REPORTS OF ARCHEOLOGICAL MEETINGS.

MR. URBAN, - Everybody who ever speaks in public must get gradually hardened to the sort of nonsense which reporters must often put into his mouth. I remember the time when it used to annoy me to see myself represented as talking some stuff which had never come into my head and still less out of my lips. Latterly I have consoled myself by thinking that the readers of such reports fall pretty much into two classes, those who do not see that it is nonsense at all, and those who see that it is such nonsense that the speaker cannot have uttered it. For example, one of the Northampton papers made my talk at Crowland last July consist of the very fables which I, together with other members, did my best to upset. For this I did not much care; one set of people would think it was all right; another would see that I could not have been such a fool. But there are bounds where human long-suffering gives way; one of those is when a man is represented, not only by a local penny-a-liner, but in the GENTLEMAN'S MAGAZINE, as saying exactly the opposite of what he did say on a controverted subject on which he has thought a good deal, and which he has a floating idea of some day treating more at length.

This misfortune has happened to me twice in the report given in your last number of the Cambrian meeting at Swansea. There is an architectural case and a historical

case.

The latter is really important; the former I should have left to correct itself if I had not been writing about the other.

First then I am made to say in Margam Chapter-house that "it (the chapter-house) had another peculiarity-that, unlike most monasteries, it had no passage to the church itself."

Every one who knows anything of collegiate and monastic arrangements knows very well that in a collegiate church the chapter-house almost always forms part of the church itself, and often has no approach except through the church. In a monastery the church and chapter-house

"BIFORIETTA," &c.

have no special connexion; both are approached from the cloister, but there is rarely-I do not remember any instance, but it is dangerous to say "never"-any passage leading from the one to the other. This distinction I tried to explain at Margam; you see what has come of my wellmeant attempt.

This hash however any one who was at once knowing and charitable would set right for himself; not so about the Flemings in Gower. I am made to say positively that “it was a matter of history that there was a Flemish colony in Gower in the twelfth century." I said no such thing, because I know of no historical evidence on the point. What I did say was, that the Flemish settlement in Pembrokeshire was an undoubted historical fact, and that the analogy of Pembrokeshire, combined with the received tradition as to Gower, seemed to me evidence enough to make us accept the Gower settlement also. You will find a complete report of my speech in the next "Archæologia Cambrensis;" but I thought I ought at once to contradict the statement that I rested the case of the Flemings in Gower on direct historical evidence which, as far as I know, does not exist.

While I have my pen in hand I will give, what otherwise I should not have given, a line or two to your correspondent Mr. Westwood, who not only cannot understand a joke, but takes you to task because you can. I am not going to argue with him; no scholar would: if he cannot see of himself that "Biforietta" is simply "before-gate," and that Hengest's grandfather was as likely to be commemorated in Latin as Romulus" grandfather in English, it would be vain to try to prove it to him. By "the Anglo-Saxon words in use for 'before-gate,' I suppose he means the Old-English spelling "Before [or befóran] Geát or Gát." What difference that makes I really cannot see.

It has often struck me that the OldEnglish colloquial pronunciation must have been much less unlike our modern

INGULF'S CHRONICLE-ITS ERRORS.

MR. SCOTT'S "WESTMINSTER ABBEY."

MR. URBAN,-It has afforded me great satisfaction to find that the valuable papers which have appeared in your pages have been collected into a volume; but will you allow me to point out what seems to me to be an important oversight, which is repeated in the volume as reprinted.

The great question as regards the early church is, whether Edward the Confessor built a nave as well as a choir. Mr. Scott quotes a passage from Sir Christopher Wren, purporting to be a translation from a contemporary document, in which the nave is expressly mentioned, thus:

"The principal area or nave of the church, being raised high," &c.

As a pièce justificatif he has printed as a note what purports to be the original Latin, which to my mind distinctly mentions the choir, not the nave, thus:

Principalis aræ domus altissimis erecta fornicibus."

"building containing" the "high altar." It does not follow that Wren made a blunder: "Principalis ara" may be an error of the printer or transcriber for "principalis area," which would perhaps justify Wren's translation.

On this point I should be much obliged if one of your correspondents could give me some information. The passage reads to me as referring to the "choir," i.e. the part east of the "cross" or transepts, and to that alone. As it stands, however, there certainly seems to be a want of consistency between the text and the note, which should be cleared up.-I am, &c. JASPER.

P.S.-May I ask, also, where Wren finds authority for "a double vaulting of the aisles in two stories." I admit that the whole passage is obscure from beginning to end, but so much the more reason why some competent person, like Mr. Scott,

This I translate as the "house of," i.e. should give a careful translation.

MARMITES.

similarity in form to the Marmites depicted in your last two numbers induces me to send you this sketch. What were Marmites? and does the small size of my vessel militate against the probability of its being one?-I am, &c.

Leicester.

T. NORTH. [Marmite in French signifies "an iron pot for porridge," &c. In Halliwell's "Dictionary of Archaic Words" Marmite is explained as "a pot with hooks at the side." Dr. Hyde Clarke's Dictionary simply defines it "a saucepan." The word has been of late specially applied to medieval iron pots of shape similar to that above depicted. But from the diminutive size of our correspondent's specimen we incline to believe that it must have been a plaything for a child.]

ORIGIN OF THE NAME HUSE.

MR. URBAN,-Will you allow me to put the following question, with the view of gaining some information which is neces

sary for a memoir that I have undertaken for a county history?

Where can I find a list of the Norman

ARMS AT CONGRESBURY.

CANDITCH.

The Note-book of Sylvanus Urban.

[Under this title are collected brief notes of matters of current antiquarian interest which do not appear to demand more formal treatment. SYLVANUS URBAN invites the kind co-operation of his Friends, who may thus preserve a record of many things that would otherwise pass away.]

RE-OPENING OF LICHFIELD CATHEDRAL.-The re-opening of Lichfield Cathedral (the nave with the choir), took place on Tuesday, October 22. Future progress in the restoration will not interrupt the daily services. The particulars of what has been done are thus detailed in a published statement:-"It will be seen with satisfaction that the liberality of the diocese has enabled the greater part of the dilapidated or wantonly destroyed stonework to be restored, the whitewash of long standing to be removed, the bishop's throne and stall-work to be completed, the pavement of the choir to be ordered (although it will not be entirely laid), and a light and open screen to be substituted for the former complete separation of the church into two parts, besides the introduction of many costly requisites, the organ, the font, the lectern with Bible, the Litany desk, lighting standards and candlesticks, books of Service, embroidered altar cloth, poor's-box, &c., many of which have been the gift of individual benefactors."

HEREFORD CATHEDRAL RESTORATIONS.-The Dean and Chapter of Hereford prepared a statement of the work of restoration at this cathedral already effected and yet to be completed, which was distributed among the visitors at the recent musical festival. From this statement it appears that of the sums borrowed on mortgage (£13,000) under the Hereford Cathedral Restoration Act, from 1859 to 1861, £10,000 has been expended on the external and internal restoration of the north transept and aisles, the south transept, the north aisle of the choir, including Bishop Stanbury's Chapel, the north-east transept, the south-east transept, the south aisle of the choir, the chapter-house and vestibule, the Lady-chapel and vestibule, and Bishop Audley's Chapel, and the external restoration of the north aisle of the nave, the north porch, the south aisle of the nave, and the great cloisters. They have, therefore, £3,000 in hand to meet the balance of existing contracts and the cost of flooring generally (except the choir), repairing and refixing monuments, releading part of the roof, repairs of inner stonework, &c. The following additional works are proposed to be executed if funds can be raised for the purpose-Fitting up and flooring of the choir, the restoration of the external stonework of the tower, lighting the cathedral for congregational use, and fitting up of the Lady-chapel for service for St. John's parish. These works are estimated to cost £8,000, towards which the Dean and Chapter have a sum in hand and promised of £3,553 10s. 10d., leaving £4,446 9s. 2d. to be provided. They therefore appeal to the public for pecuniary aid, and state that if the funds were supplied the whole of the works in the interior might be completed, and the cathedral opened in October of next year.