Notes and Queries Vol. IV., No. 109, Saturday, November 29. 1851

NOTES:—

QUERIES:—

REPLIES:—

MISCELLANEOUS:—

Although I am afraid "NOTES AND QUERIES" may not be considered as open to contributions purely bibliographical, and admitting I am uncertain whether the following copy of the treatise of John Fisher, Bishop of Rochester, has been before noted, I am induced to send this extract from Techener's Bulletin du Bibliophile for May 1851. The book is in the library at Douai.

"This Treatise concernynge the fruytful Saynges of David the King and prophete in the seven penytencyall psalmes, devyded in ten sermons, was made and compyled by the ryght reverente fader in god Johan Fyssher, doctour of dyvinyte and bysshop of Rochester, at the exortacion and sterynge of the most excellent pryncesse Margarete, Countesse of Richemount and Derby, and moder to out souverayne Lorde Kynge Hēry the VII."

It is described as a small 4to., printed upon vellum, in Gothic letters, at London, 1508, by Wynkyn de Worde, and contains 146 leaves. On the first leaf it has a portcullis, crowned with the motto "Dieu et mon Droit." On the recto of the last leaf there is—

"Here endeth the exposycyon of the 7 psalmes. Enprynted at London in the fletestrete, at the sygne of ye Sonne, by Wynkyn de Worde. In the yere of oure lorde M.CCCCC.VIII. ye 16 day of ye moneth of Juyn. The XXIII. yere of ye reygne of our souverayne Lorde Kynge Hēry the Seventh."

At the back, there is the sun, the monogram of Wynkyn de Worde—the letters W. C. displayed as usual—and beneath, "Wynkyn de Worde."

At the beginning of the book, "sur une garde en vélin" (a fly-leaf of vellum?), there is written in a very neat hand the following ten verses, the profession of faith of Thomas Morus and of his friend John Fisher, Bishop of Rochester:

Beneath—

And lower on the same page—

It is traditionally reported, upon the testimony of some Anglican Benedictines (an order now extinct), that the lines which contain the profession of faith, and those which follow, are in the handwriting of Bishop Fisher, and that the work was presented by him to the chancellor, during their imprisonment, when by order of Henry VIII. the chancellor was denied the consolation of his books.

In the same library there is a fine Psalter, which belonged to Queen Elizabeth. The Livre d'Heures of Mary Queen of Scots was here also to be found: "Maria, glorious martyr and Queen of Scotland." It is conjectured these books were brought to Douai by the fugitive English Roman Catholic priests. In 1790 their collections were confiscated and given to the public library of Douai. It would be of interest to ascertain, if possible, the authenticity of the Heures à l'Usage, stated to have belonged to Mary Queen of Scots. Upon this point one may be permitted to be sceptical. I have myself seen two. One of these, it was said, had been used by Mary on the scaffold, and contained a note in the handwriting, as I think, of James II. attesting the fact. It was understood to have been obtained from a monastery in France. The other, a small Prayer Book MS. in vellum, of good execution, had the signature "M." with a line I think over it of "O Lord, deliver me from my enemies!" in French. I am, however, now writing from memory, and, in the first case, of very many years.

Whether the line, "Maria, glorious martyr and Queen of Scotland," be written in the Psalter, or has been added by the mental excitement of M. Duthillœul, the librarian at Douai, I cannot decide. The grand culmination of "and Queen of Scotland" forms doubtless a very striking anti-thesis: but neither the possessor of the book nor a priest would have so sunk the martyr, although a woman and a queen were alike concerned, as this line does. Lowndes states there is a copy of the bishop's treatise on vellum at Cambridge. A copy is in the British Museum; but the title, according, to Lowndes, has seven sermons. It will be observed the title now given has ten.

S. H.

The social elements of society in the seventeenth century were more simple in their character and development than at the present period. The population was comparatively small, and therefore the strivings for success in any pursuit did not involve that severe conflict which is so frequently the case in the present day. Society then was more of a community than it is now. It had not public bodies to aid it. It was left more to its own inherent resources for reciprocal good, and for mutual help. The temptations to evade and dissemble, in matters of business, or private and public negotiations, were not so strong as they now are. Its transactions were more transparent and defined, because they were fewer and less complicated than many of our own. We readily grant that society now, in its social, religious, and commercial aspects, enjoys advantages immeasurably superior to those of any former period; still there are some few advantages which it had then, that it cannot possess now. The following advertisements, from the newspapers of the time, will illustrate the truth of the foregoing remarks:

From a Collection for Improvement of Husbandry and Trade.

Friday, January 26, 1693/4.

"One that is fit to keep a Warehouse, be a Steward, or do any Business that can be supposed an intelligent Man that has been a Shopkeeper is fit for, and can give any Security that can be desired, as far as Ten Thousand Pound goes, and has some Estate of his own, desires an Employment of One hundred Pounds a year, or upwards. I can give an account of him."

That a man having 10,000l. to give as security, and in possession of an estate, should require a situation of 100l. per annum, sounds oddly enough in our ears. "I can give an account of him," denotes that the editor was a man well known and duly appreciated. He appears to have been a scribe useful in many ways. He was known, and knowing.

Friday, February 2, 1693/4.

"A very eminent Brewer, and one I know to be a very honest Gentleman, wants an Apprentice. I can give an account of him."

In what sense the word "honest" must here be taken it is difficult to define. As an eminent brewer, we should naturally conclude he must have been an honest man. He is here very eminent and very honest.

Friday March 16, 1693/4.

"Many Masters want Apprentices, and many Youths want Masters. If they apply themselves to me, I'll strive to help them. Also for variety of valuable services."

Here is the editor of a paper offering his help to masters and apprentices for their mutual good. Let us suppose an advertisement of this kind appearing in The Times of our own day. Printing-house Square would not contain a tithe of the individuals who would present themselves for the reception of this accommodating aid. In such a case the editors (as it regards their particular duties) would be cyphers, for a continuous absorption of their time would necessarily occur in the carrying out of this benevolent offer. This advertisement may be considered as multum in parvo, giving the wants of the many in an announcement of three or four lines, connecting them with a variety of services which in those days were thought to be valuable. How greatly are we assisted by these little incidents in forming correct views of the state of society at that period.

The next advertisement shows the value set upon the services of one who was to perform the duties of a clerk, and to play well on the violin.

"If any young Man that plays well on a Violin, and writes a good Hand, desires a Clerkship, I can help him to Twenty Pounds a year."

Of course twenty pounds was of more value then than it is now: still it seems a small sum for the performance of such duties, for twelve months. Here is musical talent required for the amusement of others, in combination with the daily duties of a particular profession. An efficient musician, and a good writer, and all for 20l. per annum! We learn by the editor's "I can help him," his readiness to assist all who would advertise in his journal, to obtain those employments which their advertisements specified.

Friday, April 6, 1694.

"A Grocer of good business desires an Apprentice of good growth."

The "good growth" must have been intended to convey the idea of height and strength.

My next article shall be devoted to advertisements of another class, further illustrating the state of society and the peculiarities of the people at the end of the seventeenth century.

H. M. BEALBY.

North Brixton.

As having originated the inquiry in "NOTES AND QUERIES"[1] respecting this Treatise, under the signature of J. M., I feel great obligation both to the editor of that journal, and the editor of the Treatise itself, for having brought it to light by publication, and added it to the stock of accurate and very important historical information. Indeed, a real vacancy was left for it; and it is a subject of high self-gratulation, that a boon previously, and for a length of time, hidden and unproductive, is now accessible and operative without limit. I have no doubt that all your readers, and the whole reading public, join with me in rejoicing that the editorship of the work has fallen into hands so competent and so successful.

[1] Vol. i., pp. 263. 357.; Vol. ii., pp. 136. 168. 446. 490.

I was, not for ten, but twenty years or more, in quest of the MS. now so happily made public property, and should have fallen upon it much earlier, but for the misleading title under which it appears, where it is really; for it has been found. In the Catalogus Lib. MSS.: Ox. 1697, among the Laudian MSS. appears, p. 62., "968.95. A Treatise against Equivocation, or fraudulent Dissimulation." Against! when no such word is in the original, and the real matter and meaning is for! I had, at some early time, marked the very entry; but presuming that the work had been actually printed (which I believe it was in a very few copies, which have disappeared), naturally enough I did not pursue the search in that direction. Others, I am happy, have, and I am gratified.

The work is very important; for there is not a work more evidently genuine and authentic than this is proved to be by plain historic evidence, both as to the document itself and the facts which it attests. The witness, or witnesses, appearing in it, give their testimony respecting themselves with the most unsuspectable simplicity. They meant not, and have not, misrepresented themselves: they have proclaimed their own doctrine for themselves respecting Equivocation and Mental Reservation—the last of which is really of most importance; and it was most needful to the Roman body at the time, and under their circumstances. Their object, for mere safety, was concealment as to their resorts or residences. They could not exist, as they did, without the assistance and knowledge of many individuals, some of inferior class. Against the incessant inquiries to which they were exposed they had no defence, except the power of disappointing or misleading by ambiguity or deception, which was completely secured by reserved termination in the mind to any uttered declaration. Now, there is in this very Treatise plain admission that all the co-religionists of the endangered party, particularly a lady who is distinctly noticed, were not convinced of the moral rectitude of such a procedure; and it was necessary, or expedient, that their hesitation should be removed. And this seems to be the main object of the present work. How far it has succeeded must depend upon the evidence which is adduced.

We have generally had the doctrine of the Roman body on the subject of the Treatise presented by opponents; here we have it as deliberately stated by themselves. There is a passage rather observable in p. 103., beginning at the bottom and extending to the words "he hath no such meaning to tell them," of which we are not acquainted with a duplicate. But the whole has something of the freshness and interest of novelty.

Macbeth, it is agreed, I believe, was written in 1607, consequently after the Powder Plot, when the doctrine before us was brought forward pointedly against the traitors. Might there not be some reference to the fact in the Second Act, where the porter of the castle, roused by repeated knockings, on the murder, after other exclamations in the manner of the poet, proceeds:

"Here's an Equivocator, that could swear in both the scales, against either scale: who committed treason enough for God's sake, yet could not equivocate to heaven. Oh, come in, Equivocator"?

Mr. Jardine will thank your correspondent for pointing out an error or two which should be corrected in another edition. At p. 44., for "χθο," in the margin, should be printed "sub verbo." The word in the MS. is a contraction to that effect: the capital "V" has a curved stroke across the first line of the "V," followed by "bo." Generally the Dubium, in alphabetic works of the kind referred to, ranks under some alphabetic word, one or more, as it may happen; but in Em. Sà's work the word Dubium comes under the letter D., and this is meant to be expressed. At p. 49. the footnote should be omitted, as the Vulgate, which is followed, calls the 1st of Samuel the 1st of Kings. The first line of p. 56. should have "autem" instead of "antea." I have inspected the MS. carefully, and therefore speak with confidence.

EUPATOR.

"Infixit. Inflixit, lectionem quorundam MSS. facile prætulissem, et quod statim præcesserit transfixo, unde evadit inconcinna cognatæ dictionis repetitio, et quod etiam Æn. x. 303.:

"si Sidon. Apoll. v. 197. haud tueretur vulgatam scripturam:

To which criticism of Wakefields's, Forbiger adds: "Præterea etiam acuto scopulo infigendi voc. accommodatius videtur quam infligendi." And Wagner: "acuto scopulo infigi melius."

This interpretation and these criticisms are founded altogether on a false conception of the meaning of the word infigere, which is never to fix on, but always either to fix in, or to fix with, i.e. pierce with. Scopulo infixit acuto, fixed or pinned down or to the ground with a sharp rock; i.e. hurled a sharp-pointed rock on him, so as to nail him to the ground. So (Æn. XII. 721.) "Cornua obnixi infigunt," fix their horns, not on, but in; infix their horns; stick their horns into each other; stick each other with their horns: q.d. Cornibus se mutuo infigunt: and, exactly parallel to our text:

In confirmation of this view of the passage, I may observe: 1st, that it is easier to imagine a man staked to the ground by a sharp-pointed rock, than flung on a sharp-pointed rock, so as to remain permanently impaled on it; and 2dly, that the account given of the transaction, both by Quintus Calaber and Seneca, agree as perfectly with this view as they disagree with the opposite:

And so Seneca; who, having presented us with Ajax clinging to the rock to which he had swum for safety, after his ship had been sunk, and himself struck with lightning, and there uttering violent imprecations against the Deity, adds:

And, so also, beyond doubt, we are to understand Sidonius Apollinaris's—

Not, with Wakefield and the other commentators, fixed on the rocks of Caphareus, but, pierced with the rocks of Caphareus, and lying under them. Compare (Æn. IX. 701.) "fixo pulmone," the pierced lung; "fixo cerebro" (Æn. XII. 537.); "verubus trementia figunt" (Æn. I. 216.), not, fix on the spits, but, stick or pierce with the spits; and especially (Ovid. Ibis. 341.),

pierced and pinned down with a rock, at the bottom of the Eubœan gulf.

TURBINE. SCOPULO.—Not two instruments, a whirlwind and a rock, but one single instrument, a whirling rock; scopulo turbineo; in modo turbinis se circumagente; as if Virgil had said, Solo affixit illum correptum et transverberatum scopulo acuto in eum maxima vi rotato: or, more briefly, Turbine scopuli acuti corripuit et infixit. Compare:

So understood, 1st, the passage is according to Virgil's usual manner, the latter part of the line explaining and defining the general statement contained in the former; and, 2ndly, Pallas kills her enemy, not by the somewhat roundabout and unusual method of first striking him with thunder, and then snatching him up in a whirlwind, and then either dashing him against a sharp rock, and leaving him impaled there, or, as I have shown is undoubtedly the meaning, impaling him with a sharp rock, but by the more compendious and less out-of-the-way method of first striking him with thunder, and then whirling a sharp-pointed rock on top of him, so as to impale him.

From Milton's imitation of this passage, in his Paradise Lost (ii. 180.), it appears that even he fell into the general and double error:

Caro's translation shows that he had no definite idea whatever of the meaning:

---

"'INCEDERE' wird besonders von der feierlichen, würdevollen Haltung im Gange gebraucht: vers 500, von der Dido, 'Regina incessit.' (Ruhnk. zu Terent. And. I. i. 100. Eun. v. 3. 9.) Deshalb der majestätischen Juno eigenthümlich, Ἡραῖον βαδίζειν. Also nicht für sum, sondern ganz eigentlich."—Thiel.

And so also Holdsworth and Ruæus.

I think, on the contrary, that incedo, both here and elsewhere, expresses only the stepping or walking motion generally, and that the character of the step or walk, if inferable at all, is to be inferred only from the context. Accordingly, "Magnifice incedit" (Liv. II. 6.); "Turpe incedere" (Catull. XXXXII. 8.); "Molliter incedit" (Ovid, Amor. II. 23.); "Passu incedit inerti" (Ovid, Metam. II. 772.); "Melius est incessu regem quam imperium regno claudicare" (Justin. VI. ii. 6.); "Incessus omnibus animalibus certus et uniusmodi, et in suo, cuique, genere" (Plin. X. 38.).

The emphasis, therefore, is on regina, and the meaning is, I who step, or walk, QUEEN of the Gods; the dignity of the step being not expressed by "incedo," but inferable from "regina." The expression corresponds exactly to "ibit regina" (Æn. II. 578.); with this difference only, that "ibit" does not, like "incedo," specify motion on foot.

"Jovisque et soror et conjux."—Both the ets are emphatic. "Jovisque et soror et conjux."

"Bella" expresses the organised resistance which she meets, and the uncertainty of the issue; and being placed first word in the line is emphatic.

JAMES HENRY.

—The subjoined notice of a curious entry in the records of the Belfast corporation may be acceptable. The author is unknown. They are inscribed, "Verses to General Monck," and, as the last six lines show, are an attack on the Rump Parliament:—

The occasion of their presentation is unknown. General Monck took Belfast in 1646 from the Scotch, who being true Presbyterians of the older school, had turned against the parliament. This was the probable occasion of their being presented to the future restorer of King Charles II.

E. L. B.

—You have done yourself credit by exonerating Queen Elizabeth from a charge the easiest to bring, and the most difficult to rebut, implying the proof of a negative; and therefore frequently brought by the unprincipled. I propose, as a counterpart, to exonerate Pope Pius V. from an imputation, mistakingly, though unjustly, cast upon him by an authority of no less weight than that of Sir Walter Scott. In his edition of Somers's Tracts, vol. i. p. 192., occurs a note on a place in the execution of justice: "Pius V. resolved to make his bastard son, Boncompagni, Marquis of Vincola, King of Ireland," &c. For this assertion no authority is cited, nor indeed could be. The very name might have suggested the filiation to his successor, Gregory XIII., which was the fact. In a work, not much known, The Burnt Child dreads the Fire, &c., by William Denton, M.D., London, 1675, at p. 25. we read, "Gregory XIII. had a bastard, James Buon Compagna, and to him he gave Ireland, and impowered Stewkely with men, arms, and money, to conquer it for him."[2] There is no reason to doubt, that with the editor of the Tracts the above imputation was a simple mistake; but it is an important duty of all who interfere with historical literature, to state and correct every discovered instance of the kind.

[2] Camden, in his Elizabeth, under 1578, states the fact without mention of the name, only calling him "the pope's bastard;" but the date is the sixth year of the pontificate of Gregory XIII.

EUPATOR.

In the 22nd volume of the Archæologia, p. 58., is the following passage:

"The cross, which does not appear to have been peculiar to Christianity, when introduced on these obelisks, is usually filled with tracery."

The obelisks, or stones of memorial, referred to are the subjects of a very interesting paper communicated by Mr. Logan to the Society of Antiquaries. (See Plates 2, 3, 4, and 5.) I am desirous of being informed what authenticated instances there are of crosses, or stones marked with crosses, being used for landmarks, memorials, or for any other purpose, civil or religious, before the introduction of Christianity? I have met with one instance. Prescott, in his History of Mexico, relates that—

"In the court of one of the temples in the island of Columel he was amazed by the sight of a cross of stone and lime, about ten palms high."

It was the emblem of the god of rain (See vol. i. p. 240., &c.)

In the same paper Mr. Logan observes—

"Crosses, or stones on which the figure was traced, marked a place of meeting for certain districts; and within memory of man a fair was held on this spot. It is not improbable that market-crosses may be deduced from this custom."

It seems that every town that had the privilege of a market or fair (I am speaking of England) had a market-cross. In most of these towns the cross has disappeared, and in its place a ball or globe has been mounted on the shaft; but the term "market-cross" is still in use. In the town of Giggleswick, in the parish of Giggleswick, there is a perfect market-cross, the cross being what is, I believe, called a cross-fleury. In the town of Settle, in the same parish of Giggleswick, the ball or globe is placed on the top of the shaft. Are there other instances of market towns in which the cross is still found?

I passed through a market town lately in which the stone steps, and socket in which the shaft was placed, are preserved; but they have been removed to one corner of the market-place. The shaft and cross have disappeared.

Is not this erection of the cross, in places in which markets and fairs were held, of ecclesiastical origin? Was the cross erected by licence granted by the bishop within whose jurisdiction it was placed? Is there any grant of such licence in existence? Or did these crosses originate in the gratuitous piety of our ancestors? I fear to ask the question, whether the buyers and sellers under the cross are more upright in their dealings than those who buy and sell without the presence of this emblem of all that is true and just. Is the cross erected in the cities and towns of other states, as in England? Was the custom general in Europe?

F. W. J.

Mr. Curzon states, in the introduction to his Monasteries of the Levant, that—

"The crucifix was not known before the fifth or sixth century, though the cross was always the emblem of the Christian faith."

I am persuaded that this assertion is incorrect, and that the crucifix was used in much earlier times. Will some one kindly inform me where the first mention of it is to be found, and what is the date of the earliest examples now known?

DRYASDUST.

In reading the Topographer for January 1791 (a work which was published under the editorship of my uncle, Sir Egerton Brydges), I was surprised to find, in an account of the family of Brocas, of Beaurepaire, in the county of Hampshire, that the post of Master of the Buckhounds had been sold in the reign of James I.

Mr. Gough (Sepulchral Monuments, pp. 160, 161.) appears to be the authority quoted who describes the monument of Sir Bernard Brocas, Kt., as existing at Westminster, and having on it an inscription in which is the following sentence:

"Sir Bernard succeeded to the paternal inheritance both in England and France, and having married Mary, daughter and heiress of Sir John de Roche, had a large estate with her, and the hereditary post of Master of the Buckhounds; which was confirmed to him by King Edward the Third, and held by the family, till sold in James the First's reign."

I have no means of ascertaining at the present time whether this monument is still in existence or not; nor indeed has that much to do with the object of my writing, which is to suggest the following Queries, in the hope that some of your correspondents may be able to send satisfactory answers.

1. By whom was the post of Master of the Buckhounds first instituted, and who was the first Master?

2. Is there any list of persons holding this office; and if so, where may it be seen?

3. Is there any instance of an unmarried lady having held it: for in the case before us we see that a lady was able to convey it by inheritance to her husband?

4. By whom was it sold? Was it by the last hereditary possessor; and if so, what was his name? Or was it by the king, on the death of one of the possessors, for the purpose of enriching himself?

5. Is it known whether there is any other instance of its having been sold: and when did it come to be, as now, a ministerial office?

JOHN BRANFILL HARRISON.

Maidstone.

—Where did Penn get the title of his well-known work? St. Paulinus, Bishop of Nola, in allusion to the custom of crowning crosses, has these lines:—

Vide Dr. Rock's Hierurgia. Quarles says, in his Esther:

MARICONDA.

Who was the author of the above well-known bit of philology?

A. A. D.

—Dr. Schmitz (in Smith's Antiq., article SHIPS) speaks of "the pegs, σκαλμοί, between which the oars move[d], and to which they were fastened by a thong, τροπωτήρ." What is the authority for two pegs, between which, &c? A single peg and thong, as still in frequent use, would be intelligible!

Dr. Smith observes (ap. id. p. 1139.) that the decree of Scamandrius, which ordained that no free Athenian should be tortured, "does not appear to have interdicted torture as a means of execution, since we find Demosthenes (de Cor. 271.) reminding the judges that they had put Antiphon to death by the rack." Does it not escape him that Antiphon was then an alien, having suffered expulsion from the Lexiarchic list. (See Dem. l.c.)

A. A. D.

—Where is the treaty or act of parliament to be found which guaranteed compensation to the French refugees at the end of the war? Is it possible to obtain a list of those who received compensation, and the amount paid; and if so, where?

S. QUARTO.

—In Charles Knight's London mention is made, amongst the noble persons buried in the church of the Grey Friars, of Isabel, wife of Baron Fitzwarren, sometime queen of the Isle of Man. Will you or some of your correspondents be so kind as to tell me who this lady was, and when the Isle of Man ceased to be an independent kingdom?

FANNY.

—According to the Friend of India of 4th September, 1851, there is at Cossimbazar the following inscription:—

In the following number (dated 11th September, 1851), the editor offers an apology for having omitted the date of the decease of Mrs. Mattocks, viz. 1778; and then remarks that—

"As she was twenty-seven years old at her death, she must have been born in 1751; it was therefore impossible that she should have been the grand-daughter of the great John Hampden, that died in 1643, one hundred and eight years before her birth."

Query, Can any of your correspondents give me any information respecting the subject?

SALOPIAN.

—In Latrobe's Rambler in North America, London, 1835, vol. ii. p. 290., is a curious account of this insect, which visits Pennsylvania every seventeenth year, and appears about May 24. It is under an inch in length when it first appears early in the morning, and gains its strength after the sun has risen. These insects live ten or fifteen days, and never seem to eat any food. They come in swarms, and birds, pigs, and poultry fatten on them. The female lays her eggs in the outermost twigs of the forest; these die and drop on the ground. The eggs give birth to a number of small grubs, which are thus enabled to attain the mould without injury, and in it they disappear; they are forgotten till seventeen years pass, and then the memory of them returns, and they rise from the earth, piercing their way through the matted sod, the hard trampled clay, &c. They appeared in 1749, &c., to 1834, and are expected in 1851. Has this expectation been fulfilled?

C. I. R.

—Under this title (the proper spelling in which should be Sina or Senena) an article appears in Vol. iv., p. 120., comprising a portion of the genealogy of the Welsh princess, in which three of her sons are mentioned, viz., Owen, Llewellyn, and David. But there was a fourth son, Roderic, who settled in England, and appears to have been residing there for some time, when the fatal rupture occurred between the two countries. It would appear that descendants of his have lived, and are living in our own times; among them, the late Dr. John Mawer, of Middleton Tyas, whose remarkable epitaph was given in a former number of "NOTES AND QUERIES." My first inquiry is, Is there known to exist any genealogy assuming to extend between the Rev. and learned gentleman just named and Prince Roderic? I am told there was one published in the British Peerage for 1706, at which time John Mawer would be three years of age; is such the fact? I wish also to ask, whether Prince Owen was in existence at the time of the deaths of Llewellyn and David—whether in Wales or England? and whether he was the ancestor of Owen Tudor, the proud father of Henry VII.; and, if not, who was Owen Tudor's ancestor?

AMANUENSIS.

—Was the late Mr. Jenings of Acton Hall, Suffolk, descended from the family of Jenings, formerly of Silsden, Skipton in Craven, and afterwards of Ripon, Yorkshire; and if so, where can information as to the pedigree be obtained?

A. B. C.

Brighton.

—May not the site of Caleva Atrebatum have been at Caversham, on the north of the Thames, near Reading?

The distance of Caleva from Londinium was forty-four Roman miles, making forty English; and from Venta Belgarum, thirty-six Roman or thirty-three English miles.

Caleva, according to Ptolemy's map, was on the north of the Thames; a portion of the present Oxfordshire being in the country assigned by the same geographer to the Atrebates.

G. J.

—Whence, or when, originated the application of Abigail, as applied to a lady's maid? It is used by Dean Swift in this sense; but in a way that shows that it was no new phrase in those days.

J. S. WARDEN.

Balica.

—Jacob, in his Law Dictionary, giving Cowel as his authority (who, however, advances no further elucidation), derives the word from dur-den, a coppice in a valley. Does the word dur signify wood, or, if the British dwr, is it not water?

F. R. R.

—I have a halfpenny, apparently American, bearing on the obverse, a head to the right, and "Auctori Connect.;" and on the reverse, "Inde." for independence, and "Lib." for liberty; date in the exerg., 1781 or 1787; and between "Inde." and "Lib." five stars. Can any of your correspondents tell me if my explanation of the reverse is the correct one? and also who was the "Auctori Connect.," or founder of the state of Connecticut?

J. N. C.

King's Lynn.

—For what reason are the arms of Methwen (and some others, I believe) placed on the breast of a two-headed eagle displayed sable?

H. N. E.

[When armorial ensigns are borne upon the breast of an eagle, the general inference is that the bearers thereof are Counts of the Holy Roman Empire, it being the practice in Germany for Counts of the Empire so to display the eagle.

There are some cases in which especial grants have been made to Englishmen so to do, as in the case of the family of Methwen; and persons having received the royal licence in England to accept the dignity of Count of the Empire, so carry their arms, as in the cases of Earl Cowper, Lord Arundel of Wardour, St. Paul, &c.]

—Where can I obtain any information respecting St. Beuno, to whom I find several churches dedicated in Wales?

J. D. D.

[In Rees's Essay on the Welsh Saints, p. 268., and Williams's Ecclesiastical Antiquities of the Cymry, p. 137. The college of Beuno is now called Clynog Vawr. See also The Cambro-Briton, vol. iii. p. 14.]

—What publication contains a list of the knights bachelor made by George I. and George II. (1714-1760)? With regard to the subsequent reign I have found the Calendar of Knights, by Francis Townsend, London, 1828, very accurate and perfect.

☞ N.

[There is not any continuous list of Knights Bachelors in any published works since Philpot's Catalogue, 1660, until Townsend's Calendar, which commences in 1760. The knights made by Kings George I. and II. will be found only in some of the genealogical publications of the day, such as the British Compendium, published at intervals between 1720 and 1769; Chamberlayne's State of Great Britain; or Heylin's Help to English History, or Phillipps's List of Nobility, and similar works.

Mr Townsend contemplated the publication of a list, and left an imperfect MS., which passed into the hands of Sir Thomas Phillipps, who printed it; but though privately circulated, it was never published. See Moule's Bibliotheca Heraldica for various works of the character referred to.]

—An American lady lecturing on Bloomerism last week was much puzzled by the audience bursting into roars of laughter upon her quoting Professor Walker as an authority for some statement. The roars redoubled upon her declaring her belief that Professor Walker was a most respectable and trustworthy person. Can any one explain the origin of the joke that lies in the name "Walker?" Why do people say "Walker" when they wish to express ridicule or disbelief of a questionable statement?

DAVUS.

[The history of the renowned "Hookey Walker," as related by John Bee, Esq., is simply this:—John Walker was an out-door clerk at Longman, Clementi, and Co.'s in Cheapside, where a great number of persons were employed; and "Old Jack," who had a crooked or hooked nose, occupied the post of a spy upon their aberrations, which were manifold. Of course, it was for the interests of the surveillants to throw discredit upon all Jack's reports to the heads of the firm; and numbers could attest that those reports were fabrications, however true. Jack, somehow or other, was constantly outvoted, his evidence superseded, and of course disbelieved; and thus his occupation ceased, but not the fame of "Hookey Walker."]

—Can any of your readers inform me of "The privileges of, and the ancient customs appertaining to, the See of Durham?"

H. F.

Clapham, Nov. 3. 1851.

[These relate most probably to the palatine rights of the Bishops of Durham, granted by Egfrid, King of Northumbria, in 685; when he gave to St. Cuthbert all the land between the Wear and the Tyne, called "the patrimony of St. Cuthbert," to hold in as full and ample a manner as the king himself holds the same. This donative, with its ancient customs and privileges, was confirmed by the Danes, and afterwards by William the Conqueror; in addition to which, the latter made the church a sanctuary, and the county a palatinate. Its bishop was invested with as great a power and prerogative within his see, as the king exercised without the bounds of it, with regard to forfeitures, &c. Thus it was a kind of royalty subordinate to the crown, and, by way of eminence, was called The Bishoprick. For an account of the ancient customs connected with the cathedral, our correspondent is referred to the curious and interesting work of Davies of Kidwelly, entitled, The Ancient Rites and Monuments of the Monastical and Cathedral Church of Durham, 12mo. 1672, which has been republished by the Surtees Society.]

This body (of which I am a member) ought to meet on the same occasions with that of Canterbury; but owing to the neglect or the wilfulness of its officials, many omissions and mistakes occur. I have heard a commission to further adjourn the Convocation, from a day to which it previously stood adjourned, read the day after that on which it ought to have assembled, but which day had arrived and passed without any one recollecting the fact! Our Convocation appears at no time to have acted a very prominent part, though its constitution is far better fitted for a working synod than that of the southern province. In the latter the parochial clergy are so inadequately represented as to be much outnumbered by the dignitaries appointed by the crown and the bishops; but in York there are two proctors chosen by the clergy of each archdeaconry and peculiar jurisdiction, and two by each cathedral chapter; thus affording a complete counterpoise to the deans and archdeacons who are members ex officio. Another peculiarity in the Convocation of York is, that it assembles in one house, the bishops commonly appearing by their proxies (priests), and the archbishop presiding by his commissioner, who is always the dean, or one of the residentiary canons of York.

In 1462 (temp. Archbishop Booth) the Convocation of York decreed that such constitutions of the province of Canterbury as were not prejudicial to those of York should be received, incorporated, and deemed as their own (Wilkins's Concilia, vol. iii. p. 580.). Under Archbishop Grenefeld it was decreed that since the Archbishop of York hath no superior in spirituals except the Pope, no appeals should be suffered to the Archbishop of Canterbury (p. 663.). At an earlier period the northern metropolitan laid claim to all England north of the Humber, with the whole realm of Scotland (Wilkins, vol. i. pp. 325, 479, &c.). In a provincial council at London, A.D. 1175, his jurisdiction was denied over the sees of Lincoln, Chester, Worcester, and Hereford, upon which he appealed to the Pope. With the exception of Chester, however, none of these sees were finally retained in the province.

The next year we are told that, in a (national) council at Westminster, the Pope's legate presiding, the Archbishop of York, "disdaining to sit at the left hand of the legate, forced himself into the lap of the Archbishop of Canterbury, but was immediately knocked down by the other bishops and clergy, severely beaten, and thrust out of the council!" (Hoveden ap. Wilkins, vol. i. p. 485.) How far the Northern Convocation supported their burly prelate in these claims I do not know; but I note that in those days the disorderly conduct of the clergy was not made a pretext for the indefinite suspension of synodical functions; and I query whether the clergy might not be trusted to behave quite as well in the nineteenth century.

But to return to the Convocation of York. There is a curious letter, A.D. 1661, from Accepted Frewen, Archbishop of York, to the Convocation, desiring them to send up to London some of their members duly commissioned on their part to sit with the Lower House of Canterbury for the review of the Liturgy. In this letter the archbishop says that himself and the other bishops of the province were sitting with the bishops of the southern province in their House. A similar expedient for constituting a quasi-national synod seems to have been resorted to upon some earlier occasions; but the Convocation of York still passed in due form by their own separate decree what was so agreed upon. The Articles were thus subscribed by our Convocation in 1571, and the Canons in 1604 and 1640.

Since then the Convocation of York has been regularly summoned, met, adjourned, and been prorogued, without even the dutiful address to the crown, which is regularly discussed and adopted in Canterbury. In the year 1847, a spasmodic attempt at life was manifested in this venerable and ill-used institution. Archbishop Harcourt had consented that an address to the crown should be adopted, and himself procured a draft to be approved by the bishops. His grace however died before the day of meeting. Some difficulty was experienced by the officials, both in York and London, as to the course to be pursued; but a precedent having been pointed out in the reign of James I., when Archbishop Hutton died after summoning the Convocation and before its assembly, a writ was issued from the crown to the dean and chapter at York to elect a præses for the Convocation during the vacancy of the archbishoprick. They appointed the canon who happened to be in residence; an unusually large attendance was given; the Convocation was opened, the names called over, and then the officials had reached the limit of their experience; according to their precedents we ought all to have been sent away. The address however was called on by the præses, being apparently quite unaware that a prolocutor should be chosen by the clergy before they proceeded to business. Such an officer probably seemed to the dignitary already in the chair like a second King of Brentford "smelling at one rose," and the demand was refused. Further difficulties ensued, of course, the moment the debate was opened; and finally, the præses, determined not to be tempted out of his depth, rose all at once, and read the fatal formula which restored our glorious Chapter House to its silent converse with the ghosts. The Convocation has never since been heard of.

CAN EBOR.

If your correspondent A. B. R. will refer to Walpole's Fugitive Pieces he will find a minute inquiry into the person and age of this long-lived lady. This is doubtless the dissertation alluded to by C. (Vol. ii., p. 219.) Pennant has two notices of the countess in his Scotch tours. In that of 1769 (which somewhat strangely follows the one of 1772), he gives at p. 87. the engraving spoken of (Vol. iv., p. 306.), apparently taken from the original at Dupplin Castle. It differs a little from R's. description of another portrait, as the cloak is strapped over the chest, not held by a button. In 1772 Pennant again describes this portrait in his Tour in Scotland, vol. ii. p. 88., and speaks of four others, viz., first, at Devonshire House; second, at the Hon. John Yorke's seat, near Cheltenham; third, at Mr. Scott's, printer; and the fourth, in the Standard Closet, Windsor Castle. At the back of the last is written with a pen "Rembrandt." "A mistake (says P.) as Rembrandt was not fourteen years of age (he was indeed only eight) in 1614, at which time it is certain the countess was not living."

In my copy of the Fugitive Pieces (the Strawberry Hill edition, presented by Walpole to Cole), I find the following manuscript note by Cole; an amplification of the passage from Walpole's letters quoted at p. 306.:—

"Being at Strawberry Hill in April, 1773, I saw there a copy of the picture commonly attributed to the old Countess of Desmond; but Mr. Walpole told me that there is sufficient proof that it is a painter's mother, I think Rembrandt's. However, by a letter from Mr. Lort, April 15, 1774, he assures me that on Mr. Pennant's calling at Strawberry Hill to see this picture, he was much chagrined at having a print of it engraved for his book, till Mr. Lort revived him by carrying him to a garret in Devonshire House, where was a picture of this same countess with her name on it, exactly corresponding to his engraved print. I remember a tolerable good old picture of her at Mr. Dicey's, prebendary of Bristol, at Walton in Bucks."

Walpole could not dismiss Pennant without a disparaging remark. He is "a superficial man, and knows little of history or antiquity; but he has a violent rage for being an author." Those who live in glass houses should not throw stones: Pennant would not have displayed the ignorance which Walpole exhibits in the instance before us. In an inscription, which the latter gives, on a Countess of Desmond buried at Sligo, occurs the following contraction: "Desmoniæ Noie Elizabetha." Walpole says (Fugitive Pieces, p. 204.), "This word I can make no sense of, but sic originale; I take it to be redundancy of the carver. It seems to be a repetition of the last three syllables of Desmoniæ!"

The sarcastic observations which Walpole passes on the Society of Antiquaries, its members, and its publications, are so frequent and so bitter, that they must have been founded on some offence not to be pardoned. Were the remarks on the "Historic Doubts" by the president, Dean Milles, and by the Rev. Robert Masters (printed in the first two volumes of the Archæologia), regarded as satisfactorily confuting Walpole's arguments; or did he aim, but unsuccessfully, at the president's chair?

J. H. M.

Bath.

There have been many attempts to explain the puzzling VCRIMDR, on the supposition that a Latin sentence was concealed under these letters. Pinkerton suggested "Voluntate Cæsaris Romani Imperatoris Maximi Domini, Rex." I hope to offer a better solution, which, although not new, has been passed over, I believe, by all subsequent writers. The Rev. George North, in the Museum Meadianum, p. 97., gives the following note: "Apud Arabes accepi verbum Karama significare Honoravit, a quo Ucrima, et Ucrim; quo sensu respondet hoc Arabicum Τῷ Σεβαστῷ apud Græcos." On applying to a well-known scholar and linguist here, I found that from the verb Karama there was derived the adjective Karīmat (nobilis), from which again the superlative Akram comes. There can, I think, be little doubt that the word VCRIMDR is originally derived from this verb Karama, and that it is most probably equivalent to Nobilissimus, a title so common shortly afterwards, as applied to the heirs to the empire.[3]

[3] "Nobilissimus, in the Byzantine historians, is synonymous with Cæsar."—Niebuhr.

The word ϹΡΩΙΑϹ or ϹΡΙΑϹ, which appears on the Alexandrian coins of this prince, is of more difficult explanation. Some think it a prænomen, some a Syriac or other Eastern title, perhaps corresponding to VCRIMDR. Pellerin thought so. I hope some Oriental scholar will direct his attention to this point. These coins are very often ill struck, so that the part of the legend below the head, where the word in question is found, is indistinct, for which reason I suppose MR. TAYLOR has followed the erroneous reading of Banduri, ΕΡΜΙΑϹ (properly ϵΡΜΙΑϹ, with lunate epsilon) for ϹΡΩΙΑϹ, which has been corrected by Eckhel. Of three specimens which I possess, one only reads clearly ϹΡΩΙΑϹ, from the above-mentioned cause, but it is unquestionably the correct reading on all. The best arrangement of the legend, from analogy with those forms used by the Romans, is as follows:

The existence of coins, of which I possess a specimen also, reading

shows that we must not read ΑΘΗΝΟΥ as one word, but must divide it as above. I think MR. TAYLOR will find his specimen to read as the last-mentioned coin, the ΕΡ (properly ϵΡ) being ϹΡ, and the ΑΥ in like manner ΑϹ. My coin gives the whole legend distinctly, and I can vouch for the exactitude of the above legend.

I believe there appeared some years ago, in the Revue de Numismatique, an article on the coins of the Zenobian family, but I do not remember when it was published, nor the conclusions to which the writer came. That is, however, the most recent investigation of the subject, and to it I must refer MR. TAYLOR, as I have not access to that periodical here.

Sir Gardner Wilkinson has published in the Numismatic Chronicle, vol. vii. or viii., an inscription containing the names of Zenobia and Vabalathus. After the name of Vabalathus, who has the title of Autocrator, is the word ΑΘΗΝΟΔΩΡΟΥ, which justifies the reading Αθηνοδωρου Υιος on the coins. Vabalathus is thus probably the son of Zenobia by a former husband, Athenodorus, while bearing himself the same name, as Vabalathus (better Vaballathus, as on the Alexandrian coins) is said to be equivalent to Athenodorus, Gift of Pallas.

W. H. S.

Edinburgh.

I entirely agree with you that your pages are not a fit battle-ground for theological controversy. Still, since the question of the translation of Heb. xiii. 4. has been mooted, I beg with much deference to suggest that it will not be quite right to let it fall to the ground unsettled, especially since CEPHAS has thought fit to charge those of our Reformers who translated the Scriptures with mistranslating advisedly, and with propagating new doctrines.

CEPHAS'S version of the passage is right, and our English version is wrong; but the fault lies in the ignorance of our translators, an ignorance which they shared with all the scholars of their day, and many not bad scholars of our own, of the effect produced on the force of the article by the relation in which it stands to the other words in the clause, in point of order. ὁ τίμιος γάμος is "the honourable marriage;" ὁ τίμιος γάμος ἐστί is "the honourable marriage is;" ὁ γάμος τίμιος is untranslateable, unless you supply ἐστί, and then it means "the marriage" (or, marriage in general, in the abstract) "is honourable." But ἔστω might be supplied, as it is in Heb. xiii. 4., when it will mean, "let marriage be honourable:" and τίμιος ὁ γάμος has just the same meaning, with perhaps this difference, that the emphasis falls more distinctly on τίμιος. The circumstance that the mere assertion that marriage is honourable in all (men or things), true as it is in itself, ill accords with the tenor of the passage of which it forms a part, which is hortatory, not assertive, is a good reason why CEPHAS'S version should be preferred. But when we find afterwards the words καὶ ἡ κοίτη ἀμίαντος, it is impossible to deny this hortatory force to the sentence; for those words cannot mean "the undefiled bed:" and to translate them "the (or their) bed is undefiled"—which is the only version which they will here bear, but one—would give but a feeble sense. That sole remaining sense is, "the bed (let it) be undefiled;" subaudite ἔστω in the verse is, "Let marriage be honourable in all" (men or things), "and the bed be undefiled; but (or for) whoremongers and adulterers God will judge." Had our translators known that ἡ κοίτη ἀμίαντος could not mean "the bed undefiled," they would at once have been driven to see that the verse is a commandment: and the commandment that marriage should be held honourable in all men (or in all respects), would have served the purpose of their doctrines quite as well as the affirmative form which they have given to their present version. I say, it would have served their purpose; but I say more: they heeded not what did or would serve their purpose. They looked only for the truth and disregarded all else in their pursuit of it. With regard to the controversy about ἐν πᾶσι, it is immaterial which version be adopted. MR. WALTER is right in the rule which he enunciates, if he means that in those cases of adjectives in which the masculine and neuter forms are the same, "man" or "men," not "thing" or "things," must be understood: but it is not always observed, even in classical writers, either in Latin or in Greek. There is no reason why it should be broken here; and I do not believe it is broken. It must have been only by a slip of CEPHAS'S pen that he called πᾶσι a feminine adjective. It undoubtedly refers to both sexes. I wish E. A. D. had given the Greek of the passages from Chrysostom and Augustine, of which he has communicated the Oxford translation, which is as likely to err, perhaps, as any other. Jerome's Latin, like the Vulgate, though the words are not precisely the same, gives a literal version of the Greek, without supplying any verb at all, either est or sit, and, since the Latin has not that expressive power in cases like this which the article gives to the Greek, leaves the passage obscure and undecided.

THEOPHYLACT.

—The lines alluded to by your correspondent MR. ABSALON form a inscription on a portrait of King James I. in the Cracherode Collection. (Vide Beloe's Anecdotes, vol. i. p. 210.)

I am aware that this reference does not go to the "root of the matter," if MR. ABSALON wishes to ascertain the author's name; but it may serve as a clue to further discovery.

MARGARET GATTY.

Ecclesfield.

It is quite obvious what lines your correspondent alludes to, though the above quotation which he gives as the commencement of them is not quite correct, nor were they written with the object he supposes.

I send a correct copy of them below, taken from Mr. Payne Collier's very interesting Life of Shakspeare, to whom they have always been attributed; and, it is said, with every show of reason. It is supposed they were written by him in the shape of a complimentary allusion to King James I., in grateful acknowledgment of the patronage bestowed by that monarch upon the stage. The subject is fully discussed at pp. 202, 203. of Mr. Knight's volume, whence, indeed, the above information is derived; and he publishes the lines, as follows, stating then to be copied from a coeval manuscript in his possession:—

Some one, to make the allusion more complete, that is, to over-do it, changed "a king" into "the king" in a subsequent publication of the lines. But this, as Mr. Payne Collier very justly feels, completely spoils the whole complexion of the epigram, and perverts a fine allusion into a raw personality.

J. J. A.

—The observations of BOLTON CORNEY upon my incidental mention of Dr. Farmer, are, I think, wholly unwarranted, both in substance and manner, especially as he himself furnishes ample confirmation of its truth.

[4] At page 379., second column, fifth line from bottom, for "thrice" read "twice."

Taking his quotations in due order—

1. The certificate of Dr. Farmer's character for learning and ability is unnecessary, because neither was impugned; nor does an allegation of atrocity in taste and judgment necessarily imply deficiency in mere book-learning.

2. As for Isaac Reed's opinion in favour of Farmer's Essay, it might be met by many of directly opposite tendency, and of at least equal weight.

3. In the only point really in question, BOLTON CORNEY "cannot deny that Farmer related the anecdote of the wool-man" (that being the reputed trade of Shakspeare's father); but to what end was it related, if not to suggest an application of which Steevens was only the interpreter?

But BOLTON CORNEY thinks the character of the witness suspicious; he forgets that only just before he had stated that the anecdote and its application had been repeated in three editions, extending over thirteen years, all within the lifetime of Dr. Farmer!

A. E. B.

Leeds.

—The correspondent who asserts the curious fact that Johnson, Richardson, and Webster do not notice the word earwig must have consulted some expurgated editions of the works of those celebrated lexicographers—or else we must consider his assertion as a curious fact in the history of literary oversights.

BOLTON CORNEY.

Although there are few books which have proved of greater utility to inquirers into the more recent history of England than Beatson's Political Index, yet it is also true that there are few which have more frequently or more justly caused the reader to feel the want of a new and improved edition. A very short examination, however, of Mr. Haydn's recently published Beatson's Political Index Modernised, The Book of Dignities, containing Rolls of the Official Personages of the British Empire, Civil, Ecclesiastical, Judicial, Military, Naval, and Municipal, &c., will satisfy the reader that such want has at length been supplied in a manner the most ample and the most satisfactory. For though we have referred to Beatson's well-known work for the purpose of furnishing a better idea of the Book of Dignities, we are bound to acknowledge that Mr. Haydn is justified in stating, that in the work in question he owes little more than the plan to Beatson. Mr. Haydn's volume not only contains many lists (among them the "Administrations of England, and the Judges of the Ecclesiastical Courts") not to be found in the Political Index, but the author has had the advantage of being permitted to search the various official records with the view of enabling him to give complete and accurate information. The result, of course, is obvious; namely, that just in the same proportion that our author surpasses Beatson in the extent and accuracy of his various lists, does the Book of Dignities exceed its predecessor in usefulness to the official man, the historian, and the scholar.

Mr. Hunt's experience as a public lecturer at the various literary and scientific institutions of the country, having convinced him that for the majority of the members of those institutions most of the existing works on natural philosophy are of too abstruse and technical a character—are, in short, sealed books,—he has been led to publish a small volume which we have no doubt will soon become extremely popular. It is entitled Elementary Physics, an Introduction to the Study of Natural Philosophy; and, as its object is to teach physical science so far as to render all the great deductions from observation and experiment satisfactorily clear, without encountering the difficulty of mathematics,—and no one is better able to do this, and throw a charm over such a subject, than the author of the Poetry of Science,—the work, which is illustrated with upwards of two hundred woodcuts, will be found eminently useful; not only to those who have neither time nor opportunity to carry their studies beyond its pages, but especially as a "first book" to those in whom it may awaken the desire for a more perfect knowledge of the beautiful and important truths of which it treats.

The nature of the Hand Atlas of Physical Geography, consisting of a Series of Maps and Illustrations, showing the Geographical Distribution of Natural Phenomena, embracing the Divisions of Geology, Hydrography, Meteorology, Natural History: from the Physikalischer Atlas of Berghaus, and the Maps of the Erdkunde, drawn by and under the immediate Superintendence of Drs. Ritter and Kiepert, Oetzel, Grimm, &c., by the Editor of the University Atlas of the Middle Ages, is sufficiently described by its ample title-page; which shows, moreover, that the work is not a mere copy or reduction of the great atlas of Berghaus, on which it is founded. As a companion to the works of Humboldt, Mrs. Somerville, and other writers on physical geography, it will be found most useful; while its convenient size, and moderate price, place it within the reach of almost all classes of readers.

CATALOGUES RECEIVED.—Nattali and Bond's (23. Bedford Street) Catalogue Part II. of Ancient and Modern Books; Adam Holden's (60. High Street, Exeter) Catalogue Part XXXIII. of Second-hand Books in Excellent Condition; B. Quaritch's (16. Castle Street, Leicester Square) Catalogue No. 37. of Books in Oriental Literature; J. Russell Smith's (4. Old Compton Street, Soho) Catalogue Part VII. of an Extensive Collection of Choice, Useful, and Curious Books.

HUNTER'S DEANERY OF DONCASTER. Vol. I. Large or small paper.

CLARE'S RURAL MUSE.

CHRISTIAN PIETY FREED FROM THE DELUSIONS OF MODERN ENTHUSIASTS. A.D. 1756 or 1757.

AN ANSWER TO FATHER HUDDLESTONE'S SHORT AND PLAIN WAY TO THE FAITH AND CHURCH. By Samuel Grascombe. London, 1703. 8vo.

REASONS FOR ABROGATING THE TEST IMPOSED UPON ALL MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT. By Samuel Parker, Lord Bishop of Oxon. 1688. 4to.

LEWIS'S LIFE OF CAXTON. 8vo. 1737.

CATALOGUE OF JOSEPH AMES'S LIBRARY. 8vo. 1760.

TRAPP'S COMMENTARY. Folio. Vol. I.

WHITLAY'S PARAPHRASE ON THE NEW TESTAMENT. Folio. Vol. I. 1706.

LONG'S ASTRONOMY. 4to. 1742.

MAD. D'ARBLAY'S DIARY. Vol. II 1842.

ADAMS' MORAL TALES.

AUTOBIOGRAPHY OF DR. JOHNSON. 1805.

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

J. NORTH will find his Query respecting the Zollverein answered in our 3rd Vol. p. 451. His others shall appear shortly.

LOVELACE'S POEMS. D. H. M. C. is informed that these were reprinted in 1817, under the editorship of our valued correspondent MR. SINGER.

J. RAYNER, who asks for names of present reigning sovereigns, of presidents of the United States for the last thirty years, and of the governors-general of India, is referred to Mr. Haydn's Book of Dignities (noticed in our present number), where he will find all the information of which he is in search.

W. S. W. Many thanks for your kind reminder. The article is in type, although omitted this week from want of room.

J. S. B. is thanked. Such a list would be most useful.

REPLIES RECEIVED.—Pope's Honest Factor—Serpent with Human Head—Marriage of Ecclesiastics—Hobbes's Leviathan—Definition of Truth—Wearing Gloves before Royalty—Derivation of Earwig—Dictionary of Hackneyed Quotations—Passage in Campbell—"'Tis Twopence now"—Cozens the Painter—"Acu tinali meridi"—Nightingale and Thorn, &c.—Theodolite—Temple of Ægina—Ashen Fagots—Cause of Transparency—Praed's Charade—Marriages in ruined Churches—Age of Trees—Joceline's Legacy—St. Bene't Fink—Bristol Tables—"A little Bird told me"—Lycian Inscriptions—Tuden Aled.

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.

Errata.—Page 345, for "FERMILODUM" read "FERMILODVNI;" p. 394. col. 1. l. 34. for "Danish" read "Dutch;" p. 395. col. 1. l. 19. for "Dunferline" read "Dunfermline."

Printed by THOMAS CLARK SHAW, of No. 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, November 29, 1851.