meant by the "borders" only the strictly border parishes. The two "pretty good" bells of Kirklinton have now given place to one bell; and in Brampton deanery there are now but three churches which have each more than one bell. The same diminishing process has probably been going on in other parts of the county, which may be found, when its church towers and terriers have been thoroughly explored, to possess fewer bells now than it had in 1749, and to have had fewer in 1749 than in 1552. Not that there was ever any abundance of church bells in this county, for it appears, as nearly as can be ascertained from the present imperfect condition of Edward VI.'s Inventory, that in 1552 only two Cumberland churches had 4 bells each, four had 3, seventy-six had 2, nineteen had each but one bell, and twenty had no bell, making a total of 181 bells in III churches, or an average of 1.6 to each church; a poor list compared with that given in the Inventory for other counties, e.g., Herts with its average of 3.6 (Church Goods in Herts, by J. E. Cussans), Berks 3.2 (Church Goods in Berks, by W. Money, F.S.A.), and Kent 3 (Archæologia Cantiana). But, as a main reason for the present rarity of mediæval bells in England has been the recasting of rings to adapt them to the requirements of change ringing, a comparatively modern innovation, it is just possible that in Cumberland, for the reason that from remote times down to the present day its rings have been few and far between, there may yet be remaining in its church towers a greater number of ancient bells than are to be found in counties where from time immemorial almost every parish church has had its ring. Mr. North says :

"The old rings consisted usually of few bells and heavy ones.

6

. To ring the changes,' introduced by Stedman and his disciples, a larger number of bells were required. This want could be met in two ways, either by adding new trebles to the existing heavy rings, which was the best but most expensive way, or by recasting, say, four heavy bells into six or eight light ones, and so increasing the number without buying more metal. This was the least expensive

but

but more popular plan . . It ceases, therefore, to be a matter of surprise that it is chiefly in small rural churches, with few bells, where the temptation to change ringing could not exist, that we chiefly expect and usually find ancient bells (Rutland Church Bells, p. 31). We might therefore expect to find many medieval bells still remaining in Cumberland but for the probability that their number has been considerably lessened by a practice we have already had occasion to notice, which is exactly the opposite to that spoken of by Mr. North. The ancient Cumberland bells, if we may judge from the two surviving specimens in this deanery, and from the traces on which we have come of bells formerly existing at Brampton, Hayton, Kirklinton, and Milburn, were very small, and the temptation has been to recast two bells into one. Still if there remain even as many medieval bells in each Cumberland deanery as in that of Brampton, it will be above the average of other counties. Publicity will be the best means of saving them from the furnace.

In conclusion I beg to return my best thanks to the clergy and churchwardens of this deanery, who have kindly supplied me with much of the information contained in the foregoing paper.

ART. XLII.-On some Earthworks near Eamont Bridge.

By WM. ATKINSON.

Read at that place August 2nd, 1882.

I.-MARKED (A) ON THE MAP.

ABOUT 150 yards south of what is known as Arthur's

Round Table, on the same flat alluvial tract as that structure, and almost exactly opposite the bridge of the Penrith and Kendal road over the Lowther, there existed, before the construction of the new private road to Lowther Castle, a low circular ridge of considerable diameter, about half of which was contained in the field adjoining the road and river, and the rest in the two fields to the north of this. The ridge was, through most of its extent, not more than 6 to 9 inches above the level of the surrounding ground, and from 3 to 5 feet broad at the base. It would have a diameter of from 60 to 80 yards as nearly as I can now estimate, and this considerable area, slight elevation, and extension over three fields, probably account for its being previously overlooked. When it first drew my attention some 8 or 10 years ago the circle was incomplete on the side towards the river, and had doubtless been removed here in the erection of the wall enclosing the road, or obliterated by traffic when the road was less circumscribed, or it might have been destroyed by tillage, which had no doubt considerably reduced the parts still visible at the time I have mentioned. The ridge was composed mainly of gravel, with a little soil intermixed, and seemed to be scarcely at all different from the subjacent soil, in fact no line of demarcation between the two was evident. I had an opportunity of noting this during the formation of the new private road, above referred to, 4 or 5 years ago, when part of the ridge had been newly removed. There was apparently