in England. But, as in a former number I went fully into this part of the subject, I beg to refer the indulgent reader to the article there inserted, without trespassing on his patience by a repetition.

The beforegoing observations may account for the institution of feudalism, but they do not explain the extraordinary increase of fiefs, almost to the disappearance of the true allodium, which is discernible in the 11th century in England.

In France, Montesquieu has attributed the same circumstance to the fact of the large allodiaries voluntarily surrendering their estates, and receiving them back from their sovereign as hereditary benefices; their inducement to take this step being the greater honour and protection which attended the king's vassals.*

Similar privileges undoubtedly appertained to the king's thegnas in England, but no mention can be found of the English medeme thegn surrendering his bocland for the prospect of obtaining them; and other reasons therefore must be sought for to explain this increase of fiefs.

None I think so readily or so naturally present themselves as the immense escheats to the crown of bocland, occasioned by the destruction of the great families, which must have followed the hideous devastations of the Northmen in all parts of the country during the tenth century, and the seizures and confiscations made by the Danish sovereigns who sat on the English throne. There is no doubt that, at the commencement of the eleventh century, the infeudation which had been proceeding during the preceding century had then pervaded the major part of the English territory. In the first-mentioned century the word allodium had acquired the general meaning of a hereditary property, and as such was applied to fiefs; † and it is in this sense that we find it so extensively employed in the Domesday Book, to describe estates as they were held during the reign of the Confessor.

Such notices as the following occur continually in the Survey, 'God

"

* L'Esprit des Lois, liv. 30, c. 8. + Hallam's History of the Middle

Ages, vol. i. ch. 2, p. 103, in note.

winus comes tenuit de Rege E. sicut allodium.”‡

These words are inapplicable to the old Saxon allodial estate of bocland, which was not held of the king or any other superior, but they can only express the fief or perpetuated benefice, developed in the course of things out of the folcland. The events of the reign of the Confessor compose a picture of feodality scarcely, if at all, differing from the political appearances of the continent. The excessive influence and power which that system, when full grown, was calculated to give to the eminent families by means of the sub-infeudations which theirown large benefices enabled them to make, is distinctly shown in the conduct and proceedings of Eorl Godwin and his sons, which would have been impracticable, unless through the aid of that system; and the overwhelming importance conferred by it was in that age so familiar to men's minds, that, when the great Eorl I have named was dispos sessed and outlawed, the nation wondered at his fall, not at his previous power and riches. "That" (says a contemporary historian) "wolde thyncan wundorlic ælcum men the on Engla lande wæs, gif ænig man ær tham sæde, thæt hit swa gewurthan sceolde."§

From the reign of the Confessor the transition was but short to the Conquest of the Norman. If therefore any change was effected by the latter in the principles on which the English soil was occupied, it must have been abrupt and violent, and would therefore leave behind it ample memorials of its occurrence. It has been usual to attribute to the Conqueror the parentage of the feudal tenure in this country; and this opinion is supported by the authority of Blackstone and De Lolme. The theory is attempted to be grounded on a circumstance recorded in the Saxon Chronicle, under the year 1085, in the following words, "Siththan he (i. e. William) ferde abutan, swa that he com to Lammæssan to Searebyrig, and thær him comon to his witan, and ealle tha land sittende men, the ahtes wæron,

Tom. i. fol. 22.

§ Sax. Chron. A.D. 1051.

ofer eall Engleland, wæron thes maunes men, the hi wæron, and ealle hi bugon to him, and wæron his men, and him hold athas sworon, that hi wolden ongean ealle othre men him holde beon."

I will ask the reader, what is there in this passage, to intimate that at this epoch, nineteen years after the accession of William, the feudal system was for the first time introduced into England? If the English historian had intended to commemorate a revolution in the institutions of his country, such as the sudden and arbitrary introduction of a foreign novelty, by which the general allodial land of the kingdom was transformed into fiefs, would it not be amazing that he should use language so inadequate to represent his meaning? He could be clear and circumstantial when he recorded the Survey preceding the compilation of the Domesday; and other events of a similar degree of importance are also carefully told by him. If the construction put upon this fact by Blackstone and De Lolme were correct, we should look to find existing in our own times some solemn record of it, for such a measure could not have been done without the consent of all persons interested in such a proceeding, and must have left a legal memorial to attest the change of law, and to enforce its observance. But, though we have many copies even of the act of the Witenagemot which founded the ecclesiastical Courts, we have no trace of any enactment of that body connected with the present subject. The fact is, that the witan were specially convened by the Conqueror to take the oath of fealty The same thing had been done by Cnut, who, on his accession to the whole of the kingdom in 1016, had assembled the magnates, and obtained from them an oath of the like nature."

The explanation of each circumstance is founded on the peculiar character of vassalage as it then existed. Homage and fealty were originally undistinguishable, no fealty being due where homage did not apply, and the immediate vassal only was

Flor. Wig. A.D. 1016.

bound by this obligation. In the Saxon oath which has been quoted it will have been seen that no fealty was even reserved to the king.

It was not till later times that this reservation was made. The effect of this principle was practically seen in the reign of the Confessor. During the troubles of that period the followers of Godwin, Swegen, and Harold unhesitatingly embraced their cause, as that of their immediate lords, against the king. The Saxon historian says of these vassals, " Ealle gearwe to wige ongean thone cyning." Their conduct was contrasted with that of the eorls, who were engaged in hostilities against their own lord, and felt all the feudal responsibility of the step. The same writer says, “hi (the eorls) trymedon hi fæstlice ongean, theah him lath wære, that hi ongean heora cynehlaford fundan sceoldon." This state of things compelled Edward to take securities of the thegnas of Harold, and afterwards, for his own safety, to require them all to be delivered into his hands. As the same circumstances might occur in his own case, we should not be surprised that William took the precaution of administering to the landed proprietors of the country, whether his own or others' vassals, an oath of personal fidelity to himself as a guarantee for their support, and in order to obviate the mischiefs that might arise through the want of taking such an obligation from them; and this was all which he could do, or could propose to himself to be done.

In conclusion of this sketch, I will merely observe, that the same data being found in the institutions and customs of England before the Conquest, as those from which the continental system was undoubtedly derived, and there being no proof of the Normans having introduced that system, it must necessarily follow that feodality in England had a native origin and growth.

OPENING OF THE GREAT EASTLOW
BARROW, AT ROUGHAM, SUFFOLK.
MR. URBAN,

In the Gentleman's Magazine for Nov. 1843, p. 527, I communicated a few observations supplementary to the account of the exploration in the month of Sept. in that year, made by the Rev. Professor Henslow, of one of the four Roman tumuli extant at Rougham, near Bury St. Edmund's, on the estate of Philip Bennett, esq. At p. 190 of the same volume is a notice of an accidental discovery made, on the 7th of the previous month of July, of Roman sepulchral remains in another of these barrows, which led to the research above mentioned.

I mentioned that the Roman tumuli at Rougham were four in number, ranging near the side of a country road, on a line nearly north and south. That the northernmost, the loftiest of the range, was known as Eastlow hill; the next barrow, to the south, was accidentally opened in July 1843, as I have described; the third barrow was explored by Professor Henslow, with a very successful result, as has been seen by his report of the excavation; the fourth barrow, at some former, but, I believe, unascertained period, was nearly levelled with the adjacent natural surface of the soil.

The first, however, and loftiest of these ancient sepulchres remained still unexplored, except that a portion of its west side had been cut away on some occasion merely for agricultural purposes. This larger tumulus could not be less than one hundred feet in diameter, and twelve or fourteen feet in height.

When I was on the spot last autumn, I had reason to believe that I might my self have been permitted to explore this tumulus, but I could not then conveniently undertake the task, and I have awaited with some degree of curiosity the result of a research which I thought it highly probable might be made by the gentleman who, in the former instance, had proved himself so well qualified to direct it.

This renewed exploration of the Rougham sepulchres was made by the Rev. Mr. Henslow about 1st July last, and has produced a very interesting discovery. Had I been fortunate enough to be apprized of the day fixed for the excavation, I should have certainly been present as a spectator.

Mr. Henslow has recorded the particu. lars, some weeks since, in the Bury Post,

and hints that they may be followed up at some future time by a lecture on the subject of ancient sepulchral deposits; I shall for the present, therefore, confine myself to a few general outlines of the discovery, and to one or two observations which the notes of the Professor have elicited.

Narrative of Professor Henslow.

On Thursday morning, the 4th of July last, the workmen were sufficiently advanced, after more than four days' constant labour, in exploring the large tumulus at Rougham, named East low-hill, to raise our expectations that we should be able to expose an extensive deposit of Roman remains by the hour at which the public had been invited to attend. The discovery turned out to be something of a very different description from what I had anticipated. Instead of urns and vases, pateræ and simpula, lamps and lachrymatories, such as were found last year, the only contents of a large chamber of masonry, which I shall presently describe, proved to be a leaden coffin, inclosing a skeleton.

to

Perhaps it is my scanty experience in this sort of adventure that inclines me to fancy our antiquaries will feel more interested at this result than if we had met with a repetition of what the Bartlow Hills, the smaller tumuli at Rougham, and those of other places, have revealed us concerning the more usual ceremonies adopted by the Romans in burying their dead. I am aware that Roman skeletons have been found before in leaden coffins; but the circumstance is rare; and I have no opportunity here of consulting the Archæologia, or other standard works on antiquities, to ascertain how far former discoveries may bear comparison with the present.

The object of peculiar interest to myself was the well-built chamber of masonry. My very slight acquaintance with antiquities must be my excuse, if I wrongly suppose this chamber to afford us, in England, a solitary existing example of the manner in which the Romans tiled their houses. I recollect having seen a rather rude sketch (in the second volume of the Archeologia) of a tiled roof, which, I believe, was of the same description as the one we have now found. It was discovered in a tumulus near York; and, if it has been preserved, it may be a second example of this sort. In that case, the

GENT, MAG, VOL. XXII.

3B

chamber contained urns, and other articles of the ordinary funereal deposits. It is not at all likely that any Roman building should be standing above ground in this country, with a tiled roof laid over it 1500 years ago. Another feature in this chamber, of peculiar interest to myself, was the arched vaulting, a mode of construction, of which, believe, there are very few examples among us which can positively be assigned to the Romansso few, indeed, that, at one time, it was imagined that they were not well acquainted with the principle of the arch. I am not sure that in this case we can feel quite confident that they had placed absolute faith in that principle, for circumstances may have required that the woodwork which formed the centering should not be removed. It had been left, and had rotted, and the fragments had fallen upon the lid of the coffin.

Before I enter into further detail, Í shall permit my pen to wander a little into the regions of imagination. For 1500 years, or thereabouts, a narrow vault has been tenanted by the mouldering remains of we know not whom-only we feel confident that he must have been a person who, in his brief day, had been eminent in some way or other-for his wealth or his rank, his valour, or his position in the social system. No one of little estimation in the eyes of his fellow men would have been buried in the style of this Roman-in a leaden coffin-within a solidly built vault-and with a monumental mound of earth piled over it, which needed the united efforts of a numerous company for its erection. I think we shall not be wandering very far from the truth, in supposing this person to have been lord of that neighbouring villa, whose foundations we detected last year, in a field at a short distance from these tumuli. He was possibly the very last who died in occupation of it, before the Roman legions were finally recalled from enervated Britain, in the year of our Lord 426. I argue thus in favour of the late period at which this tumulus was erected.

The Romans in the earlier periods of the Empire burnt their dead, almost universally. The other tumuli at Rougham afforded examples of this custom, with the usual accompaniments of those vessels in which the offerings to the manes of the deceased had been conveyed to the bustum, and deposited with the burning lamp, to cheer them on their way to that bourne from whence (as they supposed) no traveller was ever to return," to the enjoyment of light and life, in a resurrection of the flesh. Some of the occupiers of this villa may have

returned to Italy and died there-and perhaps a few only of the successive possessors of the property may have left their bones in this foreign land. This may account for their burial ground contain. ing so few barrows, though the villa itself may have stood for many years. We have, however, ascertained that several interments had taken place in the southern. most of the four barrows, which was not well shaped, and might, probably, be the spot appropriated to inferior members in the family. Upon a small cinerary urn, restored from fragments found in this barrow, there has been rudely scratched a few letters, from which I can make out nothing satisfactory. They may be intended for a name; but I sometimes fancy they read ἀεολ . . λα for ἀει όλωλα, "I am perished for ever," a sort of lament we can suppose a good mother might have scrawled, whilst weeping over the urn which contained the bones of her departed child. No one, rejoicing in our happier prospect, can look upon those relics from the smaller barrows, preserved at the Hall at Rougham, without feeling them to be a record testifying to the general belief of mankind in the immortality of the soul. But, in the arrangements within this larger and later tumulus, perhaps we have some trace of the already spreading influence of a still better creed. During the 400 years that the Romans held this country in subjection, the Gospel had been gradually leavening the corrupting mass of heathen superstitions. Better conceptions of what is life, and what is death, were becoming interwoven with the current opinions of the world, and they were inspiring even heathens with a contempt for practices which could profit nothing to departed souls. The simpler mode of sepulture adopted for this Roman, may have had some connection with that mighty revolution which was then taking place in the world of mind. The Christians were everywhere abandoning the practice of of burning the dead; and, though their faith may not have reached the heart of this Roman, yet his head may have assented to better notions than those which had persuaded his predecessors at Rougham to feed ghosts with oil and wine, milk and blood, and other substantial creations, suited only to the sustenance of a bodily existence. For where are those funeral rites which we found had been so carefully attended to in the other cases? The funeral pyre no longer blazes. The lamp is no longer considered of any importance. No offerings are placed within the vault. All that could be found within the tomb indicative of

heathen superstition was the pass money (an obolus) in the mouth of the entombed. Charon had been propitiated. I have not yet been able to distinguish any legend on this coin, which is nearly as much corroded as the one found last year. There was a little chamber outside the vault, in which glass vessels had been deposited, but unfortunately these had crumbled to powder, and there was no relic of any kind to show what they had contained. If that rusty obolus had been missing, we might have felt half persuaded to believe this Roman had embraced the Cross. The superstitions of those days, and of later days, and, alas! of these days also, are strange things to look upon. Indeed we have no need to tax our imaginations for what the false fancies of ignorant and unenlightened minds may formerly have tempted men to put their trust in. I allude to none of the vanities of will-worship; but it seems that even the record in the Acts, concerning those dealers in curious arts who burnt their books and repented, is a lesson lost upon many of us now-a-days; and we still hear of hundreds consulting some "wise man," or "wise woman," (wise indeed in their generation,) as confidently as this heathen ever trusted an aruspex or an augur. Truly a thousand years in these matters have passed away but as one day!

But let me come to a detail of facts; and, with the assistance of the woodcuts you have so liberally consented to introduce in illustration of my account,* I shall hope to make the structure of the chamber we have discovered intelligible to all. I dare say that very few of the many hundreds who passed through the tumulus were aware they had been peeping into a building of the form represented in fig. 1. More than half of the roof still remains covered over by the superincumbent earth; but we may see plainly from what has been exposed the real character of the whole.

The workmen approached this subterraneous building by driving a tunnel, at the level of the natural soil, and about six feet high, as directly towards the centre of the barrow as we could judge. At a distance of about fifty feet from the outermost edge of the base, they struck upon the middle of the western wall, running in a N.E. direction, rather more westerly than the direction of the tunnel. They had previously come upon the solid concrete foundation (A B C) upon which the tomb is built, and which projects on

And as liberally lent by The Bury Post to ourselves. Edit.

all sides round the walls. The walls of the tomb were then exposed by tunnelling completely round the tomb. The passage at the north end of the tomb was driven easterly till an opening was effected in that direction through the tunnel, which was the nearest way out again; the tomb lying to the east of the centre of the barrow. Notwithstanding the very unfavourable state of the weather, many hundreds visited the spot, and the constant stream of wonderers passing through the tunnels was kept up for five or six hours without any intermission. It was very satisfactory to witness the good behaviour and good humour of the labouring classes, who appeared to be far more gratified than I could have expected, considering the absence of all those kinds of sepulchral furniture which were found in the adjoining tumuli opened last year. The confidence with which Mr. Bennett had trusted them was in no instance abused, and we have this example, among many, that Englishmen are wonderfully improved since the times when they had a character (was it a just one?) of looking more through their fingers than with their eyes. Such a light-fingered faculty is now restricted to the practice of the clair-voyant mesmeriser! There are, indeed, a light-fingered gentry of another class-pilferers of whatever may be transmutable into modern coin, whom we have not thought it advisable to trust overconfidently. Common prudence has dictated the propriety of removing the leaden coffin to a better secured locality; and Mr. Bennett having left it at my disposal, I have suggested it being transferred to the Fitzwilliam Museum, at Cambridge, the nearest public depository suited to its reception with which I am acquainted. It would certainly have been desirable to have left it with the skeleton in the tomb; but probably it would have gradually corroded away in that position. I intend to forward

the skull to the Anatomical Museum at Cambridge, where it will possess a scientific interest, among a rapidly increasing and skilfully arranged collection of objects of comparative anatomy. The rest of the bones will be left in the tomb, to undergo that speedy decay which the admitted influences of the weather will produce upon them. This skull has all its teeth in perfect preservation; but the sutures in it are partially obliterated. Perhaps we guess pretty correctly in believing the disentombed had, in his lifetime, seen about as many revolving suns as the disentomber, born in 1796. In stature this Roman appears to have been rather more than six feet; but the bones