cester, and John Montacute third earl of Salisbury, who were elected by Richard II., are altogether omitted. The earl of Arundel and Sir Thomas Felton, the count Palatine duke of Bavaria, John Beaufort earl of Somerset and marquess of Dorset, Sir William Arundel, the Soudan de la Trau, and Sir Simon Felbrigge, who were all elected by Richard II., are misplaced under other reigns; the two first under Edward III., the four following under Henry IV., and the last under Henry V. "The catalogue during the reign of Henry IV., incorrectly describes William as Gilbert lord Roos; omits Richard Beauchamp fifth earl of Warwick, and Henry lord Scrope of Masham; and transfers the Kings of Portugal and Denmark, and Henry lord Fitzhugh, who were elected into the Order under this Sovereign, to the reign of his successor." These errors are attributable to the circumstance of the early records of the Order, previous to the reign of Henry V. having been lost; and, in consequence, minute facts have to be assembled from Wardrobe accounts and other miscellaneous records, in order to form a body of collateral evidence. With regard to other questions of the same kind, Mr. Beltz shows, by copious proofs, that the name of Rupert Count Palatine of the Rhine, temp. Hen. IV. is an error for Albert (Aubert); and that the names of Henry III. King of Spain, Lewis Duke of Briga, Gilles de Bretagne son of John V. duke of Britanny, of Sir Philip Wentworth temp. Hen. VI., and Paul Baptist Spinola, have been sometimes erroneously assigned to a place in the Order. By proofs and arguments equally ingenious and satisfactory, he has ascertained that the "Count of Mont Grison," temp. Edw. IV. whose identity had wholly eluded the researches of Vincent, Heylin, Ashmole, and Anstis, though he was styled in the Garter catalogues as "of Naples," is in fact Inigo d'Avalos, Count of Monte Odorisio, a man of great historical importance as Grand Chamberlain of Naples, whose name was spelt in the English records Mont Orizo, and by the misreading of the initial letter wholly obscured. We have now adverted to the most important points in Mr. Beltz's prefatory introduction. It is succeeded by a summary view of the history of the Order; in which its origin, changes, "The germ of this splendid fraternity may be traced to the TABLE RONDE, by whomsoever invented, which, according to the testimony of our ancient authors, corroborated by the public records, was, soon after the Conquest, and, occasionally, until the reign of our first Edward, erected in England for the entertainment of knights assembled to exercise themselves in feats of strength and courage; qualities which then constituted almost the only recommendation to distinction. "The revival of these chivalrous conventions, in a more brilliant form, was reserved for King EDWARD THE THIRD. His sagacity in council and promptitude in action have, by the common consent of historians, assigned to him a pre-eminent rank among the monarchs, his contemporaries. Engaged in bitter hostilities with France, whose sovereign alone rivalled him in fame and power, he anticipated substantial benefits from a device to gather around his standard, and attach to his person and policy, the flower of the European Knighthood. His taste for jousts, hastiludes, and tourneys, concurring with that of the age, presented the means of accomplishing his object; and it can scarcely be doubted that, at the particular festivities to which allusion will presently be made, his plan of founding a military society, of strangers as well as subjects of exalted valour, was conceived and matured." That particular occasion from which the Order took its rise, has been one of the points which has always furnished matter for dispute, and it necessarily occupies some space in Mr. Beltz's pages. Very various have been the dates assigned by different authors, and the most prevaling opinion has been for the year 1349. It is somewhat amusing, but very agreeable withal, that the result of Mr. Beltz's investigations is in favour of the gossiping Froissart. That popular and somewhat careless writer, but who was well acquainted with the English court and its occurrences, gives, in his 213th chapter, an account of "How the King of England founded a Chapel of St. George, and ordained the Feast of the Blue Garter, to be annually there in celebrated;" and, though he has committed the error of stating the number of the Knights at forty instead of twenty-six, it is now proved that he supplies the correct date, viz. on St. George's Day, 1344. It is singular that no description of this memorable feast should be given by any native chronicler; but so it is, and we must be grateful to Froissart for his aid. "There were present," he says, "the earls, barons, knights, ladies, and damsels of the Kingdom of England. The festivities were on a grand and noble scale, with much feasting and tourneying for fifteen days. Many knights from Flanders, Hainault, and Brabant crossed the sea, in order to be present on the occasion; but from France there came none.' "Of the principle which governed the nomination of the first knight companions, we know as little as of the form in which the election was conducted. The fame of Sir Reginald Cobham, Sir Walter Manny, the earls of Northampton, Hereford, and Suffolk, had been established by their exploits, long before the institution of the Order; and would have amply justified their admission amongst the Founders, if military merit had been the sole qualification. Those distinguished captains of the age were elected subsequently upon the vacancies created by the deaths of persons of less apparent pretensions. Is it, therefore, an improbable conjecture (more especially considering the youth of several of the primary knights, and the small celebrity of others), that the distinction was, in the first instance, bestowed upon those who had excelled at the joust which shortly preceded the foundation?" We should say this supposition has every appearance of being the truth. The foreigners who were included among the primary Knights of the Garter were Jean de Grailly, Captal de Buch in Gascony; Sir Henry Eam of Brabant, a name unknown to the English records before the foundation of the order, but afterwards a knight attached to the service of the Black Prince; and Sir Sanchet d'Abrichecourt, of Hainault, but whose father (as supposed) had served in the army of England. On the popular traditions regarding the adoption of the Garter as the name and symbol of the order (such as the Countess of Salisbury dropping her garter, &c.) we will not stop to dilate : they are duly considered and disposed of by Mr. Beltz; no other result, however, is arrived at, but that the Garter was assumed as an emblem of the tie or union of warlike qualities. Mr. Beltz has given a complete and carefully compiled series of all the Knights of the Garter, the last of whom, Robert Marquess of Westminster, elected on the 11th March 1841, is the 688th that has received this illustrious distinction. Next follows a List headed, "Ladies of the Order," or the names of those ladies for whom robes of the order were provided for the Feast of St. George from the reign of Edward III. to that of Henry VII. From Mr. Beltz's observations in another place (pp. 244-6), it appears that there is ancient authority for the title here given to them, as they are sometimes designated "Dominæ de Secta et Liberatura Garterii," and, at others," Dames de la Fraternité de Saint George." There is, however, ceremonies of admission for ladies; and no account of any form of election or it is found, that "the favour was not limited to the consorts and relicts of the Knights of the Order, but extended to others of their families," and very probably to any ladies resident at Court, whom the Sovereign, from his own grace, or at the nomination of a Knight Companion, was pleased to invite to be present at the festivities and solemnities; as at its very foundation, Froissart says, "the Queen of England, accompanied by three hundred ladies and damsels, all noble and gentle women, and uniformly apparelled, were to be present." It is possible that the delivery of robes to the King of Spain (p. xiv.) and some other males mentioned in the preface, may be explained in the same way. We have looked at the annals of the order in the reigns of Mary and Elizabeth on a point which excited some interest at the commencement of the present reign, the mode of wearing the order by female sovereigns. It is remarkable that at the present time the Knights, with their female Sovereign, amount to the number of forty; for though the number of twenty-five ordinary knights (besides the Sovereign) remains, the Foreign Princes and Princes of the Blood Royal are supernumerary, and are, together, fourteen. Nothing, however, there occurs on the point; but under the reign of Anne we find the following: "Queen Anne, upon her accession, commanded the chancellor of the Order to summon a select number of the knights, for the purpose of obtaining their opinion touching the manner in which she should wear the ensigns as Sovereign. The companions to whom the consideration of the point was committed, were the marquess of Normanby, the duke of Somerset, the earls of Rochester and Feversham, the duke of Devonshire, and the earls of Portland and Pembroke. They expressed their opinion that the George might be worn pendent from a ribband about the Queen's neck; the Garter on her left arm; and the star upon her breast; which was accordingly, by the direction of the knights, reported to her Majesty by the chancellor." Subsequently, at an installation, she "assumed her stall, wearing the mantle and collar of the Order." To return to the "" Ladies of the Order." A note in p. ccxxi. informs us that "Garters, of the same fashion as those of the knights, were also provided for ladies; but the delivery was not annual, like that of the robes. Ashmole, p. 218, states that the figure of the countess of Tancarville upon her tomb (probably An. tigona, wife of Henry the 2nd earl, and natural daughter of Humphrey duke of Gloucester.) was decorated with a Garter around the left arm, a little above the eibow; and, in the church of Stanton Harcourt, the figure of Margaret Byron, the wife of Sir Robert Harcourt, K.G. is represented with the like decoration. Both these ladies were living in the reign of Edward IV. The figure of Alice Countess of Suffolk at Ewelme, temp. Hen. VI. is also represented with the Garter round her left arm." In the reign of Charles I. on the 22nd May 1638, "An attempt was made to revive the ancient custom of issuing the ensigns and robes of the Order to LADIES. Sir James Palmer, acting as deputy for Sir Thomas Rowe, chancellor, moved the Sovereign, That the Ladies of the Knights Companions might have the privilege to wear a Garter of the Order about their arms; and an upper robe, at festival times, according to ancient usage.' Upon which motion the Sovereign gave orders that the Queen should be made acquainted therewith and her pleasure krown, and the affair left to the particular suit of the ladies.' On the 10th of October in the ported to the Sovereign in chapter the year following, the deputy-chancellor reanswer which the Queen was pleased to give: whereupon it was left to a chapter, to be called by the Knights-companions, to consider of every circumstance, and how it were fittest to be done for the honour of the Order.' A chapter was appointed to be held for the purpose; but owing, at it is supposed, to the civil wars nothing was done therein." We have derived the foregoing remarks from that part of Mr. Beltz's work which relates to the corporate history of the Order, as best suited for comment and extract within our space; but we must distinctly state, before we conclude, that the author's personal memoirs of the Knights, and his genealogical details, inasmuch as they are the result of long and unwearied research, and are full of original and important information, are those portions of the work which deserve the highest credit and approbation. The active and chivalrous period in which his heroes flourished is one very favourable to the interest of biographical narrative; and few readers will fail to derive gratification from so authentic a history of the captains of Cressy and Poictiers, and the gentle and gallant knights of the pages of Froissart. A more attentive and complete perusal than we have yet been able to bestow upon these memoirs would probably fail in suggesting any material remarks upon so elaborate and wellconsidered a work. We may, however, mention that Mr. Beltz, in p. ccxxiii, has forgotten the article in the first volume of the Collectanea Topographica et Genealogica, which proved the distinction between Beatrix countess of Arundel and Beatrix lady Talbot. With regard to Sir William Fitzwaryne, K.G. there appears to remain some little obscurity not yet cleared up. He is identified (p. 96) with the person called "William Fitzwaryne le Frere" in public records, and with the Sir William who was once (only) summoned to Parliament, in 1342. It is suggested in a note that "the de scription le frere may warrant the conjecture that he was brother to the chief of the family, Fulk lord Fitzwaryne, a person of great distinction at the period." We do not dissent from the opinion so expressed; but, as we believe such distinctions were usually applied to distinguish two persons of the same name, we would inquire, was there another William? and, if so, what relation? A sepulchral effigy of the Knight of the Garter still exists in Wantage church, Berkshire (see a plate recently published in Hollis's Monumental Effigies): but, as for the person buried in the Grey Friars' church in London, as mentioned by Stowe (Beltz, p. 97), together with his wife "Isabella quondam Regina Man," there is every probability that he was William Bourchier lord Fitzwaryne,† who died in the reign of Edward the Fourth, and the wife of whose son, together with her father Sir John Dynham, was interred in the same place. If the lady bearing the lofty title of "Queen of Man," could be identified, this point would probably be determined. The History and Antiquities of Leath Ward, in the County of Cumberland; with Biographical Notices and Memoirs. By Samuel Jefferson. Carlisle, 8vo. pp. 516. THE county of Cumberland is divided, not into Hundreds but into Wards, an arrangement which, according to this author, is owing, in common with the subdivision of other counties into hundreds, "to the wise policy of Alfred the Great." But had Alfred any jurisdiction over Cumberland? We rather imagine not. And if so, in what ancient record are the Wards first mentioned? This should be one of the first questions to be investigated by a Cumberland historian. Dr. Burn gives a more satisfactory account of this peculiar division of Cumberland and Westmorland. He says the Wards were "the districts of the like number of High Constables, who presided over the wards to be sustained at certain fords and other places, for re pelling plundering parties out of Scotland." (Burn's Westmorland, pp. 12, 13.) A very recent alteration has taken place in the division of Cumberland. The five Wards of which it consisted have been formed into six. Leath Ward, however, remains unaltered (p. 496.) It comprises the southeastern portion of the county; is about thirty-five miles in length east and west, and in breadth north and south very irregular, in no part exceeding fourteen miles. It contains twentyone parishes, of which that of the town of Penrith is first noticed in the present volume. The history of Cumberland has been described by a very competent judge, (Mr. Hodgson, the historian of Northumberland,) as a wide and rich, but uncultivated field." It has only been surveyed, not cultivated, by Messrs. Nicolson and Burn, by Mr. Hutchinson, and the Messrs. Lysons. But we should not forget another survey made by the historian of Northumberland himself, and contributed to "The Beauties of England and Wales," an early evidence of his love of topography, and his patriotic affection towards his native county. Mr. Jefferson discloses the circumstance, that "The History of Cumberland which bears Mr. Hutchinson's name is usually attributed to him; but that gentleman ap. pears merely to have written a few parts, furnished notes for some parishes, and left the management and editorship to others. His Histories of Northumberland and Durham having established his fame as a writer, he lent his assistance and countenance to that of Cumberland, which now bears his name." And now we are called upon to give our opinion of Mr. Jefferson's own performance: We could not conscientiously give it the highest praise: for to bring it into a comparison with the erudition and taste of Mr. Hodgson would be extravagant. We think its compilation has been rather hurried; but life is short, and topographers are not immortal. On the tomb of too * See the Register of the Grey Friars, Collectanea Topograph. vol. v. p. 278. +Dugdale (Baron. ii. 131) says this Lord was buried at the Augustine Friars in London, which is probably a mistake for Francisca. In vol. i. p. 447. Dugdale led the way in assigning (erroneously, as we think) the burial in Stowe to the earlier Baron. many a county historian the motto Magnis ille excidit ausis. The world, in one sense, is more indebted to publishers than to collectors, that is, to the publishers of their own generation who diffuse the collections of preceding times, rather than to the collectors of their own generation, who bury their stores for posterity. The former process Mr. Jefferson is very laudably engaged in accomplishing. He has the use of a MS. history of the diocese, compiled towards the close of the seventeenth century, by the Rev. Hugh Todd, D.D.; of the MS. collections of Bishop Nicolson, and others in the library of the Dean and Chapter of Carlisle. He also pays greater attention to the Church architecture than has been previously done, and publishes copies of the sepulchral memorials. Among these, in the church of Skelton, we find the following: "To the memory of HENRY RICHMOND BROUGHAM, Esq. who died 23rd April 1749, and lies near this place, where his father Peter Brougham, Esq. and his mother Elizabeth, his brother John, and sister Mary, are likewise Erected by John Gale, Esq." interred. The Peter here mentioned was the great-uncle of Lord Brougham. He married Elizabeth, daughter and heiress of Christopher Richmond, esq. which Christopher's mother elder daughter and coheiress of John was Mabell, Vaux of Catterlen. The children of the marriage of Brougham and Richmond all died without issue, as above noticed; and the remarkable part of the matter is, that Lord Brougham and Vaux is not descended from the heir of the latter family. We think, however, that Mr. Jefferson, on concluding his pedigree of Vaux of Catterlen in p. 149, should have mentioned that Lord Brougham's title was derived from that family, in the way we have mentioned. Another object of interest in the volume is the castle of Greystoke, which our author states is at present undergoing a very extensive repair, from designs of A. Salvin, esq. F.S.A. architect. The volume is closed with biographies of several eminent natives or re sidents of the district, among which is one of Father Huddleston, contributed by Dr. Lingard. On the whole, though it is obvious fully discussed in 500 not very large that twenty-one parishes cannot be octavo pages, we have no hesitation in saying that Mr. Jefferson's book is, and ought to be, very acceptable to the county, and that it is published at a price which will meet the convenience of all purchasers. The embellishments are of an inferior kind; and, rially, the author might certainly obwithout increasing his expences matetain more correct drawings and more interesting subjects. In this respect we shall hope to see an improvement in Mr. Jefferson's next volume, which will contain the history of Allerdale Ward above Derwent. The History of Belvoir Castle, from the Norman Conquest to the Nineteenth Century; accompanied by a Description of the present Castle, and Critical Notices of the Paintings, &c. By the Rev. Irvin Eller, of Queen's Coll. Camb. 8vo. pp. 410. THIS work is executed in an agreeable manner, and we think will give general satisfaction. It is also very perceived from the plate presented to handsomely embellished, as will be our readers in a previous part of this Magazine. So attached are we to works of this description, that we should be glad to rian, and every noble family its genesee every ancient Castle find its histoalogist. But histories cannot be writpioneer has cleared the way, and stored ten off-hand, unless some laborious up the necessary materials. For Belvoir Castle and its lords, this has been most copiously done by Mr. Nichols in his History of Leicestershire, of which the present author has largely availed himself. is an unbroken line of inheritance from The descent of the Castle of Belvoir through the male descents of their the Conquest to the present day; successive families. The first possesor was Robert de Todeni, standard-bearer to the Conqueror, whose male issue, bearing the name of Albini, lasted unRos, barons of Parliament and men of til 1247. Next came the family of de renown, who lasted until 1508. Their |