complete edition of Marlowe's Works which he has lately published, considering it to have been "distinctly shown by Mr. Collier" that it could not have been the work of that poet. I must say, however, that the argument for its rejection does not appear to me by any means conclusive. It runs thus: in the first act is presented the death of a certain King Philip of Spain; and this King Philip must be Philip II., because in a tract printed in the Somers' Collection, giving an account of the "last words" of that monarch, are found passages which are plainly copied in the play. Now, Philip II. did not die till 1598, and the tract was not published till 1599, whereas Marlowe's death took place in 1593. Ergo, Marlowe could not have written Lust's Dominion. But we know that it was the constant custom of managers to cause acting plays to be altered and added to from time to time: the curious Diary of Manager Henslowe is full of entries of the payment of sums of twenty shillings or so, to the authors whom he kept, for "adycyons" to the works of others. And surely it is no forced hypothesis to suppose that some literary cobbler employed to touch up Marlowe's work, finding a King Philip in it, should have thought to improve and give it an air of historic truth, by introducing the circumstances furnished by the pamphlet into the death-scene. Apart from these particulars, the king is neither Philip I. nor Philip II., but a mere King Philip of Spain in general, quite superior to historical considerations. The positive evidence in support of Marlowe's authorship is tolerably strong, though not absolutely conclusive. The earliest extant edition of the play bears his name at full length on the title-page. It is true that the date of that edition is 1650, sixty-six years after his death: still the publisher must have had some reasonable ground for attributing the work to him; and in all cases comparatively little value ought to be attached to negative, when opposed by positive evidence. We

need look no farther than this very edition of Marlowe for an illustration of the possibility such a combination of circumstances as I have supposed. In the earliest known edition of the play of Dr. Faustus is found an allusion to a certain Dr. Lopez, who did not attain notoriety (by being hanged) till after Marlowe's death; but Mr. Dyce very justly only infers from this that the particular passage is an interpolation. According to the reasoning applied to Lust's Dominion, Faustus also should have been expelled summarily, upon this objection: and yet, in the case of that play, we know that such a conclusion from such premises would have been erroneous. I am unwilling to lay much stress on the internal evidence to be drawn from the language and conduct of the play itself, because I am aware how little reliance can be placed on reasoning drawn from such observations; but no one, I think, will deny that there are many passages which at least might have been written by Marlowe: and, on the whole, I submit that it would have been more satisfactory if Mr. Dyce had included it in this edition.

He has changed his practice since he printed among Middleton's works (and rightly) the play of the Honest Whore, a play generally—I believe, universally—attributed to Dekker alone, on the authority of one single entry in Henslowe's Diary, where the names of the two poets are incidentally coupled together as joint authors of the piece!

I should mention, that I take the dates and book-lore from Mr. Dyce himself.

B. R. I.

DOVER CASTLE: A NOTE TO HASTED.

Lambard, Camden, and Kilburne all speak of an accumulation of stores in Dover Castle, on the origin of which various traditions and opinions existed in their days.

"The Castell of Douer (sayth Lidgate and Rosse) was firste builded by Julius Cæsar the Romane emperour, in memorie of whome, they of the castell kept, till this day, certeine vessels of olde wine and salte, whiche they affirme to be the remayne of suche prouision as he brought into it, as touching the whiche (if they be natural and not sophisticate), I suppose them more likely to have beene of that store whiche Hubert de Burghe layde in there."—Lambard.

"In this castle likewise antiently was to be seen a tower (called Cæsar's Tower), afterwards the king's lodgings (excellent for workmanship and very high),—a spacious hall (called King Arthur's Hall) with a faire gallery, or entry,—great pipes and cashes (bound with iron hoopes), wherein was liquor (supposed to be wine) which by long lying became as thick as treackle, and would cleave like bird-lime;—salt congealed together as hard as stone, cross bowes, long bowes, and arrowes to the same (to which was fastened brass instead of feathers); and the same were of such bigness as not fit to be used by any men of this or late ages."—Kilburne.

"Camden relates that he was shown these arrows, which he thinks were such as the Romans used to shoot out of their engines, which were like to large crossbows. These last might, though not Cæsar's, belong to the Romans of a later time; and the former might, perhaps, be part of the provisions and stores which King Henry VIII. laid in here, at a time when he passed from hence over sea to France; but for many years past it has not been known what is become of any of these things."—Hasted.

The following extract from an inventory furnished by William de Clynton, Earl of Huntyngdon, Lord Warden, on handing over the castle to Bartholomew de Burghersh, his successor, dated "die Sabati in vigilia sancti Thome Apostoli, anno regni regis Edwardi tercei a conquestu Anglie decimo septimo" (i. e. September 20, 1343), will supply a satisfactory elucidation of what these stores were:

"Item in magna Turri; quinque dolea et j pipam mellis; unde de j doleo deficiunt viij pollices; et de alio deficiunt iij pollices; et de alio deficiunt xvj pollices; et de alio xv pollices; et de quinto xj pollices; et de pipa deficiunt xx pollices. Item, j molendinum manuale et ij molas pro eodem.

"Item, in domo armorum iij springaldas magnas cum toto atilo^[1] præter cordas. Item, quinque minores springaldas sine cordis; et iij parvas springaldas^[2] modici valoris; L arcus de tempore Regis avi; clvj arcus de tempore Regis nunc; cxxvj arbalistas, de quibus xxxiij arbaliste de cornu ad duos pedes, et ix de cornu ad unum pedem, et iij magne arbaliste ad turnum.^[3] Item, xliij baudrys; vij^xx et ix garbas sagittarum; lviij sagittas large barbatas; xxv haubergons debiles et putrefactos; xxij basenettos debiles de veteri tour; xj galeas de ferro, de quibus vj cum visers; xx capellas de ferro; xxij basenettos coopertos de coreo, de veteri factura, debiles et putrefactos; xxv paria cirotecarum de platis nullius valoris; xij capellas de nervis de Pampilon depictas; xxx haketons^[4] et gambesonspublic@vhost@g@gutenberg@html@files@42791@[email protected]#footnote5"