much interest in the parallel between Mrs. Siddons and Queen Katharine, though written after the most approved manner of Plutarch; or put in a word as to the important dispute carried on by the great Actress and the Poet, and Mrs. Jameson, as to whether Lady Macbeth had blue eyes and blonde hair, and might have been a religious woman, if it had so pleased Providence. These things we omit to mention, as well as 'Laocoon perishing between double stings,' and such well-chosen and select language, as the people of Edinburgh badgering the histrions,' or La Harpe lets out,' or the Englishmen grew as fierce as an old bull,' 'a potent drama,'' a solid dunce,' a dolorous author;' nor shall we say any thing of the taste that calls Lady Macbeth' a splendid Titaness, the sister of Milton's Lucifer,' or of the propriety of the reflection, How fleeting is human life!' applied as it is, not to a friendship of Mr. Campbell's that has vanished from him, but to his friend Mr. George Siddons, whom he knew thirty-five years since, and who now enjoys with Mr. Campbell a wealthy and honourable old age. We think but few friendships of such standing, more lasting, or more substantial, or less fleeting! Mr. Campbell not only being a poet, but having shown a very refined and elegant vein of criticism in his various works, it would naturally be expected to flow freely and luxuriously through such congenial matter as the poetry and fortunes of the stage. Accordingly in vol. I. we find a criticism on Southerne's Isabella, accompanied with the following observations on the fatalism of the antient drama.

"On the contrary, the action advances with a beguiling rapidity, and the deeply affecting story has an air of fatalism, that always reminds me of the Greek stage. Perhaps in all powerful tragedies, this air is to be traced. It is a cold dramatic atchievement to shew us only the ordinary and necessary connexion between the passions and misfortunes of our species. The poetic invention that affects us to the deepest degree, is that which teaches us by what surprising coincidences the passions of the bad may work more misery than even they themselves intend; and how the shafts of cruelty may strike the innocent with more than natural force, coming like arrows impelled by the wind."

This is well expressed, and to a certain extent correct; but the subject opens on a field of inquiry too ample to be thus briefly dismissed. At p. 176 we meet with some judicious reflections on Rowe's Fair Penitent; and at p. 199 on Isabella in Measure for Measure.

In vol II. p. 6. in his observations on Macbeth, Mr. Campbell has this following passage.

"I regard the tragedy of Macbeth, as the greatest treasure of our dramatic literature. We may look as Britons on Greek sculpture, and Italian paintings, with a humble consciousness that our native art has never reached its perfection; but in the drama we can confront Eschylus himself with Shakspeare. And of all modern theatres, ours alone can compete with the Greek, in the unborrowed nativeness and sublimity of its superstition. In the grandeur of tragedy, Macbeth has no parallel, till we go back to the Prometheus, and the Furies of the Attic stage. I could even produce, if it were not going too far from my subject,

-1

innumerable instances of striking similarity between the metaphorical mintage of Shakspeare's and Eschylus's style; a similarity, both in beauty and the fault of excess, that, unless the contrary had been proved, would lead me to suspect our great dramatist to have been a studious Greek scholar: but their resemblance arose only from the consanguinity of nature. In one respect, the tragedy of Macbeth always reminds me of Eschylus's poetry. It has scenes and conceptions absolutely too bold for representation. What stage would do justice to Eschylus, when the Titan Prometheus makes his appeal to the elements; and

when the hammer is heard in the Scythian Desert, that rivets his chains; or when the ghost of Clytemnestra rushes into Apollo's temple, and rouses the fiery

Furies? I wish to imagine these scenes. I should be sorry to see the acting of them attempted."

At p. 95, is an argument on improbabilities in the drama in good and bad plays, as to which, the truth to us seems to be closer at hand, than the critic reaches for it. We agree with him in the conclusion he draws at p. 186, that the ghost of Banquo ought to appear; but we differ from Mr. Campbell, insomuch as we think the Stranger to be both immoral, and insufferably dull; contrary to nature and good sense, and good feeling throughout. As far as Miss Baillie's play of De Montfort is concerned, it failed from defect of rapidity of transition, and change of incident; the attention of the general audience was wearied by the repetition of expressions of hatred, to their minds most unnaturally and improperly nourished, and dwelt upon to satiety; while the beauty of the imagery, and the elegance of the poetry, which delights the scholar in the perusal, was but inadequately felt by them in whose hands the fate of the drama is placed; and who are not bad practical judges of what "moving incidents" are required constantly to supply the restless and craving imagination of the spectator.

THE RECORD COMMISSION.

No. V.

THE fourth division of the works published by the late Record Commission, comprehends the actual Records sent forth into the world under their direction. We shall notice them in the order of their antiquity, commencing with the Records supplementary to Domesday-book, and at the same time recurring to the Introduction to Domesday by Sir Henry Ellis, the consideration of which was properly postponed until this occasion, at the time we mentioned the Indexes with which it is bound up. (Gent. Mag. New Series, I. 510.)

Libri Censualis, vocati Domesday Book, additamenta; ex Codic. Antiquiss. fol. 1816.

Although the transfer of the throne to William of Normandy was accomplished by means of a great Revolution, his management and disposition of the demesne lands and ancient territorial revenues of the Crown, lead us to infer, that he wished it to be thought, that not Amurath to Amurath' had succeeded, but that the diadem had merely passed from the brow of one legitimate monarch to that of an equally legiti mate successor. In this spirit, he professed to respect the local customs and personal privileges of the people, and that not merely in the management of the Royal Estates, but also in his grants to his companions in arms. The Norman Baron merely stepped into the place of the Saxon Thane, and was equally bound to respect the franchises of the humble tenants of the soil. The Socman, if previously entitled, according to the language of Domesday, ire cum terra quo volebat, that is, to part with his land, or place himself under the protection of any Lord he pleased (Ellis's Introd. I. 70. n.), might, as freely as before the Conquest, transfer his services to another patron, and no longer render his consuetudines, or customary returns, to one by whom protection was either tardily afforded, or altogether withheld. The Bordar, if bound to give his Lord the labour of only one day out of every seven, continued to be secure in his voluntary occupations during the remainder of the week. The Milites, or Soldarii, who were retained to do military service for unwarlike ecclesiastics, or home-loving burghers, were protected in the possession of the lands allotted

to them, and the lodgings in the Lord's vill assigned to them, for their maintenance and residence in time of peace. Custom, at all times the life of the English common law, was acknowledged to be the rule of right; and, however much its free course might be interfered with in times of public disorder, or by powerful oppressors, it was still declared to be the principle of government, and whatever privilege it had previously guaranteed, was entitled to be held in respect. The truth of this is strikingly exemplified in many parts of Domesday, and especially in the instance of a transaction of public importance, and which affected the revenue of the Sovereign himself; we allude to the ratification of the old exemptions from the payment of Danegeld. This land tax had been remitted by Edward the Confessor, but was reimposed by William the Conqueror; in such manner, however, that it by no means be. came a new tax, but merely a revival of the old imposition, and all lands or persons, who by custom, or by agreement with previous monarchs, were originally free from the payment, were confirmed in their exemption by Domesday. In such a state of society, the uses of Domesday, which exhibited the condition of England under the old dynasty, as well as at the time of the survey, were manifold, and might have been enlarged upon in the Introduction. Upon this subject Sir Henry Ellis writes thus, By the completion of this Survey, the King acquired an exact knowledge of the possessions of the Crown. It afforded him the names of the landholders; it furnished him with the means of ascertaining the military strength of the country; and it pointed out the possibility of increasing the revenue in some cases, and of lessening the demands of the Tax Collectors in others. It was moreover a Register of Appeal for those whose titles to their property might be disputed.'—(Introd. I. 343.)

Several authors of reputation have endeavoured to connect the Domesday Survey with the conversion of all the lands of the kingdom into feudal tenures. Sir Henry Ellis quotes their opinions, without himself offering any thing upon the subject. For our own parts we think that, although, if such a conversion took place, which upon the authority of the Saxon Chronicle (Ingram, p. 290), we believe to have been the case, the Domesday Survey might be used upon the occasion, yet such a purpose might have been answered without the trouble and expense of so minute an inquiry. It would be extremely difficult to shew that the Survey was entered upon with a view to any single object; if it were so, that object was in all probability rather fiscal than legal. This would account for the frequent omission of lands which were 'a geldo quieta,' and consequently made no payment to the revenue; for the minute statements of small rents payable to the Crown; and for the circumstance that the inquiry seems to have emanated immediately from those who had the management of the King's revenue; that the returns of the inquiring Commissioners were lodged with them; that Domesday was compiled by them—and that it was, and still is, preserved at the Exchequer.

The most valuable account of the origin of Domesday is to be found in the contemporaneous Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, and as Sir Henry Ellis has inserted it merely in Gibson's Latin version, we shall lay it before our readers in a translation as nearly literal as we can make it. A. D. 1085. After this the King had a great meeting, and very deep speech, with his witan, about this land, how it was occupied, and by what men. Then he sent his men over all England, into every shire, and bade them find out how many hundred hides were in the shire, and what land the King himself had, and what stock upon the land, and what returns he ought to have of the shire, for the twelve month. Also, he bade them write how much land his Archbishops had, and his diocesan Bishops, and his Abbats, and his Earls, and-though I am long in the telling-what, or how much each man had, who was dweller on lands in England, in land or in stock, and how much money it was worth. So very narrowly he bade them spy it out, that there was not a single hide, nor a yard-land, nor further (it is

shame to tell, but he thought it no shame to do), an ox, nor a cow, nor a swine, was there left, that was not set down in his writing, and all the writings were brought to him afterwards.' This interesting passage is not more distinguished by the minute accuracy of its delineation, than by its genuine Saxon feeling ;-a valuable peculiarity which pervades the admirable historical authority from which it is derived. We here see not merely the manner in which the Survey was conducted, but how the free spirit of the people revolted against the minuteness of its inquiries, and its extension to property of a character so fluctuating and unimportant as to be thought beneath the dignity of an historian even to enumerate. Domesday itself affords indications of this feeling, in the several instances which it records of the refusal of the occupiers of lands to attend the Commissioners, or give them any information. (Ellis, Introd. I. 31.) Some historians who have dwelt upon this subject, have represented the Survey as having been altogether oppressive and tyrannical. The authority of the Saxon Chronicle cannot, however, we apprehend, be extended beyond an objection to the meanness of its inquisitorial character. The enumeration of live stock is prin cipally confined to the second volume, containing the counties of Essex, Norfolk, and Suffolk. If it formed an item of inquiry throughout the rest of the kingdom, which it probably did, it must have been omitted when the first volume of the Survey was composed out of the returns, provided the first volume now in existence is really the volume compiled at that time. As to the general character of the inquiry, there seems no reason whatever to impeach its fairness; indeed, Sir Henry Ellis has selected several instances of equitable interference on the part of the Commissioners, and of the restoration of property to its rightful owners by their means. (Introd. I. 31-32).

The Commissioners by whom the Survey was taken, are termed in Domesday itself Legati Regis,' and by other authorities, 'Barones Regis,'' Principes Regis,' and • Justiciarii Regis.' (Madox, Hist. Exch. I. 141). The only known enumeration of them is to be found in Heming's Chartulary, where those who took the account of the possessions of the Church of St. Mary, Worcester, are stated to have been, Remigius, Bishop of Lincoln, Walter Giffard, Earl of Buckingham, Henry de Ferers, and Adam the brother of Eudo the King's Dapifer, or steward. It seems probable that there were many sets of Commissioners, and that these acted for some of the Midland counties.

The Inquisitio Eliensis,' one of the documents published in the volume of the Domesday Additamenta, furnishes the following statement of the nature of the Inquisition held before the Commissioners respecting the property of the Monastery of Ely, which may be presumed to accord in its general character with the inquisitions held throughout the country. Here follows the Inquisition of Lands. In what manner the King's Barons inquired; that is to say, by the oath of the Sheriff of the Shire, and of all the Barons, and the Foreigners, and of the whole hundred, of the Priest, of the Bailiff, and of six villagers of every Vill. Afterwards, what is the name of the mansio, who held it in the time of King Edward, who now holds it, how many hides, how many carucates in demesne, how many men, how many villani, how many cottarii, how many servi, how many free men, how many socmanni, how much wood, how much meadow, how much pasture, how many mills, how many fisheries, how much has been added, or taken away, how much it was then worth, and how much now; how much every free man or socman there had or hath. All this at three several times, that is to say, in the time of King Edward, and when King William granted it, and what it is now; and if its value might be increased.' When the Inquisition was held, it would seem that all occupiers of lands were called upon to appear before the Commissioners. We have before remarked that some persons refused to attend; in which case the Commissioners obtained the best account they

could without them; others appear not merely to have attended willingly, but to have gone unnecessarily into the state of their titles, producing their charters, and giving much more information than was required. To this latter class of persons we are indebted for some of the most interesting passages in Domesday, those, namely, which refer to purchases, mortgages, prices paid for lands, and other similar particulars. On the other hand, many of the Charters produced to the Commissioners are thought to have been fabricated for the occasion, and most of the forged documents of this description at present in existence, are attributed to the anxiety of the Eccle siastics to make their titles appear valid upon the Domesday Inquiry. This anxiety often hurried them into egregious blunders; but the Commissioners were probably not deeply enough read in Saxon antiquities, to be able to discover them.

The particulars elicited by the inquiry were reduced into writing, in the form of a return; and, in the phrase of the Saxon Chronicle, all the writings were brought to the King' at Winchester, where his Exchequer or Treasure-house was then held. They were there methodised and transcribed into one general survey. In this shape Domesday still exists, comprised in two volumes, one a large folio, the other a quarto; the larger volume containing thirty-one counties, the smaller only three; the larger volume written in double columns, the smaller in single columns; the smaller containing the returns of live stock, the larger omitting them, and with various other differences, not only in form, but in substance;—differences which are not sufficiently pointed out in Sir H. Ellis's Introduction, and which form an almost unnoticed and very curious subject of inquiry. In the present state of our Record Offices, the subject cannot be very well taken up except by some Record Officer, who has constant and free access to the books themselves; but at some future time we shall not be surprised to learn, that a minute comparison of the two volumes furnishes reason to believe, that the smaller volume alone is part of the original Domeday.

Two of the documents contained in the volume of Domesday Additamenta, that is, the Exeter Domesday, and the Ely Inquisition, are thought to have been copied from the original returns of the Commissioners. The Exeter Domesday exists in MS. amongst the muniments of the Dean and Chapter of Exeter Cathedral. It comprises the counties of Wilts, Dorset, Somerset, Devon, and Cornwall, all written upon vellum, by several copiers, in a small folio volume; and, besides a description of these counties, differing only in various minute particulars from that in Domesday, it contains Inquisitiones Geldi,' the Inquisitions of the taxation of the Hundreds in the counties enumerated in the book, that of Wiltshire being inserted thrice, the copies varying from each other in some trifling matters. It also contains abstracts or summaries of the lands of Glastonbury Abbey, and those of Ralph de Mortuo Mari and several other tenants in capite. The differences between the description of lands in the Exeter Domesday, and in that of the Exchequer, are to be found chiefly in the names of persons and places, in the frequent omission from the latter of the names of the tenants in King Edward's time, and the general omission of the returns of live stock. The Ely Inquisition' contains transcripts of parts of the returns for the county of Cambridge. Manuscripts of it are preserved in a register of the monastery of Ely, now in the Cotton MSS. (Tiberius, A. vi.) and in the Ely Chartulary in Trinity College, Cambridge. The part published by the Commissioners comprises the Inquisition which we have before quoted, and the portion of this manuscript relating to the possessions of the Church of Ely. The second portion, entitled ‘Inquisitio de terris quas laici tenuerunt in Grantebriggescyra,' was omitted to be published for reasons which do not appear. It seems equally worthy of attention with the Ely portion. The introduction to the Domesday Additamenta states that 'in point of form, arrangement, contents, peculiarities, redundancies of entry and diction, the Inquisitio Eliensis very much resembles the Exeter Survey. It contains the same enumeration of live stock;