alone, it must be presumed, of brevity) of some letters within the circumference of others: thus, for instance, the word decidit occupies the space only of four letters-the e, i, and i being severally included within the d, c, and d. The Romans, in the later period of that empire, occasionally resorted to this singular mode of abbreviation; and, we need not wonder, that it was from them adopted in the succeeding Gothic Ages. It was sometimes, though but rarely, used amongst us in the eleventh and twelfth centuries. A second instance of such an inscription may be seen on a monumental stone of the twelfth century in memory of Ilbertus de Chaz, now at Lacock Abbey, but which was brought from the Priory of Monkton Farley, in this County. A plate of this monumental stone, and inscription, may be seen, p. 352 of the "Annals and Antiquities of Lacock Abbey."

On the above inscription Mr. Gough thus remarks in favour of Bishop Roger:

"Such was the prosperous situation of our prelate under this prince, in which there is every thing to justify the elogia, which compose this epitaph. His great influence with his Sovereign, and his mutual esteem for hun, is recorded in the words Principibus gemma reluxit. His administration of justice entitled him to the name of Ensis justitie. His munificence to his infant church, to that of Pater ecclesie Salisbiriensis. His impregnable fortifications, as well as his irreproachable conduct, made that non timuit fastus potentum; as his high rank in the state made him Clava terrorque nocentum. We are to presume, that with his great wealth miseros aluit; (not to mention his religious foundations) and considering what a reverse he underwent in the next reign, dum viguit is not without its meaning. The words inscribed on the front of his robe more strongly mark the distresses of this prelate's declining age. Affer opem, devenies in idem, is an earnest address to the sympathy of the spectators, warning them at the same time of the uncertainty of human events. The conclusion, Propeque tibi gemma reluxit, seems an address to the church, reminding her of the lustre he reflected on her, while he presided as bishop in her former situation at Old Sarum."

• This interesting topographical work, the conjoined production of my friends, the Rev. W. L. Bowles, and J. G. Nichols, Esq., was published in 1835.

I must here remark, that Mr. Gough seems to me to have erringly separated the substantive Principibus from its adjective nobilibus, and to have wrongly given to gemma a double reference. With these exceptions, I cordially agree with him in the general interpretation of the words; but I consider them as much more applicable to Joceline than to Roger. Mr. Gough himself (conscious of the inapplicability of the passage to Bishop Roger) proceeds to say, "My only difficulty is about the noble descent ascribed to him in the words, de ducibus, de nobilibus, primordia duxit. But he may have been the younger son of some noble family in Normandy, which the Monks may have known from evidences not mentioned by general historians, or they may have introduced it here for rhyme sake."

The above hypothesis of Gough is merely to obviate a difficulty, which he could not explain. Mr. Hatcher says of Bishop Roger, "His birth and parentage are unknown, but his origin must have been obscure, for he first occurs to notice as the priest of a petty church in the suburbs of Caen, in Normandy;" but of Joceline he says, "Joceline is described by some authors as a Lombard by descent, though, from his name, it is not improbable, that he belonged to the great Norman family of Bailul." In conclusion, I must aver, that the inscription is, in every point, equally, and that the words "De ducibus, de nobilibus, primordia duxit Principibus," are more applicable to Joceline than to Roger. They were successive bishops; and, therefore, no argument can be grounded as to a different style of sculpture in monuments of dates so very near to each other-I say very near, for, in the range of centuries, forty or fifty years (as in the present instance) may, in their extreme points, be almost regarded as coeval, and that inferior, or superior, sculpture, which rested, in fact, alone on the individual genius, or ability, of the artist, may be erroneously attributed to the earlier, or later, date; yet Mr. Britton coincides with Gough, "because" (says he) "the style of sculpture is plainly of earlier date!" I do not admit the justice of this allegation, nor am I disposed to recognise any alleged data for its foundation.

When, therefore, I revolve on the inscription around the tomb, which is only partially applicable to Bishop Roger, but wholly so to Bishop Joceline; and when I observe, that the effigy in question does appear (in accordance with the fashion

of the day) with a beard, I cannot but decidedly say, that this tomb must be that of Bishop Joceline.

Thus useful, then, is the ascertained history even of the beard!

I do not at all agree in the opinion of Mr. Gough, that the inscription on the robe, "Affer opem, devenies in idem," is meant to bear reference to the temporal state of Bishop Roger (assuming that this is his tomb) and to "mark the distresses of this prelate's declining age." A reference to reverse of fortune is evidently pourtrayed under the words "Dum viguit, miseros aluit, fastusque potentum non timuit," (and these words are equally applicable to either bishop,) but there is little probability, that the same allusion would be again repeated on the robe-no-these words bear clearly a different meaning-they are not of temporal import. They present a humble, and pious, address to the perusing spectator-they are a call on the casual passer by to remember the departed, and to look to himself: Affer opem," says this terse, and energetic, invocation"Grant me your aid-give my soul the benefit of your earnest prayers"-" devenies in idem :" "death will in the end also lay you prostrate, and then you will equally need the prayers of others."

แ

Let us now visit the northern end of the eastern transept, which is parted from the adjoining aisle by a screen, and is used as a baptistry and morning chapel. Here we find an ancient altar-tomb supporting the effigy of a bishop in pontificalibus. This tomb was, originally, placed on the northern side of the High Altar, and tradition has ever supported its appropriation to Bishop Poor. He was the Founder of the Cathedral, and that is the very spot, where, as such, we may suppose, his interment would take place. The architectural ornaments of this tomb are also those of the thirteenth century, and its recumbent effigy is very similar to that on the indubitable seal of Bishop Poor, an engraving of which is in the work on the Cathedral published in the name of Mr. Dodsworth. On opening the tomb a skeleton was found therein, the bones of which were removed together with the tomb. Thus it was clearly ascertained, that this was a real sepulchre, and not merely an honorary cenotaph, which it might be otherwise conjectured to have been, since, at the time of his death, he held the See of Durham; and Leland, on the authority of an ancient manuscript,

formerly suspended in the Lady Chapel of Salisbury Cathedral, says, that he was buried at Durham, and that his heart was deposited in the monastery of Tarrant, in the county of Dorset, which was founded by him. On the other hand, says the author of the History of the Cathedral of Salisbury, (published in the name of Dodsworth,) "Robert de Graystanes, the annalist of the Church of Durham, asserts, that he was buried at Tarrant; and the account is corroborated by an ancient list of the Bishops preserved in our Episcopal Records." When, however, we consider the original situation of this tomb-the architectural peculiarities of its canopy-and the correspondency of the habit and crosier of the effigy with those on his seals-we cannot but assign the monument to this venerable Bishop, who was raised to the See of Salisbury in the first year of Henry, the Third, A. D. 1217. The presence of the beard in this effigy is corroborative of the truth of this conjecture, since, in the early part of the long reign of Henry, the Third, it was in fashion amongst the higher order of ecclesiastics, as, in an illumination of the coronation of that Sovereign, the Bishops of Winchester and Bath, who assisted on the occasion, both appear thus arrayed. If the mortal remains of Bishop Poor were removed from Durham, it is most probable, that his heart alone was buried at Tarrant, and his corpse deposited in the far-famed Cathedral, of which he was the founder.

During the long reign, however, of Henry, the Third, the fashion fluctuated. The Sovereign himself did not wear the beard, and, therefore, finally the razor triumphed-shaving predominated; and, accordingly, we find, that the effigies of Bishop Bridport and of Bishop De la Wyle (who were appointed to the See in the respective years of 1256 and 1263) appear each with the smoothened chin. The tomb of the former is between the southern aisle and that end of the eastern transept -that of the latter is in the nave.

The next exemplar, with which we are supplied, is the effigy in brass on the floor of the Baptistry (already mentioned) of Bishop Wyvil. He was made Bishop of Salisbury in the third year of Edward, the Third, 1329, when the beard had its sway and he, certainly, does fall in with the fashion, though his feelings, as an ecclesiastic, may have induced him to wear one short, and stubbed.

Bishop Mitford, who was raised to the See in the year 1395

in the 19th year of Richard, the Second-(whose tomb is situate between the south end of the western transept, and the adjoining aisle) appears in his sculptured form, in accordance with the then prevailing taste, to be close shaven; and, in consistency, also, with the more generally prevailing fashion, those heroes, Robert Lord Hungerford and Sir John Cheney, (whose tombs are in the nave,) are thus personally recorded to have worn no beard.

Pass we on now to the reign of Elizabeth; and here, within that bearded, and gallánt, age, have we, on the floor of the Baptistry, the engraven portrait of Bishop Gheast, who followed the fashion of the world, and wore-the beard.

This, then supposed, decorative ornament of the face was, also, held in esteem, though worn of diminished size, during the reigns of the three Stuarts.

The monuments of Sir Thomas Gorges and Sir Richard Mompesson, and the three statues, which adorn the superb Somerset Monument-the one recumbent, and the other two in a kneeling posture, fully sanction this remark, in which I must, also, include the fine bust of Sir Robert Hyde, Lord Chief Justice of England. He there appears with mustachios, and the lock of hair on the centre of the chin, which I denominate the beardlet, but which is absurdly called by those, who covet this disgusting appendage-this unenviable distinction-the IMPERIAL!

I have thus illustrated my slender dissertation on beards by a reference to existing exemplars in the Cathedral of Salisbury. I am not disappointed in the result of this inquiry, which did not occur to my mind, till after my essay was actually printed. I have found nothing to contradict-much to confirm my historical barbaric memoranda, and I wish it had been in my power to have pointed out an example of every æra, but this was more than could be expected to be found within the walls of one sacred edifice.

The beard, finally, fell into a deep decline; and its decease, which was not mourned, took place at the close of the reign of James, the Second.

NOTE 9-(p. 172.)

"Paston Letters." The collection of letters thus denominated-these valuable reliques of the olden times were edited,