment given to the fenior alderman, or father of the city. In the fame paragraph, the number of common councilmen is faid to be 210: the true number is 236. How could thefe errors efcape from a prefs in that city?

Page 114. 2d col. On the cliff by the feat, ftand fome remains of St. Edmund's chapel, erected 1272, and near it stood a lighthouse, whofe light, reflected from a lamp of oil against a combination of glattes, is feen seven leagues out at fea.' Is this lighthoufe ftanding, or is it not? We rather think it is, reflectors being a modern improvement.

Page 234. Under Lincolnshire, the author makes an obvious. and just remark: It has frequently been obferved, as a very fingular circumftance, that no other part of the county to the fame extent, is furnished with fuch large and handfome parish

* Gough, vol. iii. p. 55. REV. OCT. 1790.

Hunstanton, Norfolk.

churches