of cities, castles, camps, or other military antiquities that had been hitherto totally unknown among us; the parts called the wastes appeared never to have been trodden by any human foot since the ruin of the buildings and streets, which he could easily trace by the foundations, though they were covered with grass. An account of these discoveries he has now published, with representations of the Roman inscriptions and sculp tures. There are two walls which cross the north of England, beginning about three miles more eastward than Newcastle, and extending ten miles farther west than Carlisle, at the distance of near seventy miles. One of these walls is of turf, called Hadrian's Vallum; the other of stone, called the Wall of Severus; and both were intended to keep out the Picts or Scots, for which purpose Julius Agricola had before carried a series of forts or stations across the country in the same direction, and of equal extent. Hadrian's fence consists of a bank or wall on the brink of a ditch, another bank at the distance of about five paces within it, called the south bank, and a third nearly the same distance beyond the ditch to the north. These four works are every where parallel to each other, and probably formed a military way from one part of the old stationary fence to another. To Severus's wall, which is of stone, belongs the paved military way, which is now repairing; it is on the south side of the wall, but not in all parts parallel to it. On the north of this wall there is a large ditch, but no appearance of a bank, though the ground is in some places raised by the earth thrown out of it, and a little resembles a glacis. Castles were placed upon this wall at unequal distances, which, however, except two or three at the east end, are all less than a mile; the buildings appear to have been squares of sixty-six feet, of which the wall itself forms the north side. The space between these castles was equally divided by four watch towers, each of which appears to have been about four yards square at the bottom; and as the centinels in these towers were within call of each other, a communication might easily be continued along the whole line, without the help of speaking trumpets, or subterraneous pipes, contrivances which have been feigned in times of gross ignorance; and as men are generally credulous of wonders in proportion as the time when they are said to have happened is remote, this method of communication appears to have been believed by almost every writer on the subject, and particularly by Echard. There were also upon this wall eighteen larger forts, or stations; the mean distance between these would be about four miles, but they are placed much nearer to each other in the middle, and toward the extremities of the wall, than on the other parts. The wall generally runs along the ridge of the higher ground, the descent being to the enemy on the north; and to preserve this advantage it is frequently carried out, and brought back in an angle. Hadrian's vallum, on the contrary, is continued nearly in a straight line, from station to station; and the paved military way, where the wall passes along the brink of a precipice, or runs into angles, is carried so as to keep the level, and as much as possible the line. It does not appear that there were gates in this wall, or passes through it, except just in the stations, and where it is crossed by the great military ways from south to north. The original dimensions of the walls, ditches, banks, and military ways, cannot now be certainly known; but Hadrian's wall is thought to have been about eight feet broad, and twelve high, and that of Severus, in thickness measures seven feet, being nearly equal in all parts that remain entire, except at Kirkland's on the Solway Frith, where it is increased to nine feet, for a manifest reason, because at full sea the water has certainly flowed up to it. The breadth of the military way must have been about three Roman paces and a half, as it now measures near seventeen feet. Hadrian's ditch measures nine feet deep, and eleven feet over, which appears to have been its original dimensions, and Severus's ditch is every where wider and deeper. The distance between the two walls, is sometimes scarcely a chain, and sometimes more than fifty; and the distance between Severus's wall and the military way, is generally between two and three chains, sometimes six; and between the two forts west of Shewen Sheels, it is fifteen. The materials of which these walls are constructed may be certainly known by their remains. Hadrian's is of earth, which in some places is mixed with stone, but is no where strengthened by timber. Severus's is of free-stone, and where the foundation was not good, it is built on piles of oak; the interstices between the two faces of this wall are filled with broad thin stones, placed not perpendicularly, but obliquely on their edges; the running mortar or cement was then poured upon them, which, by its great strength and tenacity, bound the whole together, and made it firm as a rock. But though these materials are sufficiently known, it is not easy to guess where they were procured, for many parts of the wall are at a great distance from any quarry of free-stone; and though stone of another kind was within reach, yet it does not appear to have been any where used. It will also be difficult to conceive how the Romans could carry on such a work in the face of an enemy, except it be supposed that it was not then the bounds of their conquest, but that they possessed great part of the country farther north. Of the present state of these walls it will be sufficient to say, that in some places that of Hadrian cannot be traced without difficulty, though in others it continues firm, and its height and breadth are considerable. In some parts of the wall of Severus, the original regular courses are remaining; in some the stones remain upon the spot, though not in a regular disposition; in others, the rubbish is high and distinct, though covered with earth and grass, and frequently the vestiges are extremely faint and obscure. 1754, April. XXXI. Explanation of the Word BRANDONS, To Mr. Joseph Ames. SIR, IN the table fortwenty-four years, prefixed to the "Hore intemperate beate Marie Virginis secundum Usum Romanum," printed by Thielman Kerver, the first column is la date de l'année, the second les brandons, the third pasques, &c. and so afterwards to explain the table it is written, "Quis veult scavoir les brandons, pasques," &c. And it appears evidently from the table, that the brandons correspond to what we call Quadragesima, or the first Sunday in Lent. But how comes the first Sunday in Lent to be called Les Brandons? You will find nothing in any French dictionary, not even in Cotgrave or Menagius, that will clear this; and therefore we must try further. Now Sir Henry Spelman in his Gloss. tells us, that brandeum signifies a veil: these are the words, " Brandeum, opperimenti quidpiam sanctorum reliquiis impositum ne te mere violentur. Velum, sudarium. V. Baron. to. 1. § 12. 1. 5. et v. inf. Sanctuarium.* Flodoard. hist. eccl. rem. lib. 1. cap. 20. Corpus ejusdem rubeo constat brandeo involutum, et cap. 21. Sudarium-cum parte prædicti brandei scriniolo reconditum eburneo." But what has this to do with the case in hand? I answer, it was the custom at this penitential season to hang a veil before the altar, and all the ornaments of it, and to begin particularly to do it on this day, the first Sunday in Lent, from whence this first Sunday came to be called by the French les brandons, as much as to say, the Sunday of the Veils. All this I assert, upon the authority of Durandus, in his Rationale Divinorum Officiorum; from whom take the following passages: fol. CLXI. speaking of the first Sunday in Lent, he says, "Ab hac die usque ad Parasceuen opperiunt cruces, et velum ante altare suspendunt, de quo in prima parte dictum est sub ti. de picturis." The purport of which is," from this day unto Easter-even, they cover the crosses, and hang a. veil before the altar, of which I have already spoken in the first part of this work, where I treat of pictures and ornaments.' The place here referred to is fol. IX. where we read, "Sane omnia que ad ornatum pertinent, tempore qua-. dragesime removeri vel contegi debent. Quod fit secundum aliquos in Dominica de Passione, quod extunc divinitas fuit abscondita et velata in Christo.. Permisit enim se capi et flagellari ut homo, tanquam non haberet in se virtutem divinitatis. Unde in evangelio hujus diei dicitur, Jesus autem abscondit se, et exivit de templo. Tunc ergo cooperiunt cruces, i.e. virtus sue divinitatis absconditur. Alii hoc faciunt a prima Dominica Quadragesime, quod extunc ecclesia incipit de ejus passione agere. Unde eo tempore crux ab ecclesia non nisi cooperta portari debet," &c." Indeed all things which relate to ornament, in the time of Lent, ought either to be removed or covered, which by some is done ou Passion Sunday, because from that time the divinity of our Lord was hidden and veiled; for he suffered himself to be taken and whipt as a man, as if he had not the divinity inherent in him. From whence, in the gospel of this day, it is said, But Jesus hid himself, and went out of the temple. Then, therefore, they cover the crosses, that is, the power of the divinity is hidden. Others do this from the first Sunday of Lent, because from that time the church begins to treat and think of his passion, and therefore at that time * The author, though, has nothing concerning it in that place. the cross ought not to be carried from the church uncovered." Brandon, therefore, is a veil, and les brandons in the table, may not improperly be translated Veil Sundays. 1754, Nov. MR. URBAN, Yours, &c. S. P. Dec. 23, 1754. your magazine for last month, I observed S. P.'s explanation of the French word brandons, as it stands prefixed to Thielman Kerver's table. It appears, indeed, from his quotations, to mean a veil, and that it denotes the first Sunday in Lent; but yet I believe, it is not to be applied to that ceremony of veiling images and altars in the Roman church, which is not reckoned so material, as to need to acquaint the people with it, by inserting it in any table or calendar. The true meaning, therefore, is to be found, I presume, in that other ceremony of the same church, of veiling new married couples; which the priest performs, by spreading a veil over the parties, immediately after he has joined their hands. From the first Sunday in Advent to the Epiphany, and from Ash-Wednesday to Low-Sunday, marriages are forbid to be performed in church; but in some countries, as in Spain, where they allow of private marriages in houses, the marriage rites may be there performed, during these intervals of prohibition, all to the ceremony of veiling, which the priest defers till the parties come afterwards to church. It was necessary to acquaint the people with the times in which marriages could be solemnized, as they varied every year according to the moveable feasts; and it was customary in some places to place the notice thereof in their almanacks; and in Spain, where the marriage may be performed, but not the veiling, they at this day mark it in their almanacks in the following man ner: Advent Sunday, Veilings shut. Veilings open. Veilings shut. Veilings open. Now as these prohibitions may have varied, according to the times and countries, so, in Kerver's time, it might have been only from the first Sunday in Lent, instead of AshWednesday, and his diocese may have followed the custom in Spain of putting down veiling, instead of marriage, in their almanacks, or calendar tables; as the latter could be |