Part 3

_Noses of the Descendants of John of Gaunt_ (Vol. vii., p. 96.).--What peculiarity have they? I am one, and I know many others; but I am at _a loss to know_ the meaning of E. D.'s remark.

Y. S. M.

_General Wall._--Can any of your Irish correspondents give me any information respecting the parentage and descent of General Richard Wall, who was Prime Minister at the Court of Spain in the year 1750 or 1753 (vide Lord Mahon); also whether the General belonged to that branch of the Walls of Coolnamuck, whose property fell into the hands of certain English persons named Ruddall, in whose family some Irish property still remains?

Did the general have any sisters? Is there any monograph life of the general?

H.

_John Daniel and Sir Ambrose Nicholas Salter._--Can any of the readers of "N. & Q." give any information respecting one John Danyel or Daniel, of Clement's Inn, who translated from the Spanish, _Jehovah, A free Pardon with many Graces therein contained, granted to all Christians by our most Holy and Reuerent Father God Almightie, the principal High Priest and Bishoppe in Heaven and Earth, 1576_; and _An excellent Comfort to all Christians against all kinde of Calamities, 1576_?

Also any information respecting Sir Ambrose Nicholas Salter, son of John Nicholas of Redingworth, in Huntingdonshire, to whom the first tract is dedicated; or of his mayoralty of the city of London, 1575-6.

B. B. W.

_Edward Bysshe._--I shall feel particularly obliged to any of your correspondents who will favour me with a biographical notice of Edward Bysshe, author of _The Art of English Poetry, The British Parnassus_, &c., especially the dates and places of his birth and death.

CIVIS.

_President Bradshaw and John Milton._--In a pamphlet by T. W. Barlow, Esq., of the Honorable Society of Gray's Inn, entitled _Cheshire, its Historical and Literary Associations_, published in 1852, it is stated that among the memorials of friends which President Bradshaw's will contains, is a bequest of _ten pounds_ to his _kinsman, John Milton_, which cannot be said to be an insignificant legacy two centuries ago.

Can any of your numerous correspondents afford a clue to the family connexion between these distinguished individuals?

T. P. L.

Manchester.

* * * * *

Minor Queries with Answers.

_Ket the Tanner._--Can you or any of your correspondents give me any information about "Ket the Tanner;" or refer me to any book or books containing a history or biography of that remarkable person? As I want the information for a historical purpose, I hope you will give me as lengthy an account as possible.

W. J. LINTON.

Brantwood, Coniston, Lancashire.

[A long account of Ket, and his insurrection, is given in Blomefield's _Norfolk_, vol. iii. pp. 222-260., edit. 1806. Incidental notices of him will be also found in Alexander Nevyllus' _Norfolke Furies and their Folye, under Ket, their accursed Captaine_, 4to., 1623; Strype's _Ecclesiastical Memorials_, vol. i.; Heylin's _History of the Reformation_; Stow's _Chronicle_; Godwin's _Annales of England_; and Sharon Turner's _Modern History of England_, under Edward VI. A Fragment of the Requests and Demands of Ket and his Accomplices is preserved in the Harleian MS. 304. art. 44.]

"_Namby-pamby._"--What is the derivation of namby-pamby?

Clericus Rusticus.

[Sir John Stoddart, in his article "Grammar" (_Ency. Metropolitana_, vol.i. p. 118.), remarks, that the word "_Namby-pamby_ seems to be of modern fabrication, and is particularly intended to describe that style of poetry which affects the infantine simplicity of the nursery. It would perhaps be difficult to trace any part of it to a significant origin."]

* * * * *

Replies.

EDITIONS OF BOOKS OF COMMON PRAYER.

(Vol. vii., pp. 18. 91. 321.)

As you have printed various lists of Prayer-Books, I send you the following of such books as are in my own possession. Other persons may, perhaps, send lists of copies in private libraries:

1549. Book of Common Prayer. Whitchurch. June. Folio. 1549. May. Folio. (Wants title and last leaf.) 1549. June. Folio. (Last leaf wanting.) 1552. Whitchurch. Folio. 1552. Grafton. Folio. (Title wanting) 1552. Whitchurch. 4to. The first edition to which the prose Psalter and the Godly Prayers were appended. 1567. 4to. (No title.) 1571. 24mo.

{319}

1580. Folio. 1574. 4to. 1578. Folio. 1551. Ordinatio Ecclesiæ seu Ministerii, &c. 4to. A Latin translation of the Book of 1549. 1548. Ordo Distributionis Sacramenti, &c. 12mo. A Latin translation of the Order of Communion. 1571. Liber Precum Publicarum, &c. Londini, 24mo. 1574. 8vo. 1596. 8vo. 1604. Book of Common Prayer. Folio. (Royal Arms on sides.) The first edit. of the reign of James I. 1605. Folio. 1605. Folio. 1614. 4to. 1615. Folio. 1618. 4to. 1616. 12mo., bound in silver by the nuns of Little Gidding. 1621. 4to. In Welsh. 1622. Folio. Liturgia Inglesia, 4to., large paper. A Spanish translation, made at the cost of Archbishop Williams. 4to. The same. 1616. La Liturgie Angloise, 4to., large paper. This translation was also made at the charge of Williams. 4to. The same. 1625. Common Prayer. Folio. First edition of the reign of Charles I. This copy was used by Secretary Nicholas, in his family, during the period of the Commonwealth. A clause in his own hand is inserted in the Prayer for the King. 1628. 12mo. 1631. Folio. 1633. Folio. 1633. Edinburgh. 12mo. (Young.) 1633. 12mo. The same. 1634. 4to. 1636. Folio, large paper. (Royal Arms on sides.) 1636. Folio. 1637. 4to. 1637. 12mo. 1639. 4to. 1640. 24mo. 1657. Edinburgh. Folio. (Young.) 1713. 8vo., large paper. (Watson's reprint of the preceding.) 1660. Folio. 1660. Folio. (A different edition.) 1660. 4to. 1690. 12mo. 1661. Folio, large paper, with the Form at the Healing. 1662. Folio, large paper, with the Form at the Healing. 1662. Folio, large paper. 1662. Folio. 1662. Folio. 1662. Folio. Second edition of this year. 1662. Cambridge. 8vo. 1662. Cambridge. 8vo. Different edition. 1669. Folio. 1686. Folio. 1687. Folio, large paper. 1692. 8vo. 1694. Folio. 1699. 8vo. 1700. 8vo. 1703. Folio, with the Form at the Healing. 1708. 8vo., with the Form at the Healing. 1769. 12mo., with the Form at the Healing. 1715. Folio, with the Form at the Healing.

I have excluded from my list all those thin editions of the Prayer Book, which were usually bound up with Bibles, except in three instances. The exceptions are these:--The folio, 1578; Young's edition, 1633; and that of 1715. Generally these thin books, which have only references to the Epistles and Gospels, are of no value whatever. The exceptions in this list, however, are important books. The book of 1578 was prepared by the Puritans, and is so altered that the word _priest_ does not occur in a single rubric. Young's book of 1633 is the first Prayer Book printed in Scotland; and the edition of 1715 is remarkable for "The Healing," though George I. never attempted to touch for the king's evil.

Should you deem this list worth printing, I will send another of _occasional forms_, now in my possession, from the reign of Elizabeth to the accession of the House of Hanover. It may lead others to do the same, and thus bring to light some forms not generally known. The Prayer Books and occasional forms in our public libraries are known to most persons; but it is important to ascertain the existence of others in private collections.

THOMAS LATHBURY.

Bristol.

I possess a copy of the Prayer Book of an edition I do not see mentioned in any of the lists published in "N. & Q." It is small octavo, _imprinted_ by Bonham, Norton, and John Bill, 1627.

K. L.

* * * * *

THE CRESCENT.

(Vol. viii., p. 196.)

Your correspondent W. ROBSON, in asking to have pointed out "the period at which the crescent became the standard of Mahometanism," appears to assume, what is more than doubtful, that it _has been_, and still _is_ so. For although "modern poets and even historians have named it as the antagonistic standard to the cross," the crescent cannot be considered as "_the_ standard" of Mahometanism--emphatically, much less exclusively--except in a poetical and figurative sense. That it is _one_ among several standards, I admit; it is used by {320} the Turks as an ornament, and probably as a symbol, of their dominion, or in connexion with their religion. This may have originated in the following fact:--Mahomet, at the introduction of his religion, said to his followers, who were ignorant of astronomy, "When you see the new moon, begin the fast; when you see the moon, celebrate the Bairam." And at this day, although the precise time of the lunar changes may be ascertained from their ephemerides, yet they never begin either the Ramazan, or the Bairam, till some have testified that they have seen the new moon. (Cantemir's _History of the Othman Empire_, pref. pp. iv, v.) But the ancient Israelites had precisely the same custom in commencing _their_ "new moons and appointed feasts." (See _Calmet_, art. "Month.") That which may properly be called the standard of the Turks, is the _Sanjak Cherif_, or Standard of the Prophet. It is of green silk[5], preserved in the treasury with the utmost care, and never brought out of the seraglio but to be carried to the army. This banner is supposed by the Turks to ensure victory, and is the sacred signal to which they rally. (De Tott's _Memoirs_, vol. ii. pp. 2, 3.)

The military ensigns which the grand seignior bestows on the governors of provinces and other great men, include the following: 1. The _sanjak_, or standard, only distinguished from that of Mahomet by the colour, one being red and the other green. 2. The _tug_, or standard consisting of one, two, or three horse-tails, according to the dignity of the office borne by him who receives it. Pachas of the highest rank are distinguished by three tails, and the title _beglerbeg_, or prince of princes. Those next in rank are the pachas of two tails, and the beys are honoured but with one. These tails are not _worn_ by the pachas, but fastened at the end of a lance, having a gilt handle, and carried before the pacha, or fixed at the side of his tent. 3. The _alem_ is a large broad standard, which instead of a spear-head has a silver plate in the middle, bored in the shape of a _crescent or half-moon_. (Cantemir, _Hist. Oth. Emp._, p. 10.)

The sultan's barge, with canopy of purple silk, supported throne-like by four gilt pillars, is adorned with _three gilt candlesticks_; and only the capudan pacha, when going to sea, is allowed to have similar ornaments, as he is then considered as _deriyá padishahi_, emperor of the sea. Even the vizier is only permitted to display a canopy of green silk on ivory pillars, but without candlesticks. (_Ib._, p. 424.)

Thus it appears that the crescent holds but a subordinate position among the ensigns at present in use among the Turks. As to its history, I have found no trace of it in connexion with that of the Crusades. Tasso, in _La Gerusalemme Liberata_, mentions "the spread standards" of the soldan's army "waving to the wind" ("Sparse al vento ondeggiando ir le bandiere," canto xx. st. 28.), but he makes no allusion to _the crescent_. I have not access to Michaud's _Histoire des Croisades_, and shall be glad if your correspondent will quote the passage to which he has referred. Does Michaud speak of it as existing _at that time_? This does not clearly appear from the reference. There were several sultans named Mahomet who reigned in or near the age of the Crusades, two of the Seljak dynasty; the first the conqueror of Bagdad, the second cotemporary with Baldwin III., king of Jerusalem. In the Carizmian dynasty, Mahomet I. was cotemporary with Godfrey, Baldwin I., and Baldwin II.; and Mahomet II. commenced his reign about A.D. 1206. But the conqueror of Constantinople, Mahomet II., was of the Othman dynasty, and lived some centuries later, the fall of that city having taken place A.D. 1453. _To which_ of these eras does Michaud ascribe the use of _the crescent_ for the first time?

After all, perhaps, the Turkish crescent, like the modern crown of Western Europe, may be but a variation of the horn, the ancient symbol of authority, so often alluded to in the Old Testament. The _two_ cusps or horns of the crescent, and the circle of diverging _rays_ in the diadem, suggest that the variation is simply one of number; and the derivation is strongly corroborated by etymology. The Hebrew word ‎ ‏קרן‎‏ (_keren_) is connected with, and possibly the original source of, our two words _horn_ and _crown_. Its dual (_karnaim_) signifies _horns_ or _rays_, as in Habak. iii. 4.

A fact mentioned by D'Herbelot may have some connexion with the Turkish crescent. When the celebrated warrior, Tamugin, whose conquests preceded those of the Othman dynasty, assumed in a general assembly of the Moguls and Tartars the title of _Ghenghis Khan_, or king of kings, "Il y ordonna qu'une cornette blanche seroit dorénavant l'étendart général de ses troupes" (_Bibliothèque Orientale_, p. 379.). Thus did the Mogul conqueror (to use the words of the Psalmist) "lift up the horn on high." (Psalm lxxv. 5.) About half a century after the death of Ghengis Khan, Aladin, Sultan of Iconium, conferred on Othman, who afterwards founded the Turkish empire, the _tabl alem_--the drum, standards, and other ornaments of a general. (Cantemir, _Hist. Oth. Emp._, p. 10.) The explanation of the _alem_ by the historian in his annotations, I have already quoted. This is the only allusion to the crescent as an ensign that I have met with in Cantemir.

{321}

The painters of Christendom (no high authorities in this matter) often represent the crescent as a part of Turkish costume, worn in front of the turban. But in the portraits of the Turkish emperors, "taken from originals in the grand seignior's palace," there appears no such ornament. (See the plates in Cantemir's _History_.) Many of them are represented as wearing the _sorgus_, a crest of feathers adorned with precious stones. Like the horn, it is an emblem of authority. Many of them have two fastened to the turban.

Your correspondent states that "the crescent is common upon the reverses of coins of the Eastern empire long before the Turkish conquest." I think this highly probable, but would be glad to see the authorities for the fact. I cannot admit, however, that the crescent was in any degree "peculiar to Sclave nations" for, first, the Sclave nations reached no farther south than Moravia, Bohemia, and their vicinity, they did not occupy the seat of the Eastern empire, which was partly Greek and partly Roman. Secondly, though I have no work on numismatics to consult, I have casually met with instances in which the heavenly bodies are represented on Persian, Phœnician, and Roman coins. As instances, in Calmet's _Dictionary_, art. "Moloch," is represented a Persian coin with the figures of a star and _crescent_; in the Pictorial Bible, 2 Chron. xv. 16., a Phœnician coin bearing a _crescent_; and in Matt. xx. 1., on a Roman coin of Augustus, there is the figure of a star. The Turks, however, stamp nothing on their coins but the emperor's name and the date of coinage.

Again, in European heraldry, Frank, German, Gothic, and not Sclave, the _crescent_ appears; in "common charges," for example, as one of the emblems of power, glory, &c. and among "differences," to distinguish a second son.

Should the above facts tend to throw any light on the subject of your correspondent's inquiry, I shall be gratified; and if any of my views can be shown to be erroneous, it will afford me equal pleasure to correct them.

J. W. THOMAS.

Dewsbury.

[Footnote 5: So says De Tott; Cantemir says it is _red_. But this discrepancy in the authorities is easily accounted for, since the _Sanjak Cherif_ is so sacred that it must be looked upon by none but the _Muslimans_, the true believers. If seen by the eyes of _giaours_ (unbelievers), it would be profaned. (De Tott, _Memoirs_, p. 3.)]

* * * * *

SEALS OF THE BOROUGH OF GREAT YARMOUTH.

(Vol. viii., p. 269.)

I fear that the result of my researches will be but of little service; but your Querist is heartily welcome to the mite I offer.

The second seal appears to have been the seal of assay; probably used for certifying the correctness of the king's beam, or for sealing documents authorising exports, of which there were formerly many and various from this port. Yarmouth was held by the kings until 9 John, when a charter was granted to his burgesses, inhabitants of Gernemue, that they should henceforth hold the town in "fee-farm," paying yearly the sum of 55_l._ in lieu of all rents, tolls, &c. Probably on this occasion a seal of arms was granted. About the year 1306 a dispute fell out between Great Yarmouth and the men of Little Yarmouth and Gorleston adjoining, the latter insisting on the right to load and unload fish in their harbours; but the former prevailed as being free burgh, which the others were not. In 1332 a charter was granted (6 Ed. III.) for adjusting these disputes, wherein it was directed--

"That ships laden with wool, leather, and skins upon which the great custom is due, shall clear out from that port where our beam and the seal called _coket_ remain, and nowhere else (ubi thronus noster et sigillum nostrum, quod dicitur _coket_, existunt, et non alibi carcentur)."

What _coket_ is, I am unable to say: but the king's beam for weighing merchandise, called _thronus_ or _tronus_, stood usually in the most public place of the town or port. The legend on this seal appears to be old French, and is evidently the "seal of assay of Great Yarmouth."

The third seal has probably belonged to Little Yarmouth. The arms of Great Yarmouth were "azure three herrings in pale argent." It is not unlikely that during disputes between the two ports the Little Yarmouthites might assume a seal of arms; but as such thing were more carefully looked after then than in these degenerate days, they would not venture on the _three herrings_, but content themselves with one; and they might desire to dignify their town as "New" instead of "Little" Yarmouth.

With regard to the first seal, I should judge from its oval shape, the cross, and legend, that it is ecclesiastic, and has no connexion with Yarmouth.

BROCTUNA.

Bury, Lancashire.

* * * * *

MOON SUPERSTITIONS.

(Vol. viii., pp. 79. 145.)

Notwithstanding the authority upon which MR. INGLEBY founds the assertion, that there is not the "slightest observable dependence" between the moon and the weather, the dictum is open to something more than doubt. That the popular belief of a full moon bringing fine weather is not strictly correct, is undoubted; and the majority of the popular ideas entertained on the influence of the moon on the weather are equally fallacious; but that the moon exerts no influence whatever on the changes of the weather, is a statement involving grave errors.

The action of the moon on meteorological processes is a highly complex problem; but the principal {322} conclusions to which scientific observations tend, on this matter, may be pointed out without perhaps encroaching too much on the space of "N. & Q."

Luke Howard, of Ackworth, several years ago, concluded, from a series of elaborate observations, extending over many years, that the moon exerted a distinct influence on atmospheric pressure: and Col. Sabine has more recently shown, from observations made at the British Magnetical and Meteorological Observatory at St. Helena since 1842--

"That the attraction of the moon causes the mercury in the barometer to stand, on the average, .004 of an English inch higher when the moon is on the meridian above or below the pole, than when she is six hours distant from the meridian."--_Cosmos_, vol. i. note 381, (author. trans.); _Phil. Trans._, 1847, art. v.

Luke Howard farther gives cogent reasons, from his tabulated observations, for the conclusion that the moon has an appreciable effect upon the weather, exerted through the influence of its attraction on the course and direction of the winds, upon which it acts as a marked disturbing cause; and through them it affects the local distribution of temperature, and the density of the atmosphere. There is no constant agreement between the _phases_ of the moon and certain states of the weather; but an apparent connexion is not unfrequently observed, due to the prevalence of certain winds, which would satisfactorily account for the origin and persistence of the popular belief: for, "it is the peculiar and perpetual error of the human understanding to be more moved and excited by affirmatives than negatives" (_Nov. Org._, Aph. 46.). For example, in 1807, "not a twentieth part of the rain of the year fell in that quarter of the whole space, which occurred under the influence of the moon at full" (_Lectures on Meteorology_, by L. Howard, 1837, p. 81.). In 1808, however, this phase lost this character completely.

A more marked relation is found between the state of the weather and the _declination_ of the moon: for--

"It would appear, that while the moon is far south of the equator, there falls but a moderate quantity of rain with us; that while she is crossing the equator towards these latitudes, our rain increases; that the greatest depth of rain falls, with us, in the week in which she is in the full north declination, or most nearly vertical to these latitudes; and that during her return over the equator to the south, the rain is reduced to its minimum quantity. _And this distribution obtains in very nearly the same proportions both in an extremely dry and in an extremely wet season._"--_Climate of London_, by L. Howard, vol. ii. p. 251., 1820.

Still more recently, Luke Howard has summed up the labours of his life on this subject, and he writes:

"We have, I think, evidence of a great _tidal wave_, or swell in the atmosphere, caused by the moon's attraction, preceding her in her approach to us, and following slowly as she departs from these latitudes. Were the atmosphere a calm fluid ocean of air of uniform temperature, this tide would be manifested with as great regularity as those of the ocean of waters. But the currents uniformly kept up by the sun's varying influence effectually prevent this, and so complicate the problem.

"There is also manifest in the lunar influence a _gradation of effects_, which is here shown, as it is found to operate _through a cycle of eighteen years_. In these the mean weight of our atmosphere increases through the forepart of the period; and having kept for a year at the maximum it has attained, decreases again through the remaining years to a minimum; about which there seems to be a fluctuation, before the mean begins to rise again."--"On a Cycle of Eighteen Years in the Height of the Barometer" (_Papers on Meteorology_, Part II.; _Phil. Trans._, 1841, Part II.).