Oak, now a shattered wreck although it still produces acorns, occupied about the centre of the Lancastrian position. An inscription upon the pedestal gives a few details of the results of the battle, and the strength of the forces engaged under their respective commanders. It records the date as occurring on February 2nd, 1460, whereas modern historians would designate it 1461. The "New style" of the Calendar was introduced into England in the year 1751, before which period the legal year did not commence until the 25th March, consequently by the Old style, the year would be called 1460 until that date (March 25th) arrived. Measurements of the oak tree will be found in Woolhope Transactions 1870, page 307, and a description of the battle upon page 2 of the same volume, but those who desire a more full account should read it in Richard Brooke's Visits to Fields of Battle in England of the Fifteenth Century,* published in 1857, and a reference to Shakespeare's Henry VI., part III., Act 2, Scene I., will add still further interest to the subject.

The Woolhope Club would desire to bring local public opinion to bear against allowing this monument to be defaced. Were it not that much is expected from the Authorities of the County Council, the aid of the Society of Antiquaries or of the Inspector of Ancient Monuments would have to be invoked.

Leaving Kingsland, the route was directed to Eardisland, where the members were received and most hospitably entertained by Mrs. Barker and her family at their picturesque residence, Staick House. After refreshments they paid a visit to the Church, and re-assembled in its large porch, where they had the pleasure of listening to the following paper on

What has become of "the ancient spur, of the description called the prick-spur, of steel, plated with silver?" which Mr. Richard Brooke says was presented to the Museum at Hereford in 1839, and which he saw in the Museum in May, 1855, on the occasion of his second visit to the site of the field of battle. Where are now to be seen "the large buckle, perfectly plain, the small buckle, rather ornamented," all found on the field of battle in 1854, which were exhibited to him by the Rev. R. D. Evans, Rector of Kingsland, when he visited the locality for the third time in May, 1856? Where are the arms, swords, and spear heads which, within the recollection of Rev. R. D. Evans were presented to the Museum at Hereford? At that period the Museum was in the Castle Green, under the auspices of the Hereford Philosophic and Literary Institution, long since defunct. It is seriously hoped that these and many other objects of local interest will be restored by selfish collectors to their appropriate position in the Museum at the Free Library, Hereford.

ERISLONDE, ALIAS EARDISLAND, ALIAS ARELAND. [By Rev. JOSEPH BARKER, Vicar.]

So does this place appear among the livings discharged of this Deanery in Bacon's Liber Regis of 1786; and in Dingley's History from Marble, compiled in the reign of Charles II. and printed for the Camden Society in 1867, we have it Erdestland. I have also seen it Aresland; being on the banks of the river Arrow we find too Areland, vel Eardisland, quasi Arrow-land; and we have even now in these days of general education sometimes Yurzland. There are various conjectures respecting the meaning of Eardisland, and in my endeavour to get at its right interpretation I have received much kind help from a respected member of our Club, Chancellor Phillott, and also from the Professor of Anglo-Saxon at Cambridge, the Rev. Dr. Skeat.

A common idea prevails that the name is "Earl's-land," and from the circumstance of the parish adjoining those of Kingsland and Monkland this would not at first seem unlikely. Flavell Edmunds, not at all I fear a trustworthy authority, explains Herdisland, now Eardisland as the herds fee-farm-land, but Professor Skeat says, 66 where he found that the Anglo-Saxon Len (error for Læn) meant a fee farm, I don't know. It is clearly 'land."" He also considers a guess of Chancellor Phillott's "Earl Harold's-land" in an abbreviated form a bad shot. Eardisland does not find a place in Domesday I believe, but Domesday says (this from the Chancellor's letter) that Alured the Spaniard held Pembridge, Stretford, a place called Ewre, and other lands. Also that these lands were formerly held by Earl Harold or his son. These all adjoin Eardisland, and therefore is it not likely that Eardisland may mean in an abbreviated form "Earl Harold's land?"

But Professor Skeat considers that "this contradicts the first law in phonetics, that in contraction the strongest syllable never drops; and surely 'Har' is the strongest syllable in that combination."

In the first letter I had from him he writes, "You do not tell me the most helpful thing, viz., how you pronounce it. In fact it is almost impossible to express pronunciation by our miserable Protean alphabet. I suppose it is 'Urdzl'nd' where 'ur' is like the 'ur'in burn. And I suppose that the 'd' is inherent, and therefore the spellings Erislonde, Areland, are of no particular account. I should say the chances are that it is derived from the Anglo-Saxon Eard, a dwelling-place, a home, once very common, but now obsolete. The genitive is Eardes which would have passed into 'yardz' or 'erdz' either. If you sound the word as three syllables, i.e., if the 'i' counts, then you may be sure that something has been suppressed. And as 'Eardes-land,' land of a dwellingplace, is not really good Anglo-Saxon (for the word would have been compounded Eard-land, which indeed occurs), I should say it is extremely probable that it stands for Eardulfes land, much as Lemster is for Leominster, and Wo'ster for Worcester, and all the rest. In fact, the first part must have been a man's name;

and Eard is never a name. Eardulfe's lea actually occurs in a Charter of Æthelred, and the etymology Eardulf is well-known, it is from 'Eard' a home, and wulf' a wolf. Wolf of the home' sounds like nonsense, but it has a thousand parallels. Our ancestors used to make up names just in this way, by combining elements that make no sense; often in order to stick to some prefix. Thus Ead-blessedness, happiness, is the well-known royal prefix, and occurs in Ed-ward (happiness-ward), Ed-red (happiness-counsel), Ed-gar (happinessspear), Ed-wy (happiness-war), and all the rest. So my guess at present would be for Eard-wulfes-land, the land or 'home-farm' of Mr. Eard-wulf. But this rather assumes that the 'i' was, or is sounded." When I replied to this letter and said the 'i'in Eardisland was not sounded, but that in Dingley's History from Marble, it was called Eardestland, the Professor kindly wrote: "the pronunciation is what I thought. Of course if the 'i' had been kept, it would have been clearer. But the old spelling Erdestland will do just as well. The 't' is the well-known excrescent 't' which is so often wrongly introduced after 's,' as amids-t, amongs-t, betwix-t, &c., for old English amiddes, amonges, betwixe. So Erdestland really means Eardesland, in which 'es' was a syllable. I should say that settles it. The rustic 'Yarzland' is a more faithful representation of the old sound than Urzland is," and further on he wrote, "I have little doubt that Eardulfes land is all right. It cannot be applied to 'Earl' or to 'Herd."" Here, then, I am inclined to feel satisfied that the place in which we take the liberty of residing' is the land of the wolf's home, and may not a part of the parish named "Bearwood " be the wood of the Bear?

In notes on Eardisland, I will begin, as in duty bound, with the Church, which, though it may not be looked upon as quite a joy, like many in the county, we may still call "a fair place." It is dedicated to St. Mary, and may have been built by a "Gentle Mortimer," as the arms of that powerful family were seen on a shield in one of the windows when Dingley visited the Church. Liber Regis reports the living as antiently belonging to the Priory of "Shene," and, after the dissolution, to John Booth, Esq., 1663-69; Robert Price, and John Dutton Colt, Esqs., 1726; James Kinnersley, Esq., 1772. I find there were different religious communities founded at Shene, and among them a Priory of Carthusian Monks by Henry V., which probably is the one named in Liber Regis. Shene or Sheen (Saxon resplendent), so called from its delightful situation, is the present Richmond in Surrey.

It will be seen at once, that the Church was not built as Kingsland, at one and the same period, the nave (80ft. long by 24ft. 6in. wide) being a much earlier structure than the chancel (27ft. 4in. long by 18ft. 6in. wide), forming indeed the ancient Church, and the tower (20ft. by 15ft.) having been erected only 160 years ago. We have entries in an old parish book, The Eardisland Journal, that the ancient tower, which had a steeple (see Dingley's sketch) collapsed from age, and the present one was built at a cost of £155, by Thomas Hooper, of the parish of Yarpole; this was the lowest tender.

During the restoration in 1864, under the architectural superintendence of Mr. Henry Curzon, the chancel arch was re-built, and in stripping the plaster

from the wall there were evident indications of the chancel having originally terminated with the present nave, the wall having three lancet lights, and a round or oval window above. The small South doorway would be the original priests' door. But I will give a brief account of the antecedent history of the Church, so far as the Archæologist can divine, with which I was kindly furnished by Mr. Curzon for our Parish Magazine in 1869.

"The Church," he says, "is one of a type of ancient churches, of which many examples are found in the diocese of Hereford. The distinctive peculiarities of this type are as follows :-The long wide nave without aisles, porch, and main doorway on the south and smaller doorway on the northern side, the ample chancel, and the western tower often as wide as the nave.

The original building appears to have been erected about the end of the 12th century; it was of the simplest form, namely, a long nave, the eastern end serving as the chancel, the doorway on the south side now blocked up being the priest's entrance; the piscina and aumbry, accessories of the altar, also remain. The square opening near them was provided with a shutter, and was no doubt an alms-window. A western tower may also have formed part of the original edifice. The ancient Church was lighted with very narrow lancet windows, four of which still exist, and in the east wall where now is the chancel arch was a triplet arrangement of three lancets with a circle above.

The porch is of a later date than the early Church; later still is the three light window on the south side inserted in the place of an original lancet to supply a want of light in the interior.

The chancel, vestry, and the two easternmost windows of the nave are the work of the 14th century builders, and both in design and execution are extremely good. The neighbouring churches of Pembridge and Kingsland were built almost entirely at this period. The external tomb on the south wall of the chancel was probably intended to receive the mortal remains of the founder. The tombs in the nave are of a later date; one of them is noticed in the Dineley (Dingley) MSS. (circa 1683) in the possession of Sir Thomas Winnington, Bart. It bears no inscription; the centre shield at the finish of the canopy is noted as being curious, and is carefully illustrated; it bears on a field or, a Latin cross gules between a cock, ladder, nails, sponge, spear, vestment, and other attributes of the Crucifixion.

The nave had anciently, beyond all doubt, a high-pitched roof, but at the time the restoration was undertaken no trace remained of such a roof, and only two tie beams of the 15th century roof which followed it. The roof then existing dated about the end of the 16th century, and was designed on a thoroughly bad constructive principle. The porch roof was of the same description, and the low pitch led to the lowering of the original gable. Happily these two roofs are restored to their original lines and now harmonize fitly with that of the chancel.

The tower was built 160 years ago to replace one which fell, and in falling shattered the bells. These were re-cast by a lady parishioner. The former tower is shown in a little view of the Church in the Dineley (Dingley) MSS. before referred to. It would there seem to have been the original one, that is of the same date as the nave, with later insertions and parapet. It was of the full width of the nave,

a circumstance common in this type of Church. The evidence the Dineley (Dingley) sketch supplies as to the width is supported by the conditions of the old walls of the nave where the present tower recedes from them. It is evident that they have been severed at that point and afterwards made good with masonry of a different fashion. The present tower has no pretension to architectural device; its builders had no other object than to build a loft for the bells. They lived in the darkest age which architecture had known, in England at least, since the days of the very early Saxons. What wonder, then, that the little done about that time in and about the rest of the building, in the way of new windows, gallery, &c., was only adding one incongruity to another?

The chancel arch removed at the time of the Church restoration was of about the same date as the chancel itself, but of a much plainer style and inconveniently narrow."

I wish Mr. Curzon's had not been so wide.

"The chantry screen now placed before the organ is a good example of the woodwork of the 15th century."

And I wish this screen was back in its old position. So far Mr. Curzon's account of the Church.

I would draw special attention to the small square window on the south side at the east end of the nave, which Mr. Curzon calls an "Alms window," as it certainly may have been, but I rather conceive it is one of those remarkable windows found in a great number of churches, called "low side windows," or sometimes "lepers' windows," the purpose of which is now generally considered to have been for the administration of the Sacrament to lepers or to sick persons during time of plague. "No example of these windows," Mr. Parker says, "has been noticed of a date prior to the Early English style, and the majority are later, though they are found inserted in Norman churches. The theory adopted by the Ecclesiologists was that a light was burnt on the altar, which might be seen from the outside through these windows, and thus they gave them the name of Lychnoscope."

On the same side of the nave under the two-light decorated south window, which most likely was inserted for additional light at a later period, will be noticed the canopied arched niche, known as the tomb of the Holy Sepulchre, of which a drawing was given by Dingley, and in his time on the triangular stone at the top, now plain and mutilated, were represented upon a shield all the instruments of the Crucifixion, and on another shield a coat of arms. In the "History from Marble," we are told: "In the window is seen these arms, differing from that on the monument, whose bearing is argent and gules, the same with Marten of the West seen in the Temple Church of London." There were also at that time other coats of arms in the windows, though none now, those of St. Owen (formerly of Burton Court), Barry of six gules and or, Mortimer, and Hopton argent, a lion rampant sable.

There are several other monuments of antiquity in the Church, one of interest in the floor under the leper window, with a black letter inscription, which I should be glad if any member of the Club will help to decipher. All at present