should be given to "Old Iolo" as an antiquarian, is to judge him by his own works; and here his inconsistency will be glaring.

"Tradition," he says, "if it be not received in the bardic sense, is nothing but the wildly confused popular story of we know not what ; old wives' tales; the nonsense of those who jabber they know not what.” All his own elegant vocabulary.

Now, tradition, in the bardic sense, is that which is handed down orally and in rhyme. But was it always so well guarded that it could never be altered? Is rhyme so very difficult that to add to it or to change it was a thing impossible? What bardic tradition transmitted to posterity is at present difficult, indeed, impossible to say, for every thing we have now has come down to us by means of letters. But, says Iolo Morganwg, "it is wrong to confide in letters, which skulk in dens and dark corners; we know not whence they come into light, and often know not how they came into existence." If this be true,

let us ask the question, What is to be done with the works of the bards printed in the first volume of the Archæology? Must they go, because they have not been handed down by tradition, bardic tradition? Oh, no! Iolo knows better. And when it suits him, he can appeal to letters, "letters that transmit lies to posterity;"" for," says he, "we have it in MSS. of five hundred years standing," and this too let the reader remember, after he had said in the very same page, when oral tradition and letters clash, that "if a MS. has a little of the mould of age in it, we admit blindly more of what it says as truth than becomes a wise man."

But it is not intended to deny Old Iolo all credit. Far from it. All the writer would imply is, that it should be given to him with great caution, if not rigid scrutiny. Yet what scrutiny have his novel theories undergone at the hands of Mr. Williams? None, absolutely none; he has received all, as if he were imbibing solely the oracles of inspiration.

Old Jolo and his followers, for he has many, should shew a little reserve in abusing letters, when it is considered that, in order to support these novel theories, a constant appeal is made to MSS. which no one, until he discovered them, ever heard so much of as their existence; for they "skulked in dens and dark corners." In such a case it would have been wiser to have assigned to letters and MSS. a less opprobrious sentence than the sweeping one" of the scoundrel scribblecraft, that journeymen thief of priestcraft;" more particularly when it is considered that the ingenious invention-for we still call it an "invention,”—of the Coelbren, or the bardic alphabet, is grounded by himself, not on an original Coelbren, but on the faith of letters of a MS., and that, too, not one " moulded by age."

These, it must be admitted, are conflicting circumstances. They weaken sadly the authority of the great Chair. Let some one weed them out, or that authority must perish for ever.

IV. To examine the whole pile of consecrated rubbish upon which Mr. Williams has raised his history would be indeed a labour not very unlike the cleansing of the Augæan stable; for as Hercules left nothing but the stable standing, so, when our sweepings would

It

be well out, should we leave nothing remaining in this book, save its cover, with the elegant gold-embossed cross-keys. But we have neither time nor space to enter upon this examination. may not, however, be amiss, if, before we conclude, we point out the manner in which some species of evidence is handled by Mr. Williams. For instance, the early want of primates is thus logically proved.

"It does not appear that there were any primates at first in the British church." Of course there were none anywhere. But why not in the British church? "Because," says Mr. W., " Silurian bardism presented nothing analogous to the office!" Then in another place," The church had naturally and gradually become incorporated with bardism." And again, "The church, though in perfect accordance with the primary object of bardism, was, nevertheless, so different from the Druidical department in polity and doctrine, as to require a legal sanction for the transition."

To condemn this mode of writing it is impossible to use language too strong. For what does it amount to? Simply this: that the pure precepts of Christianity could not be incorporated with the foul maxims of Druidism," without," as he says further on, "the consent of the country, the neighbouring country, and particularly the tribe." Mr. Williams is an incumbent; he has the cure of souls; he is a preacher of the gospel; he has vowed, under circumstances the most awful and the most sacred, to drive away every strange and erroneous doctrine. Yet, notwithstanding all this, he is constantly labouring throughout this book to "incorporate"-that's his wordthe divine revelation of Christ with the blasphemous, foul, and infernal dogmas of British Druidism.

If he really possesses that acquaintance with the British Poems which he professes, (and it is not doubted that he does,) he must know that the old bardism scattered throughout these relics is very different from that which the world never yet heard of till the Chair of Glamorgan began to thunder it forth. He owns that "they were in possession of dogmas at variance with their Christian profession." Yet he tells us ("Old Iolo" again) that bards and priests of Christ were identical-that is, they served God and the devil; now would they worship Christ in the temple; now would they write poems as priests of the British God, Hu the Mighty, "The Dispenser of Good," " The Father of all the tribes on the earth," "Father Deon," "The Great Beli." This was Taliesin in the sixth century. But things are not better in the fourteenth. Iolo Goch, a bard of Owen Glendwr, says, "That Hu is the Mighty Sovereign, Emperor of the land and sea, and the Life of all that is in the world is he." Kent, one of the Lollards, who wrote A.D. 1450, directly charges his countrymen, the Welsh, with being idolators of the great Hu; and accordingly we have Llewellyn Moel, a bard of this period, alluding to his oxen, saying that "they are those of Hu the Mighty; his five angels you see with a golden harness of active, fiery flame”—that is, he is Beli the Sun! But we have not done yet. Rhys Brydydd, who wrote in the sixteenth century, says, "The smallest of the small is Hu the Mighty in the judgment

of the world. Over us (bards) he is the greatest and lord, we sincerely believe, and our GOD OF MYSTERY."

This, then, is bardism, hideous in its form, professing idolatry, and glorying in it; not, be it remembered, a bardism breaking forth when the light of the gospel was dim and obscure, and consequently affording some extenuation to its professors, but a bardism whose hideousness was exultingly gloried in when the sun was well up, and the light of the gospel had beamed upon the world for upwards of sixteen hundred years! The bardism of Glamorgan is ingenious, for it extenuates the paganism of the British bards; but then, it is the ingenuity of an Ireland, which falsifies the mould of the original. In vain do we hold out to the world a system of ethics, whose chief aim is to captivate and to palliate the ignorance of our ancestors, if the genuine relics of those very ancestors hold out another system which is directly and pointedly the reverse.

Let Mr. Williams, then, reconsider the whole argument. Let him apply himself diligently to represent the church in this period-and the writer thinks him equal to it-just as she was, and no more. Let him not suppose, from some innate, imaginary virtue, that a connexion between church and state is the very "ideal" of a pure church here on earth; and that this connexion can be worked out through the rotten links of a spurious bardism. This is the key to all his extravagances. It is the rock on which he has, without question, struck, in attempting to represent the ECCLESIASTICAL ANTIQUITIES OF THE CYMRI.

A Supplement to the authorized English Version of the New Testament, being a Critical Illustration of its more Difficult Passages from the Syriac, Latin, and earlier English Versions, with an Introduction. By the Rev. F. H. Scrivener, M.A. of Trinity College, Cambridge. London: Pickering. Vol. i. pp. 331. 8vo.

THE design of this work, as stated by the author, is to collect and review those passages of our authorized version of the New Testament, which a diligent collation with the original may shew to be inaccurate or obscure. It is "intended for the use of the student in the closet," and not to distract the minds of uneducated persons, or render them dissatisfied with our present version. It is not, in fact, designed to make out a case in favour of a new translation, but the contrary.

The writer cannot speak without some degree of caution of a work of which only the first volume has been put into his hands. But, from a pretty careful perusal of the greater portion of the present volume, he cannot but express a hope that the whole work may soon be completed. The introduction is extremely interesting and instructive, written with great clearness and good sense, and the criticism on particular passages (with one or two very trifling exceptions) have, as far as he has been able to examine them, thrown so much light on the text, that he cannot but recommend the work as one likely to afford the student of the New Testament very valuable assistance. The collation of the earlier English versions, Mr. Scrivener has annexed to every correction he proposes, "chiefly with a view of checking a rash spirit of criticism." They add materially to the usefulness of the volume.

The Rubrics of the Communion Service examined, with a view to Conformity. By the Rev. R. Wickham, M.A. of Christ Church, Oxford. London: Parker. pp. 27. 8vo.

A VALUABLE and well-timed pamphlet, written with much judgment and temper. Mr. Wickham endeavours to prove that the rubrics enjoining the offertory when there is no communion refer only to the case of there not being any, or a sufficient number of communicants present, and that they were intended to direct the minister how to close the service under such circumstances. And he further contends that the omission of the offertory at present is more in accordance with the spirit of the rubrics; that insisting on it in such a manner is to give legal sanction to the neglect of weekly communion. The pamphlet should be read, and the argument attentively considered by every one desirous of forming an opinion on the subject. The writer of this notice confesses that, in his judgment, Mr. Wickham has taken the correct view of the question; and if correct, one which cannot fail of giving relief to many who are perplexed by what present themselves to their consciences as conflicting duties.

Elevations, Sections, and Details of Saint Peter's Church, Wilcote, Oxfordshire. By J. C. Buckler, Esq., Architect.

A USEFUL and pleasing model for a small church or chapel in the decorated style, calculated to hold 150 persons. An estimate of the expense of erecting a church on the same scale accompanies the work.

Bidding of Prayers before Sermon no Mark of Disaffection to the present Government. By Charles Wheatly, M.A. (A new edition.) London: Leslie. pp. 39. 8vo.

THOUGH Wheatly is by no means to be relied on for accuracy of statements as an authority on the history of the Liturgy, this tract will be found of value to those inquiring into the history of the 55th Canon. And it is in a form to bind up with the octavo edition of his Commentary.

MISCELLANEA.

THE CAMBRIDGE CAMDEN SOCIETY-PROPOSED DISSOLUTION OF THE SOCIETY.

ON Thursday evening, February 17th, the forty-first meeting of the Cambridge Camden Society was holden at the usual place in the rooms of the Philosophical Society. The President took the chair at half-past seven o'clock, and twentyfour gentlemen were balloted for and elected.

The Lord Bishop of Newfoundland was admitted as a Patron by acclamation. The Bishop Elect of New Brunswick was admitted as a Patron by acclamation. A list of presents received since the last meeting was read by F. A. Paley, Esq., Hon. Sec.

The following Report from the Committee was read by the Rev. B. Webb, Hon. Sec.

REPORT.

"The Committee have to announce the election of twenty-six new members, including two colonial bishops.

"A grant of 10l. has been made towards the restoration of the decorative paintings in the chancel of St. Mary le Crypt, Gloucester.

"The fifth part of the Instrumenta Ecclesiastica' has been published during the vacation, as also the paper on the History of Christian Altars, which was read at the last meeting of the Society.

"The delay in the publication of the drawings of the chancel of All Saints', Hawton, has been chiefly owing to the difficulty of procuring paper of a sufficiently large size.

"The Committee have been able to assist the Bishop Elect of New Brunswick in procuring designs for churches and details for use in his diocese. An application has been received for designs for a church in the settlement of HongKong.

Among the presents received since November may be mentioned an interesting series of coloured full-sized drawings from the stained glass in the Sainte Chapelle, Paris, received from Professor Dyce, and the late publications of the Oxford Architectural Society, for which the best thanks of the members are due." The President then rose, and said, that the announcements he had just made of accessions to the Society, however gratifying, especially by their promise of the extension of the Society's usefulness in distant colonies, would not adequately supply the vacancies which he felt it his duty, though not required by the rules, to announce from the chair. The members were aware that one of their patrons, the Bishop of Exeter, had not only withdrawn, but had published his retirement and disapprobation to the world, assigning reasons of which it did not now become him to contest the validity, however much he might be prepared and desirous to disavow the imputations therein conveyed. Another of their patrons, the Bishop of Lincoln, had since withdrawn his name, on grounds similar to, and brought to his notice by, those adopted by the Bishop of Exeter; and subsequently the committee had received an intimation simply announcing the retirement of the Chancellor of the University, followed, as was to be expected by the usual etiquette, by that of the Vice-Chancellor. If the members were really animated, as he believed to be the case, by the principles which had always been professed by the Society, he felt assured that they would neither be surprised nor offended, however much they might be distressed, by the remainder of the Report of the Committee, the reading of which he had interrupted in order to secure for it their more serious attention:

"The circumstances just communicated to the Society by the President demand from the committee, at this the earliest opportunity, a statement of their view as to the manner in which these announcements ought to affect its conduct at the present juncture.

"The retirement of two of its episcopal patrons, accompanied in the case of one of them by public expressions of disapprobation, and followed by that of the Chancellor and his representative, have appeared to them to place the Society in a position incompatible with its character as an association of members of the Church and University. They feel satisfied that any advantages which might be expected from its continued operations would be insufficient to counterbalance the positive evil that must result from even an apparent disregard of the sentiments of those invested with authority. They therefore recommend unanimously that the SOCIETY BE dissolved.

"This recommendation can only be carried into full effect at the anniversary meeting. Till then the ordinary meetings, which have been already convened, will be held pro forma for the despatch of necessary business. The interval will be occupied in winding up the Society's affairs. The recommendation now announced will be submitted at that meeting for, what the Committee earnestly hope it will receive, its ratification."

This was received with a dead silence. It was evident that the announcement