any other country. It was most likely with reference to this that the following singularly striking account was written, in 1556, by an unknown author. "Many that were mery at dyner were buried in the evening: some that went at night to slepe lustie, were founde in bedde dead in the morning: some that went not farre from their owne house, never returned. Then, as long as the ferventnesse of the plage lasted, there was crying 'Peccavi, peccavi, peccavi; I have sinned, I have sinned, I have sinned; mercie, goode Lorde, mercie, mercie, mercie!" The ministers of God's worde were sought for in everie corner; they could not reste; they might not slepe. Ye must come to my Lorde.-Ye must come to my Lady.—My maister prayeth you to come straight unto him.-My maistres must needs speke with you. Come if ye love God.—And if ye love their salvacion tarye not.-For Goddes sake, Master Minister (saye the sicke folkes) tell us what we shall doo to avoide Godd's wrothe. Take these bagges. Paye so muche to suche a man, for I deceaved him. Geve him so muche, for I gat it of him by usurie. I made a craftie bargain with suche a one; restore him so muche; and desire him to forgive me. I have taken bribes from suche a one, I pray you geve him so much more again. I have spoken evil of suche a man, God forgeve it me. Dyvide this bagge among the poore. Carrie this to the hospital. Pray for me for Goddes sake. Good Lorde, forgeve me, I have dissembled with thee. I pretended to love thy worde with my lippes, but I thought it not with my hart. But now I see thou knowest the secretest secretes, and wilt not leave evil unpunished. Have mercie on me, and forgive me good Lord, I beseeche thee from the bottome of my harte.-This was the dissimulacion of the people for three or four daies, whiles the execusion was, But after, when the rage was somewhat swayed, then return they to their vomite, worse than ever thei were. Then, that they had before caused to be restored, and given in almose, they şeke to recover by more evil-favoured chevisaunces. But God is not blynde, nither is his hande shortened."

1563. A virulent disorder, whether originating with the English garrison in Havre, or imparted by their assail

ants, is uncertain, was this year introduced into England on the return of Lord Warwick with his reduced troops, after the capitulation of that town; during the siege of which, the chroniclers assure us, the contagion slew many more than either did famine or sword; the precise number in London being, according to Stowe, 20,136.

1574. The following respecting 1574 is extracted from Holinshed: "This yeare the Mayor kept no feast at Guildhall, although great provision had beene made for that purpose, but dined at his own house with his brethren the aldermen: this was done by the especial appointment of the Queen's council, to avoid infection ofthe plague. The sixt of November, in the morning, there happened two great tides at London, in the river Thames; the first by course, the other within one houre following, which overflowed the marshes, with manie vaults and cellars neare adjoining. The 14th of November, being Sundaie about midnight following, diverse strange impressions of fire and smoke were seene in the aire to proceede forth of a blacke cloud in the north toward the south, which so continued till the next morning, that it was daie light. The next day following, the heavens from all parts did seem to burn marvellous raginglie, and over our heads the flames from the horizon round about rising did meet, and there double, and roll one in another, as if it had been in a cleare fornace. The 18th day, at night, blew verie stormie and tempestuous winds out of the south, as hath not beene known the like out of that quarter, especially after midnight, till next morning that it was daie light." During the whole of this pestilence the elements seem to have been sadly disjointed and unruly, as the following from Holinshed will sufficiently shew: "The 24th daie of February, being the feast of St. Matthie, on which daie the fair was kept at Tewkesburie, a strange thing happened there. For after a flood, which was not great, but such as thereby the medows neere adjoining were covered with water, in the afternoon there came down the river Severn great numbers of flies and beetles, such as in summer evenings use to strike men in the face, in great heaps, a foot thick above the water, so that to credible men's judgement there were seene

within a paire of buts length of those flies above 100 quarters. The mills thereabouts were dammed up with them for the space of foure daies after, and then were clensed by digging them out with shovels: from whence they came is yet unknown, but the daie was cold, and a hard frost. The 26th of February, betweene 4 and 6 of the clocke in the afternoon, great earthquakes happened in the cities of York, Worcester, Gloucester, Bristow, Hereford, and in the countries about, which caused the people to run out of their houses, for fear they should have fallen on their heads. In Tewkesburie, Bredon, and other places, the dishes fell from the cupboards, and the books in men's studies from the shelves. In Norton chappell, the people being on their knees at evening prayer, the ground mooving, caused them to run awaie in greate feare that the dead bodies would have risen, or the chappell have fallen. Part of Ruthen castle fell down, with certain brick chimneys in gentlemen's houses. The bell in the shire hall at Denbigh was also caused to toll twice by shaking of the hall.' (To be concluded in our next.)

Mr. URBAN, April 18. IT is highly creditable to the present age that a large and commodious Building has been provided, in order to afford adequate and suitable accommodation for the meetings of the various Religious, Charitable, and Scientific Institutions of the Metropolis. The want of such a Building was long and severely felt, before any decided and efficient measures were adopted for remedying the evil. At length, a Society was established for the purpose; which, after encountering many difficulties, has succeeded in its object; the accomplishment of which may justly be deemed a circumstance for congratulation, as being calculated to produce a religious, moral, and beneficial effect upon the character of the public mind.

The Building called Exeter Hall contains one of the largest and most magnificent Rooms in Europe, together with several Committee-rooms, and other appropriate offices. It was completed in the spring of last year, and opened on the 29th of March, 1831, (see an account of the meeting in our last volume, parti. p. 362). The amount already subscribed by Shares (of 501.) and DonaGENT. MAG. July, 1832.

tions, is nearly 24,000l., and the further sum of not more than 7,000l. is required to meet the entire expense which has been incurred. The income of the first year, although the Offices have been hitherto but partially occupied, has produced the sum of 1,5007.; which, after defraying the ground-rent and other expences, has enabled them to declare a dividend of 3 per cent on the amount subscribed in Shares.

The great Room is 90 feet broad, 138 in length, and 48 in height, and is lighted by 18 large windows. The ceiling is tastefully comparted into alternate sunken squares and parallelograms, ornamented in their centres with raised rosettes. At the eastern end, to the right of the principal entrance, at an elevation of about five feet, is a platform for the orators and principal persons, consisting of five broad steps, regularly rising above each other by a graduated scale of two inches, and sweeping in a semicircle from the south to the north side of the apartment. Immediately behind this are two galleries for the accommodation of ladies. From the base of the platform the floor stretches on a level about 50 feet to the west; from which point 27 steps, each two feet in breadth by two inches in height, rise in graduated succession to the western ex

tremity of the hall. About 3,000 persons can, without the slightest inconvenience, assemble in this capacious room.

The approach to the hall is through the entrance represented in the accompanying engraving, (Plate I.) which is the only portion of the exterior possessing a decorated character. The elevation consists of a porch or portico formed of two columns, and the like number of antæ in pairs, each pair being raised on a stylobate of bold proportions. The caps of the antæ are designed in unison with the capitals of the columns, and are composed from Grecian examples of great beauty. The entablature consists of an architrave of two faces, a frieze, and dentil cornice, and is crowned with an enriched cymatium. Above this rises an attic, the pilasters corresponding with the main supporters. In the centre is a long panel inscribed

ΠΑΝΑΘΗΝΑΙΟΝ

The attic is crowned with a blocking course, and above it rises an acroterium, which is necessary to conceal the roofs of the adjacent houses;

otherwise it would have very much the air of an excrescence. Within the portico a low flight of steps leads to the principal entrance, which occupies the central of three divisions, formed by four antæ attached to the wall in the rear of the columns. The antæ are surmounted by an entablature dividing the wall in height into two stories; the upper has no opening, but on a long panel near the summit is inscribed EXETER HALL. When the folding doors are thrown open, as seen in the engraving, a bold and lofty staircase is seen leading to the great hall; and beneath the first landing is an entrance to the rooms and offices on the ground floor, which are formed beneath the principal apartment.

The architect was Mr. J. P. Sandy Deering, the joint architect with Mr. Wilkins, of the London University.

Exeter Hall is managed by a board of thirty gentlemen, of whom Sir Thomas Baring, Bart. M. P. is President, and Lord Barham, Lord Gambier, the Rt. Hon. Sir G. H. Rose, M.P., Sir R. H. Inglis, Bart, M.P., and Sir C. S. Hunter, Bart., are Vice-Presidents. E. J. C.

New Kent Road, Mr. URBAN, July 18. YOUR correspondent T. D. F. has attacked a single paragraph of my communication to the Archæologia, vol. xxiv. p. 192, on the assumption that it was directed against an article which he says was penned by him, and which I find in the form of a review of Mr.

Brayley's Londiniana in your Volume for 1829, part i. page 515.

Although your correspondent, in the termination of his letter, declines further notice of the subject, I cannot let it pass without correcting his misapprehension that I had his plan in view when I made the observation that the finding of sepulchral remains within the area of the city militated against the opinion of those antiquaries who considered London at an early period of its history to be a regularly fortified place laid out agreeably to the usual mode of Roman castrametation.

The truth is, Mr. Urban, that, instead of having your correspondent's hypothesis in view, 1 chanced never to have observed its existence, until I was directed to a perusal of his communication by his observations on the paragraph which he considers as pointed against it.

Your correspondent's own opinion, in fact, meets mine more than half way, when he says, that London was originally no more than an old Celtic town, afterwards converted into a Roman station. I should, indeed, myself think, that with a marsh on the north, Wallbrook on the east, and the Fleet River on the west, a position was formed not unlikely to be occupied at a very remote era as a place of strength, while the fine tide river, which formed the southern boundary, must have rendered it also one of commerce.

The early Roman settlers probably erected at Llyn Dun (the hill-town on the lake) two forts, one on the high ground, perhaps at Tower Royal, near St. Paul's, adjacent to the river, the other on the present site of the Tower of London.

If a regular form had obtained in laying out London, would not its walls have followed that form, when erected by the Romans about the time of Constantine or Theodosius, as the walls erected at Caerwent and other places decidedly of Roman construction, instead of presenting the extremely irregular outline which their course now does on the map of London?

What evident necessity is there for straining the economy of all ancient towns into a conformity with a Roman camp?

Very slight deductions can perhaps be drawn from the direction of the streets in modern London, to make out the ichnography of the ancient. The direction relatively to the cardinal points of every Roman road, now subterranean, which has been discovered, is of the greatest importance to settling these matters. For instance, the old gravel bank or raised way, lying five feet under the surface of Eastcheap, which the labourers lately cut through in forming the bridge approaches, took a north-easterly direction from London stone, which was, I believe, the point whence most of the ancient ways from Londinium diverged. Look at the map of London, you will find this north-easterly line from London stone sometimes taken up, and sometimes lost in the direction of the modern streets and lanes, until it makes its exit at Aldgate. Maitland informs us, that the old Watling-street was discovered at Holborn-bridge, pointing towards Newgate, that is, running from north-west to south-east. What, then,

will become of the way, via sagularis, in the plan in your vol. xcix. which is made to run in a right line from the Old Change, and terminate at the Tower. I believe it must be given up; but I can inform your correspondent, according to the statement of the labourers employed in forming sewers, &c. in the city of London, that in Upper Thames-street, twenty feet below the modern level, there is really an ancient paved causeway. I received a similar statement from some labourers lately engaged in an excavation in Watling-street; twenty feet below the surface is a causeway paved with flints, and laid in chalk. It is worthy of observation, that there was no pavement on the gravel causeway discovered in Eastcheap, although it evidently converged into the Watlingstreet.

If I have erred in presuming to doubt of the Roman form of ancient London, without any idea of controverting your reviewer, I have erred with authorities whom he would not have thought unworthy of replying to.

Maitland says, there was no such place as London as a place of strength in the time of Claudius; he adds, moreover, that it was highly improbable there was a Roman station at Southwark at an early period, as it must have been overflowed every spring

tide;

that the Londinium of Tacitus was no post of strength is evident from the Britons destroying all places void of defence; if Camelodunum, a veteran colony, was not fortified, much less can it be expected that London, an emporium, was.'

*

London was most certainly so far abandoned by Suetonius that it was not covered and protected by him in a military view. Your correspondent, therefore, regards his own construction, and disregards my obvious meaning, when he says London was not abandoned by Suetonius. What, not abandoned! when he marched through it, and left it to the vengeance of its foes!

"At Suetonius mira constantia medios inter hostes Londinium perrexit, cognomento quidem coloniæ non insigne, sed copiâ negotiatorum et commeatu maxime celebre. Ibi ambiguus an illam sedem bello diligeret, circumspecta infrequentia militis, satisque magnis documentis temeritatem Petilii coercitam, unius oppidi damno servare universa statuit.

* Maitland, p. 11, et passim.

Neque fletu et lacrymis auxilium ejus orantium flexus est, quin daret profectionis signum et comitantes in partem agminis acciperet. Si quos imbellis sexus aut fessa ætas vel loci dulcedo attinuerat ab hoste oppressi sunt. Eadem clades municipio Verulamio fuit," &c.t

I would not have quoted this striking passage so well known to many of your readers, but to vindicate myself from the imputation of a misstatement which T. D. F. fastens upon me, for saying, Suetonius abandoned London.

Whatever may be remarked by Sigonius about potters' stamps, the authority of no modern critic can be weighed against tangible evidence. From the wall which aligned with the north-east side of the ancient causeway in Eastcheap, I myself saw taken some stamped pateræ of the red ware much discoloured by fire, some coins of Claudius, and some of the rudest fashioned bricks which I had ever beheld they appeared to be clumsy imitations of the Roman mould. The pateræ were impressed with stamps, of a different character in the letter and label to those on other specimens. See fac similes of them under the head potters' marks, in my communication to the Archæologia, vol. xxiv. p. 201, the first and third in the list.

I now imitate your correspondent, and close further discussion of this subject, my object being explanation, not controversy; and I am fully aware I might stand little chance in a contest with one of the acknowledged antiquarian acquirements and learning of T. D. F., qualifications which I duly appreciate.

To use, however, one of his own adjectives, the plot of Roman London still remains, I conceive, very nubigenous. What, indeed, are gratuitous conjectures in matters of remote antiquity, but the ingenious libertinism of polished minds, a sort of authoritative guesses, maintained the more strongly, because if they cannot be supported on real evidence they cannot be refuted on the same grounds.

notices of the building may probably be acceptable to your readers.

The parish church of Hornsey is dedicated to the Blessed Virgin, and appears to have been built about the year 1500,* a date with which the architecture well agrees. The irregular appearance of the building, however, would seem to indicate a greater degree of antiquity. The walls are composed of stones of various forms and dimensions, intermixed with brick, and worked up in rubble, presenting a rude and ragged surface, and which would certainly lead to the belief that the main building was of an earlier date; but here tradition comes in aid of History. It is said that the materials of the Church were brought from the ruins of a castellated mansion belonging to the Bishops of London, situate in the parish,† and which explanation will satisfactorily account for the ancient and rude appearance of the walls of the Church. Of this mansion some trace is said to exist at the present time, and perhaps some one of your Correspondents who may be more intimately acquainted with the locality than I am, can favour your readers with a notice of it.

A south-west view of the Church has been already engraved in the Gentleman's Magazine; but the notice which accompanies it entering but slightly into detail, I purpose to supply the deficiency, and at the same time the means of preserving a recollection of one of the last of the village Churches in the neighbourhood of the metropolis.

The plan approaches to a parallelogram, a form very unusual in ancient Churches; it is divided by a range of piers into a nave and south aile of nearly equal dimensions, and at the extremity of the former a square tower; the whole being comprehended within the four walls of the plan; the only projections are a porch on the south side, and a semi-octangular staircase

turret, which formerly led to the roodloft. I am inclined to think that the regularity of the plan is the effect of modern arrangement, and from a circumstance to be noticed in the end, that a chapel was situated on the north side. The division between nave and chancel is only indicated by the staircase, and a slight variation in the internal architecture.

The west front is nearly covered with ivy, and in consequence, the two shields engraved in your volume for 1811,* are hidden from observation; and since the view of the Church there given was taken, the windows are materially altered. In that and other views of the Church which I have seen, the windows appear to have been pointed, with mullions; they are now altered into arches formed of a small segment of a circle, and have no mullions; these are the principal alterations which the Church has undergone in modern times. The tower at some distant period has been lowered to the extent of one story; and on ascending the leads, it will be seen that the lower part of a window, consisting of the sill and base of the mullions and a portion of the jambs, remains on the parapet at the south and west sides; and the existence of an additional story is further indicated by the stairs in the north-west angle of the tower being continued higher than the present doorway to the leads; the windows were probably repetitions of those in the story immediately below the present parapet. The tower appears to have settled towards the Church.

The north side of the Church has three windows and two buttresses, and near the west end is a low pointed doorway; the east end has two windows with gables above them, answering to the nave and ailes; all the windows being uniform, as before described. The interior shows the architecture of the sixteenth century. The

Ibid.