&c., to the Ashmolean Museum at Oxford; and most of them were
accordingly deposited there. He however appears to have retained his
original manuscript of the " Natural History," in which he made
several observations in the year 1691; that being the latest date
attached by him to any of the additions.†

† [Some of these additions of 1691 Aubrey afterwards transcribed into
certain blank spaces in the Royal Society's copy.]

On the 15th of September in the same year Aubrey sent this work to his
learned and scientific friend, John Ray, for his perusal. The latter
made a number of notes upon various parts of the manuscript, which he
retained till the 27th of the ensuing month; when he returned it with
the very judicious letter which will be found printed in this present
publication (p. 7.) He had acknowledged the receipt of the work in a
previous letter, in which he says: "I have read it over with great
pleasure and satisfaction. You doe so mingle "utile dulci" {the useful
with the sweet} that the book cannot but take with all sorts of
readers: and it is pity it should be suppressed; which, though you
make a countenance of, I cannot persuade myself you really intend to
do:" and then proceeds to criticise a few pedantic or "new-coyned "
words, and also the contents of Chapter VIII. (Part I.) It was
probably soon afterwards that Evelyn perused and added some notes to
the manuscript;‡ and in February 1694 Aubrey also lent the work to
Thomas Tanner (afterwards Bishop of St Asaph), at his earnest request.
He seems to have become acquainted with his fellow county-man, Tanner,
only a short time before this. The latter, although then only in his
twenty-first year, and pursuing his studies at Oxford, had acquired a
reputation for knowledge of English antiquities, and with the ardour
and enthusiasm of youth evinced much anxiety to promote the