title which his father had previously enjoyed in right of his marriage.

There was another bastard, of like reputation as a gallant rebel, whose name has asserted a place in our English annals, and who played a part of some importance on the field of Flodden, though the incident escaped Sir Walter Scott when writing his Marmion. This was "the bastard Heron," as he was always called, both in his lifetime and in the subsequent records of his family. He was an illegitimate brother of Sir William Heron, of Ford Castle in Northumberland, which Sir William died in 1535, aged 59. Sir Richard Heron, the genealogist of the family (in folio, 1797), found reason to conclude that the bastard was older than his legitimate brothers; and indeed he appears to have exercised a more fatal influence on Sir William's own destiny than is easily to be paralleled under similar circumstances, unless we conclude that he possessed some advantage from his seniority in years. The story, in Sir Richard Heron's words, is as follows:

"John Heron the bastard, his brother, having, in an affray at a border meeting, unfortunately killed Sir Robert Ker,* butler to James IV. and warden of the middle marches, Henry VII. delivered Sir William to the King of Scotland his sonin-law, who kept him a prisoner in Fastcastle Tower, in the Mers, on a rock above the Frith of Forth, until the battle of Flodden Field,-so called from Flodden Hill, the property of Sir William Heron, situate opposite Ford Castle. This battle was fought 9 Sept. 1513, upon a challenge sent by the Earl of Surrey to James a few days before the battle. By the first article of the message, Surrey accepts an offer the King had made to Elizabeth Lady Heron, wife of Sir William, not to destroy Ford Castle (which he had taken), on the Earl's releasing Lord Johnston and Alexander Hume, his prisoners; and he further offers to release Sir George Hume and William Carre two other prisoners in exchange for Sir William Heron. James refused these proposals by his herald, but accepted the challenge. The proposals

refute the charge of the Scotish historians, (Drummond, and Lindsay of Pitscottie) that Lady Heron had a criminal connexion with their King, and betrayed him to Surrey."

Shortly before the battle of Flodden, Alexander Hume had entered the English border with 3000 horse (as described by Buchanan), but having fallen into an ambush was defeated, and with his brother George Hume was taken prisoner. Buchanan assigns this defeat, and the fact of the bastard Heron appearing openly in Northumberland, as the main provocation of the Scotish invasion. He states that George Hume was exchanged for the Lord Hern of Ford; but Sir Richard Heron remarks that the Earl of Surrey's message shows that such exchange could not have taken place prior to the battle.

When Sir William Heron returned home, he found his castle had not been spared by the invaders; for a survey of the borders made in 1542 describes it as having been burnt by the late King of Scots, a little before he was slain at Flodden. (MS. Cotton. Calig. B. viii.) This fact certainly does not countenance the scandalous whispers respecting King James and the lady of Ford; for Cupid's fire would scarcely have ignited the border fortress. Yet such are the charms of scandal, however ancient, that I believe the story of King James's gallantry with the Lady Ford (as she is called by Hume) has hitherto met with general acceptance from all our historians, notwithstanding the indignant denial of the family genealogist. That the poet of Marmion (though not cognisant, as I have already stated, of the story of the bastard Heron,) should have readily caught at the presumed dalliance of James in the towers of Ford was perhaps a matter of course; but Sir Walter Scott has represented the matter in the worst possible light when he says in his notes to that poem that "Part of the pretences of Lady Ford's negociations with James was the liberty of her husband." the poet descends into plain prose, and makes that the vehicle of such grave accusations, he may be fairly asked for

When

Scott's

the authorities upon which his historical statements are founded. She was a lady who would not have been insulted with impunity in her life-time, for she was a sister of Robert Lord Ogle, a Baron of the realm.

To return to John Heron the Bastard. His history is related by Sir Richard the genealogist, as follows::

"Henry VII. summoned him to answer for killing Ker. He professed to obey, but at a village near Newark his servants gave out that he was dead of the plague, and pretended to bury him. He returned into Northumberland, and lay for some time concealed in the Cheviot mountains, where, being outlawed in both kingdoms, he collected and trained a troop of horse, with which he ranged the borders. When the right wing of the English army was defeated in Flodden Field, and Sir Edmund Howard, who commanded it, was left alone on the ground, the bastard at the head of his troop threw himself between the two armies. Some accounts of this famous battle join Lord Dacre with him; but Hall says, that Heron the Bastard, though much wounded, rescued Sir Edmund, and that "Lord Dacre with hys company stode styl all daye unfoughten withall."

The closing scene of the Bastard's career is described by Holinshed, in a passage which escaped the notice of Sir Richard Heron. On the 22d May, 1524, being Trinity Sunday, five hundred Scots had made an inroad into England, and had plundered the market folks on their way to the great fair kept that day at Berwick. "The v. of Julye next ensuing, Sir John a Fenwike, Leonarde Musgrave, and bastarde Heron, with diverse other Englishe captaynes, having with them nine hundrethe men of warre, entred the Mers, minding to fetche out of the same some bootie; and encountring with the Scots, being in number two thousand, after sore and long fight, caused them to leave their grounde, and to flie, so that in the chase

were taken two hundreth Scottes, and many slaine, and amongst them were diverse gentlemen; but Sir Raufe a Fenwike, Leonard Musgrave, and the bastard Heron, with xxx. other Englishmen wellhorsed, followed so farre in the chase that they were past rescues of their companie; wherof the Scottes being advised, sodainly returned, and set on the Englishmenne, which, oppressed with the multitude of their enimies, were soone overcome, and there was taken Sir Raufe a Fenwike, Leonard Musgrave, and sixe other; and bastarde Heron, with seaven other, were slayne. The residue by chaunce escaped. The other Englishmen, with their two hundreth prisoners, returned safely into Englande." (p. 1532.)

Such was the characteristic death of the bastard Heron. The name of his wife is not on record; but he left at least two sons, John and William, one of whom (probably the former) became a peaceful inhabitant of London. His funeral, in the reign of Queen Mary, is thus recorded in the Diary of Henry Machyn the merchanttaylor:

"1557. The xvij. day of August was the obseque of master Heyron, the sune of the basterd Heron of the North, with cot armur and pennon of armes, with torches and lyght."

The church where the funeral took place is not specified.

William Heron, citizen of London, son of John, died without issue, and by his will, dated 12th July, 1580, left his cousingerman, Thomas Heron of Newcastle, son of William, and then 40 years of age, the heir of his property. (Esc. 23 Eliz. pars 2, No. 83.)

These details, Mr. Urban, I beg to supply as an additional note to Machyn's Diary, where I was at a loss to identify "the bastard Heron," not having then made acquaintance with Sir Richard Heron's rare genealogical volume. Yours, &c.

JOHN GOUGH NICHOLS.

tomy being one of the regular studies of my profession. These circumstances, I trust, you will consider some excuse for my troubling you with the following account, which I have not written without the full permission of Mr. Neville himself. I should also have written sooner, but the paragraph to which I allude escaped both Mr. Neville's attention and my own until a day or two ago.

The number of skeletons exhumed was no less than 188. Of these there were only about twenty which I could with confidence put down to the female sex. In

many cases the bones were in such a crumbling state that it was impossible to form a correct opinion on the subject. There were the bones of several children, and also some few of very old people, as shown by the shape of the lower jaw; but by far the greater number were those of middle-aged males. Amongst such a number there were of course specimens of all sizes; but, from the general character, I should say that they belonged to a strong and powerful race of good stature. The femora and humeri were large and strong, and had almost invariably the insertions of the various muscles strongly developed. The teeth were generally good, and the whole set, both in the upper and lower jaw, was often complete. They had very broad crowns, and were much worn down, so much so, in some instances, that I should think during life they must have been almost level with the gum. This worn state was observed not only in the molars, but even in the front teeth. There were but few instances of decay. The crania were generally of the elongated form, and this, I think, was their only peculiar characteristic. The superior development varied much, as is natural amongst such a number; but, taken as a whole, I must do them the justice to say that there was a fair average of frontal bones, well calculated to contain lobes of a size worthy of the most civilised races of the present day. This character might fairly be given to them generally. There were of course occasional specimens of extremes, some of the heads being altogether remarkably fine, and some others having but very poor superior develop. ment; the tendency to length, however, applied to all. The relics found with these various skeletons were of the same character throughout, the same things being found with every kind of skeleton, the only difference being that some appeared richer than others. There were, however, none so poor as to be without an iron knife, and very few who had not a spear also. The more fortunate had also a sword and a boss, and so on; the richest having, besides these implements, ornaments of various kinds, as beads, brooches, bronze pins, &c. One or two

were also favoured with little buckets, or situlæ, made of staves of wood bound together by ornamented bronze. These various relics were found indiscriminately with all kinds of skeletons; by which I mean that no peculiarity of shape in the cranium was any criterion as to what was to be found with it. In no instance was this the case.

From these circumstances I am led to think that the opinion of your informant, that in this cemetery there were two distinct classes of people and of two distinct periods, is erroneous. On the contrary, there seems to be every reason to believe that the people were of one race, differing only in worldly wealth, and that the period of their interment extended only over the time in which such a number of persons died in the neighbourhood. As far as it is possible to judge from dry bones, I should also say that this cemetery was used in a time of peace, as I found but few marks of violence, and those which I did observe were old fractures which had been united, and united in a manner which did credit to the surgeons of the day. There were some few cases which showed the ordinary diseases of bone, but not in one instance did I see anything indicating violence at the time of death.

I may mention that the most marked specimen of poor development of the superior part of the cranium was preserved, and is now in the museum of the Archæological Institute. Other specimens of different kinds should have been preserved; but, besides the difficulty occasioned by the repugnance which every one must in some degree feel to taking up and distributing the mortal remains of one's fellowcreatures all over the country, most of the specimens were in such a brittle and fragile state, that to preserve them when all the earth was taken out of them was almost impossible. It gives me great pleasure to inform you, in conclusion, that it is Mr. Neville's intention to publish an illustrated catalogue of the very numerous and interesting relics which were collected during the excavation.

Yours, &c.

JOHN LANE OLDHAM.

truer way of accounting for this circumstance is the destruction of these relics during the many civil wars of which this island for successive centuries was the scene-one barbarous people after another, first the Britons, after the departure of the Romans, in their wars with each other, next the Saxon, and then the Dane, deluged like a torrent the face of the

country, and swept away most, though not all, the nobler remains of Roman greatness. That very many magnificent structures of that polished people did adorn our land, is fully attested by the numerous fragments of columns, pediments, friezes, &c. which accident has from time to time exhumed from the bowels of the earth. In proportion, however, as the vestiges of Roman occupancy diminish, so have the difficulties of the antiquary increased. In the absence of written records, what has he to rely upon for any information on the state of Roman Britain, after the date of the last Itinera, except the casual discoveries of relics of that people? For be it remembered the Itineraries do but tell us of the towns or stations in the earlier part of the Roman æra in Britain, but of the two centuries or more that succeeded the last of the Itineraries we are left in utter darkness. Antiquaries have too generally lost sight of this, and, by supposing there were no stations but what are contained in the Itineraries, have been for altering the numerals on every occasion, to make the distance correspond with some favourite hypothesis. No sooner are some fixed and heavy remains brought to light, than the next question is asked, to which of the stations named in the Itinerary of Antoninus or Ptolemy shall we assign these ruins ? Little argument is needed to convince a willing antiquary, and, where certainty is unattainable, our imagination grows warm in proportion as truth assumes a more shadowy form.

When we consider how great a number of altars have been brought to light during the last half century, especially in the north of England and in Scotland, it seems to me a point of great importance to the future antiquary, that as correct a description as possible of all of them should be attempted in some common receptacle. Such a publication, whether in the form of an enlarged edition of Horsley, or as an independent work, provided it embraced all that has ever been discovered in Great Britain relating to Roman antiquities, especially a more careful comparison of all the known inscriptions of that people in this island, would constitute a book of reference most valuable to the future inquirer. By such means a clue would be afforded to the decyphering of difficult inscriptions that might hereafter be discovered, and much light shed upon the Roman history of Britain by a careful consideration of the contents of each inscription, its æra, and the place where it was found.

I have been led to these remarks by the advantage I have myself experienced in arriving at a truer knowledge of some

Roman inscriptions in my own neighbourhood, by a careful inspection of many Roman altars in Scotland. In a Roman station, situate nearly three miles from my own residence, near Scammonden, in the parish of Huddersfield, many very interesting relics have been brought to light from time to time, affording undeniable evidence of a station of the first class. That station, from the discoveries of the late Mr. Watson, as well as from some that I have myself made, I believe to be the site of the ancient Cambodunum. Many of your readers will be aware that there is no part of the Roman dominion in ancient Britain that has given birth to so much controversy as this once important fortress. There are some, however, I believe, who, though they readily admit, from the many fixed and heavy remains found at the Ealdfields (the name it is now known by), that it is a Roman station, yet give the preference to Greetland, where, too, some fixed and heavy remains were discovered in the time of Camden, deeming it to combine more of the usual requisites observed by the Roman tacticians in the selection of their stations, especially one so important as Cambodunum. However, this is not the opportunity I shall take to discuss the relative merits of the two claimants. All I purpose to do, in the present paper, is to make a few selections of inscriptions, which have been brought to light from time to time in the line of the wall of Antoninus during the works of the Edinburgh and Glasgow Railway. Seldom have many years elapsed without one accidental circumstance or another exposing to light some interesting memorials of its Roman constructors.

If anything can mitigate the regret we feel for the destruction of this ancient boundary line of civilization in Britain, it must be the discovery of so rich a store of antiquarian wealth, and the extrication from the concealment of thirteen or fourteen centuries, of so many sculptured altars, and so many legionary inscriptions, which have shed a light on Roman affairs in Britain; but which otherwise might have continued for centuries more in the bowels of the earth. The secrets too which have been revealed of the very names of some of its Roman constructors at a distance of so many ages, are calculated to awaken feelings of emotion. It was whilst decyphering these altars in the Hunterian Museum at Glasgow, as well as in some other repositories of a similar kind, that I noticed so many inscriptions of the sixth legion, the "Legio sexta victrix." This legion, it is well known, came over to Britain in the reign of Hadrian, and as no altar or inscription of that legion has been found in any part of