good, not only between Tacitus and Sallustius, but between Sallustius and Thucydides. Such is the aspect under which I endeavour to behold the classics, viz. as one great whole, having here and there pieces gone or faded (lost or hopelessly corrupted), and which fit into each other, showing the building which intellect erects, the only building calculated to withstand the hand of time. Thanks be to printing, to cheap literature, and to English energy and investigation, antiquity may again rear her head, and fell that it is comprehended in all its varied bearings, and lights and shadows. To men like Niebuhr, Grote, Layard, Prescott, St. John, Wilkinson, Rawlinson, and Norris, do we owe a debt of gratitude, for such patience and investigation; and no one cheers them on with a more sincere feeling, and thanks them for their past exertions, than KENNETH R. H. MACKENZIE. [Footnote 2: Short-hand, we know, was in use at Rome.] * * * * * THE OUTER TEMPLE. Mr. Peter Cunningham, in his delightful _Handbook of London_, says that when the New Temple "passed to the Knights of St. John of Jerusalem, the Inner and Middle Temple were leased to the Students of the Common Law; and the OUTER TEMPLE to Walter Stapleton, Bishop of Exeter:" and in describing Essex House, by which name it {326} was afterwards known, he repeats the same statement; as if the Outer Temple was part of the original property of the Knights Templars. I should be very glad to know what authority he has for this; because I have very great doubt whether the "Outer Temple" ever belonged to the Knights Templars or to the Knights of St. John, or was in any manner comprehended within the property. The New Temple, as the whole property was called, belonged to Aymer de Valence, Earl of Pembroke, at the time of his death, in June, 1323. The Council of Vienna, in 1324, bestowed all the lands of the Knights Templars on the Knights of St. John. Since my letter to you on the general subject of the Temple, and L. B. L.'s obliging answer (Vol. ii., pp. 103. 123.), I have been kindly furnished by Mr. Joseph Burtt, of the Chapter House, with a deed, dated June 28, 1324, by which the Knights of St. John granted the _whole_ of the New Temple, "totum messuagium nostrum vocatum Novum Templum," to Hugh le Despencer the younger; describing it to be lying _between the house_ (hospicium) _of the Bishop of Exeter_ towards the west, and the house of Hugo de Courteneye towards the east. This shows manifestly that if the Bishop of Exeter's house ever belonged to the Temple, it did not at that time; and I am not aware of any earlier evidence proving that the Templars ever possessed it. I believe, though I have not seen the record, that, in the grant to Sir William Paget, temp. Henry VI., it is described as the "Outer Temple;" but I am inclined to think, from various circumstantial testimonies, that it was merely so called because it was situate on the _outside_ of the Temple.