of right, and in capital charges of every kind, and the laws of justice, are received from it.

On another occasion I should be happy to offer you some observations on the Pooran, or mythological books; and Bidye, or books of sciences, including the Nutt Bidya, or juggler's text book.

W. BARNES.

THE BAYEUX TAPESTRY. WE append by way of postscript the following addenda and corrections to our Article on the Bayeux Tapestry, p. 471 of our last number.

In the copy of the inscriptions, note p. 471, for Hic Harold Dux, read, Ubi Harold Dux. The words Et venerunt ad Dol should follow Cosnonis. For Alfgyva, read, Elfgyva ;-what does this term, taken as a distinctive appellation, imply? Elfgyva Emma occurs in the Saxon Chronicle. In the absence of any satisfactory conjecture we refer it to our Saxon literati. For Conan fuyā vertit, read, Conan fuga vertit; for at Hestengaceastre, read, at Hestenga-ceastra; the prefix at or at before the names of places is a decided Saxonism. For fuga verteruntur Angli, read, fugá verterunt Angli.

In the proper name Gyrth, the Saxon is employed, GYRÐ; and the Saxon character for the conjunction et is occasionally used, precisely as it occurs throughout Domesday book 7, also +, a character used in Saxon MSS. Many of the letters are blended together in the monogrammatic form, in the same way as on the coffin of Queen Matilda at Caen. These peculiarities, and others, which we could not typographically indicate, will be observed on reference to the drawings of the Tapestry by the late C. A. Stothard, as engraved in the Vetusta Monumenta.

Among the numerous circumstances which shew that the pictorial record was directed by an eye-witness of the Norman invasion, may be noticed the landing at Pevensey-that is, in the bay bearing that name; the cavalry proceeding immediately to the nearest town, Hastings, to forage for provisions for the troops of William,

exhausted as they would be by the sickness incident to a sea voyage-the cooking of the food thus obtained, the Bishop (Odo) blessing the repast as chaplain to the army. A tradition of this refection lingers at Hastings even to the present day, and a rock of tabular form which lay on the sea beach near that town, near the present gateway into St. Leonard's, had acquired from time immemorial the name of "the Conqueror's Table." We may also notice the examination, by Duke William, of a person named Vital, who had been despatched as a scout to look for the approaching army of Harold :-the Bishop Odo exhorting the Norman Infantry (Pueros) to sustain the shock of battle; the overthrow of the standard of Harold, represented as a dragon,* and its bearer; all these circumstances accumulate to

"confirmations, strong,

As proofs of Holy Writ,"

of the contemporaneous execution of the Tapestry. Indeed so firmly must they have opposed themselves to the

"

new conjecture" offered by Mr. Corney, that the Tapestry was fabricated about one hundred and forty years after the battle of Hastings, that he was obliged to get rid of them, and of the entire testimony borne by appropriate costume, in a way much more novel and surprising than the new conjecture itself,-namely, by suggesting that the whole internal evidence of identity was owing to some ingenious forger of Antiquities "for the nonce! "

"The elaborate nature of the composition, and the intelligence contained in the inscriptions, clearly point out," says Mr. Corney, "the superintendence of some learned person," (read forger) "who most probably was qualified to direct the operatives as to the costume of the period. It is observable that Harold is called Dur previously to the scene of his coronation, afterwards Rex. William, whose coronation forms no part of the pictorial tale, is called Dur, never Rex. This evinces a

*This is a discrepancy with the Chronicles, which describe the standard of Harold as embroidered with the figure of an armed warrior.

desire to avoid anachronisms; and is not erroneous costume an anachronism?"

So, because the Tapestry whose details end with the death of Harold does not style William King, before he was recognised as such and crowned, and thus fall into a blunder and absurdity of the grossest nature, its contemporaneous authenticity is to be questioned and overthrown! Really this is a subtilty of argument which we cannot praise, because it is beyond the bounds of any rational consideration. The proposition refutes itself, and saves us any extension of our postscript.

MR. URBAN, Greenwich, May 14. I REQUEST permission to comment on the review of my Researches and Conjectures on the Bayeux Tapestry, which appeared in the last number of your Magazine.

1. The Reviewer appends to my name the significant capitals F.S.A. The authority for this honorable addition has escaped my inquiries, and I cheerfully give him the credit of an archaiologic discovery.

The

2. I am avowedly answerable for a new conjecture; but, in controverting the asserted antiquity of the Bayeux Tapestry, do not stand alone. Abbé de la Rue ascribes it to the Empress Matilda, or Maud, who died in 11672; Sir Samuel Meyrick, a very accomplished antiquary, declares it to have been "fabricated under the directions of the Empress Maud;" and the Honorable Daines Barrington conceives it was woven many centuries after the Norman invasion."4

"

3. When we have the misfortune to experience a failure of documentary evidence, it is surely allowable to have recourse to conjecture, and to internal evidence. This plan I have pursued ; but the Reviewer censures the comprehensive and decisive terms in which I express myself on the latter criterion. Now, I shall repeat the axiom in question-so he is pleased to call it-in juxta-position with his own axiom :

Pro

"This point [internal evidence]_requires considerate examination. priety of costume is not always decisive of the coeval execution of a monument. It may have been the result of choice, or of the propensity of inferior artists to copy the works of their predecessors."-C. Propriety of costume is always (in works of the middle age) decisive of the coeval execution of a monument."The Reviewer.

I confidently leave my axiom to its fate-and, with the same confidence, leave the reader to decide who has best observed the important canon of criticism: "Il faut être reservé sur les affirmations générales."

4. The Reviewer strenuously urges the alleged practice of ancient sculptors, painters, illuminators, &c. I admit, and have dwelt on, the importance of that tangible evidence which is afforded by "architectural remains, monumental effigies, coins, seals, illuminations, &c."-but in the application of such evidence, I conceive that much caution is requisite-much more caution than is commonly exerted. Antiquaries are too apt to argue in a ̈ circle; to assume the date of a monument-to assume that the costume which it exhibits is that of the period -and from ideas of costume so obtained, to infer the date of other monuments which exhibit the same costume. Now, the establishment of a date in such cases is often an insurmountable difficulty. Mr. Gally Knight, who has paid so much attention to mediæval architecture, admits that "few dates can be discovered relating to early buildings, and affording satisfactory evidence on controverted points ;" and Mr. David Casley, who had examined ancient manuscripts with singular care and assiduity, remarks that the want of a date is the "general defect in MSS."

5. It is a favourite mode of argument with the Reviewer-if argument it can be called-to reverse my propositions. I have asserted that the letters of the inscriptions "are unlike those on the seals of our Kings of the

M. Duval, in a critical essay on Marie de France, remarks: "jamais Breton, à cette époque, ne se fût dit Français." We may with the same confidence exclaim: jamais Normand, à cette époque, ne se fut dit Français.

If we believe the monument to have been executed after the union of Normandy with France, the appellation Franci would be that of the periodbut an anachronism as applied to the events described. I have suggested that it might have been an oversight: now cometh, with permission of the Reviewer, a new conjecture. Henry de Beaumont, Bishop of Bayeux, died in 1205-soon after the union. Pierre, his reputed successor, was a nonentity. Robert des Ableges, one of the canons of the church, obtained the episcopate in 1206, and held it twenty-five years. There are circumstances in the life of this prelate which make it probable that the monument in question was executed in his time. Detached from other evidence, they may not convince -but certainly form a curious addition to it. His connexion with Bayeux extended probably over half a century; and his munificence to the church could not but make him a favorite with the chapter. Now the subject of the

monument-which for various reasons I have ascribed to the chapter-was exactly suited to his character. A Tancred by descent, he was a Tancred in spirit. He had served in an expedition against the Albigeois. In the crusade of 1216 he conducted his own soldiers to the Holy Land, and is said to have been present in some victorious affair at Acre. An armament, an embarkation, a victory, a martial prelate, &c.-what could be more appropriate? At what more suitable time could such an ornament be devised for a church?

The new conjecture shall now make its appearance. Robert des Ableges was an especial favorite of Philippe Auguste; and it is possible that the word Franci, in lieu of Normanni, may have been designedly introduced as an act of homage to that monarch.

In justification of the relative importance attributed to this question, I shall submit an anecdote. The Lai d'Ignaurès, by Renaut, contains this couplet:

"Franchois, Poitevin et Breton

L'apie tent le Lay del Prison." MM. Monmerqué and Michel, the experienced editors of the Poem, consider that the distinction made between the French and the Poitevins proves it to have been composed before the union of Poitou with France, in 1205; and M. Raynouard, who admits this to be une forte conjecture, finds in the style proofs of its remarkable antiquity.*

The Reviewer asks how the fact escaped me, that "the Conqueror addressed his Charters relating to English affairs, tam Francis quam Anglis.""-The fact did not escape me: I have cited, as an authority, the Exemplar Chartarum Regum Angliæ, in which the formula" omnibus fidelibus suis Francis et Anglicis" occurs, I doubt if the Reviewer interprets it correctly. I contend that the word Franci has no reference to the population of Normandy-but, to all persons resident in England except natives. is impossible otherwise to explain this variation of the formula: "fidelibus suis Francis et Anglis de Kent."

It

7. The Reviewer points out to my attentive consideration some remarks of Mr. Charles Stothard.-I cite, in my Researches, the very paper; and must now add that Mr. Stothard is somewhat more cautious than the Reviewer. "It was the invariable practice," he says, "with artists in every country, excepting Italy, during the middle ages, whatever subject they took in hand, to represent it according to the manners and customs of their own time."5 Now, this exception is equivalent to an admission, that artists of intelligence avoided the absurd practice which the axiom of the Reviewer implies. Does he consider that the pictorial epic in question, displays no intelligence?

1705, 4to. p. 205, etc.

5 Archaeologia, xix. 186.

4 H

3. "Mr. Corney, to account for these circumstances [the few Saxonisms which the Tapestry contains], asserts that the Saxon language prevailed at Bayeux, where traces of it are still discoverable; this we take to be a real curiosity of literature,' greater than any D'Israeli has culled, or our author tracking the compiler through his authorities, illustrated by his critical castigations."-The Reviewer.

Those only who are familiar with the history of certain minor events which have gently agitated the République des Lettres in the course of the last few months, can form an adequate conception of the dismay which came over me on the perusal of the above paragraph. I shall endeavour to discuss it with something like serenity.To fabricate a curiosity of literature is a misdemeanour which deserves the sharpest castigation; but every collector is liable to have a spurious article in his possession,-and if he names the former proprietor, he relieves himself of much of the responsibility which would otherwise attach. This is precisely what I have done,-and I shall now produce additional facts in illustration of my fidelity.

Before the fall of the Roman empire, the maritime parts of Normandy had acquired the name of LITTUS SAXONICUM.2 The Saxons who had formed settlements in le Bessin became famous.3 Grégoire de Tours, who flourished in the sixth century, twice mentions the Saxones Bajocassini, the Saxons of Bayeux; and in the vernacular chronicles they are called les Saisnes de Bayeux.5 Two acts of Charles le Chauve, dated in 843 and 853, notice a district under the name of Otlingua Saxonia, la Petite-Saxe; and some of the villages which it com

1 Vide Gent. Mag. 1838, i. 61, etc.

prised are in the immediate vicinity of Bayeux. Dudon de St.-Quentin, a writer of the tenth century, informs us, that William I. of Normandy sent his son Richard to Bayeux to learn the Danish language, which at Rouen was obsolescent, about the year 940;$ and Benoît de Sainte-More, a poet of the twelfth century, repeats this curious information. I cannot omit the latter anecdote,-because, as the learned Bosworth assures us, the northern languages "have a striking similarity."io

I shall assume that I have justified my assertion as to the prevalence of the Saxon language at Bayeux-but, indeed, the addition that traces of it are still discoverable appears to be considered as the more extravagant portion of the curiosity of literature. To relieve myself of the charge of fabricating an article of that description, I shall introduce as my substitute M. Frédéric Pluquet, Membre de la Société Royale des Antiquaires de France, de l'Académie des Belles-Lettres de Caen, de la Société des Antiquaires de Normandie, etc.

"Baveux.-Une colonie Saxonne a habité à ses portes, et la langue et les usages du Nord s'y sont conservés plus long-temps qu'ailleurs."-Frédéric Pluquet, 1827.11

"BAYEUX SOUS LES SAXONS.-Il ne nous reste des Saxons que des noms de lieu et quelques mots qui se sont conservés dans la langue rustique."-Frédéric Pluquet, 1829.12

It is now time to acquit M. Frédéric Pluquet,-and finally to dispose of this real curiosity of literature. It pertaineth to the Reviewer! He has read, as I conceive, that mischievous brochure entitled, Ideas on Controversy;13 and has too literally interpreted Idea XV: "In quoting your op

9 Roman de Rou, i. 127, note.

11 Roman de Rou, i. 67, note.