204 Anglo-Saxon Cemetery at Harnham. 
The finding of buckles, rings, beads, &c., upon the several parts 
of the skeleton to which, when it was clothed with flesh, they had 
Christendom used it, but only Italy. ‘‘The Italian” (he says) ‘‘and also 
most strangers that are commorant in Italy, doe alwaies at their meales use a 
little forke when they cut the meate: for while with their knife, which they 
hold with one hand, they cut the meat out of the dish, they fasten the fork which 
they hold in their other hand upon the same dish, so that whatsoever he be that 
sitteth in the company of others at meate, if he should unadvisedly touch the dish 
of meate with his fingers, from which all at the table do cut, he will give occasion 
of offence unto the company, as having transgressed the laws of good manners. 
This forme of feeding, I understand, is generally used in all places of Italy, 
their forks being for the most part made of iron or steel, and some of silver, 
but those are used only by gentlemen. The reason of this their curiosity is, 
because the Italian cannot by any means endure to have his dish touched by 
fingers, seeing all men’s fingers are not alike clean. Hereupon I myself thought 
good to imitate the Italian fashion by this forked cutting of meat, not only 
when I was in Italy, but also in Germany, and oftentimes in England since I 
came home: being once quipped for that frequent using of my fork, by a certain 
learned gentleman, a familiar friend of mine, one Mr. Laurence Whitaker, who 
in his merry humour doubted not to call me Furcifer, only for using a fork at 
feeding, but for no other cause.” (The word was equivocal, and signified also 
a ROGUE.) It is therefore clear that in Coryate’s time, forks were not used in 
England. Indeed Heylin (Cosmography, Bk. 111.) speaks in 1652 of silver 
forks ‘‘having been taken up of late by some of our spruce gallants from 
Italy.” But King Edward I. had been the happy owner of one, of which special 
mention is made in the inventory of his plate chest. Piers Gaveston, the 
favourite of the next reign, could boast of four: which, we are particularly 
told, were for ‘‘eating of pears.” John Duke of Brittany also had one, 
of silver, ‘‘to pick up sops from his pottage mayhap.” Before the days of 
forks a round-ended knife assisted the proverbial fingers of the eater.- The 
carver of a smoking joint seems to have had nothing for it but to manage 
as he could, with his left hand. Our cooks still send up their haunch of 
mutton or their ham, with an inviting handle of ornamented paper round 
the bone, as if they still expected us to lay hold of it ‘‘ more majorum.” In an 
ancient ‘‘ Book of Carving,” the operator is directed so to do, but with a cer- 
tain delicacy. ‘‘ Never set on fish, flesh, beast, nor fowl more than two fingers 
and a thumb!” A joint was sometimes brought to table still on the spit. 
Harnham and Seyington therefore bear witness to the occasional use of the fork 
at a much earlier period than is commonly supposed. 
For the interment of such rare property, we can really suggest only one reason. 
As it was a custom amongst Anglo-Saxons to deposit in the grave articles to 
the use of which the owner had been partial during his lifetime, it is a fair 
inference that the individual at the former place who took his knife and fork 
away with him was one who had found a special gratification in the use of 
those instruments when above ground, He would also seem to have been 
