Notes and Queries Vol. IV., No. 102, Saturday, October 11. 1851

NOTES:—

QUERIES:—

REPLIES:—

MISCELLANEOUS:—

In the year 1816, Mr. Charles Stothard discovered in a cellar (as it is described) of one of the buildings adjoining the ruined abbey at Fontevraud, which was then used as a prison, the monumental effigies of King Henry II., Eleanor of Aquitaine his queen, King Richard I., and Queen Isabella of Angoulême. It had been feared that these monuments shared the destruction of the royal tombs from which they were torn, in the fearful outrages of the Revolution; but they were found to have escaped the general havoc, although they had suffered some mutilation. They are described to be sculptures almost coeval with the decease of the sovereigns represented, and to possess such a chaste grandeur and simplicity of character as to add great artistic value to their historical importance. Mr. Stothard represented to the English government of that day the propriety of rescuing such venerable monuments from further injury, and of bringing them to Westminster Abbey; and an application appears to have been made, through some official channel, to the French authorities; but it was not successful, though it had the effect, as it is said, of inducing the latter to direct measures to be taken for the better preservation of these effigies. About the same time, Mr. Stothard discovered the monumental effigy of Queen Berengaria in the ruins of her once-stately abbey-church of L'Espan, near Mans, which he found converted into a barn; but it was then in contemplation to place this effigy in the church of St. Julien there, when the restoration of that edifice should be completed. A memoir (which I cannot here obtain) on the sepulchral statues of English sovereigns at Fontevraud was read in 1841 in the congress of the Society for Preserving the Historical Monuments of France; and by the researches of M. Deville, a distinguished antiquary of Normandy, another effigy of King Richard "of the Lion Heart" was brought to light in 1838, from beneath the modern pavement of the choir of Rouen Cathedral, and was shortly afterwards made known in England by the very interesting communication made by Mr. Albert Way to the Society of Antiquaries of London, and published in vol. xxix. of the Archæologia.

I am not aware that attention has been otherwise drawn to these effigies since the publication of Mr. Stothard's great work, nor can I find that his suggestion has at any time been revived, or that the steps which may have been taken at Fontevraud for rescuing these monuments from the gradual demolition which seemed to threaten them, were such as are likely to insure their ultimate preservation. What those steps were, or what is the present state of these interesting memorials, I have not been able to learn; but, inasmuch as it appears that the tombs they covered have been destroyed; that in the fury of revolutionary violence the remains of the royal dead were scattered to the winds; and that the abbey church of Fontevraud itself fell into a state of ruin, if not of desecration; it will probably be agreed that the removal of these monuments to Westminster Abbey is unobjectionable, and that their deposit among the effigies of our early sovereigns in that glorious edifice would be appropriate, and is much to be desired. Being strongly impressed with that opinion, I trouble you with this note, which, if you should deem it worthy of insertion, may elicit some information, and perhaps lead to an application for leave to remove these monuments, and place them in Westminster Abbey. The present time seems favourable for such an effort; and if the object in view should have the sanction of Queen Victoria, the interference of Her Majesty would probably prevail.

W. SIDNEY GIBSON.

Newcastle-upon-Tyne.

The principle of decyphering propounded for the Nineveh inscriptions (Vol. iv., p. 220.) is available equally, and with better prospect of speedy solution, in the case of those of Mocatteb. A very interesting narrative is given of these in Laborde's Mount Sinai and Petra (p. 248). The site of them is seventy miles direct distance south-east from Suez, and they extend on the rock three miles and more in length, at a height of ten or twelve feet, and in the line of route to Sinai, which is distant fifty miles south-east from Mocatteb. They also lie not only in the usual caravan route, but almost in a direct line drawn from Ethiopia to the cities of Nineveh and Babylon. Nimrod is represented as an Ethiopian (Gen. x. 8.), "Cush begat Nimrod" = "Nimrod was an Ethiopian by descent." The whole of this invaluable monument of the most ancient geography, the tenth of Genesis, must be read with reference to nations, and not individuals.

Both the valley and the mountains are named from these "Inscriptions" = Mocatteb in Arabic; that fact alone indicates considerable antiquity, especially in a country like Arabia, where the fashion of changing any usage, especially that of names of places, has never prevailed. The vicinity of these inscriptions to that portion of the world wherein the Mosaic law had its origin, and probably, as a necessary consequence, the invention of an alphabet also; and likewise the great question of ancient intercourse between Egypt, Ethiopia, Assyria (Chaldea), and India, have rendered the interpretation of the Mocatteb inscriptions a problem of paramount interest, insomuch that Bishop Clayton offered a considerable sum of money for a copy of them. In the Royal Society's Transactions, vol. ii. part vi. 1832, are specimens of 187 of these, whereof nine are Greek and one Latin. Some of them are doubtless of the sixth century.

Coutelle and Roziere (Antiquities, vol. v. p. 57.) copied seventy-five of them, and Pococke and Montague give a few specimens. Seetzen, Burkhardt, and Henneker saw them; and Niebuhr may be said to have been sent out expressly on their account, but the result was nil. Cosmus, Montfaucon, Neitzchitz, Monconys, Koischa, and others, mention them, and they have been seen by a caravan of persons familiar with Arabic, Greek, Hebrew, Syriac, Coptic, Latin, Armenian, Turkish, English, Illyrian, German, and Bohemian, to all of whom they were equally inexplicable. Since the discovery of Daguerre, we are placed in a position to obtain a real fac-simile of the whole of these inscriptions, at a small expense of time or money. Any person familiar with the use of the daguerrotype (the less learned the better) could now speedily furnish what the good Bishop so fervently longed after, were he only provided with the small sum of a few hundred pounds to take him thither and bring back his invaluable treasures. Although the Mocatteb are graven with an iron pen in the rock (Job xix. 24.), they are not everlasting, for the rains have had some effect in obliterating them, being cut, not on granite, as was formerly thought, but on red sandstone. It is worth remark, that although Moses was learned in all the wisdom of the Egyptians, he rejected entirely the hieroglyphic system of writing, and that no mention or allusion is made to the art of writing till 1491 B.C., in Ex. xvii. 14.,[1] just prior to the delivery of the law, and in connection with the account of Jethro, his father-in-law; subsequently, constant allusion is made to writing. There is only one reference to this art in Homer (Il. z. 168.). The author of Job, who appears to have had a much more enlarged knowledge of art and science than Moses, speaks of the cutting and painting (for so the Arabic and Hebrew words should be rendered, and not printing) on a roll, i.e. with the style and brush; also of the cutting (felling) with a chisel (in Arabic, a digger) on lead, or on a rock.[2]

[1] "Jehovah said to Moses, Write this as a memorandum on a roll, and let it be read to Joshua, that I intend to obliterate entirely the memory of Amalek here below. And Moses built an altar and called it Jehovah Nissi (Jehovah is my banner). The reason he assigned for the name was that a hand (power) opposed to the throne of Jah was (the cause of) Jehovah's perpetual warfare against Amalek." This is the sense of the Hebrew as it stands, in the current language of our day, and not a copy of the words merely,—an error, it is conceived, into which most of the translators, from the Seventy downwards, have often fallen. If a conjectural criticism might be offered, let כ, caf, be inserted for נ, nun, and instead of Jehovah Nissi (banner), read Jehovah Cissi, "Jehovah is my throne;" then the reason assigned by Moses for the name becomes intelligible, which it certainly is not in the existing text, undoubtedly very ancient, being confirmed by the Samaritan.]

[2] The word, correctly translated for ever, according to the Masoretic system, means "as a witness or testimony," if pointed with Tsereh instead of Pathach. The general sense of this chapter, in some respects obscure, appears to be, "I seek for justice, but cannot obtain it. Every obstacle is put in my way. Neither my own kindred nor servants obey me. Look at my most wretched condition; although I call you friends, you all hate me. You are not satisfied with persecuting my body, but you afflict my soul also. Oh that I could make an impression upon you. I would set forth my petition for relief from your persecutions on a roll, on lead, or on a rock, as a constant memorial in testimony of my sufferings and your hate; as I know that my Goel (Redeemer or Avenger) lives, and will at length ascend from the dust (sand or soil). (In his approach he raises a cloud of dust.) Then arise and destroy this (memorial), for, living, I shall get a judgment on my case, being personally present and not by representative, although I may be hardly able to attend from mental anxiety. Then you will say, why did we persecute him, we were all wrong. And you will fear punishment because you will learn that justice must be satisfied."

Divested of its highly poetic diction, the above gives the subject matter in the vernacular.]

The examination of the copies of the inscriptions already in our possession will probably determine whether the language is hieroglyphic, syllabic, or alphabetic. The principal point is to enumerate the characters found to be clearly distinct from each other. Should there be found two to three hundred decidedly distinct characters—assuming it to be one language and one uniform character of that language, for many nations (peoples) use more than one character—the language à priori must be hieroglyphic. If 70 to 90, it will be syllabic; but if only 20 to 50, it may be safely concluded that it is alphabetic. The letters distinct from each other may be less than 20, inasmuch as in the Arabic, most probably the language which will solve this problem, one character represents several sounds, the points, usually omitted, alone distinguishing the difference between be, te, tse, nun, and jod, between jim, ha and cha, between dal and zal, between re and se, sin and shin, zad and dad, fe and kaf, &c. &c. On the other hand, the language has increased the number of its characters, by distinguishing initial from medial and terminal letters, having retained only thirteen originally distinct characters in its alphabet.

The Ethiopic, written from left to right, has manifestly furnished the Arabs with their cursive character, the one uniformly printed, written from right to left, or otherwise both have derived them from a common source. Of the intimate relation early subsisting between the Ethiopians and their Shemitic congeners in Asia, one remarkable instance is the former retaining to themselves exclusively "the exalted horn," so often mentioned in the Hebrew Bible, the wearing of which has been long abandoned by every other family of that race.

T. J. BUCKTON.

Lichfield.

—Sir Robert Chicheley, alderman and twice Lord Mayor of London, is said, in Wm. Ravenhill's Short Account of the Company of Grocers from their Original (4to. Lond. 1689), to have purchased the ground whereon St. Stephen's church stands, and to have built, at his own charge, the church which was afterwards replaced by the edifice of Sir Christopher Wren. The founder was a member of that company, and to them he gave the advowson. He was the youngest of three brothers, of whom the eldest was Henry Chicheley, Archbishop of Canterbury temp. Henry VI. The second brother was Sir William, who, like Robert, was an alderman, and a member of the Grocers' Company. From the younger brother, Robert, descended Sir Thomas Chicheley, who was Master of the Ordnance and Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster in the reign of Charles II.

—In 1411 the custos or warden and brethren of the Grocers' Company purchased of Robert Lord Fitzwalter his mansion-house and lands, extending from near the Old Jewry to Walbrook in the centre of the city of London, for 320 marks, and soon afterwards laid the foundation of their new Common-hall. In 1429 they had license to acquire lands of the value of 500 marks. There was "a fair open garden behind, for air and diversion, and before the house, within the gate, a large court-yard." The company, after the fire of London, rebuilt and enlarged the old Hall, says Ravenhill in his Account of the Grocers' Company (Lond. 1689), "with offices and accommodations far beyond any other place, for the most commodious seat of the chief magistrate." (See Mr. Cunningham's quotation from Strype, as to its civic uses.) King Charles II. accepted the office of Master of the Company, and they set up his statue in the Royal Exchange. See Ravenhill's Short Account of the Company of Grocers, and Howel's Londinopolis, fol. Lond. 1657.

W. S. G.

Newcastle-upon-Tyne, Sept. 1851.

Owing to my absence from England, I was unable to answer the Queries which were put to me (No 94., p. 116.) by your respected correspondent J. E. The word guistroun (as also Salhanas) was merely an error of the press; and with respect to the others, I concur, for the most part, in the learned observations of MR. SINGER (No 96., p. 159.). Quistroun, it may be added, is found in a MS. chronicle quoted in the preface to the French version of Havelok, and with the explanation "de sa quisyne." The singular form of chaunsemlees is written chauncemele in the Promptuar. Parvul., and rendered subtelaris, which, according to Ducange, would correspond exactly to slipper.

I now beg to present your readers with a fresh series of extracts from the same volume. The first, though rather long, will not easily bear abbreviation. It is somewhat in the style of Piers Ploughman, but earlier by several years. The subject is the unfaithfulness of the clergy in the former half of the fourteenth century:—

2. Nor was the author of these sermons less severe in rebuking the faults of the layman. The following is a specimen of his plain-spoken fervour:—

3. Yet with regard to one class of questions, the tongue of the preacher was restrained. After touching the subject of confession and the frailty of some confessors, he adds in a significant way:

4. The following extract will not fail to interest the student of prophecy:—

5. The last passage I shall cite is a curious exposition of the First Commandment (p. 455.):—

"Þe first heste is þis: Þu schalt worschipen Þi lord god & him alone seruyn. In þt heste is forboden to don any sacrifice to mawmettis or worschipe to fals goddis. In þt heste also is forboden al maner wicchecraftis, enchauntementis, wiþ seruys and markis and al manere experimentis, coniuraciouns, as men wone to do and maken for thynges i-stolen, in bacynes, in swerdis and in certeyn names wreten and enclosed, holi water and holi candel and oþere manye maneris whiche ben nought good to neuene. In þt heste also is forboden al maner iogelyng and for to tellyn of þing þt is to comen, be sterres and planets, or be metell, or be destene, or be schynynge of þe pawme of mannes hond or eny oþere maneris. For þei aproperen to man þing þt oneliche falleþ to god, to witen of þinges þt arn to come," &c.

C. H.

St. Catharine's Hall, Cambridge.

MR. GATTY'S observations (Vol. iii., p. 499.) regarding the funeral of an Irish labourer, have reminded me that while on a visit some years ago to a brother in the city of Hamburgh, we one Sunday spent the day with a worthy pastor of a small village a few miles from that city, where we went early enough to attend morning service in the village church; and in the afternoon, while indulging with our pipes and coffee in an alcove in the pastor's garden, I observed a funeral approach the churchyard gate, and understanding that the ceremony was different to what I had been accustomed to, I laid down my pipe and walked into the churchyard to observe what passed, and my movement induced my brother and another or two to become spectators also. The funeral party having arranged themselves at the entrance, the ceremony commenced as follows. The parish clerk or verger walked first, having a lemon in one hand and a bunch of evergreen in the other; he was followed by six choristers or singing boys, then six men as bearers carrying the coffin, and after them the mourners and other attendants. As soon as the cavalcade moved off, the clerk or verger gave out a strophe of some psalm or hymn, which he and the boys chanted while moving round the churchyard; and thus chanting they followed a green path, which I discovered was kept close mown for the purpose; and I observed our worthy pastor had joined the cavalcade, though alone, and at some little distance from the mourners. I understood it was customary thus to move three times round, but being a very sultry afternoon, the party made two turns serve, when coming to the open grave the bearers let down the coffin into it, and then another strophe was chanted, which ended, the mourners took a last look at the coffin, and silently dropped their sprigs of evergreen upon it; the bearers then each took a spade, already provided for them, and quickly filled up the grave, and adjusted its form, when the funeral party returned silently home as they came. The pastor had now retreated again to the alcove in his garden, where we soon joined him, and he told me that as we had gone to witness the ceremony, it would have been thought disrespectful had he not also shown himself, though it did not appear that his attendance was necessary. The general practice here observed of the bearers filling up the grave, shows that the Irish labourers had some more general custom for their practice than MR. GATTY appears to be aware of.

W. S. HESLEDEN.

—Ophelia (Act IV. Sc. 5.) says that

This reminds me of a Welsh tradition concerning the female who refused a bit of dough from the oven to the Saviour "when He hungered," and was changed into Cassek gwenwyn, for לִילִית, lilish[TR: Lilith], lamia, strix, the night spectre, mara, or screech-owl.

G. M.

—The interesting note with which MR. WILLIAM J. THOMS presented the firstborn of "NOTES AND QUERIES," may perhaps admit of a postscript, borrowed from one of Mr. Jerdan's well-deserving pupils, the Literary Gazette for 1822:

"I am inclined to believe that the illuminated grottos of oyster-shells for which the London children beg about the streets, are the representatives of some Catholic emblem which had its day, as a substitute for a more classical idol. I was struck in London with the similarity of the plea which the children of both countries urge in order to obtain a halfpenny. The 'It is but once a year, sir!' often reminded me of the

This to prove that I did remember the grotto.

* & ?

Manpadt House.

—One Mr. Bacon of Ferns, being an one-and-twentieth son born in wedlock, without a daughter intervening, has performed prodigious cures in the king's evil and scrofulous cases, by stroking the part with his hand. (The Gentleman's Magazine for December 1731, p. 543.)

* & ?

—Being at a neighbour's house about a month ago, the conversation turned upon the death of a mutual acquaintance a short time prior to my visit. A venerable old lady present asked, with great earnestness of manner, "Whether Mr. R.'s bees had been informed of his death?" (Our friend R. had been a great bee-keeper.) No one appeared to be able to answer the old lady's question satisfactorily, whereat she was much concerned, and said, "Well, if the bees were not told of Mr. R's death they would leave their hives, and never return. Some people give them a piece of the funeral cake; I don't think that is absolutely necessary, but certainly it is better to tell them of the death." Being shortly afterwards in the neighbourhood of my deceased friend's residence, I went a little out of my way to inquire after the bees. Upon walking up the garden I saw the industrious little colony at full work. I learned, upon inquiring of the housekeeper, that the bees had been properly informed of Mr. R.'s death.

I was struck with the singularity of this specimen of folk-lore, and followed up the subject with further inquiries amongst my acquaintance. I found that in my own family, upon the death of my mother, some five-and-twenty years ago, the bees were duly informed of the event. A lady friend also told me, that twenty years ago, when she was at school, the father of her school-mistress died, and on that occasion the bees were made acquainted with his death, and regaled with some of the funeral cake.

I wish to know whether this custom prevails in any other, and what part of England, and to what extent?

L. L. L.

North Lincolnshire.

Reflecting on the extreme rarity of the works which issued from the press of Caxton, the question arises, What number of copies was he accustomed to print? On that point, as it seems, we have only conjectures.

Maittaire assumes that the number was about 200; an opinion which I shall not controvert. Dibdin, however, inclines to think, with regard to The golden legend and other works of the same class, "that at least 400 copies were struck off;" and in support of this conjecture, cites the practice of Sweynheym and Pannartz, as proved by the memorial addressed in their behalf to Sixtus IV., by J. Andrea, bishop of Aleria, in 1472, which practice he thus states:—

"If we are to judge from the celebrated list of the number of copies of the different works printed by those indefatigable typographical artists, Sweynheym and Pannartz, it would appear that 275 was the usual number of copies of a particular work; although sometimes they ventured to strike off as many as 550; and, twice, not fewer than 1100 copies."

Now, our renowned bibliographer misinterprets the important document which he cites. Sweynheym and Pannartz printed 300 copies of a Donatus, and the same number of a Speculum vitæ humanæ, and of two more works. In all other cases, each impression of the works which proceeded from their press consisted of only 275 copies. The words Volumina quingenta quinquaginta refer to works of which two editions were published, or which were in two volumes; and the words Volumina mille centum, to a work of which there were two editions of two volumes each. So the conjecture of Dibdin loses its best support.

As Sweynheym and Pannartz printed only 275 copies of the works of such authors as St. Augustin and St. Jerome, of Cæsar, Cicero, Livy, Ovid, Quinctilian, and Virgil—works which must have found purchasers in all parts of Europe—it is rather improbable that Caxton should have ventured to exceed that number with respect to books for which, being chiefly translations, there could be no demand beyond the shores of England.

BOLTON CORNEY.

—The following remarkable account of this place by John Watson, Esq., of Malton, in the year 1781, may be interesting to some of the readers of your paper. Braham is situated five miles S.W. of Tadcaster, and close to, and in, the remains of the old Roman road called "Watling Street:"—

"Upon the middle of this moor a man may see ten miles around him; within those ten miles there is as much free stone as would build ten cities as large as York; within those ten miles there is as much good oak timber as would build those ten cities; there is as much limestone, and coals to burn it into lime, as the building of those ten cities would require; there is also as much clay and sand, and coals to burn them into bricks and tiles, as would build those ten cities; within those ten miles there are two iron forges sufficient to furnish iron for the building of those ten cities, and 10,000 tons to spare; within those ten miles there is lead sufficient for the ten cities, and 10,000 fodders to spare; within those ten miles there is a good coal seam sufficient to furnish those ten cities with firing for 10,000 years; within those ten miles there are three navigable rivers, from any part of which a man may take shipping and sail to any part of the world; within those ten miles there are seventy gentlemen's houses, all keeping coaches, and the least of them an esquire, and ten parks and forests well stocked with deer; within those ten miles are ten market towns, one of which may be supposed to return 10,000l. per week."

CHAS. W. MARKHAM.

Becca Hall, Tadcaster.

—Through the kindness of a friend I have just examined what I take to be an interesting and curious work of art, viz., a miniature of the great Edmund Burke, painted by Sir Joshua Reynolds, and said to be the only miniature he ever painted. It is a small oval of ivory executed in water colours, and represents him past the meridian of life, his hair combed back from his ample forehead, and powdered; the coat (according to the fashion of the day) without a collar, and, as well as the waistcoat, of a chocolate colour; a white stock, and the shirt frill of lace; the features, although retaining great animation and intelligence, are round and plump. The painting is carefully and delicately finished. The same friend also possesses another miniature of the same right honourable gentleman (artist unknown), deserving notice: it is in a much larger oval, and drawn in coloured crayons. This likeness represents the statesman at a much earlier period of life, and is most exquisitely executed: his fine auburn hair in natural waves, if I may use the expression, is also thrown off the face, the features rather sharp, the nose prominent, the eyes brilliant, the lips beautifully expressed, and, on the whole, one of the most highly finished specimens of this style I ever saw: the costume the same as that already described, the colour being a snuff-brown. In this portrait, a black ribbon crosses the lace frill, indicating the presence of an eye-glass, an appendage not observable in portraits taken later in life. The lady who owns these paintings is the widow of a gentleman lately deceased, who being related to, was brought up under the guardianship of this great man, and was by him introduced into public life; circumstances which prove the authenticity of the works thus briefly described.

M. W. B.

Bruges, Sept. 26, 1851.

A short time ago I accidentally became possessed of a small packet of autograph letters, by this distinguished man, to a very intimate friend and brother officer. These letters were found in an old military chest, which had belonged to the latter. They are twelve in number; the first is dated Glasgow, 2d April, 1749, and the last, Salisbury, 1st December, 1758, on the eve of his embarkation with the memorable expedition against Quebec. The letters are written in a small and remarkably neat hand, and Wolfe's seal is still adhering to some of them. They contain much honourable sentiment, and proofs of a warm generous heart.

The perusal of these curious letters, and their allusions to passing incidents, have excited a desire to become better acquainted with the details of Wolfe's personal history; but in this I experience considerable difficulty, from the meagreness with which his biographers appear to have treated the subject. I shall accordingly feel much obliged by any of your military, or other correspondents, favouring me with references to the fullest and best account of this distinguished officer. I am anxious to obtain information, in particular, on the following points.

1. Wolfe's family connexions? I am aware who his father was, but should like to know if the former had any brothers or sisters, and who is the present representative? What was his mother's name and family?

2. Where was Wolfe educated? In one of the letters he mentions that he was taken from his studies at fifteen, and entered the army at that early age.

3. The different regiments in which he held a commission, with his rank in each, the steps and date of promotion?

4. His first and subsequent military services?

5. How long was he stationed in Scotland, on what duty, and in what places?

6. In particular, was he engaged in the formation of any of the military roads in that country, when and where?

7. Did he serve in Scotland during the rebellion of 1745-46, and was he present at the battle of Culloden? If so, in what regiment, and with what rank?

8. Are there any good portraits of Wolfe extant, and where are they to be seen?

9. Was his body brought to England, and are memorials of him preserved, such as his sword, pistols, &c.? His spurs were lately in the possession of a gentleman near Glasgow.

Ʒ.

Is it the intention of the Ecclesiastical History Society to publish a new edition of Walker's Sufferings of the Clergy? At the time when the society was instituted it was on the list of works to be published by them.

Surely, if that is the case, somewhat might be done to correct the many inaccuracies, and, in other ways, increase the value of a work which has preserved the memory of some of the most exalted acts of Christian heroism that England has ever witnessed.

Will the editor of "NOTES AND QUERIES" open his pages to receive notes and corrections for a future edition of The Sufferings of the Clergy?

DRYASDUST.

[It is believed that the trading speculation, miscalled a Society, has ended with considerable loss to both undertakers and subscribers; and is not likely to publish any more of the works which figured in its rhodomontade prospectus. Certainly it is very desirable that there should be a new, careful, and critical edition of Walker; and any assistance which can be rendered by "NOTES AND QUERIES" will be at the service of anybody who will undertake such a work. It would be well, however (and it is mentioned here with general reference to all such cases, though it is particularly applicable to the present), if the learned doctor would specify some mode by which the readers of "NOTES AND QUERIES", may address him directly. The Editor suggests this, not to save himself trouble, or because he grudges room (or rather would grudge room if he had it) for many voluminous and important communications, which would be very valuable to the Doctor, but which, from length, and want of general interest, could not be inserted in this little work. It is probable that he would by this mode obtain many communications which the writers would not send to "NOTES AND QUERIES," from being aware that they could not be inserted. There would be nothing in this to prevent his maintaining his incognito; and, therefore, the Editor ventures to request his correspondents to send to "NOTES AND QUERIES" anything that is brief, and may promise to be of general interest; and to address anything which may be more voluminous to DR. DRYASDUST, at our publisher's, No. 186. Fleet Street.]

—Can any of your correspondents give me any information about a colony of Spaniards said to exist at Brighton; of Flemings in Pembrokeshire; of Frisians in Lancashire; of Moors in (I think) Staffordshire; and of some Scandinavian race, with dark eyes and dark hair, at Yarmouth in Norfolk. I should feel thankful for the mention of other colonies besides these, if any more exist, as I believe many do, in other parts of England.

THEOPHYLACT.

—John Buxtorf the elder, in his Bibliotheca Rabbinica (printed along with his useful book De Abbreviaturis Hebraicis: Basil, 1630), p. 345., speaking of the curious and valuable work on the Hebrew Accents, by R. Elias Levita, called ספר טוב טעם, says, "Habemus cum Latine a nobis translatum."

Can any of your readers inform me whether this translation was ever printed; and, if not, whether the MS. of it is known to exist?

JAMES H. TODD.

Trin. Coll. Dublin.

—Can any of your readers offer any suggestions as to how the name "Robert," and its various diminutives, became connected with so much diablerie?

Besides the host of hob-goblins, hob-thrush, hob-with-the-lantern, and the Yorkshire Dobbies, we have those two mysterious wights Robin Hood and Robin Goodfellow, and "superstitious favourite" the Robin Redbreast. It is a term also frequently applied to idiotcy (invariably among our lower orders linked with the idea of super-naturalism). Hobbil in the northern and Dobbin in the midland districts of England are terms used to denote a heavy, torpid fellow. The French Robin was formerly used in the same sense.

SAXONICUS.

—In Halliwell's Archaic Dictionary, p. 821. col. 2., there is a quotation from Middleton's Epigrams and Satyres, 1608. Will you, or any of your readers, be kind enough to inform me what is the meaning of the word "Art'rizde which occurs in the quotation, and also give some information as to the book from which it is quoted? Dyce professes to publish all of Middleton's known works, but in his edition (1840) there are no epigrams to be found.

QUÆSO.

—Elizabeth, daughter of William Fiennes, Constable of Dover Castle, who was slain at the battle of Barnet, 10 Edw. IV., married, according to the pedigrees of Fiennes, "Sir William Griffith, of North Wales, Knt." It appears there were several persons of this name, and one styled Chamberlain of North Wales, but no such wife is given to him. Can any of your Welsh genealogists identify the Sir William Griffith by reference to any evidence or authorities, manuscript or otherwise, which state the marriage, and show whether Elizabeth Fiennes had any issue?

G.

—I have been informed that Chatham House, opposite the barracks at Knightsbridge, was the residence of Penn. This house was built in 1688; it had formerly large garden grounds attached both in front and behind. Another account informed me that a house, now known as the "Rising Sun," was the honoured spot. This house has only of late years been turned into a public-house; it is of neat appearance, and the date of 1611 is, or was till lately, to be seen at the two extremes of the copings. Query, Can either of these houses be pointed out with certainty as having been the residence of the great Quaker, and, if so, which? Why was the first-mentioned house called Chatham House?

H. G. D.

These lines are the forenoon portion of Martial's well-known distribution of hours and occupation.

Taking these hours then, for the sake of simplification, at the equinox, when they assimilate in length to our modern hours and assuming it as granted that "quies lassis" refers to the noon-tide siesta, and therefore that "sexta" cannot signify any time previous to our twelve o'clock, or noon, I wish to ask the classical readers of "NOTES AND QUERIES"—

1st. How far into the day are we carried by the expression "in quintam?"

2nd. If no farther than to a point equivalent to our eleven o'clock, A.M., in what way is the vacant hour between that point and sexta, or noon, accounted for by Martial?

A. E. B.

Leeds.

—A sermon of Dr. Pusey's contains the following beautiful illustrations of the danger of much knowledge and little practice:

"The pale cold light of the moon, which enlightens but warms not, putrifies what it falls upon."

Will any one inform me whether this is a physical truth, or only an allowable use of a popular opinion?

PHILIP HEDGELAND.

—Lightfoot, in his Flora Scotia, vol. ii. p. 642., says—

"That in many parts of Scotland (the Highlands), at the birth of a child the nurse or midwife puts one end of a great stick of the ash-tree into the fire, and while it is burning receives into a spoon the sap or juice which oozes out at the other end, and administers this as the first spoonfuls of liquor to the new-born babe."—Phillip's Sylva Flora.

Why?

G. CREED.

—In John Minshieu's Ductor in Linguas, published in 1617, the origin of this word is thus explained:—

"That a citizen's son riding with his father out of London into the country, and being a novice and merely ignorant how corn and cattle increased, asked, when he heard a horse neigh, what the horse did? His father answered, the horse doth neigh. Riding further he heard a cock crow, and said, doth the cock neigh too?"

I should not have troubled you with this story had I not been anxious to ascertain the real origin of the word "Cockney," about which Johnson seems to have been nearly as much in the dark as I am. For any other and more rational explanation I shall be much obliged, as well as by being informed from what source Minshieu derived this story of a cock and a horse, which I am confident I have met with elsewhere, and which is probably familiar to many of your readers.

H. C.

Workington.

—This term is well understood to mean those orders conferred in the church which elevate a deacon to the rank of a priest, capable of a full and entire performance of the duties of the Christian ministry. An interesting point has recently been stirred afresh, touching the validity of any ministerial commission which does not draw its authority from the imposition of episcopal hands. I am not proposing to start a controversial question, unsuited to the quiet and pleasant pages of "NOTES AND QUERIES;" but there branches out from this question a Query solely relating to the Church of England, and involving no dispute; and therefore I beg to ask, whether our church holds that a bishop can confer the full orders of the priesthood without any concomitant laying on of the hands of the presbytery? The rubric in the office for the Ordering of Priests, says, "The Bishop with the Priests present shall lay their hands severally upon the head of every one that receiveth the order of Priesthood:" and the Bishop then says, "Receive the Holy Ghost for the office and work of a Priest in the Church of God, now committed unto thee by the imposition of our hands," &c. Is, then, the aid of the priests essential to the due performance of the rite? Does the expression "our hands" mean both bishop's and priests' hands, as the joint instruments of conveying authority to do the work and office of a priest? Is there any instance of an Anglican bishop ordaining a priest without assistance? I am aware that Beveridge considers that the bishop's hands alone are sufficient; that it has never been the practice in the Greek or the Eastern churches for priests to take a part in the ceremony of conferring "full orders;" and that the custom of their doing so is referred to a decree of the Council of Carthage, A.D. 398, which says, "When a priest is ordained, the bishop blessing him and laying the hand upon his head, let all the priests also, that are present, hold their hands upon his head, by the hands of the bishop." Without the slightest reference to which is really the orthodox method, I would merely ask, whether the Church of England could legally forego the intervention of the priests, just as the Church of Scotland dispenses with the aid of bishops in the act of conferring "full orders?"

ALFRED GATTY.

—Can any correspondent furnish a derivation of ear-wig superior to the ones in vogue?

ΑΞΩΝ.

—I will thank any one to tell me on what grounds the stanzas called the Soul's Errand are reported to have been written by Sir Walter Raleigh the night before his execution. The first stanza is (memoriter)—

It will be satisfactory to hear at the same time in what work they are to be found. A nobleman of high rank is said to have them engraved on a silver table of the period.

ÆGROTUS.

—What is the origin of the common saying to call a spade, a spade? Is it an old proverb or a quotation? In a letter of Melancthon's to Archbishop Cranmer respecting the formularies of the Anglican Church, dated May 1st, 1548, the following sentence occurs, which seems to be another form of it:—

"In Ecclesiâ rectius, scapham, scapham dicere; nec objicere posteris ambigua dicta."

Is scapham, scapham dicere, I would also ask, a classical quotation, or a modern Latin version of the other expression?

W. FRASER.

[Mr. Halliwell, in his Dictionary, says, "The phrase To call a spade a spade is applied to giving a person his real character or qualities. Still in use." "I am plaine, I must needs call a spade a spade, a pope a pope."—Mar-Prelate's Epitome, p. 2.]

—At the risk of being thought somewhat ignorant, I beg for enlightenment with regard to the following passage extracted from a late number of Household Words:—

"Now the first production of an author, if only three lines long, is usually esteemed as a sort of Prince Rupert's Drop, which is destroyed entirely if a person make on it but a single scratch."

If you, or some of your correspondents, would not think this too trivial a matter to notice, and would inform me what the allusion to "Prince Rupert's Drop" refers to, I should be very much obliged.

YRAM.

[For the history of Prince Rupert's Drops our correspondent is referred to our 100th Number, p. 234. These philosophical toys, which exhibit in the most perfect manner the effects of expansion and contraction in melted glass, are made by letting drops of melted glass fall into cold water. Each drop assumes an oval form with a tail or neck resembling a retort; and possesses this singular property, that if a small portion of the tail is broken off the whole bursts into powder with an explosion, and a considerable shock is communicated to the hand that grasps it.]

—Who first remarked, with reference to the murder of the Duc D'Enghien by Napoleon, "It was worse than a crime, it was a blunder?"

T. ALLASON.

Furnival's Inn, Oct. 3. 1851.

[This saying has always been attributed to Talleyrand; and it is so clearly the remark of a clever politician, but lax moralist, that we have little doubt it has been very justly appropriated to that distinguished sayer of good things.]

—Can any of your readers oblige me with information respecting the Druidical remains at Arbor Lowe and Stanton Moor, in the Peak of Derbyshire? I am unable to find any but meagre notices; and in one or two so-called histories of Derbyshire, they are only casually mentioned. Also any particulars concerning the old family of the Ayres, who formerly lived at Birchever, and whose house still stands in a very ruinous condition at the foot of the Routor Rocks?

I have heard that some very singular histories are connected with the family.

H.

[Arbor Lowe and Stanton Moor will be found very fully described by that indefatigable Derbyshire antiquary Mr. Bateman, in his Vestiges of the Antiquities of Derbyshire, published in 1848.]

—Who was the Bishop of Worcester about the year 1697? I have a book by him On the Sufferings of Christ, and it only states by Edward Bishop of Worcester. I presume it is Dr. Stillingfleet.

Σιγμα.

[This work is by Bishop Stillingfleet; the first edition was published in 1696, and Part II. in 1700, the year following the Bishop's death.]

—Is the present Lord Clifford lineally descended from the Lord Clifford who was Lord High Treasurer temp. Charles II., or whether he derives through any collateral branch?

CLERICUS.

[The present Lord Clifford, the eighth baron, is lineally descended from Thomas first Baron Clifford of Chudleigh, who was so created 22nd April, 1672.]

—Can any one inform me who translated this into Latin? I have a copy of an early edition, without printer's name or place of publication, and with the fictitious name Petri Suavis Polani; an anagram, though not an accurate one, of Pauli, Sarpis, Veneti. The date is 1622, and over it is the device of a man under a tree, round which a vine twines, with "non solus" on a scroll. At the foot of the title-page is a MS. note in the handwriting of Rev. Francis Boult, who was a dissenting minister in Shrewsbury about a hundred years ago. It would enable those who have access to public libraries (which I have not) to answer the question above proposed. Si scire cupias quis interpres hanc historiam ex Italico in Latinum sermonem verterit, consula opusculum Degorii Wheare, Relectiones Hyamales vocatum pag. 219 et 220.

E. H. D. D.

[This is the first edition of the very inaccurate Latin translation of Sarpi's Council of Trent. The first two chapters were translated by Sir Adam Newton, and the last two by William Bedell, afterwards Bishop of Kilmore.]

—What is the meaning of livery stables, and when were they first so called?

J. C. W.

[Livery, i.e. delivery, from the French livrer, to deliver. To the origin of this word (says Junius) these words of Chaucer allude, "that is the conisance of my livery, to all my Servants delivered." Richardson also gives the following quotation from Spenser explanatory of it:—"What livery is, wee by common use in England know well enough, namely, that it is allowance of horse-meate, as they commonly use the word in stabling, as to keepe horses at livery:—the which word, I guesse, is derived of livering or delivering forth their nightly foode. So in great houses the livery is said to be served up for all night, that is, their evening's allowance for drinke. And livery is also called the upper weede which a serving man weareth, so called (as I suppose) for that it was delivered and taken from him at pleasure."—Spenser on Ireland.]

It may seem a little too late to notice a criticism nearly two years old; but, though I had casually looked at "NOTES AND QUERIES," it is but lately that I have, with very great pleasure, read through the volumes which have appeared. I was therefore ignorant of some remarks relating to myself, which from time to time have been made. Greatly as I am open to the charge of too frequent inaccuracy in what I have published, I can defend myself from some strictures of your correspondents.

The first of these is contained in a letter signed CANTAB (Vol. i., p. 51.), and relates to a passage in my History of the Middle Ages, where I have said, on the authority of Mabillon, "Not one priest in a thousand in Spain, about the age of Charlemagne, could address a common letter of salutation to another." CANTAB produces the passage in Mabillon, which contains exactly what I have said; but assigns as a reason for it, that the Christians, that is, the clergy, had wholly devoted themselves to the study of Arabic and Hebrew books. And this excuse CANTAB accepts. "They were devoting all their energies to Arabic and Chaldean science, and in their pursuit of it neglected other literature. A similar remark might be made respecting many distinguished members of the university to which I belong." In order to make this a parallel case, it should be asserted, not that many senior wranglers would be at a loss in a Greek chorus, but that they cannot write a good English letter. CANTAB seems to forget, that in the age of Charlemagne, all that was necessary towards writing a Latin letter in Spain was to substitute regular grammar for the corrupt patois, the lingua Romana rustica, which was soon to become Castilian. The truth is, that the reasons assigned by Mabillon's authority, whoever it might be, is wholly incredible. I am not convinced that it was more than a sarcasm on the ignorance which it affects to excuse. Does CANTAB believe that the whole body of the Spanish clergy relinquished at once, not other literature, but the most elementary knowledge, for the sake of studying Arabic and Chaldee books? And this is not alleged to have been for the purpose of converting Moors and Jews, but as a literary pastime. They are expressly said to have neglected the Scriptures. The object that I had in view was to show the general ignorance of various nations in those ages and this charge of ignorance, as to what lay most open to the Spanish clergy, would hardly be alleviated, even if it were true, that some of them had taken to the study of Arabic.

Another criticism in Vol. i., p. 435., relating to what I have said in Hist. of Literature, vol. iii. p. 149. (1st edition), concerning Campanella and Adami, is better founded, though your correspondent C. is himself not wholly accurate. I have said of Tobias Adami, that he "dedicated to the philosophers of Germany his own Prodromus Philosophiæ Instaurandæ (Instauratio is, of course, an error of the press), prefixed to his edition of Campanella's Compendium de Rerum Naturâ, published at Frankfort in 1617." C. says, "This Prodromus is a treatise of Campanella's, not, as Mr. Hallam says, of Adami. Adami published the Prodromus for Campanella, who was in prison; and he wrote a preface, in which he gives a list of other writings of Campanella, which he proposes to publish afterwards. What Mr. Hallam calls an edition, was the first publication."

The words Prodromus Philosophiæ Instaurandæ, which appear only on the title-page, are of Adami himself, not of Campanella. The work of the latter is called Compendium de Rerum Naturâ, and is printed, after the preface, with this running title. The error into which I fell was to refer the words Prodromus Philosophiæ Instaurandæ to the preface of Adami, and not to the entire work. It may be satisfactory to give the title-page, and one or two extracts from the preface:—

"Prodromus Philosophiæ Instaurandæ, id est, Dissertationis de Natura rerum Compendium, secundum sera principia, ex scriptis Thomæ Campanellæ præmissum, cum præfatione ad philosophos Germaniæ. Francofurt. 1617."

Prodromus, of course, means the avant-courier of a new philosophy; and this, I might think, was intended for Adami himself. But, on looking again at the preface, I perceive that it refers to the Compendium, which was to lead the way to ulterior publications.

"Præmittere autem hoc saltem opusculum visum nobis est, quo brevis ἀνακεφαλαίωσις physicorum philosophematum conjecta est, ut judicia doctorum ex eo in Germania experiremur, exercitaremusque. Cui si operæ pretium videbitur, subjungemus posthac autoris pleniorem et concinniorem Epilogismum Philosophiæ Naturalis, Moralis et Politicæ, addito opusculo Civitatis Solis, quo idea ingeniosissima reipublicæ philosophiæ secundum naturam instituendæ proponitur."

I had at one time a doubt, suggested by the language of the title-page, whether the Compendium de Rerum Naturâ were not an abridgment of Campanella, by Adami himself. But the style has too much vigour and terseness to warrant this supposition. And the following passage in the preface leads us to a different conclusion:

"De stylo, si tam delicatæ, ut nostratium nonnullæ sunt, aures reperiantur, quibus non ubique ita accuratus, et ex scriptis mendosis interdum depravatus videatur, supervacuum puto excusare, cum philosophus non loquatur, ut loquatur, sed ut intelligi velit."

Your correspondent observes also: "What Mr. Hallam calls an 'edition,' was the first publication." Is not this rather hyper-critical? "First edition" is a familiar phrase, and Adam was surely an editor.

In Vol. iii., p. 241., it is said that "in 1811 these MSS. (viz. of Wilkes) were, I presume, in the possession of Peter Elmsley, Principal of St. Alban's Hall, as he submitted the Junius Correspondence, through Mr. Hallam, to Serjeant Rough, who returned the letters to Mr. Hallam." And it is asked, "Where now are the original Junius letters, and where the other MSS.?"

I have to answer to this, that I returned the Junius letters (I never had any others of Wilkes) to Mr. Elmsley some years before his death in 1825. They are, in all probability, in the possession of his representatives.

HENRY HALLAM.

More than a few of your contributors have, I trust, concurred with me in hoping, if not expecting, that something will be done to effect the object presented to our notice through M.'s most judicious suggestion. It will be admitted that now, for about thirty years, the study of the history of early printing has been commonly neglected, frequently despised. The extent of the advance or decline of any science in general estimation can always be accurately computed by means of a comparative view of the prices demanded at different periods for the works which treat of it; and it is unquestionable, that books on bibliography, which once were highly rated, have latterly become (at least to those who have them already) provokingly cheap. In fact, unless some measures be adopted to revive a taste for this important branch of learning, the next generation will be involved in decrepitude and darkness with respect to typographical antiquities.

M. has incidentally asked, "Do different books circulate under the title of Fasciculus Temporum?" I should say, strictly speaking, Certainly not. But there is a sense in which the supposition is perfectly true; for we not only meet with the genuine Fasciculus of 1474, by Wernerus Rolevinck de Laer, but have also to encounter the same work as it was interpolated by Heinricus Wirezburg de Vach, and published for the first time in 1481. Ratdolt's edition of 1484, which M. used, does not contain the remarkable substituted passage in which the author was compelled to record the invention, instead of the propagation, of printing; and it would appear, therefore, that that impression does not belong to the Wirezburgian class. I have been surprised at finding that Pistorius and Struvius have reprinted the sophisticated, and not the authentic, book; and it is curious to see the introduction of an "&c." along with other alterations in the account given of the death of Henry VII. from the reception of a poisoned Host.

M. will instantly perceive that we cannot safely trust in a Fasciculus Temporum of, or after, the date 1481; but I can answer for the agreement of the impression of Colon. 1479 with the editio princeps. The citations respecting the Gutenberg Bible are not from the Fasciculus Temporum, but from Die Cronica van der hilliger Stadt van Coellen, A.D. 1499; the testimony of which (or rather of Ulric Zell related therein) as to the origin of printing is very well known through the Latin translation of it supplied by B. de Mallinckrot. (Clement, vii. 221.; Meerman, ii. 105.; Marchand, Hist. de l'Imp., ii. 4. 104.; Lambinet, 132.)

R. G.

It would have been more courteous in H. C. K. to have requested me to exhibit my authority for the assertion that the pendulum phenomenon had been latterly attributed to differences in the earth's superficial velocity, than to have assumed that explanation as having originated with myself. There is certainly nothing to justify H. C. K. in calling it "A. E. B.'s theory;" on the contrary, my avowed object was to suggest objections to it, and even my approval of it was limited to this, that, providing certain difficulties in it could be removed, it would then become the most reasonable explanation as yet offered of the alleged phenomenon,—the only one, I might have added, that I had the slightest hope of comprehending.

I can understand what is meant by the parallelism of the earth's axis; and, with the slight exceptions caused by precession and nutation, I take that to be the standard of fixity of direction in space. When, therefore, I am told that the plane of a pendulum's oscillation is also fixed in direction, and yet that it is continually changing its relative position with respect to the other fixity, the axis of the earth, not only does it not present to my mind a comprehensible idea, but it does present to it a palpable contradiction of the commonest axiom of philosophy.

I am therefore in a disposition of mind the reverse of H. C. K.'s; that which to him is only "hard enough to credit," to me is wholly incomprehensible; while that which to him is "utterly impossible to conceive," appears to me a rational hypothesis in which I can understand at least the ground of assertion.

H. C. K. asks me to "reduce to paper" the assertion of the difference of velocity between two parallels of latitude ten feet apart. He is not surely so unphilosophical as to imagine that a theory, to be true, must necessarily be palpable to the senses. If the element of increase exist at all, however minute and imperceptible it may be in a single oscillation, repetition of effect must eventually render it observable. But I shall even gratify H. C. K., and inform him that the difference in linear circumference between two such parallels in the latitude of London would be about fifty feet, so that the northern end of a ten-feet rod, placed horizontally in the meridian, would travel less by that number of feet in twenty-four hours than the southern end. This, so far from being inadequate, is greatly in excess of the alleged apparent motion in the plane of a pendulum's vibration.

In the remarks of another correspondent, E. H. Y. (Vol. iv., p. 177.), there is but one point that seems to require observation from me; it is his assertion that "there is no force by which a body unconnected with the earth would have any tendency to rotate with it!" Is then the rotation of forty miles of atmosphere, "and all that it inherit," due to friction alone? And even so, can any object, immersed in that atmosphere, be said to be "unconnected with the earth"?

A. E. B.

I have not yet thanked LORD BRAYBROOKE for the obliging manner in which, in reply to my inquiry, he furnished a list of the reputed authors of "Winifreda." His recent note on the same subject gives me an occasion for doing so, while expressing my concurrence in his view that G. A. Stevens was not the author. In short, it may be taken now I think as an established fact, that the author is unknown.

Nevertheless, I do not believe that this poem was written in any part of the seventeenth century. It appears to me to be the work of a true poet in the most vicious age of English poetry, and infected with all its faults. Weakened with epithets, and its language poor and artificial, it rises to nature at the close, than which nothing of the kind can be much better. In the following stanza I do not altogether like the personification of Time:—

A likely thought, truly, for a boy of sixteen! My own impression is, that it did not long precede the age of "the little folks on Strawberry Hill."

Since writing the above I have referred to my copy of Steven's songs, which I had not at hand before. It is the Oxford edition mentioned by LORD BRAYBROOKE; and although it does not contain "Winifreda," a clue, it appears to me, may be drawn from it as to Stevens's connexion with this piece. In the first place, it is to be remarked that the title of the book is, Songs, Comic and Satyrical, by George Alexander Stevens. The motto is from the author's Lecture on Heads, "I love fun!—keep it up!" These circumstances are important, as one would hardly expect to find "Winifreda" in such a volume, though it were by the same author. Yet, there is a song which, though written in a more lilting measure, is quite as much out of place; and this song shows evidence, in my opinion, of Stevens having known and admired "Winifreda." It is entitled "Rural Felicity," and is to be found at page 71 of the volume. Compare the two following stanzas with the last two of "Winifreda:"—

"Rural Felicity," however, though in a purer style than "Winifreda," can hardly be said to rise to poetry at all; and if the latter had been by the same author, it is most improbable that he would have excluded it from the volume containing the former. Looking at the two songs together, one is an evident imitation; and the conclusion I should come to with regard to the other is, that it was written by a man who knew the feeling he describes; by one of whom it could not be said, "He has no children;" by one to whom that more than identity of interest that centres in the—

was a familiar feeling. Stevens, perhaps, had repeated the poem, or made a copy of it, and thus gained the credit of being its author.

I am surprised that your correspondent T. W. should find any difficulty in the passage he quotes from Childe Harold:

This mode of expression is only faulty when ambiguous; but here of ambiguity there is none.

SAMUEL HICKSON.

As CANONICUS EBORACENSIS considers that I have "not exactly hit the mark" in inferring that "the Lords, the Clergy in Convocation, and the Commons" are the "Three Estates of England" named in the Gunpowder Treason Service, I would claim, being not yet altogether convinced by CANON. EBOR.'S arguments that such is the case, a share of your space for discussing a question which must certainly be interesting to all who uphold "our Constitution in Church and State." My apology for prolixity must be, that having but just received "NOTES AND QUERIES" I have not had time to study brevity.

The passages, which contain the expressions referred to in the Service, are as under:—

"We yield Thee our unfeigned thanks and praise for the wonderful and mighty deliverance of our gracious Sovereign King James the First, the Queen, the Prince, and all the royal branches, with the Nobility, Clergy, and Commons of England, then assembled in Parliament, by popish treachery appointed as sheep to the slaughter, in a most barbarous and savage manner, beyond the examples of former ages."—The First Collect at Morning Prayer.

"By discovering and confounding their horrible and wicked enterprise, plotted and intended this day to have been executed against the King and the whole State of England, for the subversion of the government and religion established among us."—The Litany.

"Acknowledging Thy power, wisdom, and goodness in preserving the King, and the Three Estates of the Realm of England, assembled in Parliament, from the destruction this day intended against them."—The Communion Service.

"Who on this day didst miraculously preserve our Church and State from the secret contrivance and hellish malice of popish conspirators."—After the Prayer for the Church Militant.

CANON. EBOR. asserts that these Three Estates (the word "estates" being used of course in its second intention, as meaning the representatives, and not the orders en masse) are "the Lords Spiritual," "the Lords Temporal," and "the Commons," representing severally the clergy, the nobility, and the commonality. As "the Lords Spiritual" are always placed before "the Lords Temporal," he is obliged to rank the clergy before the nobility in spite of the order of precedency observed in the Collect. This seems to show that the clergy are not represented by the bishops. And in the Coronation Oath they are separately specified:

"And will you preserve unto the bishops and clergy of the realm, and to the churches committed to them, all such rights and privileges as by law do or shall appertain unto them or any of them?"

This in an older oath ran thus:

"Et quil gardera le peas de seynt Eglise et al clergie et al people de bon accorde."

From these quotations it does not seem very faulty to infer, that the clergy as represented by Convocation are the second Estate of the realm; and are not, as represented by "the Lords Spiritual," the first, which is the Estate of the nobility represented by the Peers.

Against this CANON. EBOR.'S arguments are two: first, "that the phrase 'assembled in Parliament' has no application to the Convocation;" and next, that the "Convocation does not sit at Westminster."

With regard to the first, I have to say that it was somewhat late in our history that the point was settled that Convocation was not a part of Parliament. In Mr. Palin's recently published History of the Church of England, ch. x. p. 242., I read, with respect to the dissolution of the Convocation of 1701,—

"With the presentation of this document the Convocation dispersed, both the King and the Prolocutor being now dead; and in the act that empowered the Parliament to sit after the king's death, no provision was made to continue the Convocation. The Earl of Rochester moved, in the House of Lords, that it might be considered, whether the Convocation was not a part of the Parliament, and whether it was not continued in consequence of the act that continued the Parliament. But that was soon let fall; for the judges were all of opinion that it was dissolved by the king's death."

In A Reconciling Letter, &c., a pamphlet published in 1702:

"Pray inform me to which notion I may subscribe; whether to the Convocation being a Parliamentary body, and part of Parliament, as Dr. A. has made it? Or to the Convocation having a Parliamentary relation, and such an origin and alliance," &c.

On going back to an earlier date:—In Statutis 21 Richard II. c. 2., and 21 Richard II. c. 12. the preambles state that—

"These statutes were made by the assent of the procurators of the clergy, as well as of other constituent members of parliament."

And we know that the Procuratores Cleri occasionally sat in parliament in the Lower House, as the Judges do now in the Upper: in a treatise quoted by Coke (De modo tenendi Parliamentum)—

"It appeareth that the proctors of the clergy should appear, 'cum præsentia eorum sit necessaria' (which proveth they were voiceless assistants only), and having no voices, and so many learned bishops having voices, their presence is not now holden necessary."—4 Inst. 5.

Perhaps they were not altogether voiceless, for we find that on Nov. 22, 1547, a petition was presented by the Lower House of Convocation to the Upper, the second clause of which was—

"2dly. That the clergy of the lower house of Convocation may be admitted to sit in Parliament with the House of Commons according to antient usage."

In support of this, the clause Præmunientes in the writ directing the elections of Proctors was appealed to. This "Præmunitory Clause," which at a later period of the history of Convocation was the cause of much discussion, ran thus:—

"The Bishop was commanded to 'give notice to the (Prior or) Dean and Chapter of his Cathedral Church, and to the Archdeacons and all the clergy of his diocese, that the Prior, Deans, and Archdeacons, in their own persons, the chapter by one, and the clergy by two, proper proxies, sufficiently empowered by the said chapter and clergy, should by all means be present at the Parliament with him to do and to consent to those things, which, by the blessing of GOD, by their common advice happened to be ordained in the matters aforesaid, and that the giving this notice should by no means be omitted by him.'"

"The clergy thus summoned to Parliament by the King and Diocesan, met for the choice of their proxies; for this purpose the Dean or Prior held his chapter, and the Archdeacon his synod. The representatives being chosen in these assemblies were sent up to Parliament, with procuratorial letters from the chapter and clergy to give them an authority to act in their names, and on the behalf of their electors."—Collier's Eccles. Hist., Part II. book iv.

Also—

"All the members of both Houses of Convocation have the same privileges for themselves and their servants as the members of parliament have, and that by statute."—Chamberlayn's Mag. Brit. Notitia, p. 94.

It may be reasonably doubted, whether a little research would not afford further reasons for thinking that there was some ground for applying the phrase "assembled in Parliament" to Convocation.

With respect to the Convocations sitting at Westminster. The first Convocation of 1283 sat "at the New Temple;" the next was summoned on St. Matthew's day, 1294, to meet at Westminster. On April 22, 1523, a National Synod of both Convocations was held at Westminster by Cardinal Wolsey, the Papal Legate. The Convocation sat at Lambeth in 1555 and 1558. In 1586 and 1588, we find Convocation often sitting at Westminster. In 1624 the Upper House sat at Christ Church, Oxford, and the Lower at Merton College. On May 16, 1661, the Convocation met in "the Collegiate Church at Westminster." The first Convocation of William III. had its amended commission brought to it on the 4th of December, while both Houses were sitting together in Henry VII.'s Chapel. The last Convocation of the same king met on the 10th of February, 1701, at St. Paul's, where they heard divine service, and then went to the chapter-house, where they chose for their prolocutor Dr. Hooper. On the 25th of February, the Lower House was sitting in Henry VII.'s Chapel; and on the 6th of March they were both sitting in the Jerusalem Chamber: where twice in this present year it has sat. It is true that the writ which summoned James I.'s first Convocation called the clergy to appear before the archbishop "in our cathedral church of St. Paul in London, the twentieth day of March then next ensuing, or elsewhere, as he should have thought it most convenient;" and it seems that they did assemble "at the time and place before-mentioned;" yet, supposing they were not at Westminster then, they were in almost equal danger from the Popish Plot, as it is not likely they would have received any greater mercy at the hands of the conspirators.

I have always imagined that it was still a moot-point as to whether all the Estates ever deliberated together in the presence of the sovereign. It is not generally known, I think, that they all re-assemble for the formal passing of every act: and with respect to the authority of all three being recited in the preamble, I beg to point out to CANON. EBOR. the following exceptions:—In the Act of Uniformity, the style of "Lords Spiritual" is omitted throughout, as every one of the bishops voted against it. It has also been ruled by the judges that the King may hold a parliament without any Spiritual lords; and, in fact, the first two parliaments of Charles II. were so holden.

I will presume CANON. EBOR. intended to say that Prelates do not sit in the Upper House as Peers, otherwise the charge of "mistake" will fall upon Blackstone, Comm. book i. ch. 2.:

"The next in order are the Spiritual lords. These consist of two archbishops and twenty-four bishops; and at the dissolution of monasteries by Henry VIII. consisted likewise of twenty-six mitred abbots, and two priors: a very considerable body, and in those times equal in number to the temporal nobility. All these hold, or are supposed to hold, certain ancient baronies, under the king: for William the Conqueror thought proper to change the spiritual tenure of frank-almoign, or free alms, under which the bishops held their lands during the Saxon government, into feodal or Norman tenure by barony; which subjected their estates to all civil charges and assessments from which they were before exempt: and in right of succession to those baronies, which were unalienable from their respective dignities, the bishops and abbots were allowed their seats in the House of Lords."

Sir Matthew Hale divides the king's extraordinary councils into two kinds: 1. Secular or temporal councils; 2. Ecclesiastical or spiritual: the king's extraordinary secular councils being the Houses of the Peers and of the Commons; and the extraordinary ecclesiastical, the Upper and Lower Houses of Convocation.

Some illustration of this may be perhaps found in the following extract from an appendix to A Narrative of the Proceedings of the Lower House of Convocation, published by T. Bennet, London, 1701, in which Prelates are Spiritual Lords, whether Bishops or Abbots; and the phrase "full Parliament" seems equivalent to the ones used in the Gunpowder Treason Service:—

"When the several Estates were assembled in full Parliament, and received the King's commands concerning the business which they were to consider, and were adjourned by him to another day of full Parliament, in which they were to meet, and give their answer: the Clergy, and Lords, and Commons consulted in the mean time separately, ... Instances of this are not necessary, but one may be seen among the Records in the appendix to a late book call'd Essays concerning the Balance of Power, &c., and 'tis this: 6 Edw. III. Part 3. N. 1., on Tuesday in Full Parliament the King charged the Prelates, Earls, Barons, and other Great Men, and the Knights of the Shires, and the Commons, that having regard to the honor and profit of his Realm, they should give him their counsel. The which Prelates with the Clergy by themselves, and the Earls and Barons by themselves, and the knights and others of the counties and the Commons by themselves, treated and consulted till Friday next, the day assigned for the next session, and there in full Parliament, each by themselves and afterward all in common, answered."

The formation and development of Convocation, at least that of Canterbury, presents a great analogy to the English Parliament; as that of York does to the Scottish Parliament.

We must remember that before the Norman times, the clergy were exempt from all taxation; inasmuch as "they held in Frankalmoigne," that is, held their lands, &c., on free alms "in liberam eleemosynam." Littleton (lib. ii. c. 6. s. 135.) says:

"And they which hold in Frankalmoigne are bound of right before God to make orisons, prayers, masses, and other divine services for the soul of their grantor or feoffer, and for the souls of their heirs which are dead," &c.

The king's succeeding William the Conqueror tried to make the clergy contribute to the public exchequer, but were effectually resisted. In order to surmount the difficulty, King John (A.D. 1206) summoned all the priors and abbots to parliament, and obtained from them a vote of a thirteenth: and then wrote to the archdeacons to get the same from the clergy generally. Edward I. rendered this scheme for the taxation of the clergy complete. He applied to the Archbishops of Canterbury and York to assemble, by their canonical authority, the convocations of each province; and these Metropolitans, moved by the King's writ (the same practice is settled now), summoned these bishops and clergy.

The earliest royal writ, summoning a provincial synod, is dated Nov. 24, 1282, and calling them to meet at Northampton: "Venire ... coram nobis apud Northampton."

This Convocation assembled at Northampton; and we find another mandate from the Archbishop to the dean of the province, directing him to summon the bishops and clergy to a Convocation for the 9th of May, 1283, at the New Temple (now the Inner and Middle Temples), pursuant to a resolution of the Convocation of Northampton. At this Convocation, the proctors of the clergy refused to pay the tenth. Eleven years after, we find Edward summoning the whole body of the bishops and clergy to Westminster on St. Matthew's day, 1294. His writ orders "The dean and archdeacon to appear in their proper persons, the chapter by one, and the clergy of the diocese by two procurators." The clergy objected to this writ as uncanonical, and claimed to be convoked only by their Metropolitans; as tending to abolish their provincial synods convened by regular ecclesiastical authority, and to establish in their place a parliamentary chamber under secular authority. The King, finding them so opposed to his project of thus making them a part of the Third Estate, reverted to the established practice, and addressed his writs to the Archbishops; whereupon the Metropolitans issued their mandates, Convocations met, and subsidies were voted.

An important result followed this struggle (see 2 Lingard, p. 375.), viz., that the procurators of the common clergy of each diocese (in compliance with the direction on the Kings writ) were admitted as constituent members of these and all subsequent Convocations; the archdeacons, before this time, being considered as their representatives, who probably were furnished with letters of procuration from them.

The constitution of the English Convocation may be said to be finally established in the reign of Edward I., and it has so continued to the present day; except that in 1665 the clergy in Convocation gave up the privilege of self-taxation, and received in return that of voting for the House of Commons, losing thereby one distinctive sign of their being "an Estate of the Realm."

WILLIAM FRASER, B.C.L.

P.S. The error which my former note was intended to correct was not utterly a "cockney" one, as the following Proposition, condemned in 1683, by the University of Oxford, together with several others contained in the books of the time, as "damnable and destructive," will show:—

"The sovereignty of England is in the Three Estates, viz. King, Lords, and Commons. The King has but a co-ordinate power, and may be overruled by the other two." Lex Rex. Hunter of a limited and mixed Monarchy. Baxter's H. C. Polit. Catech. See Collier's Eccl. Hist., Part 2. Book ix.

The derivation of these terms, as applied to the two extreme parties in politics, is a much vexed question, which will probably never be satisfactorily settled. That staunch Tory, Roger North, in his Examen, has referred the origin of the name of his party to their connexion with the Duke of York and his popish allies.

"It is easy (says North) to imagine how rampant these procurators of power, the Exclusioners, were under such circumstances of advantage as at that time prevailed; everywhere insulting and menacing the royalists, as was done in all the terms of common conversation, and the latter had the wind in their faces, the votes of the house and the rabble into the bargain. This trade, then not much opposed, naturally led to a common use of slighting and opprobrious names, such as Yorkist. That served for mere distinction, but did not scandalize or reflect enough. Then they came to Tantivy, which implied riding post to Rome. Observe, all the while the loyal church party were passive; the outrage lay wholly on the other side. These observing that the Duke favoured Irishmen, all his friends, or those accounted such by appearing against the Exclusion, were straight become Irish; thence bog-trotters, and in the copia of the factious language, the word Tory was entertained, which signified the most despicable savages among the wild Irish; and being a vocal and clear sounding word, readily pronounced, it kept its hold, and took possession of the foul mouths of the faction."

Burton, in vol. ii. of his Parliamentary Diary on the state of Ireland, under date of June 10, 1657, has the following passage:

"Tory is said to be the Irish word Toree, that is, Give me, which was the summons of surrender used by the banditti, to whom the name was originally applied."

In support of this assertion it may be as well to state that Tory or Terry Island, on the coast of Donegal, is said to have taken its name from the robbers by whom it was formerly infested. Dr. Johnson also supports Burton's derivation of the word; he calls it a cant term, which he supposed to be derived from an Irish word, signifying a savage. Mr. G. O. Borrow (alias Lavengro), who has devoted much attention to the Celtic dialect, in a paper which he contributed some years back to the Norfolk Chronicle, suggested that the etymology of the word Tory might be traced to the Irish adherents of Charles II. during the Cromwellian era; the words Tar-a-Ri (pronounced Tory, and meaning Come, O King), having been so constantly in the mouths of the Royalists as to have become a by-word to designate them. So much for the word Tory, which from these premises is evidently of Irish origin. We now come to consider the derivation of the term Whig, concerning which there is not quite such a diversity of opinion. The first authority we will quote shall be Burnet, who says:

"The south-west counties of Scotland have seldom corn enough to serve them round the year; and the northern parts producing more than they need, those in the west come in the summer to buy at Leith the stores that came from the north; and from a word, Whiggam, used in driving their horses, all that drove were called Whiggamors, and shorter, the Whiggs. Now, in that year (i.e. 1648), after the news came down of Duke Hamilton's defeat, the ministers animated their people to rise and march to Edinburgh; and they came up marching on the head of their parishes with an unheard-of fury, praying and preaching all the way as they came. The Marquis of Argyle and his party came and bearded them, they being about 6000. This was called the Whiggamors' inroad, and ever after that, all that opposed the court came in contempt to be called Whiggs; and from Scotland the word was brought into England, where it is now one of our unhappy terms of disunion."—Burnet's History of his own Times, vol. i. p. 43.

Such is Burnet's account of the derivation of this word, in which he is followed by Samuel Johnson, who has transcribed the above passage in his Dictionary. Kirkton also, in his History of the Church of Scotland, edited by C. K. Sharpe, Esq., in 1817, adheres to the same opinion: under the year 1667, he says:

"The poor people, who in contempt were called Whiggs, became name-fathers to all that owned one honest interest in Britain, who were called Whiggs after them, even at the court of England."

That the term Whig was originally from Scotland, I believe is a well-ascertained fact; but while some of our etymologists follow the opinion of Burton, others, with (as I think) greater show of reason, adhere to the opinion of Roger North and the historians Laing and Lingard, all of whom were of opinion that the original Scotch Whigs were called so, not, as Burnet supposes, from the word used by them in driving their horses, but from the word Whig being vernacular in Scotland for sour whey, which was a common drink with the people.

DAVID STEVENS.

Godalming.

The foregoing lines, from Burgess's able restoration of this splendid scene in the Bacchæ of Euripides, published in the Gentleman's Magazine for Sept. 1832, and afterwards without the Greek text in the Literary Gazette for Oct. 11, 1845, form a fit motto for the undertaking in which I am engaged, and of which I now present a sort of report to literary men interested in such matters.

No one, in my opinion, should endeavour to satisfy querists about a design more than the original proposer of such design, and I am the rather induced to make a few remarks, the subject having been passed over with a silence rendered remarkable by the importance of my proposal. Two correspondents, however, having come forward with additional suggestions and remarks, I feel myself possessed of a pretext to touch upon the subject once more. The following will show what common steadiness and attention have been able to bring about.

I have so far accomplished my purpose, as lately, while residing on the continent, and also since my return, to establish in Russia, Siberia and Tartary, Persia, and Eastern Europe, stations for the search after all MSS. worth attention. I hope, therefore, to be enabled ere long, through the co-operation of my friends abroad, to present the world with something more solid than mere promises, and more satisfactory to classical critics and lovers of antiquity like myself. Especially I expect from my Tartary correspondent some interesting and valuable Hebrew MSS., of which there are many to be obtained toward the frontier of China and in that country. I unfortunately missed such a MS. some years ago, which a sailor had offered to me, whom I am now unable to find. I earnestly solicit every Oriental traveller to co-operate with me.

The proposal of Dr. Arnold, quoted by M. N. (Vol. iii., p. 261.), I did not mention, although I was aware of it, as it is at present next to an impossibility to carry it out in the disturbed state of Continental Europe, useful as I allow it to be.

Your correspondent J. M. (Vol. iii., p. 340.) asks what has been accomplished at Herculaneum in the late investigations. Alas! a few thin folios at my side contain all that the most unwearied exertion, and ever-renewed patience, have been able to bring to light. A few tracts of Epicuros, Philodemos, Colotos, Polystratos, Demetrios, and Carneiscos, are the results of the labours at the "City of the Dead." It is much to be desired that the investigations should be recommenced when the troubled condition of the kingdom of Naples will admit of it. I refer J. M. to M. Morgenstern's excellent article on the subject in the Classical Journal, vol. vii. p. 272. sqq., and the Herculanensium Voluminum, Oxonii, 1824-1825 (Press-mark, 604 f 15, British Museum), and the splendid folios of Naples, 1793-1844 (Press-mark, 813 i 2.).

KENNETH R. H. MACKENZIE.

Peter Lombard, Gratian, and Comestor (Vol. iv., p. 188.).—Your correspondent W. S. W. alludes to the above-mentioned worthies. I extract from Bishop Jeremy Taylor a passage or two in support of the story of their brotherhood:

"It is reported of the mother of Peter Lombard, Gratian, and Comestor, that she having had three sons begotten in unhallowed embraces, upon her death-bed did omit the recitation of those crimes to her confessor; adding this for apology, that her three sons proved persons so eminent in the church, that their excellency was abundant recompense for her demerit; and therefore she could not grieve, because God had glorified Himself so much by three instruments so excellent: and that although her sin had abounded, yet God's grace did superabound. Her confessor replied, 'At dole saltem, quod dolere non possis (Grieve that thou canst not grieve).'"—Sermon "On the Invalidity of a late or death-bed Repentance." Sermons, p. 234. Lond. 1678.

And again:

"To repent because we cannot repent, and to grieve because we cannot grieve, was a device invented to serve the turn of the mother of Peter Gratian."—Holy Dying, "Practice of Repentance in Sickness," Sect. vi. Rule 5. Lond. 1808.

RT.

Warmington.

W. S. W. (Vol. iv., p. 188.) invites attention to a manuscript note in his valuable copy of Peter Lombard's Sentences (ed. Vien. 1477), by which Lombard, Gratian, and Comestor are described as "fratres uterini."

Antoninus, Archbishop of Florence, wrote about A.D. 1445. His account, therefore, of this clearly fabulous story must be somewhat earlier, as it is (at least in one particular) more curiously circumstantial. His words are (Chronic. Op., cap. vi. p. 65., ed. Lugd. 1586):

"A quibusdam prædicatur in populis, quod fuerunt germani ex adulterio nati. Quorum mater cum in extremis peccatum suum confiteretur, et Confessor redargueret crimen perpetratum adulterii, quia valde grave esset, et ideo multum deberet dolere, et pœnitentiam agere, respondit illa: 'Pater, scio quod adulterium peccatum magnum est; sed, considerans quantum bonum secutum est, cum isti filii sint lumina magna in Ecclesiâ, ego non valeo pœnitere.'"

However, whilst he records this singular story, Antoninus confesses that he gives little credit to it; for he presently adds:

"Non enim reperitur authenticum; imo, nec fuerunt contemporanei, etsi vicini tempore. Gratianus enim fuit ante alios duos."

And not only were they not cotemporaries, but also it may be worth observing, that they were not even fellow-countrymen.

J. SANSOM.

—Thomas Dutton, Guy Nutt, and John Glover, who published the Warnings to Scotland, were three of the French prophets who went as missionaries, first to Edinburgh and afterwards to Dublin. I have a continuation in manuscript, in a very thick 4to., of the printed book. They appear to have been succeeded at Edinburgh by James Cunningham and Margaret Mackenzie. Cunningham was the grandson of the murdered Archbishop of St. Andrews, and prophecied himself into the Tolbooth, his warnings from which place, with the autograph of the prophet, are contained in a volume entitled, Warnings of the Eternal Spirit pronounced by the Mouth of James Cunningham during his Imprisonment in the Tolbooth of Edinburgh, Lond. 1712, 12mo. pp. 547. 131. In the very curious and amusing account of the French prophets given in Keimer's Brand pluck'd from the burning, exemplify'd in the unparall'd Case of Samuel Keimer, Lond. printed by W. Boreman, 1718, Dutton, Nutt, Glover, and Cunningham, are frequently mentioned. "Thomas Dutton," he says, "was an eminent prophet, a sober ingenious man, by profession a lawyer, who wrote a letter against John Lacy's taking E. Gray." "Guy Nutt, a prophet, a formal whimsical man, who goes in plain habit, but not owned by the people called Quakers." Of Glover he gives an extraordinary account, p. 54., but which will scarcely admit of quotation. He observes, p. 115., that Glover acted the Devil "under agitations, five people standing upon him, as commanded by the spirit, he all the while making grimaces mixt with a strange mocking, yanging noise to the affrightment of the believers." Whether the prophet produced an abiding impression at Edinburgh by these yanging noises I know not, but in England the sect continued for many years. I have a collection of the manifestations of one of them, Hannah Wharton, published in 1732, 12mo. She appears to have preached and prophecied at Birmingham. I may here observe, that Keimer's tract above mentioned contains a very interesting letter from Daniel Defoe, which has not been noticed by his biographers. Keimer was one of the numerous publishers for Defoe. He afterwards went to America, and we find him frequently noticed in the autobiography of Dr. Franklin.

JAS. CROSSLEY.

—Fides carbonarii, as it ought to be written, originated in an anecdote told with approbation by Dr. Milner, or some controversial writer on the same side, and ridiculed by Protestants. A coal porter being asked what he believed, replied "What the church believes;" and being asked what the church believed, replied "What I believe." He could give no further information.

E. H. D. D.

—In answer to C. W. G., I find that Pickering, in his Races of Man, p 32., states that in Interior Oregon his friends Messrs. Agate and Brackenridge observed "no marks of fire;" and, p. 61., that in the Otafuan group the use of fire was apparently absent; and that he does not remember to have seen any signs of fire at the Disappointment Islands. Perhaps further inquiry, which he suggests, might prove that fire is not really wanting among the inhabitants of these islands.

THEOPHYLACT.

—Flatman's Poems were first published in the year 1682—his death took place in 1688: these dates, therefore, supply an answer to E. V., as far as regards the question of borrowing. The edition now before me is that of 1686, being the fourth, "with many additions and amendments." It is dedicated to "His Grace the Duke of Ormond, Lord Lieutenant of Ireland," &c., and has twenty-eight pages of recommendatory poems prefixed to it; one of which bears the name of Charles Cotton, the adopted son of honest Izaak Walton.

Although Campbell speaks with great contempt of Flatman, and quotes Granger, who says that "one of his heads (he painted portraits in miniature) is worth a ream of his pindarics," I cannot but think he has been unduly depreciated; there being many passages in his poems (brief ones it is true) possessed of considerable beauty, and which I would gladly extract in proof of my assertion, were your pages available for such a purpose.

T. C. S.

—I am very much obliged to MR. CROSSLEY for his information and obliging offer; but until he is able to find the publication of the piece in question by Curll, and with the date of 1716, he will forgive my doubting whether his memory has not failed him as to the date, as the fact is directly at variance with Pope's own statement to Spence. MR. CROSSLEY is certainly mistaken in thinking that "The two quarto volumes are the only collection of Pope's works that can be called his own, and that Dodsley's edition of 1738 was a mere bookseller's collection." There is abundant evidence that this edition was Pope's own just as much as the quartos, as was also a prior edition of the same small shape of 1736.

C.

—The main question is, I think, settled; that there is no pretence whatsoever for the supposition that the Lord Mayor is a Privy Councillor; but your last correspondent DN. has fallen into a slight error, which it may be as well to correct. He confounds a summons to the Privy Council with an invitation or notice which is sent (as he truly states) from the Home Office to such noblemen and gentlemen as are known to be at hand to attend at the meeting for proclaiming the sovereign; but which meeting any one may, and the majority do, attend without any such notice. This is the notice that DN. received, and that I myself have received at two accessions; and which no doubt the Lord Mayor and Alderman, and city officers, also receive; but this has nothing whatsoever to do with the Privy Council.

C.

—Thomas Wright suspected the motion of the sun in 1750; but I never heard that he was thought mad. See Phil. Mag., April, 1848, where an account of Wright is given.

M.

—ÆGROTUS will find the following in the Bodleian: De descensu Domini nostri Jesu Christi ad Inferos, libri quatuor, ab Hugone Sanfordo inchoati, opera Rob. Parkeri ad umbilicum perducti, 4to. Amst. 1611.

SAXONICUS.

—In the European Magazine for September, 1791, under the head of "Anecdotes of the Pitt Family," there is a memoir given of Governor Pitt, from which I extract the following passages as illustrative of the Queries of your correspondents J. SWAN and C.:—

"The most extraordinary incident in this gentleman's life was, his obtaining and disposing of the celebrated diamond which is still called by his name. It was purchased by him during the time he was Governor of Fort St. George, for 48,000 pagodas, i.e. 20,400l. sterling, instead of 200,000, which the seller first asked for it. It was consigned to Sir Stephen Evance, Knt., in London, in the ship Bedford, Captain John Hudson, Commander, by a bill of lading dated March 8, 1701-2, and charged to the Captain at 6,500 pagodas only. It was reckoned the largest jewel in Europe, and weighed one hundred and twenty-seven carats. When polished it was as big as a pullet's egg. The cuttings amounted to eight or ten thousand pounds."

"It appears, that the acquisition of this diamond occasioned many reflections injurious to the honour of Governor Pitt; and Mr. Pope has been thought to have had the insinuations, then floating in the world, in his mind when he wrote the following lines:

"These reports, however, never obtained much credit; though they were loud enough to reach the ears of the person against whom they were directed, who condescended to vindicate himself against the aspersions thrown out upon him."

T. C. S.

—C. W. might have discovered the origin of this saying in an authority much older and much more familiar to English readers than the Koran. Instead of going to Mahomet in search for legends of King Solomon, if he had opened his Bible, and turned to the Book of Ecclesiastes x. 20., he would there have found the wise monarch of Israel himself saying,

"Curse not the king, no, not in thy thought; and curse not the rich in thy bed-chamber: for a bird of the air shall carry the voice, and that which hath wings shall tell the matter."

TYRO.

Dublin.

[R. G., MACKENZIE WALCOTT, P. S. Q., ROVERT, H. T. E., A. H. B., J. A. PICTON, and other friends, have kindly forwarded similar replies.]

—The story, of which a summary appears under this title in a recent Number, resembles one I have repeatedly heard told in the city of Durham by those who had personal recollection of the facts and persons; it occurred about thirty years ago. A servant girl was capitally convicted of administering poison to the household of a farmer, in a fit of passion at some petty injury: a legal doubt raised in her behalf was submitted for consideration in London, and some months elapsed in determining it. During the interval, her character and conduct being good, she came to be employed as a servant in the household of the governor of the gaol, then situated in an old gatehouse at the entrance of the Bailey; and one of my informants has seen her drawing water at the pant in the market place, two or three hundred yards from the gaol, in the heart of the town. One morning the governor and all Durham were struck with horror at the receipt of an order for her execution, within three days; the city being then two days by coach from London, and an appeal for compassion impossible. The execution, singularly, was attended with distressing circumstances. The rope employed broke, another was not at hand: and the wretched girl sat crying under the beam, until a man sent into the town (in a field outside of which, on the Newcastle road, this scene occurred) could return with another cord, with which he was seen flogging his horse up to the gallows. So I have been told by grave and trustworthy witnesses.

F.

—Surely nothing can be clearer than the construction in the lines quoted by our correspondent T. W.:

To add one word to confirm what is so transparent, would be merely occupying your space without the slightest necessity.

JAS. CROSSLEY.

[J. G. R., H. C. K., J. MN., H. L., CHAS. PASLAM, J. A. PICTON, A. E. B., G. S., C. B., SELEUCUS, EDW. S. JACKSON, H. M. A., and many other friends, have kindly furnished similar replies to T. W.'s Query, some at considerable length. We have therefore selected the above, as one of the shortest and first that reached us.]

—Your correspondent on Gray's plagiarisms (Vol. iii., p. 445.) quotes Davenant and Prior as having both forestalled his idea with regard to sorrow, that—

I long since noted these lines as parallel to—

In the next page of "NOTES AND QUERIES," Q. E. D. reasonably defends the expression "Thamesini littoris hospes." The exact distinction between littus and ripa is marked indeed by Ovid, where he says of the rivers:

But this did not prevent his applying littora to a lake:

Both he and Virgil use littus, speaking of the same river:

Here, however, there might be a question from the context: not so, however, in Æn. vii. 797.:

On the other hand we have ripa for littus:

EFFIGIES.

Stamford.

—The couplet quoted by your correspondent RT. is from Varro, and I think he will find it given by Mad. Dacier in her edition of Anacreon, under Ode xxviii., line 26.:

.ת.א

If your correspondent RT. will refer to Gray's Works, vol. ii. p. 164., edited by Mitford, and published by Pickering, 1836, he will find the following note:—

"The fragment is not to be found in Aulus Gellius, but in Mori Marcellus, under the word 'Mollitudo.'"

Now what Mori Marcellus means, I know not: perhaps some of your correspondents may enlighten me on that point.

HENRY DYKE.

Gretworth, near Brackley, Aug. 25. 1851.

This Mori Marcellus I take to be the same person as Marcellus Nonius, of whom an account is to be found in Smith's Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography, &c., vol. ii. p. 937.

F. BW.

There is one feature in Murray's Reading for the Rail, namely, that of making the volumes not of one uniform price, but varying from One Shilling and upwards, the advantages of which are shown very clearly by the first two of the series which have appeared. For it would have been a difficulty for the most Procrustean of editors to have compressed The Essays from The Times within the limits of that capital shilling's worth, The Chase, by Nimrod. Well do we remember, that on the appearance of that sparkling sketch in the Quarterly, in the same way that many—who like Michael Cassio,

have watched with the deepest interest the masterly strategy of Marlborough, Napoleon, or that greater still, The Duke—hundreds who never set foot in stirrup—who certainly never joined in a view hallo! followed with the greatest interest and anxiety the adventures of Snob and his little bay mare in the Quorn Country. If Mr. Murray does not sell ten or twenty thousand copies of this amusing tractate, we shall be greatly deceived. May he sell as many of its more important companion, The Essays from the Times: for, as he well observes in his prefatory notice to the volume in question, these brilliant Papers on Lord Nelson and Lady Hamilton, Railway Novels, Louis Philippe, Southey, &c. exhibit "literary merits and a moral tone well calculated to promote the important national object" advocated by that powerful journal in the article on the Literature of the Rail to which the present series owes its origin. How many hundreds, nay thousands, must there be who, having read these Essays and Reviews in The Times, where they were made to point a moral most effectually, have especially desired to possess them in a more permanent form; and who, having secured the present admirable selection, will look anxiously for the period when Mr. Murray will be enabled to give a second volume of them.

Among the many works illustrative of the history of France—literary, social, and monumental—for which the French are mainly indebted to the enlightened administration of M. Guizot, when Minister of Public Instruction, there is not one of greater value than the handsome quarto published by M. Didron, the learned Secretary of the Comité des Arts et Monuments, entitled Iconographie Chrétienne. Of the importance and utility of this volume, with its admirable illustrations, every journal in this country devoted to art or archæology has exhibited repeated proofs: and of the many wonderfully cheap books which Mr. Bohn has from time to time produced, there is not one to compare with the Translation of this interesting volume, which he has just put forth under the title of Christian Iconography; or the History of Christian Art in the Middle Ages. In Two Volumes. Vol. I comprising the History of the Nimbus, the Aureole, and the Glory, the History of God the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost. This first volume contains not only nearly the whole of M. Didron's quarto; but also between 100 and 150 wood-cuts from the original blocks. The subject is one almost new to the English public; and the book therefore will be found of great interest to the general reader, and of especial interest to the artist, the ecclesiologist, the Antiquary, and the student of Church History.

CATALOGUE RECEIVED.—Cole's (15. Great Turnstile) List No. 57 of Very Cheap Books.

THE ANTIQUARY. 8vo. Edinburgh, 1816. Vols. I. and II.

HISTORY AND ANTIQUITIES OF TWICKENHAM, being the First Part of Parochial Collections for the County of Middlesex, begun in 1780 by E. Ironside, Esq., London, 1797. (This work forms 1 vol. of Miscell. Antiquities in continuation of the Bib. Topographica, and is usually bound in the 10th Volume.)

RITSON'S ROBIN HOOD. 12mo. London, 1795. Vol. II. (10s. will be given for a clean copy in boards, or 7s. 6d. for a clean copy bound.)

DR. JOHNSON'S PRAYERS AND MEDITATIONS.

ANNUAL OBITUARY AND BIOGRAPHY. Vol. XXXI.

THEOPHILUS AND PHILODOXUS, or Several Conferences, &c., by Gilbert Giles, D.D., Oxon, 1674; or the same work republished 1679, under the title of a "Dialogue between a Protestant and a Papist."

PECK'S COMPLETE CATALOGUE OF ALL THE DISCOURSES WRITTEN BOTH FOR AND AGAINST PAPACY IN THE TIME OF KING JAMES II. 1735. 4to.

NICHOLS' LEICESTERSHIRE. Wanted the Vol. containing the Guthlaxton Hundred.

HARLEIAN MANUSCRIPTS. Index to Vol. IV.

REPORTS OF CHARITY COMMISSION. Vols. VI. VIII. IX.

INDEX TO ADDITIONAL MSS. in the Museum.

FEARNE'S ESSAY ON HUMAN CONSCIOUSNESS, 4to.

BISHOP KIDDER'S LIFE OF ANTHONY HORNECK.

TIGHE'S LIFE OF LAW.

MACROPEDII, HECASTUS FABULA. 8vo. Antwerp, 1539.

OMNES GEORGII MACROPEDII FABULÆ COMICÆ. Utrecht, 1552. 2 Vols. 8vo.

OTHONIS LEXICON RABBINICUM.

*** Letters, stating particulars and lowest price, carriage free, to be sent to MR. BELL, Publisher of "NOTES AND QUERIES," 186. Fleet Street.

We this week present our Readers with an extra half-sheet for the purpose of making room for some of the many communications which have long been waiting for insertion. By the end of the present month we shall reduce the number of these very considerably, even if we fail in our purpose of finding room for all of them.

J. E. (Homerton) will find an account of Peter of Blois or Peter Blesensis in any biographical dictionary; and very full particulars of him and his work in Mr. Wright's Biographia Britannica Literaria (Anglo-Norman Period).

ALPHA BETA'S Query would give rise to a discussion—which we believe would be fruitless—and would certainly occupy more space than we could afford to it. The omission is not general, and probably originated in different places from very different causes.

LEICESTRIENSIS is thanked for his friendly hint, which shall not be lost sight of. Even he can hardly be aware of the difficulties we have to contend with.

T. C. S. The "Poetical Coincidence" in our next.

C. H. B. In our next if possible.

R. will find the subject of "Beating the Bounds" or "Parochial Perambulations" treated very fully in Brand's Popular Antiquities, Vol. i. p. 191 (ed. Ellis) 1841. For "Gospel Trees" he is referred to our 2nd Vol. pp. 407. 496.

J. M. B. Dr. Smith's Classical Dictionary of Biography, Mythology, and Geography, price one guinea, is the cheapest work upon the subject. Dr. Smith's larger dictionaries contain more information; but they are, of course, more expensive.

H. G. D. Will our correspondent favour us with copies of the ballads to which he refers?

J. ALLASON will find his Query respecting "Après Moi le Déluge" discussed in our 3rd Vol. pp. 299. 397.

REPLIES RECEIVED.—Medical Use of Pigeons—Rasher—Herschel Anticipated—Battle of Brunanburgh—Locust of New Testament—Vermin—Discovering the drowned—Sir J. Davies—Island of Ægina—Stanza in Childe Harold—Log Book—Winchester Execution—Suicides buried in Cross Roads—Prophecies of Nostradamus—Anagrams—Gray's Progress of Poetry—History of Hawick—Meaning of Mop—Archbishop of Spalatro—Meaning of Log Ship—Parish Registers—Stickle—Marriage of Ecclesiastics—Nightingale and Thorn—Borough-English—Praed's Works—William III. at Exeter—Bourchier Family—Story referred to by Jeremy Taylor—Linteamina and Surplices—Coins of Constantius Gallus—Berlin Time—Defoe's House.

Copies of our Prospectus, according to the suggestion of T. E. H., will be forwarded to any correspondent willing to assist us by circulating them.

VOLS. I., II., and III., with very copious Indices, may still be had, price 9s. 6d. each, neatly bound in cloth.

NOTES AND QUERIES is published at noon on Friday, so that our country Subscribers may receive it on Saturday. The subscription for the Stamped Edition is 10s. 2d. for Six Months, which may be paid by Post-office Order drawn in favour of our Publisher, MR. GEORGE BELL, 186. Fleet Street; to whose care all communications for the Editor should be addressed.

Printed by THOMAS CLARK SHAW, of 8. New Street Square, at No. 5. New Street Square, in the Parish of St. Bride in the City of London; and published by GEORGE BELL, of No. 186. Fleet Street, in the Parish of St. Dunstan in the West, in the City of London, Publisher, at No. 186. Fleet Street aforesaid.—Saturday, October 11. 1851.