signifies in haste, speedily. The use of the word, not only in Lazamon, but in later writers, is too common to require examples.

"BLESTE (blinnan) to cease." [146. 31.]-THORPE. We should rather read bleue, [for bileue] which is the same with bilæuen in the earlier text, Germ. bleiben, Su. G. blifwa.

"DoнGEþ (duguð) truth, &c.”[161. 14.] THORPE. Is there any other instance of the word in this sense? I suspect an error in the MS. for seohde or sohde.

"DOTIE, to be of good, from dugan, Gr. 218? or, to fear. Fr. redouter?" [155. 19.] THORPE. This is an evident error. To dotie is to dote, delirare, from the same stock as the Dutch doten, Scotch, doit, Fr. radoter. See Junius, in v. dote, and Jamieson, sub v. doitit. The original of Wace

reads:

"Ja est vielz home, si redote ;" which has no doubt caused the mistake in the latter interpretation of Mr. Thorpe, from his confounding radoter, to dote, to become imbecile, with redouter, to fear.

"EASTRES (O. Fr. estres), being, condition, state, particularly internal," &c. [164. 21.] THORPE. I would rather here translate it territories, in which sense it is not at all unusual in old French writers.

FEISI (weg-si?) departure, death. VEISIp, departure. [169. 8.] THORPE. This derivation is not correct. The word has no reference to weg, but to the Sax. fæge, fated, destined to die, Scotch, fey, which is to be found also in all the northern dialects. See Jamieson, in voce. It is synonymous with deap-sip, death, ff. 35, c. 1. 36, c. 2, and with hin-sip, in Cadmon and the fragment of Judith.

FAINEN, p. 164, 1. 26?" THORpe. This is surely nothing else but the Sax. fægnian, to rejoice.

"FELLE, well?" [155. 15.] THORPE. I suspect this is the same as fere, sound, in health, which is from the Isl. faer, Su. G. foer, validus. The letters r and are frequently interchanged in the MS. as witere and witele, vælden and vereden, bittele and bittere, &c.

"GÆR, GEARE, certainly? Of sobe

gær witelest, in sooth certainly fo most artless." [147. 3.] THORPE A similar phrase occurs elsewhere:

þat nes nan swa wis mon,
ne swa zer witele,
þat mihte to dæle
þa cristine & pa hæðene.
MS. Cott. Cal. A. ix. f. 83...
" ere so
The second text reads
witty."

næs be king noht swa wis,
ne swa zære witele,
þ' imong his duzeþe
his boht cude dernen.

ib. f. 106, c. Second text, "ne so war witele."

In all the above instances I wo understand zær in the sense of le optimè, as the Saxon geare, gear viously wrong, since it is not a conThe interpretation of witelest is a pound of wit and lest, but the supe lative of wittol, and means most shin or prudent.

"GRECEDE (grette), greeted, gridede." [168, 18.] THORPE. I tainly consider gredede here to be t preterite of gerædian, graithed, mas ready, supplied with necessaries.

"GU FULL (geoguðfull), youthful" [144. 27.] THORPE. Certainly n The same phrase occurs in p. 159, 1 21.-"godfulle dohter." Elsewhe we have "guthfulle worden," f. 69,': 1, (second text, godfolle worde

"

gudfulle folk," f. 25, c. 1. “gofulle kempen," f. 53, c. 1. (secons godne men,") and "godful king." 62, c. 2, (second, "god king.") Ai from the Goth. goth, good, goodly.

"

3EDEDE (geddode) sang; fre geddian." [157, 16.] THORPE. Mr. properly, spake, in which sense it always used by Lazamon; see ff. +4 c. 2, 45, c. 2, 123, c. 1, in what passages the second text has seide. "HÆNGENNE, to raise, eralt [152. 31.] THORPE. This is an error in the MS. for the adjective hent

high, noble, as is apparent, not only from the later text in the passage re ferred to, but from parallel lines in the poem often elsewhere repeated See f. 1, c. 2, 17o, c. 2, 32o, c. 2, 38, c. 2, &c.

"HUIE (hyge), mind.” [147. 8.] THORPE. This word elsewhere occurs under the forms of huze, f. 273, c. l.

and aze, f. 24, c. 1, and in all three passages the later text reads ob or ope, oath. From the frequent interchange of 3 and b, the latter instance might at first appear equivalent to abe; but I am induced from the former ones to consider the word as connected with the Saxon æ, œw, ewe, law or compact, whence awd, awdman, a surety or sponsor (consacramentalis.) Hæbbe him in ade oberne awdan godne." Leg. Wihtr. p. 12, § 6. Teutonic e, ee, ehe, Francic, euua, law, compact, faith. There is, unquestionably, a relationship between eid, eed, or ath, an oath, (which also means fas, jus,) and æ or ee. See Stiernhelm's Glossary to Ulphilas, voc. aithe; Ihre, vv. e, ed, Wachter, vv. ehe, eid, Haltaus, vv. echt, eid-hulf, and Spegel, v. edwa. To the same root I would refer the particle of affirmation, right, or faith, whether under the Gothic form of ja, jai, Sw. Goth. æ, Teut. ju, jah, jo, Sax. gea, Isl. Dan. and Dutch, ja, Swed. ja, jo, ju, English, aye, yea, or French oui and I think this will be found much nearer the truth than Tooke's derivation from the verb to have. See Div. of Purley, vol. I. p. 492, new ed.

"LELAICHEN, lament." [159, 7.] THORPE. Instead of "seorhful lelaichen," as printed p. 159, we should read "seorhfulle laichen." I do not know whence the interpretation is derived, but I should rather regard the word as cognate with lechen, leches, lates, or lathes, all of which occur in Lazamon, and mean gestures, looks, appearance. The Islandic lät, pl. latinn, mores, gestus, seems to be the root. See Ihre, vv. Later, Lätas.

'MANSHIPE, MANSCIPE, manhood, male progeny, humanity, kindness.” [150. 27, 153. 10.] THORPE. I regard all these interpretations as erro. neous, and the second certainly would be very awkward, in reference to the monschipe of Cordoille, the daughter of Leir, before she was married! Its general meaning is honor or worship, and it is so to be understood in the second passage above referred to. In the former instance it signifies courtesy or good manners; as also in another passage, fol. 13, c. 2. It is elsewhere equivalent to freoma, profit or advantage, f. 4, c. 2, mahthe, power, authority, f. 34, c. 2, Fr. dignité, f. 63, c.1.

GENT. MAG. VOL. II.

man

"MENSKE (mennisc), man, kind, human." [157. 21.] THORPE. How these interpretations will make sense of the passage in question

"be lond hauede mid menske,

and bitachet hit is childe."

I am at a loss to conceive. The signification of the word is honor or worship, and it is strictly synonymous with manscipe. Thus, in f. 14, c. 2,

mid mensca heold his riche,

where the second text reads, "mid For additional examples mansipe."

of its use at a later period, see Jamieson, v. mensk, who, however, in the quotation from Sir Tristrem, converts the substantive into an adjective.

"QUECCHEN, to cook?" [156. 8.] THORPE. This meaning has been assigned rather hastily, from a supposed chene. The only signification of the connection between quecchen and cuword is to move forth, or proceed, from the Sax. cweccan or cwatan, which has the same sense; forming in the past tense, cuahte or quehte. A few suffice: examples may

Ne lete ze nenne quick

quecchen to holte. f. 5. c. 1. where the later text reads scapie. Corineus com quecchen.-f. 9, c. 1. Second text, com scecky."

And ich iseh thare quene scip quecchen mid uden.-f. 26, c. 2. Second text, “seilþ bliue."

þa comen Arðures men quecchen after streten.-f. 157, c. 2. Fr. chevalcherent.

"SWOMEFEST, collected, firm." [149. 25.] THORPE. Certainly an error. We should read shame-faced,'s abashed, as shewn by samuast, in the second text, and by the original of Wace.

VEISIP, see FÆISIþ. VESTE, See ANEWEST. "WITELEST, most witless, most artless." THORPE. See GÆR.

"WUNN (wyn), joy, pleasure." [159. 18.] THORPE. It means here possessions, goods, as shown by the later text, and confirmed by many other passages; for instance,

13 This would also give a different and probably more correct derivation of shame-faced, than from shame and face.

4 F

þar biwon Brutus

feole kunnan wunnan.-f. 7. c. 1. Where the second text has hinges.

Wif & mine weden, And alle mine wunnen.-f. 130b, c. 1. These observations are not intended as an attack on Mr. Thorpe's work, nor do they at all lessen its general accuracy and value; but are only drawn up to show that a mere knowledge of Saxon is not sufficient to ensure an editor of Lazamon from occasional mistakes, whatever Mr. Kemble may think to the contrary. No one can be more aware than I am of the difficulties which present themselves in authors of this early period, with so few and feeble guides to help us to understand them, and no one would be more ready to confess an error, or be grateful for correction, if offered in a proper manner, than myself. Yours, &c.

MR. URBAN,

K. N.

Oct. 14.

A CONSIDERABLE degree of attention has recently been excited by the discovery of certain subterranean passages on the site of the ancient palace at Eltham. These remains, in an architectural point of view, are very curious, and well worthy a visit from every student of our ancient style of building and architecture; but to such, the idle tradition of their leading to underground stables, and eventually to Greenwich Palace, will give them no additional value. A small pamphlet recently published by D. King, esq. of Eltham, and Mr. Clayton the architect, by whose praiseworthy exertions these passages have been cleared of the accumulated dirt of ages, aims at giving them a romantic value, which would do credit to the pages of Mrs. Ratcliffe. In this pamphlet we find them in some way connected with the art of war; and the funnel-like shafts which reach from the surface of the ground, are conjectured to have been used to slide down pitch and missiles on the heads of any enemy, who might evince bad generalship enough to allow himself to be caught in such a trap!

The genuine remains of antiquity possess sufficient intrinsic value to render them objects of regard, without the adventitious aid of embellishments

of this kind. A little common sense applied to the study of antiquis, would render that study more useful and certainly save the students from the ridicule which the generality c upon them and their pursuits, often with justice, owing to the foret explanations, and far-fetched doctrins with which they usher into the word

their lucubrations.

A trap - door of recent format covers the entrance to a sort of char ber, from whence a passage desce by steps into another, and from here other passages run in different rections, all sloping from the building in a direction inclined to t fields on the outside of the palace e closure, one of the passages term ing in a field at a short distance ward of the Great Hall.

The width or height of the pass will only allow of an ordinary sized walking in them, without touching vault with his head or the sides his elbows. They are built with hard red bricks, and the floor is bably of the same materials: 7 entire walls appear to have been vered with a hard cement. The is of the usual Tudor form; and point, which characterizes every r of ancient formation, is carried throughout the entire works. construction of the entrance to passage is very curious; the hass of the arch are turned in bricks * on an edge, each brick being upd in the same manner as a modern r layer would construct a sewer present day; but at the curve of arch a brick is used in the mant a key-stone, which must have moulded on purpose; it is cut under edge in an angle which ser to make the point of the arch these bricks are laid in a direc transversely to the others. I this to shew the extreme care obserin the construction of this work; it is worthy of notice, that they throughout are still quite close. Fhence a passage descends by stepe the roof is ribbed in the manner bridge. There is also a descens portion in another part, in which construction of the vault is end curious; but, with these exceptrots" rest of the passages shew a pointed headway. At the sides, ≈

veral places, are funnels like chimneys, the openings of which are internally formed into a pointed arch. The steps appear to have been used in cases where the formation of an inclined plane would have been impracticable from the steepness of the descent.

The age of the remains is manifestly of that period in the history of pointed architecture, when the low arch called the Tudor prevailed; and as this arch may be found in buildings as early as the time of Edward IV., there can be little doubt that the works now under consideration, were a portion of the extensive buildings which we know to have been performed at the palace by that Sovereign. Ofthe original destination of these passages, there can be little question: they are manifestly the sewers or drains, intended for the conveyance of the waste water from the palace to the adjacent fields. This is evident from the fact that they incline in that direction. The inclination would not allow of their being used to convey water to the palace. At the termination of the main branch in the fields, it is pretty clear that the sewer was continued no further in that direction; it had performed its office in carrying the water to a sufficient distance from the palace, and there existed no use for its further continuance. An excavation in the field, close to the mouth, shews that the earth has never been before disturbed in that direction, forbidding the idea that this line of sewer ever proceeded further than it does at present. At a comparatively small distance from the mouth, the remains of iron-work shew that gratings were introduced to prevent any thief, or other unwelcome guest, From obtruding himself into the palace by means of this capacious sewer.

In every point of view, the discovery s exceedingly curious, as it shews the ery complete and excellent mode of constructing sewers which was practised in the fifteenth century; nd evinces that our boasted imrovements are not so great as we vould make it appear. To instance ne fact:-until the construction of he sewer in the new street from the Monument to the Mansion-house, no ir holes were ever made in the crown f the vaults. In the present sewer, ve find such a precaution against foul

air or explosion to have been used so long ago as the fifteenth century. To account for these passages as sallyports, is, in the first place, to fall into the mistake of this palace having been a castle. As a proof of its not having been reckoned a stronghold, we see it approached by a bridge of stone across the moat, without any draw-bridge, and the precincts surrounded with little more than a garden wall. As to the contrivances alleged to be for throwing pitch into the sewer, they are nothing more than the funnels which lead into the main sewer, the same as are to be seen in every street in London. If the main passage had been invaded by a foe, no such extraordinary defence was necessary, as a single sentinel might have kept guard against an army: supposing if the two first assailants had been killed, the residue must have retrograded in single files, the hindmost survivor dragging the bodies of his comrades after him to obtain a clear passage for a fresh attack! It must be confessed this subterranean mode of fighting would be a new discovery in the art of war, and at all events would shew an odd taste in men fighting under ground, when there was a clearer stage over head; but it is unnecessary to pursue this branch of the subject further, as the palace at the time of the construction of these works was rather a place of feasting and mirth than defence, and would have cut a sorry figure against a besieging army, or even the undisciplined forces of the Kentish rebel Jack Cade, had he chosen to attack it. In a large palace, dedicated to luxury by a luxurious prince, such contrivances as spacious sewers would possess great utility in the comfort they would necessarily create.

One word in conclusion—it is worth inquiring whether the passages in question were tunnelled or not. From the fact that they are of a later date than the original works of the palace, and from their mode of construction, I am inclined to conclude that they were. But this is a subject which some professional architect can better decide than myself, and such a one may probably be found among your numerous readers, if you should deem these remarks to be worthy of insertion. Yours, &c. E. I. C.