THE TOPOGRAPHY OF WORCESTERSHIRE. 343 



suspend him from his topographical labours until he has corrected his 

 manifold errors. We are first favoured with a map, in which Shipslon- 

 on-Stour, and Stourport, two market towns of repute, are invisible. 

 Chfton-on-Teme, Blockley, Witley, Stanford, and numerous other places, 

 are in the same predicament. Ribbesford is metamorphosed to Biddesford, 

 and Hanley Castle is placed on the eastern side of the Severn, instead of 

 the western, &c. These trifling errors we may good-naturedly forgive, 

 setting them to the account of the stupid engraver, but Mr. Tymms will 

 not be able so easily to excuse himself from others, which ought not to 

 have occurred in a work intended for general perusal, and could not, 

 had our author personally inspected the county he describes. 



Mr. Tymms comprises his description of Worcestershire under the 

 following heads, which, as they are convenient enough for the purpose, 

 we shall follow, and add to, or correct, as circumstances require. 



SITUATION AND EXTENT. 



Here carelessness and inattention soon appear, and discrepancy pre- 

 sents itself without any data to guide our steps. The county is stated 

 to consist of 674 square miles, and 466,560 acres. Now this is mani- 

 festly incorrect, and singularly enough is compounded of two incongru- 

 ous statements. The author makes a parade of having ** consulted" 

 Dr. Nash's folios, but if he had done so he would have seen that Nash 

 states the county to contain 936 square miles, or 599,040 acres. This 

 is probably o/errated, as an account published by the House of Lords in 

 1805, makes the county to contain only 674 square miles, or 431,360 

 acres. But, Mr. Tymms first actually gives the same number of square 

 miles, and raises the acres to 466,560, thus gratuitously increasing the 

 latter without adding to the former, and setting all arithmetical principles 

 at defiance. We now pass on to the •" 



ANTIENT STATE AND REMAINS. 



The British inhabitants, he says, were the Cornavii or Dobuni. No 

 information, however, as to the probable boundaries of these tribes are 

 given, or any hint conveyed of the country west of the Severn being 

 occupied by the.Silures, who possessed Herefordshire. But two stations 

 of British encampments are given, viz. "Clent Heath, and near the 

 Four Shire Stone." The two British posts on the hills near Little 

 Malvern, are thus omitted, though Dr. King considered that on the 

 Herefordshire Beacon as one of the most important on the island.* 

 Under Roman remains, however, Mr. Tymms very vaguely sets down 

 the ** Malvern Hills," while, on turning to Herefordshire, we find he 

 has there recommitted them to British keeping. Ruebury Hill, on 

 the Lickey, and the Berrow Hill, near Martley, both undoubtedly 

 occupied by the ancient Britons, are also omitted by the " Family Topo- 

 grapher." Under the head "Earthwork," we find " Cruckbarrow 

 Hill, near Worcester, a burial-place." This may be correct, though 

 we believe that Cruckbarrow has never been explored, but why are 

 numerous other "Earthworks" omitted, as the Round Hill, Spetchley, 

 Inkberrow, Castle Hill, Worcester (raised by the Britons or Ro- 

 mans), traces of mounds and trenches at Shrawley, near the Severn, 

 Ombersley, the Trench Woods, near Droitwich, and various hills either 

 artificial or rounded from their original shapes, and devoted to religious 



* See Dr. Card's " Dissertation upon the Herefordshire Beacon," which he 

 ingeniously supposes was occupied by Caractacus. 



NO. V. 2 z 



