now blocked up. The third stage has a lofty and well characterized window, divided into two narrow semicircular plain-headed lights, by a slender column with a large and lofty cushion capital with plain square abacus. This window is not recessed, and therefore without the angular columns, and the outer upper arch under which doublelighted Norman windows generally are placed. Its jambs and architraves are plain, with the exception of an impostlike projection equalling in height and projection the abacus of the central column. In the fourth stage is a wide semi-circular plain headed window. The two upper stages are similarly formed in all their faces, and they are both of masonry in excellent condition, and have, as usual with ancient Norman edifices, all their scaffold holes remaining open.

The spire is pyramidal, of little more than one diameter in height, and is also of regular masonry, each upper course overlapping that beneath it, the lowest course being thus a kind of dripping eaves, but without any cornices. At equal distance, one above another, this spire has on every face three plain quatrefoil lucerns or openings, and its capping stone is finished with a knob and cross.

On the south side of the base story of the tower is a stopped-up doorway under a semicircular plain-headed arch, of which the upper part contains a pedimented lintel, but the east and west sides of this lower story are perfectly plain. The interior of the tower is not as usual plastered, so that the herring-bone construction of its lower stage is visible throughout. Another peculiarity in the formation of this tower is, that the staircase is a semioctagonal turret built up within the tower itself, and occupying a considerable portion of its space. The stairs in this turret are of stone, and are lighted by loop-holes which open to the inside of the tower, and not externally. In former times there was a door between this tower and the south side of the chancel, of which the semicircular head and impost mouldings yet remain.

But to complete our description of the exterior. The nave has double flat buttresses, of which the outer terminate in plain sloped tops, and the GENT, MAG. VOL. II.

under in a block cornice. The windows, of which three are in the north, and two in the south wall, are not more than eight inches wide by thirty high. They are quite plain without any projecting mouldings, their glazing being nearly flush with the wall. Their heads are monolith, being formed of one stone cut into shallow receding semicircular arches. Under the central window of the north side has been a small semicircular-headed doorway, but it is now stopped up, and its mouldings cut down even with the wall. The west end is gabelled, and has double flat buttresses, with a plain horizontal string course of similar height to the imposts of the doorway, which had formerly a semicircular, but has now a modern head and door. The windows, two in number, are similar in form to those of the sides, though somewhat wider, and between them, over the door, is a circular window, but apparently an innovation.

The chancel is altogether of comparatively modern date, except a portion of its northern side, in which may be discerned the remnants of an ancient column and a string course. At the east end is a lean-to modern sacristy.

Interiorly, the window cases are slope-sided, with a semicircular head and large torus archivolt, springing from columns whose bases are embellished with the flat-leaved or claw ornament. The circular window at the west end has straight sides, without any mouldings. The chancel arch is semicircular, but plain, and springs from plain pilaster masses. The altar, as to its form and decorations, has nothing remarkable.

Near the east end of the south wall of the nave, is a holy-water-drain and shelf, in a straight-sided recess, with pointed head, and plain mouldings continued down its sides to torus bases.

The font in shape resembles a large goblet, being hemispherical, plain within, but externally embellished with flutes converging to its bottom, which rests upon a small spheroid upon a cylinder encompassed by torus mouldings standing on a plinth. This font is sufficiently capacious for immersion, as indeed the fonts of this district

3 A

generally are, a proof we think of high antiquity, and which frequently occurs, although, in the opinion of Mr. Rickman, few ancient fonts are here to be found.

The church-yard is spacious, and contains a handsome cross, but has not the usual English orthodox accompaniments of yew trees, or any others which might be deemed appropriate to a burying ground, by the more poetical imaginations of our Gallic neighbours. PLANTAGENET.

MR. URBAN, Cambridge, Sept. 1. CERTAIN correspondents in the last two numbers of your Magazine, who respectively sign themselves J. I. and T. W. have complained of your excellent and spirited article on Mr. Thorpe's "Analecta Anglo-Saxonica." I confess that I cannot understand exactly the grounds on which they found so querulous and indeed peevish an attack, nor can I see the object at which they aim. The first letter promised us a complete vindication of the unerring accuracy of the old school of Saxon scholars, and in addition to that an undeniable proof of the ignorance of the writer of the article alluded to the second correspondent, as far as I can judge, seems to have done much less towards proving the aforesaid writer's ignorance, than towards exhibiting his own. It is not by such violent and injudicious proceedings that learning is likely to be benefited.

The same experience which has shown to me the feebleness and unsafeness of the writers, in whom your correspondents glory as guides, has proved to me that the Analecta of Mr. Thorpe is an admirable book; and, meagre" as those correspondents may think the glossary, because it does not seem to them to cover much paper, I am inclined to think that, if either of them were properly acquainted with it, they would know more Anglo-Saxon than to abuse either that book or Mr. Kemble's Beowulf, to attack which, the latter of them seems to have gone a long way from his proper and congenial path. I can very easily imagine that he may find some difficulty in understanding that poem; but is it right to lay the blame of this upon its editor, or upon his

accents, which, evidently not understanding them, he is simple enough to deride? In your article on the Analecta, the critic complained, justly enough, of the heterogeneous mass of words of all periods and dialects, which are jumbled together in Lye's Dictionary. In noticing which, your correspondent T. W. says, "Does not the glossary to the Analecta contain words even from Lajamon and the Ormulum, and without reference?" What excuse can this afford for Lye? Does not the Analecta contain extracts from Lajamon and the Ormulum? and could T. W. or his friend J. 1. read any of them, if the words were not given in the glossary. That they are given "without reference," is not true; for if T. W. will look to this glossary again, he will find all the semi-Saxon words carefully marked with an asterisk. If, too, he will again refer to the article which seems so much to have stirred up his gall, he will, if I remember well, find a suggestion that the semi-Saxon and middle English poems hardly belong to the work as an Anglo-Saxon Analecta. At the same time I do not regret that, in the case of the Ormulum, a specimen is given of a poem which justifies altogether the system of accentuation which appears to afford so much amusement to your correspondenta poem which proves that the system of philosophy, which seems to scare him so much, is true and certain.

I am sorry, Mr. Urban, that this subject should have been entered upon in the spirit which characterises the letter of both your correspondents. Let them examine candidly this "German" system, as they call it, let them make themselves acquainted with it, and if they find that it is false, then let them expose it openly, and show its defects. If it be unsound it will not long stand the test. But I am certain that no good can come of people laughing at what they will not labour a little first to understand.

he has, in fact, only followed one of our Oxford men. In 1807, Dr. Ingram published his Inaugural Lecture, in which he recommends this mode of printing, and gave a specimen of it.

In his preface to Beowulf, p. xxv. Mr. Kemble says, "I have printed the text letter for letter, as I found it." This I deny; for, though the other day I had only a few minutes to examine the MS. I found, in the first folio, fyen-dearfe, printed by Mr. Kemble, 1. 28, for fyren-pearfe. If, in the first few lines, we discover accents misplaced, and an error in the literal expression of a word, what may we expect in the whole book? In the progress of his work he acknowledges he has found some words ought to have been differently accented. What then can be more applicable than your critic's own words?" He has begun by editing a book which he could not hope to understand," and "though he may have succeeded, during the progress of the work, in picking up a little of the grammar, we could mention the name" of a wouldbe Anglo-Saxon Professor, "whose doings in the way of false" accentuation, false etymology, &c. " would, if perpetrated by a boy in the second form of a public school, have richly merited, and been duly repaid by a liberal application of ferula or direr birch." (p. 392.)

Your critic asserts, "Etymology must be inborn; Poeta nascitur, non fit. Very few persons will consequently be found either capable of pursuing etymological inquiries, or justified in doing so." How can we account for this poetical flight into the regions of nonsense? Your critic shall answer in his own elegant style. “The only approach we can make to the solution of this strange problem is, that the study being a little out of the way of men's usual pursuits, has been stared at, and wondered at," and that he, "who gave himself to it, and became péya baupa thereby, has had his head turned, and lost the better part of his senses."

I beg your readers will recollect this is not an unprovoked attack upon Mr. Kemble and his friends, but an answer excited by their unwarranted aspersions. Yours, &c.

T. W.

MR. URBAN, Cambridge, Sept. 5. TRUTH, and not the predominance of a party, ought to be the pursuit of every scientific and literary man. I wish our Anglo-Saxon students would constantly bear this in mind when they write on disputed points. There is room enough for all. Should any one imagine that he has superior powers, and more extensive knowledge, then let him not attempt to shew them by haughty or angry expressions, but by his useful and valuable publications. I am no enemy to discussion, for by the collision of opposite opinions new light is often elicited; but the greatest benefit is derived where the discussion is calm, and a dignified tone of writing sustained. In the few remarks I have to make, it will be my endeavour to avoid the influence of a party spirit.

I think T. W. must acknowledge that accents are found in Anglo-Saxon MSS. and that they are useful. In many cases they serve to distinguish one word from another; as, ac but, and ác an oak; is is, and ís ice; þe the, and pé thee; for for, and fór went. The acute accent, placed over vowels by the Anglo-Saxons to denote their long sounds, was discontinued by the Norman scribes, and its place sup, plied by a union of two vowels, or by postfixing it in the form of a final e. Hence the origin of some of our double vowels, and the extensive list of words in e final, such as gód good, gós goose, bóc book, líf life, wif wife, hal hale. The difficulty is to know what words should be accented. Some aid may be derived from the analogy of our own language, and from others of co-equal origin; but infallible information can only be obtained from the best MSS. As very few can have access to these, it is highly necessary that those who publish Anglo-Saxon works, should be especially careful to give all the accents found in the MSS. and no more. I have great pleasure in referring to Mr. Thorpe's edition of Apollonius, just published on this plan; it is a very neat and cheap work, equally creditable to Mr. Thorpe the editor, and Mr. Taylor the printer. The Anglo-Saxon text of this interesting story is correctly printed with a strict attention to the accents. Mr. Thorpe's English translation, though

literal, is spirited. It is the publishing of such interesting works, that will most effectually promote the cause of Anglo-Saxon literature.

With a revival of our Anglo-Saxon studies, I hope to see a moving in our early English authors. A very early, if not the first English poet and satirist, Peirs Plouhman, deserves the first attention. The able hand that gave us an ample specimen of his powers in your No. for April last, could not be better employed than in an edition of this interesting poet. Mr. Pickering, or some other spirited publisher, could not render English literature a greater service, than by sending forth a neat and cheap edition of Peirs Plouhman.

It would be unjust to Mr. Kemble, not to state that he has a new edition of Beowulf, with an English translation, and a glossary, in the press. When this appears, many of the objections of T. W. may be removed. Yours, &c. B.

Camberwell.

Mr. URBAN, IN reply to the letter of Dr. Lipscomb, impugning the correctness of my statement, that Sir Edmund Verney, the Standard-bearer, was the son of his father's third wife Mary Blackney (the spelling of whose name I derive from the funeral certificate of Sir Edmund the elder, and from the various pedigrees of the family, compiled by the heralds in their visitations,) I shall first submit in its support those very facts which the learned Doctor advances against it.

Lady Awdrey, second wife of Sir Edmund Verney the elder, was buried in Aldbury Church in the month of July 1588.*

Sir Edmund the younger was born, according to Lloyd, on the 7th of April, 1590, which date is incontestably established by the inquisition held after his father's death at Missenden, 15 May, 42 Elizabeth (1600),†

* Vide Parish Register.

To Dr. Lipscomb I put the following questions. Did not Queen Elizabeth -ascend the throne in November 1558? -Does not the second year of her reign commence in Nov. 1559? Then how can the 15th May, 42 of Eliz. be the 15th May, 1599?

in which he is stated to be of the age of ten years and upwards. And again, by the inscription on his monument in Middle Claydon Church, which tells us that "he was slayne on the 23d of October, 1642, being then in the two and 50th year of his age.'

For the following document, also confirmative of my statement, I am indebted to the archives of the College of Arms: +

"15 February, 1599.

"Sr Edmund Verney of Pendley in the countye of Hartfs. Knight, deceeased att his house called Stonehouse nere Chalfaunt St. Gyles, within the countye of Buck. on Frydaye the xi of Januarye 1599 [1600]. The said St Edmund mar. to his first wife Frauncys, daughter of John Hastings of Elfuard in the countye of Oxfs. by whome he has no issue. After he maryed to his second wife Aw. dreye daughter of Will'm Gardener of Fulmer nere Chalfaunt aforesaid, gen. and wydowe of Sr Peter Carewe, Knight, and by her had issue Frauncys, his sonne and heire, att this p'nt of the age of xv yeares or thereaboute, who hath ma ryed Ursula daughter and one of the Blackney, daughter of John Blackney of heires of Will'm St. Barbe, by Marye Sparham in the countye of Norff. gent. and third wife, survivour of the said St Edmund Verney, by whome the said Sir Edmund hath yssue Edmund Verney his second sonne. His funeralls were according to his degree solemnized the 15th daye of February, as above said, att the p'ish church of Alburye in the countye of Hartfs. aforesaid, where he lyeth interred in the chappell on the south side the same church.

"In wyttnes of the truith of this certificate, wee have hereunto subscribed our hands the daye and yeare first above wrytten."

(Subscribed)

JA. PHILLIPS. JOHN TERING. THOM'S BRETON,

ROBERT TRESWELL, Som'sett h. Let us now, Mr. Urban, examine the inquisition, the only document in truth which need have been consulted. We there find, as Dr. Lipscomb correctly informs us, that Edmund the younger brother is heir to Francis the elder,a circumstance from which he vauntingly affirms that they must have been brothers of the whole blood. Is the learned historian of Bucks so dull,

Funeral Certif. I. 16, p. 73.

he has, in fact, only followed one of our Oxford men. In 1807, Dr. Ingram published his Inaugural Lecture, in which he recommends this mode of printing, and gave a specimen of it.

In his preface to Beowulf, p. xxv. Mr. Kemble says, "I have printed the text letter for letter, as I found it." This I deny; for, though the other day I had only a few minutes to examine the MS. I found, in the first folio, fyen-earfe, printed by Mr. Kemble, 1. 28, for fyren-pearfe. If, in the first few lines, we discover accents misplaced, and an error in the literal expression of a word, what may we expect in the whole book? In the progress of his work he acknowledges he has found some words ought to have been differently accented. What then can be more applicable than your critic's own words? "He has begun by editing a book which he could not hope to understand," and though he may have succeeded, during the progress of the work, in picking up a little of the grammar, we could mention the name" of a wouldbe Anglo-Saxon Professor, "whose doings in the way of false" accentuation, false etymology, &c. " would, if perpetrated by a boy in the second form of a public school, have richly merited, and been duly repaid by a liberal application of ferula or direr birch." (p. 392.)

66

Your critic asserts, "Etymology must be inborn; Poeta nascitur, non fit. Very few persons will consequently be found either capable of pursuing etymological inquiries, or justified in doing so." How can we account for this poetical flight into the regions of nonsense? Your critic shall answer in his own elegant style. "The only approach we can make to the solution of this strange problem is, that the study being a little out of the way of men's usual pursuits, has been stared at, and wondered at," and that he, "who gave himself to it, and became péya Oavμa thereby, has had his head turned, and lost the better part of his

MR. URBAN, Cambridge, Sept. 5. TRUTH, and not the predominance of a party, ought to be the pursuit of every scientific and literary man. I wish our Anglo-Saxon students would constantly bear this in mind when they write on disputed points. There is room enough for all. Should any one imagine that he has superior powers, and more extensive knowledge, then let him not attempt to shew them by haughty or angry expressions, but by his useful and valuable publications. I am no enemy to discussion, for by the collision of opposite opinions new light is often elicited; but the greatest benefit is derived where the discussion is calm, and a dignified tone of writing sustained. In the few remarks I have to make, it will be my endeavour to avoid the influence of a party spirit.

I think T. W. must acknowledge that accents are found in Anglo-Saxon MSS. and that they are useful. In many cases they serve to distinguish one word from another; as, ac but, and ác an oak; is is, and ís ice; þe the, and þé thee; for for, and fór went. The acute accent, placed over vowels by the Anglo-Saxons to denote their long sounds, was discontinued by the Norman scribes, and its place sup, plied by a union of two vowels, or by postfixing it in the form of a final e. Hence the origin of some of our double vowels, and the extensive list of words in e final, such as gód good, gós goose, bóc book, líf life, wíf wife, hál hale. The difficulty is to know what words should be accented. Some aid may be derived from the analogy of our own language, and from others of co-equal origin; but infallible information can only be obtained from the best MSS.

As very few can have access to these, it is highly necessary that those who publish Anglo-Saxon works, should be especially careful to give all the accents found in the MSS. and no more. I have great pleasure in referring to Mr. Thorpe's edition of Apollonius, just published on this plan; it is a very neat and cheap work, equally creditable to Mr. Thorpe the editor, and Mr. Taylor the printer. The Anglo-Saxon text of this interesting story is correctly printed with a strict attention to the accents. Mr. Thorpe's English translation, though