Grave 14. The same. Grave 15. Skull and shoulder bones gone. The remainder of the skeleton lay at length. By the left hip was a knife of iron, a thick bronze girdle-ring, and the remains of a châtelaine, consisting of a key and two or three hook-shaped instruments, all of iron, corroded together into a confused mass. They appeared to have been suspended from two rings, one of bronze, the other of iron. By the right hand was a bead of red opaque glass. Grave 16. Skeleton entirely decayed; the cist was larger than any of those previously discovered, being about 7 feet long, 4 feet wide, and the floor 5 feet from the surface. In the centre was found an iron umbo of a shield. When I took it up for the first time, after a lapse of some thirteen hundred years, a ring of the wood of the shield with the hand-bar of the umbo in the centre was disclosed to view. Grave 17. This was met with within the foundations of the house, in digging a scaffold-pole hole. The skeleton lay at length, but was much decayed, and measured, without the feet, 4 feet 9 inches in length. By the left side was an iron knife. Grave 18. Skeleton about 5 feet 6 inches long, lying at length, heels together. By the left side a small iron knife, and a fragment of thick pottery by the left femur. Grave 19. Skeleton lying at length, heels together, the skull almost gone. By the left side of it a fine spear-head, and between the left ribs and the humerus a good knife. At the waist, by the centre, was a small iron girdle-buckle. The skeletons all lay east and west, head to the west, in cists from 6 to 7 feet in length and about 3 feet in width. These discoveries are a continuation of those made by the writer in 1892, when eleven interments of a similar nature were met with. (See Archæologia Cantiana, Vol. XXI., p. lv.) The chief point of interest connected with this Pagan cemetery is that it seems to have formed a portion of the land which was given by Ethelbert to the Priory at Rochester. The gift is thus referred to in the Registrum Roffense, p. 1, as translated by the Rev. A. J. Pearman :-- King Ethelbert gave a piece of ground, which he called Priestfield, that the priests serving God might possess it by a perpetual right. He also endowed the church with Doddyngherne and with land from the Medway to the east gate of the city of Rochester, on the south, and with other lands beyond the city wall, to the north." Some little distance south of that portion of the Anglo-Saxon cemetery already explored, immediately beyond Fort Clarence, is Priestfield, which extends as far south as Cookham Hill. Doddyngherne is not defined, but we can hardly doubt that it lay between the Roman south wall of the city and Priestfield. The lane which led to the land called in Ethelbert's time "Doddyngherne" was the way which ran from the great Roman road through the Southgate of Rochester, and hence received the name of Doddyngherne Lane, which is said to mean Deadman's " Lane. This cannot be accepted as the correct interpretation, although it is now proved that soon after leaving the Southgate it passed by a field which in the days of Ethelbert was dotted over with the grave-mounds of Pagan Saxons up to the very edge of the ancient way. There were, moreover, Roman interments on Boley Hill, on the opposite side of the way, just outside the city; the tumuli that once covered these were probably also visible from the road. The land of Doddyngherne may, however, have derived its name from the family of Doddings, whose chief settlement in Kent was at Doddington, near Faversham. An off shoot of that clan possibly migrated to Durobriva (Rochester), appropriating some portion of territory outside the walls of the defunct Roman city, as did the Æslings, who settled on the opposite side of the river Medway, at Eslingham in Frindsbury. It is significant to note that the headquarters of the Eslings in Kent was at Eastling, which is the adjoining parish to Doddington; hence it is not improbable that the action of one tribe influenced that of the other. The writer submitted his views to the Rev. W. W. Skeat, Litt. D. (Professor of Anglo-Saxon in the University of Cambridge), and received the following letter in reply, which he has been kindly allowed to print: 2 SALISBURY VILLAS, CAMBRIDGE, DEAR SIR, September 26, 1896. I regret that I could not reply sooner. I can say nothing as to your concluding theory. But it is clearly that Dodding is a tribal name, and short for Doddinga, genitive plural; meaning " of the Doddings." And Dodding, as a patronymic, is derived from the Anglo-Saxon personal name Dodda, of which several instances occur. Dodding-ton signifies town of the Doddings. Doddinghyrne is correct. It occurs, in the dative case, Doddine-hyrnan (sic), in a Rochester charter, printed at p. 332 of Earle's Land Charters, dated 761, in the reign of King Ethelberht II. Hyrne, sb. fem., represents a Germanic theme, of which the theoretical form is horn-jā, a derivative of horn, which is cognate with Latin cornu; and just as English corner is derived from Latin cornu, so the Anglo-Saxon hyrne is derived VOL. XXII. e from Anglo-Saxon horn. And the two words are equivalent in sense. AngloSaxon hyrne means a corner," a nook, angle; see Toller's Anglo-Saxon Dictionary, p. 583. So Dodding-hyrne means "nook of the Doddings," a corner of land in their occupation. So we really know all about it. The Middle-English herne, a corner, occurs in Chaucer in the same sense. Yours sincerely, W. W. SKEAT. ASHFORD.-Mr. J. Broad kindly informs me that during excavations for the foundations of a house about to be erected for Mr. Challis in Albert Road, the workmen discovered a Roman interment consisting of a large cinerary urn containing calcined bones, accompanied by a small fragile cup of red ware pressed with five indentations, which gave to the vessel a fluted rim; a goblet of red ware with handle, 9 inches in height and 1 foot 5 inches in diameter; a cup of red ware, 4 inches in diameter at the rim; a patera of Samian ware, 7 inches in diameter, and one of Upchurch ware, 61⁄2 inches in diameter. Three other vessels were in fragments. I am indebted to my friend and colleague Mr. H. F. Abell of Kennington Hall for the description of the above. July, 1896. HADLOW.—Mr. F. W. E. Shrivell reports the discovery, in the Hadlow Cemetery, of two urns containing charcoal and bones; also that a fine Roman vase with two handles was dredged from the Medway between East Wickham and Golden Green. August, 1896. CHARING.—Mr. George Langley reports that, during alterations to a house which was formerly an old tannery, a beam was discovered with the following inscription in black-letter painted upon canvas, which had been stuck on to the upper moulding : "As God hath lent His earthly foode Our bodies to preserve, So Heavenly foode He hath in store Mr. Langley states that the beam came from some other building, and is moulded in a similar manner to the beams in the chancel of the church. ROCHESTER. Since the researches into the history of the ancient walls of Rochester, prosecuted by the Rev. G. M. Livett and myself, the results of which were recorded in Archeologia Cantiana, Vol. XXI., I have fortunately made the acquaintance of Mr. John Hughes of the Analytical Laboratory, 79 Mark Lane, E.C. He being much interested, and having had great experience in the analysis of ancient mortar, very kindly offered to analyze the various samples of mortar which I had obtained from the walls of known date now existing in Rochester. Mr. Hughes has also further favoured me by consenting to the analytical Report, together with his accompanying letter, being printed in the present volume. The value of this interesting appendix to what has already been written cannot be over-estimated, and we all owe a debt of gratitude to Mr. Hughes for his patient labour and hearty co-operation : ANALYTICAL LABORATORY, 79 MARK LANE, LONDON, E.C., September 7th, 1896. DEAR SIR, I send you the results of my analysis of the seven specimens of Ancient Mortar which you forwarded me in July. The analyses have been tabulated according to their richness in lime, No. 1 containing 40′26 of Anhydrous Lime (CaO) and No. 7 containing only 17:58 per cent. The description attached to the specimens by yourself has been placed over the respective analyses, and I append certain notes of my own which may be useful in considering the quality of the mortar. No. 1. Though specially rich in lime, is a soft mortar and of inferior quality. No. 2. The quantity sent was small, but as far as it is possible to judge from the appearance, the mortar appears to be hard and of good quality. No. 3. Very small quantity sent; appears to be of poor quality, though harder than No. 1. No. 4. Consists largely of fragments of small Bivalve shells firmly incorporated with the mortar, producing a very hard surface where exposed to the weather, but softer inside. No. 5. This specimen, taken from the interior of the Keep, also contains some fragments of shells, but the mortar is exceptionally soft and poor in quality, for it contains the least soluble silica. No. 6. Evidently a piece of concrete consisting of mortar mixed with broken tiles and coarse gravel, exceedingly hard and very durable; the soluble or gelatinous silica being remarkably high, in fact as much as exists in the best Portland cement, compares very favourably with No. 5, which contains only 1:55 per cent soluble silica. No. 7. This is also a piece of hard concrete like mortar, containing however less lime and more coarse gravel, but no broken tiles or bricks, of excellent quality and very durable. These remarks, taken in consideration with the analytical results, suggest the conclusion that a high percentage of lime in a mortar is by no means a reliable indication of its superior quality, and we should rather regard the quantity of soluble or gelatinous silica as a criterion of the quality and durability of a mortar. GEORGE PAYNE, Esq. Believe me, dear Sir, Yours faithfully, |