I will not conclude this communication without offering the suggestion to the worthy lord of Rougham, that the Roman coffin, house-like tomb, and their contents, might be easily preserved for the inspection of the curious in our national antiquities, by supporting, with a few timber props, the tunnel formed through the Eastlow barrow, leaving one entrance open, accessible by a gate, and entrusting the key to the tenant of the adjoining farm, who might shew the remains. They would retain a much greater value in situ, than if distributed to the Museums at Cambridge, as proposed. A neat and accurate model ought at once to be made of this tomb, and deposited in the British Museum. ALFRED J. KEMPE.

MR. URBAN,

YOUR Correspondent Mr. KEMPE, in his interesting memoir on the Battle of Barnet inserted in your last Magazine, has done me the honour to refer, generally, to my articles on Collars of Livery communicated to your pages, on the occasion of his giving an explanation of a passage in one of the Paston Letters, which he presumes to have referred to the Livery Collar of Edward the Fourth. My series of articles on Collars of Livery was unfortunately abruptly broken off before I came to the Collar of that reign; and other matters have since diverted my attention from my proposed task of resuming it, though I have collected many interesting particulars relating to the subject, which only require arrangement; and, besides, I have still to furnish the catalogue of Monumental Effigies wearing Collars of Livery, the formation of which catalogue alone was at first the principal part of my plan. I take the occasion afforded by Mr. KEMPE's note to state that I still intend to do this at the earliest opportunity, and that I shall feel obliged by any assistance that may be given me.

With regard to the passage quoted by Mr. KEMPE, I am inclined to think that it does not relate to a Livery Col

some glass vessels in the form of tears, brought from the Elysian fields, near Naples, by Albin Martin, esq.-Gent. Mag. for 1844, p. 409, pt. i. Also sketch of a glass vessel found in Deveril Street, Kent Road, Archæologia, vol. xxvi. p. 466, and our vol. vi. p. 507.

lar. As Sir John Fenn gives it in the old orthography it is as follows:

"My Lord of Clarence is goon to his brother late kyng, in so moche that his men have the Gorget on their breests and the Rose over it." (vol. ii. p. 62.)

Sir John Fenn has explained the word Gorget by this note,

was

"A Collar worn round the neck." Now, the gorge is the throat, as every body knows; and the gorget a piece of body-armour worn round the throat or neck; but I believe the word will not be found applied to a loose collar. Further, as I have shewn on a former occasion, Livery Collars were not worn by the " men, or common soldiers, who are here meant; and if they had been, and were called by the name in question, the writer of the letter would not have said that the men have the gorget," but that they "have gorgets.

It is evident to me that the word was misread by Sir John Fenn, and that this is one of the instances, of which there are probably many, in which we have to regret the disappearance of the original manuscripts of that unparalleled collection of ancient Letters.

The soldiers at large were accustomed to wear badges, made generally, I presume, of cloth, or like material,* sewn upon their breasts, and backs also, and the badge which the Duke of Clarence directed his men to assume on this occasion, was doubtless that of 'his brother late king." King Edward's badge was the rose in a sun; it was commonly known by its French name (the language of heraldry) as the Rose en Soleil, and (though there does not appear much similarity in the letters composing the words,) it is still almost certain that James Gresham, Sir John Paston's correspondent, must, instead of Gorget,

have written Soleil.

I must beg permission, before I conclude, to point out the original au

"thirteen thousand quinysans (cognizances) of fustian with boars." Warrant of Richard III. to his Wardrobe keeper, MS. Harl. 433, art. 1576.

"bothe before and behynde." Warkworth's Chronicle,

thority for the incident related of the Earl of Oxford's livery being misunderstood, which is stated to have turned the fortune of the day at the battle of Barnet. It is derived from the history of the first thirteen years of the reign of King Edward the Fourth, which has been published by the Camden Society under the title of Warkworth's Chronicle. It was from this narrative that Stowe, as was pointed out by your reviewer,* derived much that he gives in his Chronicle relative to the same period. Thus, it states the number of the slain on both sides to have been 4,000 men, as given by Mr. KEMPE on the authority of Stowe. In one important point, the duration of the battle, from four to ten in the morning, it supplies information unnoticed by Mr. KEMPE. If I append the whole account furnished by this authority, I think it will not be unacceptable. After having stated the number of king Edward's forces to have been 7,000, and that of the Earl of Warwick's 20,000, and de. scribed the arrival of the two hosts at Barnet, the writer proceeds:

"And on Ester day in the mornynge, the xiiij day of Apryl, ryght erly, eche of them came uppone othere; and ther was suche a grete myste, that nether of them myght see othere perfitely. Ther thei faughte, from iiij. of clokke in the morn. ynge unto x. of clokke in the forenone. And dyverse tymes the erle of Warwykes party had the victory, and supposede that thei hadde wonne the felde. But it hapenede so, that the erle of Oxenfordes men hade uppon them ther lordes lyvery, bothe before and behynde, which was a sterre withe stremys, wiche [was] myche lyke kynge Edwardes lyvery, the sunne withe stremys; and the myste was so thycke, that a manne myghte not perfytely juge one thynge from anothere; so the erle of Warwikes menne schott and faughte agens the erle of Oxenfordes menne, wetynge and supposynge that thei hade bene kynge Edwardes menne; and anone the erle of Oxenforde and his menne cryed Treasoune! treasoune! and fledde awaye from the felde with viij. c. menne. The lorde markes Montagu was agreyde and apoyntede with kynge Edwarde, and put uppone hym kynge Edwardes lyvery; and a manne of the erle of Warwyke sawe that and felle uppon hyme, and kyllede hym.

* Dec. 1839, vol. XII. p. 614.

And whenne the erle of Warwyke sawe his brothere dede, and the erle of Oxenforde fledde, he lepte one horse-backe, and fled to a wode by the felde of Barnett, where was no waye forthe; and one of kynge Edwardes menne hade espyed hyme, and one came uppon hym and kylled hyme, and dispolede hyme nakede. And so kynge Edwarde gate that felde.

"And ther was slayne of the erle of Warwykes party, the erle hym-self, markes Montagu, sere William Tyrelle knyghte, and many other. The duke of Excetre faugth manly ther that day, and was gretely despolede and woundede, and lefte naked for dede in the felde; and so lay ther from vij. of clokke tille iiij. afternone; whiche was taken up and brought to a house by a manne of his owne, and a leche brought to hym, and so afterwarde brought into santuary at Westmynster.

"And one kynge Edwardes party was slayne the lorde Crowmwelle, sonne and heyre to the erle of Essex, lord Barnes' sonne and heyre,† lorde Say, and dyverse other, to the nombre of bothe partys iiij мl. menne.

"And after that the felde was don, kynge Edwarde commaundyd bothe the erle of Warwikes body and the lord markes' body to be putt in a carte, and returned hym with alle his oste ageyne to Londone; and there commaunded the seide ij bodyes to be layede in the chyrche of Paulis, one the pavement, that every manne myghte see them; and so they lay iij. or iiij. days, and afterwarde buryede.

were

"And kynge Henry, beinge in the forwarde durynge the bataylle, was not hurte, but he was broughte ageyne to the toure of London, ther to be kept."

It may be observed that in this narrative occurs the passage reflecting on the consistency of the Marquess Montagu, to which Mr. KEMPE withholds his credence. On that point I have nothing further to remark, but that it corresponds with the previous very vacillating conduct attributed to that person by the same writer. would point out, however, the statement where it is said that the Marquess "put uppone hym kynge Edwardes lyvery," which in an ordinary case 1 should, as applied to a man of that rank, understand to mean a livery

I

§ Sir Humphrey Bourchier, the same person who is mentioned in the Paston letter, at p. 251 of last Magazine. See note on him in Warkworth's Chronicle, p. 64.

MR. URBAN,

IN Miss Halsted's recently published "Life of Richard III." reviewed in your last number, we find the following passage relating to Prince Edward, the only son of that King, who was created Earl of Salisbury by his uncle Edward IV.

"As relates to the immediate biography of the young Earl of Salisbury, a most interesting and curious document preserved in the same MS. library gives the only brief memorials that have been transmitted to posterity relative to this young prince in his childhood. These are contained in a fragment connected with the household expenditure and the administration and economy of the Duke of Gloucester at Middleham during this and the following year, in which the details are SO minute that even the colour of the young prince's dress is inserted, as also the price of a feather to be worn in his cap.

One item commemorates the sudden death and burial of Lord Richard Bernall, his governor, who, it would seem, expired and was interred at Pomfret recently after a journey from Middleham, a specified sum being inserted for ye Lord Richard's costs from Middleham to Ponctfret,' and another expenditure for the Lord Richard's burial.' Various entries connected with this nobleman show the entire association of the young prince with his tutor, and it also proves that Middleham was their fixed abode during Gloucester's active military career." Vol. I. p. 367.

What is here meant by MS. library is the Register of Letters, &c. under the Privy Seal, in the reigns of Edward V. and Richard III. (Harl. MS. No. 433,) of which Mr. Sharon Turner has made admirable use in his History of those reigns; and the "interesting and curious document preserved in the same" is a mandate or warrant from King Richard to Geoffrey Franke, his receiver at Middleham, dated GENT. MAG. VOL. XXII.

September 25th, 1483, authorising the payment of certain expenses incurred during a few months previous to its date, on account of the royal household at Middleham Castle. Numerous extracts from this document are given by Mr. Turner in illustration of his memoir of Richard III. and the young Prince Edward his son, and it unfortunately happens that the mistake of a single word (probably made by Mr. Turner's copyist in transcribing the warrant from the original MS.) has occasioned that eminent historian, when adverting to a letter written by King Richard from Pomfret Castle on the 22nd of September, 1483, to state that "the prince was at that time under the care of Lord Richard Bernall." (Hist. of England, 4to. ed. vol. III. p. 482.) This error is Miss Halsted's sole authority for the account she gives in the passage above quoted, of "the entire association of the young prince with his tutor," and the sudden death and burial of the latter at Pontefract.

Now, in point of fact, there is no such name as "Lord Richard Bernall" among the historical personages of this period, nor does the warrant to Geoffrey Franke, nor any other document yet brought to light, afford the slightest ground for alleging that the prince had a governor bearing the name of Bernall, or indeed that he had a governor or tutor at all. In the copy of the warrant printed in the Appendix to Miss Halsted's book, "Bernall" does not occur; the words mistaken by Mr. Turner's transcriber for "Lord Richard Bernall," are there correctly printed "Lord Richard's Burial." But, supposing Lord Richard Bernall to be a real personage, according to Mr. Turner the prince was under his care on the 22nd of September, whilst Miss Halsted, on the authority of the warrant to Franke, proves him to have been dead and buried prior to the 21st of the same month, which is the date she (incorrectly) assigns to that document.

""

It is, however, quite clear that "the Lord Richard, so frequently named in the warrant, was a person of importance, and intimately connected with the young prince; and, upon a more careful examination of this, which may be truly called a 3 C

lord prince" is meant Prince Edward, the son of the Duke of Gloucester; and it seems almost equally obvious that "the lord Richard" denotes "the Lord Richard Grey, son unto our sovereign lady the Queen," (as he is styled in a grant of Edward IV.) who was beheaded with his uncle the Earl of Ryvers at Pontefract on the 25th or 26th of June, 1483. The Croyland historian and Sir Thomas More, when relating the circumstances attending the arrest of Ryvers, Grey, and Vaughan at Stony Stratford on the 30th of April, by the order of the Duke of Gloucester, agree in stating that they were conveyed from thence to different places in Yorkshire. It is now a well ascertained fact that the Earl of Ryvers, until his removal to Pontefract to be executed, was a prisoner in the castle of Sheriff Hutton; but the place of confinement to which his nephew Lord Richard Grey was conducted has not been the subject of inquiry, historians having taken for granted that Pontefract was the scene death. But it seems extremely proof his imprisonment as well as of his bable that Gloucester, having sent the uncle to one of his own castles in Yorkshire, should select another,

1. That the Lord Richard was an inmate of Middleham Castle, from the 3rd of May, (St. Olymmesse, the invention of the Holy Cross,) to the 24th of June, (Midsummer day,) and not longer, his name being omitted from the two next items.

2. That he was conducted from Middleham to Pontefract.

3. That very soon after his arrival at Pontefract he was buried-indicating a sudden or violent death.

4. That certain expenses of the Lord Richard were subsequently "laid out" by Sir Thomas Gower.

5. That all the expenses, not only of the Lord Richard himself and his servants and horses whilst at Middleham, and on their journey thence to Pontefract, but also of his burial, together with other disbursements on his account, were afterwards repaid by the command of the Duke of Gloucester when he had ascended the throne.

There can be no doubt that by "my

as the place of honourable imprisonment for the nephew, who, from his youth and close consanguinity to the reigning monarch, was entitled to more than ordinary consideration.

A journey from Stony Stratford to Middleham would occupy two or three days, and would bring the arrival there of the Lord Richard Grey to the 3rd of May. On the 24th of June, when, according to the warrant, his stay at Middleham terminated, his uncle Lord Ryvers was conducted from Sheriff Hutton to Pontefract; and it is plain, as Dr. Lingard observes, (Hist. of Engl. vol. V. p. 243,) that the "affecting and significant" postscript to the last will of Lord Ryvers, "my will is now to be buried before an image of our blessed Lady Mary with my Lord Richard in Pomfret,' was added after he had arrived at Pontefract, and received notice of his approaching execution. He then discovered that he and his nephew were brought there to share the same disastrous fate, and with his own hand

he recorded his dying wish that their bodies should repose in the same tomb. Sir Thomas Gower, knight, was one of the witnesses to the will of Lord Ryvers, which he signed at Sheriff Hutton on the 23rd of June, (Excerpta Hist. p. 248;) and as Stittenham, "the Gowers' auntient manor place," is the adjoining township to Sheriff Hutton, it is probable that Ryvers possessed in this worthy knight a faithful friend, who, having assisted him in the performance of his latest worldly duty, afforded him the consolation of his presence and sympathy during his last moments at Pontefract, and there extended even beyond the grave his kindness and services to the beloved nephew of the accomplished and unfortunate Earl.

I AM not aware that any notice has appeared in your Magazine of the Hospital of St. Mary Magdalen, which formerly stood on the hill bearing that name, about a mile east of this city; but, as some account of it may probably afford interest to some of your readers, I send you the best I can collect from the scanty history existing of it.

It is somewhat remarkable that this establishment has escaped the notice of Dugdale, Tanner, and every other antiquary; nor is even the name of the founder positively ascertained. Milner has, however, brought together so many circumstances in his investigation of this point as prove satisfactorily, in my opinion, that to Richard Toclyve must be assigned the merit. He governed this see in the reign of Hen. 1., from the year 1173 to 1189, with the character of an exemplary prelate; and we learn that his charity led him first to the augmentation of St. Cross, but that afterwards it was diverted into another channel. We are acquainted with the works of his predecessors, and those who immediately succeeded him, and as the style of architecture of the chapel, that of

See plates i. ii. in 3d vol. Vetusta Monumenta.

the ornamented Norman with the first rudiments of the Gothic, corresponds with the period, the appropriation to him appears warranted by every sense of reason and justice.

That it must have been established soon after the Conquest is confirmed by the Register of John de Pontissara, wherein is an agreement made in 1283 between the Bishop and the Prior and Convent of St. Swithin, in which the latter acknowledge that the Bishops of Winchester had been for a long time (per multa tempora) patrons of the preferments mentioned, amongst which is the house of St. Mary Magdalen.

The foundation, which was distinguished by having the munificent Waynflete, afterwards Bishop of the see, for its master, consisted of a master and nine persons, either male or female, eight being resident, with an ample provision in money and commons, and one out-pensioner; and there is strong reason to believe that the sick and leprous were occasionally admitted, as in the will of John Fromond, Steward of Winchester College, dated Nov. 14, 1420, is the clause, "Item lego ad distribuend. inter leprosos B. M. Magdalene Winton. vis. viiid." Many other legacies are mentioned in the bishops' registers as left for the benefit of this community, which continued to prosper until the reign of Henry VIII. when it shared the fate of so many others, that of spoliation, but was not suppressed.

In the war between Charles 1. and his Parliament, it suffered greatly from the royal troops under Lord Hopton, who in vain endeavoured to restrain them. But it was in 1665 that the ruin was completed. By the command of Charles II. and Lord Arlington, the master was compelled to remove with the almsfolk, that Dutch prisoners of war might be admitted. These burned all the timber they could find, greatly injured the master's and the other houses, carried away the pulpit, scats, bell and lead of the chapel, and, indeed, rendered the buildings unfit for habitation. On this occasion an humble petition was presented to his majesty, setting forth the damage sustained, which was estimated at 6501. grant of 100l. was made, but the society not possessing means, nor find

A