I never was able to conceive how _Shap_ should have been used in the English language to signifie _Fate_, till I observed the following article in Skinner, "Shap, _now is my_ Shap, nunc mihi _Fato_ præstitutum est (i.e.) _now is it_ shapen _to me_, ab AS. Sceapan, &c." I suppose that the word _Fato_, in the Latin, led Chatterton to understand _now is my shap_ to mean _now is my fate_. The passage, to which Skinner refers, is in the Knight's tale of Chaucer, ver. 1227. _Now is me shape_ eternally to dwelle Not only in purgatorie but in helle. But in the Edit. of 1602, which Skinner appears to have made use of, it is written _Now is me shap_. The putting of _my_ for _me_ was probably a mistake of the Printer, as Skinner's explanation shews that he read _me_. I fancy the generality of readers will be satisfied by the foregoing quotations, that the Author of these poems had not only read Skinner, but has also misapprehended and misapplied what he found in him. If more instances should be wanted, a comparison of the words explained by Chatterton with the same or similar words as explained by Skinner, will furnish them in abundance[6]. I shall therefore conclude this Appendix with a short view of the preceding argument. It has been proved, that the poems attributed to Rowley were not written in the XV Century; and it follows of course, that they were written, at a subsequent period, by some impostor, who endeavoured to counterfeit an author of that century. It has been proved, that this impostor lived since Skinner, and that the same person wrote the interpretations of words by way of Glossary, which are subjoined to most of the poems. It has also been proved, that Chatterton wrote those interpretations of words. Whether any thing further be necessary to prove, that the poems were entirely written by Chatterton, is left to the reader's judgement. If he should stick at the word _entirely_, which may possibly seem to carry the conclusion a little beyond the premisses, he is desired to reflect, that, the poems having been proved to be a forgery since the time of Skinner, and to have been written in great part by Chatterton, it is infinitely more probable that the remainder was also written by him than by any other person. The great difficulty is to conceive that a youth, like Chatterton, should ever have formed the plan of such an imposture, and should have executed it with so much perseverance and ingenuity; but if we allow (as I think we must) that he was the author of those pieces to which he subjoined his interpretations, I can see no reason whatever for supposing that he had any assistance in the rest. The internal evidence is strong that they are all from one hand; and external evidence there is none, that I have been able to meet with, which ought to persuade us, that a single line, of verse or prose, purporting to be the work of ROWLEY, existed before the time of CHATTERTON.