more to the east, which seems to refute those that have supposed the ancient port of Gessoriacum to have been Boulogne; whereas, by Ptolemy's position, it must be either Dunkirk or Graveling, but the former most likely, both by the distance from the "Ixov axgov, being about twenty miles, or half a degree of longitude, to the east, or two-fifths of the whole coast of Flanders, which he makes but a degree and a quarter from the Acron Icion to the mouth of the Scheld, which he calls Ostia Tabudæ; as also for that Pliny, 1. iv. c. 16, speaking of Gessoriacum, says, the proximus trajectus into Britain from thence is fifty miles, which is too much, unless Gessoriacum were something more easterly than Calais. Dion Cassius makes the distance between France and Britain 450 stadia, or 56 miles, and says likewise it is the nearest, rò curroμTaTov. But this is in part amended by the explication given in the Itinerary of Antoninus, where the space between Gessoriacum and Rutupium is said to be 450 stadia (for this was the ordinary passage of the Romans into Britain,) Rutupium being more northerly, and Gessoriacum more easterly, than the termini of Cæsar's voyage, consequently the distance is more than thirty miles, which Casar had observed; and now lately an accurate survey has proved the distance between land and land to be 26 English miles, which shews how near Cæsar's estimate was to the truth. A farther argument (but not of equal force with the former, because of the modernness of the author, who wrote above 250 years after) may be drawn from the words of Dion Cassius, where he says, άκραν τινὰ προέχεσαν περιπλευσας iTigwσs TagExoμicon; that after his first anchoring, he sailed about a promontory to the place where he landed. Now there are no other promontories on all that coast but the South Foreland and Dengyness; the latter of which it could not be, because Cæsar says he sailed but eight miles, and the Ness itself is about ten miles from the south and nearest end of the Chalk-Cliffs, by the town of Hith; and, to have gone round that point to the other side, the distance must have been much greater; so that the promontory spoken of by Dion must needs be the South Foreland, and Cæsar must anchor near over against Dover, from whence sailing eight miles, he would double a head-land, and come to the Downs, which is such a coast as he describes in one place by apertum ac planum littus, and, in his fifth book, by molle ac apertum littus. As to Dion's word is Ta Tayn, what I have already said about it seems sufficient to prove that he means no more than the water's edge; and the etymologists derive it from réyyw, madefacio, because the wash and breach And this word τεναγή of the sea do always keep it wet. is used by Polybius for the sea-ouse: and, in another place, he speaks of the difficulty of landing at the mouth of a river, δια τὴν τεναγώδη παροδον, ob limosum accessum ; so that it is not to be doubted that it ought to be rendered, in this place, ad radum maris, rather than in paludibus. And so this objection against the assertion, that Cæsar landed in the Downs, which is known to be a firm champaign country, without fens and morasses, will be removed; and the whole argument will, it is hoped, be admitted by the curious, 1774, July. XIV. The Precise Place of Caesar's Landing in Britain disputed. MR. URBAN, THE ingenious disquisition (in your July Mag.) on the precise day and spot of Cæsar's landing in Britain, which, I think, is Dr. Halley's, published long ago in the Philosophical Transactions, No. 193, has long also been answered in the following manner by Dr. Battely:"Aristotle has distinguished these two, audis (sandy), and revayades (muddy). The Scholiast, on that passage of Apollonius Rhodius, Πάντη γαρ τέναγος, says, "Tivayos is a marshy place." Plutarch, relating the action performed by Scava, at the landing of Cæsar, says, "it happened in a place that was marshy, and full of water, and near some muddy streams," which expressions seem clearly to intimate, that there was, in the place where they fought, a river, or some muddy stream, such as can scarcely be found on the Deal coast; for there is only sand, than which nothing can be more steady, or more proper for a firm footing, on which account it used even to be spread in the theatres." Dr. Battely, therefore, supposes, (and so do those great antiquaries, Burton, Horsley, and Gale) that "Cæsar landed not in the Downs, but in the mouth of Richborough-harbour, the ancient Portus Rutupinus. That exactly agrees with Dion's description. A promontory was there; that being doubled, such a harbour appeared as Cosar sought, "fit to receive a number of large ships." There, * In his Antiquitates Rutupina, of which an abridgement has lately been published, as is usual at the mouths of rivers, was a marshy and muddy shore, on which Caesar's soldiers leaping from their vessels could not "keep their footing" [firmiter insistere]. On the. same promontory, if Plot and Darell be right in their conjecture, was Cæsar's naval camp, and from thence the place was called Cæsar's Camp. As to Cæsar's saying that "he sailed about eight miles from the first place, and then anchored on a plain and open shore," a distance which (from Dover) is undoubtedly more suitable to Deal than to Richborough, be it observed, 1. That the words "eight miles," octo millia passuum, do not occur invariably in all the editions of Cæsar. 2. That there are other places on that coast no less difficult of access than Dover, on account of the wonderful cliffs by which Cicero affirms that the approaches to the island are fortified. 3. Who but must allow, that Casar, sailing near an unknown coast, with the wind and tide in his favour, of whose force, he acknowledges, his people were ignorant, being driven perhaps farther than he suspected, might possibly mistake in his calculation, especially when we consider how unskilful and inaccurate the ancients were in measuring distances by sea, and remember that this great commander, who never erred in war, is charged, however, by Cluverius, with erring in his measurement of our island. 4. Though Cæsar says, In Britanniam trajectum esse cognoverit circiter millia XXX. a continenti, and the cliffs of the North Foreland are at a much greater distance, the reading in the most authentic copies is "XXXX." This also is approved by those learned writers, Is. Casaubon, Chifflet, and Merula, and is most clearly confirmed by Strabo; who says, that "Cæsar's passage to Britain was 320 furlongs, or 40 miles:" and all experienced seamen know that this is the exact distance between the mouth of Richborough harbour and Boulogne; for that this was the ancient Gessoriacum from whence Cæsar sailed, Dr. Battely has also, in my opinion, clearly proved. But for that I must refer to his work, observing only, that, though Dion Cassius, Pliny, and Antoninus, all make the distance between Gessoriacuin and Rutupiæ above 50 miles, in these numbers there is apparently an egregious mistake; for how could Britain be distant from the continent " 50 miles or more," when Cæsar, by the testimony of Strabo, relates that the most commodious harbour of Gaul was no more than forty miles distant from the most celebrated harbour of Britain? In short, the promontory which Dion mentions, was probably neither the South Foreland, nor Dengyness, but the utmost extremity of the shore, on the left hand of those who entered Richborough harbour, now, perhaps, by the returning of the waves, far distant from the sea. That Cæsar landed in our island on August 26, in the afternoon, Dr. Halley seems clearly to have proved; but, for the reasons above given, your readers, I am apt to think, will still be of opinion, that the place where Cæsar landed was Rutupiæ, or Richborough, and not the Downs, or Deal. 1774, Sept. I am, Yours, &c. CRITO. XV. Caesar's passage over the Thames. In a letter from Dr. Stukeley to Andrew Coltce Ducarel, LL.D. F. S. A. KNOWING well your love for ancient learning, especially that of our own country, I need not plead the title of friendship to render the subsequent account agreeable to you, being the result of my observations in the afternoon of a journey I took to Chertsey. I first went with eager steps to view the abbey, rather the site of the abbey; for, so total a dissolution I scarcely ever saw; so inveterate a rage against every the least appearance of it, as if they meant to defeat even the inherent sanctity of the ground. Of that noble and splendid pile, which took up four acres of ground, and looked like a town, nothing remains; scarcely a little of the outward wall of the precinctus. The gardener carried me through a court on the righthand at the south side of the house, where, at the entrance of the kitchen garden, stood the church of the abbey; I doubt not, splendid enough. The west front and towersteeple was by the door and outward wall, looking toward the town and entrance to the abbey. The east end reached up to an artificial mount along the garden-wall. That mount, and all the terraces of the pleasure-garden on the back-front of the house, are entirely made up of the sacred rudera and rubbish of continual devastation. Human bones of the abbots, monks, and great personages, who were buried in great numbers in the church, and cloisters which lay on the south side of the church, were spread thick all over the garden, which takes up the whole church and cloisters; so that one may pick up handfuls of bits of bones at a time every where among the garden-stuff. Indeed, it put me in mind of what the Psalmist says: "Our bones lie scattered before the pit: like as when one breaketh and heweth wood upon the earth." cxii. 8. Foundations of the religious building have been dug up, carved stones, slender pillars of Sussex marble, monumental stones, effigies, brasses, inscriptions, every where; even beyond the terraces of the pleasure garden. The domains of the abbey extend all along upon the side of the river for a long way, being a very fine meadow. They made a cut at the upper end of it; which, taking in the water of the river, when it approaches the abbey, gains a fall sufficient for a water-mill for the use of the abbey and of the town. Here is a very large orchard, with many and long canals, or fish-ponds; which, together with the great moat around the abbey, and deriving its water from the river, was well stocked with fish. Notwithstanding it is so well fenced, in the ninth century the abbey was sacked by the barbarous Danes, the abbot and ninety monks murdered. I left the ruined ruins of this place, which had been consecrated to religion ever since the year 666, with a sigh for the loss of so much national munificence and national history. Dreadful was that storm which spared not, at least, the churches, libraries, painted glass, monuments, manuscripts; that spared not a little out of the abundant spoil to support them for the public honour and emolument. But, sure, it was highly culpable not to give back a sufficient maintenance to the parochial clergy, and without it, little hope can the possessors entertain for the prosperity of their families. One piece of history belonging to this place I must mention, lately retrieved by our friend the Rev. Mr. Widmore. The body of that murdered monarch, Henry VI. was deposited in this church under a sumptuous mausoleum. King Henry VII. intending he should be beatified into a saint, removed it to Windsor chapel; thence to Westminster abbey, where it still rests, but in what place particularly is unknown. The court of Rome demanding too high a price for the favour, the king dropped his design. I now resumed my former ardour to pursue the footsteps of the great Cæsar, who passed the Thames near here. When I lived formerly in London, I made many excursions in quest of his nocturnal mansions, and the track of his journeyings in his two expeditions hither. Very largely |