ouer al thare Kuneriche on Engleneloande and ek inter Irelonde. Tranflation. 'ENRY, by God's help, King Duke of Normandy, and of Aquitain, and Earl of Anjoy, Greeting to all his faithful Clerks and Laics of Huntingdonshire: This know ye all well, that we Will and Grant that which our Counsellors, all or the most part of them that be chofen by us, and the People (or Com mons) of our Land, have done, and fhall do, for the Honour of God, and of their Allegiance to us, for the Benefit (or Amendment) of the Land, by the Advice and Confideration of our forefaid Counsellors, be stedfaft and performed in every thing for ever. And we command all our Leige People in the Fealty that they owe us, that they ftedfaftly hold, and fwear to hold [or keep] and to defend [or maintain] t the Statutes [or Provifions] which be made, and fhall be made, by thofe aforefaid Counsellors, or by the more part of them, alfo as it is beforefaid; and that they each other affift the fame to perform, according to that fame Oath, against all Men, both for to do and caufe to be done: And none either of my Land, neither from elsewhere, may for this be hindered, or damnified in any wife And if any man or woman oppose them againft, we Will and Command that all our Liege People them hold for deadly Enemies; and because we will, that this be fted faft and lafting, we fend you this Writ open, figned with your Seal, to be kept amongst you. in Store; witnefs our felf at London the 18th day of the Month Oc tober, in the two and fortieth Year of our Coronation; and this was done before our fworn Counsellors, Boniface Archbishopof Canterbury, Walter of Cantelow Bishop of Worcefter, Simon Montfort Earl of Lei Glocefter and of Hartford, Roger Bigod Earl of Norfolk and Marefchal of England, Peter of Savoy, William of Fort Earl of Aubemarle, John of Pleffeiz Earl of Warwick, John Gefferifon, Peter of Montfort, Richard of Grey, Roger of Mortimer, James of Aldithly, and before others more. AND all in these fame Words is fent into every other Shire over the Kingdom of England, and also into Ireland. Hiftorical remarks on ancient architecture. From the Grecian Orders of Architecture; by Stephen Rion, Efq. the vanity of man, when he T must be an effectual check to confiders that by the decrees and difpofitions of fupreme wisdom, heither the corporeal nor the men tal faculties are ever all united in one perfon; but that for the maintenance and good order of society, the gifts of nature combined in a continually varied proportion, are with a marvellous economy divid ed and diftributed amongst the fe veral individuals of our fpecies; fo that, how extensive foever his capacity may be, how prompt his apprehenfion, how mighty his ftrength, with the most exalted ambition, man will nevertheless ftand in need of man. From the powers of the human being thus limited it is, that when we furvey the the progrefs of genius either in the practices of art or the fpeculations of fcience, we find they never received their perfection from the fame man who gave them birth; new inventions, however valuable, have for the most part been produced in a rude and defective ftate, and have in procefs of time, little by little, received, from the fkill and induftry of others, fuch additions and improvements as were neceffary to give them all the perfection of which they are capable. On the other hand, it has not unfrequently happened that the arts, instead of making any due advancement, even lofe the advantages which only a long feries of years, and the unremitted affiduity of true genius could obtain; for during an age of turbulence and diftrefs no attention is beftowed on them, abuses creep unnoticed into the practice, and with the decline and ruin of empire, the arts themfelves decay and perifh: neither is this the only misfortune to which they are expofed; for fuch is the weakness of human nature, that in lefs calamitous times than those we have fuppofed, the imagination may be vitiated, all found judgment perverted, and our purfuits led out of their proper track by the prefumption of the ignorant, the plaufive arguments of falfe reafoners, or that propenfity with which the inconfiderate are determined to follow the ungovernable and unrestrained career of a fancy animated with the rage of novelty, though fertile only in trifles and abfurdities. Such viciffitudes have happened to the art of which we are a bout to treat, as will appear from VOL. X. a view of what will be briefly offered on this fubject. The origin of art is the fame in all nations that have cultivated it; and it is without foundation that the honour thereof be ascribed to one particular country preferably to all others in all places neceffity has proved to be the mother of invention, and every people had in themselves the feeds of contrivance in their various wants. The inventions of art were only more or lefs ancient as the nations themfelves were fo, and as the adoration of the gods was introduced amongst them fooner or latter: The Chaldeans and Egyptians, for example, had made much earlier than the Greeks, idols and other external forms of these imaginary beings, in order to worship them. It' is the fame of this as of other arts and inventions: the purple dye, not to fpeak of others, was known and practifed in the eaft, long before the Greeks were acquainted with that fecret. What is mentioned in Holy Writ, about carved or molten images is likewise far more ancient than what we know of Greece. The carved images in wood of the firft ages, and thofe of caft metal of later times, have different names in the Hebrew tongue. They who, to judge of the ori gin of a cuftom or of an art, and of its paffage from one people to another, adhere to the mere contemplation of any detached fragments which may offer certain appearances of likeness; and thus, from fome particular equivocal forms, draw their conclufions about the generality of an art, are grofsly deceived. In this manner Diony. L fius 1 fius of Halicarnaffus was in the wrong to pretend, that the art of wrestling among the Romans was derived from the Greeks, becaufe the drapery or fcarf, worn by the Roman wrestlers round their bodies, refembled that worn by the wrestlers of Greece. Art flourished in Egypt from the earliest account of time; the greatest obelisks now at Rome are due to the Egyptians, and are dated as far back as the time of Sefoftris, who lived near CCCC years before the Trojan war; they were the works of that king, and the city of Thebes was adorned with the most magnificent buildings, while art was yet unborn in Greece. The arts, though produced later in Greece than among the nations of the eaft, nevertheless arofe from the moft fimple elements; this fimplicity may fuggeft that the Grecians took nothing from others, but were truly original; they fcarcely had the opportunity of becoming plagiarifts of the Egyptians; for before the reign of Pfammitichus, the entrance into Egypt was denied to every ftranger, and the arts had then already been cultivated by the Grecians. The voyages of their philofophers and fages were chiefly undertaken to infpect into the literature, religion, and government of that famous kingdom. The conjectures of thofe who derive the arts from the east, feem better grounded, efpecially if they make them pafs from Phoenicia into Greece, the people of both thefe territories having had very ancient connections together; the latter having received the knowledge and ufe of letters by Cadmus. Before the time of Cyrus, the Etrufcans, powerful by fea, were alfo allied for a confiderable time with the Phoenicians; of this there needs no other proof than the fleet which they equipped in common against the Phoceans. What Villalpandus has furmifed, concerning the temple of Solomon, that thence the Grecians borrowed their richest defigns of the Corinthian order, though fupported with great parade of learning, and many fpecious fubtilties, only leads into a maze of uncertainties; in rearing of this ftately building, heated by a luxuriant fancy, he rather acted the panegyrift than the hiftorian. Let us follow the furer traces of fact and uncontroverted history, as we can difcover them in the pages of a writer worthy of our attention, who after having judiciously explained the feveral particulars relating to the temple, thus concludes; But though in points like this I have been upon, it be, moft lawful to err, yet those are more excufable, who keep a conftant regard to the facred original above all things, than those who manifeftly depart from it to follow their own fancies, or the fabulous accounts of the Jews; now as I have drawn the greatest part of my light from the former, I am fenfible that thofe who have been converfant with all the pompous defcriptions we have extant, will be furprised to find this of mine come fo vaftly fhort of the boafted magnificence of this facred building. But here I defire it may be remembered, that as this was defigned to contain no more than could be met with, or fairly deduced from the facred writings, fo the reader will at least reap this benefit from it, that he will be better able to judge what is or is not authentic in other plans of this ftructure than he could have been without it, The following obfervations from others upon the fubject are in the fame frain. The vifion of Ezekiel, c. xl. and feq. is taken for a defcription of a prophetic or myftical temple, that never exifted but in the revelation that was made to him, and the reprefentation he has fet down in his prophecy. As for ancient authors, we have none to produce but Jofephus, and other Jews rather of a later date than he. Now all that we learn from them, that has no foundation in holy writ, to us is no evidence at all. Much they knew or pretended to know from tradition, but that we prefume is not to be depended upon. We know no monuments they had befide those we have ourselves: And the Hebrew tongue, properly fo called, being a fort of dead language at the time thefe authors writ, it may well be doubted, without finning against modefty, whether they who had no other books to learn it by, than thofe now in ufe, could understand it better than those who study it at prefent. The Grecians, during the profperous times of their commonwealths, were a nation of all others at that time in the world the most ingenious and the most cultivated. They feem to have been endowed with the greatest propenfity to the arts, and to have felt the strongeft natural averfion to whatever favoured of inelegance and barbarifm; their country was ftyled the mother and nurse of art and science. It is this nation which challengeth to itself the fyftem of thofe three modes of architecture afterwards named the Doric, the Ionic, and the Corinthian orders, thus deno minated from the places where they were either invented, or firft receiv ed into ufe; during the practice of fome ages, they acquired all the improvements the Grecian genius in its greatest vigour could beftow; the imitations of fuch examples, it may be prefumed, will ever excel all other inventions. When the Roman ftate had attained to the highest pitch of its glory, and the most cultivated as well as the most powerful nations were fubdued, and were confidered only as provinces of that mighty empire, the inhabitants of Italy diftinguished themfelves as well by their love and ftudy of the fine arts as by their skill in arms; in both of which they must be allowed to ftand next after the Grecians; it is, then, firft to Athens, and afterwards to Rome, that the modern world owes the method of culture for every refinement; but at the fame time, it is proper to obferve, that the Romans, either through ignorance or pride, not content with the orders and difpofitions of Athenian architecture, ventured at feveral licentious alterations; they tacked two fpurious orders, the Tufcan and the Compofite, the laft called alfo Latin and Roman, to the three genuine, ones, which alone are fufficient to answer all the purpofes in building, and which can never fail of obtaining the preference whenever they are examined by an attentive and intelligent fpectator. It is matter of great regret to the inveftigators of this art, that among the writers of antiquity we find little on which to fix our ideas, or form our tafte. The writings of Vitruvius Pollio have been tranfmitted down to us; this claffic author flourished about the DCC year of Rome, in the reigns of Julius Cæfar, and of his fucceffor Auguftus; to the latter he dedicated his ten books of architecture, and to thefe, next to the veftiges of ancient edifices, pofterity remains indebted for many fuccefsful attempts to restore architecture in its original fimplicity and beauty: nor befides Vitruvius were wanting other ingenious men, who in their writings had probably given many illuftrations and maxims of their art; feveral of their names have defcended down to us, but their writings have perifhed; yet what fort of artifts they were, if their books have not remained to inform us, their works in many noble e difices, ftill remaining, give faith ful teftimony to their merit, and chiefly in Greece and Italy, where this profeffion was better preferved, and maintained its reputation, that for the courfe of about two centuries from the days of Auguftus, the manner and style of building remained unaltered, although the falfe tafte for internal decorations was prevailing even in the time of Vitruvius. Tacitus informs us in general, that there were no perfons of great genius after the battle of Actium, but in the decline of the Roman empire, fuch a decline and change feemed alfo to affect the intellects of individuals, whence learning and all the fine arts, which had flourished to admiration and for fo long a period, fell into difrepute, and were abforbed by the barbarifms which overwhelmed the land. Architecture soon saw itself miferably transformed, every good mode thereof was overthrown and fpoiled, every true practice corrupted, its antique graces and majefty loft, and a manner alto gether confufed and irregular in troduced, wherein none of its' former features were difcernible. The Gaths prevailed! At laft came the fifteenth and fixteenth centuries of the chriftian æra, fo glorious for the restoration of literature and of arts; then it was that many happy minds, fhak ing off the ruft of ignorance, and freeing themselves from the chains of indolency which had fettered t the preceding generations, recalled again into life all the fine arts and all the fineft faculties and rules, fo that it feemed as if the tafte of old Greece and Rome was revived in its true fplendor and dignity: however, to keep within due limits, it fufficeth to fay, that architectuce in Italy very foon appeared with the expected advantages; and the writings, as well as the works of the feveral great mafters of that time, remain the undeniable proofs of their abilities. -Having already mentioned the Goths, it may not ap pear altogether improper to fay fomething of their architecture. The name of Gothic was given to all fuch buildings as were not defigned according to the rules of Grecian or Roman architecture. There are two forts of Gothic, the ancient and the modern, (but improperly fo called;) in England and the northern parts of Europe, the ancient Gothic includes the Saxon and Danifa, in which indeed we may observe fome traces of elegance and ftrength. It appears that their artists were not entirely ignorant of proportions, though they did not confine them. felves ftrictly to fuch as were beau. tiful; folely attentive to render their works folid and durable, they were |