The Evidence of the Churches. 31 



the thirty or fifty churches, and the towns of the people who 

 filled them ? ^^^ly, too, did not the Chroniclers mention them 

 specifically ? Why, farther, if William pulled down all the 

 churches, are the only two, at Brockenhurst and ^Nlilford, re- 

 corded in Domesdai/,* still standing with their contemporary 

 workmanship "? Why, too, is Fawley church, with its Norman 

 doorway, and pillars, and arches, formerly, as we know from 

 another portion of Domesdai/, in the Forest, remaining, if all 

 were destroyed ? And why, last of all, if the inhabitants 

 were exterminated, was a church built at Boldre, in the very 

 wildest part of the Forest, immediately after the afforestation, 

 and another at Hordle '? f 



Had there been any buildings destroyed, all ruins of them 

 would not have been quite effaced, even in the course of eight 

 centuries. The country has been undisturbed. Nature has not 

 here, as in so many places, helped man in his work of destruc- 

 tion. They cannot, we know, have been built on, or ploughed 

 over, or silted with sand, or choked with mud, or washed away by 

 water. The slightest artificial ]:)ank, though ever so old, can be 

 here instantly detected. The Keltic and West- Saxon barrows 

 still remain. The sites of the dwellings of the Britons are still 

 plainly visible. The Roman potteries are untouched, and their 

 vessels and cups, though lying but a few inches under the 

 ground, unbroken. We can only very fairly conclude that, 

 had there been houses, or villages, or churches destroyed, all 

 traces of them would not be gone, nor entirely lost in the 

 preserving record of local names. 



* Til tliat portion under "Tn Novri. Forcstu et circa cam." 



t Warner, vol. ii. p. 33, says Hordle Churcli was standing wlien J)onics- 



day was made. Tliis is a mistake. It was, however, built soon after, as we 



know from some grants of lialdwin de Rcdvers. 



