Chapter 2

"The original orthography was _newes_, and in the singular. Johnson has, however, decided that the word _newes_ is a substantive without a singular, unless it be considered as singular. The word _new_, according to Wachter, is of very ancient use, and is common to many nations. The Britons, and the Anglo-Saxons, had the word, though not the thing. It was first printed by Caxton in the modern sense, in the _Siege of Rhodes_, which was translated by John Kay, the Poet Laureate, and printed by Caxton about the year 1490. In the _Assembly of Foulis_, which was printed by William Copland in 1530, there is the following exclamation:--

"'Newes! newes! newes! have ye ony newes?'

"In the translation of the _Utopia_, by Raphe Robinson, citizien and goldsmythe, which was imprinted by Abraham Nele in 1551, we are told, 'As for monsters, because they be no _newes_, of them we were nothynge inquysitive.' Such is the rise, and such the progress of the word _news_, which, even in 1551, was still printed _newes_!"

W.J.

Havre.

* * * * *

FOLK LORE.

_Charming for Warts_ (Vol. i., p. 19.; vol. ii. p. 150.).--In Lord Bacon's _Sylva Sylvarum, or a Natural History in Ten Centuries_ (No. 997.), the great philosopher gives a minute account of the practice, from personal experience, in the following words:--

"The taking away of warts, by rubbing them with somewhat that afterwards is put to waste and consume, is a common experiment; and I do apprehend it the rather, because of mine own experience. I had from my childhood a wart upon one of my fingers; afterwards, when I was about sixteen years old, being then at Paris, there grew upon both my hands a number of warts (at least an hundred), in a month's space; the English Ambassador's lady, who was a woman far from superstition, told me one day she would help me away with my warts; whereupon she got a piece of lard with the skin on, and rubbed the warts all over with the fat side, and amongst the rest, that wart which I had from my childhood; then she nailed the piece of lard with the fat towards the sun, upon a post of her chamber window, which was to the south. The success was, that within five weeks' space all the warts went quite away, and that wart which I had so long endured for company; but at the rest I did little marvel, because they came in a short time and might go away in a short time again, but the going of that which had stayed so long doth yet stick with me. They say the like is done by rubbing of warts with a green elder stick, and then burying the stick to rot in muck."

J.M.B.

* * * * *

MINOR NOTES.

_Capture of Henry the Sixth._--At Waddington in Mytton stands a pile of building known as the "Old Hall," once antique, but now much indeed despoiled of its beauty, where for some time the unfortunate king, Henry the Sixth, was concealed after the fatal battle of Hexham, in Northumberland. Quietly seated one day at dinner, "in company with Dr. Manting, Dean of Windsor, Dr. Bedle, and one Ellarton," his enemies came upon him by surprise, but he privately escaped by a back door, and fled to Brungerley stepping-stones (still partially visible in a wooden frame), where he was taken prisoner, "his legs tied together under the horse's belly," and thus disgracefully conveyed to the Tower in London. He was betrayed by one of the Talbots of Bashall Hall, who was then high-sheriff for the West Riding. This ancient house or hall is still in existence, but now entirely converted into a building for farming purposes: "Sic transit gloria mundi." Near the village of Waddington, there is still to be seen a meadow known by the name of "King Henry's Meadow."

In Baker's _Chronicle_, the capture of the king is described as having taken place "in _Lincolnshire_," {182} but this is evidently incorrect; it is Waddington, in Mytton, West Yorkshire.

CLERICUS CRAVENSIS.

_The New Temple_ (Vol. ii., p. 103.).--As your correspondent is interested in a question connected with the occupants of the New Temple at the beginning of the fourteenth century, I venture to state, at the hazard of its being of any use to him, that I have before me the transcript of a deed, dated at Canterbury, the 16th of July, 1293, by which two prebendaries of the church of York engage to pay to the Abbot of Newenham, in the county of Devon, the sum of 200 marks sterling, at the New Temple in London, in accordance with a bond entered into by them before G. de Thornton and others, the king's justices.

S.S.S.

* * * * *

QUERIES.

ESSAYES OF CERTAIN PARADOXES: POEM ON NOTHING.

Who was the author of a thin 4to. volume with the above title, printed for Tho. Thorpe, 1616? The contents are, "The Praise of K. Richard the Third--The French Poetes--Nothing--That it is good to be in Debt."

The late Mr. Yarnold has a MS. copy of the "Praise of K. Richard," to which was prefixed the following dedication:--

"TO THE HONOURABLE SIR HENRY NEVILL, KNIGHTE."

"I am bolde to adventure to your honors viewe this small portion of my privatt labors, as an earnest peny of my love, beinge a mere Paradoxe in prayse of a most blame-worthie and condemned Prince, Kinge Richard the Third; who albeit I shold guilde with farre better termes of eloquence then I have don, and freate myself to deathe in pursuite of his commendations, yet his disgrace beinge so publicke, and the worlde so opinionate of his misdoings, as I shold not be able so farre to justifie him as they to condemne him. Yet that they may see what may be saide, and to shew how farre they haue mispraysed his vertues, this following Treatise shall make manyfest. Your honour may peruse and censure yt at your best leisure, and though yt be not trickt up wth elegance of phrase, yet may it satisfye a right curious judgmente, yf the reasons be considered as they ought. But, howsoever, yf you please to accepte it, I shall thinke my labors well bestowed; who, both in this and what ells may, devote myself to your honour, and rest,

"Your honours most affectionat servant,

"HEN. W."

The praise of Nothing is very well versified from the Latin of Passerat, whose verses Dr. Johnson thought worthy of a place in his _Life of Lord Rochester_. Besides Rochester's seventeen stanzas "Upon Nothing," there appears to have been another copy of verses on this fertile subject; for Flecknoe, in his _Epigrams of All Sorts_, 1671, has "Somewhat to Mr. J.A. on his excellent poem of Nothing." Is _anything_ known of this _Nothing_?

S.W. SINGER.

Mickleham, July 29. 1850.

* * * * *

MINOR QUERIES.

_Papers of Perjury._--In Leicester's _Commonwealth_ occurs the following passage:--

"The gentlemen were all taken and cast into prison, and afterwards were sent down to Ludlow, there to wear _papers of perjury_."

Can any of your readers refer me to a _graphic_ account of the custom of perjurers wearing papers denoting their crime, to which I suppose this passage alludes?

S.R.

_Church Rates._--CH. would be obliged to any of your readers who could refer him to the volume of either the _Gentleman's_ or the _British Magazine_ which contains some remarks on the article on Church Rates in Knight's _Political Dictionary_, and on Cyric-sceat.

_St. Thomas of Lancaster's Accomplices._--In No. 15. I find an extract from Rymer, by MR. MONCKTON MILNES, relative to some accomplices of St. Thomas of Lancaster, supposed to have worked miracles.--Query, Was "The Parson of Wigan" one of these accomplices, and what was his name? Was he ever brought to trial for aiding the Earl, preaching sedition in the parish church of Wigan, and offering absolution to all who would join the standard of the barons? and what was the result of that trial--death or pardon?

CLERICUS CRAVENSIS.

_Prelates of France._--P.C.S.S. is desirous to know where he can meet with an accurate list of the Archbishops and Bishops of France (or more properly of their Sees) under the old _régime_.

_Lord Chancellor's Oath._--The gazette of the 16th July notified that the Right Hon. Sir Thomas Wilde, in council, took the oath of Lord Chancellor of Great Britain _and Ireland_ on the 15th inst.; and the same gazette announced the direction of the Queen that letters patent be passed granting the dignity of baron to the Right Hon. Sir Thomas Wilde, Knt., Lord Chancellor of that part of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland called _Great Britain_.

Why, when he is only Chancellor of Great Britain, should he take the oath of Chancellor of Great Britain _and Ireland_?

J.

_Mediæval Nomenclature._--In what work is to be obtained the best information explanatory of the nomenclature of the useful arts in mediæval times?

[Greek: delta]. {183}

_Sir Christopher Sibthorp._--Can any of your readers furnish me with information as to the ancestry of Sir Christopher Sibthorp, whose name appears in the title-page of the following tract: _A friendly Advertisement to the pretended Catholics of Ireland, by Christopher Sibthorp, Knt., one of H.M. Justices of his Court of Chief Place in Ireland_, 1622, Dublin and also as to the crest, arms, and motto borne by him.

DE BALDOC.

_Alarm_ (Vol. ii., p. 151.).--The derivation of _alarm_, and the French _alarme_, from _à l'arme_, which your correspondent M. has reproduced, has always struck me as unsatisfactory, and as of the class of etymologies suspiciously ingenious. I do not venture to pronounce that the derivation is wrong: I merely wish to ventilate a doubt through "NOTES AND QUERIES," and invite some of your more learned readers to lily to decide the question.

Of the identity of the words _alarm_ and _alarum_ there is no doubt. The verb _alarm_ is spelt _alarum_ in old writers, and I have seen it so spelt in manuscripts of Charles II.'s reign, but unfortunately have not taken a "Note." Dr. Johnson says _alarum_ is a corruption of _alarm_. Corruption, however, usually shortens words. I cannot help having a notion that _alarum_ is the original word; and, though I may probably be showing great ignorance in doing so, I venture to propound the following Queries:--

1. How far back can the word _alarum_ be traced in our language, and how far back _alarm_?

2. Can it be ascertained whether the French took _alarme_ from our _alarm_, or we _alarm_ from them?

3. Can any explanation be given of _alarum_, supposing it to be the original word? Is it a word imitative of sound?

_A l'arme_, instead of _aux armes_, adds to the suspiciousness of this derivation.

CH.

* * * * *

REPLIES.

SHAKSPEARE'S USE OF "DELIGHTED."

Although Dr. Kennedy does not think I have discovered the source from whence Shakspeare's word _delighted_ is derived, I am gratified to find that he concurs with me in drawing a distinction between this and the more common word. His failure to convince me is a source almost of regret, so happy do I regard the derivation he proposes in the last passage cited. But in the passage from _Measure for Measure_, it does not appear to me to express the sense which I deduce from the context; and as I look upon the word in question as the same in each of the three passages, I feel more inclined to adhere to my view, that it is a word of English manufacture, according to the analogy referred to. I express my opinion with hesitation and there can be no doubt the question is deserving of full and attentive consideration.

Strengthened, however, in my main purpose, which was to show that Shakspeare did not use _delighted_ in the ordinary sense of _highly gratified_, I am better prepared to meet MR. HALLIWELL. This gentleman does me no more than justice in the remark, not expressed, though, I hope, implied, that I would not knowingly make use of an offensive expression towards him or any living man; and I appreciate the courtesy with which he has sweetened the uncomplimentary things he has felt constrained to say of me. I trust it will be found that I can repay his courtesy and imitate his forbearance. As a preliminary remark, however, I must say that MR. HALLIWELL, in his haste, has confounded the "cool impertinence" for which I censured one editor, with the "cool correction" which was made by another; and, moreover, has referred the remark to _Measure for Measure_, which I applied to the notes to the passage in _Othello_. As I have not yet learned to regard the term "delightful" as an _active participle_, it is evident that, however "cool" I may consider the correction, I have not called it an "impertinence." But he has no mind that I should escape so easily; and therefore, like a true knight-errant, he adopts the cause without hesitation, as though to be first satisfied of its goodness would be quite inconsistent in its champion.

When I am charged with an "entire want of acquaintance with the grammatical system" employed by Shakspeare, I might take exception to the omission of the words "as understood by Mr. Halliwell," this gentleman assuming the very point in question between us. I believe he has paid particular attention to this subject; but he must not conclude that all who presume to differ from him "judge Shakspeare's grammar by Cobbett or Murray." And if I were disposed to indulge in as sweeping an expression, I should say that the remark excites a suspicion of the writer's want of acquaintance with the spirit of Shakspeare's works. I do not think so, though I think MR. HALLIWELL has formed his opinion hastily; and I think, moreover, that before I have ended, I shall convince him that it would not have been amiss had he exercised a little more reflection ere he began. In the passage in _Othello_, I object to the substitution of _delighting_ or _delightful_ for _delighted_, as _weak_ epithets, and such as I do not believe that Shakespeare would have used. It was not as a schoolmaster or grammarian, but in reference to the peculiar fitness and force of his expressions, and his perfect acquaintance with the powers of the English language, and his _mastery_ over it, that I called Shakespeare its greatest master.

But to return to the first passage I cited--that from _Measure for Measure_,--MR. HALLIWELL will be surprised to find that in the _only_ remark I made {184} upon it as it stands he actually agrees with me. I said that the passage "in our sense of the term" is unintelligible. I still say so; and he who attempts to mend it, or modernise the form, says so too. The question next arises, Does he not mean _no system_, when he says _system_? Otherwise, why does he say that Shakspeare uses the passive for the active participle, when he explains the word not by the active participle, but by an adjective of totally different meaning? Is it not more likely that MR. HALLIWELL may have misunderstood Shakspeare's system, than that the latter should have used intelligible words, and precise forms of words, so at random? And, moreover, does not the critic confound two meanings of the word _delightful_; the one obsolete, _full of delight_, the other the common one, _giving delight_, or _gratifying_?

Now by a violent figure which Shakspeare sometimes uses, _delighted may_ mean _delightful_ in the _former_ sense; perhaps, rather, _filled with delight_. The word then would be formed directly from the noun, and must not be regarded as a participle at all, but rather an ellipsis, from which the verb (which may be represented by _give_, _fill_, _endow_, &c.) is omitted. Take, as an instance, this passage in _Measure for Measure_:--

"_Clau._ Death is a fearful thing!

"_Isa._ And _shamed_ life a hateful."

The meaning here is not _life ashamed_, but _life covered with shame_. In this sense MR. HALLIWELL, apparently without knowing why, has adopted the term _delightful_; but then the two succeeding words of his explanation, "sweet, pleasant", he would appear to have taken at random from a dictionary, forgetting that he was not using the word in its ordinary sense; for it is not possible that he can suppose Shakspeare to have used the word in the sense of the active participle. Now, though I do not think this at all the expression that Shakspeare would use, it is undoubtedly allowable as a general characteristic; but the word actually used would appear to imply the result of a particular action, which would have been productive of anything but delight. In short, as we are agreed that the word _delighted_ in the passage in question in its present sense is unintelligible, so also are we, I think, agreed that the substitute, if any, must be used in a passive sense.

Now, with regard to the first instance furnished by MR. HALLIWELL of the use of the passive for the active participle, if I were sure that the delinquent were well out of hearing, and not likely "to rise again and push us from our stools," I should be disposed to repeat the charge of impertinence against the editor who altered "professed" to "professing". The word _professed_ is one of common use, and in the present instance perfectly intelligible. "To your bosom, _professed_ to entertain so much love and care for our father, I commit him," seems to express the sense of the passage: a doubt is implied by the expression, but there is a directness of insult in the term _professing_ quite inconsistent with the character of Cordelia.

"Becomed love" is love suited or fitted to the occasion. The use of the passive participle is every way more appropriate than that of the active, though the latter is more common now.

In the next instance, I have to observe that there is no such verb as _to guile_. _Guile_ is a noun; and "guiled shore" is _guile-covered_, or _charactered shore_. According to this rule, the modern word _talented_, that is, _talent-endowed_, has been formed, it not having been considered that licences are allowed in poetry that are unsuited to ordinary language.

The passage next referred to is conditional, and I regard the use of the passive participle here, too, as correct.

I have thus reduced MR. HALLIWELL'S list to that number which usually forms the exception rather than the rule; and if accident, misprint, error in copying, or other special circumstance be not held sufficient to account for the single remaining instance, I have then only to say that I prefer _deformed_ to _deforming_, as an epithet applied disparagingly to Time's hand as more in accordance with Shakspeare's practice, who was not in the habit of repeating the same idea, which, in the latter case, would occur again in the word "defeatures" in the following line.

MR. HALLIWELL may, doubtless find other instances, perhaps more felicitous than these; at present, all I can say is that he has failed to show that the use of the passive for the active participle was common with Shakspeare. As to other variations between the grammatical usage of Shakspeare's day and that of our own, I call assure him that I am not quite so ignorant of the fact as he imagines.

SAMUEL HICKSON

August 1. 1850.

* * * * *

ENGLISH COMEDIANS IN GERMANY.

I am glad to be enabled to reply to MR. BOLTON CORNEY'S Query (Vol. i., p. 439.) respecting a German book of plays.

The learned illustrator of the _Curiosities of Literature_ would find the information he desires in the _Vorrath zur Geschichte der deutschen dramatischen Dichtkunst_ of the formerly celebrated J. Christoph Gottsched (Leipzig, 1767-69, 2 vols. 8vo.). But as this book, now somewhat neglected, would perhaps be difficult to be found even in the British Museum, I will transcribe the contents of the _Schau-Bühne englischer und franzõsischer Comõdianten auff welcher werden vorgestellt die schõnsten und neuesten Comõdien, so vor wenig Jahren in Frankreich, Teutschland und andern Orten ... seynd agirt und präsentirt worden_.--_Frankfurt_, {185} 1670, 3 vols. 8vo.

Vol. I.--

1. Amor der Arzt. 2. Die Comödia ohne Comödia. 3. Die köstliche Lächerlichkeit. 4. Der Hahnrey in der Einbildung. 5. Die Hahnreyinn nach der Einbildung. 6. Die Eyfreude mit ihr Selbst. 7. Antiochus, ein Tragicomödia. 8. Die buhlhaffte Mutter. 9. Damons Triumph-Spiel.

Vol. II.--

10. Von Sidonia und Theugene. 11. Der Verliebtell Kllnstgriffe. 12. Lustiges Pickelharings-Spiel, darum er mit einem Stein gar artige Possen macht. 13. Von Fortunato seinem Wünschhütlein und Seckel. 14. Der unbesonnene Liebhaber. 15. Die grossmüthige Thaliklea.

Vol. III.--

16. Vom Könige Ahasvero und Esther und dem hoffartigen Hamon. 17. Vom verlohrnen Sohn, in welchem die Verzweifflung und Hoffnung gar artig introducirt werden. 18. Von Königs Mantalors unrechtmässiger Liebe und derselben Straffe. 19. Der Geitzige. 20. Von der Aminta und Sylvia. 21. Macht den kleinen Knaben Cupidinis. 22. George Damlin, oder der verwirrte Ehmann.

Some years before, another similar collection had been published. The first vol. printed in 1620, and reprinted in 1624, has this title:

"Englische Comedien und Tragedien, d. i. Sehr schöne, herrliche und ausserlosene, geist- und weltliche Comedi- und Tragedi-Spiel (sic), sampt dem Pickelhering, welche wegen ihrer artigen Inventionen kurtzweiligen auch theils wahrhafftigen Geschichte halbet, _von den Engelländern in Deutschland_ (I beg to notice these words) an Königlichen, Chur- und Furstlichen Höfen, auch in vornehmen Reichs- See- und Handel Städten seynd agirt und gehalten worden, und zuvor nie im Druck aussgangen."

The volume contains 10 plays. The 1, 2, 3, 5, and 10, are the 16, 17, 13, 10, and 12, of the collection of 1670. The other five are the following:

4. Eine schöne lustige Comödia von Jemand und Niemand. 7. Tragödia von Julio und Hippolyto. 8. Eine sehr klägliche Tragödia von Tito Andromico und hoffertigen Kayserinn, darinnen denkwürdigen Actiones zu befinden. 9. Ein lustig Pickelherings-Spiel von der schönen Mario und alten Hanrey.

The second volume was published in 1630, under the title _Lieberkampff, oder ander Theil der Englischen Comödien_: it contains 8 plays. The 1st is the 21st of the collection of 1670, with this addition:

Die Personen der Lustspiels sind: 1. Venus, _die stumme Person_; 2. Cupido; 3. Jucunda, _Jungfraw_; 4. Floretus, _Liebhaber_; 5. Balendus, _Betrieger_; 6. Corcillana, _Kuplerin_; 7. Hans Worst.

The 2d is the 20th of the same collection, "mit 9 Personen, worunter die lustige Person Schräm heisst."

3. Comoedia von Prob getrewer Lieb, mit 11 Personen, worunter auch eine allegorische, der Traum ist.

The 4th is the 18th, "mit 9 Personen, worunter die lustige Schampilasche _Lean Potage_ heisst."

The four remaining are operas, without particular titles.

Ebert (_Bibliogr. Lexicon_, N. 5064.), speaking of these collections, says, "the plays they are composed of are not translations from the English," but, "as it appears," German original works.

I am at a loss to understand how that bibliographer, generally so exact, did not recognise at least five comedies of Molière. MR. BOLTON CORNEY will, I wish and hope, point out the originals--English, Italian, and, I suppose, Spanish--of some others.

If you think proper to make use of the above, I entreat you, for the sake of your readers, to correct my bad English, and to consider my communication only as a token of the gratification I have found in your amusing and useful "NOTES AND QUERIES."

D.L.

Ancien Membre de la Société des Bibliophiles.

Béthune, July 31. 1850.

P.S.--The Query (Vol. i., p. 185.) concerning the name of the Alost, Louvain, and Antwerp printer, _Martens_ or _Mertens_, is settled in the note, p. 68., of _Recherches sur la Vie et les Editions de Thierry Martens (Martinus, Martens)_, par J. De Gand, 8vo. Alost, 1845. I am ready to send a copy of the note if it is required.