When the body was buried entire, it appears that the same vessels, with the exception only of the urn to contain ashes, were placed beside it in the tomb.now almasan av 161) besugger *The walls of the Roman sepulchre were sometimes composed of rubble-stone and hard mortar, as in the instance of a discovery made at Chatham hill, in Kent. The parts then excavated, exhibited a wall, 30 feet in length, "intersected by three apartments, with their walls." One of these apartments was complete, and was nine feet three inches by seven feet three inches. The walls on the inside were covered with fine white plaster, on which were painted stripes of black and red."*ali ng lainswaad wat gedach A Roman sepulchre, discovered at York, was about 250 yards from the wall of that city, and was in the form of an oblong room, with a ridged roof, covered with hollow Roman tiles. "Each side consisted of three large tiles, if they may be so called, of a beautiful red.” This tomb was about three feet and a half long, within; and contained several urns, all standing on a tiled pavement.↑ Maluca Amoitlang dram pag

The above two examples may convey satisfactory ideas of the usual character of the public and private sepulchres of the Romans, when the practice of cremation was adopted. In regard to such as were designed for the reception of numerous entire bodies, an instance occurs in the "Beauties of England" for Oxfordshire. The burial vault there mentioned, is said to have been, in the part which was explored, 20 feet in length, and 18 feet in width; the height was eight feet from "the planking stones." The human remains were laid in partitions of a dissimilar width, which crossed the vault from east to west, and were built with Roman red tiles, about eight inches and a half square. The partitions were two feet and a half deep, and were generally about the width of our modern graves. Small basins of black Roman pottery, which had probably contained milk, honey, wine, &c. were found in

several

Nenia Britannica, p. 140.

+ Gough's Sepulchral Monuments, part L. p. 25.

several of the recesses; and the Roman ash-urn, of red earthenware, was, likewise, discovered "among the rubbish." There were two tiers of sepulchral recesses; and, above, was a range of planking-tiles, covered with mortar and sand, to the thickness of about two inches, in which was set tessellated work, supposed to have formed the flooring of a temple.* tvol „ntynol

The Romans appear to have used, in Britain, stone coffins for interment; as in several instances such have been found, containing bones accompanied by urns, or funeral vessels, apparently Roman. The earliest of these stone coffins were constructed in a rude manner, and out of numerous slabs of stone; but the improvement of forming the coffin out of one stone, by the labour of the mallet and tool, was speedily introduced, and generally adopted by the affluent. Brick coffins, or sarcophagi, also were used by the Romans at a very early period; and coffins of burnt clay, assigned to the same people, have been found in this island. * chiq to loux & bite, mobay

When cremation ceased, on the introduction of Christianity, the believing Romans, together with the Romanized and converted Britons, would necessarily, as is observed by Mr. Gough, "betake themselves to the use of Sarcophagi, (or coffins) and, probably, of various kinds, stone, marble, lead, &c."+ They would, likewise, now first place the body in a position due east and west; and, thus, bestow an unequivocal mark of distinction between the funeral deposits of the earliest Roman inhabitants of this island, and their Christian successors.

THE ANGLO-SAXONS.

On the secession of the Romans from this fertile island, so affluent

*** See a more extended account of this discovery in the Beauties for Oxfordshire, p. 462-4. The particulars, as there presented, were communi. cated to the write writer of the present “Introduction," by the Rev. Mr. Nash, the resident clergyman of Great Tew, in which parish the burial place was situated,

Sepulchral Monuments, part I. p. 27.

affluent in · natural capacities, and admirably calculated for the reception of an independent population, when those who inhabit it know the great lesson of remaining compact in patriotic principle, and true to themselves; it is well known that the Britons failed to recover secure possession of their native soil, and, at length, lost even their national appellation in the sovereign name of new conquerors. #1 ni Jab

The SAXONS, who now appear on the busy stage of our islandannals, approach in barbarism the most ferocious and disgusting. But, as the scenes of narration proceed, their fierceness mellows into a resemblance of the firin, temperate courage, worthy of the warrior who uses arms chiefly for the defence of his altar, his fellow-citizens, and his home; whilst, from the rude germ of that ardent temper which impelled them to prefer a life of fortuitous, predatory adventure, to the patient cultivation of their natural soil, arises an expansive genius, eminent for legislative wisdom, and a zeal of piety, which, although sometimes fantastic in its operation, is gradually serviceable to morals and manners. landed a

The Saxons, indeed, have, in many points, a stronger claim on our attention than any of the other nations of our varied ancestry. Traces of their sound judgment in political œconomy are visible in the existing divisions of our island; and the wisdom of their laws still lives, and sustains their memory, in numerous portions of that valuable code of jurisprudence, which is the foundation of an Englishman's most rational pride of country.

It is not necessary to trace, in the present work, the progressive steps by which this people obtained a knowledge of the British coast.-The had long, in conjunction with the Francs, maintained a course of piratical depredations, injurious to several provinces of the Roman empire; and they were augmented, in numbers and power, in the fourth century, by a confederation with many small states, whose nominal distinctions were lost in the Saxon name. But the only allies of the Saxons, connected

in

in an important degree with the history of Britain, were the Jutes and Angles. It is concisely stated by Mr. Turner, the intelligent historian of these eventful periods, that, "as the boundaries of the Saxon states enlarged with their leagues, they embraced the population between the Elbe and the Weser; from the Weser they reached to the Ems; and, still augmenting, they diffused themselves to the Rhine, with varying latitude. The Jutes inhabited Jutland; or, rather, part of it which was formerly that called South Jutland. At the era of the Saxon invasion, the Angles were resident in the district of Anglen, in the dutchy of Sleswick."*

The internal state of Britain, at the first entry of that rude people who were destined to become its conquerors, merely by force of arms, and with a striking inferiority of numbers, is a subject worthy of attentive investigation. But this troubled period, in common with most others of our early history, is des titute of satisfactory contemporary annalists; and the deficiency, as usual, is ordinarily supplied by ingenious conjectures, aided by hints contained in extravagant and incredible monkish writers.

I have already ventured to deem it probable that our British ancestors, long accustomed to the profound peace attendant on subjugation, and trained, upon principle, to enjoy the enervating pleasures of tranquillity, viewed with reluctance the final departure of the protecting Romans. The miserable state into which they are confidently presumed to have fallen, when left to the exercise of their own discretion and energies, is, assuredly, an argument in favour of the correctness of such a conclusion. England and Wales, according to the conjectures of the ingenious, founded on suggestions contained in the most acceptable. remaining authorities, were divided, when abandoned by the Romans, into about thirty independent civitates; which, on the deposition of their respective officers of Roman appointment, naturally assumed the form of so many republics. Mr. Turner, writing

P

Hist. of the Anglo-Saxons, Vol. I. p. 57-58,

of this period, observes that " independent Britain contained many independent republics, or civitates; each of these was governed by chief magistrates, or duumviri, a senate, subordinate officers called decurions, an inferior senate called curia, with other necessary officers. The ecclesiastical concerns were regulated by a bishop in each, whose power sometimes extended into lay concerns.

"'*

But such a form of constituent power was not calculated for duration. When the principles of government reverted to their elements, it is probable that the descendants of ancient petty kings would prefer their long-neglected claims; and, if such claimants were wanting, ambition alone may be named as a sufficient motive to agitate temporary officers towards the destruction of a crowd. of imbecile republics.-Whatever might be the instrumentality, the existence of civil discord, caused by numerous usurpers of regal power, would appear to be unquestionable. Gildas, the most useful historian of this era, remarks that "the country, though weak against its foreign enemies, was brave and unconquerable in civil warfare. Kings were appointed, but not by God; they who were more cruel than the rest, attained to the highest dignity."

The distresses thus produced to the people of South Britain, by the secession of the Romans, were, surely, more grievous than any severity of taxes which their imperial masters were accustomed to inflict; and these miseries were aggravated by a cause which should have taught the usurpers the expediency of union. The Scots and Picts, who had with difficulty been confined to their chearless moors and barren uplands, even by the Roman arms, now penetrated the fertile districts of the south; and, while weak pretenders were struggling for ephemeral sovereignty, they, with a more serious aim, plundered the people of the vital source of regal power. It was in this state of Britain that the Saxons, who had so often appeared as pirates on our coast, but

had

Hist. of the Anglo-Saxons, Vol. I. p. 85.