Page:Archaeological Journal, Volume 1.djvu/429

Rh

Mr. Ord has entered upon a laborious and praiseworthy undertaking with the zeal of an amateur and the industry of a practised antiquary. It is advertised to be completed in twelve Parts, of which we already possess six. The earlier pages consist of a general account of the history and antiquities of the district, which, in parts, is to our taste a little too diffuse,—there is too much of general matters which have little or no connection with the locality, and which, by repetition in every local history, are repeated ad nauseam—but in excuse for this it may be said that it is a work, the chief circulation of which will be in the locality and among readers who cannot so easily gain access to the mass of materials and observations on early history and antiquities here presented to them. The writer is evidently a man of talent, and his book gains upon us as we advance, by the agreeable style in which it is written, and by the quantity of interesting and novel local information which it offers. The first Part contains the history of Britain, rather than of Cleveland, under the aborigines or original inhabitants, under the Romans, under the Saxons, and under the Danes. In the second Part, under the title of "The Norman Conquest," the history becomes more local. After this we have a succession of interesting and ably-written chapters on the geology of Cleveland and its agricultural condition, and on its monuments of antiquity, primeval and medieval. In the fifth Part we have the detailed history of Gisborough priory, followed in No. VI., by that of the town and parish. It appears to us to be deserving of the high patronage under which it is put forth, and we hope that its extended sale will repay with interest the labours of its author. It is an extremely good specimen of provincial typography, is illustrated with numerous woodcuts inserted in the text, and by many large lithographed and copper-plate engravings.

It is in our power, by the kindness of the author, to give a specimen or two of the woodcuts which illustrate his work, and we select as the first, a figure of a curious carved stone, found near a stone coffin taken up in Newton church in 1827. We believe Mr. Ord is not right in supposing it to be Saxon: it is evidently not older than the twelfth century, and the