for the reception of wooden towers, as if time would not wear away vestiges of this nature;—­that the disposition is not in regular order like that of a Roman encampment, a matter equally liable to be defaced;—­and, finally, that the out-works to the west are fully decisive of a more modern aera, as if intrenchments were not, like buildings, frequently the objects of subsequent alterations;—­In his inferences he is followed, and, apparently without any question as to their authenticity, by Ducarel, whom I suspect from his description never to have visited the place.  The Abbe Fontenu, in a paper in the same volume, gives it as his opinion that, from the term Civitas Limarum, it might safely be believed there was a city in this place; and he tries to persuade himself that he can trace the foundations of houses.

[17] Noel, Essais sur le Department de la Seine Inferieure, I. p. 88.

[18] The same is also notoriously the case in our own country:  popular tradition, by a metonymy very easily to be accounted for, from a desire of adding importance to its objects, attributes whatever is Roman to Julius Caesar, as the most illustrious of the Roman generals in England; just as we daily hear smatterers in art referring to Raphael any painting, however ordinary, that pretends to issue from the schools of Rome or Florence, every Bolognese one to Guido or Annibal Carracci, every Kermes to Ostade or Teniers, &c.

[19] Noel, Essais sur la Seine Inferieure, I. p. 98.

[20] Sully, who was himself in this battle, and bore a conspicuous part in it, dwells upon its details completely con amore, and evidently regards the issue of this day as decisive of the fate of the monarch, who is reported to have said of himself shortly before the battle, that “he was a king without a kingdom, a husband without a wife, and a warrior without money.”—­I. p. 204.

[21] In justice to my readers, I must not here omit to say that such is the opinion of a most able friend of mine, Mr. Cohen, who visited this castle nearly at the same time with myself, and who writes me on the subject:  “I feel convinced that the brick coating of the wedge-tower at Arques is recent.  Such was the impression I had upon the spot; and now I cannot remove it.  It appeared to me that the character of the brick-work, and of the stone cordons or fillets, was entirely like that of the fortifications of the XVIth century; and I also thought, perhaps erroneously, that the wedge or bastion was affixed to the round tower of the castle, and that it was an after-construction.  At the south end of the castle, you certainly see very ancient and singular masonry.  The diagonal or herring-bone courses are found in the old church of St. Lo, and in the keep at Falaise; not in the front of the latter, but on the side where you enter, and on the side which ranges with Talbot’s Tower.  The same style of masonry is also seen, according to Sir Henry Englefield, at Silchester, which is most undoubtedly a pure Roman relic.”—­It abounds likewise in Colchester Castle.