{"collection":"myth-cosmogony","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_40918/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_40918","id":"gutenberg_40918","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/40918","summary":null,"tags":["Battles -- England","Category: History - British","Category: Mythology, Legends & Folklore","Great Britain -- History -- Anglo-Saxon period, 449-1066","Lancashire (England) -- History"],"text":"Transcriber's Note:\n\n    Every effort has been made to replicate this text as faithfully\n    as possible, including some inconsistencies of hyphenation. Some\n    changes of spelling and punctuation have been made.  They are listed\n    at the end of the text. The errors listed in the Errata have been\n    fixed.\n\n    Italic text has been marked with _underscores_.\n\n\n\n\nANCIENT BATTLE-FIELDS.\n\n\n\n\n ON SOME\n ANCIENT\n BATTLE-FIELDS IN LANCASHIRE\n AND THEIR\n HISTORICAL, LEGENDARY, AND AESTHETIC ASSOCIATIONS.\n\n BY\n\n CHARLES HARDWICK,\n\n Author of a \"History of Preston and its Environs,\" \"Traditions,\n Superstitions and Folk-Lore,\" \"Manual for Patrons and Members of\n Friendly Societies,\" &c.\n\n MANCHESTER:\n ABEL HEYWOOD & SON, OLDHAM STREET.\n LONDON:\n SIMPKIN, MARSHALL, & Co., STATIONERS' HALL COURT.\n 1882.\n\n\n\n\n TO\n\n GEORGE MILNER, ESQ., PRESIDENT,\n\n AND TO THE COUNCIL AND MEMBERS OF THE\n\n MANCHESTER LITERARY CLUB,\n\n THIS WORK IS RESPECTFULLY INSCRIBED BY ONE OF ITS FOUNDERS.\n\n CHARLES HARDWICK.\n\n\n\n\nPREFACE.\n\n\nTo the transactions of the Manchester Literary Club (1875-8) I\ncontributed four papers on \"Some Ancient Battle-fields in Lancashire.\"\nThese essays form the _nuclei_ of the four chapters of the present\nvolume. Their original scope, however, has been much extended, and the\nevidences there adduced largely augmented. I have likewise endeavoured\nto still further fortify and illustrate my several positions, by\ncitations from well-known, and many recent, labourers in similar or\ncognate fields of enquiry.\n\nI am aware that the precise locality of any given battle-field is of\nrelatively little interest to the general historian, the causes of the\nconflict and its political results demanding the largest share of his\nattention. Consequently, doubtful topographical features are often\neither completely ignored, or but slightly referred to. Such a course,\nhowever, is not permissible to the local student. Scarcely anything\ncan be too trifling, in a certain sense, to be unworthy of some\ninvestigation on his part. This is especially the case with respect to\nlegendary stories, and traditional beliefs. Their interest is\nintensified, it is true, to the local reader or student, but the lessons\nthey teach, on patient enquiry, will often be found in harmony with\nlarger or more general truths, and of which truths they often form apt\nillustrations. \"Alas!\" truly exclaimed \"Verax,\" in one of his recent\nletters in the _Manchester Weekly Times_, \"it is hard to disengage\nourselves from inherited illusions. They become a part of our being, and\nfalsify the standard of comparison.\" Modern science may be able to\ndemonstrate that many of the conceptions respecting physical phenomena\ndealt with in these legendary stories are utterly at variance with now\nwell-known facts. This may be perfectly true, but human nature is\ninfluenced in its action, quite as much by its faiths, beliefs, and\nsuperstitions, as by the more exact knowledge it may have acquired.\nSubjective truths are as true, as mere facts or actualities, as\nobjective ones. Thomas Carlyle forcibly expresses this when he\nasks--\"Was Luther's picture of the devil _less a reality_, whether it\nwere formed within the bodily eye, or without it?\" Mr. J. R. Green, in\nhis \"Making of England,\" says--\"Legend, if it distorts facts, preserves\naccurately enough the _impressions_ of a vanished time.\" And these\nimpressions being emotionally true, whether scientifically correct or\nnot, have ever been, and will continue to be, powerful factors in the\nformation of character, and in the progressive development of\nhumanity,--morally, socially, and politically. Our predecessors felt\ntheir influence and acted accordingly, and many of the presumedly\nexploded old superstitions survive amongst the mass of mankind to a much\ngreater degree than we often acknowledge or even suspect; although many\nof their more repulsive forms may have undergone superficial\ntransformation amongst the more educated classes.\n\nReferring to superstitious legendary reverence as a marked feature in\nthe religious characteristics of the seventeenth century, the author of\n\"John Inglesant, a Romance,\" places in the mouth of the rector of the\nEnglish College, at Rome, in the seventeenth century, the following\nwords:--\"These things are true to each of us according as we see them;\nthey are, in fact, but shadows and likenesses of the absolute truth that\nreveals itself to man in different ways, but always imperfectly, as in a\nglass.\"\n\nThe Anglo-Saxon Chronicle records that, in the year 685, \"it rained\nblood in Britain, and milk and butter were turned into blood.\"\nOf course, educated persons do not believe this _now_; but our\nconventionally educated predecessors did, and their conduct was sensibly\ninfluenced by such belief. The Chinese think themselves much superior\npersonages, in very many respects, to the \"barbarian\" European, yet the\nfollowing paragraph \"went the round of the papers\" during May, in the\npresent year:--\"The Kaiping coal mines have been closed in deference to\nthe opinion expressed by the Censor, that the continued working of them\nwould release the earth dragon, disturb the manes of the empress, and\nbring trouble upon the imperial family.\"\n\nFrom the very nature of many of the subjects investigated, and the\ncharacter of the only available evidence, some of the inferences drawn\nin the following pages can only be regarded as probabilities, and others\nas merely possibilities, and they are put forth with no higher\npretensions. In such matters dogmatical insistence is out of place, and\nI have studiously endeavoured to avoid it.\n\n C. H.\n\n 72, Talbot Street, Moss Side, Manchester.\n August, 1882.\n\n\n\n\nCONTENTS.\n\n\nCHAPTER I.--Early Historical and Legendary Battles.\n\n_The Arthur of History and Legend. King Arthur's presumed Victories on\nthe Douglas, near Wigan and Blackrod._\n\nHistorical works are chiefly records of battles, squabbles and intrigues\nof diplomatists and politicians. More details now required as to the\ndomestic habits and conditions of the people, and the degree and kind of\nintellectual and moral culture which obtained at any given period of\ntheir history. Progress of man from the savage to a more civilized\ncondition. Records of many battles survive, the sites of which are\neither unknown or involved in the greatest obscurity. Many genuine\nhistorical events are inextricably interwoven with mythical and\ntraditionary legends. The Roman conquest of the Brigantes. Remains of\nsome of these conflicts in Lancashire. The narratives of Gildas,\nNennius, Geoffrey of Monmouth, and some others, combinations of historic\ntruths with a mass of tradition, superstition, and artistic fiction.\nWales the birthplace of much of European medi\u00e6val fiction. Views of Sig.\nPanizzi, Professor Henry Morley, Mr. E. B. Tylor, and Mr. Fiske. The\nArthurian legends the \"source of one of the purest streams of English\npoetry.\" Notwithstanding untrustworthy strictly historical elements,\nthey enshrine much genuine legendary national faith as well as\nsuperstition. The Rev. John Whitaker's belief in Arthur's historical\nverity. Other advocates of this view: Mr. Haigh, Henry of Huntingdon and\nProfessor Fergusson. Arthur's traditionary tomb at Glastonbury, opened\nA.D. 1189. Mr. Haigh's exposition of the fraud then practised. Welsh\ntraditions thereon. The Rev. R. W. Morgan's views. William of Newbury's\ncontempt for Geoffrey's fictions. Shakspere's almost total absence of\nreference to Arthur. Sir Edward Strachey's comments on the erroneous\ngeography in Sir Thomas Malory's work. Mr. J. R. Green's views. Sir G.\nW. Dasent, on the paucity of trustworthy historic record from about\nA.D. 420 to A.D. 730. The deeds of other heroes, especially those of\nUrien, of Rheged, assigned to Arthur by the medi\u00e6val romance writers.\nDoubts as to the authenticity of the authorship and dates of the\ncomposition of the works of Gildas and Nennius discussed. No mention of\nArthur by either Gildas or the Venerable Bede. Mr. Haigh's defence of\nthe old histories, and his conjectures as to the authors. Nennius says\nthe second, third, fourth, and fifth of Arthur's twelve great victories\nwere gained on the banks \"of a river called Duglas, in the region\nLinuis.\" The Rev. John Whitaker's contention that these battles were\nfought on the Douglas, near Wigan and Blackrod. The arch\u00e6ological and\ntraditional details advanced in support thereof. Opening of the huge\nbarrow \"Hasty Knoll,\" and excavations at Parson's Meadow and Pool\nBridge, in the last century, where remains were found, which Whitaker\nand others regarded as conclusive evidence that some ancient battles had\nbeen fought in the localities. Derivation of the word Wigan. Geoffrey's\nsingle battle on the Douglas, in which Arthur defeated Colgrin. Mr.\nHaigh's arguments respecting the dates of these conflicts. His advocacy\nof the Wigan sites, and identification of another battle on \"the river\nBassas,\" _i.e._, Bashall Brook, near Clitheroe. His hypothesis that Ince\nis a corruption of Linuis. Probability of the exploits of Cadwallon or\nCadwalla, king of the Western Britons, being inextricably interwoven\nwith the legendary ones of the heroes of the Arthurian romances. Views\nof Lappenberg. Mr. H. H. Howorth and Mr. Haigh on the appropriation by\nthe Britons and Danes of the deeds and heroes of their enemies or\nneighbours. Hollingworth, in his \"Mancuniensis,\" refers to the Roman\nconquests in the district by Petilius Cerealis, and afterwards speaks of\nArthur's great victory near Wigan, and gives credence to the legends\nabout the giant Tarquin, his castle at Manchester, and his combats with\nsome of Arthur's knights. Bishop Percy on the historical truth\nunderlying legend in such ancient ballads as \"Chevy Chase,\" and the\nconfusion of incidents and heroes. Professor Boyd Dawkins on \"the date\nof the conquest of South Lancashire by the English.\" Mr. J. R. Green's\nviews. During the seventh century many sanguinary battles were fought,\nthe sites of which are now unascertainable. Ethelfirth's great victory\nat Bangor-Iscoed. Some of the struggles of this period may have been\nabsorbed by the romance writers into their stock of Arthurian legends.\nThe Rev. John Whitaker and Tarquin's castle at Manchester. Sir\n\"Launcelot du Lake.\" Martin Mere. Gradual growth of legendary heroic\nfiction. Mr. Tylor's view. The Arthurian legends enshrine some of the\noldest Aryan myths, and are the source of some of our noblest poetry.\nSir George Ellis on the foundation of mythic legends. Mr. Fiske on\nartistic legendary development. Mr. E. A. Freeman and Mr. Fiske on the\nhistorical and legendary Charlemagne. Some of the deeds of Charlemagne,\nprobably absorbed into the latter Arthurian legends. Mr. H. H. Howorth\non Saxo-Grammaticus. Historical and legendary Cromwells, Alexanders, and\nTaliesens. Mr. Kains-Jackson on Arthurian accretions. Mr. F. Metcalfe on\nAlfred the Great and trial by jury. \"The famous story of Theophilus.\"\nThe Rev. Sir G. W. Cox on the distribution of ancient Aryan mythic\nheroes. Historical novels. Opinions thereon of Sir Francis Palgrave,\nDean Milman, Arminius V\u00e1mb\u00e9ry, and Leslie Stephen. Historic and \u00e6sthetic\ntruth distinct but not antagonistic. The ideal and the real, or\nsubjective and objective truths. Shakspere's treatment in the character\nof Macbeth. Artistic truths not necessarily individual or strictly\nbiographical or historical facts, but result from wider generalisation,\nand possess an inherent or subjective vitality of their own. Views of\nThos. Carlyle, Gervinus, R. N. Wornum, Dr. Dickson White, M. Mallet, and\nTennyson. Nennius's tenth battle, said by some, but on very inconclusive\nevidence, to have been fought on the Ribble.\n\n\nCHAPTER II.--The Defeat and Death of King Oswald, of Northumbria, by the\nPagan Mercian King, Penda, at Maserfeld (A.D. 642.)\n\n_The Legend of the Wild Boar, \"the Monster in former ages which prowled\nover the neighbourhood of Winwick, inflicting injury on Man and Beast.\"_\n\nThe Venerable Bede and the Saxon Chronicle's account of the battle. The\nsite disputed. Some suggest Winwick, in Lancashire, others Oswestry, in\nShropshire. Dean Howson's suggestion. Different orthographies and\netymologies of the name Maserfeld. The subject phonetically and\ntopographically considered. Views of Mr. Roberts and Mr. Howell W.\nLloyd. St. Oswald's Well, at Winwick. Its sanctity and legendary\nconnection with the death of St. Oswald. The inscription on the church\ndedicated to St. Oswald. Hollingworth's view, in \"Mancuniensis.\"\nGeoffrey of Monmouth's statement that the battle was fought at a place\ncalled Burne. Oswald's previous victory over Cadwalla at Heavenfield.\nBede's narrative, and his relation of the miracles performed by the\nSaint's bones, and even the earth taken from the spot on which he fell.\nCurious coincidence revealed during the excavations at \"Castle Hill,\"\nPenworthan, in 1856. Penda, not Oswald, the aggressor, consequently the\nsite of the battle-field may be presumed to be within the Northumbrian\nrather than the Mercian territory. Bryn, Brun, or Burne in the Fee of\nMakerfield. The great barrow or tumulus called \"Castle Hill,\" near\nNewton. Nennius says the battle was fought at Cocboy. Cockedge.\nLatchford. Probable etymology. Professor Dwight Whitney on the\ndifficulties inherent in topographical etymology. Winwick, a place of\nvictory. At \"Winfield\" Herman defeated Varus, A.D. 10. Present\nappearance of the \"Castle Hill.\" Mr. Baines and Dr. Kendrick's\ndescriptions. Opening of the tumulus in 1843. Description of its\ncontents by the Rev. Mr. Sibson and Dr. Kendrick. A burial mound haunted\nby the ghost of a \"White Lady.\" Traditionary burial-place of Alfred the\nGreat. Professor Fergusson and B. E. Hildebrand on the contents of Odin\nand Frey's \"howes,\" near Upsala, opened in 1846-7. Similarity to those\nfound at \"Castle Hill.\" Dr. Robson's description of two burial mounds\nopened at Arbury, in 1859-60. The contents consisted of burnt bones and\nwood, rude pottery, a stone hammer-head, and a bronze dart. Etymology of\nArbury. The \"Mote Hill,\" at Warrington, removed in 1852. Opinions\nrespecting the date of this tumulus of Pennant, Ormerod, W. T. Watkin,\nand John Whitaker. The Rev. Mr. Sibson thought it a \"tumulus or\nburial-place, raised after the battle fought at Winwick.\" Dr. Kendrick's\ndescription of its contents. Christian and Pagan modes of sepulture\ncontrasted. Description of the latter in \"Beowulf,\" the oldest\nAnglo-Saxon poem extant. Date of first erection of a church at Winwick\nunknown. The date of the erection of the church at Oswestry. St.\nOswald's church, according to Domesday book held \"two carucates of land\n_exempt from all taxation_.\" In 1828, three large human skeletons found\neight or ten feet below the floor of the chancel, uncoffined, and\ncovered with a heap of large stones. St. Oswald's Well. Opinions of\nBaines respecting the saint's wells at Winwick and Oswestry. \"Cae Naef,\"\nor \"Heaven's Field,\" site of Oswald's previous victory over Cadwalla.\nDennis-brook. Sharon-Turner, Camden and Dr. Smith's views of this site.\nSome of the Oswestry traditions evidently have reference to Oswald's\nprevious victory. The dedication of the church to St. Oswald could not\nhave proceeded from the then British Christians. Contests between the\ndisciples of Augustine and Paulinus, and the earlier British Church. The\nWelsh word \"tre\" means simply hamlet, homestead. Penda's defeat in the\nfollowing year near the river Vinwid. Mr. T. Baines's conjecture as to\nthe site being near Winwick. The evidence, however, conclusive as to\nWinwidfield, near Leeds. Mr. J. R. Green on Oswald's and Penda's policy.\nCromwell's victory at \"Red Bank,\" near Winwick, in 1648. Supposed crest\nof Oswald. Rude sculpture of a \"chained hog.\" Baines's legend of a\n\"monster in former ages, which prowled over the neighbourhood inflicting\ninjury on man and beast.\" Other demon-hogs. Mythical monsters,\n\"harvest-blasters,\" huge worms, serpents, dragons, and wild boars,\ncommon in the North of England. Several instances cited. Mr. Haigh's\nargument as to the site of the poem Beowulf being near Hartlepool,\nDurham. Dr. Phene on Scandinavian and Pictish customs on the\nAnglo-Scottish Border. Aryan myths of the lightning and the storm cloud.\nMr. Walter Kelly on ancient Aryan personifications of natural phenomena.\nStormy winds, howling dogs or wolves. The ravages of the whirlwind that\ntore up the earth, the \"_work of a wild boar_.\" Lancashire superstition\nthat pigs can \"see the wind.\" Monstrous boar slain in the Greek legend\nof the Kalydonian hunt. Origin of modern heraldry. Totems or beast\nsymbols amongst many ancient as well as modern nations or tribes.\nInstances. Views of Mr. E. B. Tylor, the Rev. Isaac Taylor, and others.\nThe boar favourite helmet crest or totem amongst the Teutonic invaders.\nSacred to the goddess Freya. The \"_boar of war_.\" Illustrations from the\nAnglo-Saxon poems Beowulf, the Battle of Finsburgh, the Scandinavian\nEdda, and the ancient British poem Gododin. The boar probably the crest\nof Penda. St. Anthony's pig. Re-crystallisation of ancient myths around\nrelatively more modern nuclei. Illustrations from the works of\nKeightley, Mackenzie, Wallace, Bishop Percy, Sir John Lubbock, Arminius\nV\u00e1mb\u00e9ry, John Fiske, and the Vedic hymns. Origin of modern surnames.\nMany beast, bird, or flower symbols. Examples. Shakspere's reference to\nthe bear symbol of the Earl of Warwick and the boar of Richard III.\n\"Pitris,\" or ancestral spirits. Their supposed action in the storm and\nthe battle-field. Icelandic kindred customs and superstitions. Professor\nGervinus on the importance and conditions of such critical enquiry.\nViews of Professor Tyndall and Mr. J. A. Farrar.\n\n\nCHAPTER III.--Battles in the Valley of the Ribble near Whalley and\nClitheroe.\n\n_Wada's Defeat by King Eardulph, at Billangahoh (Langho,) A.D. 798, and\nContemporary Prophetic Superstitions. The Victory of the Scots at\nEdisford Bridge in 1138. Civil War Incidents during the struggle between\nCharles I. and the English Parliament._\n\nWada's defeat recorded in the Saxon Chronicle and by Simeon of Durham.\nThe Murder of Ethelred (A.D. 794) by Wada and other conspirators. The\nmurderous and lawless characteristics of the age illustrated.\nSharon-Turner's summary of these characteristics. Superstitious\nforewarnings: whirlwinds, lightnings, and fiery dragons. Ravages of\nDanish pirates. Treasons and civil wars. The locality of Wada's defeat\nundisputed. The names of places still retained, with only such phonetic\nchanges as philologists anticipate. A probable ancestor of Wada\nmentioned in the \"Traveller's Tale.\" The Legend of St. Christopher.\nOther chieftains referred to in the same poem: \"Hwala, once the best.\"\nand Billing who \"ruled the W\u0153rns.\" Watling-street. Wade and his boats.\nBeautiful scenery in the Ribble valley around the battle-field. Tumuli.\nOne superficially opened by Dr. Whitaker, without result. When the mound\nwas entirely removed in 1836, the remains of a buried chieftain\n(probably Alric son of Herbert) were discovered. Tradition concerning\nthe battle. Two other \"lowes\" or \"mounds,\" apparently tumuli, on the\nopposite bank of the river. Some confusion in the descriptive references\nto these mounds. Observations of Dr. Whitaker, Canon Raines, Mr. Abram\nand others. Second visit of the present writer to the locality in 1876.\nCurious circular agger. Supposed ancient artificial grout at \"Brockhole\nWood-end.\" Geological phenomena. Possibly the \"lowes\" outliers of the\npartially denuded glacial \"drift.\" Further excavations necessary.\nProbable direction of the battle. Dr. Whitaker's argument as to the\nsouthern boundary of the ancient kingdom of Northumbria discussed. Mr.\nJ. R. Green on Anglo-Saxon bishoprics. King Eardulph dethroned. Other\nsuperstitious warnings attendant thereon. Patriotism and rebellion. The\nfight at Edisford Bridge in 1138. The Bashall Brook the \"Bassus\"\naccording to Mr. Haigh. Bungerley \"hyppingstones.\" Capture of Henry VI.,\nafter the battle of Hexham in 1464, by the Talbots of Bashall and\nSalesbury. Civil war incidents during the struggle between Charles I.\nand the English Parliament. Cromwellian traditions respecting the\ndestruction of Clitheroe and Bury castles. Captain John Hodgson's\ndetails of Cromwell's march by Clitheroe and Stonyhurst to the great\nbattle at Preston.\n\n\nCHAPTER IV.--Athelstan's great Victory at Brunanburh, A.D. 937, and its\nconnection with the great Anglo-Saxon and Danish Hoard, discovered at\nCuerdale in 1840.\n\nAnglo-Saxon and Scandinavian invasions of Britain. First arrival of the\nDanes, A.D. 787. The Anglo-Saxons and Ancient British inhabitants\nChristians, the Scandinavians Pagans. Savage warfare of the period.\nProgress of the invasion. Ella, king of Northumbria and Ragnar Lodbrog.\nThe real and mythic Ragnar. Halfden's settlements in Northumbria.\nAthelstan succeeds to the throne of Wessex and its dependencies.\nSubmission of the Welsh and Scots. Marriage of Editha, Athelstan's\nsister, to Sihtric, king of Northumbria. Sihtric's relapse into paganism\nand repudiation of his queen. Sudden death of Sihtric. Athelstan's\nvengeance falls upon his sons by a former wife, Anlaf and Godefrid, the\nformer of whom fled to Ireland, and the latter sought refuge with\nConstantine, king of the Scots. Athelstan dominant king of all Britain.\nRevolt of the Scottish king and his defeat. Powerful combination of\nAthelstan's enemies. Their defeat and rout at Brunanburh. Difficulty as\nto the exact date of the battle. British Christian chiefs, as on\nprevious occasions, espoused the cause of the pagan invaders, and fought\nagainst their hated rivals of the party of St. Augustine. Defeat of\nAthelstan's two governors, Gudrekir and Alfgeirr. Athelstan's arrival at\nBrunanburh. Anlaf's stratagem in the guise of a harper. Similar story\nrelated of King Alfred. Improbability of both being historically true.\nMr. T. Metcalfe's doubts on the subject. Anlaf's midnight assault of\nAthelstan's camp frustrated. Details of the great battle. Total rout of\nAnlaf and his allies. Five \"youthful kings\" and seven of Anlaf's earls\nslain. Flight of Anlaf to Dublin. Importance of the victory. The famous\nAnglo-Saxon poem. Claims to the title of first king of England\ndiscussed. The causes of the site of the battle being at the present day\nmerely conjectural. The influence of the battle after Danish and\nNorman-French conquests. Suppression of evidence. Henry of Huntingdon's\nviews on the subject. Mr. D. Haigh on the destruction of ancient Runic\ninscriptions by the disciples of Augustine and other Christian\nmissionaries. Archbishop Parker's labours in the saving of Anglo-Saxon\nMSS. from destruction in the sixteenth century. John Bale's account in\n1549 of the wholesale destruction of MSS. during his day. Thorpe, Dr.\nGrundtvig, and J. M. Kemble's testimony to the ignorance of the\nAnglo-Norman copyists. The great \"Cuerdale find\" in May, 1840. Mr.\nHawkins's description of the treasure. Its great value at the time of\nits deposit. The latest coins minted a short time previously to the\ngreat battle of Brunanburh. Dr. Worsaae's analysis of the \"hoard.\"\nVarious places suggested as the probable site of the battle: Colecroft,\nnear Axminster, Devonshire; near Beverley, and at Aldborough, Yorkshire;\nFord, near Bromeridge, Northumberland; Banbury, Oxfordshire; Bourne,\nBrumby, and the neighbourhood of Barton-on-Humber, Lincolnshire. A\nBambro', a Bambury, and some other places have likewise found advocates.\nTheir respective claims discussed. The present writer's position that\nthe Cuerdale hoard was buried owing to the disastrous defeat of the\nallies under Anlaf near the \"pass of the Ribble.\" The tradition\nrespecting its burial and non-disinterment. The three fords at the\n\"pass,\" at Cuerdale, Walton, and Penwortham, opposite Preston. Evidence\nof the coins. Discovery of Roman remains at Walton, in 1855. Revival of\nthe tradition. The hoard at Cuerdale all silver. Finds of Roman hoards\nnot uncommon in the county. Other battles known to have been fought in\nthe neighbourhood. Two great Roman roads, and some vicinal ways pass\nnear the locality. From the positions of the belligerents, the \"pass of\nthe Ribble\" a very probable site of the conflict. The certainty of its\nhaving taken place in the Anglo-Saxon kingdom of Northumbria. Anlaf, the\nDane, ruling chief of Dublin, head of the Confederacy. The ports of\nRibble and Wyre suitable for the landing of his vessels, and for his\nafter escape to Dublin. From a topographical and military point of view,\n\"the pass of the Ribble\" a very probable site of the conflict. The name\nBrunanburh, in some presumedly corrupted form, very common. Examples.\nName of place of conflict variously written by the older historians.\nDoomsday book defective in South Lancashire, in consequence of its\nravaged condition; still many corrupted names remain to furnish\nimportant etymological evidence in favour of the author's position.\nThese evidences and readings in old maps and deeds discussed in detail.\nOrigin of the names Brindle (Brunhull, in Saxton's map); Bamber\n(Brunber), Brownedge (Brunedge). Mr. Weddle's view that Weondune is a\nmistake for Weordune. Origin of the names Wearden and Cuerden.\nEtymological and philological evidence considered. Probable modern\nremains of Ethrunnanwerch in Etherington and Rothelsworth. Other names\nof places in Lancashire which require consideration. Proofs that the\nbattle was fought not far from the sea shore and not in the interior of\nthe country. Other evidence of Athelstan's connection with the district.\nHis grant of Amounderness to the Cathedral church at York, A.D. 930. The\nHarleian MSS. \"Mundana Mutabilia,\" of the early part of the seventeenth\ncentury. Tumulus named \"Pickering Castle,\" near Roman vicinal way.\nEtymological origin of the word \"Pickering\" discussed. \"Pickering\nCastle,\" a probable corruption of \"Bickering Castle,\" or the castle or\ntumulus of the battle-field. Ancient stone coffin in Brindle\nchurch-yard. Discovery of Ancient British burial urns at \"Low Hill,\"\nnear Over Darwen, in 1867. Ancient traditions respecting a battle in the\nneighbourhood of Tockholes in Roddlesworth valley. Concluding remarks in\nsupport of the view that the country south of the \"Pass of the Ribble\"\nis the most probable site of Athelstan's great victory. More recent\nbattles in the neighbourhood. Bruce's foray in 1323, Cromwell's victory\nin 1648, and Milton's sonnet thereon. The number of troops engaged.\nLegends connected with the battle. The Siege of Preston under Wells and\nCarpenter in 1715. March of the \"Young Pretender,\" in 1745. Doggrel\nballad: \"Long Preston Peggy to Proud Preston went.\"\n\n\nAPPENDIX.\n\nThe disposal of St. Oswald's remains. The dun bull, the badge of the\nNevilles. The Genesis of Myths. Anglo-Saxon Helmet.\n\n\n\n\nERRATA.\n\n\nOn page 51, line 21, insert marks of quotation (\") after--\"_or without\nit_.\"\n\nTranspose the note on page 65, beginning--\"_Bosworth, in his Anglo-Saxon\nDictionary_,\" to page 64, and place the * after \"_massacre, etc._,\" at\nthe end of the sixth line from the bottom of the text.\n\nTranspose the note commencing on page 64 to page 65.\n\nFor \"_Downham_ IN _Yorkshire_\" (page 143, fourteenth line from the\nbottom), read \"_Downham_ INTO _Yorkshire_.\"\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER I.\n\nEARLY HISTORICAL AND LEGENDARY BATTLES.\n\nTHE ARTHUR OF HISTORY, LEGEND, AND ART. KING ARTHUR'S PRESUMED VICTORIES\nON THE DOUGLAS, NEAR WIGAN AND BLACKROD.\n\n\nIt has often been remarked, and with some truth, that our standard\nhistorical works, until very recent times at least, contained little\nmore than the details of battles, the squabbles and intrigues of\ndiplomatists and politicians, and the pedigrees of potentates, imperial\nor otherwise. Now-a-days we seek to know more of the domestic habits and\nconditions of the mass of the population, and the degree and kind of\nintellectual and moral culture which obtained amongst a people at any\ngiven period of their history. But man's advance from the savage to his\npresent relatively civilized condition has been one of fierce and\nsanguinary strife, and the piratical and freebooting instincts which he\ninherited, along with some of his nobler attributes and aspirations,\nfrom his remote ancestors, are by no means extinguished at the present\ntime, although, in their practical exhibition, they may generally assume\na somewhat more decorous exterior. Still, courage and physical\nendurance, however rude and uncouth in outward aspect, as well as\nheroism of a higher mental or moral order, ever possessed, and ever will\npossess, a strange and uncontrollable fascination; and the associations,\nsocial, political, or religious, attendant upon the more prominent of\nthe bloody struggles of the past, excite, in a most powerful degree, the\nemotional as well as the imaginative elements of our being. This is\nnotoriously the case when any special interest is superinduced, national\nor provincial. \"All men naturally feel more interested in the historical\nassociations of their own race than they do in those of any other\nportion of mankind. The soil daily trodden by the foot of any reflecting\nbeing,--the locality with whose present struggles, progress or decay, he\nis practically acquainted,--whose traditions and folk-lore were first\nfixed in his memory and his heart, long before more exact knowledge or\ncultivated judgment enabled him to test their accuracy or correctly\nweigh their value,--must possess historic reminiscences not only capable\nof commanding his attention, by exciting in the imaginative faculty\nagreeable and healthy sensations, but of teaching him valuable lessons\nin profound practical wisdom.\"[1]\n\nIt might be said, without much exaggeration, that if the soil could be\nendowed with vocal utterance, we might learn that the surface area of\nthe earth which has _not_ sustained the shock of battle at some period\nof the world's history is not very much greater than that which has felt\nthe tread of armed men in deadly conflict. In the early historic and\npre-historic times, when clan or sept fought, as a matter of course,\nagainst clan or sept, for the privilege of existence or the means to\nsecure it; or when baron or other chieftain \"levied private war\" against\nhis neighbour, from ambition, passion or greed, numberless fierce and\nbloody struggles must have taken place of which no record has been\npreserved.\n\nThe _names_ of many important ancient battle-fields have been handed\ndown to the present time, the sites of which are either utterly unknown\nor involved in great obscurity. Some genuine historical events have been\nso inextricably interwoven with the mythical and traditionary legends of\nour forefathers, that it is now impossible to detect with exactness the\nresiduum of historical truth therein contained. The battle-fields and\nall authentic record of the battles themselves amongst the inhabitants\nof Britain prior to the Roman conquest are, of course, utterly lost in\nthe gloom of the past. Nay, we know, with certainty, very few even of\nthe sites of the struggles of the Britons with the victorious Roman\nlegions. The locality we now denominate Lancashire was, at that time,\ninhabited by the Volantii and the Sistuntii, Setantii, or Segantii, and\nwas included in the \"country of the Brigantes,\" a numerous and warlike\ntribe which frequently \"measured blades\" with the imperial troops. There\nexists, however, no record to inform us where any specific conflict took\nplace, notwithstanding the numerous arch\u00e6ological remains which attest\nthe after-presence of the conquerors. Yet we know on the best authority\nthat the Brigantes espoused the cause of the Iceni, who inhabited the\nNorfolk of the present day, and were defeated by Ostorius Scapula, in\nthe reign of Claudius. Soon after the death of Galba, an insurrection\nbroke out amongst them, headed by a chief named Venutius, who had\nmarried the Brigantine queen, Cartismandua, a woman infamous in British\nhistory as the betrayer of the brave but unfortunate Caractacus. This\nroyal lady likewise played false with her husband, but Fortune refused\nto smile on her second perfidy. She escaped with difficulty to the\nterritory occupied by her Roman allies, and Venutius remained master of\nthe \"country of the Brigantes,\" and for a considerable time successfully\nresisted the progress of the imperial arms. Petilius Cerealis, however,\nin the reign of Vespatian, after a sanguinary conflict, added the\ngreater portion of the Brigantine territory to the Roman province. The\nfinal conquest was effected about the year 79, by Julius Agricola, in\nthe reign of Domitian. Remains of stations established by him are\nnumerous in Lancashire. On Extwistle Moor, about five miles to the east\nof Burnley, and about the same distance south of Caster-cliff, a Roman\nstation, near Colne, are the remains of two Roman camps and three\ntumuli. The sites are marked in the ordnance map. A few years ago, in\ncompany with my friend, the late T. T. Wilkinson, I visited this\nlocality and inspected the remains. In the transactions of the Historic\nSociety of Lancashire, for 1865-6, I described and figured an ancient\nBritish urn, taken from one of these tumuli. It was in the possession of\nthe late Mr. R. Townley Parker, of Cuerden, the owner of the estate. In\nthe same paper I have described and figured British remains, including\nabout ten cremated interments and a bronze spear-head, found in a mound\non the Whitehall estate, contiguous to Low Hill House, near Over Darwen,\nthe property of Mr. Ellis Shorrock. Similar tumuli have been opened in\nseveral other places in the county, to which further reference will be\nmade. From these remains it is not improbable some of the struggles of\nthe Brigantes with the imperial legions took place in these localities,\nor they may have been ordinary burial places of distinguished chieftains\nand their relatives.\n\nAfter the departure of the Roman legions and their attendant\nauxiliaries, history becomes inextricably allied to, and interwoven\nwith, legend and romance. The marvellous narratives of the elder\n\"historians,\" such as Gildas, Nennius, and Geoffrey of Monmouth, may\nhave some substratum of fact underlying an immense mass of tradition,\nsuperstition, and artistic fiction. In the endeavour to unravel this\ncomplicated web, much ingenuity and valuable time have been expended,\nwith but relatively barren results, at least so far as the so-called\n\"strictly historical element\" is concerned. Mr. E. B. Tylor, in his\n\"Researches into the Early History of Mankind and the Development of\nCivilization,\" referring to the value of \"Historical Traditions and\nMyths of Observation\" to the ethnologist, says--\"His great difficulty in\ndealing with them is to separate the fact and the fiction, which are\nboth so valuable in their different ways; and this difficulty is\naggravated by the circumstance that these two elements are often mixed\nup in a most complex manner, myths presenting themselves in the dress\nof historical narrative, and historical facts growing into the wildest\nmyths.\" The reputed deeds of Arthur and his \"Knights of the Round Table\"\nhave not only given birth to our most famous medi\u00e6val romances, but they\nhave furnished the laureate with themes for several of his more\ndelightful poetic effusions. Professor Henry Morley, in his \"English\nWriters,\" regards Geoffrey's work as \"a natural issue of its time, and\nthe source of one of the purest streams of English poetry.\" Indeed, it\nappears to be the opinion of many scholars, including Mr. J. D. Harding,\nRev. T. Price, and Sig. Panizzi, late chief librarian of the British\nMuseum, that the entire European cycle of romance \"originated in Welsh\ninvention or tradition.\" The last named, in his \"Essay on the Narrative\nPoetry of the Italians,\" prefixed to his edition of Boiardo and Ariosto,\ndistinctly states that \"all the chivalrous fictions since spread through\nEurope appear to have had their birth in Wales.\" Mr. Fiske, of Harvard\nUniversity, in his \"Myths and Myth-makers,\" referring to the Greek\ntradition concerning the \"Return of the Herakleids,\" says \"it is\nundoubtedly as unworthy of credit as the legend of Hengist and Horsa;\nyet, like the latter, it doubtless embodies a historical occurrence.\"\nSuch may likewise be the case with some of the battles known from\ntradition to the early story-tellers, poets, or romance writers, who\ncrystallized, as it were, all their floating warlike legends around the\nnames of Arthur and his knights. Our medi\u00e6val ancestors, with very few\nisolated exceptions, innocently accepted Geoffrey's wild assertions as\nsober historical facts, notwithstanding the gross ignorance and\nfalsehood patent in many passages, and the childish superstition and\ncredulity which characterise others. Indeed, only about a century ago,\nthe Rev. Jno. Whitaker, the historian of Manchester, placed so much\nfaith in the statements of Nennius and Geoffrey, that he regarded their\nArthur as a really historical personage, and he fixed the sites of\nseveral of his presumed exploits in the county of Lancaster. There may\nundoubtedly have existed, nay, there probably did exist, a British\nchieftain who fought against Teutonic invaders during some portion of\nthe two or three centuries occupied in the Anglo-Saxon conquest, whose\nname was Arthur, but his deeds, whatever may have been their extent or\ncharacter, have been so exaggerated and interwoven with far more ancient\nmythical stories, and confounded with those of other warriors, that his\nindividuality or personality, in a truly _historical_ sense, is\napparently lost.\n\nIndeed, Mr. Haigh expressly says--\"There was another Arthur, a son of\nMouric, king of Glamorgan, mentioned in the register of Llandaff.\" In\nhis \"History of the Conquest of Britain by the Saxons,\" by altering the\ntime of the \"coming of the Angles\" to A.D. 428, \"in accordance with a\ndate supplied by the earliest authority,\" and of the accession of Arthur\nto A.D. 467, \"in accordance with a date given by other authorities,\" he\ncontends that \"all anachronisms--involved in the system which is based\nupon the dates in the Saxon Chronicle and the Annals of Cambria,--have\ndisappeared one after another; every successive event has fallen into\nits proper place; the Saxon Chronicle and the Brut have been proved\naccordant; and the result is a perfectly connected and consistent\nhistory, such as has never yet been expected, vindicating the truth of\nour early historians, and showing that authentic materials formed the\nsubstance of their Chronicles.\" In another place he contends that, by\nadapting his chronology, \"a foundation of historic truth\" is discovered\n\"in stories which have hitherto been looked upon as mere romances.\"[2]\n\nNotwithstanding this conviction, Mr. Haigh does not assume that all the\nlegendary lore which has attached itself to the name of Arthur is of\nthis character. Referring to the traditionary tomb of the hero, he thus\nfearlessly exposes the medi\u00e6val imposture which sought to demonstrate\nthe truth of the legend:--\"An ancient sepulchre, intended by those who\nwere interested in the search to prove itself the sepulchre of Arthur,\nwas opened in A.D. 1189 (the last year of Henry II. and most probably\nthe first of Abbot Henry de Soilly, under whom the search was made), in\nthe cemetery at Glastonbury. There was on the one hand a superstition\nthat he was not dead, and on the other a tradition that he was buried at\nGlastonbury; and it was the policy of Henry II. to establish the truth\nof the latter; and a search was ordered to be made in a spot which was\nsure to be crowned with success by the discovery of an interment. It was\nrecognized as a sepulchre; indeed, distinctly marked as such by the\npyramids (tapering pillar-stones), one at either end,--objects of\ncurious interest on account of their venerable antiquity; and William\nof Malmsbury, thirty years before, (at a time when no suspicion that\nArthur was buried there existed at Glastonbury), had recorded his belief\nthat the bodies of those whose names were written on the monuments were\ncontained in stone coffins within. To prove that this was the sepulchre\nof Arthur, nothing more was necessary than to forge an inscription,\nwhich might impose upon the credulity of the twelfth century, but which\nthe arch\u00e6ological science of the nineteenth must condemn. The cross of\nlead, which served to identify the remains of Arthur and his queen is\nlost, but a representation of it has been preserved, sufficiently to\nshow that its form and character were precisely such as were usual in\nthe twelfth century, such as those discovered in the coffins of Prior\nAylmer (who died A.D. 1137), and of Archbishop Theobald (who died A.D.\n1161), and in the cemetery of Bouteilles, near Dieppe, present. The\npyramids appear to have resembled the Bewcastle and Ruthwell monuments;\ntheir age is determined by the names of King Centwine and Bishop\nHedde,[3] inscribed on the smaller one; to have been the close of the\nseventh, or the beginning of the eighth century; and as the skeleton of\na man and a woman were found in coffins hollowed out of the trunks of\noak trees, it is probable that they were those of Wulfred and Eanfled,\nwhose names occur in the inscription on the larger one.\"\n\nWelsh traditions and writers ignore the Glastonbury legend, and regard,\nin some way or other, Arthur as a being exempt from ordinary mortality.\nThe Rev. R. W. Morgan, in his \"Cambrian History,\" says,--\"His farewell\nwords to his knights--'I go hence in God's time, and in God's time I\nshall return,' created an invincible belief that God had removed him,\nlike Enoch and Elijah, to Paradise without passing through the gate of\ndeath; and that he would at a certain period return, re-ascend the\nBritish throne, and subdue the whole world to Christ. The effects of\nthis persuasion were as extraordinary as the persuasion itself,\nsustaining his countrymen under all reverses, and ultimately enabling\nthem to realise its spirit by placing their own line of the Tudors on\nthe throne. As late as A.D. 1492, it pervaded both England and Wales.\n'Of the death of Arthur, men yet have doubt,' writes Wynkyn de Worde, in\nhis chronicle, 'and shall have for evermore, for as men say none wot\nwhether he be alive or dead.' The aphanismus or disappearance of Arthur\nis a cardinal event in British history. The pretended discovery of his\nbody and that of his queen Ginevra, at Glastonbury, was justly\nridiculed by the Kymri as a Norman invention. Arthur has left his name\nto above six hundred localities in Britain.\"\n\nMr. Haigh, whilst maintaining the substantial historical veracity of\nArthur's invasion of France, nevertheless adds: \"When we consider how\nmiserably the history of the Britons has been corrupted, in the several\neditions through which it has passed, we cannot expect otherwise than\nthat the Brut should have suffered through the blunders of scribes, and\nthe occasional introduction of marginal notes, and even of extraneous\nmatter into the text, in the course of six centuries. Such an\ninterpolation, I believe, is the story of an adventure with a giant,\nwith which Arthur is said to have occupied his leisure, whilst waiting\nfor his allies at Barbefleur; and I think the reference to another\ngiant-story (not in the Brut), with which it concludes, marks it as\nsuch. But I am convinced that the story of the Gallic campaign is a part\nof the original Brut, and is substantially true.\"\n\nDr. James Fergusson, in his learned and elaborate work on the \"Rude\nStone Monuments of all Countries,\" although stoutly contending for the\nhistorical verity of the victories ascribed to Arthur by Nennius,\nsomewhat brusquely rejects the Lancashire sites, because, on his visit\nto the localities indicated by Whitaker and others, he found no\nmegalithic remains to support his ingenious hypothesis respecting\nbattle-field memorials. He says \"I am much more inclined to believe that\nLinnuis is only a barbarous Latinization of Linn, which in Gaelic and\nIrish means sea or lake. In Welsh it is Lyn, and in Anglo-Saxon Lin,\nand if this is so, 'In regione Linnuis' may mean in the Lake Country.\"\nHowever, he confesses he can find no river Duglas in that district, and\nin another sentence he regards the nearness of the sea to Wigan as an\nobjectionable element on military grounds. I hold a contrary view. A\ndefeated commander near Wigan had the great Roman road for retreat\neither to the north or south, besides the vicinal ways to Manchester and\nRibchester. The objection, moreover, is valueless, from the simple fact\nthat battles _have_ been fought in the localities, as is attested both\nby historic records and discovered remains.\n\nHenry of Huntingdon, who wrote in the earlier portion of the twelfth\ncentury, regarded Arthur as a genuine historical character, and\nattributed the then ignorance of precise localities of the twelve\nbattles described by Nennius to \"the Providence of God having so ordered\nit that popular applause and flattery, and transitory glory, might be of\nno account.\"\n\nWilliam of Malmsbury, in the twelfth century, although evidently aware\nof the legendary character of the mass of the Arthurian stories, seems,\nhowever, to have had some confidence that a substratum of historic truth\nunderlying or permeating the mass, might, with skill and diligence,\neventually be extracted. Probably a few years before Geoffrey's work\nappeared, he writes--\"That Arthur, about whom the idle tales of the\nBretons (_nug\u00e6 Britonum_) craze to this day, one worthy not to have\nmisleading fables dreamed about him, but to be celebrated in true\nhistory, since he sustained for a long time his tottering country, and\nsharpened for war the broken spirit of his people.\"\n\nIt is a remarkable circumstance that Shakspere, who has availed himself\nso profusely of the old historic and legendary records, as well as of\nthe popular superstitions, with two trivial exceptions, which merely\nprove his acquaintance with the traditional hero, never refers to\nArthur. The exceptions are so slight and even casual that they seem\nrather to confirm the probability that the great poet, in the main,\nendorsed the opinion of William of Newbury as to Geoffrey's presumed\n_historical_ verities. This critical monk, in the latter portion of the\ntwelfth century, indignantly exclaims: \"Moreover, in his book, that he\ncalls the 'History of the Britons,' how saucily and how shamelessly he\nlies almost throughout, no one, unless ignorant of the old histories,\nwhen he falls upon that book can doubt. Therefore in all things we trust\nBede, whose wisdom and sincerity are beyond doubt, so that fabler with\nhis fables shall be straightway spat out by us all.\" The fact that the\nstory of \"Lear\" is given pretty fully in Geoffrey's work in no way\naffects this conclusion, as Shakspere, in the construction of his plot,\nhas followed an older drama and a ballad rather than the _soi-disant_\nWelsh historian. One allusion by Shakspere to Arthur is in the second\npart of \"Henry IV.\" (Act 3, Scene 2), where Justice Shallow says: \"I\nremember at Mile-end Green (when I lay at Clement's Inn, I was then Sir\nDagonet in Arthur's Show),\" &c. The other is in Act 2, Scene 4, of the\nsecond part of King Henry IV., when Falstaff enters the tavern in\nEastcheap singing a scrap of an old ballad, as follows: \"'_When Arthur\nfirst in court_'--Empty the jordan--'_And was a worthy king_'--[Exit\nDrawer.]--How now, Mistress Doll?\"\n\nSir Edward Strachey, in his introduction to the Globe edition of Sir\nThomas Malory's \"Morte D'Arthur,\" confesses that it is impossible to\nharmonise the geography of the work. This, however, is a very ordinary\ncondition in most legendary stories, literary or otherwise. Speaking of\nthe renowned Caerleon on Usk, he says--\"It seems through this, as in\nother romances, to be inter-changeable in the author's mind with\nCarlisle, or (as written in its Anglo-Norman form) Cardoile, which\nlatter, in the History of Merlin, is said to be in Wales, whilst\nelsewhere Wales and Cumberland are confounded in like manner. So of\nCamelot, where Arthur chiefly held his court, Caxton in his preface\nspeaks as though it were in Wales, probably meaning Caerleon, where the\nRoman amphitheatre is still called Arthur's Round Table.\" Other\ngeographical elements in the work are even more unsatisfactory. There\nis, indeed, a Carlion and a C\u00e6rwent referred to in the Breton\nlai d'Ywenec, and the latter is said to be \"on the Doglas,\" and was the\ncapital city of Avoez, \"lord of the surrounding country.\" Even, if the\nscene of the Breton romance be presumed to be in the present\nMonmouthshire, where we yet find the names Caerleon and Caerwint, still\nwe have a claimant in the Scottish Douglas, as well as in the Lancashire\nriver of that name.\n\nMr. J. R. Green, in his recently published work, \"The Making of\nEngland,\" says, \"Mr. Skene, who has done much to elucidate these early\nstruggles, has identified the sites of\" (Arthurian) \"battles with spots\nin the north (see his 'Celtic Scotland,' i. 153-154, and more at large\nhis 'Four Ancient Books of Wales,' i. 55-58); but as Dr. Guest has\nequally identified them with districts in the south, the matter must\nstill be looked upon as somewhat doubtful.\" The doubt is increased by\nthe fact that Hollingworth, Mr. Haigh, the Rev. John Whitaker, and\nothers, as well as local tradition, with equal confidence have\nidentified some of the struggles with the Lancashire battle-fields now\nunder consideration.\n\nDr. Sir G. Webbe Dasent, in his review of Dr. Latham's Johnson's\nDictionary, referring to the struggles of the ancient Britons with their\nAnglo-Saxon invaders, has the following very pertinent observations:--\n\n\"After the Roman legions left the Britons to themselves, there is\ndarkness over the face of the land from the fifth to the eighth century.\nThose are really our dark ages. From 420, when it is supposed that\nHonorius withdrew his troops, to 730, when Bede wrote his history, we\nsee nothing of British history. Afar off we hear the shock of arms, but\nall is dim, as it were, when two mighty hosts do battle in the dead of\nnight. When the dawn comes and the black veil is lifted, we find that\nBritain has passed away. The land is now England; the Britons\nthemselves, though still strong in many parts of the country, have been\ngenerally worsted by their foes; they have lost that great battle which\nhas lasted through three centuries. Their Arthur has come and gone,\nnever again to turn the heady fight. Henceforth Britain has no hero, and\nmerely consoles herself with the hope that he will one day rise and\nrestore the fortunes of his race. But, though there were many battles in\nthat dreary time, and many Arthurs, it was rather in the every day\nbattle of life, in that long unceasing struggle which race wages with\nrace, not sword in hand alone, but by brain and will and feeling, that\nthe Saxons won the mastery of the land. Little by little, more by\nstubbornness and energy than by bloodshed, they spread themselves over\nthe country, working towards a common unity, from every shore....\nCertain it is that for a long time after the time of Bede, and therefore\nundoubtedly before his day, the Celtic and Saxon kings in various parts\nof the island lived together on terms of perfect equality, and gave and\ntook their respective sons and daughters to one another in marriage.\"\n\nThe Arthur of romance is, in fact, the artistic creation of writers of a\nlater age, or, indeed, of later ages, than the conquest of Britain by\nthe Anglo-Saxons, and not of contemporary historians, bardic or\notherwise. The British chieftain who fought against Ida and his Angles\nin the north of England, and whose territory, including that of\nsubordinate chieftains or allies, is believed at one time to have\nextended from the Clyde to the Ribble, or even the Dee, with an\nuncertain boundary on the east, is named Urien of Rheged, the district\nnorth of the Solway estuary, including the modern Annandale. He is the\ngreat hero of the Welsh bard Taliesin. Amongst his other qualities the\npoet enumerates the following: \"Protector of the land, usual with thee\nis headlong activity and the drinking of ale, and ale for drinking, and\nfair dwelling and beautiful raiment.\" Llywarch Hen, or the Old, another\nKeltic poet, who lived between A.D. 550-640, incidentally mentions\nArthur as a chief of the Kymri of the South, thus, as Professor Henry\nMorley puts it: \"What Urien was in the north Arthur was in the south.\"\nThis may well account for the geographical discrepancies referred to by\nSir Edward Strachey. Llywarch Hen was present at the bloody battle in\nwhich his lord, Geraint (one of the knights introduced into the\nsucceeding romances), and a whole host of British warriors perished. The\nsaid bard likewise brought away the head of Urien in his mantle, after\nhis decapitation by the sword of an assassin. In the early English\nmetrical romance, \"Merlin,\" a Urien, King of Scherham, father of the\ncelebrated Ywain, is mentioned as the husband of Igerna's third daughter\nby her first husband, Hoel. Urien, of Rheged, is mentioned, however, in\nthe same romance as one of the competitors with Arthur for the crown of\nBritain. In Sir Thomas Malory's \"Morte D'Arthur,\" a \"King Uriens of\nGore\" is introduced. \"Gore\" is evidently the Peninsula of Gower, in\nGlamorganshire, South Wales. These, however, are merely some of the\ngeographical discrepancies referred to by Sir Edward Strachey; but such\ndiscrepancies, owing to the intermixture of several legends, under the\ncircumstances, are inevitable, and are in themselves evidences of the\nlack of unity in the original sources from which the romance writers\ndrew their materials.\n\nNennius's \"History of Britain\" was written, according to some\nauthorities, at the end of the eighth century. Others ascribe it, in the\ncondition at least in which we have it at present, with more\nprobability, to the end of the tenth. Geoffrey of Monmouth's work was\npublished in the twelfth. He professes, indeed, to have, to some extent,\ntranslated from an ancient manuscript, brought by \"Walter, Archdeacon of\nOxford,\" out of Brittany. This, however, notwithstanding Geoffrey's\ndeliberate assertion, is doubted and even flatly denied by many\ncompetent judges. Be this as it may, no such document is otherwise known\nor indeed referred to by any reliable authority. If it ever existed,\nfrom its inherent defects, it can to us possess little strictly\nhistorical value, whatever amount of truthful legendary or traditional\nmatter it may have furnished to the author of the so-called \"Historia\nBritonum.\" Referring to the too common habit of regarding mere tradition\nas reliable history, Mr. Fiske, in his review of Mr. Gladstone's\n\"Juventus Mundi,\" justly exclaims: \"One begins to wonder how many more\ntimes it will be necessary to prove that dates and events are of no\n_historical_ value unless attested by nearly contemporary evidence.\"\n\nNow, one of the most significant facts in connection with this\ninvestigation is that neither Bede nor Gildas makes any mention of\nArthur. Mr. Stevenson, in the preface to his edition of Gildas's work,\nin the original Latin, says, \"We are unable to speak with certainty as\nto his parentage, his country, or even his name, or of the works of\nwhich he was the author.\" The title of the old English translation,\nhowever, is as follows: \"The Epistle of Gildas, the most ancient British\nauthor: who flourished in the yeere of our Lord, 546. And who, by his\ngreat erudition, sanctitie, and wisdome, acquired the name of\n_Sapiens_.\" Bede was born in the year 673, and died in 735. The Rev. R.\nW. Morgan (Cambrian History) says, \"The genuine works of Aneurin--his\n'British History,' and 'Life of Arthur,'--are lost; the work of Gildas,\nwhich at one time passed for the former is a forgery by Aldhelm, the\nRoman Catholic monk of Malmesbury.\" If ever Arthur lived in the flesh it\nmust have been in the fifth or sixth centuries, and yet, as I have\npreviously observed, these writers make no reference whatever to the\nrenowned king and warrior. So that, even if we grant the earlier assumed\ndate to the work of Nennius, about three centuries must have elapsed\nbetween the performance of his deeds and their earliest known record! In\nGeoffrey of Monmouth's case the interval is no less than seven hundred\nyears! Mr. John R. Green (\"The Making of England\") says: \"The\ngenuineness of Gildas, which has been doubted, may now be looked upon as\nestablished (see Stubbs and Haddan, 'Councils of Britain,' i. p. 44).\nSkene ('Celtic Scotland,' i. 116, note) gives a critical account of the\nvarious biographies of Gildas. He seems to have been born in 516,\nprobably in the north Welsh valley of the Clwyd; to have left Britain\nfor Armorica when thirty years old, or in 546; to have written his\nhistory there about 556 or 560; to have crossed to Ireland between\n566-569; and to have died there in 570.... Little, however, is to be\ngleaned from the confused rhetoric of Gildas; and it is only here and\nthere that we can use the earlier facts which seem to be embedded among\nthe later legends of Nennius.\" Mr. Haigh, however, contends that an\n\"earlier S. Gildas\" was a relative of Arthur, and was born about A.D.\n425. He says--\"He had written, so a British tradition preserved by\nGiraldus Cambrensis\" [twelfth century] \"informs us, noble books about\nthe acts of Arthur and his race, but threw them into the sea when he\nheard of his brother's death;\" [at the hands of Arthur] \"and this\ntradition he says satisfactorily explains--what has been made the ground\nof an argument against the genuineness of the works ascribed to him--his\nstudied silence with regard to Arthur.\" Mr. Haigh likewise conjectures\nthat \"Nennius's History of the Britons\" was written by St. Albinus, from\ncontemporary records which had been carried to Armorica (Brittany), and\nsubsequently lost. However, neither traditions first recorded seven\ncenturies after the events transpired, nor \"lives\" of early British\nsaints, are considered very trustworthy historical authorities. It\nrequires very little knowledge of the state of literature, either in\nEngland or elsewhere, during these long periods of time, to remove any\nlingering doubt as to the purely legendary character of much of the\ncontents of these books, even if we grant, as in the case of the\nVenerable Bede, that the authors themselves honestly related that which\nthey honestly, however foolishly, believed to be true. Singularly\nenough, according to Spurrell's dictionary, the modern Welsh word\n_aruthr_ signifies \"marvellous, wonderful, prodigious, strange, dire,\"\nwhich is not without significance.\n\nNennius says:--\"A.D. 452. Then it was that the magnanimous Arthur, with\nall the kings and military force of Britain, fought against the Saxons.\nAnd though there were _many more noble than himself_, yet he was twelve\ntimes chosen their commander, and was as often conqueror.\" He then\ninforms us that the second, third, fourth, and fifth of these battles\nwere fought on the banks of a \"river by the Britons called Duglas, in\nthe region Linuis.\" Some copies give \"Dubglas,\" which has been\nidentified with the little stream Dunglas, which formed the southern\nboundary of Lothian. The Rev. John Whitaker, however, contends that the\nDouglas, in Lancashire, is the stream referred to. He advances, amongst\nmuch conjectural matter, the following arch\u00e6ological and traditional\ndetails, in support of his position:--\n\n\"The name of the river concurs with the tradition, and three battles\nprove the notice true.[4] On the traditionary scene of this engagement\nremained till the year 1770 a considerable British barrow, popularly\ndenominated Hasty Knoll. It was originally a vast collection of small\nstones taken from the bed of the Douglas, and great quantities had been\nsuccessively carried away by the neighbouring inhabitants. Many\nfragments of iron had been also occasionally discovered in it, together\nwith the remains of those military weapons which the Britons interred\nwith their heroes at death. On finally levelling the barrow, there was\nfound a cavity in the hungry gravel, immediately under the stones, about\nseven feet in length, the evident grave of the British officer, and all\nfilled with the loose and blackish earth of his perished remains. At\nanother place, near Wigan, was discovered about the year 1741 a large\ncollection of horse and human bones, and an amazing quantity of\nhorse-shoes, scattered over a large extent of ground--an evidence of\nsome important battle upon the spot. The very appellation of Wigan is a\nstanding memorial of more than one battle at that place.[5] According to\ntradition, the first battle fought near Blackrode was uncommonly bloody,\nand the Douglas was crimsoned with blood to Wigan. Tradition and remains\nconcur to evince the fact that a second battle was fought near Wigan\nLane, many years before the rencontre in the civil wars.... The defeated\nSaxons appear to have crossed the hill of Wigan, where another\nengagement or engagements ensued; and in forming the canal there about\nthe year 1735, the workmen discovered evident indications of a\nconsiderable battle on the ground. All along the course of the channel,\nfrom the termination of the dock to the point at Poolbridge, from forty\nto fifty roods in length, and seven or eight yards in breadth, they\nfound the ground everywhere containing the remains of men and horses. In\nmaking the excavations, a large old spur, carrying a stem four or five\ninches in length, and a rowel as large as a half-crown, was dug up; and\nfive or six hundred weight of horse-shoes were collected. The point of\nland on the south side of the Douglas, which lies immediately fronting\nthe scene of the last engagement, is now denominated the Parson's\nMeadow; and tradition very loudly reports a battle to have been fought\nin it.\"\n\nThe rev. historian of Manchester, referring to the statements in\nNennius, thus sums up his argument:--\n\n\"These four battles were fought upon the river Douglas, and in the\nregion Linuis. In this district was the whole course of the current from\nits source to the conclusion, and the words, '_Super flumen quod vocatur\nDuglas, quod est in Linuis_,' shows the stream to have been less known\nthan the region. This was therefore considerable; one of the cantreds or\ngreat divisions of the Sistuntian kingdom, and comprised, perhaps, the\nwestern half of South Lancashire. From its appellation of Linuis or the\nLake, it seems to have assumed the denomination from the Mere of\nMarton,\" [Martin] \"which was once the most considerable object in it.\"\n\nThe Rev. R. W. Morgan, in his \"Cambrian History,\" locates the Arthurian\nvictories as follows:--\"1st, at Gloster; 2nd, at Wigan (The Combats), 10\nmiles from the Mersey. The battle lasted through the night. In A.D.\n1780, on cutting through the tunnel, three cart loads of horse-shoes\nwere found and removed; 3rd, at Blackrode; 4th, at Penrith, between the\nLoder and Elmot, on the spot still called King Arthur's Castle; 5th, on\nthe Douglas, in Douglas Vale; 6th, at Lincoln; 7th, on the edge of the\nForest of Celidon (Ettrick Forest) at Melrose; 8th, at C\u00e6r Gwynion; 9th,\nbetween Edinburgh and Leith; 10th, at Dumbarton; 11th, at Brixham,\nTorbay; 12th, at Mont Baden, above Bath.\"\n\nGeoffrey of Monmouth refers but to one battle on the banks of the\n\"Duglas.\" This he fixes at about the year 500. He tells us that \"the\nSaxons had invited over their countrymen from Germany, and, under the\ncommand of Colgrin, were attempting to exterminate the whole British\nrace.... Hereupon, assembling the youth under his command, he marched\nto\" [towards] \"York, of which when Colgrin had intelligence, he met him\nwith a very great army, composed of Saxons, Scots, and Picts, by the\nriver Duglas, where a battle happened, with the loss of the greater part\nof both armies. Notwithstanding, the victory fell to Arthur, who pursued\nColgrin to York, and there besieged him.\"\n\nMr. Daniel H. Haigh, one of the latest advocates of the genuine\nhistorical veracity which underlies much of the Arthurian traditions,\nplaces, as we have previously observed, Arthur's coronation A.D. 467, or\nabout 32 years earlier than the usually received date. He says--\"The\nriver Douglas, which falls into the estuary of the Ribble, is certainly\nthat which is indicated here;\" [the second, third, fourth, and fifth\nvictories referred to by Nennius] \"and although it was one of Arthur's\ntactics to get round his adversaries, so as to be able to attack them\nwhen least expected (which will account for the scene of this conflict\nbeing considerably to the west of the direct line from London to York),\nit is extremely improbable that he would have gone so far north as the\nDouglas in Lothian, when his object was to attack Colgrin at York. The\nreading which the Paris MS. and Henry of Huntington give is, I believe,\ncorrect, and represents Ince, a name which is retained to this day by a\ntownship near to this river, a little more than a mile to the south-west\nof Wigan, and by another about fifteen miles to the west, and which may\npossibly have belonged to a considerable tract of country.[6]... Neither\nthe Brut nor Boece mention more than one battle at this time; but the\nlatter says that Arthur 'pursued the Saxons, continually slaughtering\nthem, until they took refuge in York,' and that 'having had so frequent\nvictories he there besieged them;' and these expressions may well imply\nthe four victories, gained in one prolonged contest on the Douglas, and\nanother on the river Bassas, _i.e._, Bashall brook, which falls into the\nRibble near Clithero, in the direct line of Colgrin's flight to York.\"\n\nIf, therefore, the historical hypothesis be accepted, the Lancashire\nsites for these battles would seem as probable as any of the many others\nsuggested.\n\nFrom the remains described by Whitaker, it appears certain that some\ngreat battles in early times have been fought on the banks of the\nDouglas, traditions concerning which may have served for the foundation\nof the after statements of Nennius and others. There are some recorded\nhistorical facts which countenance this view. The British warrior, king\nof the Western Britons, Cadwallon or Cadwalla,[7] with his ally, Penda,\ndefeated and slew Edwin, King of Northumbria, uncle of St. Oswald, in\nthe year 633, at Heathfield.[8] Where Heathfield is we have no perfectly\nsatisfactory evidence.[9] The Brit-Welsh poet, Lywarch Hen, or the Old,\na prince of the Cumbrian Britons, celebrated his praises in song. He\nsays--\n\n    Fourteen great battles he fought,\n    For Britain the most beautiful,\n    And sixty skirmishes.\n\nIt is by no means improbable that some of Cadwalla's exploits, mythical\nas well as real, have become inextricably interwoven with the legendary\nones of the heroes of the Arthurian romances. Singularly enough a\nparagraph in Geoffrey of Monmouth's work would seem to countenance this.\nIn book 12, chapter 2, of his so-called \"History of Britain,\" he refers\nto negotiations being entered into and afterwards broken off, in the\nyear 630, by Cadwalla and Edwin, while their armies lay on the opposite\nbanks of _the river Douglas_, the scene of the presumed Arthurian\nvictory over Colgrin in the year 500, according to the same authority.\nThis circumstance is not without significance, as the legendary Arthur\nhas evidently absorbed no inconsiderable portion of the reputations, in\nthe North of England, of Urien of Rheged, and other veritable British\nwarriors. Indeed, Lappenberg says--\"The Welsh historians adopted the\npolicy of _purloining from a successful enemy_, and skilfully\ntransferring to his British contemporaries, if not to _imaginary\npersonages_, the object and reward of his battles, the glory and\nlastingness of his individuality in history;\" and, as illustrations of\nthis practice, Mr. Daniel H. Haigh, in his \"Conquest of Britain by the\nSaxons,\" adds, \"Thus, C\u0153dwealha, Ine, and Ivar are claimed by them as\nCadwaladyr, Inyr, and Ivor.\" Mr. Haigh, notwithstanding his faith in the\nsubstantial accuracy of much of the contents of the works of doubtful\nauthority, says--\"The peace which Ambrosius established was broken in\nthe following year, A.D. 444. The Brut says nothing of this affair; it\nrarely records the defeats of the Britons.\" And, similarly, the Saxon\nchronicle is equally reticent in the opposite direction!\n\nIndeed, this weakness is not exclusively an attribute of either British\nor Anglo-Saxon historians or romance writers. Mr. H. H. Howorth, in his\nable essay on \"The Early History of Sweden,\" in Vol. 9 of the\nTransactions of the Royal Historical Society, lucidly expounds the\ncharacter of the contents of the professedly Danish History by\nSaxo-Grammaticus. He says--\"He had no scaffolding upon which to build\nhis narrative. He had to construct one for himself in the best way he\ncould, and to piece together the various fragments before him into a\ncontinuous patchwork. His was not a critical age, and we are not\ntherefore surprised to find that his handiwork was exceedingly rude. A\npiece of the history of the Lombards by Paul and Deacon, and another\ntaken from the Edda, are thrust in after narratives evidently relating\nto the ninth century, when Ireland had been more or less conquered by\nthe Norsemen. Icelanders are introduced into the story a long time\nbefore the discovery of Iceland. Christianity is professed by Danish\nkings long before it had reached the borders of Denmark. The events\nbelonging to one Harald (Harald Blatand) are transferred to another\nHarald who lived two or three centuries earlier, and the joints in the\npatchwork narrative are filled up by the introduction of plausible\nlinks.\" He afterwards adds--\"The other important fact to remember is\nthat our author was patriotic enough to lay under contribution, not only\nmaterials relating to Denmark, but to _transfer to Denmark the history\nof other countries_. To appropriate not only the traditions of the\nAnglo-Saxons, the Lombards, and the common Scandinavian heritage of the\nEdda, but also the particular histories of Sweden and Norway, and that a\ngood deal of what passes for Danish history in his pages is not Danish\nat all, but Swedish, and relates to the rulers of Upsala, and not to\nthose of Lethra; topographical boundaries being as lightly skipped over\nby the patriotic old chronicler, whose home materials were so scanty, as\nchronological ones.\" It is, under such circumstances, vain to expect\nreliable historical evidence of the identity of locality or the names of\nthe real warrior chiefs who commanded in many of the presumed Arthurian\nbattles and adventures, some of them being evidently mythical or\nartistic creations. Whitaker's \"large old spur, carrying a stem four or\nfive inches in length, and a rowel as large as a half-crown,\" does not\nseem to indicate so early a date as the Anglo-Saxon conquests in\nBritain. Mr. Thomas Wright, in his \"Celt, Roman and Saxon,\" referring to\nspurs of the Roman, Saxon and Norman periods, says--\"Amongst the\nextensive Roman remains found in the camp at Hod Hill were several spurs\nof iron, which resembled so closely the Norman prick-spurs, that they\nmight easily be mistaken for them. I suspect that many of the\nprick-spurs which have been found on or near Roman sites, and hastily\njudged to be Norman, are, especially when made of bronze, Roman. As far,\nhowever, as comparison has yet been made, the _Roman and the Saxon spurs\nare shorter in the stimulus_ than those of the Norman.\" Spurs with long\n_stimuli_ or large rowels do not appear to have been in use until some\ntime after the Norman Conquest. This, however, does not necessarily\naffect the antiquity of the whole of the remains referred to, which, of\ncourse, may have been deposited at different periods.\n\nHollingworth, in his \"Mancuniensis,\" written in the earlier portion of\nthe seventeenth century, seems to have been aware of the existence of a\ntradition that referred to several bloody battles fought in Lancashire\nin some portion of the mysterious \"olden time.\" He, however, assigns\nthem to the period of the Roman conquest, to which I have previously\nreferred. If the incidents in the Arthurian \"romances\" are no more\nhistorically tenable than those in the Iliad or the Odyssey, and as the\nRoman invasions of the Brigantine territory are undoubted, the elder\nManchester historian's conjecture as to the time of the conflicts\nindicated by the tradition and the remains found near Wigan and\nBlackrod, may possibly be preferred to that of his successor, as the\nmore probable of the two. Indeed, as has been previously observed, the\nromance writers and story-tellers have evidently absorbed and modified\nthe historical traditions of many antecedent periods. Hollingworth\nsays--\n\n\"In Vespatian's time Petilius Carealic\" (Petilius Cerealis) \"strooke a\nterror into the whole land by invading upon his first entry the\nBrigantes, the most populous of the whole province, many battailes, and\nbloody ones, were fought, and the greatest part of the Brigantes were\neither conquered or wasted.\" Hollingworth, indeed, does afterwards refer\nto a battle near Wigan, in which he says Arthur was victorious. His\nwords are--\"It is certaine that about Anno Domini 520, there was such a\nprince as King Arthur, and it is not incredible that hee or his knights\nmight contest about this castle (Manchester) when he was in this\ncountry, and (as Nennius sayth) he put the Saxons to flight in a\nmemorable battell neere Wigan, about twelve miles off.\"\n\nBishop Percy, in his introduction to the ancient ballad of\n\"Chevy-Chase,\" says--\"With regard to its subject, although it has no\ncountenance from history, there is room to think that it had some\nfoundation in fact.... There had long been a rivalship between the two\nmartial families of Percy and Douglas, which, heightened by the national\nquarrel, must have produced frequent challenges and struggles for\nsuperiority, petty invasions of their respective domains, and sharp\ncontests for the point of honour, which would not always be recorded in\nhistory. Something of this kind we may suppose gave rise to the ancient\nballad of the HUNTING O' THE CHEVIAT.\" He afterwards adds \"the tragical\ncircumstances recorded in the ballad are evidently borrowed from the\nBATTLE OF OTTERBOURN, a very different event, _but which after times\nwould easily confound with it_.... Our poet has evidently jumbled the\ntwo events together.\"\n\nDuring the seventh century many sanguinary encounters must have taken\nplace in Lancashire, many of which are unrecorded, and the sites of\nothers utterly forgotten. Professor Boyd-Dawkins, in a paper, entitled\n\"On the Date of the Conquest of South Lancashire by the English,\" read\nbefore the Manchester Literary and Philosophical Society, referring to\nthe subjugation of what he aptly terms the \"Brit-Welsh\" of Strathclyde,\n(or the north-western part of the present England and the western\nportion of the lowlands of Scotland), by Ethelfrith, the powerful\nNorthumbrian monarch, says that Chester was \"the principal seat\" of\ntheir power in that district. The whole of Lancashire, at this period,\nit would appear, was unconquered by the Angles or English. Under the\ndate 607, the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle says--\"And this year Ethelfrith led\nhis army to Chester, and there slew numberless Welshmen: and so was\nfulfilled the prophesy of Augustine, wherein he saith, 'If the Welsh\nwill not be at peace with us, they shall perish at the hands of the\nSaxons.' There were also slain two hundred priests who came to pray for\nthe army of the Welsh.\" The death of these ecclesiastics, said to be\nmonks of Bangor-Iscoed, was celebrated in song by a native poet.\nFlorence of Worcester, referring to this battle, says Ethelfrith \"first\nslew _twelve hundred_ British priests, who had joined the army to offer\nprayers on their behalf, and then exterminated the remainder of this\nimpious armament.\" This is evidently an antagonistic priestly\nexaggeration, although other authorities state that the monastery at\nBangor, at one time, contained 2,400 monks. This powerful body of\nBrit-Welsh Christians, according to Geoffrey of Monmouth, \"disdained\nsubjection to Augustine, and despised his preaching.\" Hence the strong\nclerical antipathy which characterised the conflict. Chester was utterly\nruined, and is said to have remained desolate for about two centuries.\nMr. Boyd Dawkins says--\"In all probability South Lancashire was occupied\nby the English at this time, and the nature of the occupation may be\ngathered from the treatment of the city of Chester. A fire, to use the\nmetaphor of Gildas, went through the land, and the Brit-Welsh\ninhabitants were either put to the sword or compelled to become the\nbondsmen of the conquerors.\"\n\nMr. J. R. Green (\"The Making of England\") traces Ethelfrith's march\nthrough Lancashire to his victory at Bangor-Iscoed. He says--\"Though the\ndeep indent in the Yorkshire shire-line to the west proves how\nvigorously the Deirans had pushed up the river valleys into the moors,\nit shows that they had been arrested by the pass at the head of the\nRibblesdale; while further to the south the Roman road that crossed the\nmoors from York to Manchester was blocked by the unconquered fastnesses\nof Elmet, which reached away to the yet more difficult fastnesses of the\nPeak. But the line of defence was broken as the forces of Ethelfrith\npushed over the moors along the Ribblesdale into our southern\nLancashire. His march was upon Chester, the capital of Gwynedd, and\nprobably the refuge place of Edwine.\"\n\nThe more northern portion of the county was not subdued till about half\na century afterwards, when Cumberland and Westmoreland were absorbed\ninto the Northumbrian kingdom by Ecfrith (670-685). Mr. J. R. Green, in\nthe work referred to, says--\"The Welsh states across the western moors\nhad owned, at least from Oswald's time, the Northumbrian supremacy, but\nlittle actual advance had been made by the English in this quarter since\nthe victory of Chester, and northward of the Ribble the land between the\nmoors and the sea still formed a part of the British kingdom of\nCumbria. It was from this tract, from what we now know as northern\nLancashire and the Lake District, Ecgfrith's armies chased the Britons\nin the early years of his reign.\"\n\nSome severe struggles must have taken place during this period; and,\ntherefore, it is by no means improbable that a portion, at least, of the\nremains on the banks of the Douglas, referred to by the Rev. John\nWhitaker as evidence of Arthur's historical existence, may pertain to\nthe struggles of the Brit-Welsh and their Angle or English conquerors of\nthe seventh century. This confusion of names and dates is a common\nfeature in the folk-lore of all nations and periods, but in none is it\nmore strongly developed than in the Arthurian romances. The author of\nthe metrical \"Morte D'Arthur,\" after describing the victory of the hero\nover his rebellious nephew, Modred, at \"Barren-down,\" near Canterbury,\ntells us that the barrows raised on the burial of the slain were still\nto be seen in his day. Barham Down is still covered with barrows, which\nrecent examination has demonstrated to be the remains of a Saxon\ncemetery, and not a battle-field.\n\nBangor-Iscoed, the Bovium, and, at a later period, the Banchorium, of\nthe Romans, is situated on the river Dee, some fourteen miles south of\nChester. Sharon Turner laments the destruction of its magnificent\nlibrary at the sacking of the monastery, which he regarded as an\n\"irreparable loss to the ancient British antiquities.\" Gildas, the\nquasi-historian, is said to have been one of its abbots. The Brit-Welsh\ncommander during this struggle was Brocmail, the friend of Taliesin,\nwho, in his poem on the disastrous battle, says--\n\n    I saw the oppression of the tumult; the wrath and tribulation;\n      The blades gleaming on the bright helmets;\n    The battle against the lord of fame, in the dales of Hafren;\n      Against Brocvail[10] of Powys, who loved my muse.\n\nSharon Turner says the precise date of this battle is uncertain. The\nAnglo-Saxon chronicle says it was fought in the year 607, and the Annals\nof Ulster in 612. Other authorities assign dates between the two.\n\nThe Rev, John Whitaker seems to have had not only a perfect faith in the\nhistorical existence of Arthur, but also of his famous knights of the\n\"table round.\" Following tradition he locates at Castle-field,\nManchester, the legendary fortress of \"Sir Tarquin,\" a gigantic hero, to\nwhose prowess several of Arthur's doughty knights had succumbed, before\nhe himself fell beneath the stalwart arm of \"Sir Lancelot du Lake.\"\nWhitaker regards Lancelot's patronymic, \"du Lake,\" as referable to the\nLinius which gave the name to the district, according to the hypothesis\npreviously advanced.\n\nIt is scarcely necessary to say that, notwithstanding all this\ningenuity, Sir Tarquin, Sir Lancelot, and their knightly compeers, are\nas much creatures of the imagination as the heroes of any acknowledged\nwork of fiction, such as the \"Iliad\" and the \"Odyssey\" of Homer, or the\nnovels of Scott, Thackeray, Lord Lytton, and Dickens.\n\nThe _gradual growth_ of what are generally regarded as the _spontaneous_\nproducts of the imagination, in the region of art, is well expressed in\nMr. Tylor's admirable work on \"Primitive Culture.\" He says--\"Amongst\nthose opinions which are produced by a little knowledge, to be dispelled\nby a little more, is the belief in the almost boundless creative power\nin the human imagination. The superficial student, mazed in a crowd of\nseemingly wild and lawless fancies, which he thinks to have no reason in\nnature nor pattern in the material world, at first concludes them to be\nnew births from the imagination of the poet, the tale-teller, and the\nseer. But little by little, in what seemed the most spontaneous fiction,\na more comprehensive study of the source of poetry and romance begins to\ndisclose a cause for each fancy, an education that has led up to each\ntrain of thought, a store of inherited materials from out of which each\nprovince of the poet's land has been shaped and built over and peopled.\nBackward from our own times, the course of mental history may be traced\nthrough the changes wrought by modern schools of thought and fancy upon\nan intellectual inheritance handed down to them from earlier\ngenerations. And through remote periods, as we recede more nearly\ntowards primitive conditions of our race, the threads which connect new\nthought with old do not always vanish from our sight. It is in large\nmeasure possible to follow them as clues leading back to that actual\nexperience of nature and life which is the ultimate source of human\nfancy.\"\n\nPerhaps no finer illustration, at least in English literature, of the\ntruthfulness of this position can be cited than the Arthurian\nart-products with which I am dealing. In them we have embodied thoughts\nand fancies of the earlier myth-makers of our common Aryan race, legends\nand quasi-historical traditions of medi\u00e6val times, the more artistic\nromances of a relatively recent and more highly-cultured period, and,\nlastly, the lyrics of Morris and others, and the splendid capital which\nworthily crowns this truly historic _literary_ column, in the\nexquisitely felt and gracefully wrought \"Idylls of the King,\" by the\nlaureate of the Victorian age, Alfred Tennyson. The last named says--\n\n                        Lancelot spoke\n    And answered him at full, as having been\n    With Arthur in the fight which all day long\n    Rang by the white mouth of the violent Glem:\n    And in the four wild battles by the shore\n    Of Douglas.\n\n (_Idylls, p. 162._)\n\nReferring to the parentage of the Arthurian legends, in the essay\nprefixed to his \"Specimens of Early English Metrical Romances,\" Mr.\nGeorge Ellis says--\"Although Geoffrey's 'British Chronicle' is justly\nregarded as one of the corner-stones of romantic fiction, yet its\nprincipal, if not sole effect, was to stamp the names of Arthur, Merlin,\nKay, and Gawain with the character of historical veracity; and thus to\nauthorise a collection of all the fables already current respecting\nthese fanciful heroes and their companions. For not one word is to be\nfound in that compilation concerning Sir Lancelot and his brothers; Sir\nTristram; Sir Ywain; Joseph of Arimathea and the Sangrael; the round\ntable with its perilous seat; and the various quests and adventures\nwhich fill so many folio volumes. These were subsequent additions, but\nadditions _apparently derived from the same source_. The names, the\nmanners of the heroes, and the scenes of their adventures, were still\nBritish; and, the taste for these strange traditions continuing to gain\nground for at least two centuries, the whole literature of Europe was\nultimately inundated by the nursery-tales of Wales and Armorica, as it\nhad formerly been by the mythology of Greece and Egypt.\"\n\nOf course there sometimes _is_, and there oftener _is not_, recognisable\nhistorical or biographical fact at the basis of so-called historical\nnovels, poems, or plays, but the difficulty of separating the one from\nthe other is generally insurmountable, and the labour bestowed thereon\noften profitless. This is especially the case where quasi-history has\nbecome inextricably interwoven with faded nature-myths and more modern\nartistic inventions. Mr. Fiske, in the work previously quoted, has the\nfollowing very pertinent remarks on this subject:--\n\n\"I do not suppose that the struggle between light and darkness was\nHomer's subject in the 'Iliad' any more than it was Shakespeare's\nsubject in 'Hamlet.' Homer's subject was the wrath of the Greek hero, as\nShakespeare's subject was the vengeance of the Danish prince.\nNevertheless, the story of 'Hamlet,' when traced back to its Norse\noriginal, is unmistakably the quarrel between summer and winter; and the\nmoody prince is as much a solar hero as Odin himself. (See Simrock, Die\nQuellen des Shakespeare, I., 127-133.) Of course Shakespeare knew\nnothing of this, as Homer knew nothing of the origin of Achilleus. The\ntwo stories are therefore not to be taken _as sun-myths in their present\nform_. They are the offspring of other stories which were sun-myths.\nThey are stories which conform to the sun-myth type.... The sun and the\nclouds, the light and the darkness, were once supposed to be actuated by\nwills analagous to the human will; they were personified and worshipped\nor propitiated by sacrifice; and their doings were described in language\nwhich applied so well to the deeds of human or quasi-human beings, that\nin course of time its primitive import faded from recollection. No\ncompetent scholar now doubts that the myths of the Veda and the Edda\noriginated in this way, for philology itself shows that the names\nemployed in them are the names of the great phenomena of nature. And\nwhen once a few striking stories had thus arisen--when once it had been\ntold how Indra smote the Panis, and how Sigurd rescued Brynhild, and how\nOdysseus blinded the Kyklops--then certain mythic or dramatic types had\nbeen called into existence; and to these types, preserved in the popular\nimagination, future stories would inevitably conform.... In this view I\nam upheld by a most sagacious and accurate scholar, Mr. E. A. Freeman,\nwho finds in Carlovingian romance an excellent illustration of the\nproblem before us.\"\n\nThe Carlovingian romance thus cited is, indeed, almost an exact\ncounterpart of the Arthurian one, with the certainly very important\nexception that we can appeal to reliable history in the former case to\nprove our position, while the mythical gloom of legend and tradition\nobscures so much of the probable historical facts in connection with the\nlatter that our path is beset with difficulties which cannot be solved\notherwise than by analogical inference. History informs us of the acts\nand deeds of Karl der Gross, a German by birth, name, race, and\nlanguage. This warrior, who conquered nearly the whole of Europe and\nfounded one of the most important dynastic houses in medi\u00e6val times, was\nborn about the year 742, in the castle of Silzburg, in Bavaria, and died\nin 814 at Aachen, now called Aix-la-Chapelle. On the other hand, as Mr.\nFiske says, \"the Charlemagne of romance is a mythical personage. He is\nsupposed to be a Frenchman at a time when neither the French nation nor\nthe French language can properly be said to have existed; and he is\nrepresented as a doughty crusader, although crusading was not thought of\nuntil long after the Karolingian era. He is a myth, and what is more he\nis a solar myth--an _avatar_, or at least a representative of Odin in\nhis solar capacity. If in his case legend were not controlled by\nhistory, he would be for us as unreal as Agamemnon.... To the historic\nKarl corresponds in many particulars the mythical Charlemagne. The\nlegend has preserved the fact, which without the information supplied by\nhistory we might perhaps set down as a fiction, that there was a time\nwhen Germany, Gaul, Italy, and part of Spain formed a single empire. And\nas Mr. Freeman has well observed, the mythical crusades of Charlemagne\nare good evidence that there _were_ crusades, although the real Karl had\nnothing whatever to do with one.\"\n\nIn the old ballad legend of Sir Guy, of Warwick, this chronological\nconfusion is equally apparent. One of the earlier stanzas says--\n\n    Nine hundred twenty yeere and odde\n      After our Saviour Christ his birth,\n    When King Athelstone wore the crowne,\n      I lived heere upon the earth.\n\nAnd yet this same legendary hero slays Saracens and other \"heathen\npagans\" during the crusades some three centuries afterwards. The \"Scop\"\nor Geeman's song, and others, exhibit similar instances of this\nconfusion of personages and dates.\n\nSaxo Grammaticus, the Danish historian, has, like Geoffrey of Monmouth,\nmingled so much legendary and irrelevant matter with his genuine\nmaterial, that it is often difficult and sometimes impossible to\ndistinguish one from the other. Mr. H. H. Howorth, in the work\npreviously quoted, referring to Harald Hildetand, \"the most prominent\nfigure in Scandinavian history at the close of the heroic period,\"\nsays--\"Although Saxo's notice of him is long, it will be found to\ncontain scarcely anything about him. It is filled up with parenthetical\nstories about other people, referring doubtless to other times\naltogether, while the stories it contains about his exploits in\nAquitania, and Britain, and Northumbria, show very clearly, as M\u00fcller\nhas pointed out, that he has confused his doings with those of another,\nand much later, Harald, probably Harald Blaatand (_Op. Cit._ 366, note\n3). It is only when we come to the close of his reign that we have a\nmore detailed and valuable story. This is the account of the famous\nfight at Bravalla, of which we have two recensions, one in Saxo and the\nother in the Sogubrot, and which have preserved for us one of the most\nromantic epical stories in the history of the north. The story was\nrecorded in verse by the famous champion Starkadr, whom Saxo quotes as\nhis authority, and whom he seems closely to follow. Dahlman has, I\nthink, argued very forcibly that the form and matter of this saga as\ntold by Saxo is more ancient, and preserves more of the local colour of\nthe original than that of the Sogubrot (Forsch, etc., 307-308). And yet\nthe story as it stands is very incongruous, and makes it impossible for\nus to believe that it was written by a contemporary at all. How can we\nunderstand Icelanders fighting in a battle a hundred years before\nIceland was discovered, and what are we to make of such champions as Orm\nthe Englishman, Brat the Hibernian, etc., among the followers of Harald?\nIt would seem that on such points the story has been somewhat\nsophisticated, perhaps, as in the Roll of Battle Abbey, names have been\nadded to flatter later heroes.\"\n\nIt is a recognised element in popular tradition or folk-lore, that the\ndeeds of one historic or mythological hero are sure, when he is\nforgotten, to be attributed to some other man of mark, who, for the time\nbeing, fills the popular fancy. I am, therefore, inclined to think that\nthe imaginary victories of Arthur on the continent of Europe in the\nsixth century, as recorded in Geoffrey's tenth book, owe their origin\nmainly to the real ones of Karl der Gross in the ninth. Geoffrey, or his\nBreton authority, had three centuries of tradition to fall back upon,\ntime amply sufficient for medi\u00e6val myth makers and romance writers to\ntorture them to their own purposes. Instances of this re-crystallisation\nof several stories, mythical and otherwise, around the name of a single\nhero, by the vulgar, may be found in relatively modern history. There\nis, in the region of traditional lore, in various parts of England, a\nmythical Cromwell, as well as the two well-known historical personages\nof that name. In whatever part of the country stands a ruined castle or\nabbey, or other ecclesiastical edifice, the nearest peasant, or even\nfarmer, will assure an inquirer that it was battered into ruin by Oliver\nCromwell! Here the Secretary Cromwell, of Henry the Eighth's reign, and\nthe renowned Protector, of the following century, are evidently\namalgamated. Indeed, the redoubted Oliver seems to have absorbed all the\ncastle and abbey-destroying heroes of the national history, old Time\nhimself included. There is a weather-worn statue on the triangular\nbridge at Croyland, erected in honour of King Ethelbald, the founder of\nthe neighbouring abbey now in ruins, which is popularly supposed to be\nan effigy of Cromwell, and by some the bridge is likewise named after\nhim. It is, however, more than probable that the neighbouring ruin is\nalone responsible for this nomenclature. A similar fate has befallen\nAlexander the Great in the East. Arminius V\u00e1mb\u00e9ry, in his \"Travels in\nCentral Asia,\" says--\"The history of the great Macedonian is invested by\nthe Orientals with all the characteristics of a religious myth; and\nalthough some of their writers are anxious to distinguish Iskender Zul\nKarnein (the two-horned Alexander), the hero of their fable, from\nIskenderi Roumi (the Greek Alexander), I have yet everywhere found that\nthese two persons were regarded as one and the same.\" There is likewise\na mythical as well as an historical Taliesin (the Welsh poet), but they\nare generally confounded by the populace.\n\nMr. C. P. Kains-Jackson, in \"Our Ancient Monuments and the Land around\nthem,\" referring to the huge rock, named \"Arthur's Quoit,\" Gower,\nLlanridian, Glamorganshire, says--\"The reason why the name of Arthur\nshould attach to the Titantic boulder represented in our engraving does\nnot readily appear. The name has probably come by that process of\naccretion which has caused every witty cynicism to be attributed to\nTalleyrand, or, in another way, every achievement of the Third Crusade\nto Richard C\u0153ur de Lion, and every contemporary woodland exploit to\nRobin Hood. No name from Druidical times attaching to the monument, the\nlocal tradition joined to the rock the name of the only man whose\nlegendary repute and fame at all admitted of a super-human feat of\nstrength being attributed to him.\"\n\nMr. Frederick Metcalfe, in his \"Englishman and Scandinavian,\"\nsays--\"Then again our old institution, trial by jury, to our immortal\nKing Alfred, the people's darling, it has been assigned, along with\nother tithings, hundreds, and a host of other inventions and\ninstitutions, which, we are persuaded, he would have been the first to\nrepudiate. Indeed, he has become a sort of Odin to some antiquaries, on\nwhom everything bearing the stamp of remote antiquity was gathered, the\ninvention of names amongst the rest.\"\n\nThe same writer, referring to the \"famous story of Theophilus,\"\nsays--\"The legend, as we have said, ran through Europe in various\nshapes, and was fitted to all people imaginable. It is referred to in\none of \u00c6lfric's homilies (_i._ 448), while in an Icelandic legend Anselm\nand Theophilus are thus blended. Now we know that Eormenric, who died\n370, Attila, 453, Gundicar of Burgundy, 436, and the Ostrogothic King\nTheordoric or Dietrich, 536, become contemporaries and merge one into\nanother in heroic mythus. But one is hardly prepared to find Dietrich of\nBern and Theophilus of Sicily getting confused into one. But so it is.\nAmongst the Wends it has become a popular story, and is told of Dietrich\n(Theodoric of Verona), who among the peasantry is transmuted into the\nWild Huntsman.\"\n\nMr. W. St. Chad Boscawen, in his learned lecture on \"A Chaldean\nHeliopolis,\" at Manchester, in December, 1881, after referring to the\nmanner in which Berosus \"had resort to an ingenious literary fiction to\npreserve the continuity of the narrative in his history of Chaldea,\nwhich he claimed to have based on documentary evidence, extending back\nover fifteen myriads of years,\" says--\"The daily recurring war of day\nand night, which had belonged to the nomadic age, now became national\nwars and combats of Samson, Shamgar, and Gideon, the solar heroes,\nagainst the dark forces of the Philistine and Midianite. But in this\nperiod of the heroic age--the 'once upon a time' of the Chaldean\nstory-teller, the nation was not one consolidated whole; it was the age\nof polyarchy. The beginning of Nimrod's kingdom was not one capital\ncity, it was the tetrapolis of Babel, Akkad, Erech, and Calrech, and\neach city was a little kingdom. So each city had its hero. The giant\nIsdubar was the hero of Erech; Sargon the Moses of Chaldea--the hero of\nAganne; Etanne and Ner, of Babylon. In the labours and wars of these\nheroes we saw the labours and wars and struggles of the city kingdom,\nbut lit with the lustre of divinity which shone forth from the age of\nthe gods and clothed with its brightness the characters in the heroic\nage. But, in time, as the nation became consolidated, all became blended\nand absorbed into the great national hero, Isdubar, the great king.\"\n\nThe Rev. Sir G. W. Cox, in his \"Mythology of the Aryan Nations,\"\nsuccessfully shows that the principal materials of the Arthurian legends\nare identical with those which underlie the Hindoo, Grecian, Teutonic,\nand other common Aryan myths. He contends that Arthur is a solar hero,\nof the same type as Phoibus Chrys\u00e2\u00f4r, or Heracles, or Bellerophon, or\nPerseus, or Achilleus, or Sigurd; and he illustrates this position by\nthe citation of numerous instances in which their common original is\nclearly perceptible, notwithstanding the great modification, especially\nin costume and morals, to which the original materials have been\nsubjected. A single instance of this uniformity, but an important one,\nwill suffice for the present purpose. The peculiar form as well as the\nname of the supernatural weapon of Indra, the Vedic _lightning_ god,\nhas undergone many changes in its progress through the mythical lore of\nthe various Aryan nations, and yet its identity is rarely, if ever,\ndoubtful. It is the \"Durandal\" of Roland; it is Arthur's famous sword\n\"Excalibur,\" as well as the similar weapon which no one could draw from\nthe \"iron anvil-sheaf embedded in stone\" except himself. It is the sword\nof the maiden drawn by Balin, after Arthur had failed in the attempt. It\nis the \"Macabuin,\" the weapon of the Manx hero, Olave of Norway; it is\nOdin's sword \"Gram,\" stuck in the roof-tree of Volsung's hall. It is the\nsword of Chrys\u00e2\u00f4r; it is that of Theseus, and that of Sigurd. It is very\npalpably the spear (G\u00fbngnir) which Odin lent, in the form of a reed, to\nKing Erich, in order to ensure him the victory in a battle against\nStyrbj\u00f6rn. The reed in its flight is said to have assumed the form of a\nspear and _struck with blindness_ the whole of the opposing army. It is\nthe arrow with which Apollo slew the Python; it is the lance of St.\nGeorge, the patron saint of England; it is the \"sword of sharpness\" of\n\"Jack-the-Giant-Killer;\" nay, it is the relatively humble magic cudgel\nof popular Norse story, which, like Thor's hammer, voluntarily returned\nto the lad's hand on the completion of the rascally innkeeper's\nwell-merited castigation.\n\nSo fascinating are the so-called \"historical novels\" of such men as Sir\nWalter Scott and the late Lord Lytton, such \"historical plays\" as\nShakspere's, and the popular ballads and other lyric narratives of great\nhistorical events, that _some_ of the most permanent impressions on the\nmind of the studious, and _many_ on that of the relatively non-studious\nsections of mankind, have been derived therefrom. Indeed, there are\npersons who roundly assert that \"good historical novels\" convey to the\nordinary reader a better idea of the manners and customs and general\naspect of society, as well as of the idiosyncrasies, or special\ncharacteristics, of distinguished individuals, than historical works of\na more definite and presumedly more reliable character. Those who\nentertain these views, however, as a rule, are not themselves historical\nstudents in its higher or more legitimate sense, but merely dabblers in\nhistory with an \u00e6sthetic object. Besides, if the hypothesis be a sound\none, these \"historical novelists\" must themselves be more fully and\naccurately informed concerning all the hard elements of fact and\nindividual feeling with which they deal than their rivals (which,\nunfortunately, they never or rarely are), or how could they, by any\nhuman process, produce their presumedly more truthful artistic\n\"counterfeit presentments?\" The late Lord Lytton, in the preface to the\nthird edition of his novel, \"Harold, the last of the Saxon Kings,\"\nexpressly says \"It was indeed my aim to solve the problem how to produce\nthe greatest amount of _dramatic effect at the least expense of\nhistorical truth_.\"\n\nOn the other hand, Sir Francis Palgrave denounces \"historical novels\" as\nthe \"mortal enemies to history,\" and Leslie Stephen adds, \"they are\nmortal enemies to fiction\" likewise. The latter writer contends, under\nsuch conditions, one of two evils necessarily results, notwithstanding\nthe fact that perhaps an isolated exception or two might be cited in\nopposition: \"Either the novel becomes pure cram, a dictionary of\nantiquities dissolved in a thin solution of romance, or, which is\ngenerally more refreshing, it takes leave of accuracy altogether and\nsimply takes the plot and the costumes from history, but allows us to\nfeel that genuine moderns are masquerading in the dress of a bygone\ncentury.\" Dean Milman, in his review of Ranke's work on the Papacy,\nreferring to the scene in the conclave on the elevation of Sixtus V. to\nthe Papal chair, which, he says, Gregoria Leti \"has drawn with such\nunscrupulous boldness,\" adds, \"All the minute circumstances of his (the\nPope's) manner, speech, and gesture is like one of Scott's happiest\nhistorical descriptions, but, we fear, of no better historical authority\nthan the picture of our great novelist.\"\n\nThe false impressions often formed of actual fact from implicit reliance\non artistic fiction, as authority in such matters, is admirably\nillustrated in a passage in \"Travels in Central Asia,\" by Arminius\nV\u00e1mb\u00e9ry. After journeying from Tabris to Teheran, he says--\"It is a\ndistance of only fifteen, or perhaps we may rather say of only thirteen\ncaravan stations; still, it is fearfully fatiguing, when circumstances\ncompel one to toil slowly from station to station under a scorching sun,\nmounted upon a laden mule, and condemned to see nothing but such drought\nand barrenness as characterise almost the whole of Persia. How bitter\nthe disappointment to him who has studied Persia only in Saadi, Khakani,\nand Hafiz; _or still worse_, who has received his dreamy impressions of\nthe East from the beautiful imaginings of Goethe's 'Ost-Westlicher\nDivan,' or Victor Hugo's 'Orientales,' or the magnificent picturings of\nTom Moore.\"\n\nIf, under circumstances so favourable as those attendant upon such a\n\"Dryasdust\" historical student as Sir Walter Scott, historical truth is\nviolated or perverted as often as it is illustrated, it is painful to\nreflect what must have resulted when solar and other myths, miraculous\nlegends and traditions of pagan times, have become interwoven with the\nfaith and morals of Christianity, and the pomp and pageantry of medi\u00e6val\nchivalry! Leslie Stephens asserts that \"'Ivanhoe,' and 'Kenilworth,'\nand 'Quentin Durward,' and the rest are, of course, bare, blank\nimpossibilities.\" \"No such people,\" he declares, \"ever lived or talked\non this planet.\" He is willing to allow that some fragments of genuine\ncharacter may be embedded in what he terms \"the plaster of Paris;\" but\nhe insists that \"there is no solidity or permanence in the workmanship.\"\nIf this be true, how has history fared at the hands of such craftsmen as\nGeoffrey of Monmouth, Archdeacon Walter Map, Sir Thos. Malory, and a\nwhole host of medi\u00e6val romance writers, with their King Arthur, Sir\nLancelot, Sir Galahad, their magicians, sorcerers, giants, dragons, and\nother monsters? History, in its highest, indeed its only legitimate,\nsense, most unquestionably has suffered to a much greater extent than\ncan be conceived, except by those who have patiently plodded amongst the\ndetails of a portion at least of its dim and dusty, and oft-times\ndoubtful, raw material. But, on the other hand, to the novelist or the\npoet _historical_ truthfulness in the incidents of which his plot is\ncomposed, or _biographical_ truthfulness in the characters delineated,\nis simply surplusage, if it be nothing worse, _\u00e6sthetic_ or artistic\nverities having no necessary foundation thereupon. It is this \u00e6sthetic\nideal, evolved from _general_ rather than _individual_ truths, this\npoetic element, which lies at the root, and, indeed, furnishes the\n_raison d'\u00eatre_, the very life-giving blood, of such art products as\nthose under consideration. Hamlet, Lear, Imogen, Ophelia, Cordelia,\nOberon, Elaine, Sir Galahad, Achilleus, Arthur, _et hoc genus omne_,\npossess an inherent subjective vitality and truthfulness of their own,\ndrawn from the universal and everlasting fountains of human emotion,\npassion, and psychical aspiration, however little realistic, individual,\nor strictly historic value the learned may place on the legends of Saxo\nGrammaticus and Geoffrey of Monmouth, or the myths of our common Aryan\nancestors. Thos. Carlyle, in \"Sartor Resartus,\" aptly asks--\"Was\nLuther's picture of the devil _less a reality_, whether it were formed\nwithin the bodily eye, or without it?\" Dean Milman, in his essay on\n\"Pagan and Christian Sepulchres,\" referring to the \"two large mounds\npopularly known as the tombs of the Horatii and the Curiatii,\" on the\nAppian way, near Rome, says--\"Let us leave the legend undisturbed, and\ntake no more notice of those wicked disenchanters of our old belief.\"\nYet he feelingly and truthfully adds--\"They will leave us at least the\npoetry, if they scatter our history into a mist.\" Truly the \u00e6sthetic\nelement, if in itself worthy, will ever survive the destruction of the\npresumed historical verity with which it may have been for ages allied.\nWho now believes in the historic truthfulness of the reputed deeds of\nthe gods and goddesses of ancient Greece and Rome? And yet the \u00e6sthetic\nbeauties of Homer, \u00c6schylus, Virgil, and Ovid are none the less admired\nand enjoyed. Mr. Philip Gilbert Hamerton, in his Life of J. M. W.\nTurner, when commenting on the lack of \"topographical,\" and other\nrealistic truthfulness, both in colour and details, in many of the great\nlandscape painter's finest productions, thus aptly deals with the\ndifference between \u00e6sthetic and literal truthfulness--\"It is with these\ndrawings as with the romances of Sir Walter Scott: a time comes in the\nlife of every intelligent reader when he perceives that Scott was not,\nand could not be, really true to the times he represented, except when\nthey approached very near his own; but a student of literature would be\nmuch to be pitied who was unable to enjoy 'Ivanhoe' after this\ndiscovery. So when we have found out the excessive freedom which Turner\nallowed himself; when we have discovered that he is not to be trusted\nfor the representation of any object, however important--that his\nchiaroscuro, though effective is arbitrary, and his colour though\nbrilliant is false; when we have quite satisfied ourselves, in a word,\nthat he is a poet, and not an architectural draughtsman, or an imitator\nof nature, is that a reason why we should not enjoy the poems? There is\na wide difference, I grant, between the pleasure of real belief and the\npleasure of confessed imagination: the first belongs to imaginative\nignorance, and is only possible for the uncritical; the second belongs\nto a state of knowledge, and is only possible for those in whom the\nacquisition of knowledge has not deadened the imaginative faculties.\nShow the 'Rivers of France' to a boy who has the natural faculties which\nperceive beauty, but who is still innocent of criticism, he will believe\nthe drawings to be true, and think as he dreams over them that a day may\ncome when he will visit these enchanting scenes. Show them to a real\ncritic, and he will not accept for fact a single statement made by the\ndraughtsman from beginning to end, but he will say--'The poetic power is\nhere,' and then he will yield to its influence, and dream also in his\nown way--not like the boy, in simple faith, but in the pleasant\nmake-belief faith which is all that the poet asks of us.\"\n\nThis \u00e6sthetic truthfulness, in contradistinction to literal historic\nfact, is admirably expressed by Macaulay in an entry in his journal, in\nAugust, 1851. He says--\"I walked far into Herefordshire,\" (from Malvern)\n\"and read, while walking, the last five books of the 'Iliad,' with deep\ninterest and many tears. I was afraid to be seen crying by the parties\nof walkers that met me as I came back; crying for Achilles cutting off\nhis hair; crying for Priam rolling on the ground in the court-yard of\nhis house; mere imaginary beings, creatures of an old ballad maker who\ndied near three thousand years ago.\"\n\nLord Byron wrote under the influence of the traditions of his youth or\nof his classical college education, and not as the true poet, when he\nsaid--\"I stood upon the plain of Troy daily for more than a month, in\n1810; and if anything diminished my pleasure it was that the blackguard\nBryant had impugned its veracity.\" On the contrary, I felt no such lack\nof pleasurable emotion when I first gazed on the Thames at Datchet, or\non the withered trunk of \"Herne's Oak,\" or on the Trossachs and Loch\nKatrine, or on the Rialto or the Ducal palace at Venice, or on\nthe Colisseum or the adjacent ruins of the \"lone mother of dead\nempires,\" because the mere _historical_ verity of Jack Falstaff's\nunwieldly carcase, or of Shakspere, Otway, Byron or Scott's ideal and\nsemi-historical personages, never once entered into my mind. It was\nsufficient for me that the scenes before me were those which were\ncontemplated and portrayed by the great dramatists and the great\nnovelist and the great poet. For the time being, thanks to the law of\nmental association, to my imagination their characters were as real\npersonages as was necessary for the fullest appreciation and enjoyment\nof the ideal of their artistic creators, and anything more, _being\nunnecessary_, might have been intrusive, or even _impertinent_, in the\noriginal and non-metaphorical meaning of that somewhat abused word.\nByron spoke more to the purpose in the opening stanzas of the fourth\ncanto of \"Childe Harold's Pilgrimage,\" when, after lamenting the fate of\nVenice, and recalling the glories of her past history, he exclaims:--\n\n        But unto us she hath a spell beyond\n        Her name in story and her long array\n        Of mighty shadows whose dim forms despond\n        Above the dogeless city's vanish'd sway;\n        Ours is a trophy which will not decay\n        With the Rialto; Shylock and the Moor\n        And Pierre can not be swept and worn away--\n        The keystones of the arch! Though all were o'er,\n    For us repeopled were the solitary shore.\n\nHe adds, with more significant meaning:--\n\n        The beings of the mind are not of clay;\n        Essentially immortal, they create\n        And multiply in us a brighter ray\n        And more beloved existence.\n\nDr. Gervinus says--\"Shakspere's representations of the passionate, the\nprodigal, the hypocrite, are not portraits of this or that individual,\nbut _examples of those passions elevated out of particular into general\ntruth_, of which, in real life, we may find a thousand diminished\ncopies, but never the original in the exact proportions given by the\npoet.\" And so it is with the \u00e6sthetic truth embodied in artistic\ncreations of a plastic or pictorial character. No one acquainted with\nart products of its class imagines that the colossal statue recently\nerected in Germany to the memory of Hermann, or Arminius, the conqueror\nof the Roman legions under Varus (A.D. 9), is an absolute every-day\nportrait-likeness of that not very morally scrupulous \"hero and\npatriot;\" or that the faces, figures, costumes, and other accessories,\nin the \"Last Supper\" of Da Vinci, or the \"Cartoons\" of Raffaelle,\nrepresent, _historically_ or _de facto_, the scenes as they actually\noccurred. Though conventionally called \"historical pictures,\" they\nare emphatically creations of the imaginations of the artists,\nnotwithstanding their historic basis, and consequently the great truths\nthat pervade them, and for which they are justly admired, are of an\nartistic or \u00e6sthetic, and not of a strictly historic, character.\n\nNotwithstanding this general lack of historic truthfulness we,\nnevertheless, do gain valuable knowledge of a psychological,\nethnological, and even of a strictly historical character from stories\nof the mythical and legendary class; but much of that knowledge pertains\nto the age and its mental associations in which the story-tellers or\nother artistic exponents themselves lived. In the Arthurian romances we\nfind an immense amount of historic truthfulness with reference to the\nhabits of thought, costume, and religious sentiment, which obtained in\nand about the twelfth century; but which truths are utterly untrue, as\napplied by the writers, to the fifth and sixth, the era in which Arthur\nand his Christian knights, magicians, and giants are presumed to have\nbeen corporal existences. The same may be said of much of Bede's, and,\nindeed, of most other early chronicles. Although we may refuse our\nassent to the improbable and miraculous stories therein narrated, we\nfeel convinced, in Bede's instance especially, that the writer is\nthoroughly in earnest, and honest in his work, and that he, at least,\ncorrectly describes the manners, customs, faiths, superstitions, and\nlegendary history prevalent at the period in which he lived. This view\nis now the one generally accepted by the best historians and\nethnological and psychological students. Mr. Ralph N. Wornum, in his\n\"Epochs of Painting Characterised,\" says--\"Ancient opinions are of\nthemselves facts, and the history of any subject is indeed imperfect\nwhen the ideas of early ages regarding it are altogether overlooked, for\nthe impressions and associations made or suggested by any intellectual\npursuit are, as one of its effects, a part of the subject itself.\" Mr.\nTylor, in the work already quoted, says--\"The very myths that were\ndiscarded as lying fables prove to be sources of history in ways that\ntheir makers and transmitters little dreamed of. Their meaning has been\nmisunderstood, but they have a meaning. Every tale that was ever told\nhas a meaning for the times it belongs to. Even a lie, as the Spanish\nproverb says, is a lady of birth. ('_La mentira es hija de algo._')\nThus, as evidence of the development of thought as records of long\npassed belief and usage, even in some measure as materials for the\nhistory of the nations owning them, the old myths have fairly taken\ntheir place among historic facts; and with such the modern historian, so\nable and so willing to pull down, is also able and willing to rebuild.\"\n\nM. Mallet, in his \"Northern Antiquities,\" referring to the\nsemi-historical romances of the Scandinavians, says--\"It is needless to\nobserve that great light may be thrown on the character and sentiments\nof a nation, by those very books, whence we can learn nothing exact or\nconnected of their history. The most credulous writer, he that has the\ngreatest passion for the marvellous, while he falsifies the history of\nhis contemporaries, paints their manners of life and modes of thinking\nwithout perceiving it. His simplicity, his ignorance, are at once\npledges of the artless truth of his drawing, and a warning to distrust\nthat of his relations.\"\n\nDr. A. Dickson White, in his treatise on \"The Warfare of Science,\"\nforcibly illustrates the absolute necessary harmony of all truth,\nsubjective and objective, although we may not always possess sufficient\ninsight to perceive it. He says--\"God's truths must agree, whether\ndiscovered by looking within upon the soul, or without upon the world. A\ntruth written upon the human heart to-day, in its full play of emotions\nor passions, cannot be at any real variance even with a truth written\nupon a fossil whose poor life ebbed forth millions of years ago.\"\n\nProfessor Gervinus, in his \"Shakespeare Commentaries,\" has skilfully\nanalysed the distinction between historic and \u00e6sthetic truth. He\nsays--\"Where the historian, bound by an oath to the severest truth in\nevery single statement, can, at the most, only permit us to divine the\ncauses of events and the motives of actions from the bare narration of\nfacts, the poet, who seeks to draw from these facts only a _general\nmoral truth, and not one of facts_, unites by poetic fiction the action\nand actors in a distinct living relation of cause and effect. The more\nfreely and boldly he does this, as Shakespeare has done in 'Richard\nIII.,' the more poetically interesting will his treatment of the history\nbecome, but the more will it lose its historical value; the more truly\nand closely he adheres to reality, as in 'Richard II.,' the more will\nhis poetry gain in historic meaning and forfeit in poetic splendour.\"\n\nShakspere so thoroughly felt and understood this, that in the\nconstruction of his plot, and even in the determination of the\nspecialities of the characters of Macbeth and his indomitable wife, he\nhas selected his incidents from more than one epoch in early Scottish\nhistory. The famous murder scenes in the first and second acts, so far\nas they are \"historically\" true, are drawn from the assassination of a\nprevious king, Duffe, in 971 or 972, by Donwald, captain of the castle\nof Fores, whose wife is the \"historic\" original of the \"\u00e6sthetic\" Lady\nMacbeth of the tragedy, and not the spouse (if he had one) of the\nchieftain who, history simply says, \"slew the king [Duncan] at\nInverness,\" in an ordinary battle in 1040.\n\nProfessor Gervinus adds--\"It is a common pride on the part of the poets\nof these historical plays, and a natural peculiarity belonging to this\nbranch of the art, that truth and poetry should go hand in hand. It is\nmore than probable that 'Henry VIII.' bore at first the title so\ncharacteristic in this respect--'All is True.' But this truth is\nthroughout, as we have seen, not to be taken in the prosaic sense of the\nhistorian, who seeks it in the historical material in every most minute\nparticular, and in its most different aspects; it is only a higher and\nuniversal truth which is gathered by a poet from a series of historical\nfacts, yet which from the very circumstance that it springs from\nhistorical, true and actual facts, and is supported and held by them,\nacquires, it must be admitted, a double authority, that of poetry and\nhistory combined. The historical drama, formed of these two component\nparts, is therefore especially agreeable to the imaginative friend of\nhistory and the realistic friend of poetry.\"\n\nIt will thus be seen that there is no necessary antagonism between\nindividual, or historic, and ideal, or \u00e6sthetic, truth. Their respective\nlines of action may be divergent, but they are, when thoroughly\nunderstood, both in harmony with the great central and \"eternal verity\"\nwhich embodies all truth. The only danger to be guarded against by the\nhistoric or \u00e6sthetic student arises from the too common habit of\nconfounding the one with the other.\n\nTennyson, in his \"Queen Mary,\" says--\n\n    The very Truth and very Word are one,\n    But truth of story, which I glanced at, girl,\n    Is like a word that comes from olden days,\n    And passes thro' the peoples: every tongue\n    Alters it passing, till it spells and speaks\n    Quite other than at first.\n\nNennius speaks of a tenth battle fought and won by Arthur on the banks\nof the river Trat Treuroit, or Ribroit. This has been identified by\ncommentators as the Brue, in Somersetshire, and the Ribble, in\nLancashire; but the evidence advanced is not very conclusive in favour\nof either locality. Mr. Haigh prefers Trefdraeth, in the island of\nAnglesea, as the place indicated.\n\n[Illustration]\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER II.\n\nTHE DEFEAT AND DEATH OF ST. OSWALD, OF NORTHUMBRIA, AT MASERFELD,\n\n(A.D. 642).\n\n    THE LEGEND OF THE WILD BOAR, \"THE MONSTER IN FORMER AGES, WHICH\n    PROWLED OVER THE NEIGHBOURHOOD OF WINWICK, INFLICTING INJURY ON MAN\n    AND BEAST.\"\n\n\nThe Venerable Bede, in the ninth chapter of his \"Ecclesiastical History\nof the English Nation,\" says, in the year 642--\"Oswald was killed in a\ngreat battle, by the same Pagan nation and Pagan king of the Mercians\nwho had slain his predecessor, Edwin, at a place called in the English\ntongue, Maserfelth, in the thirty-eighth year of his age, on the fifth\nday of the month of August.\"\n\nThe Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, under the same date, says--\"This year Oswald,\nKing of the Northumbrians, was slain by Penda and the South-humbrians at\nMaserfeld, on the nones of August, and his body was buried at Bardney\n(Lincolnshire). His sanctity and miracles were afterwards manifested in\nvarious ways beyond this island, and his hands are at Bamborough\"\n(Northumberland), \"uncorrupted.\"\n\nThe battle is likewise recorded by relatively more recent chroniclers,\nyet its site, hitherto, has not been satisfactorily determined. Camden,\nCapgrave, Pennant, Sharon Turner, and some others fix it at Oswestry, in\nShropshire; while Archbishop Usher, Alban Butler, Powell, Dr. Cowper,\nEdward Baines, Thomas Baines, W. Beaumont, Dr. Kendrick, Mr. T. Littler,\nand others prefer the neighbourhood of Winwick, in the \"Fee of\nMakerfield,\" Lancashire.[11]\n\nMr. Edward Baines says--\"The district in which Winwick is seated\nhas, from a very distant period, been denominated Mackerfield or\nMacerfield--a battle-field, with variations in the orthography usually\nfound in Norman and Anglo-Saxon writers.\" The late Rev. Edmund Simpson,\nvicar of Ashton-in-Mackerfield, however, disputes this etymology, and\ncontends that \"Mackerfield is Mag-er-feld, a great plain cultivated:\n_mag_ and _er_ being Gaelic and _feld_ Saxon. Thus Maghull, near\nLiverpool, is a hill on the plain: thus, also, Maghera-felt in Ireland.\"\n\nThe \"Fee of Makerfield\" was co-extensive with the Newton hundred of the\nDomesday record, and included nineteen townships. It extended from Wigan\nto Winwick, and was traversed in its entire length by the great Roman\nroad, which entered Northumbria from the south near Warrington.\n\nProfessor Dwight Whitney, in his \"Life and Growth of Language\" (p. 39),\nsays--\"_\u00c6cer_ meant in Anglo-Saxon a 'cultivated field,' as does the\nGerman acker to the present day; and here, again, we have its very\nancient correlatives in Sanscrit _agra_, Greek \u1f00\u03b3\u03c1\u03cc\u03db, Latin _ager_; the\nrestriction of the word to signify a field of certain fixed dimensions,\ntaken as a unit of measure for fields in general, is something quite\npeculiar and recent. It is analagous with the like treatment of _rod_\nand _foot_ and _grain_, and so on, except that in these cases we have\nsaved the old meaning while adding the new.\"\n\nField is from A.S., O.S., and Ger. _feld_, Danish _veld_, the open\n_country_, cleared lawn (Collins's Dic. Der.) With respect to acre the\nold meaning is still retained, in one instance at least. We still say\n\"God's acre,\" when speaking of a churchyard or burial ground.\n\nThe following are some of the principal variations in the writing of the\nname: Bede calls it Maserfelth, King Alfred writes it Maserfeld, as in\none MS. of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle. Another copy, however, has it\nMaresfeld. The latter is probably a clerical error resultant from the\naccidental misplacement of the letters _r_ and _s_ by the copyist, or\nit may be an ordinary example of what philologists call \"metathesis,\" or\ntransliteration. Matthew of Westminster writes it Marelfeld, and John of\nBrompton, Maxelfeld. Matthew and John, however, are relatively modern\nauthorities in comparison with Bede, the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, and\nAlfred. Their orthography, however, furnishes an apt illustration of the\nmutation which has taken place in local nomenclature during the\ntransition of the language from Anglo-Saxon to modern English, and hence\nthe occasional difficulty of satisfactory identification at the present\nday.\n\nThe phonetic difficulty between Maserfeld, Macerfeld, and Makerfield is,\nperhaps, not insurmountable. The letter _c_ in English is useless,\nhaving either the sound of _k_ or _s_. Before _a_, _o_, and _u_, it\nbecomes _k_, as in cat, cot, cure; before _e_ and _i_ it becomes _s_, as\nin century, certain, cinder, and city. Cer, likewise, by metathesis, or\nthe transposition of the _r_, becomes cre, as in lucre, massacre,\netc.[12] Thus it would appear the modern word \"Makerfield\" probably\naccords both etymologically and topographically with the Anglo-Saxon\nname of the site of the battle. As no other hamlet, township, or parish,\nor other territorial designation (the nearest being Macclesfield), does\nthis, especially when taken in conjunction with the many corroborative\nevidences, would appear to satisfactorily identify the locality.[13]\nThese corroborative evidences are by no means either scanty or\nunimportant.\n\nThe parish church of Winwick is dedicated to St. Oswald, and Mr. Baines\nsays--\"Little more than half a mile to the north, on the road to\nGolborne and Wigan, is an ancient well, which has been known from time\nimmemorial by the name of 'St. Oswald's Well.'\" This well is still in\nexistence, and a certain veneration at the present time hovers about it\nin the minds of others than the superstitious peasantry. On the upper\nportion of the south wall of the church is an inscription in Latin,\npurporting to be a \"renovation\" of a previous one, by a person named\nSclater, in the year 1530, in the curacy of Henry Johnson. On a recent\nvisit, this inscription, as well as other portions of the edifice, I\nfound had undergone further renovation. Gough translates the first three\nlines as follows:--\n\n    This place of old did Oswald greatly love:\n    Who the Northumbers ruled, now reigns above,\n    And from Marcelde did to Heaven remove.\n\nMr. Beamont gives the translation of the inscription as follows:--\n\n    This place of yore did Oswald greatly love,\n    Northumbria's King, but now a saint above,\n    Who in Marcelde's field did fighting fall,\n    Hear us, oh blest one, when here to thee we call.\n\n            (A line over the porch obliterated.)\n    In fifteen hundred and just three times ten,\n    Sclater restored and built this wall again,\n    And Henry Johnson here was curate then.\n\nThis, and its repetition by Hollingworth in his \"Mancuniensis,\" appears\nto have alone constituted \"the highest authority\" relied upon by Edward\nBaines for his statement that Winwick parish was the favourite residence\nof King Oswald. The inscription does not, as some have assumed, state\nthe church is built in, on, or near Marcelde. It merely asserts that\nOswald died at a place so named, and which may have been Winwick, the\nsite of the church dedicated to St. Oswald, or any other locality,\nMarcelde being evidently a corruption and a rythmical contraction of the\nundoubted Anglo-Saxon name of the scene of Oswald's defeat and death.\n\nObjection has been taken to the word \"Marcelde,\" as a bad Latin\nsubstitute for \"Maserfeld.\" But the goodness or badness of medi\u00e6val\nLatin substitutes for English names is of no consequence to the question\nat issue, as the reference to the place of Oswald's death is undeniable.\nIt is but an apt illustration of the strange transformations local\nnomenclature sometimes has undergone in transmission from past centuries\nto the present time.\n\nGeoffrey of Monmouth and the Welsh Bruts curiously confound the\nincidents attendant upon this and a previous battle, in which Oswald was\nengaged and was victorious. Geoffrey says that Cadwalla, a Brit-Welsh\nking, one of the heroes of Lywrich Hen's poetic effusions, _hearing of\nOswald's victory over Penda(?)_ at \"Heavenfield,\" \"being inflamed with\nrage, assembled his army and went in pursuit of the holy king, Oswald;\nand in a battle which he had with him, at a place called Burne, broke in\nupon him and killed him.\"\n\nGeoffrey here, as noted by Sharon Turner, shows his irrational\npartiality to the fame of the British chieftain, and his disregard of\nhistorical truth when it did not minister to his prejudices or\npresumed patriotism. Cadwalla was slain in the battle with Oswald at\n\"Heavenfield,\" in 635, seven years previously to the saintly\nNorthumbrian warrior's defeat and death; and, consequently, the British\nhero was, in accordance with ordinary mortal notions, somewhat\nincapacitated for the performance of the after-deeds of valour, ascribed\nto him by his panegyrist--without miraculous intervention--which,\nhowever, Geoffrey does not even suggest, notwithstanding its presumed\nfrequency on other momentous occasions.[14]\n\nReferring to Oswald's death, Bede says--\"It is also given out and become\na proverb, 'that he ended his life in prayer;' for when he was beset\nwith weapons and enemies, he perceived he must immediately be killed,\nand prayed to God for the souls of his army, hence it is proverbially\nsaid, 'Lord have mercy on their souls, said Oswald, as he fell on the\nground.' His bones, therefore, were translated to the monastery which we\nmentioned (Bardsea), and buried therein; but the king that slew him\ncommanded his head, hands, and arms to be cut off from the body, and set\nupon stakes. But the successor in the throne, Oswy, coming thither the\nnext year with his army, took them down, and buried his head in the\nchurch of Lindisfarne, and the hands and arms in the royal city\"\n(Bamborough).\n\nBede relates many anecdotes, illustrative of the sanctity of Oswald, and\nthe miracles wrought by his bones, as well as by the earth which\nreceived his blood on the battle-field. One instance I give entire, in\nDr. Giles's translation of the venerable historian's own words. In\nchapter x., book iii., he says--\n\n\"About the same time, another person of the British nation, _as is\nreported_, happened to travel by the same place, where the aforesaid\nbattle was fought, and observing one particular spot of ground, green\nand more beautiful than any other part of the field, he judiciously\nconcluded with himself that there could be no other cause for that\nunusual greenness but that some person of more holiness than any other\nin the army had been killed there. He therefore took along with him some\nof that earth, tying it up in a linen cloth, supposing it would some\ntime or other be of use for curing sick people, and proceeding on his\njourney, he came at night to a certain village, and entered a house\nwhere the neighbours were feasting at supper; being received by the\nowners of the house, he sat down with them at the entertainment, hanging\nthe cloth in which he had brought the earth, on a post against the wall.\nThey sat long at supper and drank hard, with a great fire in the middle\nof the room; it happened that the sparks flew up and caught the top of\nthe house, which being made of wattles and thatch, was presently in a\nflame; the guests ran out in a fright, without being able to put a stop\nto the fire. The house was consequently burnt down, only that post on\nwhich the earth hung remained entire and untouched. On observing this,\nthey were all amazed, and inquiring into it diligently, understood that\nthe earth had been taken from the place where the blood of King Oswald\nhad been shed. These miracles being made known and reported abroad, many\nbegan daily to frequent that place, and received health to themselves\nand theirs.\"\n\nIn June, 1856, whilst I was engaged superintending the excavations at\n\"Castle Hill,\" Penwortham, near Preston, an incident occurred, which,\n\"in the olden time,\" would have been regarded as a conclusive proof not\nonly of the miraculous quality of the earth on which St. Oswald expired,\nbut of the site of the battle-field. We found, under the mound\nexcavated, the remains of an edifice which had been destroyed apparently\npartly by fire, and on the ruins of which to the height of about 12 or\n14 feet, the Anglo-Saxon tumulus had been piled. The hill, situated at\nthe nose of the promontory overlooking the upper portion of the Ribble\nestuary, had evidently been occupied at one time as a _specula_, or\noutpost, in connection with the Roman station at Walton-le-dale. The\nwattle and thatch characteristics of the remains of the fallen roof of\nthe edifice were very apparent. But the most remarkable, nay,\ninexplicable feature disclosed, was a single oak pillar, with wooden\npeg-holes in it, standing erect near the centre of the mound, while the\nremainder of the structure was scattered in confusion on a mass of\ndebris and vegetable litter, in which were found, together with several\narticles in metal, etc., an enormous quantity of bones of animals,\nevidently killed and eaten for food. To the persistent enquiries of\nseveral somewhat bewildered persons, anxious to discover an _immediate_\nexplanation of so remarkable a fact, I at length yielded, and related,\nin a serious, but not _authoritative_ manner, the statement of Bede, and\nI feel confident several persons returned home with a conviction that\nthe story was probable enough, or at least there was something either\nmiraculous or \"uncanny\" about the whole affair. Without, of course,\nassenting to the miraculous medicinal quality of the earth, it is highly\nimprobable that so conscientious, if credulous, a writer as Bede would\nrelate such a story, unless there had been some substratum of _prosaic\nfact reported to him_, on which the miraculous element might easily have\nbeen engrafted in those superstitious days. It is not improbable that\nthe accidental preservation of the pillar to which was hung the presumed\nsacred earth on which the saintly monarch breathed his last, prevented\nits destruction or removal, and hence its position near the centre of\nthe mound raised above the ruined edifice, and, doubtless, afterwards\nused as a \"mote hill,\" or out-of-door justice seat, or place of public\nassembly. If Winwick be the site of the battle-field, the traveller\npassing from thence northward by the great Roman road would arrive at\nPenwortham in time for supper, presuming that his journey commenced\nthree or four hours previously.\n\nAll this may not be worth much more than some of the idle tales of the\nold \"historians\" in support of the claims of the Lancashire site as the\nlocality of the great battle between the Christian and Pagan elements in\nthe population of the northern portion of England in the seventh\ncentury.[15] Nevertheless, it presents, at least, one of those\nremarkable coincidences that occasionally puzzle our reason and perplex\nour faith. Deeper insight into the psychological aspect of the humanity\nof any period may often be gained by a careful study of their legendary\nlore and cherished superstitions than from the perusal of the more\northodox historical chronicles. But there are other evidences respecting\nthe site of this important Anglo-Saxon conflict, more reliable than the\nmiracles of tradition, which demand our attention.\n\nFrom the antecedents of the respective belligerents, and the statement\nof Bede, it seems almost certain that the Pagan chieftain, Penda, was\nthe aggressor, and, anxious to avenge the death of Cadwalla, his\nquasi-Christian ally, invaded the Northumbrian kingdom, on the frontier\nof which he was successfully confronted by his Christian antagonist. The\ntradition in Geoffrey's day, at least, distinctly states that Oswald's\nconqueror was the aggressor. He says--\"inflamed with rage, he went in\npursuit of the holy king.\" See Ante, p. 67.\n\nReferring to the antecedents of the war under Oswy, which followed\nOswald's death, and in which Penda was slain near the river Winwid, Mr.\nGreen (\"Making of England\") says--\"That Oswiu strove to avert the\nconflict we see from the delivery of his youngest son, Ecgfrith, as a\nhostage into Penda's hands. The sacrifice, however, proved useless.\nPenda was _again the assailant_, and his attack was as vigorous as of\nold.\" We, therefore, in the first instance, should naturally look for\nthe battle-field in Northumbria, rather than in North Wales,[16] or even\nin Mercia.\n\nAnother important element with reference to the disputed site has not\nhitherto, to my knowledge, received the attention it deserves. Geoffrey\nof Monmouth, and the Welsh Bruts, notwithstanding their determination to\ngive all the honour to the defunct British chief, Cadwalla, could have\nno motive for falsifying the site of the battle. Indeed, his reference\nto it by name, as will be seen by the extract previously given, is of an\nordinary passing character.\n\nNow, there is a locality, in the parish of Winwick, and in the \"Fee of\nMakerfield,\" to the north of the great barrow or tumulus, to which I\nshall call further attention, that answers, on true phonetic laws, to\nthis nomenclature. Mr. Edward Baines says--\"The original proprietors of\nthe township of Ashton\" (which is the largest township in the old parish\nof Winwick) \"derived their name from Bryn Hall, the place of their\nresidence, or gave their name to that place, and Alan le Brun occurs in\nthe 'Testa de Nevill,' as holding by ancient tenure two bovates of land\nfor 6s. of Sir Henry de Le.\" It is here apparent that the present name\nBryn was originally Brun, and, as brun and burn are, by what\nphilologists term transliteration, but different renderings of the same\nword, meaning a spring or brook, Geoffrey's varied reading of the name\nof the locality--\"at a place called _Burne_,\" strongly supports the\nother evidence in favour of the Lancashire site. Edward Baines,\nreferring to the ancient Lancashire family, the Gerards of Bryn,\nsays--\"This family have had four seats within the township of Ashton,\"\n(in Makerfield), \"namely, Old Bryn, abandoned five centuries ago; New\nBryn, erected in the reign of Edward VI.; Garswood, taken down at the\nbeginning of the present century; and the new hall, the present\nresidence of the family.\"\n\nNennius says Penda slew Oswald at the \"battle of Cocboy,\"[17] and that\n\"he gained the victory by diabolical agency.\" No attempt, however,\nwithin my knowledge, has been made to identify \"Cocboy\" with any\nexisting locality. There is, however, I understand, a place near the\nancient pass of the Mersey, or Latchford, and contiguous to the great\nRoman road, named Cockedge. As Cocboy is unknown this may be a\ncorruption of it. Etymologists identify _coc_ with the British _gosh_ or\nred. As the new red sandstone crops out in the neighbourhood, this\ninterpretation accords with the local condition.\n\nLatchford, too, would be significant, if like _Lich_field, it had its\nroot in the Anglo-Saxon _lic_, but this is doubtful. Lichfield or\nLitchfield, the \"field of dead bodies,\" is said to have derived its name\nfrom the circumstance that \"many suffered martyrdom there in the time of\nDioclesian.\"[18] In Gibson's \"Etymological Geography,\" _Win_-feld, where\nArminius, or Hermann, defeated the Roman legions under Varus, A.D. 10,\nis said to signify the \"field of victory.\" A similar etymology is\nequally valid for _Win_wick, and hence its significance. Indeed, the\nintransitive form of the Anglo-Saxon verb _winnan_, whence our _win_,\nsignifies \"To gain the victory.\" A similar interpretation will equally\napply to Winwidfield, near Leeds, the scene of Penda's subsequent defeat\nand death.\n\nWhen dealing with the identification of modern with ancient names, it is\nwell to bear in mind the remarks of so erudite a philologist as\nProfessor Dwight Whitney. In his \"Life and Growth of Language,\" he\nsays--\"It must be carefully noted, indeed, that the reach of phonetics,\nits power to penetrate to the heart of its facts and account for them,\nis only limited. There is always one element in linguistic change which\nrefuses scientific treatment, namely, the action of the human will. The\nwork is all done by human beings, adapting means to ends, under the\nimpulse of motives and the guidance of habits which are the resultant of\ncauses so multifarious and obscure that they elude recognition and defy\nestimate.\" Again, \"Every period of linguistic life, with its constantly\nprogressive changes of form and meaning, wipes out a part of the\nintermediates which connect a derived element with its original. There\nare plenty of items of word-formation in even the modern Romanic\nlanguages, which completely elude explanation. Mere absence of evidence,\nthen, will not in the least justify us in assuming the genesis of an\nobscure form to be of a wholly different character from that which is\nobvious or demonstrable in other forms. The presumption is wholly in\nfavour of the accordance of the one with the other; it can only be\nrepelled by direct and convincing evidence.\" And again, \"As linguistics\nis a historical science, so its evidences are historical, and its\nmethods of proof of the same character. There is no absolute\ndemonstration about it: _there is only probability_, in the same varying\ndegree as elsewhere in historical enquiry. There are no rules, the\nstrict application of which will lead to infallible results. Nothing\nwill make dispensable the wide gathering-in of evidence, the careful\nsifting of it, so as to determine what bears upon the case in hand and\nhow directly, the judicial balancing of apparently conflicting\ntestimony, the refraining from pushing conclusions beyond what the\nevidences warrant, the willingness to rest, when necessary, in a merely\nnegative conclusion, which should characterize the historical\ninvestigator in all departments.\"\n\nThe most important ancient structure at present remaining in the parish\nof Winwick is an immense tumulus called \"Castle Hill.\" Mr. Edward Baines\nsays--\"At the distance of half-a-mile from and to the north of Newton,\nstands an ancient barrow, called _Castle Hill_. It is romantically\nsituated on elevated ground, at the junction of two streams, whose\nunited waters form the brook which flows past the lower part of the town\nof Newton.[19] The sides and summit of the barrow are covered with\nvenerable oaks, which to all appearance have weathered the rude and\nwintry blasts for centuries. It is a spot well adapted for the repose of\nthe ashes of the mighty dead.\"\n\nMr. W. Beamont, in a paper read before the Lancashire and Cheshire\nHistoric Society, on the \"Fee of Makerfield,\" etc., in March, 1873,\nsays,--\"On the west side of this rivulet\" (the Golbourne brook), \"where\nthe red rock rises above it, there is scooped out a rude alcove or cave,\nwhich the country people assign to Robin Hood, the popular hero, who in\nmost of our northern counties divides with Arthur of the Round Table and\nAlfred the Great the right to legendary fame. The Castle Hill, which\nstands in a commanding position above the other bank of the stream, and\nis boul-shaped, is 320 feet in circumference at the base, 226 feet in\ncircumference at the top, and it has an elevation of 17 feet above the\nlevel of the field below.\"\n\nOn a recent visit I found the old oaks, like faithful veteran sentinels,\nstill guarding, in Mr. Baines's language, \"the repose of the mighty\ndead.\" One or two of them, however, exhibited unmistakeable evidence\nthat the rude blast of the storm-wind and fiery embrace of the\nlightning-flash had shattered their aged limbs, while the benumbing\ngrasp of Time had chilled their heretofore invigorating sap. Yet,\nalthough they are destined, in a relatively very short period, from\n_their_ chronological standpoint, to succumb to the destiny of all\norganic life, and finish their lengthened existence in ignominious\nassociation with the faggot-shed, still their venerable forms,\nnotwithstanding the dilapidations which attest the force of years of\nelemental conflict, in conjunction with the historic and legendary\nmemories with which they are associated, render them more suggestive\nteachers in their decay than they were in the pride of their stalwart\nand umbrageous prime.\n\nAnother change has likewise come over the scene since Mr. Beamont's\ndescription was written. The stream near Newton has been blocked by an\nearthen embankment, and the \"Castle Hill\" now overlooks a beautiful\nartificial lake, with three branches. Robin Hood's cave, alas! had to be\nsacrificed; four or five feet of water now placidly flows over the site\nof its former entrance.\n\nThis tumulus, situated on the Gol-_bourne_ brook, in the Fee of\nMackerfield, was opened on the 8th of July, 1843. An account of this\nexcavation, by the Rev. E. Sibson, was published in the \"Transactions of\nthe Manchester Literary and Philosophical Society\" at the time, from\nwhich I gather the following important particulars. Mr. W. Beamont, who\nwas present during the excavations, likewise (in the paper previously\nquoted) gives a detailed account of the mode of procedure adopted, and\nof the remains discovered. The mound was found to be artificial, and\ncomposed of earth, sand, and rock taken from a trench on the south and\nwest sides. This trench was then found to be about five feet deep and\nforty feet wide. It appeared to have been originally seven feet deep,\ntwo of which had been excavated out of the solid rock. A shaft six feet\nwide was sunk in the centre of the tumulus, and an adit to meet it, from\nthe west side, on the level of the original soil. Mr. Beamont says--\"At\nthe distance of about ten feet from the centre of the barrow, on the\nsouth side of the shaft, a chamber was discovered. The base of this\nchamber was two feet broad, and it was curved. Its length was twenty-one\nfeet, its height two feet, and the roof was a semi-circular arch. It\nseemed to be constructed of masses of clay, about a foot in diameter,\nrolled into form in a moist state, and closely compacted by pressure.\nWhen the chamber was first opened the candles were extinguished, and\nthere was great difficulty in breathing. The sides and bottom of the\nchamber were coated with impalpable powder, of smoke colour. The bottom\nof the chamber was covered with a dark-coloured substance. The external\nsurface of this substance was like peat earth, being rough, uneven, and\nof a black colour. The inside of it, when broken, was close and compact,\nand somewhat similar to black sealing-wax, which, when examined by the\nmicroscope, was found to be closely dotted with particles of lime. It\nwas thought to be a mixture of wood ashes, half burned animal matter,\nand calcined bones. On this plate of animal matter, which had been\nplaced on the edge of the original green sward, was a covering of loose\nearth, about two inches in thickness, which might have fallen from the\nroof and sides of the chamber. Immediately below the plate of animal\nmatter a trench had been cut, about fifteen inches deep, and two tiers\nof round oak timber had been placed in it. The first tier was notched\ninto the green sward, and the second tier was nine inches below it. The\nhorizontal distance of the several pieces was about eighteen inches, and\nthe pieces in the lower tier were placed exactly opposite to those in\nthe upper one. Several of the pieces were charred, and many of them had\nentirely disappeared, leaving black marks in the sides of the trench,\nwhere they had formerly been placed. These pieces of oak appeared to\nhave been three or four inches in diameter. In almost all the cases the\nwood of these pieces had been absorbed; in some cases the bark on the\nunder side of these pieces was carbonised, and had nearly the appearance\nof coal; and in other cases the bark on the under side of these pieces\nretained its original form and colour. In one case, however, one of\nthese pieces, in contact with the animal matter, had the appearance of\ndry decayed wood. The trench, below the plate of animal matter, was\nfilled with clay.\"\n\nMr. Beamont gives several other interesting details, and adds,--\"It is\nprobable that this chamber contained the original deposit, and that it\nhad never been opened before. On the roof of the east side of the\nchamber there was discovered a very distinct and remarkable impression\nof a human body. There was the cavity formed by the back of the head,\nand this cavity was coated with a very thin shell of carbonised matter.\nThe depression of the back of the neck, the projection of the shoulders,\nthe elevation of the spine, and the protuberance of the lower part of\nthe body, were distinctly visible. The body had been that of an adult,\nand the head lay towards the west. The exact form and vertical position\nof the circular chamber was indicated by a ridge on the crest of the\nhill, which was one reason why the tunnel was driven from the bottom of\nthe shaft towards the south.\" The writer further informs us that the\n\"Castle Hill is said to be haunted by a white lady, who flits and\nglides, but never walks. She is sometimes seen at midnight, but is never\nheard to speak.\" The Rev. Mr. Sibson adds--\"There is a tradition that\nAlfred the Great was buried here, with a crown of gold, in a silver\ncoffin.\" He likewise says that in a \"drift, on the east side of the\nshaft, and near the centre of the hill, a broken whetstone was found. It\nwas of freestone of a fine grain, of a dull white colour, slightly\nveined with red; and the surface was finely polished. It was about five\ninches in length and three in breadth.\" He likewise figures a fragment\nof an urn, apparently of Roman manufacture, from the presence of which\nhe inferred that \"the Castle Hill had been a place of interment for\npersons of distinction for a long period.\"\n\nDr. James Fergusson, in an appendix to his work on \"Rude Stone Monuments\nof All Countries,\" gives, at length, an account of the opening, in 1846,\nof a huge tumulus, named \"Oden's Howe,\" near Upsala, by Herr Hildebrand,\nthe royal antiquary of Sweden. The similarity of many of the remains\nbrought to light to those found in the \"Castle Hill,\" seems to suggest\nthat these tumuli were erected by cognate people, and at no very distant\nperiods from each other. Herr Hildebrand says,--\"During the diggings\nwere found unburnt animal bones, bits of dark wood, charcoal, bits of\nburnt bones, etc. This was evidently a sepulchral mound. Diggings have\nalso been made in the smaller cairns near by, and, although they have\nbeen opened before, burial urns have been found, burnt human bones,\nbones of animals and birds, bits of iron and bronze, etc.... At the\nmiddle of the howe, the grave-chamber is nine feet above the level of\nthe soil, 18 feet under the top of the howe. On the bed of the clay,\nunder the great stones, have been found an iron clinker three inches\nlong, remains of pine poles partly burnt, a lock of hair chestnut\ncoloured, etc. The numerous clusters of charcoal show that the dead had\nbeen burned on the layer of clay, and the bones have been collected in\nan urn not yet found. In one of the nearest small howes have been found\na quantity of burnt animal and human bones, two little-injured bronze\nbrooches, a fragment of a golden ornament, etc.\" After further\nexamination of the contents of the howe, Herr Hildebrand says, \"June\n29th, 1847,--The burial urn has been found in the grave-chamber, also\nhave turned up bones of men, horses, dogs, a golden ornament delicately\nworked, a bone comb, bone buttons, etc.\" He afterwards writes to say\nthat the burial urn was found three inches under the soil, and was\ncovered with a thin slab. \"It was seven inches high, nine inches in\ndiameter, filled with burnt bones, human and animal (horse, dog, etc.),\nashes, charcoal (of needle and leaf trees), nails, copper ornaments,\nbone articles, a bird of bone, etc. In the mass of charcoal also were\nfound bones, broken ornaments, bits of two golden bracteates, etc. Coins\nof King Oscar were then placed in the urn, and everything restored as\nbefore. Frey's Howe was opened, and showed the same results.\"\n\n\"Dr. Fergusson, commenting on this, says--\"With a little local industry,\nI have very little doubt, not only that the date of these tombs could be\nascertained, but the names of the royal personages who were therein\nburied, probably in the sixth or seventh century of our era.\"\n\nIn a paper read before the Lancashire and Cheshire Historic Society, in\nMarch, 1860, the late Dr. Robson says--\"In the Ordnance survey as first\npublished on the inch scale, about half a mile to the east of Winwick\nchurch, we find a couple of tumuli, one on each side of a bye-lane; but\nin the later and larger map, a single tumulus is marked, through the\ncentre of which the road seems to have been cut. The earlier survey\ngives the more correct representation of the place, as there have\ncertainly been at least two barrows, one in the field on the east, the\nother in that of the west side of the lane.\" The latter is on a farm\ncalled \"Highfields.\" As the land has long been under cultivation, the\ntumulus was not very well defined, but it appeared to have been about\nthirty yards in diameter. The summit is \"distinct enough,\" says Dr.\nRobson, and \"is about six feet above the level of the lane.\" This mound\nwas dug into in November, 1859, and the Dr. records that \"deposits of\nburned bones were found at some distance from its centre, on the slopes\nto the east and south. These bones were in small fragments, apparently\nin distinct heaps, mixed with minute particles of burnt wood, and one or\ntwo fragments of brown, thick, ill-burnt and rude pottery turned up,\nnot, however, appearing to have any connection with the bone\ndeposits--the only portion of which offering any recognisable character,\nwas the head of a thigh bone of a subject twelve or fourteen years old.\nAbout six feet deep in the centre, the red sandstone rock was\nreached.... Some labourers working in the field on the other side of the\nlane, fifteen years ago, came upon an urn with bones in it, apparently\nof a similar description. This tumulus was removed at the beginning of\nthe present year, and the men in their operations cutting into some soft\nblack stuff, struck a spade into an urn and broke it into pieces; it\nseems to have been of large size, and has a feathered pattern scored on\nthe outside, in other respects agreeing with the fragments already\ndescribed. It contained bones in the same fragmentary state as those\nfound on the west side of the lane, and with them a stone hammer-head\nand a bronze dart.\"\n\nNear these tumuli, on the ordnance map, is a place named Arbury. This\nname has evidently had originally some connection with these mounds. In\nthe \"Imperial Gazetteer,\" Arbury, in Herts, on the Icknield-st., is\ndescribed as a \"Roman camp,\" and so is Arbury or Harborough, near\nCambridge, as well as Arbury Banks, on the Watling-st., near Chipping\nNorton, Northamptonshire. In Anglo-Saxon the prefix _ar_, according to\nBosworth's Dictionary, signifies \"glory, honour, respect, reverence,\"\netc.\n\nDr. Robson discusses at some length the presumed date of these\ninterments, and contends that such nomenclature as \"stone and bronze\nperiods\" only mislead. He says--\"In some graves are coins which carry a\ndate with them, and in others Roman remains which belong to the first\nfour centuries of our era. But in tumuli such as those at Winwick, there\nis nothing to show whether it was raised six centuries before or six\ncenturies after that period.\" From the drawings which accompany Dr.\nRobson's paper, there appears nothing to vitiate the hypothesis that\nthese mounds were raised on the battle-field of 642. The stone hammer is\nhighly finished and polished. The form of the spear-head agrees with\nsome of the examples figured by Mr. Thomas Wright and Mr. L. Jewitt, as\npertaining to the earlier Anglo-Saxon period. It presents a kind of\ntransition from between the shorter Roman bronze and the more elongated\niron of the later Anglo-Saxon time. The \"feathery pattern\" scored on\nthe pottery resembles the rude \"herring-bone,\" or zig-zag ornamentation\nof late Roman and early Anglo-Saxon masonry.\n\nAnother and much larger tumulus until recently was situated opposite to\nthe parish church at Warrington, and contiguous to the ancient\nLatchford, by which the British trackway and the great Roman road\ncrossed the Mersey. For some miles both on the east and west, in early\ntimes, no other route was practicable; the mosses on the one hand and\nthe tidal estuary on the other presenting insuperable obstacles,\nespecially to heavy traffic. The tumulus at Warrington, named the \"Mote\nHill,\" was entirely removed in 1852. Pennant had conjectured it to be\nRoman; Ormerod, Norman; and John Whitaker, Saxon. In a paper read before\nthe Lancashire and Cheshire Historic Society, on November, 1852, Dr.\nKendrick gave a detailed account of the excavation, and exhibited the\ndiscovered remains. Some of the pottery was rude (apparently\nRomano-British), and cremated human remains were present, as well as an\nimmense quantity of the remains of animals. Referring to Whitaker's\nconjecture of the Saxon origin of the mound, or of that race having\nutilised it, Dr. Kendrick says--\"to this opinion I think all the\nappearances detailed this evening afford strong support.\" Mr. Sibson,\nlikewise, who was present at the examination of the hill in 1832, and\nagain in 1841, coincides in this view, and suggests that it originally\nconstituted a _tumulus_, or burial place, raised after the battle fought\nat Winwick. Dr. Kendrick thought that as the church was dedicated to\nSt. Elphin, slain in 679, the mound might have covered his remains; but\nthe Pagan character of the interment or interments negatives this view.\n\nMr. W. T. Watkin, in a note to the present writer, says--\"Dr. Kendrick's\naccount compared with that of Mr. Sibson evidently shows that the mound\nwas originally a Roman boundary mark, used afterwards in Saxon and\nmedi\u00e6val times for various purposes. The second excavation merely shows\nthe contents of the mound as they _were thrown in_ after the first\nexploration, with the exception of the well and one or two smaller\ndetails.\" He adds--\"All these things are in accordance with the rules of\nthe Roman _agrimensores_.\" This view seems very probable.[20]\n\nI am inclined to regard these tumuli, in the main, as monuments of the\nsite of some great battle or battles, and that amongst others, Maserfeld\nmay be, perhaps, the latest and most important fought in the\nneighbourhood previous to the disuse of cremation and the general\nadoption of the modern Christian mode of interment. The whole of these\nlarge barrows were evidently erected by people who burned and buried\ntheir dead on the spot where the memorial mound or monument was\nafterwards erected. We know from the Venerable Bede's record, how the\nbody of King Oswald was disposed of. Besides the king being a pious\nChristian, such a mode of sepulture would not have been adopted by his\nfollowers. Penda, on the contrary, was a Pagan, and strongly attached to\nthe superstitions and customs of his Teutonic ancestors. We know that\nthe Pagan Anglo-Saxons in England practised both modes of interment, the\nburial of the body entire and cremation. Mr. Thomas Wright says--(Celt,\nRoman, and Saxon, p. 401) \"The custom in this respect appears to have\nvaried with the different tribes who came into the island. In the\nAnglo-Saxon cemeteries in Kent, cremation is the rare exception to the\ngeneral rule; while it seems to have been the _predominating practice_\namong the Angles from Norfolk into the centre of Mercia.\" It is,\ntherefore, highly probable, if the battle of Maserfeld was fought in\nthis district, that these tumuli, or some portion of them, were raised\nby the Pagan Mercian victors over the bodies of chieftains of their\nparty slain in the battle. Nennius says that in the conflict Penda's\nbrother Eawa was slain, and, consequently, he and the other Pagan\nchieftains who fell in the battle would be interred in Pagan fashion by\nthe victorious survivors.\n\nThe oldest Anglo-Saxon poem extant, \"Beowulf,\" the scene of the events\nof which Mr. D. Haigh, in his \"Conquest of Britain by the Saxons,\"\ncontends to be the neighbourhood of Hartlepool, in Durham,[21] has\npreserved to us a description of such a ceremonial in detail. On\nBeowulf's death, his warriors raised a funeral pile to burn the body. It\nwas--\n\n    hung round with helmets,\n    with boards of war, [shields]\n    and with bright byrnies, [coats of mail]\n    as he had requested.\n    Then the heroes, weeping,\n    laid down in the midst\n    the famous chieftain,\n    their dear lord.\n    Then began on the hill,\n    the warriors to awake\n    the mightiest of funeral fires;\n    the wood-smoke rose aloft\n    dark from the fire;\n    noisily it went,\n    mingled with weeping.\n\nHis faithful followers afterwards erected the barrow over his ashes:--\n\n    a mound over the sea;\n    it was high and broad,\n    by the sailors over the waves\n    the beacon of the war-renowned.\n    They surrounded it with a wall\n    in the most honourable manner\n    that wise men\n    could desire.\n    They put into the mound\n    rings and bright gems,\n    all such ornaments\n    as before from the hoard\n    the fierce-minded men\n    had taken.\n\nThe date of the erection of the first parish church at Winwick is not\nknown with certainty. Some contend that it was coeval with the\nintroduction of Christianity into the North of England by Paulinus.\nAlthough this is incapable of absolute verification, it is generally\nconceded that a church must have existed for some time antecedent to\nthe Norman conquest. The Domesday Survey, under the head of \"Newton\nHundred,\" seems to confirm this. It says, \"Under the reign of King\nEdward\" (the Confessor) \"there were five hides in Newton: one of these\nwas held in demesne. The church of this manor had one carucate of land,\nand St. Oswald, of this village, had two carucates, _exempt from all\ntaxation_.\" Mr. Baines says--\"In 1828, while digging a vault in the\nchancel of this church, there were found, at the depth of eight or ten\nfeet below the floor, three human skeletons of gigantic size, laid upon\neach other, and over them a rude heap of cubical sandstone blocks of\nirregular dimensions, varying from one to two feet. No remains of\ncoffins were found in the grave, and the history of the occupants of\nthis mysterious tomb remains undiscovered.\" It seems, however, not\nimprobable that these interments took place anterior to the building of\nthe church, that the skeletons were the remains of chieftains who\nperished with Oswald, and that the sacred edifice, dedicated to the\nwarrior saint, was afterwards erected on the spot.\n\nThe first known record of the old church at Oswestry is thus referred to\nby the Rev. D. R. Thomas (His: Diocese of St. Asaph):--\"The Parish\nChurch of St. Oswald is first definitely mentioned in 1086 in the Grant\nof Warin, Vicecomes ... to the abbot and monks of Shrewsbury Abbey,\ndedit eis _Ecclesiam Sancti Oswaldi_ cum decima ville;\" but there is a\nbelief that there was a still earlier one elsewhere than on the present\nsite, which may be due partly to the fact that the town was originally\nbuilt on some other site, partly to the circumstance that several of the\nearlier mission stations are still indicated by such names as Maen\nTysilio, Croes-Wylan, Cae Croes, and Croes Oswaldt, or The Cross; and to\nthe tradition which Leyland records, \"that at Llanforda was a church\nnow\" (sixteenth century) \"decaid. Sum say this was the paroche church of\nOswestre.\"\n\nI have previously referred to the ancient well, situated about\nhalf-a-mile from Winwick Church, known from time immemorial as \"St.\nOswald's Well.\" Mr. Edward Baines regards this sacred spring as having\nbeen originally formed by the excavation of earth on the spot where\nOswald fell, and he fortifies his position by reference to Bede, who\nsays--\"Whereupon many took up of the very dust of the place where his\nbody fell, and putting it into water, did much good with it to their\nfriends who were sick. This custom came so much into use, that the earth\nbeing carried away by degrees, there remained a hole as deep as the\nheight of a man.\"\n\nPerhaps the most important objection to the Oswestry site lies in the\nfact that there is no satisfactory representative of the name of\nMaserfeld to be found in its neighbourhood.[22] One writer says--\"In the\nvicinity of the town, at a place called by the Welsh 'Cae Naef'\n(Heaven's Field) there is a remarkably fine spring of water, which bears\nthe name of Oswald's Well, and over which, as recently as the year 1770,\nwere the ruins of a very ancient chapel likewise dedicated to him.\"\nCommenting on this, Mr. E. Baines says--\"The well in that country is a\nspring and not a fosse, as described by Bede, and is as the well at\nWinwick,\" and he regards this feature as additional evidence in favour\nof the presumed Lancashire site of the battle. The saint's _well_ is\nnot, however, of much value, as Bede makes no mention of any spring,\nnatural or otherwise, and wells dedicated to saints in the \"olden time,\"\nare common all over the country. Indeed, there is a natural spring near\nthe main highway about a mile to the north of Winwick Church, which is\nlikewise called St. Oswald's well. From Bede's context it is evident\nOswald died on the ordinary dry earth, which, in consequence,\nthenceforth produced greener grass than the surrounding land, and the\n_soil_ was afterwards mixed with water and used medicinally. In England\nthere are at least five different places named after St. Oswald, and, in\naddition, many ecclesiastical edifices have been dedicated to him.\n\nThere is something mysterious, or at least curiously coincident, about\nthis Welsh \"Cae Naef,\" or \"Heaven's Field,\" as this latter, according to\nBede, is the name of the site of the previous battle in 635, when Oswald\ndefeated and slew Cadwalla. The same authority likewise refers to it as\nbeing fought \"at a place called Denises-burn, that is Denis's-brook.\"\nDr. Giles says \"Dilston is identified with the ancient Deniseburn, but\non no authority.\" Dilston is situated about two miles from Hexham.\nSharon Turner says--\"Camden places this battle at Dilston, formerly\nDevilston, on a small brook which empties into the Tyne.\" He adds,\n\"Smith, with greater probability, makes Errinburn as the rivulet on\nwhich Cadwallon perished, and the fields either of Cockley, Hallington,\nor Bingfield, as the scene of the conflict. The Angles called it\nHefenfield, which name, according to tradition, Bingfield bore.\" Dr.\nSmith says that Hallington was anciently Heavenfelth, but adds that\nprobably the whole country from Hallington southward to the Roman wall\nwas originally included in the name. On the place where Oswald is said\nto have raised a cross, as his standard during the battle, a church was\nafterwards erected. Thus it would at first sight appear that Oswestry\nmight enter into competition with Bingfield for the site of the\nHeavenfield struggle, rather than with Winwick for that of Maserfeld.\nThere is, however, one important fact which fatally militates against\nthis. Bede says, referring to the Heavenfield where Cadwalla met his\ndeath, the \"place is near the wall with which the Romans formerly\nenclosed the island from sea to sea, to restrain the fury of the\nbarbarous nations, as has been said before.\" The greater probability is\nas the two engagements are intertwined by the Welsh Bruts, and in the\nOswestry and Geoffrey traditions, that the place owes its designation\ndirectly to neither the one nor the other; but that, like the sites I\nhave mentioned, the dedication of a church to the saint has been\nsufficient to confer his name on the locality. That a neighbouring well,\nunder such circumstances, should receive a similar designation, is too\nordinary a matter to require special consideration.\n\nIt is not at all improbable that, as Geoffrey and the Welsh Bruts both\nrefer to the battle in which Oswald fell as fought at or near Burne, the\nOswestry traditions may have originally only had reference to the battle\nof Denis-BURN or Denis-brook, in which the Welsh Christian hero,\nCadwalla, was slain by his hated rival, the Anglican Christian king\nOswald, of Northumbria. It is utterly improbable that the Welsh\nChristians would dedicate a church to St. Oswald. The first Christian\nking of Northumbria, Edwin, the friend of Paulinus and Augustine, was\nslain by Cadwalla, \"king of the Britons,\" or Brit-Welsh, in a battle at\nHeathfield (Hadfield, in the West Riding of Yorkshire), A.D. 633, in\nwhich he was aided by the pagan Penda. The Brit-Welsh Christians and the\ndisciples of Augustine and Paulinus hated each other with more than\nordinary sacerdotal intensity, and the former often entered into\nalliances with the pagan Anglo-Saxons, in order to avenge themselves on\ntheir detested rivals. One of the subjects of fierce contention between\nthem, as is well known, related to the time for the celebration of\nEaster. Bede, referring to the defeat of Edwin at Heathfield and the\nconsequences attendant thereon, says--\n\n\"A great slaughter was made in the church or nation of the\nNorthumbrians; and the more so because one of the commanders by whom it\nwas made was a pagan, and the other a barbarian more cruel than a pagan;\nfor Penda, with all the nation of the Mercians, was an idolator and a\nstranger to the name of Christ; but Cadwalla, although he bore the name\nand professed himself a Christian, was so barbarous in his disposition\nand behaviour, that he neither spared the female sex, nor the innocent\nage of children, but with savage cruelty put them to tormenting deaths,\nravaging all their country for a long time, and resolving to cut off all\nthe race of the English within the borders of Britain. Nor did he pay\nany respect to the _Christian religion which had newly taken root among\nthem_; it being to this day\" (the 8th century) \"the custom of Britons\nnot to pay any respect to the faith and religion of the English, nor to\ncorrespond with them any more than with pagans.\"\n\nUnquestionably no Christian church was dedicated to St. Oswald at\nOswestry until after the final subjection of the district by the\nAnglican Christians. The probability therefore is that the locality was\nmerely named, as in the other instances referred to, from the fact that\nit had become the location of a place of worship dedicated to him, and\nthat gradually the various traditions about the saint and his rivals\nbecame inextricably confused. The last syllable \"_tre_\" is indicative of\nBritish influence in the formation of the word Oswestry, as in Pentre,\nGladestry, Coventry (in Radnorshire), Tremadoc, Trewilan, Tredegar,\netc., which simply means, according to Spurrell's Welsh dictionary,\n\"resort, homestead, home, hamlet, town (used chiefly in composition).\"\nIndeed, Oswestry is more suggestive of Oswy's-tre, and may refer to a\nsuccessor who, some time after Oswald's death, built a church and\ndedicated it to the saintly monarch.\n\nThe pagan Mercian king, Penda, was himself slain in the following year\nby Oswy, the successor to St. Oswald. Bede says \"the battle was fought\nnear the river Vinwed, which then with the great rains had not only\nfilled its channel, but overflowed its banks, so that many more were\ndrowned in the flight than destroyed by the sword.\" Most authorities\nplace this battle at Winwidfield, near Leeds. Mr. Thos. Baines, however\n(\"Historical Notes on the Valley of the Mersey,\" His. Soc. Lan. and\nChes. Pro. session 5), claims for Winwick the scene of both engagements.\nHe says--\"Penda and upwards of thirty of his principal officers were\ndrowned in their flight, having been driven into the river Winweyde, the\nwaters of which were at that time much swollen by heavy rains. There is\nno stream in England which is more liable to be suddenly flooded than\nthe stream which joins the Mersey below Winwick[23], and there both the\nresemblance of the names, and the probability of the fact, induce me to\nthink that Penda met with his death within two or three miles of the\nplace at which Oswald had fallen.\"\n\nThis seems, at first sight, plausible enough, but as Bede distinctly\nstates that \"King Oswy concluded the aforesaid war in the country of\nLoides\" (Leeds), Winwidfield must unquestionably have preference over\nthe Lancashire site, as the scene of Penda's discomfiture and death.\n\nIt is generally accepted that Oswald died either at Oswestry or Winwick.\nThere are some, however, who accept neither, but contend that the true\nsite of the battle may yet, possibly, be found in a different locality.\nThis appears to be the opinion of Mr. John R. Green. In support of this\nview he says (\"Making of England\")--\"Though the conversion of Wessex had\nprisoned it (Mercia) within the central districts of England, heathendom\nfought desperately for life. Penda remained its rallying point; and the\nlong reign of the Mercian king was in fact one continuous battle with\nthe Cross. But so far as we can judge from his acts, Penda seemed to\nhave looked on the strife of religion in a purely political light. The\npoint of conflict, as before,\" [that is when Edwin was defeated and\nslain at Hatfield] \"seems to have been the dominion over East Anglia.\nIts possession was vital to Mid-Britain as it was to Northumbria, which\nneeded it to link itself with its West-Saxon subjects in the south; and\nOswald must have felt that he was challenging his rival to a decisive\ncombat when he marched, in 642, to deliver the East Anglians from Penda.\nBut his doom was that of Eadwine; for he was overthrown and slain in a\nbattle called the battle of Maserfeld.\"\n\nIf this view be accepted, the claim of Oswestry must be at once\ndismissed, while that of Winwick is rendered still more doubtful. But\nMr. Green does not state on what authority he relies when he states that\nOswald \"marched in 642, to deliver the East-Anglians from Penda.\" In\nconsequence I am unable to test its value or probability. He certainly\nwould not march by either Oswestry or Winwick if such were his\ndestination. This statement, however, appears to be not exactly in\naccordance with another by Mr. Green, previously quoted, in which he\nsays, referring to the antecedents of the war under Oswy, which\nfollowed Oswald's death, and in which Penda was slain near the river\nWinwid--\"That Oswiu strove to avert the conflict we see from the\ndelivery of his youngest son Ecgfrith as a hostage into Penda's hands.\nThe sacrifice, however, proved useless. _Penda was again the assailant_,\nand his attack was as vigorous as of old.\"\n\nIf Penda was the assailant, his assault must, in the first instance,\nhave been not on Oswald himself, but on his East-Anglian allies, or\nOswald would not have thought of marching in that direction for their\nrelief. But if Penda, having previously humbled the East-Anglians, had\nbecome aware of such intention on the part of the Northumbrian monarch,\nthere is nothing improbable in a vigorous warrior of Penda's stamp, by a\nrapid march, surprising him on the frontier of his own dominions,\ndefeating him, and thus warding off the threatened blow. Under such\ncircumstances Winwick might very probably have been the scene of the\nconflict. The advocates of Oswestry do not deny the great probability\nthat Oswald had a favourite residence in the locality.\n\nThe neighbourhood of Winwick, however, is the undisputed site of a\nbattle in more recent times. After the Duke of Hamilton's defeat at\nPreston, by Cromwell, in 1648, the former made a stand against his\npursuers at a place called \"Red Bank,\" where he was totally routed by\nthe less numerous but highly disciplined army of his more skilful\nantagonist.\n\nA rude piece of sculpture built in the outer wall, evidently a relic\nfrom an older edifice, was long supposed to be a representation of the\ncrest of St. Oswald; but this is disputed by Mr. Edward Baines. He\nsays--\"The heralds assign to that monarch azure, a cross between four\nlions rampant, or.\" He adds--\"Superstition sees in the chained hog the\nresemblance of a monster in former ages, which prowled over the\nneighbourhood, inflicting injury on man and beast, and which could only\nbe restrained by the subduing force of the sacred edifice.\" This\nsculpture he regards as not improbably a rude attempt to \"represent the\ncrest of the Gerrards--a lion rampant, armed and langued, with a coronet\nupon the head.\" This is certainly more probable than the heralds'\nassignment of \"azure, a cross between four lions rampant, or,\" to\nOswald, which is suggestive of medi\u00e6val Norman-French associations and\nnomenclature, without the slightest Anglo-Saxon ingredient. The late Mr.\nT. T. Wilkinson refers to a tradition which asserts that \"the demon-pig\nnot only determined the site of St. Oswald's Church, at Winwick, but\ngave a name to the parish.\" This attempt to solve the enigma by the\nassistance of the squeak of a sucking pig, has evidently originated in\nsome rural jesting or lame attempt to divine the connection of the\nanimal with the church and neighbourhood.\n\nThis traditionary \"monster in former ages, which prowled over the\nneighbourhood, inflicting injury on man and beast,\" is worthy of a\nlittle more serious attention than has hitherto been paid to it. The\nlegend is evidently but a northern form of the wide-spread Aryan myth\nconcerning Vritra, the dragon, or storm-fiend, who stole the light rain\nclouds (the \"herds of Indra,\" the Sanscrit \"god of the clear heaven, and\nof light, warmth, and fertilising rain\"), and hid them in the cave of\nthe Panis (the dark storm-cloud). Indra, launching his lightning-spear\ninto the black thunder-cloud, (personified by the dragon, snake, or\nmonster whose poisonous breath parched the earth and destroyed the\nharvest), released the confined waters and thus refertilised the land.\nThe Rev. Sir G. W. Cox, in his \"Manual of Mythology,\" says--\"In the\nIndian tales Indra kills the dragon Vritra, and in the old Norse legend\nSigurd kills the great snake Fafnir.\" The myth survives in the exploits\nof the patron saint of England, St. George, the slayer of the dragon.\nIn one Teutonic form Odin, or Wodin, hunted the wild boar, the\nrepresentative of the stormy wind-clouds. His tusk was a type of the\nlightning. This mythical devouring monster is reproduced in Grendel, the\n\"great scather,\" in the old Anglo-Saxon poem \"Beowulf,\" the scene of\nwhich Mr. D. Haigh, in his \"Conquest of the Britons by the Saxons,\"\nregards as the neighbourhood of Hartlepool, in Durham.\n\nThere exists a great diversity of opinion as to the genesis and original\nhabitat of the poem, Beowulf. Mr. Frederick Metcalfe, in his \"Englishman\nand Scandinavian,\" says--\"There is, however, one Saxon work which tells\nus of the northern mythology, 'Beowulf,' the oldest heroic, or, as\nsome will have it, mythic--perhaps it will be best to call it\nmytho-heroic--poem in any German language, and which has been pronounced\nto be older than Homer.\" In another place he says--\"The date of its\ncomposition has been much debated. By Conybeare it was thought, in its\npresent shape, to be the work of the bards about Canute's court. The\nleading incidents of the plot are as follows:--Beowulf, the son of\nEcgtheow and prince in Scania (South Sweden), hearing how for twelve\nyears King Hrothgar and his people in North Jutland had been mightily\noppressed by a monster, Grendel, resolves to deliver him, and arrives at\nHart Hall, the Jutish palace, as an avenger.\"\n\nMr. Benjamin Thorpe, in the preface to his edition of the poem (1855)\nsays--\"With respect to this the oldest heroic poem in any Germanic\ntongue, my opinion is, that it is not an original production of the\nAnglo-Saxon muse, but a metrical paraphrase of an heroic Saga composed\nin the south-west of Sweden, in the old common language of the north,\nand probably brought to this country during the sway of the Danish\ndynasty. It is in this light only that I can view a work evincing a\nknowledge of northern localities and persons, hardly to be acquired by a\nnative of England in those days of ignorance with regard to remote\nforeign parts. And what interest could an Anglo-Saxon feel in the\nvalourous feats of his deadly foes, the northmen? in the encounter of a\nSweo-Gothic hero with a monster in Denmark? or with a fire-drake in his\nown country? The answer, I think, is obvious--_none whatever_.\" In a\nnote Mr. Thorpe says--\"Let us cherish the hope that the original Saga\nmay one day be discovered in some Swedish library.\" The only MS. of the\npoem extant, (MS. Cott. Vitellius A. 15), he says--\"I take to be of the\nfirst half of the eleventh century.\"\n\nWith respect to the strictly historical character of this poem, Mr.\nThorpe says--\"Preceding editors have regarded the poem of Beowulf as a\nmyth, and its heroes as beings of a divine order.[24] To my dull\nperception these appear as real kings and chieftains of the North, some\nof them as Hygelac and Offa, entering within the pale of authentic\nhistory, while the names of others may have perished, either because the\nrecords in which they were chronicled are no longer extant, or the\nindividuals themselves were not of sufficient importance to occupy a\nplace in them.\"\n\nMr. Haigh likewise contends for the historic value of the poem; but\nattributes its locality to Britain. Some of the legends and traditions\nof the North of England certainly suggest that the Scandinavian\npopulation settled there were either acquainted with the poem or the\nlegendary elements which strongly characterise it, and upon which it is\nevidently mainly constructed, whatever strictly historical matter, as in\nthe romances of Richard C\u0153ur de Lion, Charlemagne, Arthur, and others,\nmay have become incorporated therewith.[25]\n\nMr. John R. Green (\"The Making of England\") says, \"The song as we have\nit now is a poem of the eighth century, the work it may be of some\nEnglish missionary of the days of Beda and Boniface, who gathered in the\nhomeland of his race the legend of its earlier prime.\"\n\nAfter referring to the interpolations in which there \"is a distinctly\nChristian element, contrasting strongly with the general heathen current\nof the whole,\" Mr. Sweet, in his \"Sketch of the History of the\nAnglo-Saxon Poetry,\" in Hazlitt's edition of Warton's \"His. of English\nPoetry,\" says--\"Without these additions and alterations it is certain\nthat we have in Beowulf a poem composed before the Teutonic conquest of\nBritain. The localities are purely continental; the scenery is laid\namongst the Goths of Sweden and the Danes; in the episodes the Swedes,\nFrisians, and other continental tribes appear, while there is no mention\nof England, or the adjoining countries and nations.\"\n\nMr. Jno. Fenton, in an able article on \"Easter\" in the _Antiquary_ for\nApril, 1882, says--\"To us in western lands the equinox is the beginning\nof spring and the new life of the year; but in the east it is the\nbeginning of summer, when the early harvest is also ripe, when the sun\nis parching the grass and drying up the wells, when, as Egyptian\nfolk-lore has it, a serpent wanders over the earth, infecting the\natmosphere with its poisonous breath.\"[26]\n\nThese mythical huge worms, serpents, dragons, wild boars, and other\nmonsters, \"harvest blasters,\" are still very common in the North of\nEngland. The famous \"Lambton worm,\" of huge dimensions and poisonous\nbreath, when coiled round a hill, was pacified with copious draughts of\nmilk, and his blood flowed freely when he was pierced by the spear-heads\nattached to the armour of the returned Crusader. The Linton worm curled\nitself round a hill, and by its poisonous breath destroyed the\nneighbouring animal and vegetable life. The Pollard worm is described as\n\"a venomous serpent which did much harm to man and beast,\" while that at\nStockburn is designated as the \"worm, dragon, or fiery flying serpent,\nwhich destroyed man, woman, and child.\"\n\nIn the ancient romance in English verse, which celebrates the deeds of\nthe renowned Sir Guy, of Warwick, is the following quaint description\nof a Northumberland dragon, slain by the hero:--\n\n    A messenger came to the king.\n    Syr king he sayd, lysten me now,\n    For bad tydinges I bring you.\n    In Northumberlande there is no man,\n    But that they be slayne everychone;\n    For there dare no man route,\n    By twenty myle rounde aboute,\n    For doubt of a fowle dragon,\n    That sleath men and beastes downe.\n    He is blacke as any cole,\n    Ragged as a rough fole;\n    His body from the navill upwards.\n    No man may it pierce it is so harde;\n    His neck is great as any summere;\n    He renneth as swift as any distrere;\n    Pawes he hath as a lyon;\n    All that he toucheth he sleath dead downe,\n    Great winges he hath to flight,\n    That is no man that bare him might,\n    There may no man fight him agayne,\n    But that he sleath him certayne;\n    For a fowler beast then is he,\n    Ywis of none never heard ye.\n\nThe said Guy, amongst other marvellous exploits, killed at \"Winsor,\"\n\n    A bore of passing might and strength,\n    Whose like in England never was,\n    For hugenesse both in breadth and length.\n\nMr. Barrett, a saddler, of Manchester, with antiquarian taste, in an\nilluminated MS., now in the Chetham Library, refers to an old tradition\nconcerning a dragon whose den was amongst the red sandstone rocks in the\nneighbourhood of Lymm, about five miles from Warrington. Geoffrey of\nMonmouth, in Merlin's prophesy especially, often refers to these\nmythical monsters; and the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle is equally expressive\nin attributing disaster to their influences. In the latter work we read:\n\"A.D. 793. This year dire forewarnings came over the land of the\nNorthumbrians, and miserably terrified the people; these were excessive\nwhirlwinds and lightnings; and fiery dragons were seen flying in the\nair. A great famine soon followed these tokens.\" Mr. Baring-Gould says,\nas recently as the year 1600,--\"A German writer would illustrate a\nthunderstorm destroying a crop of corn by a picture of a dragon\ndevouring the produce of the field with his flaming tongue and iron\nteeth.\"\n\nThat this tradition at Winwick respecting a \"monster in former ages,\nwhich prowled over the neighbourhood, inflicting injury on man and\nbeast,\" is a legitimate descendant from our Aryan ancestors'\npersonification of natural phenomena, seems very apparent, and aptly\nillustrates what Sir G. W. Dasent terms the \"toughness of tradition,\"\nespecially when interwoven with the marvellous or supernatural. Mr.\nWalter K. Kelly, in his \"Curiosities of Indo-European Tradition and\nFolk-Lore,\" says--\"These phenomena were noted and designated with a\nwatchfulness and a wealth of imagery which made them the principal\ngroundwork of all the Indo-European mythologies and superstitions. The\nthunder was the bellowing of a mighty beast or the rolling of a wagon.\nThe lightning was a sinuous serpent, or a spear shot straight athwart\nthe sky, or a fish darting in zigzags through the waters of heaven. The\nstormy winds were howling dogs or wolves; the ravages of the whirlwind\nthat tore up the earth _were the work of a wild boar_.\"[27] Mr. Fiske,\nin his \"Myths and Myth-makers,\" says that these mythical monsters \"not\nonly steal the daylight, but they parch the earth and wither the fruits,\nand they slay vegetation during the winter months.\"\n\nThese traditionary \"Harvest Blasters,\" as they are sometimes styled,\nhave a wide range, and are not confined even to the various branches of\nthe Aryan race.\n\nMost writers agree in assigning the origin of heraldry, in the modern\nacceptation of the term, to the crusades. At least little is recorded\nconcerning the \"science,\" or \"art,\" as it is sometimes termed,\npreviously to the middle of the twelfth century. It was found necessary\nduring the religious wars in the east that the knights should wear some\ndevice or distinguishing badge on the field of battle, on account of the\ndiversity of the languages spoken by the combatants, and hence the term\n\"cognizance\" was often applied to these symbols. This, in the following\ncentury, eventuated in the adoption of the warlike badges or \"arms\" of\nthe original bearers by their families. They afterwards became\nhereditary characteristics, and hence the development of the _quasi_\nscience. These devices were figured on crest, banner, and shield. One\nauthority (Pen. Cyclop.) says--\"The crest is said to have been carved on\nlight wood, or made of leather, _in the shape of some animal, real or\nfictitious_, and fastened by a fillet of silk round the helmet, over\nwhich was a large piece of fringed samit or taffeta, pointed with a\ntassel at the end.\" The same writer adds--\"The custom of conferring\ncrests as distinguishing marks seems to have originated with Edward\nIII., who, in 1333 (Rot. Pat., 9 Edward III.), granted one to William\nMontacute, Earl of Salisbury, his 'tymbre,' as it is called, of the\neagle. By a further grant, in the thirteenth of the same king (Rot.\nVasc., 13 Edward III., m. 4), the grant of this crest was made\nhereditary, and the manor of Wodeton given in addition to support its\ndignity.\"\n\nI am inclined, notwithstanding, to regard heraldry in its more extended\nsignificance, that is if the term can properly be applied to practices\nanterior to the establishment of heralds, as of much greater antiquity\nthan the crusades. Herodotus tells us that the Carians first set the\nGreeks the example of fastening crests upon their helmets, and of\nputting devices upon their shields. The \"totems,\" or beast symbols, of\nour savage ancestors undoubtedly preceded the medi\u00e6val practice, and\ninfluenced its incipient development. The \"White Horse\" of Hengist, the\n\"Raven\" of the Scandinavian vikings, the \"Golden Dragon\" of the kings of\nWessex, as well as others, might be mentioned, which clearly demonstrate\nthis position. Uther, the father of Arthur, according to Geoffrey of\nMonmouth, caused \"two dragons to be made of gold, which was done with\nwondrous nicety of workmanship.\" The quasi-historian adds--\"He made a\npresent of one to the cathedral church of Winchester, but reserved the\nother for himself to be carried along with him to his wars. From this\ntime, therefore, he was called Uther Pendragon, which in the British\ntongue signifies the dragon's head.\" Indeed, amongst savage nations at\nthe present or relatively recent time, we find \"totems\" or symbols, such\nas beaver, snake, hare, cornstalk, black hawk, dog, wolf, bear, beaver,\nlittle bear, crazy horse, and sitting bull, not only used by the warrior\nchiefs, but even the tribes sometimes take their names therefrom.\n\nMr. E. B. Tylor, in his \"Early History of Mankind,\" says--\"More than\ntwenty years ago, Sir George Grey called attention to the divisions of\nthe Australians into families, and distinguished by the name of some\nanimal or vegetable, which served as their crest or _kobong_.\" He\nadds--\"The Indian tribes\" (of America) \"are usually divided into clans,\neach distinguished by a _totem_ (Algonquin _do-daim_, that is 'town\nmark,') which is commonly some animal, as a bear, wolf, deer, etc.,\nwhich may be compared on the one hand to a crest, and on the other to a\nsurname.\"\n\nIndeed, until very recently, some of our own regiments had their \"beast\ntotem\" in the shape of a goat, a bear, or a tiger, which generally\nmarched at the head of the corps. The goat, I believe, yet survives, and\nthe men of one regiment are designated \"tigers\" to this day.\n\nThe crest is evidently one of the oldest, if not the oldest, forms in\nwhich the beast symbol was displayed. The bronze Roman helmet, or rather\nbust or head of Minerva, found at Ribchester, in 1796, had originally a\nsphinx as a crest. This appendage, however, having become detached, has\nsince been lost. The gladiators' helmet decorations, in the pictures\nfound at Pompeii, are generally plumes or tufts of horsehair, but some\nof their shields exhibit devices suggestive of those of more recent\ndate. The Roman historians, recording the events pertaining to the\ngreat Cimbri-Teutonic invasion rather more than a century before the\nChristian era, state that each of the fifteen thousand horsemen, which\nformed the \u00e9lite of the army of Bojorix, \"bore upon his helmet the head\nof some savage beast, with its mouth gaping wide.\"\n\nOsman, the son of Ertoghrul, was the founder of the Turkish empire (A.D.\n1288-1326). One writer (Pen. Cyc.) says--\"The name Osman is of Arabic\norigin (Othman), and signifies literally the bone-breaker; but it also\ndesignates a species of large vulture, usually called the royal vulture,\nand in this latter acceptation it was given to the son of Ertoghrul.\"\n\nThe Rev. Isaac Taylor, in his \"Etruscan Researches,\" referring to the\norigin of the tribal \"totem\" of the Asena horde, afterwards named Turks,\nsays--\"It is not difficult to discover the genesis of the legend. It has\nbeen already shown that the ancient Ugric word _sena_ meant a 'man.' The\nanalogy of a host of ancient tribe-names leaves little doubt that the\nAsena simply called themselves 'the men.' This obvious etymology of the\nname having in lapse of time become obscure by linguistic changes, the\nword _schino_, a wolf, was assumed to be the true source of the national\nappellation, and the myth came into existence as a means of accounting\nfor the name of the nation which proudly called itself the 'wolf-race,'\nand bore the wolves' heads as its 'totem.'\"\n\nIt is said the Kabyls tattoo figures of animals on their foreheads,\ncheeks, nose, or temples, in order to distinguish their various tribes.\nA similar practice obtains generally in central Africa and the Caroline\narchipelago.\n\nThe plague, sent by Artemis to punish \u00c6neus, who had neglected to offer\nup to her a portion of a sacrifice, was a \"monstrous boar,\" afterwards\nslain by Meleagros, Atalanta, and others, in the famous Kalydonian hunt,\nis evidently a Greek form of a mythical \"monster, which in former ages\nprowled over the neighbourhood, inflicting injury on man and beast.\"\n\nThe boar, or the boar's head, was a favourite helmet crest or \"totem\"\namongst our Teutonic ancestors, both Scandinavian and German. This\nanimal was sacred to the goddess Friga, or Freya, whom Tacitus, in his\n\"Germania,\" styles the \"mother of the gods,\" and from whom our Friday is\nnamed. She was propitiated by the warriors in order to secure her\nprotection in battle. This practice is often referred to in the sagas,\nas well as in the earliest known example of Anglo-Saxon poetry extant,\n\"Beowulf.\" The following illustrations are from this remarkable poem:--\n\n    When we in battle our mail hoods defended,\n    When troops rushed together and boar-crests crashed.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n    Then commanded he to bring in\n    The boar, an ornament to the head,\n    The helmet lofty in war.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n    Surrounded with lordly chains,\n    Even as in days of yore,\n    The weapon-smith had wrought it,\n    Had wondrously finished it,\n    Had set it round with shapes of swine,\n    That never afterwards brand or war-knife\n    Might have power to bite it.\n    They seemed a boar's form\n    To bear over their cheeks;\n    Twisted with gold,\n    Variegated and hardened in the fire;\n    This kept the guard of life.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n    At the pile was\n    Easy to be seen\n    The mail shirt covered with gore,\n    The hog of gold,\n    The boar hard as iron.\n\nIn the episode relating the events attendant on the battle of Finsburgh,\nin the same poem, we find similar importance attached to the boar, as\nthe warrior's protector. We read--\n\n    Of the martial Scyldings,\n    The best of warriors,\n    On the pile was ready;\n    At the heap was\n    Easy to be seen\n    The blood-stained tunic,\n    The swine all golden,\n    The boar iron-hard, etc.\n\nIn the \"Life of Merlin,\" Arthur and his kinsman, Hoel, are described as\n\"two lions,\" and \"two moons.\" In the same poem, Hoel is styled the\n\"Armorican boar.\"\n\nIn the Welsh poem, \"The Gododin,\" by Aneurin, are several allusions to\nthe boar and the bull, as warlike appellations:--\n\n    It was like the tearing onset of the woodland boar;\n    Bull of the army in the mangling fight.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n    The furze was kindled by the ardent spirit, the bull of conflict.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n    And those shields were shivered before the herd of the roaring\n                                                               Beli.[28]\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n    The boar proposed a compact in front of the course--the great plotter.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n    Adan, the son of Ervai, there did pierce,\n    Adan pierced the haughty boar.\n\nMr. F. Metcalfe, in his \"Englishman and Scandinavian,\" says--\"Indeed\nthis porcine device was common to all the Northern nations who\nworshipped Freya and Freyr. The helmet of the Norwegian king, Ali, was\ncalled Hildig\u00f6lltr, the boar of war, and was prized beyond measure by\nhis victors (Prose Edda, I., 394). But long before that Tacitus (Germ.,\n45) had recorded that the Esthonians, east of the Baltic, wore\nswine-shaped amulets, as a symbol of the mother of the gods.\n\nTacitus adds--\"This\" (the wild-boar symbol) \"serves instead of weapons\nor any other defence, and gives safety to the servant of the goddess,\neven in the midst of the foe.\"\n\nThis connection of the boar with the religious ceremonies and warlike\nexploits of our pagan ancestors is often referred to in the Edda. The\nvaliant Norseman believed that when he entered Walhalla he should join\nthe combats of the warriors each morning, and hack and hew away as in\nearthly conflict, till the slain for the day had been \"chosen,\" and\nmealtime arrived, when the vanquished and victorious returned together\nto feast on the \"everlasting boar\" (s\u0153hrimnir), and carouse on mead and\nale with the \u00c6sir. The boar's head, which figured so conspicuously in\nthe Christmas festivities of our ancestors, is evidently a relic, like\nthe mistletoe and the yule-log, of pagan times.\n\nThere is nothing, therefore, improbable in the proposition that the\nstandard, totem, or helmet-crest of some devastating Teutonic chieftain\nlike Penda, the ferocious pagan conqueror of Oswald, may have been of\nthis porcine character. The Christian adherents of the Northumbrian king\nand saint would very easily confound him and the devastation attendant\nupon his victorious march through their country, with the dethroned and\nabhorred pagan deity whose emblem formed his crest or \"totem,\" as well\nas with the older wild boar storm-fiend, or \"the monster who prowled\nover the neighbourhood, inflicting injury on man and beast,\" and for the\nsubdual of which the sanctity of the edifice of the saintly monarch was\nalone effectual. In the prophecy attributed to Merlin, King Arthur is\ndescribed as the wild boar of Cornwall, that would \"devour\" his enemies.\nThe mingling of ancient superstitious fears with the more modern\nChristianity, especially with reference to such matters as charms,\nprophylactics, etc., is of very common occurrence even at the present\nday. Sir John Lubbock, in his \"Origin of Civilisation and the Primitive\nCondition of Man,\" says--\"When man, either by natural progress or the\ninfluence of a more advanced race, rises to a conception of a higher\nreligion, he still retains his old beliefs, which linger on side by side\nwith, and yet in utter opposition to, the higher creed. The new and more\npowerful spirit is an addition to the old pantheon, and diminishes the\nimportance of the older deities; gradually the worship of the latter\nsinks in the social scale, and becomes confined to the ignorant and\nyoung. Thus a belief in witchcraft still flourishes amongst our\nagricultural labourers and the lowest class in our great cities, and the\ndeities of our ancestors survive in the nursery tales of our children.\nWe must, therefore, expect to find in each race traces--nay, more than\ntraces--of lower religions.\"\n\nSome parties regard the Winwick sculpture as \"St. Anthony's pig,\" but\nthey acknowledge they know of no connection of that saint with the\nparish. But, as I have shown in the previous chapter, \"the deeds of one\nmythical hero are sure, when he is forgotten, to be attributed to some\nother man of mark, who for the time being fills the popular fancy.\"\nKeightley, in his \"Fairy Mythology,\" says--\"Every extraordinary\nappearance is found to have its extraordinary cause assigned, a cause\nalways connected with the _history_ or _religion, ancient or modern_, of\nthe country, and not unfrequently _varying with the change of faith_.\nThe mark on Adam's Peak, in Ceylon, is by the Buddhists ascribed to\nBuddha; by the Mohammedans to Adam.\"\n\nMr. Mackenzie Wallace, in his \"Russia,\" speaking of the Finns and their\nRussian neighbours, says--\"The friendly contact of two such races\nnaturally led to a curious blending of the two religions. The Russians\nadopted many customs from the Finns, and the Finns adopted still more\nfrom the Russians. When Yumala and the other Finnish deities did not do\nas they were desired, their worshippers naturally applied for protection\nor assistance to the Madonna and the 'Russian god.' If their own\ntraditional magic rites did not suffice to ward off evil influences,\nthey naturally tried the effect of crossing themselves as the Russians\ndo in moments of danger.\" In another place he says--\"At the harvest\nfestivals, Tchuvash peasants have been known to pray first to their own\ndeities and then to St. Nicholas, the miracle-worker, who is the\nfavourite saint of the Russian peasantry. This dual worship is sometimes\nrecommended by the Yornzi--a class of men who correspond to the medicine\nmen among the Red Indians.\" He truly observes--\"popular imagination\nalways uses heroic names as pegs on which to hang traditions.\"\n\nBishop Percy, in the preface to his translation of \"Mallet's Northern\nAntiquities,\" says--\"Nothing is more contagious than superstition, and\ntherefore we must not wonder if, in ages of ignorance, one wild people\ncatch up from another, though of very different race, the most arbitrary\nand groundless opinions, or endeavour to imitate them in such rites and\npractices as they are told will recommend them to the gods, or avert\ntheir anger.\"\n\nJacob Grimm says (Deutsche Mythologie)--\"A people whose faith is falling\nto pieces will save here and there a fragment of it, by fixing it on a\nnew and unpersecuted object of veneration.\"\n\nIt appears, therefore, that the Winwick monster, in this respect, is but\nan apt illustration of ordinary mythological transference of attributes\nor emblems, which in no way invalidates the more remote origin to which\nI have ascribed it, or its connection with the totem or beast symbol of\nthe heathen warrior. The boar, indeed, has been a sacred symbol for ages\namongst the Aryan nations. Herodotus (b. 3, c. 59) says that the\nEginet\u00e6, after defeating the Samians in a sea-fight, \"cut off the prows\nof their boats, which represented the figure of a boar, and dedicated\nthem in the temple of Minerva, in Egina.\"\n\nThe Rev. Sir G. W. Cox, in his \"Introduction to Mythology and\nFolk-Lore,\" referring to the Greek war god Ar\u00eas, says--\"In the Odyssey\nhis name is connected with Aphrodite, whose love he is said to have\nobtained; but other traditions tell us that when she seemed to favour\nAdonis, Ar\u00eas changed himself into a boar, which slew the youth of whom\nhe was jealous.\"\n\nThe Mussulman's abhorrence of roast pork is well known. Amongst the\nTurkomans of Central Asia (the ancient home of our Aryan ancestors) the\nprowess of the living animal is likewise regarded with a strange\nsuperstitious dread, evidently akin to some more ancient belief in the\nsupernatural attributes of the animal. Arminius V\u00e1mb\u00e9ry, in his \"Travels\nin Central Asia\" (having narrowly escaped serious injury from a wild\nporcine assailant), informs us he was seriously assured by a Turkoman\nfriend that he might regard himself as very lucky, inasmuch as \"death by\nthe wound of a wild boar would send even the most pious Mussulman nedgis\n(unclean) into the next world, where a hundred years' burning in\npurgatorial fire would not purge away his uncleanness.\"\n\nSince the above was written I have perceived a passage in Mr. Fiske's\nessay on \"Werewolves,\" in his \"Myths and Myth-makers,\" that seems not\nonly to strengthen the conjecture that the boar was the crest or \"totem\"\nof the pagan Penda, but likewise the probability of the influence of the\nolder mythical story with which I have associated it. The boar, it must\nbe remembered, in all the Indo-European mythologies, is associated with\nstormy wind and lightning. Mr. Fiske, referring to what he terms one of\nthe \"more striking characteristics of primitive thinking,\" namely, \"the\nclose community of nature which it assumes between man and brute,\"\nsays--\"The doctrine of metempsychosis, which is found in some shape or\nother all over the world, implies a fundamental identity between the\ntwo: the Hindu is taught to respect the flocks browsing in the meadow,\nand will on no account lift his hand against a cow, for who knows but\nthat it may be his own grandmother? The recent researches of Mr. Lennan\nand Mr. Herbert Spencer have served to connect this feeling with the\nprimeval worship of ancestors and with the savage customs of\ntotemism.... This kind of worship still maintains a languid existence as\nthe state religion of China, and it still exists as a portion of\nBrahmanism; but in the Vedic religion it is to be seen in all its native\nsimplicity. According to the ancient Aryan, the Pitris, or 'Fathers'\n(Lat. _Patres_) live in the sky along with Yama, the great original\nPitri of mankind.... Now if the storm-wind is a host of Pitris, or one\ngreat Pitri, who appeared as a fearful giant, and is also a pack of\nwolves or wish-hounds, or a single savage dog or wolf, the inference is\nobvious to the mythop\u0153ic mind that men may become wolves, at least after\ndeath. And to the uncivilised thinker this inference is strengthened, as\nMr. Spencer has shown by evidence registered on his own tribal 'totem'\nor heraldic emblem. The bears and lions and leopards of heraldry are the\ndegenerate descendants of the 'totem' of savagery which designated a\ntribe by a beast symbol. To the untutored mind there is everything\nin a name; and the descendant of Brown Bear, or Yellow Tiger, or\nSilver Hy\u00e6na, cannot be pronounced unfaithful to his own style of\nphilosophising if he regards _his ancestors, who career about his hut in\nthe darkness of the night_, as belonging to whatever order of beasts his\n'totem' associations may suggest.\"\n\nIn the Volsung tale of the Northern mythology the \"gods of the bright\nheaven\" had to make atonement to the sons of Reidmar, whose brother\nthey had slain. This brother was named \"the otter.\"\n\nModern surnames have been derived from very varied sources, including\ntrades, locations, and individual characteristics. Many, identical with\nbirds, beasts, and fishes, may have originally been what are vulgarly\ntermed \"nicknames,\" or they may be corrupt modern renderings of very\ndifferent ancient words, such as Haddock, from Haydock, a township in\nLancashire; Winter, from vintner; and Sumner from summoner, &c.\nNevertheless, the old tribal \"totem\" or heraldic device of a feudal\nsuperior may have given rise to some of the following: Wolf, Lyon, Hog,\nBull, Bullock, Buck, Hart, Fox, Lamb, Hare, Poynter, Badger, Beaver,\nGriffin, Raven, Hawk, Eagle, Stork, Crane, Woodcock, Gull, Nightingale,\nCock, Cockerell, Bantam, Crow, Dove, Pigeon, Lark, Swallow, Martin,\nWren, Teal, Finch, Jay, Sparrow, Partridge, Peacock, Goose, Gosling,\nBird, Fish, Salmon, Sturgeon, Gudgeon, Herring, Roach, Pike, Sprat, &c.\nSome flowers and plants may likewise have formed badges or tribal or\nfamily symbols or \"quarterings,\" and thus given rise to surnames. We\nhave several of this class, such as Plantagenet (the broom), Rose, Lily,\nPrimrose, Heath, Broome, Hollyoak, Pine, Thorne, Hawthorne, Hawes,\nHyacinth, Crabbe, Crabtree, Crabstick, &c. The leek, the Welshman's\n\"totem,\" is not an uncommon name, though generally spelled Leak. I\nnever, however, heard of such names as Shamrock or Thistle. On the other\nhand, many families have reversed the process and adopted a symbol or\ncrest from a real or fancied similarity of their names and those of the\nselected objects. The figure of a dog is borne on the arms of the Talbot\nfamily, whence, perhaps, the name. The talbot is a dog noted for his\nquick scent and eager pursuit of game.\n\nJacob Grimm (\"Deutsche Mythologie,\") says:--\"Even in the middle ages,\nLandscado (scather of the land) was a name borne by noble families.\" He\nfurther says:--\"Swans, ravens, wolves, stags, bears, and lions, will\njoin the heroes, to render them assistance; and that is how animal\nfigures in the scutcheons and helmet insignia of heroes are in many\ncases to be accounted for, though they may arise from other causes too,\n_e.g._, the ability of certain heroes to transform themselves at will\ninto wolf or swan.\"\n\nMr. Charles Elton (\"Origins of English History,\") says--\"The names of\nseveral tribes, or the legends of their origin, show that an animal, or\nsome other real or imaginary object, was chosen as a crest or emblem,\nand was probably regarded with a superstitious veneration. A powerful\nfamily or tribe would feign to be descended from a swan or a\nwater-maiden, or a 'white lady,' who rose from the moon-beams on the\nlake. The moon herself was claimed as the ancestress of certain\nfamilies. The legendary heroes are turned into 'swan-knights,' or fly\naway in the form of wild-geese. The tribe of the 'Ui Duinn,' who claimed\nSt. Bridgit as their kinswoman, wore for their crest the figure of a\nlizard, which appeared at the foot of the oak-tree above her shrine. We\nhear of 'griffins' by the Shannon, of 'calves' in the country around\nBelfast; the men of Ossory were called by a name which signifies the\nwild red-deer! There are similar instances from Scotland in such names\nas 'Clan Chattan,' or the Wild Cats, and in the animal crests which have\nbeen borne from the most ancient times as the emblems or cognizances of\nthe chieftains. The early Welsh poems will furnish another set of\nexamples. The tribes who fought at Catraeth are distinguished by the\nbard as wolves, bears, or ravens; the families which claim descent from\nCaradock or Oswain take the boar or the raven for their crest. The\nfollowers of 'Cian the Dog' are called the 'dogs of war,' and the\nchieftain's house is described as the stone or castle of 'the white\ndogs.'\"\n\nThe writer, in the Pen. Cyclop., of the memoir of Owen Glendwr,\nsays--\"It was at this juncture that Glendwr revived the ancient prophecy\nthat Henry IV. should fall under the name of 'Moldwary,' or 'the cursed\nof God's mouth'; and styling himself 'the Dragon,' assumed a badge\nrepresenting that monster with a star above, in imitation of Uther,\nwhose victories over the Saxons were foretold by the appearance of a\nstar with a dagger threatening beneath. Percy was denoted 'the Lion,'\nfrom the crest of his family; and on Sir Edward Mortimer they bestowed\nthe title of 'the Wolf.'\"\n\nHugh of Avranche, Earl of Chester, was called Hugh Lupus, from his\ncognizance or favourite device of a wolf's head.\n\nShakspere has preserved to us at least two noteworthy instances in which\nthe \"totem\" or beast symbol of our savage ancestors survived, with its\noriginal significance, until the period of the \"Wars of the Roses.\" In\nthe Second Part of \"King Henry VI.\" (Act 5, Scene 1), _Warwick_\nexclaims:--\n\n    Now, by my father's badge, old Nevil's crest,\n    The rampant bear chain'd to the ragged staff,\n    This day I'll wear aloft my burgonet\n    (As on a mountain top the cedar shows,\n    That keeps his leaves in spite of any storm),\n    Even to affright thee with the view thereof.\n\nTo which boast _Clifford_ replies:--\n\n    And from thy burgonet I'll rend thy bear,\n    And tread it underfoot with all contempt,\n    Despite the bearward that protects the bear.\n\n_Warwick_, in the following scene, amidst the carnage of battle,\nshouts:--\n\n    Clifford of Cumberland, 'tis Warwick calls!\n    And if thou dost not hide thee from the bear,\n    Now--when the angry trumpet sounds alarm,\n    And _dead men's cries do fill the empty air_--\n    Clifford, I say, come forth and fight with me!\n\nThe expression \"_dead_ men's cries do fill the empty air,\" I have\nhitherto regarded, as doubtless most other readers of Shakspere have\ndone, as either a misprint or an obsolete form of expression, meaning,\nin the more modern English, \"_dying_ men's cries do fill the empty air.\"\nTaken in connection, however, with the continual reference of Warwick to\nthe \"rampant bear\" as his ancestral \"totem\" or beast symbol, I am\ninclined to think it is not improbable that Shakspere, who has made use\nof such an enormous number of other superstitious fancies as poetic\nimages, as well as illustrations of character, may have had in his mind\nthe old belief that the souls of ancestors, \"Pitris,\" or \"Fathers,\"\ncareered and howled amongst the storm-winds in the form indicated by\ntheir beast symbol or tribal \"totem.\" Poetically, the thought is\nsingularly appropriate to the storm and strife of the battlefield, and\nespecially to the frenzied agony engendered by the horrors too often\nattendant upon \"_domestic_ fury and fierce _civil_ strife.\" Referring\nto, and quoting from, the \"Exodus,\" a poem of the C\u0153dman school, Mr.\nGreen (\"The Making of England\") says--\"The wolves sang their dread\nevensong; the fowls of war, greedy of battle, dewy feathered, screamed\naround the host of Pharaoh, as wolf howled and eagle screamed round the\nhost of Penda.\" Shakspere places in the mouth of _Calphurnia_, when\nrecounting the prodigies which preceded C\u00e6sar's assassination, the\nfollowing remarkable words:--\n\n    The graves have yawn'd and yielded up their dead:\n    Fierce fiery warriors fight upon the clouds\n    In ranks and squadrons and right form of war,\n    Which drizzled blood upon the Capitol;\n    The noise of battle hurtled in the air,\n    Horses did neigh and dying men did groan,\n    And ghosts did shriek and squeal about the streets.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n    When beggars die there are no comets seen:\n    The heavens themselves blaze forth the death of princes.\n\nAgain, in \"Richard III.\" (Act 3, Scene 2), _Stanley's_ messenger informs\n_Hastings_ that his master had commissioned him to say he had dreamt\nthat night \"the boar (Richard) had raised off his helm.\" This, he adds,\nhis master regards as a warning to _Hastings_ and himself--\n\n    To shun the danger that his soul divines.\n\nThe boar was the cognizance, crest, or \"totem\" of Richard. In the fourth\nscene of the same act, _Hastings_, on hearing his death sentence,\nexclaims:\n\n    Woe! woe for England! not a whit for me;\n    For I, too fond, might have prevented this:\n    Stanley did dream the boar did raise his helm;\n    But I disdain'd it, and did scorn to fly.\n\nIn Act 4, Scene 4, _Stanley_, addressing _Sir Christopher Urswick_,\nsays:--\n\n    Sir Christopher, tell Richmond this from me:\n    That in the sty of this most bloody boar,\n    My son, George Stanley, is frank'd up in hold;\n    If I revolt, off goes young George's head;\n    The fear of that withholds my present aid.\n\nIn _Richmond's_ address to his army, in the second scene of the fifth\nact, the Aryan personification of the destroying storm-wind and \"harvest\nblaster,\" as well as \"the monster in former ages, which prowled over the\nneighbourhood, inflicting injury on man and beast,\" is very distinctly\nindicated, and adds another link to the chain of evidence by which I\nhave endeavoured to justify the hypothesis that the rude sculpture of\nWinwick may represent the crest or \"totem\" of Penda, the ruthless pagan\nvictor in the disastrous fight at Maserfeld, in the year 642. _Richmond_\nsays:--\n\n    The wretched, bloody, and usurping boar,\n    _That spoiled your summer fields and fruitful vines_,\n    Swills your warm blood like wash, and makes his trough\n    In your embowell'd bosoms--this foul swine\n    Lies now even in the centre of this isle,\n    Near to the town of Leicester.\n\nThere is an old rhyming couplet, referring to the three personages who\nwere Richard's chief advisers or instruments, in his usurpation,\nRatcliffe, Catesby and Lovel, which throws additional light on this\nbeast symbolism:--\n\n    The rat and the cat, and Lovel the dog,\n    Do govern all England under the hog.\n\nAmongst our Scandinavian predecessors the customs and superstitions now\nunder consideration seem to have been deeply rooted. Sir G. W. Dasent,\nin the introduction to his translation of the Icelandic saga, the \"Story\nof Brunt Njal,\" says the Icelander believed in wraiths and patches and\nguardian spirits, who followed particular persons, and belonged to\ncertain families--a belief which seems to have sprung from the habit of\nregarding body and soul as two distinct beings, which at certain times\ntook each a separate bodily shape. Sometimes the guardian spirit or\nJylgja took a human shape, and at others its _form took that of some\nanimal to foreshadow the character of the man to whom it belonged_. Thus\nit becomes a bear, a wolf, an ox, and even a fox, in men. The Jylgja of\nwomen were fond of taking the shape of swans. To see one's own Jylgja\nwas unlucky, and often a sign that a man was 'fey,' or death-doomed. So,\nwhen Thord Freedmanson tells Njal that he sees the goat wallowing in its\ngore in the 'town' of Bergthirsknoll, the foresighted man tells him that\nhe has seen his own Jylgja, and that he must be doomed to die. Finer and\nnobler natures often saw the guardian spirits of others.... From the\nJylgja of the individual it was easy to rise to the still more abstract\nnotion of the guardian spirits of a family, who sometimes, if a great\nchange in the house is about to begin, even show themselves as hurtful\nto some member of the house. He believed also that some men had more\nthan one shape (voru eigi einhamir); that they could either take the\nshapes of animals, as bears or wolves, and so work mischief; or that\nwithout undergoing bodily change, an access of rage and strength came\nover them, and more especially towards night, which made them more than\na match for ordinary men.\"\n\nTo those who may fancy that in this inquiry I have carried conjecture\nand apparent analogy beyond the domain of legitimate critical inference,\nI answer in the words of Professor Gervinus, in his comments on the\nsonnets of Shakspere--\"The caution of the critic does not require that\nwe should repudiate a supposition so extraordinarily probable; it\nrequires alone that we should not obstinately insist upon it and set it\nup as an established certainty, but that we should lend a willing ear to\nbetter and surer knowledge whenever it is offered.\" Professor Tyndall,\ntoo, in his \"Lectures on Light,\" referring to the genesis of all\nscientific knowledge, says--\"All our notions of nature, however exalted\nor however grotesque, have some foundations in experience. The notion of\npersonal volition in nature had this basis. In the fury and the serenity\nof natural phenomena the savage saw the transcript of his own varying\nmoods, and he accordingly ascribed these phenomena to beings of like\npassions with himself, but vastly transcending him in power. Thus the\nnotion of _causality_--the assumption that natural things did not come\nof themselves, but had unseen antecedents--lay at the root of even the\nsavage's interpretation of nature. Out of this bias of the human mind\nto seek for the antecedents of phenomena, all science has sprung.\"\n\nThe value of \"comparative folk-lore,\" in the elucidation of obscure\npassages in the early history of mankind, especially with regard to\nmanners, customs, and superstitious faiths, is now pretty generally\nacknowledged by arch\u00e6ological students. Since this chapter was first\nwritten I find the subject has been ably treated by Mr. J. A. Farrer, in\nthe _Cornhill Magazine_ of January, 1875. He says--\"The evidence that\nthe nations now highest in culture were once in the position of those\nnow the lowest is ever increasing, and the study of folk-lore\ncorroborates the conclusions long since arrived at by arch\u00e6ological\nscience. For, just as stone monuments, flint-knives, lake-piles, and\nshell-mounds point to a time when Europeans resembled races where such\nthings are still part of actual life, so do the traces in our social\norganism, of fetishism, totemism, and other low forms of thought,\nconnect our past with people where such forms of thought are still\npredominant. The analogies with barbarism that still flourish in\ncivilised communities seem only explicable on the theory of a slow and\nmore or less uniform metamorphosis to higher types and modes of life,\nand we are forced to believe that ere long it will appear a law of\ndevelopment, as firmly established on the inconceivability of the\ncontrary, that civilization should emerge from barbarism as that\nbutterflies should first be caterpillars, or that ignorance should\nprecede knowledge. It is in this way that superstition itself may be\nturned to the service of science.\"\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER III.\n\nBATTLES IN THE VALLEY OF THE RIBBLE, NEAR WHALLEY AND CLITHEROE.\n\n\n    WADA'S DEFEAT BY KING EARDULPH, AT BILLANGAHOH, A.D. 798, AND\n    CONTEMPORARY PROPHETIC SUPERSTITIONS. THE VICTORY OF THE SCOTS AT\n    EDISFORD BRIDGE IN 1138. CIVIL WAR INCIDENTS BETWEEN CHARLES I. AND\n    THE ENGLISH PARLIAMENT.\n\nThe Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, under the date 798, says--\"This year there\nwas a great fight at Hwelleage (Whalley), in the land of the\nNorthumbrians, during Lent, on the 4th before the Nones of April, and\nthere Alric, the son of Herbert, was slain, and many others with him.\"\n\nSimeon of Durham has the following reference to this battle:--\"A.D. 798.\nA conspiracy having been organised by the murderers of Ethelred, the\nking, Wada, the chief of that conspiracy, commenced a war against\nEardulph, and fought a battle at a place called by the English\nBillangahoh, near Walalega, and, after many had fallen on both sides,\nWada and his army were totally routed.\"\n\n[Illustration: MAP 2.]\n\nThe Anglo-Saxon Chronicle informs us that four years previously (794),\n\"Ethelred, king of the Northumbrians, was slain by his own people, on\nthe 13th before the Kalends of May.\" This Ethelred seems to have been a\nvery unfortunate or a very tyrannical ruler, even for those barbarous\ntimes, for we find, on the same authority, he, in company with Herbert,\n\"slew three high reves, on the 11th before the Kalends of April,\" 778,\nand that afterwards \"Alfwold obtained the kingdom, and drove Ethelred\nout of the country; and he (Alfwold) reigned ten years.\" This same\nAlfwold was evidently regarded as a patriot and not as an usurper, for\nthe Chronicle tells us that he \"was slain by Siga, on the 8th before the\nKalends of October; and a heavenly light was frequently seen at the\nplace where he was slain; and he was buried at Hexham within the\nchurch.\" He was succeeded by his nephew, Osred, who, the Chronicle says,\nafterwards \"was betrayed and driven from the kingdom; and Ethelred, the\nson of Ethelwald, again obtained the government.\" Two years later, from\nthe same authority, we learn that \"Osred, who had been king of the\nNorthhumbrians, having come home from his exile, was seized and slain on\nthe 18th before the Kalends of October,\" (792).\n\nThese facts throw much light on the social and political state of the\ncountry at the period, and demonstrate that Ethelred's murder was by no\nmeans an exceptional occurrence. Indeed, the slaying of kings by their\nown people appears to have been the rule rather than the exception\namongst our ancestors, especially in Northumbria, about this period.\nSharon Turner, in his \"History of the Anglo-Saxons,\" referring to the\ninternecine conflicts which took place in the North of England for a\nlengthened period, and especially about this time, says--\"Of all the\nAnglo-Saxon Governments the kingdom of Northumbria had been always the\nmost perturbed. Usurper murdering usurper is the prevailing incident. A\ncrowd of ghastly monarchs pass swiftly along the page of history as we\ngaze, and scarcely was the sword of the assassin sheathed before it was\ndrawn against its master, and he was carried to the sepulchre which he\nhad just closed upon another. In this manner, during the last century\nand a half, no fewer than seventeen sceptered chiefs hurled each other\nfrom their joyless thrones, and the deaths of the greatest number were\naccompanied by hecatombs of their friends.\"\n\nThe public mind, under such circumstances, must of necessity have been\ndeeply perturbed, and superstition associated the social and political\nanarchy which prevailed with the \"war of elements,\" and other attendant\nmysterious physical phenomena. The trusty old chronicler, duly impressed\nwith the solemnity of his theme, informs us that during the year\npreceding the murder of Ethelred \"dire forewarnings came over the land\nof the Northumbrians and miserably terrified the people; these were\nexcessive whirlwinds and lightnings, and fiery dragons were seen flying\nin the air. A great famine soon followed these tokens; and a little\nafter that, in the same year, on the 6th before the Ides of January, the\nravaging of heathen men lamentably destroyed God's Church at Lindisfarne\nthrough rapine and slaughter.\"\n\nThe \"heathen men\" here referred to were Danish rovers. These \"Northmen,\nout of H\u00e6retha-land\" (Denmark), had a few years previously (787), in\nthree ships, \"first sought the land of the English nation,\" and, having\nfound it and pronounced it good, they ceased not their invasions until\nthey became masters of the entire kingdom, under Canute the Great. This\nconquest of the Northmen mainly resulted from the fact that the English\nmonarchs of the Heptarchy were continually at war either with the\nBritons or amongst themselves. \"Domestic treason and fierce civil\nstrife\" added additional strength to the foe, for both regal enemy and\nrebellious subject eagerly sought the aid of the pirates, or selected\nthe occasion of their hostile visits to harass their opponents. Although\nwe have no record of Danish or other Northmen's ravages in Lancashire in\nthe reign of Ethelred or his successor, yet we get a very distinct view\nof their doings on the eastern coast of Northumbria, and of the\ninternecine strife which rendered the kingdom a relatively easy prey to\nthe brave but brutal and remorseless heathen pirates.\n\nThe battles described in the previous chapters were more or less\nconjectural in some of their aspects; at least the true character of the\npresumed Arthurian victories on the Douglas, as well as the site of that\nof Penda over St. Oswald, at Maserfield, have not been demonstrated with\nsuch certainty as to obtain universal assent. Such, however, is not the\ncase with the minor struggle now under consideration. The site assigned\nto it has never been doubted. The names recorded by the old chroniclers\nare still extant in the locality, with such orthographic or phonetic\nchanges in their descent from the eighth to the nineteenth century as\nphilologists would anticipate. The _Hwelleage_ of the Anglo-Saxon\nChronicle, as well as the monk of Durham's medi\u00e6val Latin _Walalega_,\nare identical with the present Whalley; while _Billangahoh_ is\nrepresented by its descendants Billinge, Billington, and Langho.\nArch\u00e6ological remains have likewise contributed important evidence.\nThree large tumuli for centuries have marked the scene of the struggle,\none of which, near to Langho, has been removed, and the remains of a\nburied warrior exhumed. According to J. M. Kemble and other Anglo-Saxon\nscholars, Billington signifies the homestead or settlement of the sept\nor clan of the Billings, as Birmingham is that of the Beormings. This\nrule likewise applies to many other localities where the local\nnomenclature presents similar features. Consequently, from legitimate\nanalogy, we learn that Waddington, on the right bank of the Ribble\nopposite Clitheroe, is the homestead, town, or settlement of Wadda and\nhis dependents; and Waddow, in its immediate neighbourhood, the how or\nhill of Wadda.\n\nIn the fragment of the old Anglo-Saxon poem \"The Traveller's Tale,\"\nmention is made of a Wada as a chief of the H\u00e6lsings. Mr. Haigh, in his\n\"Anglo-Saxon Sagas,\" regards him as \"probably one of the companions of\nthe first Hencgest.\" Hence the probability of his being an ancestor of\nthe chief conspirator against King Eardulph. Mr. Kemble (\"Saxons in\nEngland,\") says--\"Among the heroes of heathen tradition are Wada,\nWeland, and Eigil. All three so celebrated in the mythus and epos of\nScandinavia and Germany, have left traces in England. Of Wada, the\n\"Traveller's Song\" declares that he ruled the H\u00e6lsings; and even later\ntimes had to tell of Wade's _boat_, in which the exact allusion is\nunknown to us: the Scandinavian story makes him wade across the\nGroenasund, carrying his son across his shoulder. Perhaps our tradition\ngives a different version of this story.\"\n\nThis story may have something to do with the genesis of the legend of\nSt. Christopher bearing the infant Christ on his shoulders over a broad\nstream, a subject of one of the early medi\u00e6val pictures discovered some\ntime ago, on the removal of the whitewash from the walls of Gawsworth\nChurch, near Macclesfield. The historical anachronism in ascribing such\nan action to him may have resulted from the mere transference of it from\nthe pagan hero to the Christian saint. The original story seems to have\nbeen pretty familiar to the people as late as the fourteenth century.\nMr. Kemble says--\"Chaucer once or twice refers to this (Wade's _boat_)\nin such a way as to show that the expression was used in an obscene\nsense. Old women, he says, 'connen so moche craft in Wade's boat.' Again\nof Pandarus:\n\n    'He song, he plaied, he told a tale of Wade.'\n\n _Troil. Cressid._\n\n'In this there seems to be some allusion to what anatomists have termed\n_fossa navicularis_, though what immediate connection there could be\nwith the mythical Wade, now escapes us.'\"\n\nThe \"Traveller's Tale\" likewise refers to a chieftain named \"Billing,\"\nwho \"ruled the W\u00e6rns,\" and who, in Mr. Haigh's opinion, was likewise a\n\"probable associate of Hencgest.\" Mr. Haigh likewise identifies Whaley\nin Cheshire, Whalley in Northumberland, and Whalley in Lancashire, with\na chieftain described in the same poem as \"Hwala once the best.\" Dr.\nWhitaker, Mr. Baines, and others, however, derive Whalley from\n_Walalega_, \"Field of Wells.\"\n\nMr. Jno. R. Green (\"Making of England,\") says--\"In the star-strown track\nof the Milky Way, our fathers saw a road by which the hero-sons of\nWaetla marched across the sky, and poetry only hardened into prose when\nthey transferred the name of Watling Street to the great trackway which\npassed athwart the island they had won, from London to Chester. The\nstones of Weyland's Smithy still recall the days when the new settlers\ntold one another, on the conquered ground, the wondrous tale they had\nbrought with them from their German home, the tale of the godlike smith\nWeland, who forged the arms that none could blunt or break; just as they\ntold around Wadanbury and Wadanhl\u00e6w the strange tale of Wade and his\nboats. When men christened mere and tree with Scyld's name, at\nScyldsmere and Styldstreow, they must have been familiar with the story\nof the godlike child who came over the waters to found the royal line of\nthe Gwissas. So a name like Hnaef's-scylf was then a living part of\nEnglish mythology; and a name like Aylesbury may preserve the last trace\nof the legend told of Weland's brother, the sun-archer Egil.\"\n\nAlthough we possess but little information respecting the details of the\nfight, or of the political complications out of which it arose, we are,\nat least, perfectly certain of the locality of the struggle. In\naddition, the magnificent scenery by which it is surrounded, in which\ngrandeur and beauty are seen in the most harmonious combination, the\ninteresting arch\u00e6ological remains, and the numerous other historic\nassociations of the neighbourhood, including those connected with\nWhalley Abbey, Clitheroe Castle, Mytton, and Stonyhurst, give an\ninterest to the locality which is denied to the sites of many\nbattle-fields, the names of which have become \"household words,\" not\nmerely with one nation or people, but with all the so-called civilised\nsection of mankind.\n\nOne of the tumuli to which I have referred was partially opened by Dr.\nT. D. Whitaker, the historian of Whalley. But, as in his day Anglo-Saxon\nantiquities were very little sought after and, consequently, very\nimperfectly understood, his labours were productive of nothing but\nnegative results. Canon Raines, however, in a note to his edition of the\n\"Notitia Cestriensis,\" published by the Chetham Society, says--\"In the\nyear 1836, as Thomas Hubbertsty, the farmer at Brockhall, was removing a\nlarge mound of earth in Brockhall Eases, about five hundred yards from\nthe bank of the Ribble, on the left of the road leading from the house,\nhe discovered a Kist-vaen, formed of rude stones, containing some human\nbones and the rusty remains of some spear-heads of iron. The whole\ncrumbled to dust on exposure to the air. Tradition has uniformly\nrecorded that a battle was fought about Langho, Elker and Buckfoot,\nnear the Ribble; and a tumulus was opened within two hundred yards of a\nford of the Ribble (now called Bullasey-ford), one of the very few\npoints for miles where that river could be crossed. The late Dr.\nWhitaker repeatedly, but in vain, searched for remains of this battle,\nas he appears to have erroneously concluded that the scene of it was\nhigher up the river, near Hacking Hall, at the junction of the Calder\nand the Ribble.\"\n\nDr. Whitaker does not appear to have noticed all the tumuli in the\nneighbourhood. In his \"History of Whalley\" he says--\"Of this great\nbattle there are no remains, unless _a large tumulus_ near Hacking Hall,\nand in the immediate vicinity of Langho, be supposed to cover the\nremains of Alric, or some other chieftain among the slain.\" The site of\nthe tumulus, on the left bank, or south-east side of the Ribble, is\nmarked on the Ordnance map. It is scarcely three quarters of a mile from\nHacking Hall, and rather more than a mile from Langho chapel. No other\ntumulus is noticed by the Ordnance surveyors on the south-east side of\nthe river.\n\nCanon Raines states that the \"large mound\" removed by Thomas Hubbertsty,\nin 1836, was situated \"about five hundred yards from the bank of the\nRibble,\" and that the tumulus that had been previously opened was only\ntwo hundred yards distant from that stream. The \"large mound\" of Canon\nRaines, removed in 1836, in which remains were found, seems to have been\na smaller affair than the other tumuli. This is affirmed by Mr. Abram,\nin a very able paper on the history of the township of Billington, in\nthe Lancashire and Cheshire Historical Society's Transactions, otherwise\nhe says, \"the farmer would hardly have undertaken to level it.\" The\ntumuli on the right bank or north-west side of the river are named\n\"lowes\" on the six-inch Ordnance map, and \"mounds\" on the smaller one.\nThe former name is evidently the Anglo-Saxon _hl\u0153w_, a conical hill or a\nsepulchral mound, or tumulus, in the latter sense a synonym of _beorh_\nor _bearw_, a barrow. Although these large tumuli are on the north-west\nside of the river, the nearest is scarcely half a mile distant from the\nsite of the removed one near Bullasey-ford on the south-east.\n\nThere is some confusion in the various descriptions of these mounds. Mr.\nAbram says, referring to the large tumulus called the \"Lowe\" on the\nnorth-west side of the Ribble--\"Into this mound Whitaker had some\nexcavation made about the year 1815, but he found the work heavy and\ngave it up without reaching the centre of the tumulus, where the relics\nof sepulture might be expected to be found.\" As Dr. Whitaker expressly\nsays, he saw no remains of the battle except \"a large tumulus near\nHacking Hall,\" he must not only have been ignorant of the character of\nits immediate neighbour, as well as of the one on the Langho side of the\nriver, near Bullasey-ford, if this \"lowe\" was the mound he but partially\ndisturbed. This can scarcely be the tumulus referred to by Canon Raines\nif the distance (two hundred yards) from the river be correct. Neither\ncan the five hundred yards distance of Mr. Hubbertsty's mound\nbe reconciled with the site of the tumulus at Brockhall, near\nBullasey-ford. Perhaps his figures have been accidently transposed. I\nhad previously laboured under an impression that Hubbertsty had merely\ncompletely cleared away the mound but imperfectly excavated by Dr.\nWhitaker.\n\nBeing anxious to arrive at some more definite knowledge respecting these\n\"lowes\" or \"mounds,\" on the ninth of Nov., 1876, I visited the locality,\nand by the aid of Mr. Parkinson, the present tenant of Brockhall, I was\nenabled to make a far more detailed inspection of the battle-field than\non a hurried visit about twenty years previously. Mr. Parkinson pointed\nout the site of the tumulus removed by Mr. Hubbertsty in 1836. Nothing\nof it, of course, now remains. He said that it was the only mound of the\nkind he had ever heard of on the Langho side of the Ribble. He, however,\npointed out a curious circular agger, about five or six feet broad and a\ncouple of feet high, which enclosed a level area some sixteen or\nseventeen yards in diameter. It is evidently an artificial work, but\nwithout additional evidence it is impossible to say, with any reasonable\ndegree of probability, by whom it was constructed, or to what use it was\noriginally applied. On the steep promontory called \"Brockhole Wood-end,\"\nMr. Parkinson called my attention to curious masses of cemented sand and\npebble stones, which some persons regarded as artificial grout, that had\noriginally formed part of the massive masonry of an ancient building,\nthe foundations of which had been undermined by the falling in of the\nearth in consequence of the erosive action of the flood water of\nthe Ribble at the base of the cliff. This, however, I found, on\nexamination, to be erroneous. The \"grout\" in question is a geological\nphenomenon, a kind of conglomerate or breccia, formed by the percolation\nof rain water, charged with carbonic acid and lime, through the mass of\nglacial or boulder \"till\" and its sandy and pebbly contents. The \"till\"\ncontains limestones brought by ice from both the Ribble and the Hodder\nvalleys. The phenomenon is a common one to geologists, and the\n\"concrete\" at \"Brockhole Wood-end\" is an excellent example of it. On\ngazing across the river at the larger \"lowe\" of the six-inch Ordnance\nmap, Mr. Parkinson remarked that it appeared to him to be what is termed\nby geologists an outlier of the boulder deposits on each side of the\nvalley, and therefore, not an artificial mound. He pointed out that the\nflood waters of the Ribble, Hodder, and Calder met in the plain, and\nwhen the \"till\" was excavated by a kind of circular motion of the\ncombined waters, which the present appearance of the valley indicates,\nthe land situated in the centre or vortex would the longer resist the\nabrading action, and eventually, as the passage of the currents became\nenlarged, remain a surviving outlier of the general mass of glacial\ndeposit. On passing the river in the ferry-boat, and, by the aid of a\npickaxe, exposing the material of which this mound is formed, I\nconfessed that I could detect no difference in its character or\nstructure from that of the neighbouring geological deposits. Still, as\nthe mound, if artificial, must have been constructed from the boulder\nclay and its unstratified contents, this is not surprising. It is,\nhowever, impossible to solve this problem without a much more searching\ninvestigation. Even if a mound existed at the time the battle was\nfought, nothing is more probable than that it would be utilised by the\nvictors in the interment of their honoured dead. The second and\nsmaller mound seems very like an artificial one; but this cannot be\nsatisfactorily affirmed without more complete investigation. Both mounds\nhave been partially opened near their summits, but with only negative\nresults, as might have been anticipated, as the Christian Anglo-Saxons\nin such cases buried the body in the earth, and afterwards heaped the\ntumulus or barrow above it, as a monument to the memory of the deceased\nwarrior or warriors. This mode of interment had been adopted in the\ninstance of the tumulus removed by Mr. Hubbertsty in 1836. Interesting\nresults, both to geologists and arch\u00e6ologists, may, therefore, be\nanticipated from a thorough examination of the contents of these\nremarkable \"lowes\" or \"mounds;\" but, as some expense would be attendant\nthereupon, they may yet, for some time, remain an interesting puzzle,\nboth to the learned and the unlearned in such matters. They are situated\nin the midst of the level alluvial plain. The largest is nearly twenty\nfeet high, and forms a prominent object.\n\nWhen I first visited the locality I was much amused at the rough and\nready way in which some of the country people accounted for their\nconstruction, or rather the object thereof. They had seen sheep, when\nthe Ribble valley was flooded, mount on the top of them for safety, and\nthey innocently concluded that these historic monuments, mementoes of\ndeadly civil strife during the eighth century, or of the glacial period\nof geologists, had been erected by some benevolent or thrifty ancestor\nof the owner of the soil for the especial accommodation of ovine\nrefugees during the deluges to which the low-lying land on the margin of\nthe river is occasionally subjected.\n\nIt is, of course, at the present time, impossible to define the extent\nof ground covered by the contending armies during the conflict, or to\ngive even a satisfactory outline of the general features of the battle.\nThe Roman road, the seventh iter of Richard of Cirencester, which leads\nfrom the Wyre (the Portus Setantiorum of Ptolemy), by Preston and\nRibchester to York, passed through the township of Billington, crossed\nthe Calder near the present \"Potter's Ford,\" a little above its junction\nwith the Ribble, and proceeded a little south of Clitheroe and north of\nPendle-hill, by Standen Hall, and Worston, in Lancashire, and Downham,\ninto Yorkshire. Mr. Abram seems to think that the battle was most\nprobably fought on this line of road. He says--\"Eardulf encountered the\ninsurgent army on the extreme verge of his kingdom (for it seems certain\nthat the country south of the Ribble was then a part, not of the Saxon\nkingdom of Northumbria, but that of Mercia). Wada and his army had\nprobably been driven upon the neutral territory before the decisive\nbattle could be forced upon him.\"\n\nThis notion that the Ribble and not the Mersey was the southern boundary\nof Northumbria in the earlier period of the Heptarchy, was first\npropounded by Dr. Whitaker, but upon very slight evidence. It is\nsufficient here to say that the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, under the date\n923, expressly states that King Edward sent a force of Mercians to take\npossession of \"Mameceastre (Manchester), _in Northumbria_, and repair\nand man it.\" Again, the same chronicle, when referring to this very\nbattle, A.D. 798, expressly states that it took place \"at Whalley, _in\nthe land of the Northumbrians_.\" Against such evidence, Dr. Whitaker's\nmistaken dialectal argument, as well as that based on the extent of the\nepiscopal see of Lichfield, at some period of the Heptarchy, is utterly\nvalueless. His authority is the ancient document entitled \"De Statu\nBlackborneshire,\" supposed to have been written in the fourteenth\ncentury by John Lindeley, Abbot of Whalley. Some notion of the value of\nthis monkish compilation, with reference to the earlier history of the\ndistrict, may be gathered from the fact that the author makes Augustine,\nand not Paulinus, the missionary who planted Christianity amongst the\nNorthumbrian Angles. Dr. Whitaker likewise contends that the Ribble is\nthe _dialectic_ boundary between the two kingdoms. My own observation,\nhowever, leads me to a very different conclusion. To my ear the change\nis by no means so distinctly marked on the north and south sides of the\nRibble as it is on the north and south banks of the Mersey. The swampy\ncountry between the two rivers would rather seem to have been a kind of\n\"march\" or \"debateable ground,\" during the earlier portion of the\nAnglo-Saxon and Danish periods, districts in it being sometimes governed\nby tributary British chieftains under both Northumbrian and Mercian\nkings as the fortune of war from time to time prevailed. Lancashire is\nnot referred to as a county till the middle of the twelfth century. The\nname is never mentioned in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle. As we find the\n\"Lands between the Ribble and the Mersey\" are surveyed with those of\nCheshire, in the Domesday book, it seems highly probable that they\nformed a part of Leofric's earldom of Mercia, at the time of the Norman\nconquest. Consequently it is to the latter and not to the earlier\nportion of the Anglo-Saxon period that the Ribble formed the southern\nboundary of the _earldom_ of Northumbria, rather than of the earlier\nindependent _kingdom_.\n\nMr. J. R. Green (\"Making of England,\") says--\"The first missionaries to\nthe Englishmen, strangers in a heathen land, attached themselves\nnecessarily to the courts of the kings, who were their earliest\nconverts, and whose conversion was generally followed by that of their\npeople. The English bishops were thus at first royal chaplains, and\ntheir diocese was naturally nothing but the kingdom. The kingdom of Kent\nbecame the diocese of Canterbury, and the kingdom of Northumbria became\nthe diocese of York. So absolutely was this the case that the diocese\ngrew or shrank with the growth or shrinking of the realm which it\nspiritually represented, and a bishop of Wessex or of Mercia found the\nlimits of his see widened or cut short by the triumphs of Wolfhere or of\nIne. In this way two realms, which are all but forgotten, are\ncommemorated in the limits of existing sees. That of Rochester\nrepresented, till of late, an obscure kingdom of West Kent, and the\nfrontier of the original kingdom of Mercia might be recovered by\nfollowing the map of the ancient bishopric of Lichfield.\"\n\nAfter describing in detail some of the subdivisions made by Archbishop\nTheodore (A.D. 669-672), he adds--\"The see of Lichfield thus returned to\nits original form of a see of the Mercians proper, though its bounds on\nthe westward now embraced much of the upper Severn valley, with Cheshire\nand the lands northward to the Mersey.\"\n\nNotwithstanding this error with regard to the southern boundary of\nNorthumbria at that period, the Roman road, in all probability, was\nutilised by the contending forces, and some portion of the main battle\nwas, doubtless, fought in its immediate vicinity. On the other hand, it\nis equally probable, as the two larger tumuli are situated on the\nnorth-west bank of the Ribble, that the chief conflict occurred in their\nneighbourhood. On this hypothesis, Wada and his allies, on leaving\nWaddington, crossed the Hodder, at the ford nearest its mouth, met the\nKing's army on the banks of the Ribble, and the possession of\nBullasey-ford was the immediate object of the encounter in which the\nrebellious chieftain was discomfited. Or the route may have been\nreversed. Wada may have crossed the Ribble, at the Bungerley\n\"hyppyngstones,\" to the north-west of Clitheroe, or the Edisford, to the\nsouth-west, and after penetrating the southern portion of the present\ncounty, had to fall back before the advance of the King's army, and,\nunable to retrace his steps he made for the nearer ford at Bullasey,\nwhere he was defeated and pursued across the river. As the slaughter is\ngenerally greater when a discomfited enemy is routed, perhaps the two\nlarge tumuli, named \"lowes,\" mark the spot where the greatest carnage\nensued. This, however, of course, is merely conjecture. Its value cannot\nbe tested unless a thorough investigation of the contents of these huge\nmounds should throw additional light upon the subject.\n\nThe good fortune of King Eardulf deserted him on a future occasion. The\nAnglo-Saxon Chronicle says--\"A.D. 806. This year the moon was eclipsed\nin the Kalends of September; and Eardulf, King of the Northhumbrians,\nwas driven from his kingdom.... Also in the same year, on the 2nd before\nthe Nones of June, a cross appeared in the moon on a Wednesday at dawn;\nand afterwards in this year, on the 3rd before the Kalends of September,\na wonderful circle was seen about the sun.\" This is the last we hear of\nthe victor of Billangahoh, and the manner of his exit from the historic\nstage would seem to indicate that his rule, like that of his\npredecessor, had become so intolerable that further revolts ensued, and\nthat Wada's successors, whoever they may have been, being successful in\ntheir contumacy, would be regarded, not as traitors, but as \"saviours of\ntheir country.\" Truly, in struggles of this character, in all ages,\nsuccessful \"rebels,\" writing their own history, are ever lauded as\nheroes or patriots, while discomfited rulers are, with equal verity,\ndenounced as tyrants and enemies of the common weal.\n\nA little higher up the Ribble than its junction with the Hodder, and\nabout a mile below the venerable ruin of the keep of Clitheroe Castle,\nthe ancient stronghold of the De Lacies, is a handsome modern bridge,\nnamed Edisford or Eadsford, to which I have previously referred. The\ncountry people, however, call it \"Itch-uth Bridge,\" pronouncing the\nlatter syllable as in Cuthburt.\n\nJohannes, Prior of Hagulstald, records that in this neighbourhood, in\nthe year 1138, one William, the son of the bastard brother of David,\nking of Scotland, when engaged on a foray into England, was gallantly\nencountered by a small band, near Clitheroe, but, being overpowered by\nnumbers, the Lancashire men sustained a slight defeat, and the Scots\ntook a considerable number of prisoners. The monkish chronicler calls\nthe northern assailants \"Picts and Scots,\" and adds that they with\ndifficulty held their own till the fight had lasted three hours.\nTradition has preserved both the memory and the site of this conflict.\nMr. Edward Baines says:--\"Vestiges of this sanguinary engagement have\nbeen found at Edisford Bridge, and along the banks of the Ribble, during\nsuccessive ages up to the present time.\"\n\nThe \"Bashall-brook,\" after passing \"Bashall Hall,\" enters the Ribble a\nlittle above Edisford Bridge. This is the stream referred to by Mr.\nHaigh,[29] as the \"Bassus\" of Nennius, and the site of one of the\nArthurian victories which attended Colgrin's flight to York, after his\ndefeat on the Douglas, near Wigan. I have, however, never heard of any\nlegend or tradition which referred to a battle in the neighbourhood,\nexcept the one recorded by the Prior of Hagulstald.\n\nNear the bridge above Clitheroe may yet be seen the ancient\n\"hyppyngstones\" to which I have previously referred, and by means of\nwhich the river was crossed before the erection of the present viaduct.\nThese \"hyppyngstones\" have at least one mournful historical association.\nAfter the fatal battle of Hexham, in the year 1464, the unfortunate\nHenry the Sixth, the defeated son of the renowned victor at Agincourt,\nwas for a time concealed at Bolton-in-Bolland and Waddington Halls. What\ntranspired is best told in the words of the old chronicler:--\n\n\"Also the same yere, Kinge Henry was taken byside a howse of religione\n[_i.e._, Whalley Abbey] in Lancashyre, by the mene of a blacke monke of\nAbyngtone, in a wode called Cletherwode, beside Bungerley hyppyngstones,\nby Thomas Talbott, of Bashalle, and Jhon Talbott, his cosyne, of\nColebury [_i.e._, Salesbury, near Ribchester], with other moo; which\ndiscryvide (him) beynge at his dynere at Waddington Hall; and [he was]\ncarryed to London on horsebacke, and his legges bound to the\nstyropes.\"[30]\n\nMr. J. G. Nichols (Notes and Queries, vol 2., p. 229), says--\"Waddington\nbelonged to Sir John Tempest, of Bracewell, who was the father-in-law to\nThomas Talbot. Both Sir John Tempest and Sir James Harrington, of\nBrierley, near Barnsley, were concerned in the king's capture, and each\nreceived one hundred marks reward, but the fact of Sir Thomas Talbot\nbeing the chief actor, is shown by his having received the large sum of\n\u00a3100.\" In addition to his one hundred marks, Sir James Harrington\nreceived from Edward IV. large grants of land, forfeited by Richard\nTunstell, and other \"rebels,\" \"for his services in taking prisoner, and\nwithholding as such, in diligence and valour, his enemy, Henry, lately\ncalled Henry VI.\" Mr. Baines says Sir John Talbot likewise received, \"as\na reward for his perfidy, a grant of twenty marks a year, from Edward\nIV., confirmed by his successor, Richard III., and made payable out of\nthe revenues of the county palatine of Lancaster.\"\n\nIn his \"History of Craven,\" Dr. Whitaker gives engravings of the\nunfortunate monarch's boots, gloves, and a spoon, which were preserved\nat Bolton Hall, in Bolland, Yorkshire, then the seat of Sir Ralph\nPudsey, who married a daughter of Sir Thomas Tunstell. I understand\nthese relics of the unfortunate king have been since removed to Hornby\nCastle, Lancashire. The \"Old Hall\" at Waddington, which has been\nconverted into a farmhouse, yet presents some massive masonry, and a\nfield in the neighbourhood still retains the name of \"King Henry's\nmeadow.\"\n\nThe fate of the unhappy monarch is too well known to necessitate further\nreference here.\n\nThe neighbourhood of Whalley was the scene of a relatively more recent\ncombat, of some local importance. During the civil war between Charles\nI. and his Parliament, the Earl of Derby advanced, in 1643, from\nPreston, to operate in the hundred of Blackburn. One of the \"Civil War\nTracts,\" edited by Ormerod, and published by the Chetham Society,\nsays:--\"The Earl of Derby, the Lord Molineux, Sir Gilbert Hoghton,\nColonel Tildesley, with all the other great papists in the county,\nissued out of Preston, and on Wednesday now came to Ribchester, with\neleven troops of horse, 700 foot, and an infinite number of clubmen, in\nall conceived to be 5,000.\" Colonels Ashton and Shuttleworth opposed\nthem with some regular troops, and a body of peasantry and militia,\nhastily levied. A regular engagement, or rather a running fight, took\nplace between Whalley and Salesbury, in which the Earl was defeated and\npursued to Ribchester. This success appears to have been the precursor\nof the subsequent declension of the Earl of Derby's military power in\nthe county. It was judged to be of so much importance at the time by the\n\"Roundheads,\" that a day of thanksgiving was set apart for the victory\nby order of Parliament.\n\nThe ruin of Clitheroe Castle, on its well-wooded limestone eminence\noverlooking the town, forms a picturesque object in the beautiful valley\nof the Ribble. I remember well, in my early boyhood, being seriously\ninformed that the venerable feudal stronghold of the De Lacies was\nbattered into ruin by no less a personage than the redoubtable Oliver\nCromwell. The truth of this tradition was implicitly believed by me till\nsome slight study of Lancashire history, and a special visit to the\nlocality, threw serious doubt upon it. I have likewise a distinct\nrecollection of the consternation I caused amongst some aged friends,\nafter a careful inspection of the ruined keep, by my informing them that\nif, as the tradition asserted, Cromwell had placed his cannon on \"Salt\nHill,\" about a mile to the east of the fortress, the said ordnance must\nhave possessed some of the marvellous property ascribed to the Hibernian\nweapon, which, on occasion, could \"shoot round a corner,\" the wall of\nthe keep presenting the largest amount of superficial damage facing\ndirectly west. This dilapidated aspect had, in my hearing, often been\nattributed to the pounding the wall had received from Oliver's cannon. A\ncareful examination, however, satisfied me that the western face of the\nstructure was simply most weather-worn, on account of the lengthened\naction of the prevailing south-westerly winds. Again, \"Salt Hill\" was\ntoo far distant for the eight-pounder field pieces of the parliamentary\narmy to make any serious impression on the massive walls.[31] But\ntradition is \"tough\" indeed, and especially if an element of\nsuperstition or partizan zeal be embedded in it. Of course, my critics\nhad not the slightest objection to allow that there might possibly be\nsome mistake with regard to the site of his guns, but \"everybody knew\nthat Cromwell did batter the castle into ruin,\" notwithstanding; and I\nwas frankly told that nobody thanked me for my _mischievous_ endeavour\nto undermine people's faith in the well-known legend!\n\nCromwell must certainly have _seen_ Clitheroe Castle on his memorable\nforced march from Gisburne to Stonyhurst Hall, on August 16th, 1648, the\nday previous to his decisive victory over the Marquis of Langdale, on\nRibbleton Moor, and the Duke of Hamilton at Preston and the \"Pass of the\nRibble.\" But there are two good and sufficient reasons why he did not\nstay to expend his gunpowder on the fortress. In the first place, he had\nnot time, having important business on hand that demanded the utmost\nexpedition. In the second place, the castle was garrisoned by a portion\nof the Lancashire Militia, who held the stronghold for the Parliament,\nand Cromwell was not the man to amuse himself by bombarding his friends\non the eve of a great, and, as it proved, a decisive battle.\n\nIn point of fact, the castle remained intact, till the end of the civil\nwar, when the only recorded instance of its ever having been even\nseriously threatened with a siege, occurred. An ordinance, disbanding\nthe militia generally throughout the country, did not, it seems, meet\nwith the approval of the Puritan warriors who held possession of the\nClitheroe fortress, and who, instigated, it was said, by clerical\nadvisers, \"professed for the Covenant,\" and, in the first instance,\nflatly refused to disband until their terms were accepted. After the\nenforcement of the law, however, had been entrusted to Major-General\nLambert, these chivalrous champions of the Covenant thought, under such\ncircumstances, discretion was unquestionably the better part of valour,\nand they surrendered the castle to the Parliamentary general without\nfurther pressure. By an order of a Council of State, several of these\nstrongholds throughout the country were dismantled, with a view to\nprevent their military occupation in case of a renewal of the war, and\namongst those so doomed were the castles of Clitheroe and Greenhaugh, in\nthe county of Lancaster. Thus ignominiously expires one element in the\npresumed historic truth of Cromwell's numerous castle and abbey\nbattering exploits, referred to at length in the first chapter of this\nwork, and on which the most remarkable and wide-spread legend of\n_modern_ and strictly historic times is based.\n\nA still more astounding instance of the appropriation of popular legends\nand famous names by localities that have no historical claims to them\nwhatever, is found in connection with the ancient castle at Bury,\nLancashire. Mr. Edward Baines says--\"In the civil wars which raged in\nLancashire in 1644, Bury Castle was battered by the Parliamentary army\nfrom an intrenchment called 'Castle-steads,' in the adjoining township\nof Walmersley; and from that period the overthrow of this, as well as of\na large proportion of other castles of the kingdom, may be dated.\" Mr.\nBaines gives no authority whatever for this astounding statement. He\nevidently merely repeats a well-known local tradition. It would have\nbeen worth the while of a local historian, one would think, to have made\nsome enquiry as to the history of the edifice at Bury during the century\nwhich had elapsed between Leland's reference to it, and the redoubtable\nexploit of the Parliamentary army in 1644. The earliest authentic record\nof the castle is no older than the reign of Henry VIII., but from the\nvery nature of the record it must have been in existence for a long time\npreviously. Leland, the \"king's antiquary,\" when travelling through the\ncountry \"in search of England's antiquities,\" _circa_ 1542-9, thus\nwrites about the place--\"Byri-on-Irwell, 4 or V. miles from Manchestre,\nbut a poore market. There is a Ruine of a Castel by the paroch chirch yn\nthe Towne. It longgid with the Towne sumetime to the Pilkentons, now to\nthe Erles of Darby. Pilkenton had a place hard by Pilkenton Park, 3\nmiles from Manchestre.\" Leland's distances are, of course, merely\nguesses. In this respect he is frequently in error. It is certain that\nthe de Bury family held land in the parish as recently as 1613, and we\nfind the manorial rights, at the time of the \"Wars of the Roses,\" were\nheld by the Pilkington family. Sir Thomas Pilkington, a devoted adherent\nto the fortunes of the House of York, obtained from Edward IV. a licence\nto \"kernel and embattle\" his manor-home at Stand, in Pilkington. It is\nnot, therefore, improbable that the Bury castle at this time ceased to\nbe a manorial residence, and gradually fell into the ruinous condition\nin which it was seen by Leland.\n\nDuring the time I was inspecting the excavation by the local\ncommissioners of the site of Bury castle, in October, 1865, I was\ncourteously permitted by Mr. J. Shaw, of that town, to copy a MS.,\nformerly the property of his late father, and, I understood, in that\ngentleman's handwriting. It is, however, dated \"Bury, April 13th, 1840,\"\nand signed \"T. Crompton,\" or \"Krompton,\" it is difficult to determine\nwhich. As the document may be said to embody all the \"traditional lore\"\nrespecting the subject under consideration, I give it entire:--\n\n\n\"BURY IN THE OLDEN TIME, OR THE SIEGE OF THE CASTLE, ETC.\n\n\"Bury Castle, supposed to be built in the reign of Richard II., in 1380.\nThe date when erected cannot be positively ascertained. The coin of the\nStuarts, etc., have been found in the foundations. The whole of the\ncastle was destroyed by the Parliamentary arms, in 1642-3, when the wars\nbetween Charles I. and Cromwell deluged poor England in the blood of her\nown children. Edward de Bury was attached to the unfortunate Charles's\ncause. He fell, with many others, a prey to the party spirit then raging\nso horribly in the land. The river Irwell passed by the north side of\nthe castle, and run by the north-east turret, the site of the castle,\nwhich forms a parallelogram, was about 11 roods square, and from the\nfoundation [the walls] seem to have been about two yards thick, with\nfour round towers, about 60 feet high each. A large stone has been found\nwhich belonged to the archway, with the arms of De Bury engraved\nthereon. This drama [_sic_] is principally taken from a legendary tale\nof Bury Castle. Cromwell's army (by Stanley) was placed on Bury Moor.\nThe cannon in an intrenchment at Castle Head [_sic_] on the Walmesley\nside of the river. Lord Strange arrayed his army of 20,000 for the Royal\ncause on Gallow's Hill, Tottington Side. The river opposite the Castle,\nbefore the course was altered, was about 100 to 120 yards wide.\"\n\nTraditionary lore, though on the whole generally founded on some\nfact or facts, which have become distorted, owing to their frequent\noral transmission by persons utterly ignorant of their original\nsignification, is scarcely ever to be relied on so far as individuals or\ndates are concerned. The stories do unquestionably attest the retention\nin the popular mind of something of import that took place in that vague\nperiod denominated the \"olden time,\" but not always accurately what that\n_something_ may have been. The Adam de Bury referred to in the document\nquoted is either a myth, or the name has reference to some earlier\nindividual interested in the castle at Bury. Indeed the family appears\nto have become extinct before the commencement of the civil wars\nreferred to. On this point the documentary evidence quoted by Mr. E.\nBaines is very conclusive. There can have been no \"Adam de Bury attached\nto the unfortunate Charles's cause,\" or his name would have appeared\namongst the Lancashire \"lords, knights, and gentlemen,\" who compounded\nwith the sequestration commissioners for their estates in 1646.\n\nCromwell's army could not have been placed on Bury Moor, by either\nStanley or anyone else, in 1642-3, as that general did not enter\nLancashire till 1648, and then his route lay by Stonyhurst, Preston,\nWigan, and Warrington. Lord Strange's \"army\" of 20,000 men is but\nanother form of expression for the public meeting held on Bury Moor, the\nnumbers stated as attending which are doubtless much exaggerated. A\nsimilar meeting was held on Preston Moor, and, singularly enough,\nas it was a numerous one, the same authority employs the same\nterms--20,000--to express the fact. The placing of the cannon at Castle\nStead is another proof of the ignorance of some of the transmitters of\nthe tradition, the ordnance during Charles's time being useless at such\na distance.\n\nThe statement in Mr. Shaw's document that \"coin of the Stuarts, etc.,\nhave been found in the foundations,\" is valueless, inasmuch as until the\nexcavations in 1865, the soil about the _foundations_ does not appear to\nhave been disturbed; and yet above the original surface, remains were\nfound of various relatively modern dates, as might have been\nanticipated.\n\nI have said there is generally some germ of truth at the bottom of this\nclass of legendary stories. In this case it is not only possible but\nhighly probable, that older traditions having reference to the \"Wars of\nthe Roses,\" may have been confounded with more recent events. This is by\nno means an uncommon occurrence, as I have previously contended.\nSingularly enough, Mr. Baines laments the lack of historical documents\nrelating to Lancashire during this eventful period, and which he\nattributes to the wilful destruction to which they were subjected by the\npartizans of both the contending houses. The only historical event of\nany public interest recorded in connection with the bloody struggle for\nthe crown of England between the Yorkists and the Lancastrians,\nrelates to the capture of the unfortunate Henry VI. at \"Bungerley\nhyppyngstones,\" previously referred to. It is therefore not improbable\nthat some local events, lost to history, may have survived in the\nmutilated form in which tradition presents them at the present day,\nalthough their strictly historical significance is lost, and, what is\nworse, flagrant error has usurped its place in the popular mind.\n\nIt does not appear, on the authority of any trustworthy evidence, that\nCromwell ever visited Lancashire, at least in a military capacity,\nexcept on the occasion of his great victory over Langdale and Hamilton\nin 1648. Of his movements immediately preceding that event, we have his\nown statement in a dispatch addressed to \"The Honourable William\nLenthall, Esquire, Speaker of the House of Commons.\" He says--\"Hearing\nthat the enemy was advanced with their army into Lancashire, we marched\nthe next day, being the 13th of this instant August, to Otley (_having\ncast off our train_, and sent it to Knaresborough, because of the\ndifficulty of marching therewith through Craven, and to the end that we\nmight _with more expedition_ attend the enemy's motion): and on the 14th\nto Skipton; the 15th to Gisburne; the 16th to Hodder Bridge,\nover Ribble; where we held a council of war, at which we had in\nconsideration, whether we should march to Whalley that night, and so on,\nto interpose between the enemy and his further progress into Lancashire,\nand so southward,--which we had some advertisement the enemy intended,\nand [we are] since confirmed that they intended for London itself: or\nwhether to march immediately over the said Bridge, there being no other\nbetwixt that and Preston, and there engage the enemy,--who we did\nbelieve would stand his ground, because we had information that the\nIrish forces under Munro lately come out of Ireland, which consisted of\ntwelve hundred horse and fifteen hundred foot, were on their march\ntowards Lancashire to join them. It was thought that to engage the enemy\nto fight was our business; and the reason aforesaid giving us hopes that\nour marching on the north side of Ribble would effect it, it was\nresolved we should march over the bridge, which accordingly we did, and\nthat night quartered the whole army in the field by Stonyhurst Hall,\nbeing Mr. Sherburn's house, a place nine miles distant from Preston.[32]\nVery early the next morning we marched towards Preston, having\nintelligence that the enemy was drawing together thereabouts from all\nhis out quarters.\"\n\nAt first sight it appears that Cromwell refers to some bridge which\nspanned the river Ribble, and named Hodder Bridge. This, however, is not\nthe case. By the word \"over\" he means _beyond_, that is they passed over\nthe Ribble to a bridge spanning the Hodder. Stonyhurst can be approached\nfrom the east by two bridges over this stream called the \"upper\" and the\n\"lower.\" Both have been superseded by new structures, but some\npicturesque ruins of their predecessors yet remain. In a note at page\n187, \"History of Preston and its Environs,\" I say--\"As Cromwell's army\nadvanced by way of Gisburn he would _necessarily_ pass through\nWaddington to the higher bridge, over the river Hodder, on his route to\nStonyhurst.\" In this case he could ford the Ribble near Salley Abbey a\nfew miles above Clitheroe, or at the Bungerley \"hyppyngstones,\" nearer\nthe town. From Cromwell's slight reference to Clitheroe, and his\nuncertainty respecting the troops occupying the place, together with\nColonel Hodgson's reference to \"Waddey,\" both of which will be again\nreferred to, this is the most probable route. But from Gisburn, he _may_\nhave come direct to Clitheroe, and, passing through the town, have\ncrossed the Ribble at Eddisford a little below, and proceeded from\nthence to Stonyhurst by the \"lower bridge of Hodder.\"\n\nFurther, in the evening after the battle, in a letter to the \"Honourable\nCommittee of Lancashire, sitting at Manchester,\" dated \"Preston, 17th\nAugust, 1648,\" Cromwell expresses some uncertainty as to the forces\nstationed at Clitheroe, which evidently shows he made no stay in the\nimmediate neighbourhood. He says--\"We understand Colonel-General\nAshton's [forces] are at Whalley; we have seven troops of horse or\ndragoons that we _believe_ lie at Clitheroe. This night I have sent\norder to them expressly to march to Whalley, to join to these companies;\nthat so we may endeavour the ruin of the enemy.\"\n\nCaptain John Hodgson, of \"Coalley,\" near Halifax, whom Thomas\nCarlyle somewhat unceremoniously and unnecessarily describes as an\n\"honest-hearted, pudding-headed Yorkshire Puritan,\"[33] left behind him\na kind of journal, in which the details of the campaign are described\nwith great clearness and minuteness. Hodgson, as his conduct shows, was\nnot only an honest, but a brave and skilful soldier. He says--\"The next\nday we marched to Clitheroe; and at Waddey [Waddow, between Clitheroe\nand Waddington,] our forlorn of horse took Colonel Tempest and a party\nof horse, for an earnest of what was behind. That night we pitched our\ncamp at Stanyares Hall, a Papist's house, one Sherburne; and the next\nmorning a forlorn was drawn out of horse and foot; and, at Langridge\nChapel, our horse gleaned up a considerable parcel of the enemy, and\nfought them all the way until within a mile of Preston.\"\n\nIf any military action, of even trifling importance, had taken place at\nClitheroe it could not possibly have escaped the notice both of the\ngeneral and his detail-loving \"commander of the forlorn of foot.\" After\ndescribing the earlier portion of the struggle with Langdale's troops on\nRibbleton moor, he says--\"My captain sees me mounted[34] and orders me\nto ride up to my colonel, that was deeply engaged both in front and\nflank: and I did so, and there was nothing but fire and smoke; and I met\nMajor-General Lambert coming off on foot, who had been with his brother\nBright, and coming to him, I told him where his danger lay, on his left\nwing chiefly. He ordered me to fetch up the Lancashire regiment; and God\nbrought me off, both horse and myself. The bullets flew freely; then was\nthe heat of the battle that day. I came down to the muir, where I met\nwith Major Jackson, that belonged to Ashton's regiment, and about three\nhundred men were come up; and I ordered him to march, but he said he\nwould not, till his men were come up. A serjeant, belonging to them,\nasked me, where they should march? I shewed him the party he was to\nfight; and he, like a true bred Englishman, marched, and I caused the\nsoldiers to follow him; which presently fell upon the enemy, and losing\nthat wing the whole army gave ground and fled. Such valiant acts were\ndone by contemptible instruments: The major had been called to a council\nof war, but that he cried _peccavi_.\"\n\nThese Lancashire troops, under the command of \"Colonel-General\" Ashton,\nappear to have been brave fellows enough; but, like militia-men in\ngeneral, they appear to have had only lax notions of discipline. If not\nactually mutinous, they sometimes lacked the subordination essential to\nmilitary discipline. Their qualities Captain Hodgson sums up in the\nfollowing pithy sentences--\"The Lancashire foot were as stout men as\nwere in the world, and as brave firemen. I have often told them, they\nwere as good fighters, and as great plunderers, as ever went to a\nfield.\"\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER IV.\n\nATHELSTAN'S GREAT VICTORY AT BRUNANBURH, A.D. 937.,\n\nAND ITS CONNECTION WITH THE GREAT ANGLO-SAXON AND DANISH HOARD,\nDISCOVERED AT CUERDALE, IN 1840.\n\n\nHAROLD--(On the morn of the battle of Senlac or Hastings)--Our guardsmen\nhave slept well since we came in?\n\n LEOFWIN.--    *    *    They are up again\n           And chanting that old song of Brunanburg,\n           Where England conquer'd.\n\n _Tennyson's Harold._\n\n\nUpwards of three centuries had elapsed since the departure of the Roman\nlegions from Britain, and the presumedly first regularly organised\ninvasion of the island by the Angles, Saxons, and Jutes, when a new\nenemy of the same Teutonic blood and language appeared upon her shores.\nThe country had been but partially conquered by the first Teutonic\ninvaders. Picts and Scots held their own in Ireland and that portion of\nGreat Britain to the north of the estuaries of the Clyde and the Forth.\nThe Britons were not only masters in old Cornwall and in a more extended\nterritory than is now included in the present principality of Wales,\nbut they remained dominant in Strathclyde and Cumberland, which\ncomprised the lands on the western side of the island between the Clyde\nestuary and Morecambe Bay. Christianity had become the recognised\nreligious faith of both the Britons and the Teutons, but the newly\narrived kinsmen of the latter were still worshippers of Odin, and\nmarched to battle with his sacred \"totem\" or cognizance, the \"swart\nraven\" emblazoned on their banners. The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, under the\ndate 787, says--\"This year king Bertric took to wife Eadburga, King\nOffa's daughter; and in his days first came three ships of Northmen, out\nof H\u0153retha-land [Denmark.] And then the reve rode to the place, and\nwould have driven them to the king's town, because he knew not who they\nwere: and they there slew him. These were the first ships of Danish men\nwhich sought the land of the English nation.\" These three ships landed\nin Dorsetshire, and the gerefa or reve, named Beaduheard, of Dorchester,\nsupposed them to be contraband traders rather than pirates. This mistake\ncost him his life, as well as the lives of the whole of his retinue.\n\nThe conflicts which followed for many years afterwards between these\nheathen pirates and their Christianised kinsmen were characterised by\ndeeds of remorseless atrocity as well as of indomitable valour. Truly,\nevery now relatively civilized nation has had to pass through what may\nnot be inaptly termed its Bashi-Bazouk stage of culture before from it\nevolved its present more highly developed intellectual and moral human\nfeatures. Mr. Jno. R. Green (\"Short History of the English People,\")\nsums up the more prominent characteristics of this internecine strife as\nfollows:--\n\n\"The first sight of the Danes is as if the hand of the dial of history\nhad gone back three hundred years. The same Norwegian fiords, the same\nFrisian sandbanks, pour forth their pirate fleets as in the days of\nHengest and Cerdic. There is the same wild panic as the black boats of\nthe invaders strike inland along the river reaches, or moor round the\nriver islets, the same sights of horror--firing of homesteads, slaughter\nof men, women driven off to slavery or shame, children tossed on pikes\nor sold in the market-place--as when the English invaders attacked\nBritain. Christian priests were again slain at the altar by worshippers\nof Woden, for the Danes were still heathen. Letters, arts, religion,\ngovernments disappeared before these Northmen as before the Northmen of\nold. But when the wild burst of the storm was over, land, people,\ngovernment reappeared unchanged. England still remained England; the\nDanes sank quietly into the mass of those around them; and Woden yielded\nwithout a struggle to Christ. The secret of this difference between the\ntwo invasions was that the battle was no longer between men of different\nraces. It was no longer a fight between Briton and German, between\nEnglishmen and Welshmen. The Danes were the same people in blood and\nspeech with the people they attacked; and were in fact Englishmen\nbringing back to an England that had forgotten its origins the barbaric\nEngland of its pirate forefathers. Nowhere over Europe was the fight so\nfierce, because nowhere else were the combatants men of one blood and\none speech. But just for this reason the fusion of the Northmen with\ntheir foes was nowhere so peaceful and complete.\"\n\n[Illustration: MAP 3.]\n\nThe chief Danish ravages for nearly a century were confined to the\nsouthern coast and the coast of East Anglia. In 855, the Chronicle\nsays--\"The heathen men for the first time remained over winter in\nSheppey.\" In 867, it records that \"this year the Danish army went from\nEast Anglia over the mouth of the Humber to York, in North-humbria. And\nthere was much dissention among that people, and they had cast out their\nking Osbert, and had taken to themselves a king, \u00c6lla, not of royal\nblood; but late in the year they resolved that they would fight against\nthe army, and therefore they gathered a large force, and fought the army\nat the town of York, and stormed the town, and some of them got within\nand there was an excessive slaughter made of the North-humbrians, some\nwithin, some without, and the kings were both slain, and the remainder\nmade peace with the army.\"\n\nSome writers say that \u00c6lla was put to death with the most frightful\ntortures in revenge for similar cruel treatment, on his part, of his\nconquered foe, Ragnar Lodbrock, by the three sons of that somewhat\nmythical hero, named Halfden, Ingwar, and Hubba, who commanded the\nexpedition. The story runs that Ragnar, being taken prisoner by \u00c6lla,\nwas thrown into a dungeon, and bitten to death by vipers. This Ragnar,\nhowever, has proved so troublesome to northern scholars, that many\nregard him as a mythical personage, belonging to an earlier, or what\nthey term the \"heroic period.\" Scandinavian reliable _history_ only\ndates from about the middle of the ninth century. \u00c6lla usurped the\nNorthumbrian throne in the year 862, and Mr. J. A. Blackwell, in his\nedition of Mallett's \"Northern Antiquities,\" says \"Ragnar's death is\nplaced by Suhm, who has brought it down to the latest possible epoch, in\n794, and by other writers at a much earlier period.\" Some of the deeds\nattributed to this hero are unquestionably mythical. From the \"Death\nSong,\" said to have been written by him, but which Mr. Blackwell regards\nas more probably the composition of a Skald of the ninth century, we\nlearn that Ragnar succeeded, like Indra, Perseus, St. George, and other\nsolar heroes, in conquering a monster serpent that held in captivity\nThora, the daughter of a chieftain of Gothland, and received the lady in\nmarriage, as the reward of his prowess. In order to protect himself\nagainst the serpent's venom, it is said that Ragnar \"put on shaggy\ntrousers, from which circumstance he was afterwards called Lodbrok\n(_Shaggy-brogues_).\" Be this as it may, Ingwar, his presumed son, on the\ndefeat of \u00c6lla and Osbert, ascended the Northumbrian throne, and the\nDanes remained masters of the situation, until the partition of the\nkingdom between Godrun and Alfred the Great gave them peaceful\npossession of the territory. In the year 876, Halfden, a famous Danish\nviking, according to the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, \"appropriated the lands\nof Northumbria; and they thenceforth continued ploughing and tilling\nthem.\" Consequently, from this period, the great mass of the men of\nScandinavian blood in Northumbria must be regarded rather in the light\nof emigrants or settlers than roving pirates, although, doubtless, with\nthem the sword was always ready to supersede the ploughshare whenever\nthe arrival of a fleet of their buccaneering relatives on the coast\nafforded an opportunity for a successful foray on the lands of their\nAnglo-Saxon neighbours.\n\nOn the death of Edward the Elder, in the year 925, the \"right royal\"\ngrandson of the Great Alfred, the \"golden haired\" Athelstan, succeeded\nto the kingdom of Wessex and its dependencies, which included the whole\nof England south of the Humber and the Mersey, with the exception of\nCornwall and East Anglia, and the \"overlordship\" of the whole of the\nAnglo-Saxon and Danish rulers, as well as those of the Welsh and Scots,\nwhose kings rendered him homage and acknowledged him the legitimate\nsuccessor to his father Edward, whom they regarded as \"their Father,\nLord, and Protector.\" Edward the Elder was, at the time of his highest\nprosperity, unquestionably the most powerful \"Bretwalda\" or \"overlord\"\nthat had ruled in Britain since the departure of the Romans.\n\nSoon after Athelstan's succession, however, the kings of the present\nPrincipality, or North Wales, as the whole country from the Severn to\nthe Dee was then called, rebelled against the authority of the hated\nfair-haired Sassenach. Athelstan instantly attacked Edwall Voel, king of\nGwynnedd, and wrested the entire sovereignty of his dominion from him.\nHe, however, on the submission of the other Welsh princes, and their\nperformance of homage to him at his court held at Hereford, generously\nrestored it to him. Afterwards the country between the Severn and the\nWye were added to Mercia, and a heavy tribute was imposed on all the\nrevolted Welsh monarchs. Twenty pounds weight of gold and three hundred\npounds of silver were to be yearly paid into the treasury, or, as it was\nthen styled, the \"Hoard\" of the \"King of London.\" To this was to be\nadded an annual gift of twenty thousand beeves and the swiftest hounds\nand hawks that the country possessed.\n\nThe Cornish Britons, or West Welsh, as they were then termed, were\nafterwards subdued, and thus all Britain south of the Humber and the\nMersey again acknowledged Athelstan's supremacy or \"overlordship.\"\n\nIn the year 925, the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle informs us that Athelstan and\nSihtric (or Sigtryg), king of the North-humbrians, \"came together at\nTamworth, on the 3rd before the Kalends of February; and Athelstan gave\nhim his sister.\" But this marriage failed to secure the proposed future\nalliance between the Scandinavian and Anglo-Saxon sovereigns. The Dane,\nwho had embraced Christianity, relapsed into the faith of his\nforefathers and returned his wife to her former home. Sihtric's death,\nhowever, intervened between the repudiation of Queen Editha, who\nafterwards became Abbess of Tamworth, and the vengeance of Athelstan,\nwhich fell upon Anlaf and Godefrid, sons of Sihtric by a former\nmarriage. Anlaf fled to Ireland, on the east coast of which the Danes\nheld the supreme authority, and his brother sought refuge with\nConstantine, king of the Scots. Referring to these events the\nAnglo-Saxon Chronicle says--\"A. 926. This year fiery lights appeared in\nthe north part of the heavens. And Sihtric perished; and king Athelstan\nobtained the kingdom of the North-humbrians. And he ruled all the kings\nwho were in the island; first, Howel, king of the West-Welsh; and\nConstantine, king of the Scots; and Owen, king of the Monmouth people;\nand Aldred, son of Ealdulf, of Bambrough: and they confirmed the peace\nby pledge, and by oaths, at the place which is called Eamot, on the 4th\nbefore the Ides of July; and they renounced all idolatry, and after that\nsubmitted to him in peace.\"\n\nBut the peace was not of very long duration, for the king of the Scots\nraised the standard of revolt, and the old Chronicler, or perhaps a\nsuccessor, tells us that in the year 933, \"Athelstan went into Scotland,\nas well with a land army as with a fleet, and ravaged a great part of\nit.\" This defeat of the Scottish king for a time restored Athelstan's\ndominion, but the peace which followed was, four years afterwards,\nbroken by a powerful combination of Athelstan's enemies, which shook the\n\"overlordship\" of the English monarch to its foundation, and threatened\nthe safety of his inherited kingdoms. The Scots, the Cumbrian Britons,\nthe North and West Welsh, entered into a league with Anlaf of Dublin and\nthe Danish chiefs of Northumbria and their Scandinavian allies to lower\nthe prestige of the English monarch, and to seat the son of Sihtric on\nthe throne of his ancestors. This fierce conflict culminated in the\ngreat battle of Brunanburh, in the year 937, in which, after a\ndesperate two days' struggle, the confederate forces of his enemies were\nutterly routed, and Athelstan reigned supreme monarch to the end of his\nkingly career.\n\nThere is some difficulty in determining the exact date of this\ncelebrated engagement. Sharon-Turner gives it as 934. Worsaae in his\n\"Danes and Norwegians in England,\" says 937. Ethelwerd's Chronicle says\n939. Sharon-Turner refers to the fact that one MS. of the Anglo-Saxon\nChronicle gives the date 937, notwithstanding which he prefers 934. Dr.\nFreeman in his \"Old English History\" adheres to 937, which seems to be\nthe most probable date.\n\nWe find that British Christians, as on previous occasions, espoused the\ncause of the heathen Danes, rather than fraternize with their hated\nAnglo-Saxon rivals, the disciples of Augustine and Paulinus. Thus many\nelements combined to render this battle one of the bloodiest and most\ndestructive ever fought on British soil. The great struggle did not take\nplace immediately on the arrival of Anlaf and his allies. Athelstan's\ntwo governors, Gudrekir and Alfgeirr first confronted the invaders. The\nformer was slain and the latter fled to his sovereign, with the news of\ntheir discomfiture. Athelstan, with wise forethought, tried the effect\nof diplomacy, if only for the purpose of gaining sufficient time for the\nassembling of all his forces before staking his sovereignty upon the\nissue of a single battle.\n\nThe authorities, contemporary or nearly so, for the details of this\ndecisive campaign, although meagre in comparison with those of more\nrecent struggles, are nevertheless fuller than usual for the period. We\nhave the poem in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, a notice in Ethelwerd's\nChronicle, and some Scandinavian accounts, notably Egil's Saga.\nSharon-Turner, however, regards the northern authorities as not entitled\nto implicit reliance, as their great object was the laudation of Egil\nand Thorolf, Scandinavian mercenaries in the pay of Athelstan, who, they\ncontend, mainly contributed to the victory by the annihilation of the\n\"disorderly Irish\" contingent.\n\nAthelstan, when his diplomatic _finesse_ had answered his purpose,\nsuddenly appeared at Brunanburh, and pitched his camp in front of the\nenemy. It is related that Anlaf, taken by surprise, imitated Alfred's\nstratagem, and entered the royal camp in the disguise of a harper. He\nwas admitted into the presence of Athelstan, who was ever liberal in his\npatronage of poets and musicians, and the Danish king played, sang, and\ndanced before the assembled chieftains, at a banquet, in the enjoyment\nof which he found them engaged previously to the holding of a council of\nwar. On his dismissal a purse, filled with silver groats, was given to\nhim as a reward for his services. Anlaf's observant military eye had\ndetected the weakest point in his adversary's position, and the exact\nlocality in which the royal tent was pitched, and he determined to\nsurprise the camp by a sudden night attack, and either slay or carry off\nthe king a prisoner. One false step, however, robbed him of the\nadvantage his daring had gained. On leaving the enemy's lines, he was\nobserved by a sentinel, who had formerly served under him, to bury the\nking's gratuity, which he disdained to appropriate to other use, in a\nhole in the earth. This aroused the soldier's suspicion, and Athelstan\nwas informed of the circumstance. The king, in the first instance, was\ndisposed to treat the man somewhat harshly, and demanded why the\ninformation as to the identity of the pretended itinerant minstrel had\nnot been communicated to him before his departure. To this the faithful\nsoldier replied, \"Nay, by the same oath of fealty which binds me to\nthee, O king, was I once bound to Anlaf; and had I betrayed him, with\nequal justice mightest thou have expected treachery from me. But hear my\ncounsel. Whilst awaiting further reinforcements, take away thy tent from\nthe spot upon which it now stands, and thus mayest thou ward off the\nblow of thine enemy.\" This advice Athelstan followed, and shortly\nafterwards the Bishop of Sherborne arrived with his contingent, and\npitched his tent in the locality vacated by his royal master, which\ncircumstance cost him his life during the night surprise which followed.\nWe have Alfred's harper story on the authority of Ingulf and William of\nMalmesbury, the former of whom was born in 1030, and the latter in 1095\nor 1096, so that they were recording events which had transpired between\none and two centuries before their own adult experience. The Anlaf tale\nis too exact a counterpart of the one related about Alfred, not to\nsuggest doubt as to its veracity; or, if it be a veritable incident in\nthe life of the Scandinavian warrior, the doubt will have to be\ntransferred to the story related of his Saxon predecessor. It is not\nvery probable so transparent an artifice would succeed a second time,\nespecially when played upon such a clear-headed chieftain as Alfred's\ngrandson.[35] But, however Anlaf gained his information, the night the\nattack took place, Adils, a Welsh prince, detected the strategy of\nAthelstan. After the death of the Bishop of Sherborne, he and Hyngr (a\nchieftain described in Egil's Saga as a Welshman, but whose name,\nSharon-Turner thinks, sounds very like a Danish one), led the attack on\nthe main body of the English army. But Athelstan was prepared, and\nThorolf and Alfgeirr's detachments were instantly opposed to them.\nAlfgeirr was soon overpowered and fled, on perceiving which Thorolf\nthrew his shield behind him, and hewed his way with his heavy two-hand\nsword through the opposing mass until he reached the standard of Hyngr.\nA few moments decided the fate of that chieftain. Thorolf ordered Egil,\nthough weakened by the defeat and flight of Alfgeirr, to resist Adils,\nbut to be prepared to retreat to the cover of a neighbouring wood, if\nnecessary. Adils, mourning the death of his colleague, at length gave\nway, and the preliminary nocturnal combat ended. After a day's rest,[36]\nEgil led the van of the Anglo-Saxon army, and Thorolf opposed the\n\"irregular Irish,\" which formed part of Anlaf's own division, and\nextended to the wood previously mentioned. Turketal, the English\nchancellor, a man of stalwart proportions, who commanded the citizens of\nLondon, and Singin of Worcestershire, were opposed to Constantine, king\nof the Scots, while Athelstan, at the head of his West Saxons,\nconfronted Anlaf in person. Thorolf attempted to turn the enemies'\nflank, when Adils rushed from his ambush in the wood, and countered the\nmovement. Egils saw with dismay Thorolf's banner retreating. He knew by\nthis that he must have fallen; and, rushing to the spot, he rallied the\nscattered band, successfully renewed the attack, and, in Sharon-Turner's\nwords, \"sacrificed Adils to the manes of Thorolf.\" The Councillor\npierced the enemy's centre, heedless of the arrows and spears which\nfastened on his armour. Constantine and he met and fought hand to hand\nfor some time, and Singer slew the prince, his son, who fought valiantly\nby his father's side. This vigorous and successful onslaught produced a\npanic among the Scots, and correspondingly elated the English. In the\nmeanwhile Athelstan and his brother, Edmund, the Atheling, were engaged\nwith the main body of the enemy under Anlaf. The grandson of the Great\nAlfred and the presumed grandson of Radnor Lodbrog contended both for\ndominion and renown. In the midst of the fight Athelstan's sword-blade\nsnapped near the handle. Another was supplied to him, it was said, by\nmiraculous agency, which saved his life. At length the tremendous\nstruggle, which lasted throughout the day, was brought to a close by\nTurketal chasing the Scots from the battle-field, and turning Anlaf's\nflank. Immense slaughter ensued; the enemy's ranks began rapidly to\nthin; the English shouted \"victory!\" and Athelstan, profiting by the\nauspicious opportunity, ordered his banner to the front, and by a\ndetermined and well-directed onslaught, broke the enemy's now enfeebled\nranks. They fled in various directions, and, according to Egil's saga,\n\"the plain was filled with their bodies.\" Anlaf and his immediate\nfollowers narrowly escaped to their ships and embarked for Ireland.\nSharon-Turner says--\n\n\"Thus terminated this dangerous and important conflict. Its successful\nissue was of such consequence, that it raised Athelstan in the eyes of\nall Europe. The kings of the continent sought his friendship, and\nEngland began to assume a majestic port amid the other nations of the\nwest. Amongst the Anglo-Saxons it excited such rejoicings that not only\ntheir poets aspired to commemorate it, but the songs were so popular,\nthat one of them is inserted in the Saxon Chronicle as the best memorial\nof the event.\"\n\nThe following is Dr. Giles's literal rendering of this remarkable poem\ninto modern English:--\n\n    A. 937.--Here Athelstan, king,\n    of earls the lord,\n    of heroes the bracelet giver,\n    and his brother eke,\n    Edmund etheling,\n    life-long glory\n    in battle won\n    with edges of swords\n    near Brunanburh.\n    The board-walls they clove,\n    they hewed the war-lindens,\n\n    Hamora lafan'\n    offspring of Edward,\n    such was their noble nature\n    from their ancestors,\n    that they in battle oft\n    'gainst every foe\n    the land defended,\n    hoards and homes.\n    The foe they crushed,\n    the Scottish people\n    and the shipmen\n    fated fell.\n    The field 'd\u00e6niede'\n    with warriors' blood,\n    since the sun up\n    at morning tide--\n    mighty planet--\n    glided o'er grounds,\n    God's candle bright,\n    the eternal Lord's--\n    till the noble creature\n    sank to her settle.\n    There lay many a warrior\n    by javelins strewed;\n    northern men\n    over shield shot;\n    so the Scots, eke,\n    weary, war-sad.\n    West Saxons onwards\n    throughout the day,\n    in bands,\n    pursued the footsteps\n    of the loathed nations.\n    They hewed the fugitives\n    behind, amain,\n    with swords mill-sharp.\n    Mercians refused not\n    the hard hand-play\n    to any heroes\n    who, with Anlaf,\n    over the ocean,\n    in the ship's bosom,\n    this land sought\n    fated to the fight.\n    Five lay\n    on the battle-stead,\n    youthful kings,\n    by swords in slumber laid:\n    so seven, eke,\n    of Anlaf's earls;\n    of the army countless,\n    shipmen and Scots.\n    There was made flee\n    the North-men's chieftain,\n    by need constrained,\n    to the ship's prow\n    with a little band.\n    The bark drove afloat;\n    the king departed,\n    on the fallow flood\n    his life preserved.\n    So there, eke, the sage\n    came by flight\n    to his country north,\n    Constantine,\n    hoary warrior.\n    He had no cause to exult\n    in the communion of swords.\n    Here was his kindred band\n    of friends o'erthrown\n    on the folk-stead,\n    in battle slain;\n    and his son he left\n    on the slaughter-place\n    mangled with wounds,\n    young in the fight.\n    He had no cause to boast,\n    hero grizzly haired,\n    of the bill-clashing,\n    the old deceiver;\n    nor Anlaf the moor,\n    with the remnant of their armies;\n    they had no cause to laugh\n    that they in war's works\n    the better men were\n    in the battle-stead,\n    at the conflict of banners,\n    meeting of spears,\n    concourse of men,\n    traffic of weapons,\n    that they on the slaughter-field\n    with Edward's\n    offspring played.\n\n    The North-men departed\n    in their nailed barks--\n    bloody relic of darts--\n    on roaring ocean,\n    o'er the deep water,\n    Dublin to seek;\n    again Ireland\n    shamed in mind.\n\n    So, too, the brothers,\n    both together,\n    king and etheling,\n    their country sought,\n    West-Saxons' land,\n    in the war exulting.\n    They left behind them,\n    the corse to devour,\n    the sallowy kite\n    and the swarthy raven\n    with horned nib,\n    and the dusky 'pada,'\n    erne white-tailed,\n    the corse to enjoy,--\n    greedy war-hawk,\n    and the grey beast,\n    wolf of the wood.\n\n    Carnage greater has not been\n    in this island\n    ever yet\n    of people slain,\n    before this,\n    by edges of swords,\n    as the books say--\n    old writers--\n    since from the east hither\n    Angles and Saxons\n    came to land,--\n    o'er the broad seas\n    Britain sought,--\n    mighty war-smiths\n    the Welsh o'ercame;\n    earls most bold\n    this earth obtained.\n\nSome of the MSS. of the Chronicle have the following additional\nreference to the battle:--\n\n\"A. 937. This year King Athelstan and Edmund his brother led a force to\nBrunanburh, and there fought against Anlaf; and Christ helping, had the\nvictory; and they there slew five kings and seven earls.\"\n\nSimeon, of Durham, says one of these five monarchs was \"Eligenius, an\nunder-king of Deira,\" or the eastern portion of the then kingdom of\nNorthumbria.\n\nAthelstan died in 940, and, in the following year, the Chronicle says\nhis successor \"Edmund received king Anlaf at baptism.\" In 942, it\nsays--\"This year King Anlaf died.\" There were, however, two other\nchieftains of the same name, who flourished somewhat later.\n\nHistorians are scarcely, even at the present day, unanimous in their\nviews as to what monarch ought to be regarded as the first \"king of\nEngland.\" Some say Egbert; but his authority rarely if ever extended\nover the whole of the country now so named, and a very large proportion\nof it was merely a kind of nominal \"over lordship,\" which carried with\nit very little governing influence, and, such as it was, it was held on\na very precarious tenure. Others contend that the distinction belongs to\nAlfred the Great. Yet Alfred, though beloved by all the English-speaking\npeople in the land, was compelled to share the territory with his Danish\nrival, Gothrun. Sharon-Turner says--\"The truth seems to be that Alfred\nwas the first monarch of the _Anglo-Saxons_, but Athelstan was the first\nmonarch of _England_.\" He adds--\"After the battle of Brunanburh,\nAthelstan had no competitor; he was the _immediate Sovereign of all\nEngland_. He was even _nominal_ lord of Wales and Scotland.\" This seems\nto be the true solution of the query.\n\nIt is a most remarkable circumstance that the site of this great\nvictory, notwithstanding the magnitude of the contending armies and the\nimportance of its political and social results, was, until recently, at\nleast, absolutely unknown, and it cannot yet be said that the true\nlocality has been demonstrated with sufficient clearness to entirely\nremove all doubt. Many places have been suggested on the most frivolous\ngrounds. The question where is, or was, Brunanburh is still sounding in\nthe ear of the historical student, and echo merely answers \"Where?\" Yet\nI think I have made the nearest approach to the solution of this\nproblem, in the \"History of Preston and its Environs,\" that has yet been\nattempted, and further investigation enables me to add considerably to\nthe evidence there adduced.\n\nIt is, perhaps, necessary that some attempt should be made to determine\nthe cause or causes why the site of so important a victory, celebrated\nin the finest extant short poem in the Anglo-Saxon tongue, and so\nimportant in its political results, should have become lost both to the\nhistory and tradition of the English victors. At first sight there\nappears something singularly exceptionable in the fact. But a closer\ninspection of the details of what may be termed the Anglo-Saxon period\nof conflict with their Scandinavian enemies, Danish, Norwegian, or\nNorman-French, soon removes this impression, the sites of many other,\nalmost equally important struggles, and notoriously some of those in\nwhich the Great Alfred was engaged, having been subjected to similar\ndoubt, if not oblivion.\n\nIn the first place it must not be forgotten that after the death of\nAthelstan, the Danish invasions were renewed, and, after various\nsuccesses and defeats, the Scandinavian monarchs, Sweyn and Canute,\nbefore the end of the tenth century, ruled despotically over all\nEngland. Even the temporary restoration of the Anglo-Saxon dynastic\nelement, in the person of Edward the Confessor, in consequence of his\nNorman-French connection and early education, did little to remove the\npressure of the foreign yoke, in the provinces at least; and what\ninfluence it may have exerted was speedily eradicated by the decisive\nvictory of William the Norman, near Hastings, in the middle of the\nfollowing century. Conquest, in those days, meant subjugation to the\nextent of a deprivation of all rights--at least all political\nrights--and many social privileges, and absolute serfdom for the great\nmass of the population. Consequently it was the policy of the conquerors\nto ignore, and, as far as possible, enforce the ignorement of all past\nglorious achievements of the ancestors of the subjugated peoples.\nDoubtless, tradition would still, with its tenacious grasp, retain some\nrecollection of the great exploits of their forefathers, and, in secret,\nthe people would cherish their memory with a more intense love, on\naccount of the persecution to which its open expression would be\nsubjected. But in those days there were no printing presses, nor\njournalism, local or metropolitan. The people could not read, and even\nthe nobles, in the main, like old King Cole, in the song, because he\ncould afford to salary a secretary, \"scorned the fetters of the four and\ntwenty letters, and it saved them a vast deal of trouble.\" Now, these\nsecretaries were almost, if not entirely, ecclesiastics; and they were\nlikewise the only literary, or learned men, existing during the period\nto which I refer. These ecclesiastics, in different monasteries, kept\nrecords of the general events of the period in which they lived, of a\nvery meagre character, and devoted more time and space to matters\necclesiastical, as might reasonably be anticipated. Again, when the\nDanish and Norman warriors obtained the supreme power, it is easy to\nunderstand that the ecclesiastical domination was speedily transferred\nto their clerical _confreres_; and, of course, whatever obscurity rested\non the details of previous victories or glories of the subject race,\nwould be intensified rather than lessened, by any action of theirs, even\nsupposing (which is anything but probable), that they themselves\npossessed much authentic information respecting such events. Subsequent\nwriters, of course, dealt largely in mere conjecture, on the flimsiest\nof evidence; and, as they sometimes differ so widely from each other, or\nas they are so obscure in their topographical definitions and\nnomenclature, little is derivable from their labours of value to the\nmodern historian and antiquary. Consequently, although there are many\nreferences to the great battle itself, both in the several chronicles,\nthe poem to which I have referred, and in some Scandinavian sagas,\nwritten in honour of two of their warriors of the free-lance, or Dugal\nDalgetty class, who fought on the side of the English monarch, the site\nof the great conflict has remained doubtful to the present time.\n\nHenry of Huntingdon, who wrote in the earlier portion of the twelfth\ncentury, referring to the twelve presumed victories of Arthur, accounts\nfor the then loss of their sites in the following characteristic\nfashion--\"These battles and battle-fields are described by Gildas,\"\n[Nennius,] \"the historian, but in our times the places are unknown, the\nProvidence of God, we consider, having so ordered it that popular\napplause and flattery, and transitory glory, might be of no account.\"\n\nThe clerical historian seems to have thoroughly understood the motives\nof his predecessors in the destruction of the records of a heretical or\npagan race.\n\nMr. Daniel H. Haigh, in his \"Conquest of Britain by the Saxons,\"\nreferring to the absence of Runic inscriptions in the south of England,\nand their partial preservation in the Northumbrian kingdom, has the\nfollowing pertinent observations:--\n\n\"The first missionaries, St. Augustine and his brethren, used all their\nendeavours to destroy every monument of Runic antiquity, because runes\nhad been the means of pagan augury, and of preserving the memory of\npagan hymns and incantations; for, knowing how prone the common people\nwere to their ancient superstitions (of which even after the lapse of\ntwelve centuries many vestiges still remain), and how difficult it would\nbe to teach them to distinguish the use of a thing from its abuse, they\nfeared that their labours would be in vain so long as the monuments of\nancient superstition remained. So every Runic writing disappeared; and\nwe may well believe, that records which to us would be invaluable,\nperished in the general destruction. In the first instance S. Gregory\nhad commanded that everything connected with paganism should be\ndestroyed; but afterwards, in a letter to S. Milletus, he recommended\nthat the symbols only of paganism should be done away with, but that the\nsanctuaries should be consecrated and used as churches. These\ninstructions were in force when S. Paulinus evangelized Northumbria; and\nwe cannot doubt that the work of destruction would be effectively done\nunder the auspices of a prince whose police was so vigorous as we are\ninformed that Eadwine's was. But after his death, and the flight of S.\nPaulinus, the restoration of Christianity in Northumbria was effected by\nmissionaries of the Irish school, whose fathers in Ireland had pursued\nfrom the first a different policy, by allowing the memorials of\nantiquity to remain, and contenting themselves with consecrating\nthe monuments of paganism, and marking them with the symbols of\nChristianity. Under their auspices Runic writing was permitted, for we\ncan trace its use in Northumbria to the very times of S. Oswald, whilst\nevery vestige has disappeared of the Runic records of an earlier period.\nMercia received its Christianity from the Irish school of Lindisfarne,\nand we have runes on the coins of the first Christian kings, Peada and\n\u0152thelr\u00e6d.\"\n\nBut for the zealous labour of Archbishop Parker, in the sixteenth\ncentury, even few of the remaining Anglo-Saxon MSS. would have been\npreserved to the present day. John Bale, writing in 1549, says--\"A great\nnumber of them that purchased the monasteries reserved the books of\nthose libraries; some to scour their candlesticks, some to rub their\nboots, some they sold to grocers and soapsellers, some they sent over\nsea to the book-binders, not in small numbers, but at times whole ships\nfull, to the wondering of foreign nations.\" Religious and political\nrancour has too often consigned to destruction the archives and\nmonuments of hated rivals. Cardinal Ximines, somewhat earlier, committed\nto the flames an immense mass of valuable Arabic MSS. and, not long\nafterwards, Archbishop Zumarraga committed a similar act of insensate\nvandalism on the picture-written national archives of Mexico. Our\nmedi\u00e6val historians, indeed, have themselves much to answer for in this\ndirection. Strype says that Polydore Vergil, having, by licence from\nHenry VIII., when writing his history, procured many valuable books from\nvarious libraries in England, on its conclusion, piled \"those same books\ntogether, and set them all on a light fire.\"\n\nMr. Frederick Metcalf (\"Englishman and Scandinavian\") waxed wrath as he\ncontemplated the irreparable loss sustained through the ignorance and\nfanaticism of our forefathers. He exclaims--\"Cart loads of Old English\nmythical and heroic epics, finished histories in the vernacular, heaps\nof pieces teeming with sprightly humour, with vivid portraiture, with\nprecious touches of nature, may or may not have been destroyed by the\nDanes, by the Normans, in their contempt for everything Anglo-Saxon, by\ninsensate scribes in want of vellum--who scraped out things of beauty to\nmake room for their own doting effusions, or pasted the leaves of MSS.\ntogether to make bindings--by the Reformers, by the Roundheads, by fire,\nby crass folly.\"\n\nIndependently of wilful neglect or active destruction, the Anglo-Norman\ntranscripts of previous Anglo-Saxon MSS. now existing are not only\nrarities, but wretchedly deficient, owing to both accidental damage, and\nthe carelessness, or ignorance, of their monkish transcribers. Thorpe,\nreferring to the only existing early MS. of the poem \"Beowulf,\" in his\npreface to his work on the \"Anglo-Saxon Poems of Beowulf, the Sc\u00f4p or\nGleeman's Tale, and the Fight at Finnesburg,\" says--\"Unfortunately, as\nof C\u00e6dmon and the Codex Exoniensis, there is only a single manuscript of\nBeowulf extant, which I take to be of the first half of the eleventh\ncentury (MS. Cott. Vitellius A. 15). All manuscripts of Anglo-Saxon\npoetry are deplorably inaccurate, evincing, in almost every page, the\nignorance of an illiterate scribe, frequently (as was the monastic\ncustom) copying from dictation; but of all Anglo-Saxon manuscripts, that\nof Beowulf may, I believe, be conscientiously pronounced the worst,\nindependently of its present lamentable condition, in consequence of the\nfire at Cotton House, in 1731, whereby it was seriously injured, being\npartially rendered as friable as touchwood. In perfect accordance with\nthis judgment of the manuscript and its writer is the testimony of Dr.\nGrundtvig, who says--'The ancient scribe did not rightly understand what\nhe himself was writing; and, what was worse, the conflagration in 1731\nhad rendered a part wholly or almost illegible.' Mr. Kemble's words are\nto the same effect--'The manuscript of Beowulf is unhappily among the\nmost corrupt of all the Anglo-Saxon manuscripts, and corrupt they all\nare without exception.'\"\n\nMy attention was first called to the probable site of Athelstan's great\nvictory at Brunanburh, when dealing with the \"great Cuerdale Find,\" of\nMay, 1840. Mr. Hawkins, vice-president of the Numismatic Society, who\ndevoted much attention to the contents of this remarkable chest, says\n\"the hoard consisted of about 975 ounces of silver in ingots, ornaments,\netc., besides about 7,000 coins of various descriptions.\" From my own\nknowledge many of the coins and some of the ornaments were never seen by\nMr. Hawkins. Referring to this subject, in the \"History of Preston,\" I\nsay--\"Many of the coins unquestionably found their way surreptitiously\ninto the hands of collectors; consequently there is some difficulty in\ndetermining the precise number discovered. It is pretty generally\nbelieved, however, that the chest originally contained about ten\nthousand coins.\" These coins were all of silver. \"Many of the silver\nrings and smaller bars were, likewise, 'appropriated' before any record\nof the 'find' was made.\"\n\nThe collection contained numismatic treasures both of English and\nforeign mintage, and all were coined antecedent to the great battle,\nalthough the most modern amongst them date within a very few years of\nthat event. Dr. Worsaae, the celebrated Danish antiquary, speaking of\nthis \"find,\" says--\"To judge from the coins, which, with few exceptions,\nwere minted between the years 815 and 930, the treasure must have been\nburied in the first half of the tenth century, or about a hundred years\nbefore the time of Canute the Great.\"\n\nMy position, therefore, is that this great treasure chest was buried\nnear the \"pass of the Ribble,\" at Cuerdale, opposite Preston, during\nthis troubled period, and probably on the retreat of the confederated\nIrish, Scotch, Welsh, Scandinavian, and Anglo-Danish armies, after their\ndisastrous defeat by the English under Athelstan, at the great battle of\nBrunanburh, in 937, which may not inaptly be styled, on account of its\nmagnitude and important results, the Waterloo of the tenth century.\n\nVarious places have from time to time been suggested as the probable\nlocality of the conflict, but upon the very slenderest of evidence. Some\nsay Colecroft, near Axminster, Devonshire. One authority assigns the\nfollowing reason for this site--\"Axminster is _supposed_ to have derived\nits present name from a college of priests, founded here by Athelstan,\nto pray for the souls of those who fell in the conflict, and who were\nburied in the cemetery of Axminster; there were five kings and eight\nearls amongst them.\" A claim has been advanced for Beverley in\nYorkshire, for a similar reason. But the founding of a monastery, or\nother expression of thanksgiving for a victory, does not necessarily\nindicate the locality of the conflict. William the Conqueror did\ncertainly found Battle Abbey on the site of his great victory; but such\na practice is by no means of ordinary occurrence, and without\ncorroborative evidence is valueless. Camden thought the battle was\nfought at Ford, near Bromeridge, in Northumberland. Skene, in his\n\"Celtic Scotland,\" prefers Aldborough, on the Ouse, and regards the huge\nmonoliths, known as \"the devil's arrows,\" as memorials of the victory.\nGibson and others suggest Bromborough, in Cheshire. The editor of the\n\"Imperial Gazetteer\" assigns Broomridge, no doubt on Camden's authority,\nand Brinkburn, in the Rothsay district, in Northumberland, or some\nother, as probable sites of the battle. Brinkburn is said to be the\n\"true situation of Brunanburh,\" in \"Beauties of England and Wales.\" The\nname was written in 1154, by John of Hexham, Brincaburgh. Banbury, in\nOxfordshire, and Bourne, and the neighbourhood of Barton-on-Humber, in\nLincolnshire, and a Bambro', a Bambury, and some other places have\nlikewise found advocates.\n\nDr. Giles, in his annotation of Ethelwerd's Chronicle, fixes Brunanburh\nat Brumby, in Lincolnshire, but he assigns no reasons for his\npreference. Brunton, in Northumberland, and, I believe, some other\nplaces, have been suggested. The mere identity of the name Brunanburh,\nin some corrupted form, though important, is insufficient, without\ncorroborative evidence, simply because the names of so many places, in\nvarious parts of the country, admit of such derivation. There are\nseveral even in Lancashire, to which I shall afterwards call attention.\nLocalities on the east, the south, and the west coasts of England have\neach found advocates, some, certainly, on very slight grounds. Mr.\nWeddle, of Wargrove, near Warrington, in his essay on the site, in 1857,\npertinently reminds the investigator that the very \"uncertainty of the\nwhereabouts of the battle-field\" is a good reason why it should be\nsought for \"in some place half-forgotten.\" Such being the case, I may,\nwithout much presumption, after studying the subject now for five and\ntwenty years, adhere to my previously suggested solution of this great\nhistorical and topographical enigma.\n\nThe available evidence is very diversified in its character, and may be\ndealt with under several distinct heads. In the first place I will\nendeavour to show why I maintain that the discovery of the long buried\ntreasure at Cuerdale, in 1840, has furnished the key by which we may\nprobably unlock the mystery.\n\nFrom its great value in the tenth century, the evidence of recent\nmintage at the time of its deposition, and the vast number of rare and\nforeign coins, many of which were struck by Scandinavian kings or jarls,\nall lead to the conjecture that the treasure had not originally belonged\nto some private individual or inferior chieftain. It must not be\nforgotten that coin was first made \"sterling\" in the year 1216, before\nwhich time Stowe says rents were mostly paid in \"kind,\" and money was\nfound only in the coffers of the barons.\n\nThe great probability, therefore, appears to be that some powerful\nmonarch, or confederacy, owned the chest, and that its burial near one\nof the three fords at the \"pass of the Ribble\" was caused by some signal\ndiscomfiture or military defeat, in order to prevent its falling into\nthe hands of the enemy. Its non-recovery afterwards would naturally\nresult from the slaughter of the parties acquainted with the precise\nlocality of its deposit in the disastrous riot attendant upon so great\nvictory as that achieved by Athelstan at Brunanburh. Tradition had,\nhowever, preserved the memory of its burial, but the exact site was\nunknown. It was popularly thought, however, that it could be seen from\nthe hill on which the church of Walton-le-dale stands, and which\noverlooks all the three fords which constituted the \"famous pass of the\nRibble.\" The late Mr. Barton F. Allen, of Preston, remembered that in\nhis youth a farmer ploughed a field which had remained in pasture from\ntime immemorial, in hope of finding the treasure. At the time I came\nupon the Roman remains, near the great central ford, 1855, I was\nsurprised to learn a rumour was abroad that we had \"come on't goud\" at\nlast. This resulted from the fact that the Anglo-Danish hoard consisted\nentirely of silver, and the belief of the workmen that the Roman brass\ncoins, found at the time, from their colour, when polished, were golden\nones. I therefore contend that these facts (taken in conjunction with\nthe more important one, that the date of the deposit, as demonstrated by\nthe coins themselves, coincides with that of Athelstan's great victory),\nindicate, in a very high degree, the probable connection of the two\nevents. The burial of treasure, in times of great disaster, was a very\nordinary occurrence during the Roman dominion in Britain, and was not\nunusual with their successors, the Anglo-Saxons and Danes. Two hoards,\none found at Walmersley, to the north of Bury, and the other at Whittle,\nnear the present presumed site of Athelstan's victory, to the south of\nthe Ribble, from the date of the coins, coincide with the time of the\ndefeat of the usurpers Carausius and Allectus, commanders of the Roman\nfleet stationed to protect the shores of Britain from the ravages of\nSaxon pirates. Later the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle says--\"A. 418, this year\nthe Romans collected all the treasures that were in Britain, and some\nthey hid in the earth, so that no one has since been able to find them;\nand some they carried with them into Gaul.\" Ethelwerd's Chronicle\nfurnishes further details--\"A. 418. In the ninth year also, after the\nsacking of Rome by the Goths, those of Roman race who were left in\nBritain, not bearing the manifold insults of the people, bury their\ntreasures in pits, thinking that hereafter they might have better\nfortune, which never was the case; and, taking a portion, assembled on\nthe coasts, spread their canvass to the winds, and seek an exile on the\nshores of Gaul.\"\n\nThe \"pass of the Ribble\" is marked on the old map, published by Dr.\nWhitaker, with the crossed swords, indicative of a battle having been\nfought there, but this, though not unimportant in most cases, is of\nlittle value as evidence in favour of my hypothesis, inasmuch as, from\nits geographical position, it has, of necessity, often been the site of\nmilitary conflicts, several of which are recorded in both local and\nother historical works.\n\nThe site now suggested agrees best, in a topographical sense, with the\nvarious descriptions of the conflict, the primary object of the war, and\nthe necessary movements of the several combatants engaged. The great\nRoman road from the north passed through the county, and entered\nCheshire at Latchford near Warrington. This road would serve both the\ninvading Scots and Athelstan, and his army of West Saxons, Mercians, and\nother allies. A Roman road, from the Ribble and Wyre, called\n\"Watling-street,\" crossed the country to York and the eastern coast. We\nhave distinct information that Anlaf's great object was the re-conquest\nof the kingdom of Northumbria, and that, in the first instance, success\ncrowned his efforts. Athelstan's two governors, Gudrekir and Alfgeirr,\nwere defeated, and the former slain. His colleague fled to his sovereign\nwith the tidings of their discomfiture. The grandson of the Great Alfred\nimmediately assembled his army and marched northward to confront in\nperson his successful rival and his powerful allies. It appears,\ntherefore, nearly absolutely certain that the struggle took place in\nNorthumbria, or on its border, and, consequently other localities\noutside this region may almost be said to be \"not in the hunt.\" Anlaf\nwas the ruling chief of Dublin, and the virtual organizer and head of\nthe confederacy. One wing of his army, according to Egil's saga, \"was\nvery numerous, and consisted of the disorderly Irish.\" The coast of\nLancashire being part of the then Danish kingdom of Northumbria, was, in\nevery respect, adapted for the landing of this portion of the invading\narmy. Hoveden, Mailros, and Simeon of Durham certainly say that Anlaf\ncommenced the warfare by \"entering the Humber with a fleet of 615\nships.\" This, however, may refer merely to the \"_fleets of the warriors\nfrom Norway and the Baltic_,\" who joined in the confederacy. If Anlaf\nhimself commanded this expedition in person, then he must have deputed\nthe leadership of his \"disorderly Irish\" to one of his lieutenants. From\nan inspection of the map it will be found, after the defeat of Gudrekir\nand Alfgeirr, that the \"pass of the Ribble,\" from a military point of\nview, was one of the most probable places at which the junction of the\nallies would take place. The Cumbrian Britons and the North and West\nWelsh could easily, by good Roman roads, join the Scottish monarch, as\nwell as Anlaf's Irish troops and the warriors from Norway and the\nBaltic, at this spot, and dispute the passage of the fords with\nAthelstan's forces from the south. The \"pass of the Ribble,\" from a\ntopographical and military point of view, may therefore be assumed as\nvery probably the site of the conflict.\n\nI have previously referred to the fact that the name Brunanburh, in any\ncorrupted form, is of little value in the present investigation without\nvery strong supporting evidence, simply because so many localities have\nequal claim to it. The name itself is likewise variously written by the\nolder writers when referring to the battle. It is termed \"Bellum Brune,\"\nor the \"Battle of the Brune,\" in the _Brut y Tywysogion_, or the\n\"Chronicle of the Princes of Wales,\" and the \"_Annales Cambria_.\" Henry\nof Huntingdon calls the locality Brunesburh; and the name is variously\nwritten by Geffrei Gaimar as Brunewerche, Brunewerce, and Brunewest.\nEthelwerd, a contemporary chronicler, calls the place Brunandune. The\nauthor of Egil's saga calls the site Vinheid. Simeon of Durham says the\nbattle was fought near Weondune or Ethrunnanwerch, or Brunnan byrge.\nWilliam of Malmesbury gives the name Brunsford, and Ingulph says\nBrunford in Northumbria. Notwithstanding the very important fact that\nthe southern portion of the county of Lancaster suffered so much in the\nraids of Gilbert de Lacy and his soldiery after the Norman conquest, and\nthe consequent non-productive character of much of the territory at the\ntime of the Domesday survey, which caused very few names of places to be\nrecorded in that valuable historical document, still I think present\ntopographical nomenclature south of the \"pass of the Ribble\" sufficient\nto identify the locality from etymological evidence equal or superior in\nvalue to that yet advanced in favour of any other site. The word\n_brunan_ means simply, in modern English, springs, and burh refers to\nany work of military defence of an artificial character. _Brun_ has been\ncorrupted, according to the conjectures of the authorities which I have\npreviously cited, into _Burn_, _Brom_, _Brum_, _Broom_, _Bran_, _Ban_,\n_Bourne_, _Brink_, and _Brin_.\n\nThe name of the parish of Brindle, to the south-east of the \"pass of the\nRibble,\" has been written in various documents during the past few\ncenturies, Burnhull, Brinhill, Brandhill, and, after becoming Brandle\nand Bryndhull, ends in its present Brindle. Now, burn and brun are\nacknowledged to be identical, the metathesis, as philologists term it,\nor transposition of the letter _r_ under such circumstances being very\ncommon, especially in Lancashire. We say brid for bird, brun for burn,\nbrunt for burnt, brast for burst, thurst for thrust, and some others.\nBirmingham is often called \"Brummigem.\" Indeed, Taylor, the \"Water\nPoet,\" in his account of Old Parr, writes it \"Brimicham.\" The short _u_\nwith us is ofttimes sounded nearly like _i_, as in burst, burn, etc.,\nlike the German _\u00fc_ in Re\u00fcter, M\u00fcller, Pr\u00fcssien, etc. Hence the\ninterchangeability of brin for brun, of which the following are\nexamples: The Icelandic Brynhildr, of the Eddaic poems, is the Brunhild\nof the Nibelungenlied; Brinsley, in Nottinghamshire, is sometimes\nwritten Brunsley; Burnside, near Kendal, was once Brynshead; Brynn, the\nseat of Lord Gerrard, between Wigan and Newton-in-Mackerfield, was, as I\nhave shown in a previous chapter, anciently written Brun; and, in\naddition, I have recently seen, in Herman Moll's atlas, published in\n1723, this same Brindle, south of Ribble, written Brunall, and, what is\nstill further corroborative, in Christopher Saxton's much earlier map,\npublished in Camden's \"Britannia,\" it is written Brundell, while Bryne\nand Burnley are spelled as at present. _Bryn_ or _bron_ signifies a\nlittle hill, or the slope of a hill. As _burh_ sometimes signifies a\nhill or eminence, as well as a fortification, the interchange of the\nBritish _bryn_ with its Teutonic neighbour is in no way remarkable, but\nrather what might have been anticipated. Indeed, we find this phonetic\nsubstitution in Bernicia (the northern portion of Northumbria), the\nBritish equivalent being Bryneich. _Brunan_, as I have before said,\nsignifies springs. Brindle church is situated on the slope of a hill,\nand the district, as a personal visit, or a glance at the six-inch\nordnance map, will show, is remarkable for its numerous \"wells,\" from\nwhich pure water issues from the surface of the ground. Dalton springs,\nDenham springs, and the well-known Whittle springs are in the\nneighbourhood, and one hamlet is named Manysprings.\n\nIn addition to Brindle we have Brinscall and Burnicroft, and Brownedge\nor Brunedge within the district. Between what I will now term Brunhull\nand Brunedge, we have the hamlet Bam_ber_, now termed Bamber Bridge.\nBaumber, in Lincolnshire, is sometimes written Bamburgh. Bramber, in\nSussex, in Herman Moll's map (1723) is written Bamber, and in the\nDomesday survey Branber. Bromley, sometimes written Bramley, in Kent, is\nBrunlei, in the Domboc, and Bromborough, in Cheshire, is written\nBrunburgh, in Herman Moll's map. Hence if _bam_ be likewise a corruption\nof brun, we have Brunberg, with Brunhull and Brunedge in immediate\ncontiguity. The Rev. Jno. Whitaker and the Rev. E. Sibson say _bam_\nsignifies war. This is a very significant corruption, if a great battle\nwere fought in its neighbourhood. Other authorities say _bam_ means a\n\"beam, a tree, a wood.\" This might imply that a fortification or\nstockade occupied the spot, or it might mean the fort in the wood, or in\nthe neighbourhood of the wood, like the Welsh Bettws-y-coed. In Egil's\nsaga \"the wood\" is often referred to in the detailed description of the\nbattle. We have yet Worden-wood, Whittle-le-woods, Clayton-le-woods, and\nsome others contiguous.\n\nKemble, in his (appendix) list of \"patronymical names,\" which he regards\nas \"those of ancient Marks,\" has two references, from the \"Codex\nDiplomaticus,\" to \"Bruningas,\" but he gives no conjecture as to the\nlocality of its modern representative.\n\nMr. C. A. Weddle, of Wargrove, near Warrington, in 1857, when advocating\nthe claims of Brunton, in Northumberland, after summing up the various\nnames mentioned by the old writers, and referring to their evident\ncorruption and variation, says--\n\n\"Two of them in particular, _Weardune and Wendune_, I have never seen\nnoticed by any modern writer, yet _Weardune appears to me the most\nimportant name_, if Brunanburh be excepted, and EVEN THIS IS NOT MORE\nSO. As to Wendune it is evidently a mistake in the transcribing for\nWerdune, the Anglo-Saxon _r_ being merely _n_, with a long bottom stroke\non the left.\"\n\nMr. Weddle finds a Warden Hill, about two miles from the farm-house in\n\"Chollerford field,\" in the neighbourhood of Brunton. This he considers\nas very conclusive evidence in favour of the locality being the\nBrunanburh of which we are in search. If such be the case, the existence\nof Wearden, or Worden, in the immediate neighbourhood of Brunhill,\nBamber, and Brunedge, must unquestionably be more so, and especially\nwhen taken in connection with the large amount of corroborative evidence\nwith which it is surrounded. The term Weardune is sometimes written\nWeondune, which, after the correction of the _n_, as suggested by Mr.\nWeddle, is Weorden. The ancient seat of the Faringtons, of Leyland and\nFarington, is variously written Werden, Worden, and Wearden, and it is\npronounced by the inhabitants of the neighbourhood Wearden at the\npresent day. It must have been a place of some importance in the time of\nthe Roman occupation. Many coins, and a heavy gold[37] signet ring,\nbearing the letters S P Q R, have been found there. The place is\nsituated near the great Roman highway, and, if Anlaf's troops covered\nthe \"pass of the Ribble\" near Brunhull, Brunburh and Brunedge, Wearden\nis precisely the neighbourhood where Athelstan's forces, coming from the\nsouth, would encamp in front of them. Dr. Kuerden, upwards of two\ncenturies ago, describes the northern boundary of the township of\nEuxton-burgh as the \"Werden broke.\" Mr. Baines states that there is in\nLeyland churchyard \"a stone of the 14th century, covering all that\nremains of the Weardens of Golden Hill.\" It is highly probable that the\npresent Cuerden is itself a corruption of Wearden. The prefix Cuer is\nfound in Cuerden, Cuerdale (where the great hoard was found), and\nCuerdley near Prescot, and in no other part of England. The names in the\nlocality, as I have previously said, are not recorded in the Domesday\nsurvey, but the Norman-French generally represented the English sound\n_w_ by _gu_. Philologists regard the consonants _c_, _q_, _ch_, and _g_,\nas \"identical\" or \"convertible,\" consequently, if I assume the initial\n_C_ in Cuerden to be equivalent to _G_, we have a Norman-French method\nof writing Wearden. That _cu_ was used to represent the sound of our\n_w_, is demonstrated by a reference to the survey itself, for in the\nDomesday record, Fishwick, now a portion of the borough of Preston, and\nsituated on the opposite bank of the Ribble to Cuerdale, is actually\nwritten Fiscuic. Leland, too, in his Itinerary, spells the river Cocker\nindifferently with the initials C, G, and K. The district in the parish\nof Leyland, anciently styled _Cunnolvesmores_, is sometimes found\nwritten _Gunoldsmores_.\n\nSimeon of Durham says the battle was fought near Weondune, or\n_Ethrunanwerch_, or Brunnan byrge. I have never seen any attempt to\nidentify this Ethrunanwerch with any modern locality in any part of the\ncountry. There is no such name to be found now, nor anything suggestive\nof it, in a gazetteer of England and Wales, and I therefore presume that\nit has either entirely disappeared or become so altered as to be\nunrecognizable. Consequently, if I fail in an attempt to identify it,\nnot much injury will result therefrom. The termination _werch_ presents\nno difficulty. It is evidently _worth_, as in Saddleworth, Shuttleworth,\netc., and could easily give place to some other suffix indicating\nresidence or occupation, or even locality. The prefix Ethrunan is more\ndifficult to deal with, and I should perhaps not have attempted its\nsolution, if I had not seen on a map the name Rother applied to one of\nthe head waters which, uniting near Stockport, form the Mersey. This\nstream is generally called the Etherow.[38] This is the nearest approach\nto Ethrunan that I have been able to meet with. If _rother_, by a kind\nof metathesis, is an equivalent to _ether_, perhaps I can detect two\ndistinct remains of the word Ethrunanwerch, in the neighbourhood of\nWearden. On the ordnance map we have, about a mile from Werden Hall,\nRotherham Top, and a stream, recently diverted for the purpose of the\nLiverpool water supply, named the Roddlesworth. This word implies a\nplace on the bank of a stream, and as the _d_ and _th_ are phonetic\nequivalents, it may be read Rothelsworth or Ethrunlesworth; indeed, Mr.\nBaines expressly says, \"Withnall, or Withnell, also a part of the\nlordship of Gunoldsmores, containing Rothelsworth, a name derived from\nRoddlesworth, or Mouldenwater, a rapid stream.\" On the one-inch to the\nmile ordnance map there is a name which preserves the form of the first\npart of the word without the transposition, or metathesis, to which I\nhave referred. Not far from Worden Hall is a small hamlet named\n\"Ethrington.\" The fact that these names exist in the neighbourhood\nstrengthens the probability that the etymology is not altogether\nfanciful, and consequently lends support to the presumption that the\nlocality suggested may be the true site of Athelstan's great victory.\n\nI have said that there are several places in Lancashire, even, which\nanswer to Brunan or Brun. The following are amongst the number: On the\nWyre, near the commencement of the Roman agger or \"_Danes' Pad_,\"\nas it is locally termed, which led from the Portus Setantiorum\nof Ptolemy to York, is a place named Bourne, written in the Domesday\nsurvey Brune. Bourne Hall is situated upon a \"dune\" or hill, which\ncommands a relatively recently blocked up channel of the Wyre.\nTherefore Brunnandune or Brunford would strictly apply to it.\nBryning-with-Kellamergh, near _Warton_, in the parish of Kirkham, is\ndescribed in a charter of the reign of John, as Brichscrach _Brun_ and\nKelmers_burgh_. In the time of Henry III. it is described as Brininge.\nNot far from Rochdale is a spot named \"Kildanes,\" near Bamford. The site\nis not much more than two miles from a place named Burnedge or Brunedge.\nThere is a Burnage between Manchester and Stockport. Burnley is situated\non the river Burn, generally, however, called the Brun. This\ndemonstrates how utterly impossible it is to identify the locality by\nthe name Brunanburh. The Manchester, Rochdale, and Burnley sites are too\nfar from the seashore. The fine old poem, describing the battle, says\nemphatically--\"There were made flee the Northman's chieftain, By need\nconstrained, To the ship's prow, With a little band. The bark drove\nafloat--The king departed--On the fallow flood his life he preserved.\"\nAnd, again, the poem says--\"The Northmen departed In their nailed barks;\nBloody relic of darts; On roaring ocean, O'er the deep water, DUBLIN to\nseek; Again Ireland shamed in mind.\" And further--\"West Saxons onwards\nThroughout the day, In numerous bands, Pursued the footsteps of the\nloathed nations.\" I therefore contend that, in this particular, as well\nas those already disposed of, the \"pass of the Ribble\" answers to the\nlocality of the struggle, as described by contemporary authority. Where\nthis topographical feature is wanting, I hold it to be fatal. The ships\nof Anlaf might be attending the army in the estuaries of the Ribble or\nWyre, and to them the defeated and routed forces would, of course,\nrepair with headlong speed, after crossing the fords, the defence of\nwhich they had so gallantly, if unsuccessfully, attempted. During this\nhasty retreat, I contend it is highly probable the great Cuerdale hoard\nwas deposited, and, owing to death, or other disaster, the precise\nlocality could not be determined in after times, although the tradition\nof its deposition remained. There is plenty of analagous evidence in\nsupport of such a conjecture, to some of which I have already referred.\nIn the seventh volume of \"Collectania Antiqua,\" Mr. Charles Roach Smith,\nreferring to the then recent discovery near the Roman station,\n\"Procolitia,\" near the great Roman Wall, of an enormous mass (15,000) of\nRoman coins, weighing about 400 pounds, says he regards the hoard as\npart of the money set apart for the payment of the troops occupying the\nadjoining castrum, which, _owing to some sudden panic in the reign of\nGratian_, was concealed in the well or fountain dedicated to a local\ndivinity, Conesstina. The Saxon Chronicle, as well as Ethelwerd, as I\nhave already stated, refer to the burying of treasure under similar\ncircumstances. The former says--\"This year (A.D. 418) the Romans\ncollected all the treasures that were in Britain, and some they hid in\nthe earth, so that no one has since been able to find them, and some\nthey carried with them into Gaul.\"\n\nAthelstan's connection with Preston and its neighbourhood, at the head\nof his army, is attested by stronger evidence than mere tradition. In\nthe year 930 he granted the whole of the hundred of Amounderness to the\ncathedral church at York. He is said to have \"_purchased_\" the territory\nwith his own money, a somewhat remarkable financial operation for a\nconquering king in the tenth century, in Anglo-Saxon and Pagan Danish\ntimes. But perhaps a previous grant to the church at Ripon influenced\nhim in this matter.\n\nIn the early part of the seventeenth century lived one William Elston,\nwho, in a MS. entitled, \"Mundana Mutabilia, or Ethelestophylax,\" now in\nthe Harleian collection in the British Museum, placed upon record the\nfollowing interesting particulars relative to this monarch--\"It was once\ntold me by Mr. Alexander Elston, who was uncle to my father and sonne to\nRalph Elston, my great grandfather, that the said Ralph Elston had a\ndeede or a copy of a deede in the Saxon tongue, wherein it did appear\nthat king _Ethelstan lying in camp in this county upon occacon of\nwarres_, gave the land of Ethelston vnto one to whom himself was\nBelsyre.\" (godfather).\n\nThe township of Elston, in the parish of Preston, formerly written\nEthelstan, is situated on the north bank of the Ribble a little above\nCuerdale and Red Scar.\n\nTo the south of Brindle and the east of Worden, near Whittle Springs, is\na large tumulus, and the hill side on which it is situated has the\nappearance of having been, at some time, disturbed by human agency. A\nRoman vicinal way, from Wigan to Blackburn, or Mellor, where it joins\nthe main highway from Manchester to Ribchester, passes near it. Remains\nof this road were discovered near Adlington not many years ago. Another\nancient road, probably of similar origin, leaves the main Roman military\nway from Warrington to Lancaster at Bamberbridge, and running in the\ndirection of Manchester, crosses this in its neighbourhood. This tumulus\nis named \"Pickering Castle;\" which has an important significance.\nTumuli are often termed \"castles.\" We have the \"Castle Hill\" near\nNewton-in-Mackerfield, and the \"Castle Hill\" at Penwortham, near\nPreston. The tumulus near to \"Whittle Springs\" is very similar to these\nin appearance, and may, on excavation, prove to be a sepulchral mound.\nPickering, according to the method of interpretation adopted by John\nMitchell Kemble, in his \"Saxons in England,\" should indicate the \"Mark\"\nof a sept or clan bearing that name, like the Faringas as at Farington,\nBillingas as at Billington, and many others. But there is not the\nslightest reference by any writer of such a name ever holding property\nin the neighbourhood, and Mr. Kemble places the Pickering, in Yorkshire,\nonly among the probable instances, as he had never met with any account\nof a Saxon family or mark answering to it. As the letters _P_ and _V_\nare interchangeable sounds, \"vikingring\" has been suggested as the\noriginal form of the word. Dr. Smith, in his annotations to Marsh's\n\"Lectures on the English Languages,\" speaks of the \"Danes being led by\nthe vikings, the younger sons of their royal houses.\" As the old poem\nsays--\"Five kings lay on the battle-stead. Youthful kings By swords in\nslumber laid. So seven eke Of Anlaf's earls, Of the army countless.\"\nThis interpretation seems not improbable; yet it may be no more than an\naccidental coincidence rather than a legitimate derivation. As _P_ and\n_B_ are equally interchangeable consonants, I am inclined to think that\n\"Bickering Castle\" may have been the original name of the tumulus.\n_Bicra_, in the modern Welsh, means to fight, from whence our word\n_bickering_. In this case, _ing_ meaning field, the interpretation would\nbe the \"Castle of the Battle-Field.\" There is some good analogy in\nsupport of this view. Mr. Thos. Baines, in his \"Lancashire and Cheshire:\nPast and Present,\" says--\"The _Peck_forton Hills extend from Beeston\nCastle to the Dee. On one of them _Bicker_ton Hill, 500 feet high, is a\nstrong camp with a double line of earthworks. One front overlooks the\nplain of Cheshire. The earthwork is called the \"Maiden Castle.\" Not far\nfrom Bickerton Hill is Bickley, where, according to Ormerod, certain\nbrass tablets were recently discovered, recording a grant of the freedom\nof the city of Rome to certain troops serving in Britain in the reign of\nTrajan, A.D. 98-117, some of whom may have been stationed in the\nneighbourhood where the tablets were found. We have in Lancashire the\ntownship of Bickerstaffe, and an adjoining wood named Bickershaw.\nBickerstaffe was anciently written Bicker_stat_ and Bykyr_stath_. Stadt,\nstad, or stead means a station or settlement. Thus we have battle-wood\nand battle-stead. We have seen that the old poem says--\"Five kings lay\non the _battle-stead_, youthful kings, by swords in slumber laid.\"\nBesides, we find Bicker and Bickering in Lincolnshire, and Bickerton in\nboth Northumberland and the East Riding of Yorkshire. Whatever this may\nbe worth, it is most desirable that this tumulus should be dug into, for\nremains might, and probably would, be found which could throw\nadditional light upon the subject of the present investigation.\n\nIn the yard of Brindle Parish Church, beneath the chancel window, is an\nancient stone coffin, with a circular hollow for the head of the corpse.\nNothing further is known respecting it, beyond that it was dug up\nsomewhere in the neighbourhood, and had been removed to its present\nposition with a view to its preservation.\n\nIn 1867 I examined the Ancient British burial mound and its contents,\nthen recently discovered in the park land attached to Whitehall, and\ncontiguous to that of Low Hill House, the residence of Mr. Ellis\nShorrock, at Over Darwen, and contributed a paper respecting it to the\nTransactions of the Lancashire and Cheshire Historic Society. In that\npaper I say--\"I heard that there is a tradition, yet implicitly relied\non, which speaks of a battle fought in the olden time somewhere in the\nneighbourhood of Tockholes in the Roddlesworth valley, and stories that\nremains, including those of horses, have been found, which are believed\nto confirm it. Respecting this I may have something to say in a future\npaper.\" What I have to say is this: that if a severe struggle took place\nnear the tumulus to which I have referred, the routed army, following\nthe Roman vicinal way to Ribchester, would pass by the locality, which\nis not far distant. This adds another link in the chain of evidence by\nwhich I have sought to demonstrate that the _most probable_ site of\nAthelstan's great victory at Brunanburh is that which I have indicated\nnear the famous \"pass of the Ribble,\" to the south of Preston, and that\nthe great Cuerdale hoard of treasure was buried on the bank of the\nstream, during the disastrous retreat of the routed confederate armies.\n\nIn the appendix to the \"History of Preston and its Environs,\" published\nin 1857, after discussing Mr. Weddle's objections to a Lancashire site,\nI concluded with the following words--\"These reasons, in conjunction\nwith those advanced in the second chapter of this work, induce the\nauthor to prefer the locality, in the present state of the evidence, as\nthe _most probable_ site of the 'battle of the Brun.'\"\n\nAlthough the evidence advanced in its favour on the present occasion is\nconsiderably in excess of that previously obtainable, I still merely\nreassert my previous conviction, without dogmatism, that, on weighing\nthe whole of the evidence yet adduced, I am justified in maintaining\nthat the site I name is the _most probable_ which has yet been\nsuggested; indeed, there is very little reliable evidence in favour of\nany other. But, in conclusion, I again reiterate what I wrote\ntwenty-five years ago, when dealing with the Roman topography of the\ncounty, that \"no permanent settlement of so difficult a question ought\nto be insisted upon, until every means of investigation and all the\nresources of logical inference have been fairly exhausted.\"\n\nI have already said that the neighbourhood of Preston and \"the pass of\nthe Ribble,\" as might have been expected from its topographical\nposition, and consequent strategical importance, has been the scene of\nmany known conflicts. Robert Bruce, in 1323, burned the town, but\nventured no further southward. Holinshed says he \"entered into England,\nby Carlisle, kept on his way through Cumberland, Westmoreland, and\nLancaster, to Preston, which town he burnt, as he had done others in the\ncounties he had passed through, and, after three weeks and three days,\nhe returned into Scotland without engaging.\"\n\nDr. Kuerden, writing shortly before the guild of 1682, laments the\ndestruction of documentary evidence relating to this famous Preston\nfestival during the turmoil of civil war. After enumerating the dates of\nthose still preserved, in his day, in the Corporation records, he\nsays--\"These are such as doth appeare within the Records and Gild Books,\nthat yet remain extant and in being, though some I conceive to be\nomitted, as one Gild in Henry 6th dayes occasion'd, as I conceive, in\nthose distractions and civil wars betwixt the Houses of Lancaster and\nYork; another Gild Merchant omitted to be kept in K. H. 8th dayes,\noccasioned, as may be thought, by the Revolutions at that time in Church\naffayres; the next that are wanting may be through the loss of Records\nin K. Edw. 3rd dayes [_sic._] wheras the Scottish army burnt the\nBurrough of Preston to the very ground.\" Kuerden is in error with\nreference to the king's reign in which this disaster occurred; Bruce's\nforay took place in the reign of Edward II.\n\nIn the \"History of Preston and its Environs,\" p. 50, I say--\"A tradition\nstill remains that Roman Ribchester was destroyed by an earthquake;\nanother that it was reduced to ashes in the early part of the\nfourteenth century, during the great inroad of the Scots under Bruce.\nBoth are highly improbable. Had Roman Ribchester remained a place of any\nimportance till the period referred to, it could scarcely have failed to\nhave attracted the notice of some of the elder chroniclers or\ntopographers. True, the _Saxon village_ may have shared the fate of\nPreston, in the celebrated foray of our northern neighbours, and hence\nthe tradition! An earthquake in England, of sufficient magnitude to bury\na Roman 'city,' (to use the elder Whitaker's emphatic style,) '_must_'\nhave found some one to record it. Other facts, however, demonstrate that\nthis tradition can have no better foundation than the vague conjecture\nof ignorant peasants; who, on first discovering remains of ancient\nbuildings beneath the soil, naturally attributed their subterranean\nlocation to the action of some earthquake, in that mysterious period\nusually denominated the 'olden time.'\" In Leland's day, the remains of\nthe Roman temple dedicated to Minerva were believed to have been\nconnected with Jewish religious rites and ceremonies, from the simple\nfact that they knew of no other non-Christian sect with whom to\nassociate them.\n\nAt the commencement of the campaign in 1643 between Charles I. and the\nParliament, General Fairfax, from his head quarters at Manchester,\nordered an attack upon Preston, then garrisoned by the king's troops.\nThe town was at that time fortified by \"inner and outer walls of brick,\"\nno vestige of which now remains, although it was recently not very\ndifficult to trace their site. The command was entrusted to General Sir\nJohn Seaton. Captain Booth led the attack, and scaled the outer wall.\nThe garrison defended the inner wall with great valour, \"with push of\npike,\" until Sir John Seaton, having stormed the defences on the eastern\nside, entered the town by Church-street, when they were overpowered, and\nthe Parliamentary army obtained complete possession of the town, but not\nbefore the mayor, Adam Morte, and his son, had fallen in the conflict.\n\nColonel Rosworm, the celebrated Parliamentary engineer, afterwards\nrefortified the town. Shortly afterwards Major-General Seaton and\nColonel Ashton marched from Preston, with the view to relieve Lancaster,\nthen besieged by the Earl of Derby. The earl drew off his troops on\ntheir approach, and falling suddenly on Preston, in its then defenceless\nstate, stormed the works in three places. After an hour's severe\nfighting the place surrendered. Lord Derby secured the magazine, and\ndestroyed the military works, fearing the place might again fall into\nthe enemy's hands.\n\nIn August, 1664, a smart little struggle took place at Ribble Bridge,\nwhich Colonel Shuttleworth thus describes in his dispatch--\"Right\nHonourable,--Upon Thursday last, marching with three of my troops upon\nBlackburn towards Preston, where the ennemie lay, I met eleven of their\ncolours at Ribble Bridge, within a mile of Preston, whereupon, after a\nsharp fight, we took the Lord Ogleby, a Scotch Lord, Colonel Ennis, one\nother colonel slaine, one major wounded, and divers officers and\nsoldiers to the number of forty in all taken, besides eight or nine\nslaine, with the losse of twelve men taken prisoners, which afterwards\nwere released by Sir John Meldrum upon his coming to Preston the night\nfollowing, from whence the enemy fled.\"\n\nFour years afterwards, Cromwell achieved his great victory over the Duke\nof Hamilton and the Marquis of Langdale. Reference has been made, in the\nprevious chapter, to the rapid march of the Parliamentary forces from\nSkipton, by Clitheroe, to Stonyhurst, where they encamped on the evening\nof August 16th, 1648. Some difference respecting the then famous\n\"Covenant\" prevented Langdale's forces from combining heartily with\nthose of the Duke. His English troops were encamped on Ribbleton Moor,\nto the east of Preston. Hamilton's Scotch forces were widely scattered.\nSome of his advanced horse lay at Wigan; his main army occupied Preston,\nwhile his rear, under Monro, were in the neighbourhood of Garstang.\nShort work was made, notwithstanding the great numerical superiority,\nwith such discipline and divided councils, by a soldier of Cromwell's\ncalibre. In the words of Thomas Carlyle, he \"dashed in upon him, cut him\nin two, drove him north _and_ south, into as miserable ruin as his worst\nenemy could wish.\" \"The bridge of Ribble\" was fiercely contested. When\nthe Parliamentary troops, with \"push of pike\" (Cromwell's equivalent for\nthe modern phrase \"at the point of the bayonet\"), at length prevailed,\nthe duke's army retreated over the Darwen, which joins the Ribble in the\nimmediate neighbourhood. Night put an end to the conflict. Before\ndaylight the Royalist army decamped, but was hotly pursued, through\nChorley, Wigan, and Warrington, into the midland counties, and rapidly\ndestroyed. The Duke of Hamilton was taken prisoner at Uttoxeter, and a\nsimilar fate befel Langdale at Nottingham.[39]\n\nThis victory is celebrated as one of Cromwell's greatest military\nachievements, by Milton, in his famous sonnet:--\n\n\nTO THE LORD GENERAL CROMWELL.\n\n    Cromwell, our chief of men, who, through a cloud\n    Not of war only, but detractions rude,\n    Guided by faith and matchless fortitude,\n    To peace and truth thy glorious way has plough'd,\n    And on the neck of crowned Fortune proud\n    Hast reared God's trophies and his work pursued,\n    WHILE DARWEN STREAM WITH BLOOD OF SCOTS IMBUED,\n    And Dunbar field resound thy praises loud,\n    And Worcester's laureat wreath. Yet much remains\n    To conquer still; Peace hath her victories\n    No less renown'd than War; new foes arise\n    Threat'ning to bind our souls with secular chains:\n    Help us to save free conscience from the paw\n    Of hireling wolves, whose gospel is their maw.\n\nThe number of the troops engaged in this short but brilliant campaign is\nstated variously by different authorities. There is an entry in the\nrecords of the Corporation of Preston which says \"Decimo Septimo die\nAugustie, 1648, 24 Car,--That Henry Blundell, gent., being mayor of this\ntown of Preston, the daie and yeare aforesaid, Oliver Cromwell,\nlieutenant-general of the forces of the Parliament of England, with an\narmy of about 10,000 at the most, (whereof 1500 were Lancashire men,\nunder the command of Colonel Ralph Assheton, of Middleton), fought a\nbattail in and about Preston aforesaid, and over-threw Duke Hamilton,\ngeneral of the Scots, consisting of about 26,000, and of English, Sir\nMarmaduke Langdale and his forces, joined with the Scots, about 4,000;\ntook all their ammunition, about 3,000 prisoners, killed many with very\nsmall losse to the parliament army; and in their pursuit towards\nLancaster, Wigan, Warrington, and divers other places in Cheshire,\nStaffordshire, and Nottinghamshire, took the said Duke and Langdale,\nwith many Scottish earls and lords, and about 10,000 prisoners more, all\nbeing taken [or] slayne, few escaping, and all their treasure and\nplunder taken. This performed in less than one week.\"\n\nCaptain Hodgson notices the plundering propensities of the enemy, but,\nas we have seen in the previous chapter, he entertained no higher an\nopinion of his Lancashire allies, with respect to their \"looting\"\nproclivities. His estimate of the numbers of the army of the Parliament\nis somewhat less than that in the Corporation record. He says--\"The\nScots marched towards Kendal, we towards Rippon; where Oliver met us\nwith horse and foot. We were then betwixt eight and nine thousand; a\nfine smart army, and fit for action. We marched up to Skipton; and the\nforlorn of the enemy's horse was come to Gargrave, and took some men\naway, and made others pay what money they pleased; having made havock in\nthe country, it seems intending never to come there again.\"\n\nCromwell, in his despatch \"to the Honourable William Lenthall, Esquire,\nSpeaker of the House of Commons,\" dated \"Warrington, 20th August,\n1648,\" of course attributes all the honour and glory to the Almighty,\nyet, modestly enough, he claims some credit as due to the Parliamentary\narmy, if it rested merely upon the disparity in the number of the\ncombatants. He says--\"Thus you have a Narrative of the particulars of\nthe success which God hath given you; which I could hardly at this time\nhave done, considering the multiplicity of business, but truly, when I\nwas once engaged in it, I could hardly tell how to say less, there being\nso much of God in it; and I am not willing to say more, lest there\nshould seem to be any of man. Only give me leave to add one word,\nshowing the disparity of forces on both sides, that you may see, and all\nthe world acknowledge, the great hand of God in this business. The Scots\narmy could not be less than twelve thousand effective foot, well armed,\nand five thousand horse; Langdale not less than two thousand five\nhundred foot, and fifteen hundred horse; in all Twenty-one-Thousand: and\ntruly very few of their foot but were as well armed if not better than\nyours, and at divers disputes did fight two or three hours before they\nwould quit their ground. Yours were about two thousand five hundred\nhorse and dragoons of your old Army; about four thousand foot of your\nold Army; also about sixteen hundred Lancashire foot, and about five\nhundred Lancashire horse; in all about Eight thousand Six hundred. You\nsee by computation about two thousand of the Enemy slain; betwixt eight\nand nine thousand prisoners; besides what are lurking in hedges and\nprivate places, which the County daily bring in or destroy.\"\n\nNotwithstanding the great social and political importance of this\nvictory, and the renown of the general by whom it was achieved, whose\nvery name is yet associated in the minds of some with every odious moral\nfeature, and, in the judgment of others, with the highest English\nstatesmanship, unselfish patriotism, and sincere religious conviction,\nthe amount of legendary story which it has left behind is singularly\nlimited. I have heard of several localities in Lancashire, and some\nneighbouring counties, where tradition records that Oliver Cromwell once\nvisited the district and slept in some specified house or mansion,\nalthough there exists not the slightest reliable evidence that Oliver\nwas ever in the neighbourhood. This, in some instances, I fancy, may be\naccounted for by the fact that Cromwell's name has become a typical or\ngeneric one, and has done duty for nearly a couple of centuries with the\npublic generally, for every commander, either generals or subordinate\nofficers, belonging to the Parliamentary armies.\n\nOne tradition, however, was well-known in my youthful days. The mound\nplanted with trees on \"Walton Flats\" was always regarded as \"the grave\nof the Scotch warriors.\" The place was rather a solitary one at night,\nand some superstitious fear was often confessed by others than children,\nwhen passing it after nightfall. It was in this mound, in 1855, whilst\nlooking for remains of the said \"Scotch warriors,\" that I came upon\nevidences of Roman occupation. Faith in the legend was attested when\none of the workmen informed me that he had found in the mound a\nhalfpenny with the figure of a Scotchman in the place of Britannia, on\nthe reverse. I found it to be a Roman second brass coin, the military\ncostume of a soldier suggesting to the labourer a kilted Highlander.\nAlthough at various times relics of the fight have been picked up, they\nare now extremely rare. The flood waters of the Ribble have occasionally\ndislodged human bones, including skulls, from the banks, and these are\nalmost universally, if somewhat vaguely, associated with \"Scotch\nwarriors,\" but without any definite notion as to the period or cause of\ntheir presence in the neighbourhood. I remember, many years ago,\nsuggesting to a very old man employed on a rope-walk near the south bank\nof the river, that, as a number of English, including some Lancashire\nmen, were slain in the great battle in 1648, it was possible a portion\nof the bones might belong to them. He did not deny the _possibility_;\nbut simply remarked that he had never heard the remains attributed to\nany but the aforesaid \"Scotch warriors;\" and he was evidently, from his\npoint of view, too \"patriotic\" to entertain, himself, the slightest\ndoubt on the subject.\n\nA Protestant minister of Annandale, a Mr. Patten, who accompanied the\nStuart army, and published a \"History of the Rebellion\" in 1715,\ncondemns the Jacobite leaders for not defending the \"Pass of the\nRibble.\" The approach to the old bridge down the steep incline from\nPreston was by a lane, which was, he says, \"very deep indeed.\" This lane\nwas situated about midway between the present road and the hollow, yet\nvisible, by which the Roman road passed to the north. He adds--\"This is\nthat famous lane at the end of which Oliver Cromwell met with a stout\nresistance from the King's forces, who from the height rolled down upon\nhim and his men (when they had entered the lane) huge large millstones;\nand if Oliver himself had not forced his horse to jump into a quicksand,\nhe had luckily ended his days there.\" Commenting on this passage in the\n\"History of Preston,\" I say--\"Notwithstanding Mr. Patten's political\nconversion _afterwards_, and his horror of the 'licentious freedom' of\nthose who 'cry up the old doctrines of passive obedience, and give hints\nand arguments to prove hereditary right,' he appears to have retained\nall the antipathy of a Stuart partizan to the memory of Oliver Cromwell.\nYet the loyalty of 1648 became rebellion in 1715, when Mr. Patten's head\nwas in danger. Such is the mutation of human dogmatism.\"\n\nCromwell, in a letter to the Solicitor-General, \"his worthy friend,\nOliver St. John, Esquire,\" shortly after the battle, relates an incident\nwhich illustrates one of the phases of religious thought amongst our\nPuritan ancestors, and which is by no means extinct at the present time.\nHe says--\"I am informed from good hands, that a poor godly man died in\nPreston, the day before the fight; and being sick, near the hour of his\ndeath, he desired the woman that cooked to him, to fetch him a handful\nof grass. She did so; and when he received it, he asked, whether it\nwould wither or not, now it was cut? The woman said 'yea.' He replied,\n'So should this Army of the Scots do, and come to nothing, so soon as\nours did but appear,' or words to this effect, and so immediately died.\"\n\nThomas Carlyle's old Puritan blood is up, as he contemplates the\npossibility of some adverse critic citing this story as evidence of\nCromwell's intellectual weakness, or, at least, of his proneness to\nsuperstition. He almost fiercely exclaims--\"Does the reader look with\nany intelligence into that poor old prophetic, symbolic, Death-bed scene\nat Preston? Any intelligence of Prophecy and Symbol, in general; of the\nsymbolic Man-child _Mahershalal-hashbaz_ at Jerusalem, or the handful of\nCut Grass at Preston--of the opening Portals of Eternity, and what\ndeparting gleams there are in the Soul of the pure and the just?\nMahershalal-hashbaz ('Hasten-to-the-spoil,' so called), and the bundle\nof Cut Grass are grown somewhat strange to us! Read; and having sneered\nduly,--consider.\"\n\nIn August, 1651, Colonel Lilburne defeated the Earl of Derby at\nWigan-lane, in which engagement the gallant Major-general Sir Thomas\nTildesley fell. On the day previous to the battle, a skirmish took place\nbetween the Royalists and the Parliamentary troops at the \"pass of the\nRibble.\" In his letter to Cromwell, Lilburne says--\"The next day, in the\nafternoone, I having not foot with me, a party of the Enemies Horse fell\nsmartly amongst us where our Horses were grazing, and for some space put\nus pretty hard to it; but at last it pleased the Lord to strengthen us\nso as that we put them to flight, and pursued them to _Ribble-bridge_,\n(this was something like our business at _Mussleburgh_), and kild and\ntooke about 30 prisoners, most Officers and Gentlemen, with the loss of\ntwo men that dyed next morning; but severall wounded, and divers of our\ngood Horses killed.\"\n\nANNO DOMINI 1715. \"Time's whirligig\" hath brought about strange changes.\nA \"Restoration\" and a \"Glorious Revolution\" have passed across the\nstage. The faithful followers of the dethroned Stuarts, the \"royalists\"\nof the last century, have been transformed into the \"rebels\" of this.\nThe partizans of Prince James Francis Edward Stuart, styled the \"Elder\nPretender,\" after a successful march from Scotland, arrived at Preston,\nand took possession of the town.\n\nThe \"Chevalier\" was proclaimed king. Brigadier Macintosh was anxious to\ndefend the \"pass\" at Ribble-bridge, but, as the previous fortifications\nof the town had been destroyed, it was determined instead to barricade\nthe entrance to the principal streets. The town was besieged for two\ndays by Generals Wills and Carpenter. After a brave defence,\nnotwithstanding the incompetency of \"General\" Forster, the partizans of\nthe Stuart were compelled to surrender at discretion.[40]\n\nIn 1745, Prince Charles Edward, or the \"Young Pretender,\" as he was\nstyled, marched from Scotland on his way to Derby, through Preston; and\nagain, a little more expeditiously on his return therefrom.\n\nMr. Robert Chambers says--\"The clansmen had a superstitious dread, in\nconsequence of the misfortunes of their party at Preston, in 1715, that\nthey would never get beyond this town; to dispel the illusion, Lord\nGeorge Murray crossed the Ribble, and quartered a number of men on the\nother side.\" A single repulse could scarcely justify such foreboding.\nThe name of the Ribble had evidently become associated with previous\ndisasters, as well as with the relatively recent surrender of the Scotch\nand English forces under Forster, Derwentwater, and Macintosh in 1715.\n\nConsidering the many exquisite poetical effusions which the misfortunes\nof the Stuarts added to Scottish literature, it is surprising that\nnothing, but some of the veriest doggrels in relation thereto, can be\nmet with on the southern side of the border. \"Brigadier Macintosh's\nFarewell to the Highlands\" is beneath criticism, and \"Long Preston Peggy\nto Proud Preston went\" is not much better. In May, 1847, a story\nappeared in \"New Tales of the Borders and the British Isles.\" It is\nintroduced by the first stanza of the ballad. The scene is laid at\nWalton-le-dale and Preston, 1815. It is a sad jumble of fact and\nfiction. It confounds with one another events in the campaigns of 1715\nand 1745, and illustrates, to some extent, the confusion of history and\nartistic fiction discussed in the preceding pages of this work. Peggy,\nwho, in her old age, after a somewhat profuse indulgence in ardent\nspirits, had still some remains of a handsome face and fine person,\nfrequently sung the song of which she was the heroine, five and twenty\nyears after the occurrence of the events which gave rise to it.[41]\n\n\n\n\nAPPENDIX.\n\n\nTHE DISPOSAL OF ST. OSWALD'S REMAINS.\n\nMr. John Ingram, in his \"Claimants to Royalty,\" referring to the defeat\nof Don Sebastian, King of Portugal, in 1578, by the Moors, says--\"After\nthe fight, a corse, recognised by one of the survivors as the king's,\nwas discovered by the victorious Moors, and forwarded by the Emperor of\nMorocco as a present to his ally, Philip the Second of Spain. In 1583,\nthis monarch restored it to the Portuguese, by whom it was interred with\nall due solemnity in the royal mausoleum in the church of Our Lady of\nBelem.\" It thus seems that Dean Howson's conjecture, referred to at page\n62, is, at least, not without precedent.\n\n\nTHE DUN BULL, THE BADGE OF THE NEVILLES.\n\nMr. W. Brailsford, in \"The Antiquary\" (August, 1882), referring to the\nmarriage which united the properties of the Bulmers and the Nevilles, in\n1190, says--\"The dun bull, which is the badge of the Norman Nevilles,\nwas in reality derived from the Saxon Bulmers, though it has been\nthought by some antiquarian searchers to have had its origin from the\nwild cattle which, once on a time, like those still existing at\nChillingham, roamed in the park here, then and at a later date.\"\n\n\nTHE GENESIS OF MYTHS.\n\nWhen the preceding pages were nearly all in type, I ordered a copy of\nthe then just published essay entitled \"Myth and Science,\" by Signor\nTito Vignoli, in which the gradual development of mythic thought and\nexpression is expounded with great clearness and precision. He says, p.\n87-93:\n\n\"Doubtless it is difficult for us to picture for ourselves the psychical\nconditions of primitive men, at a time when the objects of perception\nand the apprehension of things were presented by an effort of memory to\nthe mind as if they were actual and living things, yet such conditions\nare not hypothetical, but really existed, as any one may ascertain for\nhimself who is able to realise that primitive state of mind, and we have\nsaid enough to show that such was its necessary condition.\n\n\"The fact becomes more intelligible when we consider man, and especially\nthe uneducated man, under the exciting influence of any passion, and how\nat such times he will, even when alone, gesticulate, speak aloud, and\nreply to internal questions which he imagines to be put to him by absent\npersons, against whom he is at the moment infuriated; the images of\nthese persons and things are, as it were, present and in agitation\nwithin him; and these images, in the fervour of emotion and under the\nstimulus of excitement, appear to be actually alive, although only\npresented to the inward psychical consciousness.\n\n\"In the natural man, in whom the intellectual powers were very slowly\ndeveloped, the animation and personification effected by his mind and\nconsciousness were threefold: first of the objects themselves as they\nreally existed, then of the idea or image corresponding to them in the\nmemory, and lastly of the specific types of these objects and images.\nThere was within him a vast and continuous drama, of which we are no\nlonger conscious, or only retain a faint and distant echo, but which is\npartly revealed by a consideration of the primitive value of words and\ntheir roots in all languages. The meaning of these, which is now for the\nmost part lost and unintelligible, always expressed a material and\nconcrete fact, or some gesture. This is true of classic tongues, and is\nwell known to all educated people, and it recurs in the speech of all\nsavage and barbarous races.\n\n\"_Ia Rau_ is used to express _all_ in the Marquesas Isles. _Rau_\nsignifies _leaves_, so that the term implies something as numerous as\nthe leaves of a tree. _Rau_ is also now used for _sound_, an expression\nwhich includes in itself the conception of _all_, but which originally\nsignified a fact, a real and concrete phenomenon, and it was felt as\nsuch in the ancient speech in which it was used in this sense. So again\nin Tahiti _huru_, _ten_, originally signified _hairs_; _rima_, _five_,\nwas at first used for _hand_; _riri_, _anger_, literally means _he\nshouts_. _Uku_ in the Marquesas Isles means _to lower the head_, and is\nnow used for _to enter a house_. _K\u00f9ku_, which had the same original\nname in New Zealand, now expresses the act of diving. The Polynesian\nword _toro_ at first indicated anything in the position of a hand with\nextended fingers, whence comes the Tahitian term for ox, _pua\u00e1toro_,\n_stretching pig_, in allusion to the way in which an ox carries his\nhead. _To\u00f3_ (Marquesas), to put forward the hand, is now used for _to\ntake_. _Tongo_ (Marquesas), to grope with extended arms, leads to\n_protongo tongo_, _darkness_. In New Zealand, _wairua_, in Tahiti\n_varua_, signifies soul or spirit, from _vai_, to remain in a recumbent\nposition, and _rua_, two; that is _to be in two places_, since they\nbelieved that in sickness or in dreams the soul left the body.[42]\nThroughout Polynesia, _moe_ signifies a recumbent position or to sleep,\nand in Tahiti _moe pipiti_ signifies a double sleep or dream, from\n_moe_, to sleep, and _piti_, two. In New Zealand, _moenaku_ means to try\nto grasp something during sleep; from _naku_, to take in the fingers.\n\n\"We can understand something of the mysterious exercise of human\nintelligence in its earliest development from this habit of symbolizing\nand presenting in an outward form an abstract conception, thus giving a\nconcrete meaning and material expression to the external fact. We see\nhow everything assumed a concrete, living form, and can better\nunderstand the conditions we have established as necessary in the early\ndays of the development of human life. This attitude of the intelligence\nhad been often stated before, but in an incomplete way; the primitive\nand subsequent myths have been confounded together;\" [See ante, p.p. 44,\net seq., et 116.] \"and it has been supposed that myth was of\nexclusively human origin, whereas it has its roots lower down in the\nvast animal kingdom.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n\"Anthropomorphism, and the personification of the things and phenomena\nof nature, and their images and specific types, were the great source\nwhence issued superstitions, mythologies, and religions, and, also, as\nwe shall presently see, the scientific errors to be found among all the\nfamilies of the human race.\n\n\"For the development of myth, which is in itself always a human\npersonification of natural objects and phenomena in some form or other,\nthe first and necessary foundation consists, as we have abundantly\nshown, in the conscious and deliberate vivification of objects by the\nperception and apprehension of animals. And since this is a condition of\nanimal perception, it is also the foundation of all human life, and of\nthe spontaneous and innate exercise of the intelligence. In fact, man,\nby a two-fold process, raises above his animal nature a world of images,\nideas, and conceptions from the types he has formed of various\nphenomena, and his attitude towards this internal world does not differ\nfrom his attitude towards that which is external. He personifies the\nimages, ideas, and conceptions, by transforming them into living\nsubjects, just as he had originally personified cosmic objects and\nphenomena.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n\"This was the source of primitive, confused, and inorganic fetishism\namong all peoples; namely, that they ascribed intentional and conscious\nlife to a host of natural objects and phenomena. Hence came the fears,\nthe adoration, the guardianship of, or abhorrence for, some given\nspecies of stones, plants, animals, some strange forms or unusual\nnatural object. The subsequent adoration of idols and images, all sorts\nof talismans, the virtue of relics, dreams, incantations and exorcisms,\nhad the same origin, and were all due to this primitive genesis of the\nfetish. the internal duplication of the external animation and\npersonification of objects.\"\n\n\nANGLO-SAXON HELMET.\n\nThe remains of a very fine example of the Anglo-Saxon helmet referred to\nin chapter ii., was found by the late Mr. Bateman, in 1848, at Benty\nGrange, in Derbyshire. He says--\"It was our good fortune to open a\nbarrow which afforded a more instructive collection of relics than has\never been discovered in the country, and which are not surpassed in\ninterest by any remains hitherto recovered from any Anglo-Saxon burial\nplace in the kingdom.\" Amongst these remains was the head-piece referred\nto. After describing the details of its structure, he adds--\"On the\ncrown of the helmet is an elliptical bronze plate supporting the figure\nof an animal carved in iron, with bronze eyes, now much corroded, but\nperfectly distinct as the representation of a hog.\"\n\n\n\n\nINDEX.\n\n\n A.\n\n Abram, 138, 143\n\n Achilleus, 39, 46, 53\n\n Acquitania, 41\n\n Adam's Peak, 117\n\n Adils, 175, et seq.\n\n Agamemnon, 40\n\n Agricola, Julius, 4\n\n Agrimensores, 87\n\n Aix-la-Chapelle, 40\n\n Albinus, St., 20\n\n Alexander, 43, 44\n\n Alfgeirr, 175 et seq. 194\n\n Allectus, 192\n\n Alfred the Great, 44, 63, 77, 81, 168, 173, 175, 194\n\n Ancient Monuments, 44\n\n Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, 7, 27, 32, 35, 61, 130, 131, 134, 143, 165, 167,\n   170, 179, 204\n\n Aneurin, 19, 114\n\n Anlaf, 170, et seq.\n\n Annales Cambria, 195\n\n Anselm, 45\n\n Anthony, St., 116\n\n Arbury, 85\n\n Arminius or Herman, 75\n\n Armorica (Brittany), 18, 20, 38\n\n Artemis, 113\n\n Arthur, 6, et seq., 34, 35, 37, 42, 44, 46, 50, 56, 77, 103, 114, 116\n\n Arthur's Sepulchre at Glastonbury, 8\n\n Aruthur (Welsh word), 21\n\n Aryan Myths, 100\n\n \u00c6sthetic Truth, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 58, 59\n\n Ashton, Col.-Gen., 161, et seq.\n\n Athelstan, King, 41, 164, et seq.\n\n Augustine, St., 32, 94, 184\n\n\n B.\n\n Baines, Edward, 62, 66, 73, 74, 77, 90, 92, 99, 136, 148, 153, 157\n\n Baines, Thomas, 62, 207\n\n Bale, John, 185\n\n Bamborough, 62\n\n Bamber Bridge, 198\n\n Bangor-Iscoed, 32, 33, 34\n\n Barbarism and Civilization, 129\n\n Bardney, Lincolnshire, 61, 68\n\n Barham-Down, 34\n\n Baring-Gould, Rev., 107\n\n Barrett, 107\n\n Battle Abbey, 42\n\n Beamont, W., 64, 66, 77, 78, 81\n\n Bede, the Venerable, 15, 18, 19, 56, 61, 68, 71, 87, 92, 95, 105\n\n Beowulf, 88, 101, 105, 113, 187\n\n Bickerton, 207\n\n Billangahoh, 130, et seq.\n\n Blackrod, 22, 30\n\n \"Blackburnshire, De Statu,\", 144\n\n Blackwell, J. A., 168\n\n Boar, or Hog, Wild, 61, 99, 100, 108, et seq.\n\n Boscowen, W. St. Chad, 45\n\n Bewcastle and Ruthwell monuments, 9\n\n Boece, 25\n\n Bojorix, 112\n\n Bolton Hall, Bolland, 150\n\n Bosworth, Rev. J., 65\n\n Bovium, 34\n\n Bramha, 120\n\n Bravalla, Fight at, 42\n\n Brigantes, 3, 5, 30\n\n Brindle, 196, 205, 208\n\n Brinhildr or Brunhild, 197\n\n Brit-Welsh, 34, 45, 67, 75\n\n British Urns, 4\n\n Brockhall, 137 et seq.\n\n Brocmail, 35\n\n Bruce, Robert, 210, 211\n\n Brunanburh, 164, et seq.\n\n Brut, 7, 11, 25, 27, 67, 73, 94\n\n Brut-y-Tywysogion, 195\n\n Bryn, Brun, and Burne, 73, 74, 97\n\n Brynhild, 39\n\n Budda, 117\n\n Bullasey-ford, 138, 139, 146\n\n Buried Treasure, 192, 193\n\n Bungerley hyppyngstones 146, 149, 158\n\n Burial Mound, Ancient British 208\n\n Bury, Adam de, 157\n\n Bury Castle, Traditionary Siege of, 154, et seq.\n\n Byron, Lord, 53\n\n\n C.\n\n Cadwalla, or Cadwallon, 26, 27, 63, 67, 72, 93, 94\n\n Caldean Heliopolis, 45\n\n Camden, 93, 189\n\n C\u00e6rwent, 14\n\n C\u00e6dmon, 125, 187\n\n Caerleon on Usk, 14\n\n Camelot, 14\n\n Cannon-balls, 152\n\n Canute, 181, 188\n\n Cardoile, Carlisle, 14\n\n Carausius, 192\n\n Cartismandua, 4\n\n Castle Field, Manchester, 35\n\n Caster-cliff, near Colne, 4\n\n Castle Hill, 70, 77, 78, 84, 206\n\n Castle Stead, near Bury, 157\n\n Carlyle, Thomas, 51, 161, 213, 219\n\n Catraeth, Fight at, 123\n\n Centwine, 9\n\n Chambers, Robert, 222\n\n Charlemagne, 39, 40, 42, 103\n\n Charles I., King, 150, et seq.\n\n Charles Edward Stuart, Prince, 221\n\n Chester, 32, 33, 34\n\n Chevy-Chase, 31\n\n Childe Harold's Pilgrimage, 54\n\n Chivalry, 6\n\n Christianity and Paganism, 165, 166, 172\n\n Christopher, St., Legend of, 135\n\n Chronicles of the Princes of Wales, 195\n\n Civilization, Origin of, 116\n\n Clitheroe Castle, 148, et seq.\n\n Clitheroe Castle, Traditional Siege of, 151, 153\n\n Clifford, Lord, 124\n\n Cocboy, 74\n\n Codoy, 65\n\n Coffins, Oak Tree, 10\n\n Coffin, Stone, at Brindle, 208\n\n Coins, Roman, 200, 204\n\n Colgrin, 24, 27, 148\n\n Conybeare, 101\n\n Constantine, King of the Scots, 171, 176\n\n Coote, H. C., 87\n\n Cox, Rev. Sir G. W., 46, 100, 118\n\n Cremation, 80, 82, 84, 87, 88\n\n Crests, or Totems, 109, seq.\n\n Crusades, 40\n\n Cromwell, 43, 99, 151 et seq., 213 et seq.\n\n Cromwell Legends, 217\n\n Croyland, 43\n\n Cuerdale Find, The Great 188, et seq.\n\n Cuerden, 200\n\n\n D.\n\n Danes' \"Pad\", 202\n\n Danish Invasions, 133, 165, et seq.\n\n Dasent, Dr. Sir G. W., 15, 108, 127\n\n Darwen, Over, 5, 208\n\n Dawkins, Prof. Boyd, 31, 32, 73\n\n Deira, 35\n\n Denisburn, 93\n\n Derby, Earl of, 150, 155, 212, 220\n\n Dialects, Provincial, 144\n\n Dickens, Charles, 35\n\n Dietrich, 45\n\n Documents, Destruction of, 182, 184, 185, 186\n\n Domesday Book, 89, 196\n\n Douglas, 7, 11, 12, 14, 21, 24, 26, 27, 34, 37, 133, 148\n\n Dragons, 101, 105, 107, 110, 123, 132\n\n Dublin, 203\n\n Durham, Simeon of, 201\n\n\n E.\n\n Eardulph, King, 130, et seq., 147\n\n Earwaker, Mr., 64\n\n Easter, 106\n\n Edda, 28, 39, 115\n\n Editha, Athelstan's Sister, 170\n\n Edisford, 146, 148, 161\n\n Edmund the Atheling, 176\n\n Edwall Voel, King of Gwynnedd, 169\n\n Edward the Confessor, 182\n\n Edward the Elder, King, 169\n\n Edwin, King of Northumbria, 26, 27, 61, 95, 185\n\n Ecgfrith, 34\n\n Egbert, King, 180\n\n Egil, 173, et seq.\n\n Ella, King, 166, 168\n\n Ellis, Mr. G., 37\n\n Elmet, 33\n\n Elphin, St., 87\n\n Elston, William, 205\n\n Elton, C., 122\n\n England, Making of, 15, 19, 21\n\n Erich, King, 47\n\n Ethelbald, King, 43\n\n Ethelfrith, King, 32, 33\n\n Ethelred, King, 130, 133\n\n Ethrunanwerch, 201\n\n Etymological, 62, et seq.\n\n Exoniensis Codex, 187\n\n Extwistle-moor, Remains on, 4\n\n\n F.\n\n Fafnir, 100\n\n Fairfax, Gen., 211\n\n Fairy Mythology, 116\n\n Falstaff, Sir John, 13\n\n Farrar, J. A., 129\n\n Fenton, J., 106\n\n Fergusson, Dr. J., 11, 82, 83\n\n Finns, The, 117\n\n Finnesburg, Fight of, 113, 187\n\n Fiske, Mr., 6, 18, 38, 108, 119\n\n Florence of Worcester, 32\n\n Folk-lore, 129\n\n Forster, Gen., 221\n\n Freeman, E. A., 39, 40, 172\n\n Freya, or Friga, 113, 114\n\n Frey's Howe, Upsala, 83\n\n\n G.\n\n Galahad, Sir, 50\n\n Gargrave, Skirmish near, 215\n\n Gawain, Sir, 37\n\n Gawsworth, 135\n\n Geoffrey of Monmouth, 5, 6, 7, 13, 18, 19, 24, 26, 32, 37, 41, 42\n\n Geological Phenomena, 141\n\n Geraint, 17\n\n Gerards of Bryn, 74\n\n Gervinus, Dr., 55, 58, 59, 128\n\n Giant Stories, 11\n\n Gilbert de Lacy, 196\n\n Gildas, 5, 18, 19, 20, 33, 34, 184\n\n Giles, Dr., 26, 190\n\n Giraldus Cambrensis, 20\n\n Gladstone, W. E., 18\n\n Glendwr, Owen, 123\n\n Gododin, The, 114\n\n Godrun, 168\n\n Golborne, 66, 77, 78\n\n Gothrun, the Dane, 180\n\n Green, J. R., 15, 19, 26, 33, 65, 73, 97, 104, 125, 136, 145, 166\n\n Gregory, St., 184\n\n Grendel, 101\n\n Grimm, J., 22, 118, 122\n\n Gudrekir, 194, 195\n\n Guest, Dr., 15\n\n Guilds, Preston, 210\n\n Ginevra, Queen, 11\n\n Guy of Warwick, Sir, 41, 106\n\n Gwynedd, 33\n\n\n H.\n\n Hacking Hall, 138\n\n Haigh, Mr. D. H., 7, 11, 15, 20, 24, 27, 60, 88, 101, 134, 136, 148,\n   184\n\n Hamilton, Duke of, 99, 153, et seq., 213, 214\n\n Hamlet, 38\n\n Hammerton, P. G., 52\n\n Harald Blatand, etc., 28, 41\n\n Harald Hildetand, 41\n\n Harrington, Sir J., 149, 150\n\n Harold, King, 48\n\n Hartlepool, 101\n\n Hartshorne, Mr., 72\n\n Harvest-Blasters, 109, 126\n\n Hasty Knoll, 21\n\n Hawkins, Mr., 188\n\n Hazlit, 105\n\n Heavenfield, 67, 68, 93\n\n Heathfield, 26, 95\n\n \"Heathen-men\" (Danes), 132\n\n Helmets, 111, 227\n\n Helmet, Anglo-Saxon, 227\n\n Hengist and Horsa, 6, 110\n\n Henry VI., King, 149, 158\n\n Henry of Huntingdon, 183\n\n Heraclids, 6\n\n Heraldry, 109, et seq.\n\n Herodotus, 110, 118\n\n Hildebrand, Herr, 82, 83\n\n Historia Britonum, 18\n\n Historical Documents, Destruction of, 158\n\n Historical Novels, 47, 48, 50, 52, 54, 57, 59\n\n Historical Pictures, 55\n\n Hodgson, Col., 161, et seq., 214\n\n Hoel, 17\n\n Hollingworth, 15, 30, 66\n\n Homer, 35, 38, 52\n\n Honorius, 15\n\n Horatii and Curiatii, Tombs of, 51\n\n Horse Shoes, Ancient, 23, 24\n\n Howorth, Mr. H. H., 27, 41\n\n Howson, Dean, 62, 68\n\n Hrothgar, 101\n\n Hubbertsty, T., 137, 138, 139, 140\n\n Huntington, Henry of, 12, 25, 195\n\n Hwiccas, or Gewissas, 65\n\n Hygelac, 102\n\n Hyngr, 175, et seq.\n\n\n I.\n\n Iceland, 28, 42\n\n Iceni, 3\n\n Ida, 16\n\n Idylls of the King, 57\n\n Igerna, 17\n\n Illiad, 35, 38\n\n Inaccuracy of Ancient MSS., 187\n\n Indra, 39, 46, 100\n\n Ingulph, 195\n\n Isdubar, Giant, 45\n\n\n J.\n\n Jack the Giant-Killer, 47\n\n Johannes, Prior of Hagulstald, 148\n\n Johnson, Rev. H., 66\n\n Joseph of Arimathea, 37\n\n Jylgja, Guardian Spirit, 127\n\n\n K.\n\n Kabyls, 112\n\n Kains-Jackson, C. P., 44\n\n Kalydonian Hunt, 113\n\n Kay, Sir, 37\n\n Keightley, 116\n\n Kelly, W. K., 108\n\n Kemble, J. M., 65, 135, 187, 198\n\n Kendrick, Dr., 62, 86, 87\n\n King of England, First, 180\n\n Kuerden, Dr., 200, 210\n\n Kyklops, 39\n\n\n L.\n\n Lake District, 34\n\n Lambert, Major-General, 153, 162\n\n Lancashire Civil War Troops, 153, 163\n\n Lancashire Dialect, 75\n\n Lancashire Militia, 216\n\n Landisfarne, 69\n\n Lancelot, Sir, 35, 37, 50\n\n Langdale, Marquis of, 153, et seq., 213, et seq.\n\n Language, Life and Growth of, 75\n\n Langho, 134, et seq.\n\n Lanscado, Scather of the Land, 122\n\n Lappenberg, 27\n\n Latchford, 74, 75, 86, 193\n\n Leofric, Earl, 145\n\n Lichfield, Bishopric of, 146\n\n Lilburne, Col., 220\n\n Lindeley, John, Abbot of Whalley, 144\n\n Linguistics, 75\n\n Linuis, 11, 21, 23, 35\n\n Littler, T., 62\n\n Lloyd, Howel W., 64\n\n Lombards, 28\n\n Loyalty and Rebellion, 219, 221\n\n Lubbock, Sir John, 116\n\n Luther's Picture of the Devil, 51\n\n Llywarch Hen, 17, 26\n\n Lytton, Lord, 35, 47, 48\n\n\n M.\n\n Macaulay, T. B., 53\n\n Magic Cudgel, 47\n\n Mallet, M., 57, 117\n\n Malory, Sir Thomas, 14, 50\n\n Malmesbury, William of, 9, 12, 175, 195\n\n Mameceastre, 144\n\n Manchester, 12, 30, 33\n\n Map, Walter, 18, 50\n\n Marcelde, 66, 67\n\n Martin Mere, 23\n\n Maserfeld, Macerfeld, Marcelde, Mackerfield, 61, 62, et seq.\n\n Meldrum, Sir John, 213\n\n Merchant, Guild, 210\n\n Merlin, 17, 37, 114\n\n Mesbury, 64, 72\n\n Metcalfe, Fred, 44, 101, 114, 175, 186\n\n Metempsychosis, 119\n\n Metrical Romances, 57\n\n Milman, Dean, 49, 51\n\n Milton, John, 214\n\n Missionaries, the first, 145\n\n Modred, 34\n\n Moll, Herman, 197\n\n Monsters, Mythical, 113, 115\n\n Morgan, The Rev. R. W., 10, 19, 24\n\n Morley, Prof. H., 6\n\n Morris, 37\n\n Morte, Adam, 212\n\n Morte, D'Arthur, 14, 34\n\n Mote-hill, Warrington, 86\n\n M\u00fcller, Max, 41\n\n Myths, 5, 6, 7, 37, 38, 39, 43, 46, 57\n\n Myths, Genesis of, 224\n\n\n N.\n\n Nennius, 5, 7, 11, 12, 18, 19, 20, 21, 23, 50, 51, 65, 67, 68, 72, 74,\n   88, 92, 107, 110, 148, 184\n\n Newbury, William of, 13\n\n Nicholas, St., 117\n\n Nichols, J. G., 149\n\n Nimrod, 45\n\n Northumbria, Southern Boundary of, 143, 145\n\n Nursery Tales, 38\n\n\n O.\n\n Odin, 38, 44, 47, 101\n\n Odins' Howe, Upsala, 82\n\n Odyssey, 35, 39, 118\n\n Offa, 102\n\n Origins of English History, 122\n\n Ostorious Scapula, 4\n\n Oswald, St., 26, 33, 61, et seq., 133, 224\n\n Oswald's Well, St., 66, 69, 91\n\n Oswestry, 62, 65, 72, 90\n\n Oswy, 68, 73, 96\n\n\n P.\n\n Palgrave, Sir Francis, 48, 176\n\n Panis, 39\n\n Panizzi, Sig., 6\n\n Paulinus, 89, 94, 144, 185\n\n Pagan Symbols destroyed, 185\n\n Parker, Archbishop, 185\n\n Parkinson, Mr., 140, et seq.\n\n Patten, The Rev. Mr., 218\n\n Penda, 26, 61, 62, 67, 72, 73, 74, 92, 95, 115, 133\n\n Percy, Bishop, 31\n\n Petilius Cerealis, 4, 30\n\n Phene, Dr., 103\n\n Phonetic Laws, 75\n\n Pictish Customs, 103\n\n Pilkington, Sir T., 153\n\n Pitris, or Fathers, 120, 125\n\n Poem, Anglo-Saxon, on the Battle of Brunanburh, 178\n\n Potter's Ford, 143\n\n Prehistoric Battlefields, 3, 30\n\n Preston, Great Battle of, 213, et seq.\n\n Pretender, the Elder, 221\n\n Primitive Culture, 36\n\n Puritan prophetic superstition, 219\n\n\n R.\n\n Raines, Canon, 137, 138\n\n Ragnar Lodbrock, 166, 168\n\n Rebellion and Loyalty, 147\n\n Red Bank, near Winwick, 99\n\n Ribchester, 12, 151, 210, 211\n\n Ribble-bridge, Battle at, 221\n\n Ribbleton Moor, Fight on, 162\n\n Richard III., 125\n\n Richard C\u0153ur de Lion, 44, 102, 103\n\n Richard of Cirencester, 143\n\n Richmond, Earl of, 126\n\n Roach-Smith, C., 204\n\n Roberts, Askew, 64, 91\n\n Robin Hood, 44, 77, 78\n\n Robson, Dr., 83, 85\n\n Roman Remains at Walton, 218\n\n Roman Wall, 204\n\n Round Table, The, 14, 77\n\n Rosworm, Col., 212\n\n Runes, 184\n\n Russians, 117\n\n\n S.\n\n Saga, 102, 127, 183\n\n St. George, 100\n\n Salt Hill, Clitheroe, 152\n\n Samson, 45\n\n Sangraal, 37\n\n Saracens, 41, 103\n\n Saxo-Grammaticus, 28, 41, 42, 51\n\n Saxton, C., 197\n\n Scandinavia, 57, 103\n\n Science, Genesis of, 128\n\n Scop, or Gleeman's Tale, 41, 187\n\n Scotch Warriors, Grave of, 217, 218\n\n Scott, Sir Walter, 35, 47, 49, 52\n\n Seaton, Sir John, 212\n\n Serpents, 104, 106\n\n Setantii, Sistuntii, or Segantii, 3, 23\n\n Shakspere, 13, 38, 47, 58, 123, 128\n\n Sharon-Turner, 34, 67, 73, 175, 176, 177, 180\n\n Sherburne, Bishop of, 174\n\n Shuttleworth, Col., 212\n\n Siege of Preston in 1715, 221\n\n Siege of Preston in 1643, 211\n\n Sigurd, 39, 46, 100\n\n Sihtric or Sigtryg, 170\n\n Simeon of Durham, 130, 179, 194, 195\n\n Sibson, Rev. E., 21, 62, 77, 78, 81, 87\n\n Skene, Mr., 15, 19, 68, 189\n\n Solar Myths, 39, 40, 45, 46\n\n Songs resultant from the Stuart Troubles, 222, 223\n\n Spear Heads, Ancient, 85\n\n Spencer, Herbert, 120\n\n Spurs, Ancient, 23, 29\n\n Stephen, Leslie, 48, 50\n\n Stevenson, Mr., 18\n\n Stone Hammers, 85\n\n Stonyhurst, 152, 157, 160\n\n Strachey, Sir Edward, 14, 16, 17\n\n Stubbs and Haddon (Councils of Britain), 19\n\n Superstitious explanations of Natural Phenomena, 147\n\n Surnames, 121\n\n Sweyn, King, 181\n\n Swords, Magic, 47\n\n\n T.\n\n Tacitus, 114\n\n Talbot, T. and J., 149, 150\n\n Taliesin, 17, 35, 44\n\n Talleyrand, 44\n\n Tarquin, Sir, 35\n\n Taylor, Rev. I., 112\n\n Tempest, Sir John, 149, 150, 162\n\n Tennyson, 37, 60\n\n Thackeray, 35\n\n Theodoric, 45\n\n Theophilus, Story of, 45\n\n Thor, 47\n\n Thorolf, 175, et seq.\n\n Thorpe, B., 101, 102\n\n Tildesley, Sir Thos., 220\n\n Totems, or Crests, 109, et seq.\n\n Traveller's Tale, Poem, 134, 136\n\n Tre, Welsh prefix, 96\n\n Treasure, Buried, 192, 193\n\n Tristan, Sir, 37\n\n Troy, 53\n\n Tumuli, Ancient, 83, 85, 86, 87, 137, et seq., 205, 208\n\n Turketal, the English Chancellor, 176, 177\n\n Turkomans, 118\n\n Turner, J. M. W., 52\n\n Tylor, E. B., 5, 36, 56, 111, 128\n\n\n U.\n\n Ulster, Annals of, 35\n\n Urien of Rheged, 16, 17, 27\n\n Urns, Ancient, 81, 83, 84\n\n Upsala, 29\n\n Uther Pendragon, 110, 123\n\n\n V.\n\n V\u00e1mb\u00e9ry, Arminius, 43, 49, 119\n\n Vergil, Polydore, 186\n\n Venutius, 4\n\n Vicinal ways, Roman, 205, 208\n\n Volsung Tale, 120\n\n Vritra, 100\n\n\n W.\n\n Wada, 130, et seq.\n\n Wada, Weland and Egil, 134\n\n Wade's Boat, 135\n\n Walhalla, 115\n\n Wallace, Mackenzie, 117\n\n Wars of the Roses, 158, 210\n\n Warwick, Earl of, 124\n\n Watkin, W. T., 87\n\n Watling street, 136, 194\n\n Wearden, 199\n\n Weddle, C. A., 190, 199, 209\n\n Well, St. Oswald's, 91, 92\n\n Welsh Tribute, Heavy, 170\n\n Werewolves, 119, 122\n\n West Kent, kingdom of, 145\n\n Weyland's Smithy, 136\n\n Whitney, Professor D., 63, 75\n\n Whitaker, the Rev. Jno., 7, 11, 15, 21, 26, 34, 35, 86, 198\n\n Whitaker, Dr., 136, et seq., 193\n\n White, Dr. A. D., 57\n\n Whittle Springs, 197\n\n Wigan, 12, 22, 30\n\n Wigan Lane, battle of, 220\n\n Wild Huntsman, 45\n\n William, the Norman Conqueror, 182, 189\n\n Wilkinson, T. T., 4, 100\n\n Winwick, 61, et seq.\n\n Winwidfield, 97\n\n Wornum, R., 56\n\n Worsaae, Dr., 188\n\n Worde, Wynkyn de, 10\n\n Worms, Huge, 104, 106\n\n Wright, T., 29, 88\n\n\n X.\n\n Ximines, Cardinal, 186\n\n\n Y.\n\n York, 33\n\n Yornzi, 117\n\n Ywain, Sir, 17, 37\n\n\n Z.\n\n Zumarraga, Archbishop, 186\n\n\nABEL HEYWOOD AND SON, PRINTERS, MANCHESTER.\n\n\n\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[1] His. Preston, viii.\n\n[2] Mr. Haigh's ingenious hypothesis, however, is not accepted by\nhistorical students generally.\n\n[3] \"It was twenty-six feet high, and had inscribed on it these names,\nand two others, Bregored and Beorward. Centwine became King of the West\nSaxons, and Hedde, Bishop of Winchester, in A.D. 676; the former became\na monk in A.D. 683, the latter died in A.D. 705. Bregored was an Abbot\nof Glastonbury (but not in the times of the Britons, as William of\nMalmsbury concluded from his name, for it is clearly Saxon), and\nBeorward may be the Abbot Beornwald who attested a charter of Ine in\nA.D. 704. The larger pyramid, twenty-eight feet high, which stood at the\nhead of the grave, is said to have been in a very ruinous condition, and\nthe only intelligible words in the inscription upon it (as given by\nWilliam of Malmsbury), are the names of Wulfred and Eanfled. The\ndiscovery of these trunk coffins at Glastonbury has not been noticed by\nMr. Wright, in his account of the similar discoveries at Gristhorpe,\nBeverley, Driffield, and Selby (_Gent. Mag._ 1857. vol. ii. p. 114), nor\nby Mr. Wylie in his paper on the Oberflacht graves (_Arch\u00e6ologia_, vol.\nxxxvi., p. 129), but deserves to be mentioned in connection with them.\"\n\n[4] The Rev. E. Sibson says:--\"A piece of high ground near the Scholes\nis called King Arthur's camp.\"--_Man. Lit. and Phil. Soc. Transactions,\nApril_, 1845.\n\n[5] Giving a man \"wigan,\" in the present vernacular of the county, is\nsynonymous to giving him a good threshing.\n\nJacob Grimm, in his \"Deutsche Mythologie,\" says the Old High German\n_wig_, pugna, seems occasionally to denote the personal god of war.\n\nThe modern English word \"vie,\" to contend, to fight, to strive for\nsuperiority, is derived from the Anglo-Saxon _wigian_, _wiggan_, which\nare cognate to the Gothic _veigan_ (Collins's Dic. Der.) _Wig_, war,\nwarfare, battle (Bosworth, A.S. Dic.)\n\n[6] The district referred to is variously written _Linuis_, _Cinuis_,\nand _Inniis_.\n\n[7] Nennius calls him \"Catgublaun, king of Guenedot,\" Gwynedd, North\nWales.\n\n[8] Anglo-Saxon Chron. and Bede.\n\n[9] Dr. Giles, Mr. Green, and others, say--\"Hatfield, in the West Riding\nof Yorkshire, about seven miles to the north-east of Doncaster,\" and\nthis seems the most probable site.\n\n[10] Variation, Brocmail.\n\n[11] Dean Howson, in an address delivered at Chester, in 1873, in\nreference to the disputed site of Oswald's death, said--\"He was not\ngoing to decide between the claims of the two places, but he was\ninclined to think both views might be reconciled. Oswald had a palace at\nWinwick, and there was a well there that bore his name, and an\ninscription that recorded his attachment to the locality. Oswestry was\nsaid to mean Oswald's tree. There was no reason why they should not\nbelieve that he was killed at Winwick, and that his head and arms were\ntaken away and put on a stump of wood at Oswestry. The conflicting\nstatements would then be reconciled.\" Such an act would, in no way, be\ninconsistent with the character of Penda. He might send the remains to\nhis Welsh allies as trophies of his victory over the vanquisher of their\ngreat chief, Cadwalla.\n\n[12] Bosworth, in his Anglo-Saxon dictionary, under the letter K, says,\n\"Though the A. S. generally used _c_, even before _e_, _i_, and _y_, yet\nas _k_ is sometimes found,\" he gives a list of words commencing with\nthat consonant under such conditions. The Anglo-Saxon \"Cymen's ora\" is\nnow represented by Keynor. Kemble says the homes of the Elsingas\nand Elcinghas, are now represented by Elsing and Elkington, in\nNorthamptonshire. Mr. Green speaks of \"those Gewissas, the Hwiccas, as\nthey were called,\" and Peille says, \"Indo-European _ky_ and _ty_ become\n_ss_, as in 'prasso' for 'prack-yo' (root 'prack,' formative suffix\n'yo.')\"\n\n[13] The etymology on which Mr. Howel W. Lloyd, the recent able advocate\nfor the Shropshire site, and others, rely, (Earwaker's Local Gatherings\nrelating to Lancashire, vol. i., 1876, and the summary, by Mr.\nAskew Roberts, in his \"Contributions to Oswestry History,\") is as\nfollows:--Referring to Mr. Lloyd's paper, Mr. Roberts states his\nposition thus:--\"Mesbury (now Maesbury, called in Domesday Meresbury), a\nhamlet in the parish of Oswestry, is now called 'Llysfeisir or Llys\nfeisydd.'\" He adds--\"Thus a basis is supplied for a correct inference as\nto the order of nomenclature. 1. The Welsh Te-fesen, corrupted by the\nSaxons into Mesafelth or Maserfelth, and then into Maserfield, the name\nof the district in which is Oswestry, as Winwick is in Makerfield. 2.\nThe monastery founded on the spot in honour of St. Oswald, called Album\nMonasterium, Candida Ecclesia Y Fonachlog Wen (by the Welsh according to\nDavies), and Blancmonster and Blancminster by the Normans, all meaning\nthe same thing, viz.:--White Monastery, applied latterly also to the\ntown, which grew up around the monastery. 3. Mesbury, corrupted into\nMaesbury, when the town in Trefesen, to which a Fitzalan granted a\ncharter, grew into a borough; and 4, Oswaldestree or Oswestry, from the\n'tre' or district, or else possibly from the traditional tree, on which\nthe king's arm was recorded to have been hung. A further basis is\nsupplied for reconciling the statement of Nennius, that the battle was\nfought at Codoy, with that of the Saxon historian that it was fought at\nMaserfield. For just as Winwick is in Mackerfield, so may Codoy have\nbeen in the larger locality of Maserfield; and Nennius, as a British\nhistorian, representing, as his editors believe him to do, a much\nearlier author, gives, as might naturally be expected, the precise\nsituation of the spot, the territorial appellation only for which\nreached the foreign and more distant chroniclers. From all this it is\ncertain that Oswestry had its Maserfield as Winwick its Mackerfield, the\nformer, however, more nearly reflecting the ancient British name, as\nwell as character of the place, but both alike designating a district\nrather than a town, that being the ancient meaning of the word 'tre.'\nMaserfelth is, therefore, Oak-field, a translation of the original\nBritish name of Trefesen (compare English 'mast,') and the arms\nconnected St. Oswald with the Oak.\"\n\n[14] There is great difficulty in reconciling the various statements\nrespecting this Cadwalla. Mr. Skene (\"Four Ancient Books of Wales\")\nthinks it not improbable that it was his father, Cadvan, who fell at\nHeavenfield, and not himself. If Cadwalla fought at Maserfeld, Dean\nHowson's conjecture is rendered more probable. See Ante, p. 62. Revenge\nfor his father's death might induce him to display his trophies of\nvictory over his previously successful rival before his Brit-Welsh\nsubjects at a locality afterwards named Oswestry.\n\n[15] Mr. Hartshorne, however, refers to this story in connection with\nhis claim of \"Maesbrook, a place in a direct line between Maesbury and\nCoedway, and about five miles from Oswestry,\" as the site of Oswald's\ndefeat, and connects a local legend with it.\n\n[16] For a long time after the death of Oswald, the present Shropshire\nremained British, or as Professor Boyd Dawkins appropriately terms it,\n\"Brit-Welsh,\" territory.--See Mr. Green's maps.\n\n[17] The Welsh authorities write this word \"Codoy.\" The Rev. W. Gunn and\nDr. Giles, \"Cocboy.\"\n\n[18] The martyrdom is a very doubtful matter; indeed, it is more than\nprobable this name of the field, and its presumed etymology, gave birth\nto the legend, or it may have been an ancient burial place. A Lancashire\npeasant pronounces the word neither, nather and nother, at the present\nday, while some clergymen pronounce it nigh-ther. The Lancashire\ncontraction for James is Jim not Jem, as in the South of England. I have\noften heard China pronounced \"Chaney\" by Lancashire people. The number\nof ancient burial tumuli to the north of the ford may possibly have\ninfluenced the local nomenclature. In Webster's dictionary a third\nmeaning to the word \"latch\" is thus described: \"3. [Fr. l\u00e9cher, to lick,\npour. O. H. Ger. _lecch\u00f4n_. See LICK.] To smear [Obs.]\"\n\n[19] The Rev. E. Sibson says--\"The streams which unite at this barrow\nare the Dene and the Sankey.\" Mr. Beamont says the tumulus is situated\non the Golbourne brook.\n\n[20] \"Siculus Flaccus says that it was the practice of some\n_agrimensores_ to place under _termini_ ashes, or charcoal, or pieces of\nbroken glass or pottery, or _asses_, or lime, or plaster (gypsum)....\nThe writer of a later treatise, or rather compilation, attributed to\nBo\u00ebthius, speaking upon the same subject, enumerates as the objects to\nbe so placed, ashes, or charcoals, or potsherds, or bones, or glass,\nor _ass\u00e6_ of iron, or brass, or lime, or plaster, or a fictile\nvessel.\"--\"_The Romans of Britain_,\" _by H. C. Coote F.S.A._\n\n[21] This, of course, is disputed by other authorities. Mr. Thorpe\nregards the only copy now extant as an Anglo-Saxon version of an older\nScandinavian poem.\n\n[22] Mr. Askew Roberts, in his \"Contributions to Oswestry History,\" has\nthe following:--\"Is not all the alluvial tract of country which lies\nbetween Buttington and Oswestry, called in the Welsh tongue 'Ystrad\nMarchell.' = Strata Marcella, at one end of which stood the once famous\nmonastery of Ystrad Marchell or Strata Marcella? Is it not more likely\nthat Oswald should have been overwhelmed by a combined force\nof Mercians, Welsh, and Angles somewhere in the large plain of\n_Ystradmarchell_, which lies on the boundary of the Welsh and Mercian\nterritories, than at Winwick, in Lancashire, and does not the above line\nprove that 'Oswald from Marchelldy [Marcelde the House or Monastery of\nMarchell] did to Heaven remove.'--BONION, writing in _Bygones_, August\n6, 1873.\" This would have more value had the inscription been on\nOswestry Church. It is not very probable the Cleric of Winwick would be\na Welsh scholar, or that he would translate the Welsh word into Latin in\npreference to the English one by which the locality was well known. What\nbusiness had Oswald \"somewhere in the large plain of _Ystradmarchell_,\nwhich lies on the boundary of the Welsh and Mercian territory,\" if Penda\nwere the aggressor, as Geoffrey and others testify. Besides, as Mr.\nGreen's maps show, the district in question was, in the seventh century,\na long way from either the Mercian or Northumbrian boundary. To be in\nthe locality at all would constitute Oswald the attacking and not the\ndefending party, as Bede's expression, \"_pro patria dimicans_,\" seems to\nimply.\n\n[23] This is a very daring assertion, and is by no means confirmed by a\nvisit to the locality.\n\n[24] \"Were there no other record of the existence of our own Richard I.\nthan the _Romaunt_ bearing his name, and composed within a century of\nhis death, he would unquestionably have been numbered by the Mythists\namong their shadowy heroes; for among the superhuman feats performed by\nthat pious crusader, we read, in the above mentioned authority, that\nhaving torn out the heart of a lion, he pressed out the blood, dipt it\nin salt, and ate it without bread; that being sick, and longing after\npork (which in a land of Moslems and Jews was not to be had),\n\n    \"They took a Sarezyne young and fat\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n    And soden full hastely,\n    With powder and with spysory,\n    And with saffron of good colour.\"\n\nOf this Apician dish 'the kyng eet the flesh and gnew the bones.'\nRichard afterwards feasts his infidel prisoners on a Saracen's head\neach, every head having the name of its late owner attached to it on a\nslip of parchment. Surely all this is as mythic as it is possible to be,\nand yet Richard is a really historic earth-born personage.\"\n\nYes, there was a truly historical Richard, as there doubtless was an\nArthur, but the Richard and Arthur of romance, nevertheless, are not\nhistorical characters, in the strict sense of the word, and ought not to\nbe confounded with them.\n\n[25] At the meeting of the British Association, held at York, in 1861,\nDr. Phene, F.S.A., &c., read a paper on Scandinavian and Pictish customs\non the Anglo-Scottish Border. He spoke of the persistent retention of\ncurious customs, and the handing down from generation to generation of\nthe traditionary lore of ages long past, and then referred to some of\nthose which were corroborated by ancient monuments of an unusual kind\nstill famous on the Scottish border. These consisted of sculptured\nstones, earth works, and actual ceremonies. Quoting from former writers,\nfrom family pedigrees, and other documents, he showed that the estates\nto which this traditionary lore pertained, had been held alternately by\nthose claiming under the respective nationalities, or more local powers,\nand which from their natural defensive features must have been places of\nborder importance earlier than history records. The district was\noccupied by the descendants--often still traceable--of Danes, Jutes,\nFrisians, Picts, Scots, Angles, and Normans; and by a comparison of\nseveral of the languages of these people, as well ancient as now\nexisting, and also of the Gothic, it was shown in relation to a\nparticular class of the most curious monuments, that the Norse \"ormr,\"\nAnglo-Saxon \"vyrm,\" old German \"wurm,\" Gothic \"va\u00farms,\" pronounced like\nour word worm; and the word \"lint,\" or \"lind,\" also German, and the\nNorse \"linni,\" are all equivalent, and mean serpent; and in some cases\nthe two words are united as in modern German \"lindwurm,\" and the Danish\nand Swedish \"lindorm.\" On this apparently rested the names of some of\nthe places having these strange traditions, as Linton or serpent town,\nWormiston or worm's (ormr's) town, Lindisfarne, the Farne serpent\nisland, now Holy Island, &c., and also the various worm hills, or\nserpent mounds of those localities. It was curious that the contests to\nwhich the traditions referred (like that of St. George) were sometimes\nwith two dragons, as shown on a sculptured stone in Linton Church, and\non a similar stone at Lyngby, in Denmark, in the churchyard, where there\nwas a tradition that two dragons had their haunt near the church. From\nthese and other facts, the author concluded that the contests were\ninternational, and in the case of two dragons, an allied foe, either\nnational, religious, or both, was overcome. He showed from the Scottish\nseals that Scotland used the dragon as an emblem, apparently deriving it\nfrom the Picts; that the Scandinavians also used it, and that these\nnationalities were antagonistic to the Saxon. In the time of David the\nFirst of Scotland, the first great centralisation of Saxon power took\nplace, and the powerful family of the Cumyns took, apparently by\nconquest, at least two of the localities having these strange\ntraditions. And as the political object was to suppress the Celtic and\nScandinavian, or other local national feeling, there could be little\ndoubt that however they obtained them, the persons dispossessed were of\none or other of the Northern tribes. Hence probably the middle-age\ntradition of the slaying of the serpent or dragon, or the serpent or\ndragon bearer, on the Anglo-Scottish border. But he considered such\ntraditions would hardly have originated through such conquests, had not\nprevious marvellous stories existed of the prowess and conquest by the\ndragon (bearers) of the lands they invaded, all the wonders of which\nwould be transferred to the conqueror's conqueror. Hence these stories\nwere not to be set aside with a sneer, as in them was a germ of history,\ngiving us, perhaps, the only insight we could obtain of the prehistoric\ncustoms and mythology of some of the ancient tribes of Britain. Earthen\nmounds, tumuli, standing stones, &c., still existed in some of these\nlocalities, with all of which the dragon serpent or worm was associated\nin the legends. The author described his personal experiences in the\nstill existing dragon ceremonies in the south of France and Spain, which\nwere always either on the present national or former less important\nprovincial frontiers, and which still formed the subjects of great\necclesiastical ceremonies. One of the high ecclesiastical dignitaries of\nthe north of England--the Bishop of Durham--is in the position of having\nto take part in such a ceremony. Whenever a bishop of that diocese\nenters the manor of Sockburn for the first time, the Lord of the Manor,\nwho holds under the see of Durham, subject to the following tenure, has\nto present the Bishop, \"_in the middle of the river Tees_, if the river\nis fordable, with the falchion wherewith the champion Conyers destroyed\nthe _worm_, _dragon_, or _fiery flying serpent_ which destroyed man,\nwoman, and child\" in that district, and an ancient altar called\n\"_Greystone_\" still marks where the dragon was buried.--_Manchester\nExaminer._\n\n[26] \"Klunzinger: Upper Egypt, 184.\"\n\n[27] \"There exists yet a traditionary superstition very prevalent in\nLancashire and its neighbourhood to the effect that pigs can '_see the\nwind_.' I accidentally heard the observation made, not long ago, in the\ncity of Manchester, in what is termed 'respectable society,' and no one\npresent audibly dissented. One or two individuals, indeed, remarked that\nthey had often heard such was the case, and seemed to regard the\nphenomenon as related to the strong scent and other instincts peculiar\nto animals of the chase. Indeed, Dr. Kuhn says that in Westphalia this\nphase of the superstition is the prevalent one. There pigs are said to\nsmell the wind.\"--_Traditions, Superstitions, and Folk-Lore, p. 69._\n\n[28] The Rev. Jno. Williams, in a note to his translation of \"The\nGododin,\" says:--\"Beli, son of Benlli, a famous warrior in North Wales.\"\n\n[29] See Chapter I., page 25.\n\n[30] Warksworth Chronicle.\n\n[31] Several cannon balls, fired during Cromwell's military operations\nin this short but decisive campaign, have been found in the\nneighbourhood of Ribbleton, Ashton, and Walton-le-dale. They are about\neight pounds weight each. One of them is in my possession at the present\ntime.\n\n[32] This is an error, excusable under the circumstances. Stonyhurst is\nabout twelve miles from Preston.\n\n[33] So savage a critic as Joseph Ritson seems to have entertained a\nmuch higher opinion of Captain Hodgson's literary qualities than the\n\"seer of Chelsea.\" In his preface to the memoir he says--\"Without\nmeaning to dispute the merit of Defoe, in his peculiarly happy manner of\ntelling a story, or, in other words, in the art of book-making, it will\nprobably be found, that, truth or falsehood being out of the question,\nin point of importance, interest, and even pleasantry, Captain Hodgson's\nnarrative is infinitely superior to the 'Memoirs of a Cavalier.'\"\n\n[34] He had overcome a cavalry officer, and \"appropriated\" his horse.\n\n[35] Mr. F. Metcalfe, in his \"Englishman and Scandinavian,\" says,--\"It\nis this same historian (William of Malmesbury), and not Asser, who\nrelates the story of Alfred masquerading as a minstrel, and so gaining\nfree access to the Danish camp, meanwhile learning their plans. It is\nnot mentioned in the most ancient Saxon accounts. Indeed, it sounds more\nlike a Scandinavian than a Saxon story, an echo of which has reached us\nin the tale of King Estmere, who adopted a similar disguise. A story was\ncurrent of Olaf Cuaran entering Athelstan's camp disguised as a harper\ntwo days before the battle of Brunanburh.\"\n\n[36] Some writers say two days intervened, and Sir Francis Palgrave says\nthe main battle was but a continuation of the night attack, and was\ntherefore fought on the following day.\n\n[37] Mr. Thompson Watkins, His. Soc. Trans., says the metal is bronze.\n\n[38] In Herman Moll's map, the Etherow, before its junction with the\nGoyt and Tame, is written Mersey.\n\n[39] For details of this battle see \"History of Preston and its\nEnvirons.\"\n\n[40] For details respecting this siege, see His. Preston, c. v.\n\n[41] Mr. J. P. Morris, in _Notes and Queries_, says--\"Many collectors\nhave endeavoured, but in vain, to find more of this old Lancashire\nballad than the two verses given by Dr. Dixon, in his 'Songs and Ballads\nof the English Peasantry,' and by Mr. Harland, in his 'Ballads and Songs\nof Lancashire.' I have much pleasure in forwarding to _Notes and\nQueries_ the following version, which is much more complete than any yet\ngiven:\n\n    \"Long Preston Peggy to Proud Preston went,\n    To view the Scotch Rebels it was her intent;\n    A noble Scotch lord, as he passed by,\n    On this Yorkshire damsel did soon cast an eye.\n\n    He called to his servant, who on him did wait--\n    'Go down to yon maiden who stands in the gate,\n    That sings with a voice so soft and so sweet,\n    And in my name do her lovingly greet.'\n\n    So down from his master away he did hie,\n    For to do his bidding, and bear her reply;\n    But ere to this beauteous virgin he came,\n    He moved his bonnet, not knowing her name.\n\n    'It's, oh! Mistress Madame, your beauty's adored,\n    By no other person than by a Scotch lord,\n    And if with his wishes you will comply,\n    All night in his chamber with him you shall lie.'\"\n\n[42] \"See Gaussin's _Langue Polyn\u00e9sienne_.\"\n\n\n\n\n    Transcriber's notes:\n\n    The following is a list of changes made to the original.\n    The first line is the original line, the second the corrected one.\n\n    Dean Milman, Arminius V\u00e1mb\u00eary, and Leslie Stephen.\n    Dean Milman, Arminius V\u00e1mb\u00e9ry, and Leslie Stephen.\n\n    Sir John Lubbock, Arminius V\u00e1mb\u00eary, John Fiske,\n    Sir John Lubbock, Arminius V\u00e1mb\u00e9ry, John Fiske,\n\n    The names of places still retained, with only sueh phonetic\n    The names of places still retained, with only such phonetic\n\n    Talbots of Bashall and Salebury. Civil war incidents\n    Talbots of Bashall and Salesbury. Civil war incidents\n\n    influence of the after Danish and Norman-French conquests.\n    influence of the battle after Danish and Norman-French conquests.\n\n    \"For \"_Downham_ IN _Yorkshire_\"\n    For \"_Downham_ IN _Yorkshire_\"\n\n    \"Return of the Heraklieds,\" says \"it is undoubtedly as\n    \"Return of the Herakleids,\" says \"it is undoubtedly as\n\n    similar discoveries at Gristhorpe, Beverley, Driffield. and\n    similar discoveries at Gristhorpe, Beverley, Driffield, and\n\n    laid'Ywenec, and the latter is said to be \"on the Doglas,\"\n    lai d'Ywenec, and the latter is said to be \"on the Doglas,\"\n\n    mentioned as the husband of Igerna's third danghter by\n    mentioned as the husband of Igerna's third daughter by\n\n    not one capital city, it was the tetrapolis of Babel\n    not one capital city, it was the tetrapolis of Babel,\n\n    we, nevertheless, do gain valuable knowlege of a\n    we, nevertheless, do gain valuable knowledge of a\n\n    ancient correlatives in Sanscrit _agra_, Greek \u1f00\u03b3\u03c1\u1f41\u03db, Latin\n    ancient correlatives in Sanscrit _agra_, Greek \u1f00\u03b3\u03c1\u03cc\u03db, Latin\n\n    probably accordsboth etymologically and topographically\n    probably accords both etymologically and topographically\n\n    tranformations local nomenclature sometimes has undergone\n    transformations local nomenclature sometimes has undergone\n\n    England)\" says--\"That Oswiu strove to avert the\n    England\") says--\"That Oswiu strove to avert the\n\n    called _Burne_, strongly supports the other evidence in\n    called _Burne_,\" strongly supports the other evidence in\n\n    burial place, raised after the battle fought at Winwick.\"\n    burial place, raised after the battle fought at Winwick.\n\n    Newton: one of these was held in desmene. The\n    Newton: one of these was held in demesne. The\n\n    cum decima ville;' but there is a belief that there was a\n    cum decima ville;\" but there is a belief that there was a\n\n    and to the tradition which Leyland records, 'that at\n    and to the tradition which Leyland records, \"that at\n\n    Sum say this was the paroche church of Oswestre.'\"\n    Sum say this was the paroche church of Oswestre.\"\n\n    Bingfield for the site of the Heavenfeld struggle, rather\n    Bingfield for the site of the Heavenfield struggle, rather\n\n    Jacob Grimm says (Deutsche Myhologie)--\"A people\n    Jacob Grimm says (Deutsche Mythologie)--\"A people\n\n    in power. Thus the notion of _casualty_--the assumption\n    in power. Thus the notion of _causality_--the assumption\n\n    twenty marks a year, from Edward IV,, confirmed by\n    twenty marks a year, from Edward IV., confirmed by\n\n    relatively more recent combat, of some local importance,\n    relatively more recent combat, of some local importance.\n\n    Preston, to operate in the hundred of Blackburn, One\n    Preston, to operate in the hundred of Blackburn. One\n\n    inhabitants of the neigbourhood Wearden at the present\n    inhabitants of the neighbourhood Wearden at the present\n\n    crosses this in its neighbonrhood. This tumulus is\n    crosses this in its neighbourhood. This tumulus is\n\n    the \"battle of the Brun.\"\n    the 'battle of the Brun.'\"\n\n    the 'olden time.' In Leland's day, the remains of the\n    the 'olden time.'\" In Leland's day, the remains of the\n\n    Colonel Rosworn, the celebrated Parliamentary engineer,\n    Colonel Rosworm, the celebrated Parliamentary engineer,\n\n    sculls, from the banks, and these are almost universally,\n    skulls, from the banks, and these are almost universally,\n\n    of \"General\" Forster, the partisans of the Stuart were\n    of \"General\" Forster, the partizans of the Stuart were\n\n    myths have been confounded together;\" [See ante, p.p. 44, et seg.,\n    myths have been confounded together;\" [See ante, p.p. 44, et seq.,\n\n    \"For the devolpment of myth, which is in itself always a human\n    \"For the development of myth, which is in itself always a human","title":"On Some Ancient Battle-Fields in Lancashire: And Their Historical, Legendary, and Aesthetic Associations.","tradition":"myth-cosmogony","translated_text":null,"word_count":68149}