with me,
executed, is perhaps of its kind, one of the most perfect things
extant. In saying this, I only deliver the opinions of very many
competent judges. It must however be noticed, that the Society of
Antiquaries published the whole series of this exceedingly curious and
ancient Representation of the Conquest of our Country by William I. Of
this publication, the figures measure about four inches in height: but
there is also a complete, and exceedingly successful fac-simile of the
first two figures of this series--of the size of the originals
(William I. and the Messenger coming to announce to him the landing of
Harold in England) also published from the same quarter. The whole of
these Drawings were from the pencil of the late ingenious and justly
lamented THOS. STOTHARD, Esq. Draftsman to the Society of
Antiquaries.]

[145] A complete copy is of rarity in our own country, but not so abroad.
It is yet, however, an imperfect work.

[146] There have been bibliographers, and there are yet knowing
book-collectors, who covet this edition in preference to the Leipsic
impression of Sir T. More's Works of 1698; in folio. But this must
proceed from sheer obstinacy; or rather, perhaps, from ignorance that
the latter edition contains the _Utopia_--whereas in the former it is
unaccountably omitted to be reprinted--which it might have been, from
various previous editions.

[147] This figure is introduced with pursuivants and dogs: but great
liberties, as a nice eye will readily discern, have been taken by
Montfaucon, when compared with the original--of which the fac-simile,
in the previous edition of this work, may be pronounced to be PERFECT.

[148] Something similar may be seen round the border of the baptismal vase
of St. Louis, in Millin's _Antiquites Nationales_. A part of the
border in the Tapestry is a representation of subjects from Aesop's
Fables.

[149] Of a monument, which has been pronounced by one of our ablest
antiquaries to be "THE NOBLEST IN THE WORLD RELATING TO OUR OLD
ENGLISH HISTORY," (See _Stukely's Palaeog. Britan._ Number XI.
1746, 4to. p. 2-3) it may be expected that some archaeological
discussion should be here subjoined. Yet I am free to confess that,
after the essays of Messrs. Gurney, Stothard, and Amyot, (and more
especially that of the latter gentleman) the matter--as