knows better than myself. Geoffrey says, in the 10th chap. of the 3rd
book, that Belin, among other great works, made a wonderful gate on the
bank of the Thames, and built over it a large tower, and under it a
wharf for ships; and when he died his body was burned, and his ashes put
into a golden urn on the top of the tower. Stow seems to doubt it. In
Strype's edition, 1720, he says, concerning this gate, "Leaving out the
fable thereof faming it to be builded by King Belin, a Briton, long
before the incarnation of Christ." Burton, writing 1722, mentions the
legend, but adds, "But whether of that antiquity is doubted." and John
Brydall, in 1676, mentions it only as a wharf or quay for ships. Now, as
Geoffrey of Monmouth's _Chronicle_ is generally allowed by critics to be
but a mass of romance and monkish legends, built on a slight foundation
of truth, we may suppose this account to partake of the general
character of the rest of the work. That some circumstance gave rise to
the name is not doubted. "Haply," says Stow, "some person of that name
lived near." I look on the name as only a corruption or romantic
alteration of the word Baal or Bel; and, as we have every reason to
suppose he was worshipped by part of the aborigines of this country, I
deem it not improbable that on or near this spot might once have existed
a temple for his worship, which afterwards gave a name to the place. It
is true Baal generally had his temples placed on the summit of lofty
mountains or other eminences. But supposing a number of his votaries to
have settled near London, and on the banks of the Thames, nothing would
be more likely than, to obviate the natural lowness of the ground, they
would raise a tower for the better celebration of the ceremonies
attendant on his worship. This might have been the foundation upon which
Geoffrey built his story. However, I only suggest this. The real origin
of the name I am afraid is too far sunk in oblivion to hold out any
hopes of its being rescued at the present day.