many fatisfactory proofs, and gives numerous inftances of mo numents that have been falfely attributed to the Saxons. Thus, the monument of Ethelwerd, at Winbornminster, appears, from the form of the letters on the brafs plate, to be no older than the Reformation. Bishop Leofric's tomb at Exeter is confeffedly of Queen Elizabeth's reign. What has been miftaken for Harold's tomb at Waltham Abbey, is the cistern of a garden fountain, in James the Firft's time.

The Author next enters into a copious account of such Saxon tombs as appear to be genuine. He defcribes the materials of which monuments in different ages were made,-the manner in which they were executed, and feveral other particulars, equally curious. We must however pafs them over, at the fame time affuring our Readers, that the perufal of them will prove entertaining and inftructive, and afford matter for many interefting

obfervations.

The article of ancient drefs derives much light from fepulchral monuments, which fupplied the place of portraits before we had painters among us: this fubject has been amply treated by the learned and laborious Mr. Strut*. Mr. Gough, however, has made many curious remarks on the drefs of both men and women, from the time of the Conqueft. The armour is minutely defcribed, as are alfo the arms and weapons which are found on ancient monuments. The clerical habit likewife engages much of his attention; and throughout the whole of thefe obfervations on the fafhions of the times, he frequently explains fuch parts of our ancient poets, efpecially Chaucer, as defcribe the drefs and accoutrements of knights, priefts, burgeffes, &c.

We have now given an account of this very long introductory discourse, which may be confidered as a treatife on the fubject. It occupies 194 large folio pages, and is illuftrated with nine well executed copper-plates.

The work itfelf is divided into centuries, each of which contains descriptions of monuments, in chronological order. The defcriptive, however, although extremely accurate, and accompanied with fplendid engravings, is the leaft important part of Mr. Gough's labours. The hiftorical and biographical anecdotes, the criticifms on former writers, the obfervations on the manners of the times, and the variety of mifcellaneous remarks which he has introduced, render the performance highly useful.

The first tomb that is defcribed, is that of Edward the Confeffor, which, according to the Author, may fairly be faid to be the firft of Norman work among us.' The Conqueror, when he came first to London, vifited this tomb, and made an offering of two palls to cover it; and in his charter to Westminster

See Monthly Rev. vol. li. p. 102. ; lii. p. 421.; and lv. p. 184.

Abbey,

Abbey, after a gift of 100 lb. of filver to complete the building, he adds, "Ob reverentiam nimii amoris quem ego in ipfum inclitum regem Edwardum habueram tumbum ejus & reginæ juxta eum pofitæ ex auro et argento fabrili opere artificiofe decoris mirifice operiri feci." This' adds Mr. Gough, was the leaft refpect he could fhew to the memory of a Prince whofe pious chastity had left the fucceffion open to him.' The coffin of the Confeffor was opened 36 years after his death, and the body was found perfectly incorrupt. Miracles multiplying at his tomb, he was canonized; and when Henry III. rebuilt the church, he erected an higher tomb, in which the body was lodged, 1269. All that remained of the infcription in April 1781, was-vxit O inaƐtum romanus civis O bo-in the moft ancient fimple Gothic letters.

Mr. Gough, in many parts of the work, inveighs against the ravages of conquerors, the devaftation of false zeal and fanaticism, the depredations of ignorance, intereft, and falfe tafte; the defacements of the white-wafher's brufh, and a variety of other circumstances which, befide the ever-wafting hand of Time, have all contributed to deftroy the fepulchral monuments of our anceftors.

Among other curiofities, he gives a minute defcription of a brass plate monument at Lynne, which hath hitherto escaped the notice of topographers, who have contented themselves with only tranfcribing the legend round the verge, in Gothic capitals. +Orate pro Animabus Roberti Braunche Leticie et Margarete uxorum ejus et pro omnibus quibus tenentur. Qui quidem Robertus abiit xv. die Octobris, Anno Domini, mccclxiiii. Animi eorum per mifericordiam dei in pace requiefcant, Amen. The brass plate is highly finished, and exquifitely embellifhed. The following is the Author's defcription:

His figure in the centre is habited in flowing hair, close coat, fit below the waift, with long clofe fleeves, and standing cape, an under garment appearing at his neck, and in pointed fhoes faftened on the inftep with a lace or latchet. Under his head is a wrought cufhion rounded at the corners, and supported by angels, and under his feet a fingular but claffical reprefentation of the story of Prometheus and the vulture, worthy the invention of Albert Durer. His two wives, one on each fide of him, are habited in hoods or coifs, and a kind of neckerchief gathered under and round the chin, their gowns clofe about their arms and waifts, but falling thence in elegant folds, and gathered and held up on the right arm of one, and left arm of the other; the fleeves richly embroidered from a little above the elbow to the wrifts, in nearly the fame pattern on both ladies, and the wrist-bands close and double banded; the hems and linings of thefe gowns are alfo richly flowered, but with more variety of patterns. At the feet of each lady is a dog, with a collar

Quere, What other inftance can be produced of claffical literature being cultivated at that time in England?

of

of bells. Both ladies, as well as their husband, recline their heads on rich flowered cufhions fupported by angels.

Each figure is under a rich arch, adorned with crotchets and bouquets, with a back ground not uniformly ornamented. Over the point of each niche, is a fitting figure with a nimbus, and holding an infant in its arms, and fided by angels, holding cenfers and playing on harps and violins, and divided and furmounted by the richeft Gothic work, in various patterns. The two principal pillars at the fides have, in niches, each four figures of men and women; the men in hats and fhort doublets, with or without long fleeves; one in a clofe long cloak, and one in a cloak covering only his left fide. The three women have the fame habits as the larger ones, one only has the hood under the chin like theirs. In the middle of the right pillar are the arms of England and France quarterly, and of the left, a crofs ingrailed, thofe of Branche.

Under the three principal figures is reprefented a feaft, that, for the splendour of the table and the company, the band of mufic and the attendants, might pafs for fome grand anniverfary celebrated in this wealthy town, perhaps the feast of St. Margaret, their patronefs, on the fair day granted them by 'King John; or perhaps the Mayor's feaft, when Mr. Braunch held that office 1349, or 1359. He may be feated at the upper end or right hand of the plate, and the Aldermen and their wives in a row below him.

Among the delicacies of this fplendid table one fees the peacock, that noble bird, the food of lovers, and the meat of Lords*. Few dishes were in higher fashion in the 13th century, and there was fcarce any royal or noble feast without it. They ftuffed it with spices and fweet herbs, and covered the head with a cloth which was kept conftantly wetted to preferve the crown. They roasted it, and ferved it up whole, covered after dreffing, with the skin and feathers on, the comb entire, and the tail fpread. Some perfons covered it with leaf gold instead of its feathers, and put a piece of cotton, dipped in fpirits, into its beak, to which they fet fire as they put it on the table. The honour of ferving it up was referved for the ladies most diftinguished for birth, rank, or beauty, one of whom, followed by the others, and attended by mufic, brought it up in the gold or filver dish, and fet it before the mafter of the houfe, or the guest moft. diftinguished for his courtefy and valour, or after a tournament before the victorious knight, who was to difplay his fkill in carving the favourite fowl, and take an oath of valour and enterprize on its head. The romance of Lancelot, adopting the manners of the age in which it was written, reprefents King Arthur doing this office to the fatisfaction of 500 guests. A picture by Steevens, engraved by l'Empereur, reprefents a peacock feat. Monf. d'Auffy had feen an old piece of tapestry of the 15th century, reprefenting the fame fubject, which he could not afterwards recover to engrave in his curious Hiftory of the Private Life of the French. It may flatter the vanity of the English hiftorian to find this defideratum here fupplied.'

We have felected this defcription, to fhew the ufe which Mr. Gough makes of thefe old fculptures. Former authors, instead

This is the language of the romances of those days.

of

of defcribing the dreffes of the burgefs of Lynne and his two wives, would perhaps only fay, "the figures are habited in the drefs of the times," which is totally unknown. The Author's interpretation of the feaft is an ingenious one; especially if the picture be attentively confidered.

In the account of the tomb of Edward the Black Prince, in Canterbury cathedral, Mr. Gough fays, the ends and fides [viz. of the monument] are garnifhed with 16 copper fhields in ftarred quatrefoils, on which are alternately his arms, England and France quarterly with a file of three points, and his device three oftrich feathers, the quil end of each in a focket, across which is a label with this motto, ich diene, fuperfcribed with the words houmout and ich diene. To this he adds the following note:

Mr. Gotling's account feems rather to have proceeded from his not recollecting the prevalent tradition, than from his doubting the truth of it, though it is not fupported by the authority of contemporary hiftorians. Whatever the first of these mottoes means, the latter is faid to have been taken from the King of Bohemia at Crefïy. Both appear with his fign manual to a grant of a penfion of fifty marks per ann. to John d'Efquet, 34 Edw. III. Ich dien, as always now written, is on this tomb written ich diene. While the origin of this motto is fo difputed, there will be no harm in telling the explanation given of it by an illiterate Welchman who viewed this monument. He faid, that Edward I. when he prefented his new-born fon to the Welsh, affembled at the caftle of Caernarvon, ufed the fe words, Ich dien houmout, "This is the man." Welsh for man, and ych for behold; but I find nothing like houmout in Dyn is certainly the the Welsh dictionaries. The story of Edward's appointing his infant fon Prince of Wales is in all the Welsh hiftorians, but in none of the old English till John Stowe. True it is, that Knyghton (c. 2,87, 2588) exprefsly mentions the King of Bohemia among the flain in the battle of Crefly. And Froiffart (I. c. 130, p. 139.) is most particular in the account of his death, ftating it as told by Rapin and modern hiftorians. He calls him "Roi de Bebaigne," and "Monfeigneur Charles de Behaigne, qui fecrioit, J'ay roi de Behaigne, et en portoit les armes ;" yet, in c. 123, he makes him the fon of the gentile roi de Behaigne et Monfeigneur Charles de Behaigne fon fils, qui deflors s'appelloit roi d'Allemagne." And c. 1, he fpeaks of Charles Duke of Behaigne as on the fide of France. All other writers call the then King of Bohemia John. He married Elizabeth, heirefs of Bohemia, by whom he had Charles, afterwards Emperor, by the name of Charles IV. name, calls him rightly enough King of Bohemia, fon of the EmAnd Froiffart, though he mistakes his peror Henry de Luxenbourg. Carte (11. 460.) properly calls him John King of Bohemia, and his fon, Charles, King of the Romans,

Mr. Goftling fays, "boumout, in the German language, fignifying a baughty Spirit, might reprefent him as an intrepid warrior; and ich dien -1 ferve, as a dutiful fon,"

Sandford

Sandford fays, p. 182, the Prince having flain the King of Bohemia with his own hand, deplumed his cafque of thofe oftrich feathers, which, in memory of this victory, became his cognizance, fometimes ufing one feather, fometimes three, with the motto Ich dien, meaning that John, King of Bohemia, ferved the French King in his wars, and as his ftipendiary; or that the Prince of Wales ferved his father as a fon, which is moft probable, fince the feathers have been borne by all fucceeding Princes of Wales, heirs apparent, though fometimes alfo by collateral branches, both of the houfe of York and Lancaster, as their feals. Certain it is, however, that feathers make no part of the present arms of Bohemia.'

The origin of these feathers feems to be one of the many points of our history that want difcuffion.

The general account we have given of this valuable work, and the promifcuous extracts we have made from it, will, in fome degree, enable our Readers to judge of its merits. Mr. Gough appears to be well acquainted with the fubject which he bath chofen; he hath certainly beftowed great labour on it, and difplayed a vaft fund of attentive reading.

With refpect to the engravings, they are fplendid; and, fuch of them whofe originals we have feen, are juft reprefentations; which leads us to conclude that they are all accurately drawn. Great part of them are the workmanship of Mr. Bafire, an engraver of acknowledged merit, who hath here given ample proofs of his abilities.

ART. III. A Defence of the Conftitutions of Government of the United States of America. By John Adams, LL. D. Member of the Academy of Arts and Sciences at Bolton. Vol. II. 8vo. 6s. Boards. Dilly. 1787.

DR

R. Adams proceeds, in this volume, with great patience and affiduity, to give a sketch of the hiftory of the Italian republics of the middle age; viz. Florence, Sienna, Bologna, and Neuchatel, which exhibit a series of the most unpleafing events recorded in hiftory: but which the Author has interfperfed with fuch obfervations as tend to throw light on the excellencies or imperfections of their government. This volume contains the ftrongest internal marks of its being written by the fame hand with the former *; and as we cannot pretend to give a fatiffactory

* A Correfpondent, on reading our account of the first volume, favoured us with fome general oblervations, which we fhall lay before our Readers, as they contain a juft apology for the peculiar difadvantages to which literary productions are liable, when communicated to the Public in feparate parts:

"The publication of parts of a work, at different times, is frequently very prejudicial both to its effect and reputation; and is pe

culiarly