can be traced-but we have also found in Normandy a Robert 'Levilain' granting by that name lands to the Church, to be held in capite . . . feodaliter,' his godson Robertvillanus' attesting the grant. Thomas 'le vilein,' whom we have noted in 1247, had a seal of his own, which proves his status; while Simon Vilanus de Anesio,' alias 'Symon dictus Rusticus de Aniseio,' as he describes himself in his charter, completes the chain of evidence. It is certain, therefore, that Villain, which Mr. Bardsley assigns to status-a position of 'miserable serfdom' -was given as a nickname, and his illustrations are taken from sources which accord with this solution. His arguments strike us here as not quite consistent. He urges in one place that such names have been thrown off by the posterity of those who first acquired them as simple bondmen,' and yet, under nicknames, sets himself to explain the retention of 'Bond,' which bespoke slavery,' together with other names of a more humorous and broad character.' Had he not quoted decisive instances of Bond with the prefix 'le,' we might have been tempted to derive it, as of course does Mr. Barber, from the Anglo-Saxon Bondig, the Bondi' or 'Bundi' of Domesday. The prevalence of the name, no doubt, is in favour of Mr. Bardsley's derivation.

6

One of the great difficulties encountered in the study of surnames is caused by the length of the period during which they were taking form. If it began with the Normans at the Conquest, it had not closed when Williams the Welshman took, ́under Henry the Eighth, the name of Cromwell: for the Welsh, like other Celtic races, were slow to adopt the fashion. As an instance of what is meant by Mr. Barber's phrase as to tracing surnames to their source,' we may take that of Thynne (now Marquis of Bath). Mr. Bardsley classifies it as a nickname (Thin'), and duly adduces Thomas Thynne' from the Hundred Rolls (thirteenth century). Mr. Barber classes together Thin, Thynne, and Thing as a personal name, ‘Thin' in French and Thijn' in Dutch. Yet the family of Thynne has always been admitted to have been originally 'o' th' Inne,' and to have exchanged for that sobriquet, in the fifteenth century, its ancestral name of Botfeld. We are acquainted with all the evidence, among which 'Thomas de la Inne' occurs more than once. What is one to say in such a case as this?

Το

Such an instance illustrates the importance of caution, even where we seem on sure ground, as well as the need, for our knowledge of surnames, of further intelligent research. those who may feel inclined to approach so interesting a study we may offer a few suggestions as to the lines they should follow.

follow. The first essential is that they should master what has been done already. Where the origin of a name is already well ascertained, a fresh search involves, at the best, lost labour; at the worst, as in Mr. Barber's case, the substitution of error. Taking Mr. Bardsley's work as a starting point, they may explore, with Mr. Fergusson for their guide, the mysteries of Anglo-Saxon nomenclature, and trace its derivatives in our surnames. But we must warn them that, while professing to deal with Anglo-Saxon times, the learned writer has included in his lists, admirably classified though they are, a number of essentially Norman names. These belong to what Mr. Freeman termed, happily enough, the Teutonic nomenclature of Normandy.' To the philologist, no doubt, it is of interest to trace in the name-systems of England and the Continent the roots common to both; but to the student of our own nomenclature the sharp and absolute distinction found between that of Normandy and that of England, in the days before the Conquest, is an all-important fact. Mr. Fergusson's conclusions must also, as we have already explained, be checked by the actual evidence of records for the two centuries after the Conquest. Το mention only one of the sources latterly rendered available, 'Bracton's Note Book,' which Professor Maitland has so ably edited, has a copious index of names and places which deserves careful study. The parents of the parties to the cases it records were living about the close of the twelfth or beginning of the thirteenth century, and the number of Anglo-Saxon survivals among their names would have astonished Mr. Bardsley, no less than Mr. Freeman. It is notable that, even then, Godwine was first favourite. We may glance at two female names, 'Diamanda,' which gives us 'Diamond' and 'Dymond,'names found only in The Norman People,' where they are assigned to' Dinant' ; and 'Licoriza,' which gives us 'Lickorish (derived by Mr. Barber from Lickerigg).

In spite of the labour bestowed upon this subject, there are names innumerable yet to be explained, especially those derived from localities, which, as we have seen, are not included in the scope of Mr. Bardsley's work. Here Mr. Guppy comes to our help with a goodly number of trustworthy derivations. "The Norman People' is occasionally of use for local names in France, though the utter rashness of its author makes it a dangerous guide. Nor can we recommend Mr. Barber's work for the names of places. De Quency,' for instance, is known to be derived from a foreign locality, though he makes it identical with the personal name 'Chinesi,' i.e. Kinsige (which is now 'Kinsey '). Here again, in cases of difficulty, the student

will find that the Gazetteer must be supplemented by early

record evidence.

While holding, with such names as Walker, Butcher, and Baker, that the prima facie evidence is in favour of their obvious derivation, he will always have his eyes open to possible confusion and corruption. He will not, for instance, assume with Mr. Bardsley that Luckin and Luckock are diminutives of Luke, but will treat them as more probably corruptions of Lovekin and Lovecock, the more so as we have in Lufkin a transition form for one of them. So also he will bear in mind that a name of eminently Teutonic appearance may prove to be no survival from early Anglo-Saxon days, but a comparatively recent introduction from the enterprising Fatherland. In the same spirit he will carefully distinguish between those foreign names which belong to the period of the Conquest, and those which came in with the refugees of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. Savery or Savory, for instance, which Mr. Barber enters as a Huguenot and p. n.,' must also belong to the Middle Ages, for it occurs as Saveri' in the Hundred Rolls, and was Latinized in the twelfth century as 'Savaricus,' just as Aimeri (now Amery) was Latinized as Almaricus. Mr. Barber, by the way, wildly derives Amery through the Flemish Emery from a personal name, but Emery, also as the Flemish Emery' from Emmerich, a local name. For the study of refugee surnames, the excellent publications of the Huguenot Society now present copious materials.

The most practically useful work perhaps that could be undertaken by students would be the reading' of monastic cartularies, printed national and local records, and similar sources of evidence, just as works are 'read' for the New English Dictionary,' and the systematic noting of those names which have not yet been properly explained, and on which these records may throw fresh light. We do not wish to exaggerate the importance of such researches, nor will we claim for their results historical or ethnological importance. But those who may wish to occupy their leisure with an entertaining field of study will find one here in which they may hope to increase our knowledge of the subject, and, indirectly, to afford illustration of social, economical, and philological history, sufficient to vindicate their studies from the charge of dilettante curiosity.

ART.

ART. X.-1. Great Landowners of Great Britain and Ireland. By John Bateman. London, 1876.

2. Board of Agriculture, Agricultural Returns for Great Britain. 1893.

3. The Representation of the People Acts, 1832-1884. 4. The Local Government Acts, 1888 and 1894.

5. The Finance Act, 1894.

UCCESSIVE changes have placed power and the means of

and less wealthy masses. How this ascendency will be manifested, and how it will affect different classes of the community, are questions which can hardly fail to occur even to the unthinking. There are signs that, for the present at any rate, owners of land are likely to attract and to receive a large amount of attention from the representatives of the people. "Owners of land' is an expression which covers many descriptions of ownership, from the great territorial owner, chiefly to be found among the peers of the realm, down to the cottage proprietor, unius dominus lacertæ. Between these extremes lies the class of country gentlemen or squires, with possessions of (say) from 1500 to 25,000 acres, and with incomes derived from land of from 1000l. to 20,000l. a year. It is the position and prospects of this latter class that we propose to consider, with special reference to recent and prospective legislation.

It may be taken that in England and Wales there are nearly 4,000 squires, owning in the aggregate some twelve million acres. Not a few of them have inherited their acres and their mansions in unbroken male line from ancestors who survived the Wars of the Roses; others can trace a longer lineage, even (it may be) to a knight who crossed the Channel with William the Norman; others owe their origin to some copyholder or yeoman, who by ability, industry, or fortunate marriage became the founder of an estate. Others, again, are the descendants in more recent times of a West Indian planter, or of a successful country banker, brewer, lawyer, or merchant. Few, however, comparatively speaking, come of a strictly mercantile stock.

In any case the lot of the English squire was cast in a fair ground. Born and bred in the midst of scenes of tranquil beauty, in a climate open to the reproaches only of those who make a personal grievance of frost or rain, lord of a soil more fertile than that of any other European country, he started with a full share of Nature's treasures. A seat in Parliament was often within his reach in the administration of justice, in the county business transacted at quarter sessions, in the concerns of

his immediate neighbourhood, and in the management of his own property, his faculties and energies found ample everyday employment. Those among them (and they were not few) who used their opportunities, became excellent men of business, and benefactors in their generation. They were not obliged to work, but they worked hard and usefully. Nor is it easy to conceive more manly and wholesome recreation than the field sports of the English gentleman. If he is proud of proficiency in them, it is with justice; if he becomes sometimes too devoted to them, he may perhaps be pardoned.

Is it then wonderful that no one-not excepting an Irish peasant is more passionately attached to his home, to the old place,' than the squire and the members of his family? Is it wonderful that many added to the estates which were the source of so much profit and pleasure-like the late Sir Robert Peel, who used to carry with him a little book containing memoranda of his purchases-in the belief that land was the best and securest of investments? From the days of Sir Robert to the early seventies this confidence seemed justified. The position of the squire was probably never better. The Californian and Australian gold discoveries had inflated prices. The Crimean War and the Civil War in America kept them up. Railway communication and the increase of merchant enterprise opened new markets. The Poor Law Act of 1834 had stopped the worst administration of local funds that ever disgraced this country, and had removed a burden of poor rates which oppressed the land to an extent now hardly credible. The long struggle over the Corn Laws was settled; the condition of the labourers had been improved; farmers were doing well; and in many parts of the country there had been, between 1860 and 1878, a considerable rise in rents. Since 1846 there had been no distress calling for Parliamentary investigation.

With 1879 a new era began, and since that disastrous year 'agricultural depression' has seldom been out of the mouths of those connected with land. Coincidently with a succession of bad seasons, there commenced the importation of foreign produce which flows into the country in ever-increasing volume. It is not our purpose to discuss the operation of the causes, whether connected with the cost of labour and production, or with comparative standards of living, or with currency, or with railway rates, or with gambling in futures,' which have enabled foreigners and colonists to compete successfully in home markets. The hard fact with which we are concerned is that bad seasons, the stress of foreign and colonial competition, low prices, and (it must be added) extravagant living during the

good