at the king's charges as long as he pleases: the master of each ship receiving sixpence a day; the constable sixpence; and all the rest of the men three-pence a day." Through the genial influence of royal favour, the town, as may be supposed, increased rapidly in extent; and contained, besides the castle, a priory of Austin canons; a free royal chapel, within the castle; an hospital, dedicated to St. Mary Magdalen; and, it is said, four parish churches, of which two only remain. Of all these public edifices, imperfect, indeed, are the written memorials that have been preserved. If any of them can lay a reasonable claim to antiquity more remote than the reign of William the Conqueror, it is probably due to one or both of the parish churches; but all researches into the history of these have hitherto proved fruitless and unsatisfactory *. In the absence of authentic history, an attempt has, however, been made to award a Roman origin to the castle, under the supposition that William did not build, but that he merely repaired it. We will first state the facts, and then consider the truth or the probability of this supposition. It is stated in the Saxon Chronicle, that "Earl William came up from Normandy into Pevensey, on the eve of St. Michael's mass; and soon after his landing was effected, they constructed a castle at the port of Hastings." Now, as two weeks only elapsed between the landing of William and the victory which gave him the sovereignty of the kingdom, some writers have contended, (Bishop Lyttleton among the rest,) that the time was too short for the erection of such a massive structure. as the castle: that William must have found it there on his arrival: that he could only have put it into a proper state of defence to be useful to him; and that "as it presents the same kind of thick walls of stone and flint, held together by an extremely hard mortar, mixed with pebbles, as those buildings which are allowed to be Roman, that it was probably the work of that warlike people." Neither Leland nor Camden have noticed the date when this castle was built, nor, indeed, by whom it was erected. But an older authority than either (John Brompton) says, that it was the work of William of Normandy; but with the same discrepancy as the Saxon Chronicle. The passage, however, which runs thus,-"Haraldus Rex Anglorum eodum die Eboracum reversus, dum cum summâ lætitiâ pro tantâ victoriâ pranderet, nuncium sibi dicentem audivit, Willielmus Dux Normanniæ apud Pevenescye juxta Hasting applicans, et littora occupans, castellum apud Hastyngum construxit +"-shows very clearly the author's view of this point. Writing in a dead language, he was not so likely to use words confusedly or carelessly, as if he had written in his vernacular tongue. And to use construxit in the sense of reparavit, would be an error that could only happen under the reign of Bacchus. The sense which was intended to be conveyed by the Saxon Chronicle probably is, that as soon as William arrived at Hastings, he began to build a castle, (an event as intelligible as it is probable, and that John Brompton, who was evidently indebted to the Chronicle for a part of his account, thoughtlessly translated the perfect tense of the Saxon into the same Bishop Lyttleton on the Antiquity of the Hastings' Churches. tense in Latin, without considering the possibility of the action described, or detecting the error of the Saxon scribe. If this be not the meaning of the passage, then must the castle be of Roman origin, or William must have had the previous assistance of the black dog who used to accompany John Daundelyon, two or three centuries afterwards, and was celebrated for building the castle of the said John, in the space of one night. To enter into all the differences and coincidences between this castle and an acknowledged Roman one, would lead us into an argument too long to be brought within the limits of the present paper; we must content ourselves, therefore, with adducing one, which is the total absence of the long, thin bricks and tiles; which, by contrast of colour, and regularity of disposition among the stone-work, add so greatly to the beauty of the design, and are the never-failing accompaniments of all castellated buildings of Roman workmanship. The absence of these indications is, of itself, sufficient evidence in disproof of all the opinions favourable to this castle being of so remote an origin. The castle, grand and imposing as a ruin, stands in frowning majesty upon a rocky cliff, 400 feet in height, and has all the characteristics of a Norman feudal military structure. The walls, composed of stone and flint, now fast decaying, and covered with the mould of ages, are of great strength, measuring eight feet in thickness, surrounded by ditches nearly 60 feet deep, and more than 100 feet in breadth. In this castle was a royal free chapel, dedicated to the Virgin Mary, with at dean and seven prebends, to which Henry de Augo, or Err, (Tanner says*,) was a great benefactor, if not the founder. The name of Thomas à Becket occurs among those of the deans. A mistake occurs in the old editions of Dugdale's Monasticon, in which the charter of this fraternity is printed as belonging to the Priory of Austin Canons. In the 5th of Edward the Third, the dean and chapter petitioned the king to repair the castle walls to secure their chapel, which they stated to be "sita infra claustrum predictum, quod, per frequentes inundationes maris, pro majori parte, devastatur." The king granted the prayer of the petition, and also gave them permission to enclose the castle with walls. At the dissolution of monasteries, the 26th of Henry the Eighth, the deanery was valued at 207., and the seven prebends at 41. 13s. 5d., and the whole was granted to Sir Anthony Browne. Of the priory of Augustine Canons, dedicated to the Holy Trinity, the editors of the last edition of Dugdale † remark," No register of Hastings Priory is at present known, nor are the editors acquainted with any impression from the seal of the convent. So complete and entire has been the decay of this priory, that it may be almost literally said to have scarcely left one stone upon another to repeat the story of its existence. A very small fragment of an old wall, in a farm-yard adjoining to a cottage on the scite where it stood, is the only discernible trace now left of it." Athelstan, who first regulated the coining of money in England, by law, had a mint at this town; but no specimens have yet been disco Bibliotheca Monastica. ↑ Monasticon Anglicanum, c. vi. p. 168. vered of the coinage; nor of that of Lewes and Chichester, where he had similar establishments *. The ancient harbour, like the ancient town to which it belonged, is forgotten by history, and has been so completely destroyed, that it may be almost said to have suffered total annihilation. The present town had formerly a good harbour, although the traces of it are few, and not always visible. It was formed by a wooden pier, which projected into the sea to a considerable length, in a south-easterly direction, and from a point below the situation of the Six-gun battery. A violent storm in the beginning of the reign of Queen Elizabeth 'totally destroyed this pier and harbour; and although an attempt was made to re-build the pier, the work was never completed. Camden says, that "Elizabeth granted a contribution towards the making a new harbour at Hastings, which was begun, but the contribution was quickly converted into private purses, and the public good neglected." Considerable progress was made with the foundation of this work, of which several rows of piles, some very large pieces of timber, and huge masses of stone remain, and are often visible at half-ebb. These are the remains which are now known by the name of the Stade; although credulity and ignorance, always constant companions, attach ideas of remote antiquity to them, and profound mystery to the name by which they are designated †. Such is the force and power of the sea on this coast, that a chain-pier would be more suited to it than one composed of solid work, and might be put up at less than half the cost of a similar erection, if built with stone. Among the other vestiges of the olden time worthy of notice in the neighbourhood are, the remains of a Roman encampment, situated on a hill to the eastward of the town. It was of great extent, strongly fortified, and from its elevated situation, commanded a very extensive lookout; but nothing certain is known as to when or by whom it was formed. Conjecture has given its construction to Vespasian, who was sent by Platius to reduce the Belgic Britons inhabiting the line of coast from Sussex to Cornwall; but it is noticed only as a conjecture, and not as founded on the slightest degree of authority. * Annals of the Coinage, c. i. p. 348. Stade was a term very commonly applied, in ancient times, to those erections which we now call piers and moles; one of the most celebrated of which, that of Alexandria, is not without its full share of mystery. Ammianus Marcellinus, speaking of the Heptastade, which ran out from Alexandria to the isle of Pharos, and formed the magnificent harbour of that city, says, that it was so named from the belief that it was the work of only seven days, although its length is nearly one thousand paces. Cæsar, however, gives its length as nine hundred paces, and says, that it formed a narrow road-way which joined the town to the island, on which the beautiful light-house was situated in the same manner as a bridge. Different opinions have been entertained on this subject by other ancient writers, which have been collected by Peter Bertius, in a scarce and curious work, "De Aggeribus et Pontibus hactenus ad mare exstructis." THE FAILURE AT BREST IN 1694. THE study of history has occupied, more or less, the attention of all persons of education, either to amuse the imagination, interest the passions, improve the understanding, or strengthen the principles. But while a real knowledge of this important department of literature operates in removing prejudices, a slight acquaintance with it is likely to engender very erroneous notions, from the want of candour and care which occurs in relations hastily written, and, it may happen, by party writers. Thus, from the want of a medium like the United Service Journal, the exploits of our forefathers have generally been handed down to us according to their quota of positive success; while the cases of failure have been stigmatized as "unfortunate attempts ""rash undertakings "or" disgraceful events,"-without our being allowed an insight into the facts of the question. We have been particularly struck with this remissness in Smollett's account of the transaction before us. It contains the truth, but not the whole truth; and a naval writer, as he was, might have paid a juster tribute to the indomitable valour displayed by so many of the land and sea forces employed. In the year 1693, both the French and English appeared to be pretty tired of the war then raging. After the defeat at La Hogue, Louis "le Grand" was so harassed and impoverished as to remain on the defensive, except in Catalonia; while King William, bearded by the Commons, and raising supplies with the utmost difficulty, was dispirited at the ill success of the expedition to the West Indies, the attack on Rooke's convoy, and the melancholy fate of Sir Thomas Wheeler and his squadron *. Intelligence, however, having been received of the designs of the French upon Barcelona, it was resolved by our government to prevent the junction of the Brest and Toulon squadrons, by despatching Russell to sea as early as the fleet could be got in readiness for sailing; but before that celebrated admiral arrived at Portsmouth, the Brest division had effected its departure from the Channel. Foiled in this project, it was then determined to attack Brest itself; unusual exertions were made to render the expedition formidable; and although Whig principles reigned in their zenith, presswarrants were issued, without regard to any protections." The grand fleet weighed and made sail from Spithead on the 30th of June, 1694; and having cleared the land, arranged the plan of operations, at a council of war held on board the Britannia, which was attended by seven English and six Dutch naval flag-officers, and four generals of the army. On the 5th of June, Admiral Russell detached a division under Lord Berkely for the destined service, and stood away with the remainder of the fleet for the relief of Barcelona. The combined squadron, which shaped its course for Brest, consisted of 29 sail of the line, English and Dutch, of which 10 were three-deckers; and there were 27 frigates, bomb-ketches, fire-ships, and tenders. A strong This brave admiral, who seemed born to misfortune, having been caught by a gale of wind on a lee-shore, three sail of the line and nine other vessels were lost, and the remainder of the squadron disabled. The Sussex, the flag-ship, foundered, and all hands perished, with the exception of two Moors, who were providentially saved. U. S. JOURN, No. 57, Aug. 1833. 2 G body of land forces was embarked, who were under the command of Lieut.-General Talmash *. The flag-ships were as follow:: On the 6th, the usual formality of a council of war took place, when it was resolved to sail into Camaret Bay, with colours flying, and anchor there, disembark the troops, and wait the event, before standing into Brest water. Major-General Lord Cutts advised landing all the grenadiers, amounting to about 600, a little before the rest of the forces, to reconnoitre intrenchments, and be ready to lead the forces landed to sustain them. This proposition was approved of, and his lordship very gallantly offered his services to conduct the movement, to which Lieut.-General Talmash consented. Meantime, the enemy having pensioned adherents in our cabinet, had received intelligence of our design, and had taken such precautions, under the direction of the celebrated Vauban, as to render the various positions in a manner impregnable; the sea front of their works was bristled with guns of the weightiest calibre, and strong bodies of cavalry and infantry were stationed in intrenchments at every commanding spot. On the evening of the 7th, the ships stood into Camaret Bay, with the tide; but as the wind was at N.N.E., they were under the necessity of working up, under a heavy fire from four mortar-batteries and the castle. This was coolly received, and at 7 P.M. the fleet came to an anchor between Camaret Bay and the Bay of Bertheaume, in sixteen fathoms water. A party of the army and navy officers now reconnoitred the points of attack, and on their report a plan of operations was formed. As the castle was advantageously situated for defending the landing-places, it was resolved that it should be battered by the Monk, of 60 guns, and a Dutch man-of-war of about the same force, while the landing was to be covered by three English, and three Dutch frigates. Lord Carmarthen solicited and obtained the command on this occasion; and Monsieur Mountergis, a person well acquainted with the locality, was appointed to accompany him. The morning of the 8th rose, however, in so dense a fog, that the appointed rendezvous was prevented by three or four hours; and on the vapours clearing off, besides the regular forts, and the new batteries, fourteen squadrons of cavalry were seen posted upon a convenient height on the west side of the bay, in readiness to dash upon any particular point. But these "uncomfortable prospects" did not delay the attack,-for the destined force moved onwards with a resolution and method that extorted the praise of their adversaries. Our * In Smollett's History of England, this officer's name is spelt Ptolemache, but I have followed the orthography of Lord Carmarthen. And in the "relation" of the success of his Majesty's forces at Tangier, against the Moors, "published by authority," in 1680, the conduct of Lieut.-Colonel Talmash is highly eulogized. |