By the Rev. W. H. E. Me. Knight. 199 
distance of the line of Roman occupation similar earthworks there, still retain the 
name of Castle, or rather “ Castell.’”’ And that this was the true name for such 
earthworks or secured dwelling-places we find from Livy’s use of the word in 
his account of Annibal’s passage of the Alps. In Book 21, chap. 33, he states 
that the inhabitants (montani) posted themselves in a strong position over 
Annibal’s line of march and made it impossible for him to advance. He therefore 
halted for the night and kindled his camp-fires. On which the inhabitants 
withdrew to their own places for the night. In the night heseized upon the 
very point of vantage, and in the morning, as Livy writes, ‘‘ Jam montani, signo 
dato, ex castellis ad stationem solitam conveniebant ” were assembling when 
they found it already occupied. Here the ** castella "’ were the usual dwelling. 
places to which for the night they retired, for it is not likely they were earth- 
works suddenly thrown up for the occasion, but, as the whole narrative rather 
assumes, they were the mountain-villages or dwelling-places through which 
Annibal was making his way when he met this vigorous resistance. The Romans, 
therefore, would call these ‘*camps’’ ‘‘ castella”—not “ castra ”’-—-and they have 
left that name, descriptive to them of their real character, to all generations since, 
even to our times. 
But Cesar also from his imperfect knowledge of this country, which we know 
was limited to the county of Kent, or, rather to the south of the Thames, gives 
a description of a British town or dwelling-place of the tribe which tallies re- 
markably with these camps, with only the exception of the ‘* woods” which our 
downs never could boast of. He says, Bell. Gull., Bk. 5, c. 22, ‘ Oppidum 
autem Britanni vocant cum silvas impeditas vallo atque foss& munierint.” Here, 
if instead of woods we substitute down or heights, we have the true description 
of the primitive British fown. 
The next proof from the names of things we have is in the word “ bury.” 
After the Romans had left Britain, and their four hundred years of rule had 
disciplined the Britons (now leavened with the influences of the Christian faith) 
into the passive acquiescence of a conquered people—after, indeed, they had so 
long enjoyed the rest and security of that “ rule ”’—they were unfit to meet the 
struggle that lay before them. The northern nations of Europe found the victim 
prepared for conquest, and after a hundred and fifty years of varying conflict, 
the Britons, influenced, as I think, by the strong instinct of their new faith, left 
their native land for Brittany, or withdrew into Wales and Cornwall, rather 
than submit to the rule of pagan conquerors. But during that long struggle 
these ‘‘camps” assumed a very different character—became of more serious 
importance than they had ever been during the Roman conquest. They were 
undoubtedly the chief centres on which the new invaders bent their attention, 
and they gave them the distinctive name of their own tongue, and called them 
Beorg—Burg—Bury—which meant a defended town or dwelling-place. We 
may see why this was so. Unlike the conquest of the civilized Roman, who never 
meant to occupy the land, but only to hold it for his use and profit, the new 
_ inyaders were nearer alike to their foe—nay even inferior in civilization—certainly 
without the influence of the Christian faith—and to them, therefore, conquest 
_ meant possession and occupation, and these dwelling-places were to them the 
country, and the struggle would centre much around them, as tradition and 
history affirm it did. 
