of the Appendices the charge against the Incorporation of Hammermen of having prevented James Watt from starting business in Glasgow as a mathematical instrument maker is discussed, and the conclusion is arrived at that the story is nothing more than a baseless myth.' Elsewhere, however, the mythical' story related by Spottiswood about the threatened destruction of the cathedral is repeated without qualification. It is highly improbable that the cathedral itself was ever in danger of effacement, and the tradition to that effect seems merely to have been based on a proposal made in 1588 for removing the north-west tower. The design was frustrated at the time, its accomplishment having been reserved for the ill-advised renovators of the nineteenth century.

ROBERT RENWICK.

ROSE CASTLE, THE RESIDENTIAL SEAT OF THE BISHOP OF CARLISLE. By the Rev. James Wilson, B.D., Litt.D. Pp. xx, 270. With Plans and Illustrations, and an Appendix of Original Documents. Demy 8vo. Carlisle Charles Thurnam & Sons. 1912. 6s. net.

WHEN Henry I. founded the house of Austin Canons at Carlisle in the year 1132, he endowed the body, after the fashion of the time, with churches not only in Cumberland and Westmorland, but also in Northumberland and elsewhere. In the following year a diocese was constituted, it being intended that the bishop should not only be diocesan, but also prior of the convent. This arrangement was found not to work so well as the founder expected, and in the year 1219 a letter was written by Henry III. to the Pope telling him that during the destitution of the see, lasting from 1157 to 1203, certain churches in the diocese of Durham had been alienated through the neglect of the canons. In consequence of the disputes between the bishop on the one side, and the canons on the other, their estates, under the authority of the papal legate Pandulf, were partitioned. Among the estates set aside as the patrimony of the see was the lordship of Linstock, north of Carlisle, and there, at the first, the bishop had his residence.

But Linstock was exposed to raids from the North, and in the year 1230, Walter, the fourth bishop in the succession, obtained from the king a grant of the manor of Dalston, some six or eight miles to the south-west of, and therefore protected by, the city. Here he either adapted an existing building or built himself a see-house, which, from the year 1255 to the present time, has been the official residence of the Bishop of Carlisle.

The evolution of this house, its description, and its vicissitudes, form the subject of Dr. Wilson's volume.

After an introductory chapter, in which is sketched the story of the other manor-houses and towers once held by the bishop, Dr. Wilson, with sufficient fulness, relates the story of the acquisition of Dalston-of which parish he is the vicar-and discusses the erection of the see-house on which was bestowed the name of Rose. He adduces evidence to suggest that the name may have been contemporary with the acquisition of Dalston, and sets out the different theories advanced to explain this unusual though attractive designation. In the pages that follow he weaves the warp of the history of the structure with the woof of the personal history of its succes

sive owners, in a manner which arouses and sustains the eager attention of the reader.

In the chapter given to the chapel-in the more usual sense of a building -there is a luminous and informing description of the bishop's 'chapel' in the technical use of the word, meaning the episcopal apparatus of books, ornaments, vestments, etc.; Bishop Lyttelton, in the year 1762, whimsically complaining that his predecessor had not left him even a chaplain's surplice. In the chapter dealing with the precincts of the castle, mention is made of the large sums of money received for fines by Bishop Sterne, who was translated to York in 1664. The revenues of the see arising from rectories appropriate, and other scattered possessions, were collected by the bishop after the custom of other ecclesiastical corporations, handed down from the days of imperial Rome, of demising the tithes and manors to middlemen, who paid a substantial sum in ready money as a consideration, or fine, for the lease, and also yearly a small or moderate reserved rent. The middlemen -the publicans of distant Galilee-sublet to the owner or cultivator of the land, of course taking a profit on the transaction. Very seldom did it happen that the farmer of the tithe and the cultivator failed to come to a bargain or working arrangement. If they did fail to come to terms of arrangement, the proprietor of the tithes, or his lessee, was put to the disagreeable necessity of lifting his tithes in kind, viz. the tenth sheaf, the tenth calf, the tenth lamb, and so forth. This archaic system was put an end to by the Tithe Commutation Act, following which the bishop was able to cut down the establishment, which previously had devoured his revenues.

Special commendation is due to the selection of illustrative documents, comprising the grant of the manor and the advowson of the church of Dalston to Bishop Walter by Henry III. on the 26th of February, 1230. The volume is well printed and beautifully illustrated.

J. C. HODGSON.

MAITLAND OF LETHINGTON, THE MINISTER OF MARY STUART: A STUDY OF HIS LIFE AND TIMES. By E. Russell. Pp. viii, 516. 8vo. London Nisbet & Co. 1912. 15s. net.

THIS interesting volume is not in the strict sense a biography of Maitland. While it is more than a biography, it is not, except as regards the earlier portions of his career, very biographical. Later the author's plan gradually becomes more comprehensive, and for the greater portion of the book the 'Times' of Maitland bulk more largely than himself, such biographical details as are supplied being referred to in an incidental fashion. Even his second marriage is mentioned only cursorily, and it is not even stated whether he had any descendants. We are not told of the method of the final conveyance of the infirm secretary to the castle; we have merely the bald statement that Grange was joined (11th April) by Maitland'; nor is any mention made of Knox's denunciation of Maitland, nor of Maitland's complaint in a letter to the session of Edinburgh against Knox's slander, nor of the character of Knox's deathbed message to Kirkaldy, nor of Maitland's characteristic and scornful reply: all we are told is that the 'pin-pricks' of Maitland disturbed the Reformer's last illness,' which they probably did

not.

The word 'Times' in the title must also be understood in a somewhat restricted sense. Social and ecclesiastical events and characteristics are not dealt with in detail: the book is concerned mainly with the complex political intrigues of the period. Further, matters with which Maitland had no direct connection are treated almost as fully as those in which he was immediately concerned. His aims and intentions might have been set forth fully enough, and certainly more consecutively, without so detailed an account of his 'Times'; and, again, we might have had a more comprehensive account of his "Times,' and a fuller exposition of the character and aims of the other personalities of the drama, but for the special purpose that has determined the character of the book. Still, Mr. Russell's plan has advantages of its own: though it prevents him supplying a fully comprehensive account of the 'Times' of Maitland, it enables him to devote a more detailed attention to certain aspects of them, than would otherwise have been possible within the compass of his present volume. Moreover, what he has done he has generally done very well: with great care, with admirable lucidity, and with as much freedom from bias as one can reasonably expect.

Necessarily Mr. Russell's standpoint is not that of every other student of the period. Here there is still considerable variety of opinion, if not partizanship; and doubtless there are some, besides myself, who, more particularly, will not coincide with his estimates either of Moray or Knox, or with all his judgments about Mary. For example, there is hardly a unanimous opinion that 'Knox was more of a statesman than an ecclesiastic'; nor will every one admit that the position of Knox is quite fully or satisfactorily defined by the following formula: The Church and State in his view, as later in that of Hooker and Arnold, were co-extensive—only different aspects and relations of the same national life.' Indeed the wide difference between Knox and Arnold is shown in the very next sentence. 'Every Scot owed allegiance to the Church as he did to the State,' for Arnold would not, as Knox did, seek to enforce allegiance to the Church by legal penalties. Again, the position of Knox is only deceptively defined by stating that he held that the Sovereign of a Protestant State should be a Protestant.' What he did hold was that there should be neither Catholic Sovereigns nor Catholic States. Moreover, it is questionable whether Scotland on Mary's arrival was either de jure or by full persuasion de facto a Protestant State. Knox was even afraid that with Mary as queen it might not be long a Protestant State; but whether the majority of the nation were Protestants or not, did not, with him, affect the question of what was permissible. His aim had been to change the religion of the State, and while, as Mr. Russell tells us, the crown in Scotland was the ruling factor in the government and policy of the State,' he sought to override the crown and the government so far as religion was concerned; and in those times this meant the substitution of the Kirk, or rather himself, as 'the ruling factor' in the State. His views of the relations of Church and State were, in short, medieval, not modern. They supposed a certain infallibility in himself and in the Kirk. Again, it would be more correct to speak of Knox's 'demagogic' than his