It may be considered improbable that any new light can be thrown on the history of Mary Queen of Scots; but the interest in her romantic story never ceases. I have in my possession a document which relates to an important event in her life. I am inclined to make it known to the public in consequence of the recent publication by the Society of Antiquaries of the interesting communication by the Rev. R. S. Ellis, respecting the imprisonment, death, and burial in Denmark of the Earl of Bothwell (see Archaeologia, vol. XXXVIII).

When, in words which were prompted by others, Queen Anne of Cleves had declared, upon receiving the report of Convocation against the validity of her marriage with Henry VIII. that she at once accepted and approved their sentence, although she also declared that her case was a very hard and sorrowful one from the great love which she bore to the king; and when, further, she had written (under similar dictation) to her brother to announce this her acquiescence, and to assure him that the divorce need not cause any cessation of friendship between him and the sovereign who now called her “sister” instead of “wife;” it was no wonder that the separation appeared to excite little attention or sympathy either at home or abroad. The happy temper of equanimity which enabled Anne to bear her lot so calmly, with such fortunate results of peace and comfort for herself to the end of her days, prevented the arousing of any such interest as might have been wakened had she made some passionate appeal to her countrymen and friends, or refused to lay down at the king's bidding the rank to which he had called her. Only once (as it was supposed) when, in a short year and a half after the divorce, her successor was in the Tower awaiting her own condemnation, was there any step taken to urge the claims of Anne; and we may well believe that the then abortive negociation of her brother's ambassador, who in December 1541 sought to enlist the sympathies of Cranmer and of the Earl of Southampton in her behalf, was one which had hardly been undertaken with her knowledge and approval at a time when the perils of royal wifehood were being so evidently demonstrated.

Having lately had occasion to examine with some particularity the sequence of domestic events during the first four years of King Edward the Fourth, especially in connection with the movements, during part of that time, of the deposed King Henry and his consort, Margaret of Anjou, it has surprised me to find how confusedly the period in question has been treated.

The Roll of Accounts, which is here printed in full, is the property of Colonel Smyth of Welwyn, and was sent to the Society for exhibition by the Right Rev. the Bishop Suffragan of Nottingham, D.D., F.S.A. There are, in fact, two separate rolls, measuring in length, the first six feet six inches, the second twelve feet. Each roll is composed of sheets of paper sewn together, and the reason for the two being now joined is, that they were presented for audit as one account; and the receipt for the balance due to the king is still appended to them.

The folio MS. which I have the honour to exhibit to the Society, and which has been bound in calf and vaguely lettered Varia Curiosa, is a fragment consisting of 45 leaves, forming ff. 197-241 of the original compilation, and appears to belong to the latter part of the fifteenth century, and to be the production of some German artist of the Augsburg school. The treatise is of an astronomico-astrological character, and commences with some general observations headed “Concerning the whole of the heavens and stars,” which deal with astronomical distances, etc. The writer passes on (f. 199) to speak of the heaven of the fixed stars: “The firmament of heaven is a circle, in which circle are the fixed stars or the constellations. Under the same circle is another circle, that of the Zodiac.” He then proceeds (ff. 199A-210A) to treat of the Zodiacal Signs, and mentions whether each is diurnal or nocturnal.” Throughout the treatise he uses the formula: “—is a Sign of the heaven and has many stars.”

The Chapel of King Henry the Seventh, orbis miraculum, as Leland calls it, has passed through troublous times with less injury to itself than most of our ecclesiastical buildings have, and than its especially exposed position might lead us to expect; and it still possesses much of the rich furniture and decorations with which it was originally fitted up. Amongst the latter, of one hundred and seven stone images in niches which once adorned the interior, not less than ninety-five remain, and of the twelve missing ones, we can discover the subjects of some, and explain the absence of all. The outside was once also rich in images, as the empty niches still testify, and they seem to have stood there until the beginning of the last century. I have not found the exact date of their removal, but Dart says they were “taken away lest they should fall upon the heads of those who attend the Parliament.” They were forty-eight in number, the six eastern turrets having four niches apiece, and the eight others three. The outside of the Chapel is all new, but is a very good copy for the time when it was done. The pedestal under each niche has a scroll, with a name, as it were that of the figure formerly above, but, I fear, not worth much as evidence of what was originally there. The selection has a very modern look, and there seems to be no system of arrangement. Apostles, prophets, and kings are mixed up in the most complete confusion; but the apostles and evangelists are all there, as are the greater and lesser prophets.

In the spring of 1878 it was requisite to sink a pit, about twelve feet deep, on the south side of the nave of St. Paul's Cathedral, and within a few feet of the walls, for a gas-meter.

Near the bottom of this pit was found a fragment of a foundation which seemed to belong to the old Cathedral. It was evidently not of the Norman construction, because it was partly formed of Norman fragments. It seemed therefore to belong to the cloister or chapter-house.

It has long been known that King Charles I. of England, some two years or little more after his accession to the throne and marriage with Henrietta Maria, a daughter of Prance, ordered that a diamond should be engraved with his arms, as a signet, designing it probably for his Queen's private use.

Although such signet has been lost sight of and forgotten, the record still exists of payment made to the artist for executing the work, and from it alone have we hitherto derived that knowledge.

A knowledge of the working of the English Law of Attainder and Forfeiture for High Treason is essential to a proper understanding of the History of England in the Middle Ages, especially during the period of the Wars of the Roses.

Perhaps the working of the law can be shown best in individual cases. Let us select as examples the fortunes of the dignities and estates which but for forfeiture and other intervening circumstances would have centred in the ill-fated Edward Earl of Warwick, last male scion of the splendid House of Plantagenet.

The earthwork known as Cæsar's Camp or Castle Hill is one mile and three-quarters (3 kil.) to the north-west of Folkestone Harbour. It is a conspicuous object from the railway to all who look for it, being situated on the summit of the line of hills termed by geologists the Chalk Escarpment, and overlooking from a commanding position the whole of the low ground between it and the sea. A good view of it taken from the east may be seen in the frontispiece to Mr. W. Topley's Geology of the Weald. Geologically the ground on which the Camp has been constructed corresponds to that of Mount Caburn on the opposite side of the weald valley; both overlook the weald valley, but from opposite directions, both occupy the chalk ridges which bound the valley on three sides, and both are situated not far from the coast line on which that extensive geological area opens into the English Channel.

The commemoration in the Egyptian Calendar of the rising of the Dog Star is a subject that has excited the curiosity of historians and antiquaries from the time of Sir Isaac Newton to the present day. One of the most learned of modern Egyptologists, Herr Brugsch, who has himself written a work on the Egyptian Calendar, has admitted, in his latest book, that this great secular problem is as yet unsolved.

A discovery was made this afternoon in part of the monastic buildings of Westminster Abbey, which appears to me to be of sufficient interest to be worth laying before the Society of Antiquaries.

It is now twenty-three years since Mr. John Mitchell Kemble, in an address delivered before the Royal Irish Academy, drew attention to a small bronze object of unknown use in the museum of Dr. Petrie in Dublin. I have to acknowledge with much regret that so long a time has been allowed to elapse, and yet no illustration or complete description of this object has yet appeared; and I beg to offer the Society my sincere thanks for the opportunity now afforded of submitting to your consideration such drawings and photographs as I have been able to obtain of this interesting relic.

In a note to the communication of Dr. Gustav Oppert, on the Origin of the Æra Dionysiana (Archaeologia, vol. XLIV. p. 347), you paid me the compliment of mentioning a suggestion I had made for the correction of the Latin note to the year A.D. 625, which is found in the MS. of the Saxon Chronicle in the Bodleian MS. Laud, 636, and which, as it stands, is, as you observed, unintelligible. It runs thus: “Hic Cyclus Dionysii quinque decennovenalibus constans, hoc est, xcv. annis: sumitque exordium a xxx. anno Incarnationis Domini, et desinit in DCXXVI. anno.”

When some time ago I was describing the figures in Henry the Seventh's Chapel to the Society, there was one which I was unable to explain, but which had so many distinguishing marks that I suggested that it must be the image of All Hallows which the people of South Cave, in Yorkshire, wanted in 1495. The suggestion was not then made seriously, and was not printed with the description. I now, however, venture to repeat it, with a few remarks intended to show that this may after all be the true explanation of the figure.