Зображення сторінки
PDF
ePub

Richard Forster, of Newbam; and at present it belongs to Grieve Smith, Esq. From Budle bay there are high and bold remains of a Roman way towards Alnwick; from whence it probably passed to the Devil's Causeway by Lemmington.

P. 210, line 9, after castle, add :--and is now, jure uroris, the property of Sir M. Masterman Sykes, Bart. of Sledmere in Yorkshire.

P. 213, line 24, for “ Henry," read, Sir Henry Liddle, Bart.
P. 215, line 14, for “ family' read Roddams.

P. 217, after line 21, add :-FOWBURY Tower was the seat of William de Foleher, who in 1273 held Folebyr, Caldmerton, and Hesibrigg, by one knight's fee, of the old Feoffment of the barony of Vescy. In 1416, Robert de Folebery was a representative in Parlia. ment of this county. “On Trinity Sunday, 1524, 500 Scotsmen passed the Tweed at different fords, and lay in hollow grounds near the highway, with a view of intercepting the traders and others going to Berwick Fair. They took much spoil, and made many prisoners; but being attacked near Brankston by a body of English- , men, who gathered on the alarm, and were joined by the young Lord of Fowberry, at the bead of 100 light horse, a fierce skirmish ensued, in which the Scots were defeated; and in their flight 200 of them taken."* In 1532, The Scots plundered this place. In 1663 it was the property of William Strother, Esq. of Kirknewton; but charged upon “Mr. Flearon of Fowbery” in the rental for raising the train-bands. In 1741, John Strother Kerr, Esq. of Fowberry, was sheriff for this county. At present this place is the resi. dence and property of Matthew Culley, Esq. who purchased it of Sir Francis Blake, Bart.

NORTHUMBERLAND.

• Rid. Bord. Hist. p. 529.

[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]

8663 149766

18703 10698 11783 37215

Bambrough............ 1778 | 101 1025 430) 443
Castle...........

8109 252 1734 5475 3855
Coquetvlale ......... 3302 165 1801 996 1179
Glendale ..... 206755 1321 444 369
Morpelh..... 2132 159 1175 976 483
T'indale................. 6790 268 3704 | 2022 2006
Town and County)
of the Town of

169 1099 521 Berwick - upon

Tweed............. Town and County)

of the Town of S3164 105 10 5055 Newcastle upon

1390 Tyne..............? Totals................... 28258 1126 10945 116547 | 10251

[ocr errors]

21

[ocr errors][merged small][merged small]
[ocr errors][merged small]

NOTTINGHAMSHIRE.

In a supplementary paper furnished hy the editor of the BEAUTIES for this county, he observes that it cannot be denied but that much might be added to the account of a district so important in extent and in population. Of what is written there is little, however, that re. quires correction, in regard to fact; and, where speculation has been hazarded, the editor fears not the charge of presumption when he claims the authority of recent events, to justify the principles assumed in reference to general polity.”

The names of the principal gentlemen who contributed information to this portion of the work, have been already enumerated;* but it should be added, that, “ for the interesting account of Stanton, the public are indebted to the pen of the very intelligent and Rev. Dr. STANTON; the editor's note to that account requires, however, a slight correction.- Although the Stanton family of Ireland are there said to be a younger branch of the family,' yet we are assured by that gentleman that there, in fact, exists no relationship whatever.

" In the description of Stoke-upon-Trent, and the account of the battle fought there in the reign of Heory the Seventh, much stress is laid upon the extraordinary discovery at Minster Lovel, recorded by Gough in his edition of Camden, as connected with a passage in Bacon's history of that reign. Since that was written, we have perused the account of Oxfordshire in the present work, the editor of which seems to consider Mr. Gough as having been imposed upon.f To enter into the controversy, here, is needless; -the reader will judge for bimself of the general probabilities on both sides.

" It is also proper, in this place, to notice a slight mistake of the Engraver with respect to the plate of the " Excavations, which are there said to be at Sneinton, but are really in the park near the confluence of the Lene and Treut.”

NOTTINGHAMSHIRE.

Sec Beautics for Nottinghamshire, and the General Preface.

+ See Beauties for Oxfordshire, p. 507–508.

[blocks in formation]

HUNDRED OR WA

PENTAKE OF BAS* SETLAW. Hatfield Division..... 3001

886 265 14602 North Clay Division 1730

676

8484 South Clay Division 1314

268

6183 Binghain, North) and South Divi

569

10042 sions............... Broxtow, North ) and South Divi- || 7922 120 | 1796 | 6295

42118 sions............... Newark, North and South Divi. I

| 254

5813 sions............. Rushcliffe, North

and South Divi- & 1687 | 31 | 1061

sions,.............. Liberty of South

1726 49 1091 well and Scrooby) |

8602 Thurgarton, North and South Divi. 2864 56 1685

15198 sions............... ) Borough of New. 1483 9 389 993

7236 ark-opon-Trent 3 Town and County of the Town of

305 | 34253 Nottingham..... ) Local Militia embodied, May,

1364 1811................ ) Totals.. ........ 131344 95412293 18928 | 2293 1162900

9005

[ocr errors]

1104

P

IS...............

...

OXFORDSHIRE.

OXFORDSHIRE.

The Editor regrets that his delineations of this county should bare been restricted, by unavoidable causes, to limits too likely to prove posatisfactory to some partial inhabitants. An account of the university of Oxford necessarily engrossed so large a portion of his allotted pages, as to leave little room for historical discussions, or descriptive statements, respecting many circumstances and places, of minor, although of unques tionable, interest. It is felt desirable to remind the reader that he investi. gated ground untrodden by the laborious and patient county historian, whilst prosecuting his researches in this district. Such an inconvenience he states in palliation of any possible errors; but he has the satisfaction of observing that a scrutiny rather more rigorous than might be expected, bas, hitherto, failed in discovering any serious inaccuracies.

His unprinted collections are numerous, as he resided for many years on the border of Oxfordshire ; but he cannot suppose that they would be acceptable in an Appendix, embracing notes upon many dif. ferent counties. All corrections that have appeared to be strictly neces. gary, are here made ; and some few additional remarks are presented.

Page 2, line 19, for “ Dr. Whitaker," read the Red. J. Whitaker, The ancient British tribe termed the Dobuni, (see p. 2–6) is noticed with more mature consideration in the Introduction" to the Beauties, article « The Ancient Britops.

Page 8-9; to the Roman stations in Oxfordshire, add Stonefield, Vide“ Introduction," and the attached map.

Page 9-10; on further consideration, there appears reason for sup. posing that Astal Barrow, and other similar tumuli, were of British, rather than of Romar construction, as is conjectured by Dr. Plot.

Page 10-13. The remains of Roman roads are accurately laid down in the map annexed to the “ Iotrociuction."

Page 139–140. Mr. Gough, in bis elaborate work on Sepulchral Monuments, thus notices the curious shrine mentioned in these pages:

-“The shrine of St. Frideswide, in the north aisle of Christchurch, Oxford, of which there is an aquatinta priuit lately executed by Mr. Roberts, portrait painter to the Duke of Clarence, is a rich piece of

« НазадПродовжити »