\6 Erroi'in the Review of ike Forest Muistreli* [Aug. 1, 
is sain in my last of Victis or Vectis, 
the Isle of 'Wight, and tiie above, it 
is plain that ic in old. names is varied 
to ac, cue, ec. oc, vie, n ick, ike. In the 
Cassieiichlani it is varied to euch, and 
each of these is used for Border Land, 
or Lend. But the border land was 
sometimes marshy; and hence the words 
above often ioipiy marsh lands. 
In like manner B.broc in the Bibro- 
ci was derived from bior or hiurj water; 
and ac, border land ; and biorac implies 
a Toarsh. The Saxons rendered right- 
Jv Bibroc, Berroc. In the east of Berk¬ 
shire lies Ripplesmere hundred. In this 
and the adjoining hundreds there is 
much marshy and low ground. The 
Bibroci inhabited this and many such 
like portions. The Atrebates of the 
continent also inhabited low marshy 
land'. The Saxons, supposing that these 
lijw or marsh-landers peopled the west part 
of Berksliire, and knowing that the inlia- 
biiants of the ea^t part were appropriately 
cai!edMarsh-men, gave the name Marsii- 
men to the whole. Or rather perhaps 
bnowmgthat the Marsh-men and the Wa¬ 
ter-Hill IMen w ere tiie same nation ; and, 
i^ot knowing the derivation ot theii 
bames ; thev gave them one name, and 
made Marsh Men ot the IIi!l-Lan Jers. 
In the same way did these people 
mistake the name Sctvreii, or 
Savern, the old name of the Severn. 
Snv in this name meant stream; but, 
sbmh or seW being also, summer, they 
mistook the word sfreuni lor sic-nmcr; 
and, instead of rendering the land on it, 
the Stream Track, from anv a stream, and 
seed or sect a track, they rendeted it 
Suinmerset or the Suinmer irack; and 
hence the people of that county owe 
their name to a Saxon blunder. 
A.B. 
To fb.e BdHor of (he JJjnthlj/ Magazine. 
SIR, 
N the hope that one of the Reviews 
w'oulfi have correctcfi the strange error 
wliich [ am about to mention to yon, I 
refrained fronr iioticing it : luit, as it 
DOW appears to arise from tJie review¬ 
er’s own want of knowledge, I can¬ 
not help attempting to shew the ignoi'ance 
of the w riter of the article. 
in the Review for Tebruary last, is a 
critique upon a publication called the 
“ Forest Minstrel.” Tiie writer sets out 
with an acknowledgment ot having been 
iihfavourably impressed as to this work, 
and truly its merit does not seem to be 
great; but jjis candor should htlve kd him 
a little further, and have prevented his 
detracting from what little value the work 
may possess, by such criticisms as the fol- 
lowiug : “—Our poetical sliepherd resorts 
to most far-fetclied and w himsical allusions 
by wT.y of novelty. For instance, where, 
avoiding tlie long-established similes of 
twinkling stars, roses, and mountain 
fleeces (2), he compares a girl’s eyes to 
‘ two beads of glass,’ and her cheeks ta 
* leather bells.’” Now, nobody will 
doubt hut that the term “• uhimsicul al¬ 
lusion,” imy very justly be applied to these 
‘‘ leather hells'” but could not the crnic 
here have suggested an error of the press? 
Could he not have substituted an A for the 
I; and then surely the allusion is as beau-* 
tiful and as appropriate (for a Scottish 
shepherd especially,) as.that of the Rose. 
-—Or is he yet to learn the meaning of 
the word heather} 
Not having the book to refer to, I can¬ 
not ascertain w liether it be really printed 
leather: but this is of small monicnr, for, 
in these times, surely no one, who sets up 
for a literary judge, can plead ignorance 
of the heather. 
“ Away hath pass’d iht bcuther^heily 
That bloom’d so rich or.' Needpach fell.” 
Marmbr.. . 
The critic therefo.-e cannot well, as it ap¬ 
pears to me, invalidate one^ of these 
ohaiges, u ui/ful niisquotatiofi, or gross 
ignoi'ance^ 
1 ought perhaps have given tliis reviewer 
himself, a private hint of this; but per¬ 
haps also it is the duty of every one pub, 
liclv to expose tbe blunders of a would- 
be arbiter of public taste ; and, if so, it 
cannot be more eiTectuaily. done than 
through the medium of vour widelv-ex"- 
tended pubiieation. L. N. 
June, 1611. 
To the Editor of the Jlonthly JIastazinf. 
SIR, 
N my opinion the -following extract 
from the Dream of Caiazan, (a Ger¬ 
man work.) would not form an unm, 
teresting article in your ?daga 2 iiie. .My 
translation i.- quite at your service. 
“ I'hc rich and sordid Caraz.m Iiad 
closed his heart against triendsinp and 
compassion, i-n proportion to the in¬ 
crease of his wealth.; as his humanity 
grew colder, his religious exercises and' 
the fervour of his prayers augmented. 
After having made this confession, he 
contiooes thus: One evening bv tlie 
light of my lamp, while I was cRsting- 
up 
