matters as were necessary to be known by sportsmen. Hawkingmost commonly forms a part of these books; and, though this pastime can on!y-'be considered as a modern invention, when it is put in competition with that of hunting, yet it has obtained the precedeliey, notwithstanding the sanction of antiquity is so decidedly'against it. I shall, however, in the following pages, revert the-arrangement of those amusements, and begin with hunting] 'which naturally, in my opinion, claims the priority of place.-. .'".?/' II.—HUNTING AMONG THE BRITONS.

.'."' Dio Nicceus, an ancient author, speaking of the inhabitants 'of the northern parts of this island, tells us, they were a fierce and barbarous people, who tilled no ground, but lived upon the depredations they committed in the southern districts, or upon the food they procured by hunting.1 Strabo also says, that the dogs bred in Britain were highly esteemed upon the continent, on account of their excellent qualities for hunting; and these qualities, he seems to hint, were natural to them, and not the effect of tutorage by their foreign masters.2 The information derived from the above-cited authors, does not amount to a proof that the practice of hunting was familiar with the Britons collectively; yet it certainly affords much fair argument in the support of such an opinion; for it is hardly reasonable to suppose that the pursuit of game should have been confined to the uncultivated northern freebooters, and totally neglected by the more civilised inhabitants of the southern parts of the island. We are well assured that venison constituted a great portion of their food,3 and as they had in their possession such dogs as were naturally prone to the chase, there can be little doubt that they would exercise them for the purpose of procuring their favourite diet; besides, they kept large herds of cattle, and flocks of sheep, both of which required protection from the wolves, and other ferocious animals, that infested the woods and coverts, and must frequently have rendered hunting an act of absolute necessity.

If it be granted that the Britons, generally speaking, were expert in hunting, it is still uncertain what animals were obnoxious to the chase; we know however, at least, that the hare was not anciently included; for Caesar tells us, "the Britons did not eat the flesh of hares, notwithstanding the island abounded with them." And this abstinence, he adds, arose from a principle of religion;1 which principle, no doubt, prevented them from being worried to death: a cruelty reserved for moreenlightened ages.

We do not find, that, during the establishment of the Romans m Britain, there were any restrictive laws promulgated respecting the killing of game. It appears to have been an established maxim, in the early jurisprudence of that people, to invest the right of such things as had no master with those who were the first possessors. Wild beasts, birds, and fishes, becameVhe property of those who first could take them. It is most probable that the Britons were left at liberty to exercise their ancient privileges; for, had any severity been exerted to prevent the destruction of game, such laws would hardly have been passed over without the slightest- notice being taken of them by the ancient historians.

III.—HUNTING AMONG THE SAXONS.

The Germans, and other northern nations, were much more strongly attached to the sports of the field than the Romans, and accordingly they restricted the natural rights which the people claimed of hunting. The ancient privileges were gTiulually withdrawn from them, and appropriated by the chiefs and loaders to themselves; at last they became the sole prerogative of the crown, and were thence extended to the various ranks and dignities of the state at the royal pleasure.

As early as the ninth century, and probably long before that period, hunting constituted an essential part of the education of a young nobleman. Asser assures us, that Alfred the great, before he was twelve years of age, " was a most expert and active hunter, and excelled in all the branches of that most noble art, to which he applied with incessant labour and amazing success."2 It is certain that, whenever a temporary peace gave leisure for relaxation, hunting was one of the most favourite pastimes followed by the nobility and persons of opulence at that period. It is no wonder, therefore, that dogs proper for the sport should be held in the highest estimation. When Athelstan, the grandson of Alfred, had obtained a signal victory at Brunanburgh over Constantine king of Wales, he imposed upon him a yearly tribute of gold, silver, and cattle; to which was also added a certain number of "hawks, and sharp-scented dogs, fit for hunting of wild beasts." 1 His successor, Edgar, remitted the pecuniary payment on condition of receiving annually the skins of three hundred wolves.2 We do not find, indeed, that the hawks and the hounds were included in this new stipulation; but it does not seem reasonable that Edgar, who, like his predecessor, was extremely fond of the sports of the field, should have given up that part of the tribute.

IV.—HUNTING AMONG THE DANES.

The Danes deriving their origin from the same source as the Saxons, differed little from them in their manners and habitudes, and perhaps not at all in their amusements; the propensity to hunting, however, was equally common to both. When Canute the Dane had obtained possession of the throne of Englan', he imposed several restrictions upon the pursuit of game, which were not only very severe, but seem to have been altogether unprecedented; and these may be deemed a sufficient proof of his strong attachment to this favourite pastime, for, in other respects, his edicts breathed an appearance of mildness and regard for the comforts of the people.

V HUNTING DURING THE RESTORATION OF THE SAXONS.

After the expulsion of the Danes, and during the short restoration of the Saxon monarchy, the sports of the field still maintained their ground. Edward the Confessor, whose disposition seems rather to have been suited to the cloister than to the throne, would join in no other secular amusements; but he took the greatest delight, says William of Malmsbury, "to follow a pack of swift hounds in pursuit of game, and to cheer them with his voice." 3 He was equally pleased with hawking, and every day, after divine service, he spent his time in one or other of these favourite pastimes.4 Harold, who succeeded him, was so fond of his hawk and his hounds, that he rarely travelled without them. He is so represented upon the famous tapestry of Bayeux, with his hounds by his side and a hawk upon his hand, when brought before William duke of Normandy.5 Travelling thus accompanied, was not a singular trait in the character of a nobleman at this period.

The above engraving represents a Saxon chieftain, attended by his huntsman and a couple of hounds, pursuing the wild swine in a forest, taken from a manuscriptal painting of the ninth century in the Cotton Library.1

2. Spearing A Boa*—XIV. Century.

The above is a representation of the manner of attacking the wild boar, from a manuscript written about the commencemen of the fourteenth century,in the possession of Francis Douce,Esc

The preceding engraving is from a manuscript in the Roya Library,2 written about the same time as the latter.

V1.--HUNTINC AMONG THE NORMANS OPPRESSIVELY EXERCISED.

During the tyrannical government of William the Norman, and his two sons who succeeded him, the restrictions concerning the killing of game were by no means meliorated. The privileges of hunting in the royal forests were confined to the king and his favourites; and, to render these receptacles for the beasts of the chase more capacious, or to make new ones, whole villages were depopulated, and places of divine worship overthrown; not the least regard being paid to the miseries of the suffering inhabitants, or the cause of religion. These despotic proceedings were not confined to royalty, as may be proved from good authority. I need not mention the New Forest, in Hampshire, made by the elder William, or the park at Woodstock in Oxfordshire, seven miles in circumference, and walled round with stone by Henry his son." This park, Stowe tells us, was the first made in England. The royal example was first followed by Henry earl of Warwick, who made a park at Wedgenoke, near Warwick, to preserve his deer and other animals for hunting; after this the practice of park-making became general among persons of opulence.

This subject is delineated, with great force of colouring, by John of Salisbury, a writer of the twelfth century, when the severity of the game laws was somewhat abated. “In our time,” says the author, “hunting and hawking are esteemed the most honourable employments, and most excellent virtues, by our nobility; and they think it the height of worldly felicity to spend the whole of their time in these diversions; accordingly they prepare for them with more solicitude, expense, and parade, than they do for war; and pursue the wild beasts with greater fury than they do the enemies of their country. By constantly following this way of life, they lose much of their humanity, and become as savage, nearly, as the very brutes they hunt.” He then proceeds in this manner: “Husbandmen, with their harmless herds and flocks, are driven from their well cultivated fields, their meadows, and their pastures, that wild beasts may range in them without interruption.” He adds, addressing himself to his unfortunate countrymen, “If one of these great and merciless hunters shall pass by your habitation, bring forth hastily all the refreshment you have in your house, or that you can readily buy, or borrow from your neighbours; that you may