In the year 1861 I had the satisfaction of laying before the Society of Antiquaries, and thereby making known to the world for the first time, the important fact that the great continental island of Australia had been discovered in the year 1601 by a Portuguese navigator, named Manoel Godinho de Eredia. Up to that time the earliest authenticated discovery of any part of the great southern land was that made a little to the west and south of Cape York by the commander of the Dutch yacht the Duyfhen, or Dove, about the month of March 1606. Thus the fact which I announced in 1861 gave a date to the first authenticated discovery of Australia earlier by five years than that which had been previously accepted in history, and transferred the honour of that discovery from Holland to Portugal. The document on which this fact, so entirely new to the world, was based, was a MS. Mappe-monde in the British Museum, in which, on the northwest corner of a country which could be shown beyond all question to be Australia, stood a legend in Portuguese to the following effect:— “Nuça antara was discovered in the year 1601 by Manoel Godinho de Eredia, by command of the Viceroy Ayres de Saldanha.” This mappe-monde had the great disadvantage of being only a copy, possibly made even in the present century, from one the geography of which proved it to be some two centuries older. Still, the mere fact of its being a copy laid it open to a variety of possible objections, which fortunately I was able to forestall by arguments that I believe to be unanswerable, and which I think I need not repeat now, as they are already printed in the “Archaeologia,” vol. xxxviii. I will merely say that I had the good fortune at the time to find a happy confirmation of what was stated in the map in a little printed work which described the discoverer as a learned cosmographer and skilful captain, who had received a special commission from the Viceroy at Goa to make explorations for gold mines, and at the same time to verify the descriptions of the southern islands.

On the 14th of March last I had the honour of laying before this Society some new facts which had fallen under my notice in connection with the early discoveries of the great continental Island of Australia. One of these new facts was the very promising circumstance that there had been found in the Royal Burgundian Library in Brussels, by M. Ruelens, one of the Conservators of the Library, who had obligingly communicated to me the fact, the original autograph report to King Philip III. of a discovery of Australia in 1601 by a Portuguese named Manoel Godinho de Eredia, which discovery I had been the first to make known to the world in a paper read before this Society on the 7th of March, 1861. The report was accompanied by maps and views and portraits, and as at the time of my announcing its discovery to you I had received through M. Ruelens an obliging promise from the Chevalier d'Antas, the Portuguese Minister in Brussels, that an extract should be sent me of that portion with which I was immediately concerned, I begged that the printing of my paper should be postponed until I should possess the opportunity of incorporating into it the translation of the said extract. My reason for appearing before you without waiting till I had examined the Report with my own eyes was, that, while I had no reason to entertain the shadow of a doubt as to the corroborative nature of its contents, I had a still more important announcement to make to you respecting a yet earlier discovery of Australia in the first half of the sixteenth century. Since then I have received the promised extract, and I am sorry to have to report to you that a more unsatisfactory document has never fallen under my notice. But, in order that you may rightly estimate both it and the case to which it refers, it will be necessary that I repeat to you the leading facts and circumstances of the whole story. Up to 1861, the earliest visit to the coasts of Australia known in history in connection with the name of any ship or captain, was that made by the Dutch yacht the “Duyphen,” or “Dove,” about the month of March, 1606. This vessel had been despatched from Bantam on the 18th of November, 1605, to explore the islands of New Guinea. Her course from New Guinea was southward along the islands on the west side of Torres Strait to that part of Terra Australis a little to the west and south of Cape York, but all these lands were thought to be connected and to form the west coast of New Guinea. The Commander of the “Duyphen,” of whose name we are ignorant, was of course unconscious of the importance of his discovery. Indeed, of the discoveries made subsequently by the Dutch on the coasts of Australia, our ancestors of a hundred years ago, and even the Dutch themselves, knew but little. That which was known was preserved in the “Relations de divers Voyages curieux,” of Melchisedeck Thevenot (Paris, 1663-72, fol.); in the “Noord en Oost Tartarye,” of Nicolas Witsen (Amst. 1692-1705, fol.); in Valentyn's “Oud en Nieuw Oost Indien” (Amst. 1724-26, fol.); and in the “Inleidning tot de algemeen Geographie” of Nicolas Struyk (Amst. 1740, 4to.). We have, however, since gained a variety of information, through a document which fell into the possession of Sir Joseph Banks, and was published by Alexander Dalrymple (at that time hydrographer to the Admiralty and the East India Company) in his collection concerning Papua. This curious and interesting document is a copy of the instructions to Commodore Abel Jansz Tasman for his second voyage of discovery. That distinguished commander had already, in 1642, discovered not only the island now named after him, Tasmania, but New Zealand also; and, passing round the east side of Australia, but without seeing it, sailed on his return voyage along the northern shores of New Guinea. In January, 1644, he was despatched on his second voyage, and his instructions, signed by the Governor-General Antonio Van Diemen and the members of the Council, are prefaced by a recital, in chronological order, of the previous discoveries of the Dutch. Prom this recital, combined with a passage from Saris, given in Purchas, vol. i. p. 385, we derive the above information respecting the voyage of the Duyphen, the date of which constituted it the first authenticated discovery of Australia with which a vessel's name could be connected. In 1861, however, I ventured to dispute this priority, and I think I cannot do justice to you and to myself better than by reciting the grounds on which I did so in the very words with which I then addressed you. They are as follows: “Within the last few days I have discovered a MS. Mappemonde in the British Museum, in which on the north-west corner of a country, which I shall presently show beyond all question to be Australia, occurs the following legend: Nuca antara foi descuberta o anno 1601 por mano (sic) el godinho de Evedia (sic) por mandado de (sic) Vico Rey Aives (sic) de Saldaha,” (sic) which I scarcely need translate, Nuca Antara was discovered in the year 1601, by Manoel Godinho de Eredia, by command of the Viceroy Ayres de Saldanha.

The remarkable little book which forms the subject of this communication is interesting alike from its binding, its contents, and the tradition which connects it with the ill-fated Anne Boleyn.

In “The Whitehaven Herald” of the 19th of November, 1870, there appeared a communication entitled “Remains of Ancient British Dwellings at Ehenside, near Egremont,” signed by the Rev. J. W. Kenworthy, a paper of striking interest to all who concern themselves with the slowly increasing materials for a better knowledge of the ante-historic state of man in these islands.

In calling the attention of the Society to the interesting deed exhibited this evening by our Fellow, Mr. Peacock, it would be superfluous to do more than allude in a most cursory manner to the early history and general organization of the famous order of the Knights Hospitallers to which it relates. I need but refer to the General Chapter held at Montpellier in 1329—the date of the deed before us is 1397—when Elyan de Villanova was Grand Master, and at which the Order was for the first time divided into the seven ‘Languages,’ as they were called, of France, Provence, Auvergne, Italy, Germany, England, and Aragon; a number which was afterwards raised to eight by the addition of Castille and Portugal as a single ‘Language.’ The ‘Language’ of France, I may add, was divided into three Grand Priories: the Priory of France, which contained forty-five Commanderies–the name given to the estate of the Order placed under the control of one of the brothers, called a Commander—the Priory of Aquitaine, which contained sixty-five, and the Priory of Champagne, which contained twenty-four. On the system on which, in the fourteenth century, the property of the fraternity was managed, and its income derived and expended in England, the fullest light has been thrown by the very valuable report of the English Prior Philip de Thame to the Grand Master already mentioned, Elyan de Villanova, for the year 1338, edited for the Camden Society, in 1857, by the Rev. Lambert B. Larking, with an Historical Introduction by Mr. John Mitchell Kemble. No such information however, so far as I am aware, exists in print relating to the fraternity in France, and this circumstance gives to the deed before us an importance which at a first glance it might not be held to possess. For, although in its general features the system which regulated the Priories in different countries at the same periods was probably in substance the same, still we should be justified in inferring a priori that differences of detail must necessarily have arisen from the varieties of custom, of character, and of social condition, which marked the people with whom they were brought into contact. And in point of fact any one who is familiar with the publication of the Camden Society will find as he reads this deed that this à priori conjecture is borne out by the result, the general drift of which is to show the greater servitude to which the peasantry and lower orders generally were subjected in France, as contrasted with the comparative freedom enjoyed in this country.

The Milites Stationarii of the Empire have not succeeded in attracting the attention of archæologists. Kellermann does not mention them, though the force of which he specially treated bore unquestionable affinity to these milites, and the scope of his work took in every other form of the soldiery of the Empire. Cardinali, Grotefend, Zell, and Dr. William Smith, observe the same silence.

Having purchased the box which is the subject of the following memoir from a dealer in antiquities in Rome, I took an early opportunity of showing it to my learned friend, Padre Garrucci of the Collegio Romano, knowing that no one was more capable than he of appreciating and illustrating an object belonging to the earlier ages of Christianity, and feeling sure that I might rely on his unfailing courtesy and willingness to impart to others the stores of knowledge and learning which he possesses.

By the kindness of Mr. Edward Lloyd of the Winns, Walthamstow, I am enabled to exhibit a very remarkable Anglo-Saxon knife lately found in excavating for the foundations of a house which he is building at Sittingbourne, Kent.

In general form the knife is of a well-known type, and closely resembles one found in Lad Lane in the city of London, and engraved by Mr. C. Roach Smith in his Collectanea Antiqua. The total length is 12¾ inches, and the extreme breadth 1⅜ inch. The tang for insertion in the handle is 3½ inches long, and there is a shoulder at its junction with the blade both at the back and the edge.

The question whether the so-called Æra Dionysiana, or Æra Vulgaris, begins in reality with the year of the birth of Christ, and if not, how many years before or after, has occupied for centuries many theologians, historians, and astronomers.

Shortly before the close of the year 1868 some excavations were undertaken in the neighbourhood of the ancient Præneste of the Sabine Equi, now Palestrina, by private speculators, who had the good fortune to find a sarcophagus, containing some objects of great interest and artistic excellence. Among these were three Etruscan specchi, or mirrors, which are figured in the Monumenti inediti dell' Instituto di Correspondenza Archeologica, vol. ix. plate vii., and are further described by Dr. H. Heydemann, in the Annali of that Society, at page 193 of the volume for 1869.

The subjugation of Kent by the Jutes is perhaps the most interesting of all the barbarian conquests of South Britain, from its priority in date and the romance with which it has been invested.

Several stories of the invasion which led to this conquest have come down to us.

Beneath the Chapter House at Westminster is a Crypt of so remarkable a character that it is surprising no efforts should have been made to ascertain the purpose of its construction, or, if such efforts have been made, that they should have produced no result.

There is no subject that appears to me to present a better field for inquiry to a Christian antiquary than the architecture and antiquities of the Byzantine Church and the Churches associated with it.

James Montagu (or Mountagu, as he wrote it himself), fifth son of Sir Edward Montagu, of Boughton, in the county of Northampton (who was the eldest son of Sir Edward Montagu, Lord Chief Justice of the Common Pleas, and the founder of the ducal house of Montagu), was born at Boughton in the year 1568, and educated in Christ Church College, Cambridge, and became eventually Master of Sidney College, “where,” as Anthony Wood observes “he was noted for his piety, virtue, and learning.” “When the University went to meet James I. on his coming from Scotland, his Majesty first took notice of him at Hinchinbrooke (the seat of the loyal Sir Oliver Cromwell, uncle to the Protector), and made him Dean of the Royal Chapel, and in 1604 (December 17) Dean of Worcester. On the 17th of April, 1608, he was consecrated Bishop of Bath and Wells, and eight years afterwards, viz., in 1616, translated to the see of Winchester. “For his faithfulness, dexterity, and prudence,” adds Wood, “in weighty affairs, the king chose him to be one of his Privy Council.” (Oct. 11, 1617).

There are few pieces of coast scenery in England so little familiar to the tourist as the northern shores of Cornwall. Unexplored, yet well worth exploring, that bleak district still happily remains a “land beyond railways.” Of the treasures it has in store for the geologist, or the lover of natural history, it would be superfluous here to speak; suffice it to say, that, in the shape of cliff castles and tumuli, it presents to the antiquary one continued series of objects of interest. Along the whole line there is scarcely a high piece of cliff or a promontory which does not bear on its rough crest some landmark of pre-historic times. So rapidly, however, is the work of denudation going on, that even within the memory of those now living many a tumulus has fallen a prey to the sea, carrying with it, probably, the bones of some ancient rover, thus rudely restored to that element on which, centuries ago, his bark so gallantly rode. To quote one of the most striking examples of the encroachment of the sea since man left his traces on the cliff, I will take the instance of a “cliff castle” three miles to the north of the town of Camborne. This fortification, in common with all these singular entrenchments, was raised for purposes of defence against the land side, and consists of a double line of earthworks drawn across the neck of what was once a promontory some 70 paces broad. Within these ramparts, where once no doubt there was ample space to accommodate the whole defending force, there is now nothing but a precipice descending abruptly to the sea, some 300 feet below, and leaving scarcely standing room for a single individual between it and the inner side of the earthwork. I mention this instance of the rapidity of the process of denudation on this coast because, from their close proximity to the edge of a similar cliff, it is highly probable that in another half century the very barrows I am about to describe will have shared the same fate.

The progress of building has of late years destroyed many of the old historic features of our land, removed ancient earthworks, and covered their sites with modern dwellings; and as the growth and improvement of modern cities have almost effaced the traces of the old fortified towns—which usually formed the centres from which they have spread, so their surrounding villas have not unfrequently destroyed the vestiges of the earthworks that once crowned the hills in their neighbourhood.

In the Exhibition of Works of the Old Masters made this year (1873) at Burlington House there have been four pictures attributed to Holbein. Three of the four were from the collection of the Earl of Radnor at Longford Castle, where they have long been well known, and they are particularly described by Mr. Wornum in his Life and Works of Hans Holbein, 1867. But the occasion of their being publicly exhibited to many thousands of intelligent observers is one which must invest them with fresh interest, whilst it has afforded an opportunity for more considerate examination than it is always possible to bestow upon pictures when suspended on the walls of a great house. I therefore think there may be room for a few remarks upon these three pictures, even after the attention they have received from Mr. Wornum; whose general conclusions I do not propose to dispute, but rather to confirm; whilst I would offer some historical illustrations in relation to them, which, though actually not very recondite or far-fetched, do not appear to have been hitherto applied as they might have been.

On the brow of a hill situate about a mile to the north of the market town of Newbury in Berkshire stand the picturesque ruins of Donnington Castle. The castle derives its name from the little village of Donnington, which is linked with the adjoining hamlet of Shaw in the parochial designation of Shaw-cum-Donnington—a rural district, divided from the parish of Speen by the tiny river Lamborne, which, to use the quaint expression of Sylvester,

in haste doth run

To wash the feet of Chaucer's Donnington.