Derbyshire.' Ikenild ftreet, it is now well known, paffed through the county from the north-eaft to the fouth-weft. In the period of the heptarchy it formed a part of the kingdom of Mercia: it certainly fent knights to parliament in the twenty-third of Edward I.; was allowed a feparate fheriff and diftinct affizes in 1566. The Gospel was firit preached in the kingdom of Mercia during the reign of Ofwius, and the first church erected in Derbyshire, the cathedral of Litchfield, was built in 657 Litchfield foon became an archiepifcopal diocefe, though the epifcopal honour is now divided between this city and Coventry. The number of inhabitants is stated at 124,465, and of houfes 25,206, nearly five to one; and this number was fixed by an enumeration of houfes and inhabitants in about thirty parishes, in different parts of the county.

The fate of arts and manufactures' is detailed imperfectly; and relates only to thofe of cotton, filk, wool, and iron. The author has spoken of the porcelain manufacture, and of that very beautiful foffil the fluor fpar, which, formed into ornamental vafes and columns, is fo universally and deservedly admired, in his account of Derby. The little which particularly relates to manufactures in this part we shall transcribe:

Cotton is manufactured in different ways, and in various parts of the county. But the principal quantity is prepared by the machine lately invented and introduced into Derbyshire by fir Richard Arkwright. Several have beeen conftructed upon his model, both before and fince the expiration of the parent which he obtained for the exclusive ufe of his invention. The number of machines which are now worked in this country is fixteen, and the hands employed by them may be computed at three thoufand. A confiderable quantity of cotton is likewife fpun upon hand machines or wheels, in the north-weft part of the county. A large number of hands is alfo employed in another flage of the manufacture of this article. Many looms have been a long time worked in the parish of Chapel-le-frith for weaving cotton; and lately feveral have been fet up by Meff. Strutt in the town of Derby and its neighbourhood. If we calculate the prefent number at two hundred, I believe we fhall not be very distant from the truth.

A confiderable quantity of wool is manufactured in Derbyfhire both into stockings and cloth. The bufinefs of hofiery is carried on extenfively in that part of the county which borders upon Nottinghamshire, and alfo at Litton near Tideswell. Į have endeavoured to afcertain the number of frames employed, and believe them to amount to about 1350. It fhould be obferved, that this calculation includes thofe upon which filk and cotton, as well as wool, are wrought.

In that part of the high peak which borders upon Yorkhire, a fmall quantity of wool is manufactured into cloth The goods are, I am informed, of a fine and good quality.

Another branch of manufacture deferving of notice, is that of iron in the north-east part of the county. A good deal of this metal in an unwrought ftate is used for caft goods at Chefterfield. But the principal manufacture of iron is carried on in the neighbourhood of Sheffield. Nearly three hundred hands are employed by it, chiefly in making fcythes and fickles. In the parish of Norton alone there are one hundred and fixty-one workmen in the former of these branches.'

The customs and manners in Derbyshire are not so peculiar as to deserve a diftinct confideration.

Mr. Pilkington then proceeds to a particular view of the county, as divided into the deaneries of Repington, Derby, Caftillar, Afhbourne, and Chesterfield, with the archdeaconry of Derby; and each of thefe are comprised in different fecA topographical defcription will not admit either. of analyfis or remark; but in this part are interfperfed defcriptions of houfes of the town of Derby, as well as its manufactures, and fome curiofities of different kinds found in the county. The principal houfes defcribed, are lord Scarfdale's, the duke of Devonshire's, though we fcarcely find any thing added to the various accounts of different travellers and tourists, if we may hazard a new name applied to thofe gentlemen who travel, (or read) in order to examine and to publish.

The only natural curiofity mentioned is the fkeleton nine feet long, of which a defcription was fent to the Royal Society in 1727 it was difcovered at Repton al. Repindon on the Trent.

The account of Derby is very full, and contains, in many parts, information not generally known: we fhall tranfcribe the remarks on its name:

It is highly probable, that the name of the county is derived from that of the town of Derby. But from what particular circumftance the latter has received its prefent name, it is very difficult, if at all poffible to determine. That which it now bears, certainly is not the most ancient by which it has been known. In the time of the Saxons it was called Northworthig, But when the Danes took poffeffion of it they gave it the name of Deoraby.

Antiquarians have taken confiderable pains to ascertain the caufe of this change. Some have fuppofed that the name of Derby was given to the town because it stands near the banks of

Of the duke of Devonshire's feats, Hardwick- Hall and Chatfworth are particularly described.

the

the river Derwent. But the more general opinion is, that it is derived from two Saxon words, Deor, Fera, and by, habitatio. This conjecture is rendered probable by two circumstances: one is, that the arms of the town are a buck couchant in a park; and the other, that one of the lanes adjoining to the town is ftill called Lodge-lane.'

The ancient and modern hiftory of the town follows; but the most interesting accounts are the defcriptions of the mills for the manufacture of filk: one machine, which is more perfect than the reft, contains 26,586 wheels, and 97,746 movements, but of the last, 1700 are not in repair; and these very numerous movements are not diftinct, but a multiplication of the fame parts. When the mill is completely in motion, it works 73,726 yards of organzine filk thread. Of the porcelain manufactory, and the working of fpar and marble, the account is fhort and apparently incomplete.

Sir Richard Arkwright's machines for manufacturing cotton are erected at Cromford, in the deanery of Ashborne; and the hiftory of this undertaking, as well as the defcription of the different operations, is extremely curious and interesting: the length only prevents us from enlarging on it. The patent was at first eluded, and at last expired. Machines now multiply faft; and we have been informed that they have been introduced with fuccefs in the woollen manufactory.

A great part of this volume is filled with genealogical hiftories of families, which are of local importance only; but among those are a few traces of biography more generally interefting; these occur chiefly in the accounts of the Coke and Cavendish families. The life of Dr. Flamfteed is a curious one; and the exertions of memory in arithmetical operations recorded of Jedediah Buxton are truly aftonishing. Near the end of the volume, our author defcribes the remains of a Drujdical monument; and, as we have expreffed a little incredulity on this fubject, we fhall conclude our article with Mr. Pilkington's reafons for thinking it belongs to the professors of this gloomy fequeftered religion.

I believe it is generally allowed by antiquarians, that cirçular and elliptical monuments of this kind are of civil or religious inftitution; that they were either places of council, or courts of juftice; or that they were defigned for the rites of worship. Now upon examination there are found a few circumitances, refpecting this in particular, which render it probable, that it was once ufed for the latter purpose. It feems reasonable to fuppofe from the number and fize of the ftones, lying near the center of the area, that there formerly flood a cromlech or altar in this fituation. One of them, which was

mof

moft probably fupported by the other two, measures three yards in length, and two in breadth, and is about one foot thick. Upon this large broad stone, it is very likely, that the facrifices were offered. Perhaps the other ftones within the area might be used as feats or fupports for those, who attended the celebration of the rites of worship. As they feem to diverge from one common center, it has been imagined, that they were intended to represent the rays of the fun, and that this luminary was the object of devotion. This conjecture is ingenious and plaufible. But there is another circumftance, which renders it ftill more probable, that this ancient monument is a Druidical temple. A few years ago a transverse section was made of the barrow, which has been mentioned, and in it were found the horns of a ftag. Now there appears good ground to believe that the animal, to which they belonged, had been offered up in facrifice. For as mounts of this kind are throughout the neighbouring country places of burial, we may reasonably fuppofe, that this in particular was employed as a repository for the bones of the victims, which were used in the celebration of religious rites.'

FOREIGN ARTICLE.

Lettre fur le Nom de la Planete Herfchell, Par M. de La Lande. T1 HIS Letter, addreffed to the authors of the Journal des Sçavans, and included in their work, we have read with fo much pleasure, that though its object, in appearance, is only of importance to Mr. Herfchell, yet on account of the fhort mythological difquifition which the question has occafioned, we fhall give fome account of it. M. de la Lande has lately paid his fecond vifit to England, and was introduced to the king. This prince, fays he, well deferves the gratitude of aftronomers, for he has affifted aftronomy at a great expence. I thanked him this year in the name of all those who cultivate the science, he returned this edifying and remarkable answer'— "Is it not better than to spend money in the flaughter of mankind?"

When

M. de la Lande next speaks of the names first given by the discoverers to different ftars, which have been almost exclunvely dropped; for the prejudice of one nation refifts that of another, and prevents the fuccefs of the defign.' While Mr. Herschell confulted only his gratitude, others confulted analogy in naming this new ftar. M. Poinfinet called it Cybele, who was the mother, as Saturn was the father of the gods, and the new planet was next to Saturn. M. Profperin, the Swedish aftronomer, called it Neptune; and this name, from analogy, we at first thought beft adapted to it. M. Bode, a celebrated aftronomer of Berlin, calls it, in his excellent Ephemerides,' Uranus,'

an

and many Germans have adopted this term. But it is the ob ject of our author's letter to fhow that the term is not strictly analogical, and in many refpects improper. We may just remark, that the fame reafons will militate against the appellation Uranite, given to the fuppofed new femi-metal we have lately mentioned as difcovered in Germany. ́

To give the new planet this name, obferves M. de la Lande, is an ingratitude to the discoverer, and an affront to the king of England, whole name ought to be preferred, if that of the author did not deferve our rigard in preference. Befides, Uranus is incongruous to the general fyitem of mythology. It is true Sanchoniathon and Diodorus have faid that Saturn was the fon of Uranus, but this connection is purely allegorical. These gods were the children of the Heaven and the Earth, that is of ahe univerfe: they were only its first productions. When the Egyptian priests formed a theogony by allegorifing nature, the earth with its fluid covering was regarded as that part of the univerte which contained the germs of all its productions, and was the peint to which the active fecundity of nature was direfted. The Heavens, which covered it, poured into its bosom the principle of motion and of life, by its yivifying rains and genial heat. From hence the allegory of a marriage was de rived. The fable, though obvious, is evidently of Indian ex1raction, and it has been copied into the fyftems of the Chaldeans, the Egyptians, the Perfians, and the Greeks. We are almoff afraid of the ridicule in the Vicar of Wakefield, if we ventured to quote Plutarch, Macrobius, Synefius, and Ocellus Lucanus, whom M. de la Lande mentions on this fubject; but Atall tranfcribe fome of the obfervations of the laft author, as they come fo near to the Indian fyftem, which we shall have occafion to mention in our review of the Afiatic Researches. The univerfe, fays he, cannot be destroyed: it has always been, and will always continue to be: it has neither beginning nor end, but contains within itself generation and the caufe of generation. Generation is where there is a change and an alteration in the position of the parts, and the cause where nature is immoveable. Whence, it is evident, that it belongs to what is the caufe of generation, to move and to act; to that which receives it, to be moved and acted on.' He proceeds to obferve, that the orbit of the moon limits the changeable from the unchangeable. As nature is neither generated or destroyed, it is neceffary that the principle which caufes generation in another place, and that which produces it in the fame place, fhould have co-existed: these are the principles above and below the moon; the one moving and the other moved, the one governing and the other governed. In a word, the compofition of the world comprehends the active and the paffive cause.

This is the foundation of mythology, which is only the ancient philofophy, explaining, in its poetic allegories, the connection of phyfical caufes, and of the agents of nature perfoni