and with the exception of the market-place, and St. Giles's-street, are mostly narrow, irregular, and badly laid out. The houses in general are ancient, but as the gardens admit a free circulation of air, the whole has a cheerful appearance. Norwich, exclusively of its cathedral, contains thirty-four churches, besides a number of chapels and meeting-houses of various descriptions for dissenters. Here are five bridges over the river; three old ones of stone, the Foundery Bridge of wood, and the Carrow Abbey Bridge of cast-iron. Excepting the side towards the river, the whole city was formerly surrounded by an embattled wall flanked with forty towers, and had twelve gates. The walls are in a state of dilapidation, and the gates are taken down. With respect to the origin of this city, Camden observes, "I have nowhere met with the name of Norwich before the Danish invasion. So far is it from having been built by Cæsar, or Guiteline the Briton, as some fabulous authors tell you." It is probable that Norwich originated in the decay of Castor, or Venta Icenorum, as Salisbury arose out of Sorbiodunum, or Old Sarum. An old distich commemorates the former event:

"Castor was a city when Norwich was none,
"And Norwich was built with Castor stone."

There can be little doubt that the place received its name from the Saxons. The word Northwic in their language, according to Blomefield, signifies a northern station, castle, or town. And on the Saxon coins, many of which this author enumerates, the word occurs in their exergue, with the mint-master's name. Of the origin of Norwich Castle there have been many disputes. Alfred, beyond a doubt, to repel the inroads of the Danes, greatly improved its fortifications; though when this monarch made a peace with the Danish leader, Guthrum, Norwich Castle was in the possession of that chief. In the reign of Etheldred, it was

totally destroyed by Sweyne, King of Denmark; this was in the year 1004. This monarch was afterwards defeated by the Saxon Earl Ulfkettle, and obliged to flee to Denmark. In the year 1010 the Danes returned and settled at Norwich, which they fortified; and the castle appears to have been rebuilt by Canute on his accession to the crown of England, about 1018, at which time it was in the custody of Turkil. Being a place of importance, its government was entrusted to Harold, who, succeeding to the throne, conferred the care of it upon Leofric, a Saxon Thane; and soon after the Norman conquest, William appointed Ralph de Waher to the Earldom of Norfolk, and gave him this castle for his residence. This nobleman joined in rebellion with Waltheof, the powerful Earl of Northumberland; but having been defeated, he took refuge in his castle of Norwich; whence, after it had been invested by the royal army, he found means to withdraw to Normandy, leaving his lady to defend it in his absence. Her garrison, chiefly consisting of Armorican Bretons, making a gallant resistance, and only yielding to famine, obtained the honourable terms of being permitted to leave the kingdom as exiles. Upon this the countess and her followers joined her husband, who had been protected from the conqueror's vengeance in the castle of Dol. On this occasion the then Archbishop of Canterbury, in addressing the king, observed, "Your realm is cleared from the infections of the Bretons, the castle of Norwich yielded with the Bretons therein, and their lands in England; their lives and limbs being granted them on condition that they quit the kingdom within forty days," &c.

The earldom and castle of Norwich thus reverting to the crown, the king, in the year 1077, conferred them on Roger Bigod, another of his Norman followers; and this family, with few interruptions, continued in

the possession of this castle till the reign of King John. Among the different opinions as to the architecture of this building, Blomefield supposes that the present structure was erected by Roger Bigod, in the time of William Rufus, that it occupies the site of a brick building raised by Canute, and that it was considerably repaired and beautified by Thomas de Brotherton, in the time of Edward II. Leaving the most discordant opinions on this subject to be settled by other antiquaries, we shall observe that the keep, or master tower, is the only considerable part now standing. The promontory on which it is built appears to be a natural elevation, but is, beyond all doubt, artificial, and the ground from the castle, a mile southward, is nearly on a level with the upper ballium. The area of the ancient castle, including its outer works, contained about twenty-three acres, the whole of which was surrounded by a wall. This space comprehended three ballia, each defended by a lofty vallum and deep foss. The walls of such castles, according to Grose, were commonly flanked with towers, and had a parapet embattled, crenalated, or garretted. For the mounting of it there were flights of steps at convenient distances, and the parapet often had the merlons pierced with long chinks, ending in round holes, called oeillets. According to Mr. Wilkins, the entrance into the Barbican was at the south-east end of Golden Ball Lane, and not at the north, as stated by Blomefield. Over each foss, in each direction, was a bridge, but only one of them remains. This extends across the inner ditch. At the inner extremity of it are the foundations of two circular towers, fourteen feet in diameter, one of which was appropriated to the confinement of condemned criminals, till the year 1793, when the new buildings were added. This bridge is nearly one hundred and fifty feet in extent, and rises from the inner to the upper ballium sixteen feet. It has been much,