He now became the evil genius of Charles, who had the incredible folly to follow his advice in preference to such men as Hyde and Falkland. In November he is recorded as performing "singular good service," and "doing beyond admiration," in speaking in the Lords against the instruction concerning evil counsellors. He suggested to Charles the impeachment of the five members, and urged upon him the fatal attempt to arrest them on the 4th of January 1642; but he failed to play his part in the Lords in securing the arrest of Lord Mandeville, to whom on the contrary he declared that "the king was very mischievously advised"; and according to Clarendon his imprudence was responsible for the betrayal of the king's plan. Next day he advised the attempt to seize them in the city by force. The same month he was ordered to appear in the Lords to answer a charge of high treason for a supposed armed attempt at Kingston, but fled to Holland, where he joined the queen, and on the 26th of February was impeached. Subsequently he visited Charles at York disguised as a Frenchman, but on the return voyage to Holland he was captured and taken to Hull, where he for some time escaped detection; and at last he cajoled Sir John Hotham, after discovering himself, into permitting his escape. Later he ventured on a second visit to Hull to persuade Hotham to surrender the place to Charles, but this project failed. He was present at Edgehill, and greatly distinguished himself at Lichfield, where he was wounded while leading the assault. He soon, however, threw down his commission in consequence of a quarrel with Prince Rupert, and returned to the king at Oxford, over whom he obtained more influence as the prospect became more gloomy. On the 28th of September 1643 he was appointed secretary of state and a privy councillor, and on the 31st of October high steward of Oxford University. He now supported the queen's disastrous policy of foreign alliances and help from Ireland, and engaged in a series of imprudent and ill-conducted negotiations which greatly injured the king's affairs, while his fierce disputes with Rupert and his party further embarrassed them. On the 14th of October 1645 he was made lieutenant general of the royal forces north of the Trent, with the object of pushing through to join Montrose, but he was defeated on the 15th at Sherburn, where his correspondence was captured, disclosing the king's expectations from abroad and from Ireland and his intrigues with the Scots; and after reaching Dumfries, he found his way barred. He escaped on the 24th to the Isle of Man, thence crossing to Ireland, where he caused Glamorgan to be arrested. Here, on this new stage, he believed he was going to achieve wonders. "Have I not carried my body swimmingly," he wrote to Hyde in irrepressible good spirits, "who being before so irreconcilably hated by the Puritan party, have thus seasonably made myself as odious to the Papists?"[2] His project now was to bring over Prince Charles to head a royalist movement in the island; and having joined Charles at Jersey in April 1646, he intended to entrap him on board, but was dissuaded by Hyde. He then travelled to Paris to gain the queen's consent to his scheme, but returned to persuade Charles to go to Paris, and accompanied him thither, revisiting Ireland on the 29th of June once more, and finally escaping to France on the surrender of the island to the parliament. At Paris amongst the royalists he found himself in a nest of enemies eager to pay off old scores. Prince Rupert challenged him, and he fought a duel with Lord Wilmot. He continued his adventures by serving in Louis XIV.'s troops in the war of the Fronde, in which he greatly distinguished himself. He was appointed in 1651 lieutenant-general in the French army, and commander of the forces in Flanders. These new honours, however, were soon lost. During Mazarin's enforced absence from the court Digby aspired to become his successor; and the cardinal, who had from the first penetrated his character and regarded him as a mere adventurer,[3] on his restoration to power sent Digby away on an expedition in Italy; and on his return informed him that he was included in the list of those expelled from France, in accordance with the new treaty with Cromwell. In August 1656 he joined Charles II. at Bruges, and desirous of avenging himself upon the cardinal offered his services to Don John of Austria in the Netherlands, being instrumental in effecting the surrender of the garrison of St Ghislain to Spain in 1657. On the 1st of January 1657 he was appointed by Charles II. secretary of state, but shortly afterwards, having become a Roman Catholic—probably with the view of adapting himself better to his new Spanish friends—he was compelled to resign office. Charles, however, on account of his "jollity" and Spanish experience took him with him to Spain in 1659, though his presence was especially deprecated by the Spanish; but he succeeded in ingratiating himself, and was welcomed by the king of Spain subsequently at Madrid.

By the death of his father Digby had succeeded in January 1659 to the peerage as 2nd earl of Bristol, and had been made K.G. the same month. He returned to England at the restoration, when he found himself excluded from office on account of his religion, and relegated to only secondary importance. His desire to make a brilliant figure induced a restless and ambitious activity in parliament. He adopted an attitude of violent hostility to Clarendon. In foreign affairs he inclined strongly to the side of Spain, and opposed the king's marriage with Catherine of Portugal. He persuaded Charles to despatch him to Italy to view the Medici princesses, but the royal marriage and treaty with Portugal were settled in his absence. In June 1663 he made an attempt to upset Clarendon's management of the House of Commons, but his intrigue was exposed to the parliament by Charles, and Bristol was obliged to attend the House to exonerate himself, when he confessed that he had "taken the liberty of enlarging," and his "comedian-like speech" excited general amusement. Exasperated by these failures, in a violent scene with the king early in July, he broke out into fierce and disrespectful reproaches, ending with a threat that unless Charles granted his requests within twenty-four hours "he would do somewhat that should awaken him out of his slumbers, and make him look better to his own business." Accordingly on the 10th he impeached Clarendon in the Lords of high treason, and on the charge being dismissed renewed [v.04 p.0577] his accusation, and was expelled from the court, only avoiding the warrant issued for his apprehension by a concealment of two years. In January 1664 he caused a new sensation by his appearance at his house at Wimbledon, where he publicly renounced before witnesses his Roman Catholicism, and declared himself a Protestant, his motive being probably to secure immunity from the charge of recusancy preferred against him.[4] When, however, the fall of Clarendon was desired, Bristol was again welcomed at court. He took his seat in the Lords on the 29th of July 1667. "The king," wrote Pepys in November, "who not long ago did say of Bristoll that he was a man able in three years to get himself a fortune in any kingdom in the world and lose all again in three months, do now hug him and commend his parts everywhere above all the world."[5] He pressed eagerly for Clarendon's commital, and on the refusal of the Lords accused them of mutiny and rebellion, and entered his dissent with "great fury."[6] In March 1668 he attended prayers in the Lords. On the 15th of March 1673 though still ostensibly a Roman Catholic, he spoke in favour of the Test Act, describing himself as "a Catholic of the church of Rome, not a Catholic of the court of Rome," and asserting the unfitness of Romanists for public office. His adventurous and erratic career closed by death on the 20th of March 1677.

Bristol was one of the most striking and conspicuous figures of his time, a man of brilliant abilities, a great orator, one who distinguished himself without effort in any sphere of activity he chose to enter, but whose natural gifts were marred by a restless ambition and instability of character fatal to real greatness. Clarendon describes him as "the only man I ever knew of such incomparable parts that was none the wiser for any experience or misfortune that befell him," and records his extraordinary facility in making friends and making enemies. Horace Walpole characterized him in a series of his smartest antitheses as "a singular person whose life was one contradiction." "He wrote against popery and embraced it; he was a zealous opposer of the court and a sacrifice for it; was conscientiously converted in the midst of his prosecution of Lord Strafford and was most unconscientiously a persecutor of Lord Clarendon. With great parts, he always hurt himself and his friends; with romantic bravery, he was always an unsuccessful commander. He spoke for the Test Act, though a Roman Catholic; and addicted himself to astrology on the birthday of true philosophy." Besides his youthful correspondence with Sir K. Digby on the subject of religion already mentioned, he was the author of an Apologie (1643, Thomason Tracts, E. 34 (32)), justifying his support of the king's cause; of Elvira ... a comedy (1667), printed in R. Dodsley's Select Collect. of Old English Plays (Hazlitt, 1876), vol. xv., and of Worse and Worse, an adaptation from the Spanish, acted but not printed. Other writings are also ascribed to him, including the authorship with Sir Samuel Tuke of The Adventures of Five Hours (1663). His eloquent and pointed speeches, many of which were printed, are included in the article in the Biog. Brit. and among the Thomason Tracts; see also the general catalogue in the British Museum. The catalogue of his library was published in 1680. He married Lady Anne Russell, daughter of Francis, 4th earl of Bedford, by whom, besides two daughters, he had two sons, Francis, who predeceased him unmarried, and John, who succeeded him as 3rd earl of Bristol, at whose death without issue the peerage became extinct.

AUTHORITIES.—See the article in Dict. Nat. Biog.; Wood's Ath. Oxon. (Bliss), iii. 1100-1105; Biographia Brit. (Kippis), v. 210-238; H. Walpole's Royal and Noble Authors (Park, 1806), iii. 191; Roscius Anglicanus, by J. Downes, pp. 31, 36 (1789); Cunningham's Lives of Eminent Englishmen (1837), iii. 29; Somers Tracts (1750), iii. (1809), iv.; Harleian Miscellany (1808), v., vi.; Life by T. H. Lister (1838); State Papers.

(P. C. Y.)

[1] I.e. in the Digby line; for the Herveys see above.

[2] Clarendon State Papers, ii. 201.

[3] Memoires du Cardinal de Retz (1859), app. iii. 437, 442.

[4] Pepys's Diary, iv. 51.

[5] Ib. vii. 199.

[6] Ib. 207; Protests of the Lords, by J.E.T. Rogers, i. 36.

BRISTOL, JOHN DIGBY, 1ST EARL OF[1] (1580-1653) English diplomatist, son of Sir George Digby of Coleshill, Warwickshire, and of Abigail, daughter of Sir Arthur Henningham, was born in 1580, and entered Magdalen College, Oxford, in 1595 (M.A. 1605), becoming a member of the Inner Temple in 1598. In 1605 he was sent to James to inform him of the safety of the princess Elizabeth at the time of the Gunpowder Plot. He gained his favour, was made a gentleman of the privy chamber and one of the king's carvers, and was knighted in 1607. From 1610 to 1611 he was member of parliament for Heydon. In 1611 he was sent as ambassador to Spain to negotiate a marriage between Prince Henry and the infanta Anne, and to champion the cause of the English merchants, for whom he obtained substantial concessions, and arranged the appointment of consuls at Lisbon and Seville. He also discovered a list of the English pensioners of the Spanish court, which included some of the ministers, and came home in 1613 to communicate this important intelligence to the king. In 1614 he again went to Spain to effect a union between the infanta Maria and Charles, though he himself was in favour of a Protestant marriage, and desired a political and not a matrimonial treaty. In 1616, on the disgrace of Somerset, he was recalled home to give evidence concerning the latter's connexions with Spain, was made vice-chamberlain and a privy councillor, and obtained from James the manor of Sherborne forfeited by the late favourite. In 1618 he went once more to Spain to reopen the negotiations, returning in May, and being created Baron Digby on the 25th of November. He endeavoured to avoid a breach with Spain on the election of the elector palatine, the king's son-in-law, to the Bohemian throne; and in March 1621, after the latter's expulsion from Bohemia, Digby was sent to Brussels to obtain a suspension of hostilities in the Palatinate. On the 4th of July he went to Vienna and drew up a scheme of pacification with the emperor, by which Frederick was to abandon Bohemia and be secured in his hereditary territories, but the agreement could never be enforced. After raising money for the defence of Heidelberg he returned home in October, and on the 21st of November explained his policy to the parliament, and asked for money and forces for its execution. The sudden dissolution of parliament, however, prevented the adoption of any measure of support, and entirely ruined Digby's plans. In 1622 he returned to Spain with nothing on which to rely but the goodwill of Philip IV., and nothing to offer but entreaties.

On the 15th of September he was created earl of Bristol. He urged on the marriage treaty, believing it would include favourable conditions for Frederick, but the negotiations were taken out of his control, and finally wrecked by the arrival of Charles himself and Buckingham in March 1623. He incurred their resentment, of which the real inspiration was Buckingham's implacable jealousy, by a letter written to James informing him of Buckingham's unpopularity among the Spanish ministers, and by his endeavouring to maintain the peace with Spain after their departure. In January 1624 he left Spain, and on arriving at Dover in March, Buckingham and Charles having now complete ascendancy over the king, he was forbidden to appear at court and ordered to confine himself at Sherborne. He was required by Buckingham to answer a series of interrogatories, but he refused to inculpate himself and demanded a trial by parliament. On the death of James he was removed by Charles I. from the privy council, and ordered to absent himself from his first parliament. On his demand in January 1626 to be present at the coronation Charles angrily refused, and accused him of having tried to pervert his religion in Spain. In March 1626, after the assembling of the second parliament, Digby applied to the Lords, who supported his rights, and Charles sent him his writ accompanied by a letter from Lord Keeper Coventry desiring him not to use it. Bristol, however, took his seat and demanded justice against Buckingham (Thomason Tracts, E. 126 (20)). The king endeavoured to obstruct his attack by causing Bristol on the 1st of May to be himself brought to the bar, on an accusation of high treason by the attorney-general. The Lords, however, ordered that both charges should be investigated simultaneously. Further proceedings were stopped by the dissolution of parliament on the 15th of June; a prosecution was ordered by Charles in the Star Chamber, and Bristol was sent to the [v.04 p.0578] Tower, where he remained till the 17th of March 1628, when the peers, on the assembling of Charles's third parliament, insisted on his liberation and restoration to his seat in the Lords.

In the discussions upon the Petition of Right, Bristol supported the use of the king's prerogative in emergencies, and asserted that the king besides his legal had a regal power, but joined in the demand for a full acceptance of the petition by the king after the first unsatisfactory answer. He was now restored to favour, but took no part in politics till the outbreak of the Scottish rebellion, when he warned Charles of the danger of attacking with inadequate forces. He was the leader in the Great Council held at York, was a commissioner to treat with the Scots in September 1640 at Ripon, and advised strongly the summoning of the parliament. In February 1641 he was one of the peers who advocated reforms in the administration and were given seats in the council. Though no friend to Strafford, he endeavoured to save his life, desiring only to see him excluded from office, and as a witness was excused from voting on the attainder. He was appointed gentleman of the bedchamber on the king's departure for Scotland, and on the 27th of December he was declared an evil counsellor by the House of Commons, Cromwell on the 28th moving an address to the king to dismiss him from his councils, on the plea that he had advocated the bringing up of the northern army to overawe parliament in the preceding spring. There is no evidence to support the charge, but Digby was regarded by the parliamentary party with special hatred and distrust, of which the chief causes were probably his Spanish proclivities and his indifference on the great matter of religion, to which was added the unpopularity reflected from his misguided son. On the 28th of March 1642 he was sent to the Tower for having failed to disclose to parliament the Kentish petition. Liberated in April, he spoke in the Lords on the 20th of May in favour of an accommodation, and again in June in vindication of the king; but finding his efforts ineffectual, and believing all armed rebellion against the king a wicked violation of the most solemn oaths, he joined Charles at York, was present at Edgehill and accompanied him to Oxford. On the 1st of February 1643 he was named with Lord Herbert of Raglan for removal from the court and public office for ever, and in the propositions of November 1644 was one of those excepted from pardon. In January he had endeavoured to instigate a breach of the Independents with the Scots. Bristol, however, was not in favour of continuing the war, and withdrew to Sherborne, removing in the spring of 1644 to Exeter, and after the surrender of the city retiring abroad on the 11th of July by order of the Houses, which rejected his petition to compound for his estate. He took up his residence at Caen, passing the rest of his life in exile and poverty, and occasionally attending the young king. In 1647 he printed at Caen An Apology, defending his support of the royal cause. This was reprinted in 1656 (Thomason Tracts, E. 897, 6). He died at Paris on the 16th of January 1653.

He is described by Clarendon as "a man of grave aspect, of a presence that drew respect, and of great parts and ability, but passionate and supercilious and too voluminous a discourser in council." His aim was to effect a political union between England and Spain apart from the religious or marriage questions—a policy which would probably have benefited both English and European interests; but it was one understood neither in Spain nor in England, and proved impracticable. He was a man of high character, who refused to compound with falsehood and injustice, whose misfortune it was to serve two Stuart sovereigns, and whose firm resistance to the king's tyranny led the way to the great movement which finally destroyed it. Besides his Apology, he was the author of several printed speeches and poems, and translated A Defence of the Catholic Faith by Peter du Moulin (1610). He married Beatrix, daughter of Charles Walcot, and widow of Sir John Dyve, and besides two daughters left two sons, George, who succeeded him as 2nd earl of Bristol, and John, who died unmarried.

BIBLIOGRAPHY.—The best account of Bristol will be found in the scattered notices of him in the Hist. of England and of the Civil War, by S. R. Gardiner, who also wrote the short sketch of his career in the Dict. of Nat. Biog., and who highly eulogizes his character and diplomacy. For lives, see Biographia Britannica (Kippis), v. 199; Wood's Ath. Oxon. (Bliss), iii. 338; D. Lloyd's Memoires (1668), 579; Collins's Peerage (Brydges, 1812), v. 362; Fuller's Worthies (Nichols, 1811), ii. 412; H. Walpole's Royal and Noble Authors (Park, 1806), iii. 49; also Clarendon's Hist of the Rebellion, esp. vi. 388; Clarendon State Papers and Cal. of Cl. State Papers; Old Parliamentary History; Cabala (1691; letters); Camden Soc., Miscellany, vol. vi. (1871); Defence of his Spanish Negotiations, ed. by S.R. Gardiner; Somers Tracts (1809), ii. 501; Thomason Tracts in Brit. Museum; Hardwicke State Papers, i. 494. The MSS. at Sherborne Castle, of which a selection was transcribed and deposited in the Public Record Office, were calendared by the Hist. MSS. Commission in Rep. viii. app. i. p. 213 and 10th Rep. app. i. p. 520; there are numerous references to Bristol in various collections calendared in the same publication and in the Cal. of State Papers, Dom. Series; see also Harleian MSS., Brit. Mus. 1580, art. 31-48, and Add. MSS. indexes and calendars.

(P. C. Y.)

[1] I.e. in the Digby line; for the Herveys see above.

BRISTOL, a township of Hartford county, Connecticut, U.S.A., in the central part of the state, about 16 m. S.W. of Hartford. It has an area of 27 sq. m., and contains the village of Forestville and the borough of Bristol (incorporated in 1893). Both are situated on the Pequabuck river, and are served by the western branch of the midland division of the New York, New Haven & Hartford railway, and by electric railway to Hartford, New Britain and Terryville. Pop. (1890) 7382; (1900) 9643, including that of the borough, 6268 (1910) 13,502 (borough, 9527). Among the manufactures of the borough of Bristol are clocks, woollen goods, iron castings, hardware, brass ware, silverplate and bells. Bristol clocks, first manufactured soon after the War of Independence, have long been widely known. Bristol, originally a part of the township of Farmington, was first settled about 1727, but did not become an independent corporation until the formation, in 1742, of the first church, known after 1744 as the New Cambridge Society. In 1748 a Protestant Episcopal Church was organized, and before and during the War of Independence its members belonged to the Loyalist party; their rector, Rev. James Nichols, was tarred and feathered by the Whigs, and Moses Dunbar, a member of the church, was hanged for treason by the Connecticut authorities. Chippen's Hill (about 3 m. from the centre of the township) was a favourite rendezvous of the local Loyalists; and a cave there, known as "The Tories' Den," is a well-known landmark. In 1785 New Cambridge and West Britain, another ecclesiastical society of Farmington, were incorporated as the township of Bristol, but in 1806 they were divided into the present townships of Bristol and Burlington.

BRISTOL, a city, county of a city, municipal, county and parliamentary borough, and seaport of England, chiefly in Gloucestershire but partly in Somersetshire, 1181/2 m. W. of London. Pop. (1901) 328,945. The Avon, here forming the boundary between Gloucestershire and Somerset, though entering the estuary of the Severn (Bristol Channel) only 8 m. below the city, is here confined between considerable hills, with a narrow valley-floor on which the nucleus of the city rests. Between Bristol and the Channel the valley becomes a gorge, crossed at a single stride by the famous Clifton Suspension Bridge. Above Bristol the hills again close in at Keynsham, so that the city lies in a basin-like hollow some 4 m. in diameter, and extends up the heights to the north. The Great Western railway, striking into the Avon valley near Bath, serves Bristol from London, connects it with South Wales by the Severn tunnel, and with the southern and south-western counties of England. Local lines of this company encircle the city on the north and the south, serving the outports of Avonmouth and Portishead on the Bristol Channel. A trunk line of the Midland railway connects Bristol with the north of England by way of Gloucester, Worcester, Birmingham and Derby. Both companies use the central station, Temple Meads.

The nucleus of Bristol lies to the north of the river. The business centre is in the district traversed by Broad Street, High Street, Wine Street and Corn Street, which radiate from a centre close to the Floating Harbour. To the south of this centre, connected with it by Bristol Bridge, an island is formed between the Floating Harbour and the New Course of the Avon, [v.04 p.0579] and here are Temple Meads station, above Victoria Street, two of the finest churches (the Temple and St Mary Redcliffe) the general hospital and other public buildings. Immediately above the bridge the little river Frome joins the Avon. Owing to the nature of the site the streets are irregular; in the inner part of the city they are generally narrow, and sometimes, with their ancient gabled houses, extremely picturesque. The principal suburbs surround the city to the west, north and east.

Churches, &c.—In the centre of Bristol a remarkable collection of architectural antiquities is found, principally ecclesiastical. This the city owes mainly to a few great baronial families, such as the earls of Gloucester and the Berkeleys, in its early history, and to a few great merchants, the Canyngs, Shipwards and Framptons, in its later career. The see of Bristol, founded by Henry VIII. in 1542, was united to that of Gloucester in 1836; but again separated in 1896. The diocese includes parts of Gloucestershire and Wiltshire, and a small but populous [Sidenote: Cathedral.] portion of Somerset. The cathedral, standing above the so-called Canons' Marsh which borders the Floating Harbour, is pleasantly situated on the south side of College Green. It has two western towers and a central tower, nave, short transepts, choir with aisles, an eastern Lady chapel and other chapels; and on the south, a chapter-house and cloister court. The nave is modern (by Street, 1877), imitating the choir of the 14th century, with its curious skeleton-vaulting in the aisles. Besides the canopied tombs of the Berkeleys with their effigies in chain mail, and similarly fine tombs of the crosiered abbots, there are memorials to Bishop Butler, to Sterne's Eliza (Elizabeth Draper), and to Lady Hesketh (the friend of Cowper), who are all interred here. There is also here William Mason's fine epitaph to his wife (d. 1767), beginning "Take, holy earth, all that my soul holds dear." Of Fitz-Harding's abbey of St Augustine, founded in 1142 (of which the present cathedral was the church), the stately entrance gateway, with its sculptured mouldings, remains hardly injured. The abbot's gateway, the vestibule to the chapter-house, and the chapter-house itself, which is carved with Byzantine exuberance of decoration, and acknowledged to be one of the finest Norman chambers in Europe, are also perfect. On the north side of College Green is the small but ornate Mayor's chapel (originally St Mark's), devoted to the services of the mayor and corporation. It is mainly Decorated and Perpendicular. Of the churches within the centre of the city, the following are found within a radius of half-a-mile from Bristol Bridge. St Stephen's church, built between 1450 and 1490, is a dignified structure, chiefly interesting for its fan-traceried porch and stately tower. It was built entirely by the munificence of John Shipward, a wealthy merchant. The tower and spire of St John's (15th century) stand on one of the gateways of the city. This church is a parallelogram, without east or west windows or aisles, and is built upon a fine groined crypt. St James's church, the burial place of its founder, Robert, earl of Gloucester, dates from 1130, and fine Norman work remains in the nave. The tower is of the 14th century. St Philip's has an Early English tower, but its external walls and windows are for the most part debased Perpendicular. Robert FitzHamon's Norman tower of St Peter, the oldest church tower in Bristol, still presents its massive square to the eye. This church stands in Castle Street, which commemorates the castle of Robert, earl of Gloucester, the walls of which were 25 ft. thick at the base. Nothing remains of this foundation, but there still exist some walls and vaults of the later stronghold, including a fine Early English cell. Adjacent to the church is St Peter's hospital, a picturesque gabled building of Jacobean and earlier date, with a fine court room. St Mary le Port and St Augustine the Less are churches of the Perpendicular era, and not the richest specimens of their kind. St Nicholas church is modern, on a crypt of the date 1503, and earlier. On the island south of the Floating Harbour are two of the most interesting churches in the city. Temple church, with its leaning tower, 5 ft. off the perpendicular, retains nothing of the Templars' period, but is a fine building of the Decorated and Perpendicular periods. The church of St Mary Redcliffe, for grandeur of proportion and elaboration of design and finish, is the first ecclesiastical building in Bristol, and takes high rank among the parish churches of England. It was built for the most part in the latter part of the 14th century by William Canyng or Canynges (q.v.), but the sculptured north porch is externally Decorated, and internally Early English. The fine tower is also Decorated, on an Early English base. The spire, Decorated in style, is modern. Among numerous monuments is that of Admiral Penn (d. 1718), the father of the founder of Pennsylvania. The church exhibits the rare feature of transeptal aisles. Of St Thomas's, in the vicinity, only the tower (15th century) remains of the old structures. All Hallows church has a modern Italian campanile, but is in the main of the 15th century, with the retention of four Norman piers in the nave; and is interesting from its connexion with the ancient gild of calendars, whose office it was "to convert Jews, instruct youths," and keep the archives of the town. Theirs was the first free library in the city, possibly in England. The records of the church contain a singularly picturesque representation of the ancient customs of the fraternity.

Among conventual remains, besides those already mentioned, there exist of the Dominican priory the Early English refectory and dormitory, the latter comprising a row of fifteen original windows and an oak roof of the same date; and of St Bartholomew's hospital there is a double arch, with intervening arcades, also Early English. These, with the small chapel of the Three Kings of Cologne, Holy Trinity Hospital, both Perpendicular, and the remains of the house of the Augustinian canons attached to the cathedral, comprise the whole of the monastic relics.

There are many good specimens of ancient domestic architecture—notably some arches of a grand Norman hall and some Tudor windows of Colston's house, Small Street; and Canyng's house, with good Perpendicular oak roof. Of buildings to which historic interest attaches, there are the Merchant Venturers' almshouses (1699), adjoining their hall. This gild was established in the 16th century. A small house near St Mary Redcliffe was the school where the poet Chatterton received his education. His memorial is in the churchyard of St Mary, and in the church a chest contains the records among which he claimed to have discovered some of the manuscripts which were in reality his own. A house in Wine Street was the birthplace of the poet-laureate Robert Southey (1744).

Public Buildings, &c.—The public buildings are somewhat overshadowed in interest by the ecclesiastical. The council house, at the "Cross" of the four main thoroughfares, dates from 1827, was enlarged in 1894, and contains the city archives and many portraits, including a Van Dyck and a Kneller. The Guildhall is close by—a modern Gothic building. The exchange (used as a corn-market) is a noteworthy building by the famous architect of Bath, John Wood (1743). Edward Colston, a revered citizen and benefactor of the city (d. 1721), is commemorated by name in several buildings and institutions, notably in Colston Hall, which is used for concerts and meetings. A bank close by St Stephen's church claims to have originated in the first savings-bank established in England (1812). Similarly, the city free library (1613) is considered to be the original of its kind. The Bristol museum and reference library were transferred to the corporation in 1893. Vincent Stuckey Lean (d. 1899) bequeathed to the corporation of Bristol the sum of L50,000 for the further development of the free libraries of the city, and with especial regard to the formation and sustenance of a general reference library of a standard and scientific character. The central library was opened in 1906. An art gallery, presented by Sir William Henry Wills, was opened in 1905.

Among educational establishments, the technical college of the Company of Merchant Venturers (1885) supplies scientific, technical and commercial education. The extensive buildings of this institution were destroyed by fire in 1906. University College (1876) forms the nucleus of the university of Bristol (chartered 1909). Clifton College, opened in 1862 and incorporated in 1877, includes a physical science school, with laboratories, [v.04 p.0580] a museum and observatory. Colston's girls' day school (1891) includes domestic economy and calisthenics. Among the many charitable institutions are the general hospital, opened in 1858, and since repeatedly enlarged; royal hospital for sick children and women, Royal Victoria home, and the Queen Victoria jubilee convalescent home.

Of the open spaces in and near Bristol the most extensive are those bordering the river in the neighbourhood of the gorge, Durdham and Clifton Downs, on the Gloucestershire side (see CLIFTON). Others are Victoria Park, south of the river, near the Bedminster station, Eastville Park by the Frome, on the north-east of the city beyond Stapleton Road station, St Andrew's Park near Montpelier station to the north, and Brandon Hill, west of the cathedral, an abrupt eminence commanding a fine view over the city, and crowned with a modern tower commemorating the "fourth centenary of the discovery of America by John Cabot, and sons Lewis, Sebastian and Sanctus." Other memorials in the city are the High Cross on College Green (1850), and statues of Queen Victoria (1888), Samuel Morley (1888), Edmund Burke (1894), and Edward Colston (1895), in whose memory are held annual Colston banquets.

Harbour and Trade.—Bristol harbour was formed in 1809 by the conversion of the Avon and a branch of the Frome into "the Float," by the cutting of a new channel for the Avon and the formation of two basins. Altogether the water area, at fixed level, is about 85 acres. Four dry docks open into the floating harbour. In 1884 the Avonmouth and Portishead docks at the river entrance were bought up by the city; and the port extends from Hanham Mills on the Avon to the mouth of the river, and for some distance down the estuary of the Severn. The city docks have a depth of 22 ft., while those at Avonmouth are accessible to the largest vessels. In 1902 the construction of the extensive Royal Edward dock at Avonmouth was put in hand by the corporation, and the dock was opened by King Edward VII. in 1908. It is entered by a lock 875 ft. long and 100 ft. wide, with a depth of water on the sill of 46 ft. at ordinary spring, and 36 ft. at ordinary neap tides. The dock itself has a mean length of 1120 ft. and a breadth of 1000 ft., and there is a branch and passage connecting with the old dock. The water area is about 30 acres, and the dock is so constructed as to be easily capable of extension. Portishead dock, on the Somerset shore, has an area of 12 acres. The port has a large trade with America, the West Indies and elsewhere, the principal imports being grain, fruit, oils, ore, timber, hides, cattle and general merchandise; while the exports include machinery, manufactured oils, cotton goods, tin and salt. The Elder Dempster, Dominion and other large steamship companies trade at the port.

The principal industries are shipbuilding, ropewalks, chocolate factories, sugar refineries, tobacco mills and pipe-making, glass works, potteries, soaperies, shoe factories, leather works and tanneries, chemical works, saw mills, breweries, copper, lead and shot works, iron works, machine works, stained-paper works, anchors, chain cables, sail-cloth, buttons. A coalfield extending 16 m. south-east to Radstock avails much for Bristol manufactures.

The parliamentary borough is divided into four divisions, each returning one member. The government of the city is in the hands of a lord mayor, 22 aldermen and 66 councillors. The area in 1901 was 11,705 acres; but in 1904 it was increased to 17,004 acres.

History.—Bristol (Brigstow, Bristou, Bristow, Bristole) is one of the best examples of a town that has owed its greatness entirely to trade. It was never a shire town or the site of a great religious house, and it owed little to its position as the head of a feudal lordship, or as a military post. Though it is near both British and Roman camps, there is no evidence of a British or Roman settlement. It was the western limit of the Saxon invasion of Britain, and about the year 1000 a Saxon settlement began to grow up at the junction of the rivers Frome and Avon, the natural advantages of the situation favouring the growth of the township. Bristol owed much to Danish rule, and during the reign of Canute, when the wool trade with Ireland began, it became the market for English slaves. In the reign of Edward the Confessor the town was included in the earldom of Sweyn Godwinsson, and at the date of the Domesday survey it was already a royal borough governed by a reeve appointed by the king as overlord, the king's geld being assessed at 110 marks. There was a mint at the time of the Conquest, which proves that Bristol must have been already a place of some size, though the fact that the town was a member of the royal manor of Baston shows that its importance was still of recent growth. One-third of the geld was paid to Geoffrey de Coutances, bishop of Exeter, who threw up the earthworks of the castle. He joined in a rebellion against William II., and after his death the king granted the town and castle, as part of the honour of Gloucester, to Robert FitzHamon, whose daughter Mabel, marrying Earl Robert of Gloucester in 1119, brought him Bristol as her dowry. Earl Robert still further strengthened the castle, probably with masonry, and involved Bristol in the rebellion against Stephen. From the castle he harried the whole neighbourhood, threatened Bath, and sold his prisoners as slaves to Ireland. A contemporary chronicler describes Bristol castle as "seated on a mighty mound, and garrisoned with knights and foot soldiers or rather robbers and raiders," and he calls Bristol the stepmother of England.

The history of the charters granted to Bristol begins about this time. A charter granted by Henry II. in 1172 exempted the burgesses of Bristol from certain tolls throughout the kingdom, and confirmed existing liberties. Another charter of the same year granted the city of Dublin to the men of Bristol as a colony with the same liberties as their own town.

As a result probably of the close connexion between Bristol and Ireland the growth of the wool trade was maintained. Many Bristol men settled in Dublin, which for a long time was a Bristol beyond the seas, its charters being almost duplicates of those granted to Bristol. About this time Bristol began to export wool to the Baltic, and had developed a wine trade with the south of France, while soap-making and tanning were flourishing industries. Bristol was still organized manorially rather than municipally. Its chief courts were the weekly hundred court and the court leet held three times a year, and presided over by the reeve appointed by the earl of Gloucester. By the marriage of Earl John with the heiress of Earl William of Gloucester, Bristol became part of the royal demesne, the rent payable to the king being fixed, and the town shook off the feudal yoke. The charter granted by John in 1190 was an epoch in the history of the borough. It provided that no burgess should be impleaded without the walls, that no non-burgess should sell wine, cloth, wool, leather or corn in Bristol, that all should hold by burgage tenure, that corn need not be ground at the lord's mill, and that the burgesses should have all their reasonable gilds. At some uncertain date soon after this a commune was established in Bristol on the French model, Robert FitzNichol, the first mayor of Bristol, taking the oath in 1200. The mayor was chosen, not, like the reeve whom he had displaced, by the overlord, but by the merchants of Bristol who were members of the merchant gild. The first documentary evidence of the existence of the merchant gild appears in 1242. In addition, there were many craft gilds (later at least twenty-six were known to exist), the most important being the gilds of the weavers, tuckers and fullers, and the Gild of the Kalendars of Bristol, which devoted itself to religious, educational and social work. The mayor of Bristol was helped by two assistants, who were called provosts until 1267, and from 1267 to 1311 were known as stewards, and after that date as bailiffs. Before this time many religious houses had been founded. Earl Robert of Gloucester established the Benedictine priory of St James; there were Dominican and Franciscan priories, a monastery of Carmelites, and an abbey of St Augustine founded by Robert FitzHardinge.

In the reign of John, Bristol began the struggle to absorb the neighbouring manor of Bedminster, the eastern half of which was held by the Templars by gift of Earl Robert of Gloucester, and the western half, known as Redcliffe, was sold by the same earl to Robert FitzHardinge, afterwards Lord Berkeley. The [v.04 p.0581] Templars acquiesced without much difficulty, but the wealthy owners of the manor of Redcliffe, who had their own manorial courts, market, fair and quay, resisted the union for nearly one hundred years. In 1247 a new course was cut for the river Frome which vastly improved the harbour, and in the same year a stone bridge was built over the Avon, bringing Temple and Redcliffe into closer touch with the city. The charter granted by Henry III. in 1256 was important. It gave the burgesses the right to choose coroners, and as they already farmed the geld payable to the king, Bristol must have been practically independent of the king. The growing exclusiveness of the merchant gild led to the great insurrection of 1312. The oligarchical party was supported by the Berkeleys, but the opposition continued their rebellion until 1313, when the town was besieged and taken by the royal forces. During the reign of Edward III. cloth manufacture developed in Bristol. Thomas Blanket set up looms in 1337, employing many foreign workmen, and in 1353 Bristol was made one of the Staple towns, the office of mayor of the staple being held by the mayor of the town.

The charter of 1373 extended the boundaries of the town to include Redcliffe (thus settling the long-standing dispute) and the waters of the Avon and Severn up to the Steep and Flat Holmes; and made Bristol a county in itself, independent of the county courts, with an elected sheriff, and a council of forty to be chosen by the mayor and sheriff. The town was divided into five wards, each represented by an alderman, the aldermen alone being eligible for the mayoralty. This charter (confirmed in 1377 and 1488) was followed by the period of Bristol's greatest prosperity, the era of William Canyng, of the foundation of the Society of Merchant Venturers, and of the voyages of John and Sebastian Cabot. William Canyng (1399-1474) was five times mayor and twice represented Bristol in parliament; he carried on a huge cloth trade with the Baltic and rebuilt St Mary Redcliffe. At the same time cloth was exported by Bristol merchants to France, Spain and the Levant. The records of the Society of Merchant Venturers began in 1467, and the society increased in influence so rapidly that in 1500 it directed all the foreign trade of the city and had a lease of the port dues. It was incorporated in 1552, and received other charters in 1638 and 1662. Henry VII. granted Bristol a charter in 1499 (confirmed in 1510) which removed the theoretically popular basis of the corporation by the provision that the aldermen were to be elected by the mayor and council. At the dissolution of the monasteries the diocese of Bristol was founded, which included the counties of Bristol and Dorset. The voyages of discovery in which Bristol had played a conspicuous part led to a further trade development. In the 16th century Bristol traded with Spain, the Canaries and the Spanish colonies in America, shared in the attempt to colonize Newfoundland, and began the trade in African slaves which flourished during the 17th century. Bristol took a great share in the Civil War and was three times besieged. Charles II. granted a formal charter of incorporation in 1664, the governing body being the mayor, 12 aldermen, 30 common councilmen, 2 sheriffs, 2 coroners, a town clerk, clerk of the peace and 39 minor officials, the governing body itself filling up all vacancies in its number. In the 18th century the cloth trade declined owing to the competition of Ireland and to the general migration of manufactures to the northern coalfields, but the prosperity of the city was maintained by the introduction of manufactures of iron, brass, tin and copper, and by the flourishing West Indian trade, sugar being taken in exchange for African slaves.

The hot wells became fashionable in the reign of Anne (who granted a charter in 1710), and a little later Bristol was the centre of the Methodist revival of Whitefield and Wesley. The city was small, densely populated and dirty, with dark, narrow streets, and the mob gained an unenviable notoriety for violence in the riots of 1708, 1753, 1767 and 1831. At the beginning of the 19th century it was obvious that the prosperity of Bristol was diminishing, comparatively if not actually, owing to (1) the rise of Liverpool, which had more natural facilities as a port than Bristol could offer, (2) the abolition of the slave trade, which ruined the West Indian sugar trade, and (3) the extortionate rates levied by the Bristol Dock Company, incorporated in 1803. These rates made competition with Liverpool and London impossible, while other tolls were levied by the Merchant Venturers and the corporation. The decline was checked by the efforts of the Bristol chamber of commerce (founded in 1823) and by the Municipal Reform Act of 1835. The new corporation, consisting of 48 councillors and 16 aldermen who elected the mayor, being themselves chosen by the burgesses of each ward, bought the docks in 1848 and reduced the fees. In 1877-1880 the docks at the mouth of the river at Avonmouth and Portishead were made, and these were bought by the corporation in 1884. A revival of trade, rapid increase of population and enlargement of the boundaries of the city followed. The chief magistrate became a lord mayor in 1899.

See J. Corry, History of Bristol (Bristol, 1816); J. Wallaway, Antiquities (1834); J. Evans, Chronological History of Bristol (1824); Bristol vol. of Brit. Archaeol. Inst.; J.F. Nicholl and J. Taylor, Bristol Past and Present (Bristol and London, 1882); W. Hunt, Bristol, in "Historic Towns" series (London, 1887); J. Latimer, Annals of Bristol (various periods); G.E. Weare, Collectanea relating to the Bristol Friars (Bristol, 1893); Samuel Seyer, History of Bristol and Bristol Charters (1812); The Little Red Book of Bristol (1900); The Maior's Kalendar (Camden Soc., 1872); Victoria County History, Gloucester.

BRISTOL, a borough of Bucks county, Pennsylvania, U.S.A., on the Delaware river, opposite Burlington, New Jersey, 20 m. N.E. of Philadelphia. Pop. (1890) 6553; (1900) 7104 (1134 foreign-born); (1910) 9256. It is served by the Pennsylvania railway. The borough is built on level ground elevated several feet above the river, and in the midst of an attractive farming country. The principal business houses are on Mill Street; while Radcliffe Street extends along the river. Among Bristol's manufacturing establishments are machine shops, rolling mills, a planing mill, yarn, hosiery and worsted mills, and factories for making carpets, wall paper and patent leather. Bath Springs are located just outside the borough limits; though not so famous as they were early in the 18th century, these springs are still well known for the medicinal properties of their chalybeate waters. Bristol was one of the first places to be settled in Pennsylvania after William Penn received his charter for the province in 1681, and from its settlement until 1725 it was the seat of government of the county. It was laid out in 1697 and was incorporated as a borough in 1720; the present charter, however, dates only from 1851.

BRISTOL, the shire-township of Bristol county, Rhode Island, U.S.A., about 15 m. S.S.E. of Providence, between Narragansett Bay on the W. and Mount Hope Bay on the E., thus being a peninsula. Pop. (1900) 6901, of whom 1923 were foreign-born; (1905; state census) 7512; (1910) 8565; area 12 sq. m. It is served by the New York, New Haven & Hartford, and the Rhode Island Suburban railways, and is connected with the island of Rhode Island by ferry. Mount Hope (216 ft.), on the eastern side, commands delightful views of landscape, bay and river scenery. Elsewhere in the township the surface is gently undulating and generally well adapted to agriculture, especially to the growing of onions. A small island, Hog Island, is included in the township. The principal village, also known as Bristol, is a port of entry with a capacious and deep harbour, has manufactories of rubber and woollen goods, and is well known as a yacht-building centre, several defenders of the America's Cup, including the "Columbia" and the "Reliance," having been built in the Herreshoff yards here. At the close of King Philip's War in 1676, Mount Hope Neck (which had been the seat of the vanquished sachem), with most of what is now the township of Bristol, was awarded to Plymouth Colony. In 1680, immediately after Plymouth had conveyed the "Neck" to a company of four, the village was laid out; the following year, in anticipation of future commercial importance, the township and the village were named Bristol, from the town in England. The township became the shire-township in 1685, passed under the jurisdiction of Massachusetts in 1692, and in 1747 was annexed to Rhode Island. During the War of Independence the village was bombarded by the British on the 7th of October 1775, but [v.04 p.0582] suffered little damage; on the 25th of May 1778 it was visited and partially destroyed by a British force.

BRISTOL, a city of Sullivan county, Tennessee, and Washington county, Virginia, U.S.A., 130 m. N.E. of Knoxville, Tennessee, at an altitude of about 1700 ft. Pop. (1880) 3209; (1890) 6226; (1900) 9850 (including 1981 negroes); (1910) 13,395, of whom 7148 were in Tennessee and 6247 were in Virginia. Bristol is served by the Holston Valley, the Southern, the Virginia & South-Western, and the Norfolk & Western railways, and is a railway centre of some importance. It is near the great mineral deposits of Virginia, Tennessee, West Virginia, Kentucky and North Carolina; an important distributing point for iron, coal and coke; and has tanneries and lumber mills, iron furnaces, tobacco factories, furniture factories and packing houses. It is the seat of Sullins College (Methodist Episcopal, South; 1870) for women, and of the Virginia Institute for Women (Baptist, 1884), both in the state of Virginia, and of a normal college for negroes, on the Tennessee side of the state line. The Tennessee-Virginia boundary line runs through the principal street, dividing the place into two separate corporations, the Virginia part, which before 1890 (when it was chartered as a city) was known as Goodson, being administratively independent of the county in which it is situated. Bristol was settled about 1835, and the town of Bristol, Tennessee, was first incorporated in 1856.

BRISTOW, BENJAMIN HELM (1832-1896), American lawyer and politician, was born in Elkton, Kentucky, on the 20th of June 1832, the son of Francis Marion Bristow (1804-1864), a Whig member of Congress in 1854-1855 and 1859-1861. He graduated at Jefferson College, Canonsburg, Pennsylvania, in 1851, studied law under his father, and was admitted to the Kentucky bar in 1853. At the beginning of the Civil War he became lieutenant-colonel of the 25th Kentucky Infantry; was severely wounded at Shiloh; helped to recruit the 8th Kentucky Cavalry, of which he was lieutenant-colonel and later colonel; and assisted at the capture of John H. Morgan in July 1863. In 1863-1865 he was state senator; in 1865-1866 assistant United States district-attorney, and in 1866-1870 district-attorney for the Louisville district; and in 1870-1872, after a few months' practice of law with John M. Harlan, was the (first appointed) solicitor-general of the United States. In 1873 President Grant nominated him attorney-general of the United States in case George H. Williams were confirmed as chief justice of the United States,—a contingency which did not arise. As secretary of the treasury (1874-1876) he prosecuted with vigour the so-called "Whisky Ring," the headquarters of which was at St Louis, and which, beginning in 1870 or 1871, had defrauded the Federal government out of a large part of its rightful revenue from the distillation of whisky. Distillers and revenue officers in St Louis, Milwaukee, Cincinnati and other cities were implicated, and the illicit gains—which in St Louis alone probably amounted to more than $2,500,000 in the six years 1870-1876—were divided between the distillers and the revenue officers, who levied assessments on distillers ostensibly for a Republican campaign fund to be used in furthering Grant's re-election. Prominent among the ring's alleged accomplices at Washington was Orville E. Babcock, private secretary to President Grant, whose personal friendship for Babcock led him to indiscreet interference in the prosecution. Through Bristow's efforts more than 200 men were indicted, a number of whom were convicted, but after some months' imprisonment were pardoned. Largely owing to friction between himself and the president, Bristow resigned his portfolio in June 1876; as secretary of the treasury he advocated the resumption of specie payments and at least a partial retirement of "greenbacks"; and he was also an advocate of civil service reform. He was a prominent candidate for the Republican presidential nomination in 1876. After 1878 he practised law in New York City, where he died on the 22nd of June 1896.

See Memorial of Benjamin Helm Bristow, largely prepared by David Willcox (Cambridge, Mass., privately printed, 1897); Whiskey Frauds, 44th Cong., 1st Sess., Mis. Doc. No. 186; Secrets of the Great Whiskey Ring (Chicago, 1880), by John McDonald, who for nearly six years had been supervisor of internal revenue at St Louis,—a book by one concerned and to be considered in that light.

BRISTOW, HENRY WILLIAM (1817-1889), English geologist, son of Major-General H. Bristow, who served in the Peninsular War, was born on the 17th of May 1817. He was educated at King's College, London, under John Phillips, then professor of geology. In 1842 he was appointed assistant geologist on the Geological Survey, and in that service he remained for forty-six years, becoming director for England and Wales in 1872, and retiring in 1888. He was elected F.R.S. in 1862. He died in London on the 14th of June 1889. His publications (see Geol. Mag., 1889, p. 384) include A Glossary of Mineralogy (1861) and The Geology of the Isle of Wight (1862).

BRITAIN (Gr. [Greek: Pretanikai nesoi, Brettania]; Lat. Britannia, rarely Brittania), the anglicized form of the classical name of England, Wales and Scotland, sometimes extended to the British Isles as a whole (Britannicae Insulae). The Greek and Roman forms are doubtless attempts to reproduce a Celtic original, the exact form of which is still matter of dispute. Brittany (Fr. Bretagne) in western France derived its name from Britain owing to migrations in the 5th and 6th century A.D. The personification of Britannia as a female figure may be traced back as far as the coins of Hadrian and Antoninus Pius (early 2nd century A.D.); its first appearance on modern coins is on the copper of Charles II. (see NUMISMATICS).

In what follows, the archaeological interest of early Britain is dealt with, in connexion with the history of Britain in Pre-Roman, Roman, and Anglo-Saxon days; this account being supplementary to the articles ENGLAND; ENGLISH HISTORY; SCOTLAND, &c.

PRE-ROMAN BRITAIN

Geologists are not yet agreed when and by whom Britain was first peopled. Probably the island was invaded by a succession of races. The first, the Paleolithic men, may have died out or retired before successors arrived. During the Neolithic and Bronze Ages we can dimly trace further immigrations. Real knowledge begins with two Celtic invasions, that of the Goidels in the later part of the Bronze Age, and that of the Brythons and Belgae in the Iron Age. These invaders brought Celtic civilization and dialects. It is uncertain how far they were themselves Celtic in blood and how far they were numerous enough to absorb or obliterate the races which they found in Britain. But it is not unreasonable to think that they were no mere conquering caste, and that they were of the same race as the Celtic-speaking peoples of the western continent. By the age of Julius Caesar all the inhabitants of Britain, except perhaps some tribes of the far north, were Celts in speech and customs. Politically they were divided into separate and generally warring tribes, each under its own princes. They dwelt in hill forts with walls of earth or rude stone, or in villages of round huts sunk into the ground and resembling those found in parts of northern Gaul, or in subterranean chambered houses, or in hamlets of pile-dwellings constructed among the marshes. But, at least in the south, market centres had sprung up, town life was beginning, houses of a better type were perhaps coming into use, and the southern tribes employed a gold coinage and also a currency of iron bars or ingots, attested by Caesar and by surviving examples, which weigh roughly, some two-thirds of a pound, some 2-2/3 lb, but mostly 1-1/3 lb. In religion, the chief feature was the priesthood of Druids, who here, as in Gaul, practised magical arts and barbarous rites of human sacrifice, taught a secret lore, wielded great influence, but, at least as Druids, took ordinarily no part in politics. In art, these tribes possessed a native Late Celtic fashion, descended from far-off Mediterranean antecedents and more directly connected with the La-Tene culture of the continental Celts. Its characteristics were a flamboyant and fantastic treatment of plant and animal (though not of human) forms, a free use of the geometrical device called the "returning spiral," and much skill in enamelling. Its finest products were in bronze, but the artistic impulse spread to humbler work in wood and pottery. The late Celtic age was one which genuinely delighted in beauty of form and detail. In this it resembled the middle ages rather than the Roman empire or the present day, and it resembled [v.04 p.0583] them all the more in that its love of beauty, like theirs, was mixed with a feeling for the fantastic and the grotesque. The Roman conquest of northern Gaul (57-50 B.C.) brought Britain into definite relation with the Mediterranean. It was already closely connected with Gaul, and when Roman civilization and its products invaded Gallia Belgica, they passed on easily to Britain. The British coinage now begins to bear Roman legends, and after Caesar's two raids (55, 54 B.C.) the southern tribes were regarded at Rome, though they do not seem to have regarded themselves, as vassals. Actual conquest was, however, delayed. Augustus planned it. But both he and his successor Tiberius realized that the greater need was to consolidate the existing empire, and absorb the vast additions recently made to it by Pompey, Caesar and Augustus.

ROMAN BRITAIN

I. The Roman Conquest.—The conquest of Britain was undertaken by Claudius in A.D. 43. Two causes coincided to produce the step. On the one hand a forward policy then ruled at Rome, leading to annexations in various lands. On the other hand, a probably philo-Roman prince, Cunobelin (known to literature as Cymbeline), had just been succeeded by two sons, Caractacus (q.v.) and Togodumnus, who were hostile to Rome. Caligula, the half-insane predecessor of Claudius, had made in respect to this event some blunder which we know only through a sensational exaggeration, but which doubtless had to be made good. An immediate reason for action was the appeal of a fugitive British prince, presumably a Roman partisan and victim of Cunobelin's sons. So Aulus Plautius with a singularly well equipped army of some 40,000 men landed in Kent and advanced on London. Here Claudius himself appeared—the one reigning emperor of the 1st century who crossed the waves of ocean,—and the army, crossing the Thames, moved forward through Essex and captured the native capital, Camulodūnum, now Colchester. From the base of London and Colchester three corps continued the conquest. The left wing, the Second Legion (under Vespasian, afterwards emperor), subdued the south; the centre, the Fourteenth and Twentieth Legions, subdued the midlands, while the right wing, the Ninth Legion, advanced through the eastern part of the island. This strategy was at first triumphant. The lowlands of Britain, with their partly Romanized and partly scanty population and their easy physical features, presented no obstacle. Within three or four years everything south of the Humber and east of the Severn had been either directly annexed or entrusted, as protectorates, to native client-princes.

A more difficult task remained. The wild hills and wilder tribes of Wales and Yorkshire offered far fiercer resistance. There followed thirty years of intermittent hill fighting (A.D. 47-79). The precise steps of the conquest are not known. Legionary fortresses were established at Wroxeter (for a time only), Chester and Caerleon, facing the Welsh hills, and at Lincoln in the northeast. Monmouthshire, and Flintshire with its lead mines, were early overrun; in 60 Suetonius Paulinus reached Anglesea. The method of conquest was the establishment of small detached forts in strategic positions, each garrisoned by 500 or 1000 men, and it was accompanied by a full share of those disasters which vigorous barbarians always inflict on civilized invaders. Progress was delayed too by the great revolt of Boadicea (q.v.) and a large part of the nominally conquered Lowlands. Her rising was soon crushed, but the government was obviously afraid for a while to move its garrisons forward. Indeed, other needs of the empire caused the withdrawal of the Fourteenth Legion about 67. But the decade A.D. 70-80 was decisive. A series of three able generals commanded an army restored to its proper strength by the addition of Legio II. Adiutrix, and achieved the final subjugation of Wales and the first conquest of Yorkshire, where a legionary fortress at York was substituted for that at Lincoln.

The third and best-known, if not the ablest, of these generals, Julius Agricola, moved on in A.D. 80 to the conquest of the farther north. He established between the Clyde and Forth a frontier meant to be permanent, guarded by a line of forts, two of which are still traceable at Camelon near Falkirk, and at Bar Hill. He then advanced into Caledonia and won a "famous victory" at Mons Graupius (sometimes, but incorrectly, spelt Grampius), probably near the confluence of the Tay and the Isla, where a Roman encampment of his date, Inchtuthill, has been partly examined (see GALGACUS). He dreamt even of invading Ireland, and thought it an easy task. The home government judged otherwise. Jealous possibly of a too brilliant general, certainly averse from costly and fruitless campaigns and needing the Legio II. Adiutrix for work elsewhere, it recalled both governor and legion, and gave up the more northerly of his nominal conquests. The most solid result of his campaigns is that his battlefield, misspelt Grampius, has provided to antiquaries, and through them to the world, the modern name of the Grampian Hills.

What frontier was adopted after Agricola's departure, whether Tweed or Cheviot or other, is unknown. For thirty years (A.D. 85-115) the military history of Britain is a blank. When we recover knowledge we are in an altered world. About 115 or 120 the northern Britons rose in revolt and destroyed the Ninth Legion, posted at York, which would bear the brunt of any northern trouble. In 122 the second reigning emperor who crossed the ocean, Hadrian, came himself to Britain, brought the Sixth Legion to replace the Ninth, and introduced the frontier policy of his age. For over 70 m. from Tyne to Solway, more exactly from Wallsend to Bowness, he built a continuous rampart, more probably of turf than of stone, with a ditch in front of it, a number of small forts along it, one or two outposts a few miles to the north of it, and some detached forts (the best-known is on the hill above Maryport) guarding the Cumberland coast beyond its western end. The details of his work are imperfectly known, for though many remains survive, it is hard to separate those of Hadrian's date from others that are later. But that Hadrian built a wall here is proved alike by literature and by inscriptions. The meaning of the scheme is equally certain. It was to be, as it were, a Chinese wall, marking the definite limit of the Roman world. It was now declared, not by the secret resolutions of cabinets, but by the work of the spade marking the solid earth for ever, that the era of conquest was ended.



But empires move, though rulers bid them stand still. Whether the land beyond Hadrian's wall became temptingly peaceful or remained in vexing disorder, our authorities do not say. We know only that about 142 Hadrian's successor, Antoninus Pius, acting through his general Lollius Urbicus, advanced from the Tyne and Solway frontier to the narrower isthmus between Forth and Clyde, 36 m. across, which Agricola had fortified before him. Here he reared a continuous rampart with a ditch in front of it, fair-sized forts, probably a dozen in number, built either close behind it or actually abutting on it, and a connecting road running from end to end. An ancient writer states that the rampart was built of regularly laid sods (the same method which had probably been employed by Hadrian), and excavations in 1891-1893 have verified the statement. The work still survives visibly, though in varying preservation, except in the agricultural districts near its two ends. Occasionally, as on Croyhill (near Kilsyth), at Westerwood, and in the covers of Bonnyside (3 m. west of Falkirk), wall and ditch and even road can be distinctly traced, and the sites of many of the forts are plain to practised eyes. Three of these forts have been excavated. All three show the ordinary features of Roman castella, though they differ more than one would expect in forts built at one time by one general. Bar Hill, the most completely explored, covers three acres—nearly five times as much as the earlier fort of Agricola on the same site. It had ramparts of turf, barrack-rooms of wood, and a headquarters building, storehouse and bath in stone: it stands a few yards back from the wall. Castle Cary covers nearly four acres: its ramparts contain massive and well-dressed masonry; its interior buildings, though they agree in material, do not altogether agree in plan with those of Bar Hill, and its north face falls in line with the frontier wall. Rough Castle, near Falkirk, is very much smaller; it is remarkable for the astonishing [v.04 p.0584] strength of its turf-built and earthen ramparts and ravelins, and for a remarkable series of defensive pits, reminiscent of Caesar's lilia at Alesia, plainly intended to break an enemy's charge, and either provided with stakes to impale the assailant or covered over with hurdles or the like to deceive him. Besides the dozen forts on the wall, one or two outposts may have been held at Ardoch and Abernethy along the natural route which runs by Stirling and Perth to the lowlands of the east coast. This frontier was reached from the south by two roads. One, known in medieval times as Dere Street and misnamed Watling Street by modern antiquaries, ran from Corbridge on the Tyne past Otterburn, crossed Cheviot near Makendon Camps, and passed by an important fort at Newstead near Melrose, and another at Inveresk (outside of Edinburgh), to the eastern end of the wall. The other, starting from Carlisle, ran to Birrens, a Roman fort near Ecclefechan, and thence, by a line not yet explored and indeed not at all certain, to Carstairs and the west end of the wall. This wall was in addition to, and not instead of, the wall of Hadrian. Both barriers were held together, and the district between them was regarded as a military area, outside the range of civilization.

The work of Pius brought no long peace. Sixteen years later disorder broke out in north Britain, apparently in the district between the Cheviots and the Derbyshire hills, and was repressed with difficulty after four or five years' fighting. Eighteen or twenty years later (180-185) a new war broke out with a different issue. The Romans lost everything beyond Cheviot, and perhaps even more. The government of Commodus, feeble in itself and vexed by many troubles, could not repair the loss, and the civil wars which soon raged in Europe (193-197) gave the Caledonians further chance. It was not till 208 that Septimius Severus, the ablest emperor of his age, could turn his attention to the island. He came thither in person, invaded Caledonia, commenced the reconstruction of the wall of Hadrian, rebuilding it from end to end in stone, and then in the fourth year of his operations died at York. Amid much that is uncertain and even legendary about his work in Britain, this is plain, that he fixed on the line of Hadrian's wall as his substantive frontier. His successors, Caracalla and Severus Alexander (211-235), accepted the position, and many inscriptions refer to building or rebuilding executed by them for the greater efficiency of the frontier defences. The conquest of Britain was at last over. The wall of Hadrian remained for nearly two hundred years more the northern limit of Roman power in the extreme west.

II. The Province of Britain and its Military System.—Geographically, Britain consists of two parts: (1) the comparatively flat lowlands of the south, east and midlands, suitable to agriculture and open to easy intercourse with the continent, i.e. with the rest of the Roman empire; (2) the district consisting of the hills of Devon and Cornwall, of Wales and of northern England, regions lying more, and often very much more, than 600 ft. above the sea, scarred with gorges and deep valleys, mountainous in character, difficult for armies to traverse, ill fitted to the peaceful pursuits in agriculture. These two parts of the province differ also in their history. The lowlands, as we have seen, were conquered easily and quickly. The uplands were hardly subdued completely till the end of the 2nd century. They differ, thirdly, in the character of their Roman occupation. The lowlands were the scene of civil life. Towns, villages and country houses were their prominent features; troops were hardly seen in them save in some fortresses on the edge of the hills and in a chain of forts built in the 4th century to defend the south-east coast, the so-called Saxon Shore. The uplands of Wales and the north presented another spectacle. Here civil life was almost wholly absent. No country town or country house has been found more than 20 m. north of York or west of Monmouthshire. The hills were one extensive military frontier, covered with forts and strategic roads connecting them, and devoid of town life, country houses, farms or peaceful civilized industry. This geographical division was not reproduced by Rome in any administrative partitions of the province. At first the whole was governed by one legatus Augusti of consular standing. Septimius Severus made it two provinces, Superior and Inferior, with a boundary which probably ran from Humber to Mersey, but we do not know how long this arrangement lasted. In the 5th century there were five provinces, Britannia Prima and Secunda, Flavia and Maxima Caesariensis and (for a while) Valentia, ruled by praesides and consulares under a vicartus, but the only thing known of them is that Britannia Prima included Cirencester.



The army which guarded or coerced the province consisted, from the time of Hadrian onwards, of (1) three legions, the Second at Isca Silurum (Caerleon-on-Usk, q.v.), the Ninth at Eburācum (q.v.; now York), the Twentieth at Deva (q.v.; now Chester), a total of some 15,000 heavy infantry; and (2) a large but uncertain number of auxiliaries, troops of the second grade, organized in infantry cohorts or cavalry alae, each 500 or 1000 strong, and posted in castella nearer the frontiers than the legions. The legionary fortresses were large rectangular enclosures of 50 or 60 acres, surrounded by strong walls of which traces can still be seen in the lower courses of the north and east town-walls of Chester, in the abbey gardens at York, and on the south side of Caerleon. The auxiliary castella were hardly a tenth of the size, varying generally from three to six acres according to the size of the regiment and the need for stabling. Of these upwards of 70 are known in England and some 20 more in Scotland. Of the English examples a few have been carefully excavated, notably Gellygaer between Cardiff and Brecon, one of the most perfect specimens to be found anywhere in the Roman empire of a Roman fort dating from the end of the 1st century A.D.; Hardknott, on a Cumberland moor overhanging Upper Eskdale; and Housesteads on Hadrian's wall. In Scotland excavation has been more active, in particular at the forts of Birrens, Newstead near Melrose, Lyne near Peebles, Ardoch between Stirling and Perth, and Castle Cary, Rough Castle and Bar Hill on the wall of Pius. The internal arrangements of all these forts follow one general plan. But in some of them the internal buildings are all of stone, while in [v.04 p.0585] others, principally (it seems) forts built before 150, wood is used freely and only the few principal buildings seem to have been constructed throughout of stone.

We may illustrate their character from Housesteads, which, in the form in which we know it, perhaps dates from Septimius Severus. This fort measures about 360 by 600 ft. and covers a trifle less than 5 acres. Its ramparts are of stone, and its north rampart coincides with the great wall of Hadrian. Its interior is filled with stone buildings. Chief among these (see fig. 1), and in the centre of the whole fort, is the Headquarters, in Lat. Principia or, as it is often (though perhaps less correctly) styled by moderns, Praetorium. This is a rectangular structure with only one entrance which gives access, first, to a small cloistered court (x. 4), then to a second open court (x. 7), and finally to a row of five rooms (x. 8-12) containing the shrine for official worship, the treasury and other offices. Close by were officers' quarters, generally built round a tiny cloistered court (ix., xi., xii.), and substantially built storehouses with buttresses and dry basements (viii.). These filled the middle third of the fort. At the two ends were barracks for the soldiers (i.-vi., xiii.-xviii.). No space was allotted to private religion or domestic life. The shrines which voluntary worshippers might visit, the public bath-house, and the cottages of the soldiers' wives, camp followers, &c., lay outside the walls. Such were nearly all the Roman forts in Britain. They differ somewhat from Roman forts in Germany or other provinces, though most of the differences arise from the different usage of wood and of stone in various places.

Forts of this kind were dotted all along the military roads of the Welsh and northern hill-districts. In Wales a road ran from Chester past a fort at Caer-hyn (near Conway) to a fort at Carnarvon (Segontium). A similar road ran along the south coast from Caerleon-on-Usk past a fort at Cardiff and perhaps others, to Carmarthen. A third, roughly parallel to the shore of Cardigan Bay, with forts at Llanio and Tommen-y-mur (near Festiniog), connected the northern and southern roads, while the interior was held by a system of roads and forts not yet well understood but discernible at such points as Caer-gai on Bala Lake, Castle Collen near Llandrindod Wells, the Gaer near Brecon, Merthyr and Gellygaer. In the north of Britain we find three principal roads. One led due north from York past forts at Catterick Bridge, Piers Bridge, Binchester, Lanchester, Ebchester to the wall and to Scotland, while branches through Chester-le-Street reached the Tyne Bridge (Pons Aelius) at Newcastle and the Tyne mouth at South Shields. A second road, turning north-west from Catterick Bridge, mounted the Pennine Chain by way of forts at Rokeby, Bowes and Brough-under-Stainmoor, descended into the Eden valley, reached Hadrian's wall near Carlisle (Luguvallium), and passed on to Birrens. The third route, starting from Chester and passing up the western coast, is more complex, and exists in duplicate, the result perhaps of two different schemes of road-making. Forts in plenty can be detected along it, notably Manchester (Mancunium or Mamucium), Ribchester (Bremetennacum), Brougham Castle (Brocavum), Old Penrith (Voreda), and on a western branch, Watercrook near Kendal, Waterhead near the hotel of that name on Ambleside, Hardknott above Eskdale, Maryport (Uxellodūnum), and Old Carlisle (possibly Petriana). In addition, two or three cross roads, not yet sufficiently explored, maintained communication between the troops in Yorkshire and those in Cheshire and Lancashire. This road system bears plain marks of having been made at different times, and with different objectives, but we have no evidence that any one part was abandoned when any other was built. There are signs, however, that various forts were dismantled as the country grew quieter. Thus, Gellygaer in South Wales and Hardknott in Cumberland have yielded nothing later than the opening of the 2nd century.



Besides these detached forts and their connecting roads, the north of Britain was defended by Hadrian's wall (figs. 2 and 3). The history of this wall has been given above. The actual works are threefold. First, there is that which to-day forms the most striking feature in the whole, the wall of stone 6-8 ft. thick, and originally perhaps 14 ft. high, with a deep ditch in front, and forts and "mile castles" and turrets and a connecting road behind it. On the high moors between Chollerford and Gilsland its traces are still plain, as it climbs from hill to hill and winds along perilous precipices. Secondly, there is the so-called "Vallum," in reality no vallum at all, but a broad flat-bottomed ditch out of which the earth has been cast up on either side into regular and continuous mounds that resemble ramparts. Thirdly, nowhere very clear on the surface and as yet detected only at a few points, there are the remains of the "turf wall," constructed of sods laid in regular courses, with a ditch in front. This turf wall is certainly older than the stone wall, and, as our ancient writers mention two wall-builders, Hadrian and Septimius Severus, the natural inference is that Hadrian built his wall of [v.04 p.0586] turf and Severus reconstructed it in stone. The reconstruction probably followed in general the line of Hadrian's wall in order to utilize the existing ditch, and this explains why the turf wall itself survives only at special points. In general it was destroyed to make way for the new wall in stone. Occasionally (as at Birdoswald) there was a deviation, and the older work survived. This conversion of earthwork into stone in the age of Severus can be paralleled from other parts of the Roman empire.



The meaning of the vallum is much more doubtful. John Hodgson and Bruce, the local authorities of the 19th century, supposed that it was erected to defend the wall from southern insurgents. Others have ascribed it to Agricola, or have thought it to be the wall of Hadrian, or even assigned it to pre-Roman natives. The two facts that are clear about it are, that it is a Roman work, no older than Hadrian (if so old), and that it was not intended, like the wall, for military defence. Probably it is contemporaneous with either the turf wall or the stone wall, and marked some limit of the civil province of Britain. Beyond this we cannot at present go.

III. The Civilization of Roman Britain.—Behind these formidable garrisons, sheltered from barbarians and in easy contact with the Roman empire, stretched the lowlands of southern and eastern Britain. Here a civilized life grew up, and Roman culture spread. This part of Britain became Romanized. In the lands looking on to the Thames estuary (Kent, Essex, Middlesex) the process had perhaps begun before the Roman conquest. It was continued after that event, and in two ways. To some extent it was definitely encouraged by the Roman government, which here, as elsewhere, founded towns peopled with Roman citizens—generally discharged legionaries—and endowed them with franchise and constitution like those of the Italian municipalities. It developed still more by its own automatic growth. The coherent civilization of the Romans was accepted by the Britons, as it was by the Gauls, with something like enthusiasm. Encouraged perhaps by sympathetic Romans, spurred on still more by their own instincts, and led no doubt by their nobles, they began to speak Latin, to use the material resources of Roman civilized life, and in time to consider themselves not the unwilling subjects of a foreign empire, but the British members of the Roman state. The steps by which these results were reached can to some extent be dated. Within a few years of the Claudian invasion a colonia, or municipality of time-expired soldiers, had been planted in the old native capital of Colchester (Camulodūnum), and though it served at first mainly as a fortress and thus provoked British hatred, it came soon to exercise a civilizing influence. At the same time the British town of Verulamium (St Albans) was thought sufficiently Romanized to deserve the municipal status of a municipium, which at this period differed little from that of a colonia. Romanized Britons must now have begun to be numerous. In the great revolt of Boadicea (60) the nationalist party seem to have massacred many thousands of them along with actual Romans. Fifteen or twenty years later, the movement increases. Towns spring up, such as Silchester, laid out in Roman fashion, furnished with public buildings of Roman type, and filled with houses which are Roman in fittings if not in plan. The baths of Bath (Aquae Sulis) are exploited. Another colonia is planted at Lincoln (Lindum), and a third at Gloucester (Glevum) in 96. A new "chief judge" is appointed for increasing civil business. The tax-gatherer and recruiting officer begin to make their way into the hills. During the 2nd century progress was perhaps slower, hindered doubtless by the repeated risings in the north. It was not till the 3rd century that country houses and farms became common in most parts of the civilized area. In the beginning of the 4th century the skilled artisans and builders, and the cloth and corn of Britain were equally famous on the continent. This probably was the age when the prosperity and Romanization of the province reached its height. By this time the town populations and the educated among the country-folk spoke Latin, and Britain regarded itself as a Roman land, inhabited by Romans and distinct from outer barbarians.

The civilization which had thus spread over half the island was genuinely Roman, identical in kind with that of the other western provinces of the empire, and in particular with that of northern Gaul. But it was defective in quantity. The elements which compose it are marked by smaller size, less wealth and less splendour than the same elements elsewhere. It was also uneven in its distribution. Large tracts, in particular Warwickshire and the adjoining midlands, were very thinly inhabited. Even densely peopled areas like north Kent, the Sussex coast, west Gloucestershire and east Somerset, immediately adjoin areas like the Weald of Kent and Sussex where Romano-British remains hardly occur.

The administration of the civilized part of the province, while subject to the governor of all Britain, was practically entrusted to local authorities. Each Roman municipality ruled itself and a territory perhaps as large as a small county which belonged to it. Some districts belonged to the Imperial Domains, and were administered by agents of the emperor. The rest, by far the larger part of the country, was divided up among the old native tribes or cantons, some ten or twelve in number, each grouped round some country town where its council (ordo) met for cantonal business. This cantonal system closely resembles that which we find in Gaul. It is an old native element recast in Roman form, and well illustrates the Roman principle of local government by devolution.

In the general framework of Romano-British life the two chief features were the town, and the villa. The towns of the province, as we have already implied, fall into two classes. Five modern cities, Colchester, Lincoln, York, Gloucester and St Albans, stand on the sites, and in some fragmentary fashion bear the names of five Roman municipalities, founded by the Roman government with special charters and constitutions. All of these reached a considerable measure of prosperity. None of them rivals the greater municipalities of other provinces. Besides them we trace a larger number of country towns, varying much in size, but all possessing in some degree the characteristics of a town. The chief of these seem to be cantonal capitals, probably developed out of the market centres or capitals of the Celtic tribes before the Roman conquest. Such are Isurium Brigantum, capital of the Brigantes, 12 m. north-west of York and the most northerly Romano-British town; Ratae, now Leicester, capital of the Coritani; Viroconium, now Wroxeter, near Shrewsbury, capital of the Cornovii; Venta Silurum, now Caerwent, near Chepstow; Corinium, now Cirencester, capital of the Dobuni; Isca Dumnoniorum, now Exeter, the most westerly of these towns; Durnovaria, now Dorchester, in Dorset, capital of the Durotriges; Venta Belgarum, now Winchester; Calleva Atrebatum, now Silchester, 10 m. south of Reading; Durovernum Cantiacorum, now Canterbury; and Venta Icenorum, now Caistor-by-Norwich. Besides these country towns, Londinium (London) was a rich and important trading town, centre of the road system, and the seat of the finance officials of the province, as the remarkable objects discovered in it abundantly prove, while Aquae Sulis (Bath) was a spa provided with splendid baths, and a richly adorned temple of the native patron deity, Sul or Sulis, whom the Romans called Minerva. Many smaller places, too, for example, Magna or Kenchester near Hereford, Durobrivae or Rochester in Kent, another Durobrivae near Peterborough, a site of uncertain name near Cambridge, another of uncertain name near Chesterford, exhibited some measure of town life.

As a specimen we may take Silchester, remarkable as the one town in the whole Roman empire which has been completely [v.04 p.0587] and systematically uncovered. As we see it to-day, it is an open space of 100 acres, set on a hill with a wide prospect east and south and west, in shape an irregular hexagon, enclosed in a circuit of a mile and a half by the massive ruins of a city wall which still stands here and there some 20 ft. high (fig. 4). Outside, on the north-east, is the grassy hollow of a tiny amphitheatre; on the west a line of earthworks runs in wider circuit than the walls. The area within the walls is a vast expanse of cultivated land, unbroken by any vestige of antiquity; yet the soil is thick with tile and potsherd, and in hot summers the unevenly growing corn reveals the remains of streets beneath the surface. Casual excavations were made here in 1744 and 1833; more systematic ones intermittently between 1864 and 1884 by the Rev. J.G. Joyce and others; finally, in May 1890, the complete uncovering of the whole site was begun by Mr G.E. Fox and others. The work was carried on with splendid perseverance, and the uncovering of the interior was completed in 1908.



The chief results concern the buildings. Though these have vanished wholly from the surface, the foundations and lowest courses of their walls survive fairly perfect below ground: thus the plan of the town can be minutely recovered, and both the character of the buildings which make up a place like Calleva, and the character of Romano-British buildings generally, become plainer. Of the buildings the chief are:—

1. Forum.—Near the middle of the town was a rectangular block covering two acres. It comprised a central open court, 132 ft. by 140 ft. in size, surrounded on three sides by a corridor or cloister, with rooms opening on the cloister (fig. 5). On the fourth side was a great hall, with rooms opening into it from behind. This hall was 270 ft. long and 58 ft. wide; two rows of Corinthian columns ran down the middle, and the clerestory roof may have stood 50 ft. above the floor; the walls were frescoed or lined with marble, and for ornament there were probably statues. Finally, a corridor ran round outside the whole block. Here the local authorities had their offices, justice was administered, traders trafficked, citizens and idlers gathered. Though we cannot apportion the rooms to their precise uses, the great hall was plainly the basilica, for meetings and business; the rooms behind it were perhaps law courts, and some of the rooms on the other three sides of the quadrangle may have been shops. Similar municipal buildings existed in most towns of the western Empire, whether they were full municipalities or (as probably Calleva was) of lower rank. The Callevan Forum seems in general simpler than others, but its basilica is remarkably large. Probably the British climate compelled more indoor life than the sunnier south.