chapter xvii.), in vain tried there, or in other parts, to find any

traces of old buildings. (_Archæologia_, vol. xxxv. p. 97.)

[33]See Dr. Guest’s _Early English Settlements in South Britain; Proceedings of the Archæological Institute_, Salisbury volume, p. 57.

[34]“Nova Foresta, quæ linguâ Anglorum Ytene nuncupatur,” however, says Florence of Worcester (vol. ii. pp. 44, 45, ed. Thorpe); but the Keltic origin of the word is better.

[35]Ashley is connected with Esk and Usk, and refers to water rather than wood.—_errata_

[36]The names of the fields in the various farms adjoining the Forest—Furzy Close, Heathy Close, Cold Croft, Starvesall, Hungry Hill, Rough Pastures, &c. &c.—are not without meaning. The common Forest proverb of “lark’s-lees,” applied to the soil, pretty clearly, too, shows its quality.

[37]Manwood defines a forest “a certaine territorie of woody grounds and fruitful pastures.” _A Treatise of the Lawes of the Forest._ London, 1619. Chap. i. f. 18. Wedgwood (_Dictionary of English Etymology_, vol. ii. p. 34) shows the true meaning of the word, by connecting it with the Welsh _gores_, _gorest_, waste, open ground, and _goresta_, to lie open.

[38]See Mr. Davies’s paper on the Races of Lancashire, _Transactions of the Philological Society_, 1855, p. 258. In _Domesday_, as before, under Clatinges, p. xviii. a, we find, “Silva inutilis,” that is, a wood which has no beech, oak, ash, nor holly, but only yews or thorns, equivalent to the entry, “Silva sine pasnagio,” under Anne, p. xix. a. (See, too, Ellis, _Introduction to Domesday_, vol. i. p. 99.) Whilst under Borgate, p. iv. b, we find, “Pastura quæ reddebat xl porcos est in forestâ Regis.”

[39]See Manwood, as before, ff. 1-5.

[40]In the Charta de Forestâ of Canute (Manwood, f. 3, sect. 27) mention is made in the forests of horses, cows, and wild goats which are all protected; and from sect. 28 it is plain that, under certain limitations, people might cut fuel. These, with other privileges, such as killing game on their own lands (see sect. xxx. f. 4)—for, by theory, all game was the King’s—were compensations given to the forester for being subject to Forest Law.

Further, from the Charta de Forestâ of Henry III. (Manwood, ff. 6-11), we find that persons had houses and farms, and even woods, in the very centre of the King’s forests; and the charter provides that they may there, on their own lands, build mills on the forest streams, sink wells, and dig marl-pits, referring, most probably, in the last case, to the New Forest, where marl has been used, from time immemorial, to manure the land; and, further, that in their own woods, even though in the forest, they might keep hawks, and go hawking. (See f. 7, sects. xii., xiii.)

It shows, too, that there was a population who gained their livelihood, as to this day, by huckstering, buying and selling small quantities of timber, making brushes, and dealing in bark and coal, which last article evidently points to the Forest of Dean. (F. 7, sect. xiv.)

We must not imagine that the Charta de Forestâ of Henry III. was entirely a series of new privileges. They were, with some notable exceptions, simply those rights which had been received from the earliest times in compensation for some of the hardships of the Forest Laws, and which had been wrested away, probably by Richard or John, but which had never been granted to those who dwelt outside the Forest. (On this point see especially “Ordinatio Foreste,” 33rd Edward I., _Statutes of the Realm_, vol. i. p. 144. And again, “Ordinatio Foreste,” 34th Edward I., sect. vi., same volume, p. 149, where the rights of pasturage are re-allowed to those who have lost it by the recent perambulation made in the twenty-ninth year of the King’s reign.)

I think we may, therefore, gain from these clauses, especially when taken in conjunction with those of the Charta de Forestâ of Canute, a tolerably correct picture of an ancient forest—that it consisted not merely of large timber and thick underwood, a cover for deer, but of extensive plains,—still here preserved in the various _leys_—grazed over by cattle, with here and there cultivated spots, and homesteads inhabited by a poor, but industrious, population.

[41]See chapter ix. p. 97, footnote.

[42]See _Domesday_, as before, p. xxix. b., under Einforde.

[43]See chapters viii. p. 87, and x. p. 114.

[44]The following translation is made from the original in the Record Office. Southt Plitai Foreste, A^o viii.^o E. I.^mi “The metes and boundaries of the New Forest from the first time it was afforested. First, from Hudeburwe to Folkewell; thence to the Redechowe; thence to the Bredewelle; thence to Brodenok; thence to the Chertihowe; thence to the Brygge; thence to Burnford; thence to Kademannesforde; thence to Selney Water; thence to Orebrugge; thence to the Wade as the water runs; thence to the Eldeburwe; thence to Meche; thence to Redebrugge as the bank of the Terste runs; thence to Kalkesore as the sea runs; thence to the Hurste, along the sea-shore; thence to Christ Church Bridge as the sea flows; thence as the Avene extends, as far as the bridge of Forthingebrugge; thence as the Avene flows to Moletone; thence as the Avene flows to Northchardeford and Sechemle; and so in length by a ditch, which stretches to Herdeberwe.” It is this old natural boundary which, as stated in the preface, we have adopted for the limits of the book. A copy of the original may be found in the _Journals of the House of Commons_, vol. xliv., appendix, p. 574, 1789.

[45]This may also be found, with the perambulation made in the twenty-second year of Charles II., in the _Journal of the House of Commons_, vol. xliv., appendix, pp. 574, 575, 1789. It is also given in Lewis’s _Historical Enquiries upon the New Forest_, appendix ii. pp. 174-177.

[46]This is not the place to say more on this most important chapter of English history. See, however, on the subject, _The Great Charter: and the Charter of the Forest_, by Blackstone, Introduction, pp. lx.-lxxii. 1759. For the oppressions which still existed under the shelter of the Forest Laws, see the preamble to the “Ordinatio Foreste,” 34th Edward I. _Statutes of the Realm_, vol. i. p. 147.

[47]“Quid et quantum temporibus cujuslibet regis nullo modo eis constare potest.” The conclusion of the perambulation. Some little difficulty attends these perambulations. From _Domesday_, it is certain that the Conqueror afforested land on the west of the Avon at Holdenhurst, Breamore, and Harbridge. And amongst the MSS of Lincoln’s Inn Library we find a copy of a charter of William of Scotland, dated, curiously enough, “Hindhop Burnemuth, in meâ Novâ Forestâ, 10 Kal. Junii, 1171.” (See Hunter’s “_Three Catalogues_,” &c., p. 278, No. 78, 1838.) It would seem, from what Edward’s commissioners say, that these afforestations, which had taken place since Henry II’s time, were all made inside the actual boundaries of the Forest. It has been generally supposed that the perambulation in the eighth year of Edward I. was the first ever made of an English forest. This is not the case, for in the Record Office, in the Plita Foreste de Cōm. Southt LIII^tio R. H. III., No. III., may be found the perambulation of a forest in the north of Hampshire.

[48]For a good account of all details connected with the history of the New Forest, see the Sub-Report by the Secretary of the Royal New and Waltham Forest Commission, _Reports from Commissioners_ (11), vol. xxx. pp. 267-309, 1850, and also the Fifth Report of the Land Revenue Commissioners in 1789, published July 24th of that year, to be found also in the _Journals of the House of Commons_, vol. xliv. pp. 552-571.

[49]See “The humble petition of Richard Spencer, Esq., Sir Gervas Clifton, Knight and Baronet, and others, to enter upon the New Forest and Sherwood Forest,” &c. &c. Record Office. Domestic Series, Charles II., No. 8. f. 26, July 21st, 1660.

[50]MSS. prepared by Mr. Record-Keeper Fearnside, quoted in the Secretary’s Sub-Report of the Royal New and Waltham Forest Commission, _Reports from Commissioners_ (11), vol. xxx. p. 342.

[51]See Grant Book at the Record Office, 1613, vol. 141, p. 127—“4th October, a Grant to Richard Kilborne, alias Hunt, and Thomas Tilsby (of) the benefitt of all Morefalls within the New Forest, for the terme of one and twenty years.”

[52]See “The humble petition of Captayne Walter Neale” for “two thousand decayed trees out of the New Forest, in consideracion” of 460_l._, which he had advanced to his company engaged in Count Mansfeldt’s expedition. Record Office. Domestic Series, No. 184, Feb., 1625, f. 62.

[53]See warrant from Charles II. to the Lord Treasurer Southampton, that “Winefred Wells may take and receive for her own use” King’s Coppice at Fawley, and New Coppice and Iron’s Hill Coppice at Brockenhurst. Record Office. Domestic Series, No. 96, April 1st, 1664, f. 16. Three years before this there had been a petition from a Frances Wells “to bestowe upon her and her children for twenty-one yeares the Moorefall trees in three walks in the New Forest, ... and seven or eight acres of ground, and ten or twelve timber trees, to build a habitation.” The petition was referred to Southampton, who wrote on the margin, “I conceive this an unfit way to gratify this petitioner, for under pretence of such Moorefall trees much waste is often committed.” Record Office. Domestic Series, No. 34, April 2nd, 1661, f. 14. Hence the reason of Charles’s warrant in the case of Winefred Wells, as he knew that the Lord Treasurer was so strongly opposed to any such grants.

[54]See the report of Peter Pett, one of the King’s master shipwrights, “Touching the fforests of Shottover and Stowood.” Record Office. Domestic Series, No. 216, f. 56. i. May 10th, 1632. The New Forest, however, seems from this report to have been much better in this respect.

[55]See “Necessarie Remembrances concerning the preservation of timber, &c.” Record Office. Domestic Series. Charles I., No. 229, f. 114. Without date, but some time in 1632.

[56]9th and 10th of William III., chap. xxxvi, 1693. An abstract of the Act may be found in the _Journals of the House of Commons_, vol. xliv., appendix, pp. 576-578.

[57]To show how for years the Forest was neglected and robbed, we find, from a survey made in James I.’s reign, 1608, that there were no less than 123,927 growing trees fit for felling, and decaying trees which would yield 118,000 loads of timber; whilst in Queen Anne’s reign, in 1707, only 12,476 are reported as serviceable. See Fifth Report of the Land Revenue Commissioners, _Journals of the House of Commons_, vol. xliv. p. 563. The waste in James I.’s and Charles I.’s time must have been enormous, for from the “Necessarie Remembrances” before quoted we find that there were not in 1632 much above 2,000 serviceable trees in the whole Forest.

[58]See, as before, Fifth Report of the Land Revenue Commissioners, pp. 561, 562, and especially the evidence of the under-steward, Appendix, 583. As far back as February 20th, 1619, we find that James I. gave the Earl of Southampton 1,200_l._ a year as compensation for the damage which the enormous quantity of deer in the Forest caused to his land. Letter from Gerrard to Carleton, Feb. 20, 1618/1619, Record Office. Domestic Series, No. 105, f. 120. Gilpin (vol. ii. pp. 32, 33, third edition) states that in his day two keepers alone robbed the Forest to the value of 50,000_l._

[59]_Journals of the House of Commons_, vol. xlvii. pp. 611-792; vol. lv. pp. 600-784.

[60]See the evidence in the _Parliamentary Papers_, 1849, Nos. 513, 538. Of the Forest Rights and Privileges, the secretary to the New Forest Commission writes: “The present state of the New Forest in this respect is little less than absolute anarchy.” (_Reports of Commissioners_ (11), vol. xxx. p. 357, 1850.) It should be distinctly understood, as was shown in the last chapter, that these Rights had their origin as a compensation to those whose lands had been afforested by the King, and who were, in consequence, subject to the Forest Laws, and the injury done by the deer. Now that the injury is no longer sustained, and the exercise of the Prerogative has ceased, so ought also the privileges. The Crown, however, has not pressed this, and the Rights are thus still enjoyed. _A Register of Decisions on Claims to Forest Rights_, with each person’s name, and the amount of his privileges, was published in 1858.

[61]The present statistics of the Forest are—Freehold estates, being private property, within the Forest boundaries, 27,140 acres; copyhold, belonging to her Majesty’s manor of Lyndhurst, 125; leasehold, under the Crown, 600; enclosures belonging to the lodges, 500; freeholds of the Crown, planted, 1,000; woods and wastes of the Forest, 63,000: total, 92,365 acres. The value of timber supplied to the navy during the last ten years has been, on the average, nearly 7,000_l._ a year. The receipts for the year ending 31st of March, 1860, derived from the sale of timber, bark, fagots, marl, and gravel, and rent of farms and cottages, &c., were 23,125_l._ 6_s._ 6_d._; whilst the expenses for labour, trees, carriage of timber, and salaries, were 12,913_l._ 1_s._ 7_d._; thus showing a considerable profit. (From the Thirty-eighth Report of the Commissioners of her Majesty’s Woods and Forests.) The management of the Forest is now in the hands of a deputy-surveyor, three assistants, and eight keepers; whilst four verderers try all cases of stealing timber, turf, and furze.

[62]See further, on the condition of the Forest population, chapters xv. and xvi. When stripping bark and felling timber in the spring, the men can earn considerably more than at other times. The average wages are two shillings a day for ordinary labourers, but all work, which can be, is done by the piece.

[63]In the _Rolls of Parliament_, vol. i. p. 125, A.D. 1293, 21st Edward I., is an account of a vessel, the _All Saints_, “de Hethe juxta Novam Forestam,” which, laden with wine from Rochelle, was wrecked and plundered on the Cornish coast.

[64]A little beyond Hythe is a good example of Mr. Kemble’s test (see the _Saxons in England_, vol. i., Appendix A, p. 481) for recognizing the Ancient Mark. To the north lies Eling, the Mark of the Ealingas, and in regular succession from it come the various hursts, holts, and dens, now to be seen in Ashurst, Buckholt, and Dibden. The last village has a very picturesque church, its roof completely thatched with ivy, disfigured, however, by a wretched spire. In _Domesday_ it possessed a saltern and a fishery, and a wood with pannage for six hogs (sylva de 6 porcis). Two hydes were taken into the Forest. Eling, at the same time, maintained two mills, which paid twenty-five shillings, a fishery and a saltern, both free from tax. The manor was bound, in the time of Edward the Confessor, to find half-a-day’s entertainment (_firma_) for the King. For a curious extract from its parish register, see chapter