lumes duodecimo, and as a traveller he seems to have had but an indifferent reputation. His Travels seem to have been published at different times, and the inscription appears in the two volumes published at Paris in 1712. In these Travels Lucas gives a minute detail (vol. i. pp. 138-148) of his difficulties in making his copy, owing

to Turkish enmity against unbelievers in their faith. This, if Chishull's surmise be correct, must be a mere plausible device to remove suspicion. The inscription is at vol. i. p. 393, and the reader may perhaps not be displeased at seeing the following extracts from it of the two portions which have been endeavoured to be illustrated.

mie..

ma

per Ga

res Britan...

Dum no

Maelo Mar.. omanorum Suebo f... Phrates Oro... filius filios suos nepo

rta. .. ca

horum

iam

ignora

There is certainly no instance of an ancient inscription being developed to the world so gradually and at such distant intervals as the one of which we now treat. Andreas Schottus first giving it in his edition of Aurelius Victor in 1579. Gronovius publishing Daniel Cosson's transcript in 1695. Lucas printing his own, or Le Fabre's in 1712. Chishull printing Tourne fort's in 1728 obtained above a quarter of a century before; and lastly Mr. Hamilton following up in 1842 with his Greek duplicate. Nor is it perhaps yet fully attained, some portions of the Greek being concealed by buildings which are capable of being recovered. Each of the former transcripts seems to have been considered at the time the best that could be

. me prin

ecationum et amicitia commercium. principes carum gen tis filium Artavazdis fi

made; and the reason that the subsequent ones have been the best may have been that the fanaticism of the Turks had somewhat relaxed, allowing the task of copying to proceed in greater security; though at the same time a due tribute should be rendered to the superior talent and skill which Tournefort appears to have displayed.

The generous confidence of Tournefort in making a present of his elaborate copy to Chishull cannot but be highly applauded; and it must be owned this last has done great justice to it in the manner in which he has published it. Chishull notwithstanding he travelled in Asia Minor was never at Angora himself, which appears by his travels published after his decease. Pococke though in his journeyings in the East

he was there, yet gave no transcript of the inscription either in his published travels, or in his volume of inscriptions. Wheeler and Spon, the celebrated travellers in Asia Minor and the East in the latter part of the seventeenth century, did not extend their journeys to this place.

Of plans of the temple, the only one known is among Texier's plates of his forthcoming work on Asia Minor published at Paris, the letter-press of which work has not yet appeared. Lucas describes the temple as situated rather formidably near a Turkish mosque, the daily attendants of which can scarcely fail of being apprised of the presence of strangers to view the relic of antiquity it contains.

As to the injuries which the inscription has received, travellers have hitherto considered them chiefly as wilful. Busequius speaking of its state in his time (1554) attributes the damage to sticks or cudgels (fustibus). Tournefort thought it defaced by the modern inhabitants extracting the metal pins used in fastening the stones. Mr. Hamilton, however, contradicts this, and is of opinion that no metallic pins were used. Iis idea is that the upper and under surfaces were made slightly concave in order to obtain a finer joint, no mortar being used. Hence he supposes from the superincumbent weight bearing chiefly on the edges, in length of time exfoliations of the stones have been produced; and that these are the principal apparent injuries; and states a similar effect from a like cause is observable in the Parthenon at Athens. This argument seems advanced on good grounds; and either this or the supposition of Tournefort would account for the defacement being so gradual; and wanton injuries to it by sticks or otherwise, as related by Busequius and Clusius, are probably since become of rare occurrence.

The number of columns of the Greek inscription, which, according to later information, we find are solely on the eastern exterior of the temple,

none of them being on the west, are supposed to be about 21; but they cannot at present be correctly ascertained on account of the Turkish dwellings which conceal various of them. Some columns uncovered by Mr. Hamilton are reported to be too much destroyed to be copied, they being not protected by the interior mudwall which had been formed against those he succeeded in transcribing. The parts he copied were the five concluding columns, and the end parts of nearly all the lines of the three preceding ones. These three columns, and the ones immediately previous to them, must be those which are still capable of being retrieved, and the first ones of all those which are reported so much defaced.

Before concluding, some brief mention may seem required of Edmund Chishull, the intelligent editor of the inscription to whom we are so much indebted. He was chaplain of the factory at Smyrna, and during the time he was in the East took the opportunity of travelling in those parts. He returned from thence in 1702, and was afterwards vicar of Walthamstow, and chaplain in ordinary to the Queen. He died in 1733, aged about 60. His works are, I. An Essay on the Immortality of the Soul. II. A Dissertation on the Sigan Inscription. III. On certain Ancient Moneys of Smyrna; and, IV. his Inscriptiones Asiaticæ. His Travels were published after his death by Dr. Mead.

In editing Tournefort's transcription he was doubtlessly more qualified than Tournefort would have been himself, possessing the necessary crudition and research. The discovery since of the Greek duplicate has made this publication of still greater value, verifying the doubtful passages and letters, and confirming the greater part of the restorations. His notes contain a great fund of learning and illustration, and are a valuable accompaniment to the inscription.

Maidstone, 14th Sept.

B. P.

THE members of the Archæological Institute, recently assembled at Norwich, when on their way to Ely, stopped at Wymondham, in order to visit that interesting church, still magnificent in its imperfect state.

An architectural survey of this church was prepared for reading to the meeting by the Rev. J. L. Petit; but, in consequence of that gentleman's being unfortunately prevented from personal attendance, it was deferred for publication in the volume which will be devoted by the Institute to the illustration of Norwich and Norfolk.

Having met with a very pleasing and accurate view of this church, in the portfolios of an amateur artist at Norwich, who is as skilful as he is unassuming, we feel ourselves much indebted by his permission to engrave it; and for a description to accompany it we cannot do better than quote a paper addressed to the Society of Antiquaries in 1834, by the late Mr. Samuel Woodward, the much regretted Norfolk antiquary.

"The Priory at Wymondham was founded in 1107 by William de Albini, as a cell to St. Alban's, of which his brother Richard was abbat. It appears that the founder resided in a mansion near the stream, south of the church, which mansion, together with its offices, he gave to the monks, who dwelt in it while the monastery was building; the earl removing to another place north-west of the church, the foundations of both being still visible. The precincts are said to have contained thirty-three acres; but, as the boundary wall is very imperfect, it is impossible to say how far it extended. The abbey grounds, represented in the plan in the Archæologia, vol. XXVI. (plate xxx.) contain about fifteen acres.

"The original church, which served both priory and parish, consisted of a nave with north and south aisles and transept. How it terminated towards the east we are unable to determine, as no trace of the original remains. The

nave.

east end of the north aisle, opening into the transept, is very distinct, as also the demi-columns terminating the The arches of the nave are lofty and narrow, ornamented with zig-zag moulding, surmounted by a triforium and a clerestory of a later period. The columns have been sadly mutilated, by cutting off the reedings to give more room, reducing them to square unsightly masses of masonry.

"About A.D. 1260, a dispute having arisen between the Abbat of St. Alban's and the Prior of this place about spiritual jurisdiction, a division was made in the church; and the east end was reserved to the monks, whilst the nave, or western part, was given up to the parishioners. Under these circumstances it became needful that the monks should have a tower to suspend their bells in, to give notice of their services. They therefore, in the beginning of the reign of Edward I., set to work, and filled up the spaces between the ninth pillar and the termination of the nave, and erected a tower over that part. This tower is finished with a handsome octagonal story, similar in character to that of the Grey Friars at Lynn, and also to that which belonged to the Black Friars at Norwich (figured in the Monasticon Anglicanum), both erected about the same period. They at the same time extended their quire eastward.

"On each side the quire were large chapels; that on the north is considered to have been the Lady Chapel: the dedication or purpose of that on the south is now unknown. The space between the latter and the chapter-house appears to have been a passage to the cloisters. The west front of the chapter-house must have had a handsome appearance, if we may judge from the remains. It was divided into three compartments, each having three slender columns supporting pointed arches, the centre compartment serving as an entrance. The east end is still standing, and forms a picturesque ruin.

"The foundations of the cloister and

Wymondham Abbey Church, Norfolk.