Chapter 2

"Barrington, a Catholic priest, who had chambers in Gray's Inn, in which he was keeper of a library for the use of the Romish clergy. Mr. Barrington wrote it for amusement, in a fit of the gout. He began it without any plan, and did not know what he should write about when be put pen to paper. He was author of several pamphlets, chiefly anonymous, particularly the controversy with Julius Bate on Elohim."

Of this circumstantial and sufficiently positive attribution, which is dated October, 1785, no contradiction ever appeared that I am aware of. The person intended is S. Berington, the author of--

"Dissertations on the Mosaical Creation, Deluge, building of Babel, and Confusion of Tongues, &c." London: printed for the Author, and sold by C. Davis in Holborn, and T. Osborn in Gray's Inn, 1750, 8vo., pages 466, exclusive of introduction, 12 pages.

On comparing Gaudentio di Lucca with this extremely curious work, there seems a sufficient similarity to bear out the statement of the correspondent of the _Gentleman's Magazine_, W.H. The author quoted in the _Remarks of Sigr. Rhedi_, and in the _Dissertations_, are frequently the same, and the learning is of the same cast in both. In particular, Bochart is repeatedly cited in the _Remarks_ and in the _Dissertations_. The philosophical opinions appear likewise very similar.

On the whole, unless some strong reason can be given for questioning the statement of this correspondent of the _Gentleman's Magazine_, I conceive that S. Berington, of whom I regret that so little is known, must be considered to be the author of _The Memoirs of Gaudentio di Lucca_.

JAS. CROSSLEY.

Manchester, October 7. 1850.

* * * * *

ENGLEMANN'S BIBLIOTHECA SCRIPTORUM CLASSICORUM.

(Vol. ii., pp. 296. 312.)

The sort of defence, explanation, or whatever it may be called, founded upon usage, and offered by ANOTHER FOREIGN BOOKSELLER, is precisely what I wanted to get out, if it existed, as I suspected it did.

If your correspondent be accurate as to Engelmann, it appears that no wrong is done to _him_; it is only the public which is mystified by a variety of title-pages, all but one containing a suppression of the truth, and the one of which I speak containing more.

I now ask you to put in parallel columns extracts from the title given by Engelmann with the substitutes given in that which I received.

"Schriftsteller--welche vom "Classics ... that have Jahre 1700 bis zu Ende des appeared in Germany and the Jahres 1846 besonders in adjacent countries up to the Deutschland gedruckt worden end of 1846." sind."

I do not think it fair towards Mr. Engelmann, whose own title is so true and so precise, to take it for certain, on anonymous authority, that he sanctioned the above paraphrase. According to the German, the catalogue contains works from 1700 to 1846, published _especially_ in Germany; meaning, as is the fact, that there are some in it published elsewhere. According to the English, all classics printed in Germany, and all the adjacent countries, in all times, are to be found in the catalogue. I pass over the implied compliment to this country, namely, that while a true description is required in Germany, a puff both in time and space is wanted for England. I dwell on the injurious effect of such alterations to literature, and on the trouble they give to those who wish to be accurate. It is a system I attack, and not individuals. There is no occasion to say much, for publicity alone will do what is wanted, especially when given in a journal which falls under the eyes of those engaged in research. I hope those of your contributors who think as I do, will furnish you from time to time with exposures; if, as a point of form, a Query be requisite, they can always end with, Is this right?

A. DE MORGAN.

October 14. 1850.

* * * * * {329}

SHAKSPEARE'S USE OF THE WORD "DELIGHTED."

(Vol. ii., pp. 113. 139. 200. 234.)

I should have been content to leave the question of the meaning of the word _delighted_ as it stands in your columns, my motive, so kindly appreciated by Mr. SINGER, in raising the discussion being, by such means to arrive at the true meaning of the word, but that the remarks of L.B.L. (p. 234.) recall to my mind a canon of criticism which I had intended to communicate at an earlier period as useful for the guidance of commentators in questions of this nature. It is as follows:--Master the grammatical construction of the passage in question (if from a drama, in its dramatic and I scenic application), deducing therefrom the general sense, before you attempt to amend or fix the meaning of a doubtful word.

Of all writers, none exceed Shakspeare in logical correctness and nicety of expression. With a vigour of thought and command of language attained by no man besides, it is fair to conclude, that he would not be guilty of faults of construction such as would disgrace a school-boy's composition; and yet how unworthily is he treated when we find some of his finest passages vulgarised and degraded through misapprehensions arising from a mere want of that attention due to the very least, not to say the greatest, of writers. This want of attention (without attributing to it such fatal consequences) appears to me evident in L.B.L.'s remarks, ably as he analyses the passage. I give him credit for the faith that enabled him to discover a sense in it as it stands; but when he says that it is perfectly intelligible in its natural sense, it appears to me that he cannot be aware of the innumerable explanations that have been offered of this very clear passage. The source of his error is plainly referable to the cause I have pointed out.

It is quite true that, in the passage referred to, the condition of the body before and after death is contrasted, but this is merely incidental. The natural antithesis of "a sensible warm motion" is expressed in "a kneaded clod" and "cold obstruction;" but the terms of the other half of the passage are not quite so well balanced. On the other hand, it is not the contrasted condition of each, but the separation of the body and spirit--that is, _death_--which is the object of the speaker's contemplation. Now with regard to the meaning of the term _delighted_, L.B.L. says it is applied to the spirit "_not_ in its state _after death_, but _during life_." I must quote the lines once more:--

"Ay, but to die, and go we know not where; To lie in cold obstruction, and to rot; This sensible warm motion to become A kneaded clod; _and_ the delighted spirit To bathe in fiery floods," &c.

And if I were to meet with a hundred thousand passages of a similar construction, I am confident they would only confirm the view that the spirit is represented in the _then present_ state as at the termination of the former clause of the sentence. If such had not been the view instinctively taken by all classes of readers, there could have been no difficulty about the meaning of the word.

As a proof that this view of the construction is correct, let L.B.L. substitute for "delighted spirit", _spirit no longer delighted_, and he will find that it gives precisely the sense which he deduces from the passage as it stands. If this be true, then, according to his view, the negative and affirmative of a proposition may be used indifferently, in the same time and circumstances giving exactly the same meaning.

MR. SINGER furnishes another instance (Vol. ii., p. 241.) of the value of my canon. I think there can be no doubt that his explanation of the meaning of the word _eisell_ is correct; but if it were not, any way of reading the passage in which it occurs would lead me to the conclusion that it could not be a river. _Drink up_ is synonymous with _drink off_, _drink to the dregs_. A child, taking medicine, is urged to "drink it up." The idea of the passage appears to be that each of the acts should go beyond the last preceding in extravagance:--

"Woo't weep? Woo't fight? Woo't fast? Woo't tear thyself? Woo't drink up eisell?"

And then comes the climax--"eat a crocodile?" Here is a regular succession of feats, the last but one of which is sufficiently wild, though not unheard of, and leading to the crowning extravagance. The notion of drinking up a river would be both unmeaning and out of place.

SAMUEL HICKSON.

September 18. 1850.

* * * * *

THE COLLAR OF ESSES.

I shall look with interest to the documents announced by Dr. ROCK (Vol. ii., p. 280.), which in his mind connect the Collar of Esses with the "Sanctus, Sanctus, Sanctus" of the Salisbury liturgy: but hitherto I have found nothing in any of the devices of livery collars that partakes of religious allusion. I am well aware that many of the collars of knighthood of modern Europe, headed by the proud order of the Saint Esprit, display sacred emblems and devices. But the livery collars were perfectly distinct from collars of knighthood. The latter, indeed, did not exist until a subsequent age: and this was one of the most monstrous of the popular errors which I had to combat in my papers in the _Gentleman's Magazine_. A Frenchman named Favyn, at the commencement of the seventeenth century, published {330} a folio book on Orders of Knighthood, and, giving to many of them an antiquity of several centuries,--often either fabulous or greatly exaggerated,--provided them all with imaginary collars, of which he exhibits engravings. M. Favyn's book was republished in English, and his collars have been handed down from that time to this, in all our heraldic picture-books. This is one important warning which it is necessary to give any one who undertakes to investigate this question. From my own experience of the difficulty with which the mind is gradually disengaged from preconceived and prevailing notions on such points, which it has originally adopted as admitting of no question, I know it is necessary to provide that others should not view my arguments through a different medium to myself. And I cannot state too distinctly, even if I incur more than one repetition, that the Collar of Esses was not a badge of knighthood nor a badge of personal merit; but it was a collar of livery; and the idea typified by livery was feudal dependence, or what we now call party. The earliest livery collar I have traced is the French order of _cosses de geneste_, or broomcods: and the term "order", I beg to explain, is in its primary sense exactly equivalent to "livery:" it was used in France in that sense _before_ it came to be applied to orders of knighthood. Whether there was any other collar of livery in France, or in other countries of Europe, I have not hitherto ascertained; but I think it highly probable that there was. In England we have some slight glimpses of various collars, on which it would be too long here to enter; and it is enough to say, that there were only two of the king's livery, the Collar of Esses and the Collar of Roses and Suns. The former was the collar of our Lancastrian kings, the latter of those of the house of York. The Collar of Roses and Suns had appendages of the heraldic design which was then called "the king's beast," which with Edward IV. was the white lion of March, and with Richard III. the white boar. When Henry VII. resumed the Lancastrian Collar of Esses, he added to it the portcullis of Beaufort. In the former Lancastrian regions it had no pendant, except a plain or jewelled ring, usually of the trefoil form. All the pendant badges which I have enumerated belong to secular heraldry, as do the roses and suns which form the Yorkist collar. The letter S is an emblem of a somewhat different kind; and, as it proves, more difficult to bring to a satisfactory solution than the symbols of heraldic blazon. As an initial it will bear many interpretations--it may be said, an indefinite number, for every new Oedipus has some fresh conjecture to propose. And this brings me to render the account required by Dr. Rock of the reasons which led me to conclude that the letter S originated with the office of Seneschallus or Steward. I must still refer to the _Gentleman's Magazine_ for 1842, or to the republication of my essays which I have already promised, for fuller details of the evidence I have collected; but its leading results, as affecting the origin of this device, may be stated as follows:--It is ascertained that the Collar of Esses was given by Henry, Earl of Derby, afterwards King Henry IV., during the life-time of his father, John of Ghent, Duke of Lancaster. It also appears that the Duke of Lancaster himself gave a collar, which was worn in compliment to him by his nephew King Richard II. In a window of old St. Paul's, near the duke's monument, his arms were in painted glass, accompanied with the Collar of Esses; which is presumptive proof that his collar was the same as that of his son, the Earl of Derby. If, then, the Collar of Esses was first given by this mighty duke, what would be _his_ meaning in the device? My conjecture is, that it was the initial of the title of that high office which, united to his vast estates, was a main source of his weight and influence in the country,--the office of Steward of England. This, I admit, is a derivation less captivating in idea than another that has been suggested, viz. that S was the initial of _Souveraine_ which is known to have been a motto subsequently used by Henry IV., and which might be supposed to foreshadow the ambition with which the House of Lancaster affected the crown. But the objection to this is, that the device is traced back earlier than the Lancastrian usurpation can be supposed to have been in contemplation. It might still be the initial of _Souveraine_, if John of Ghent adopted it in allusion to his kingdom of Castille: but, because he is supposed to have used it, and his son the Earl of Derby certainly used it, after the sovereignty of Castille had been finally relinquished, but also before either he or his son can be supposed to have aimed at the sovereignty of their own country, therefore it is that, in the absence of any positive authority, I adhere at present to the opinion that the letter S was the initial of Seneschallus or Steward.

JOHN GOUGH NICHOLS.

P.S.--Allow me to put a Query to the antiquaries of Scotland. Can any of them help me to the authority from which Nich. Upton derived his livery collar of the King of Scotland "de gormettis fremalibus equorum?"--J.G.N.

_Collar of SS_ (Vol. ii., pp. 89. 194. 248. 280.).--I am surprised that any doubt should have arisen about this term, which has evidently no _spiritual_ or _literary_ derivation from the initial letters of _Sovereign_, _Sanctus_, _Seneschallus_, or any similar word. It is (as MR. ELLACOMBE hints, p. 248.) purely descriptive of the _mechanical_ mode of forming the chain, not by round or closed links, but by hooks alternately deflected into the shape of _esses_; thus, [Illustration: 3 sideways capital letter S's]. Whether chains so made (being more susceptible of ornament than other forms of links) may not have been in special use for particular {331} purposes, I will not say; but I have no doubt that the _name_ means no more than that the links were in the shape of the letter S.

C.

* * * * *

SIRLOIN.

Several correspondents who treat of Lancashire matters do not appear to be sufficiently careful to ascertain the correct designations of the places mentioned in their communications. In a late number Mr. J.G. NICHOLS gave some very necessary corrections to CLERICUS CRAVENSIS respecting his note on the "Capture of King Henry VI." (Vol. ii., p. 181.); and I have now to remind H.C. (Vol. ii., p. 268.) that "Haughton Castle" ought to be "Hoghton Tower, near Blackburn, Lancashire." Hoghton Tower and Whittle Springs have of late been much resorted to by pic-nic parties from neighbouring towns; and from the interesting scenery and splendid prospects afforded by these localities, they richly deserve to be classed among the _lions_ of Lancashire. It is not improbable that the far-famed beauties and rugged grandeur of "The Horr" may, for the time, have rendered it impossible for H.C. to attend to orthography and the simple designation "Hoghton Tower," and hence the necessity for the present Note.

The popular tradition of the knighting of the Sirloin has found its way into many publications of a local tendency, and, amongst the rest, into the graphic _Traditions of Lancashire_, by the late Mr. Roby, whose premature death in the Orion steamer we have had so recently to deplore. Mr. Roby, however, is not disposed to treat the subject very seriously; for after stating that Dr. Morton had preached before the king on the duty of obedience, "inasmuch as it was rendered to the vicegerent of heaven, the high and mighty and puissant James, Defender of the Faith, and so forth," he adds:--

"After this comfortable and gracious doctrine, there was a rushbearing and a piping before the king in the great quadrangle. Robin Hood and Maid Marian, with the fool and Hobby Horse, were, doubtless, enacted to the jingling of morris-dancers and other profanities. These fooleries put the king into such good humour, that he was more witty in his speech than ordinary. Some of these sayings have been recorded, and amongst the rest, _that well-known quibble which has been the origin of an absurd mistake, still current through the county, respecting the sirloin_. The occasion, as far as we have been able to gather, was thus. Whilst he sat at meat, casting his eyes upon a noble _surloin_ at the lower end of the table, he cried out, 'Bring hither that _surloin_, sirrah, for 'tis worthy a more honourable post, being, as I may say, not _sur_-loin, but _sir_-loin, the noblest joint of all;' which ridiculous and desperate pun raised the wisdom and reputation of England's Solomon to the highest."--_Traditions_, vol. ii. pp. 190-1.

Most probably Mr. Roby's view of the matter is substantially correct; for although _tradition_ never fails to preserve the remembrance of transactions too trivial, or perhaps too indistinct for sober history to narrate, the _existence_ of a tradition does not necessarily _prove_, or even _require_, that the myth should have had its foundation in fact.

Had the circumstance really taken place as tradition prescribes, it would probably have obtained a greater permanency than oral recital; for during the festivities at Hoghton Tower, on the occasion of the visit of the "merrie monarch", there was present a gentleman after Captain Cuttle's own heart, who would most assuredly have made a note of it. This was Nicholas Assheton, Esq., of Downham, whose _Journal_, as Dr. Whitaker well observes, furnishes an invaluable record of "our ancestors of the parish of Whalley, not merely in the universal circumstances of birth, marriage, and death, but acting and suffering in their individual characters; their businesses, sports, bickerings, carousings, and, such as it was, religion." This worthy chronicler thus describes the King's visit:--

"August 15. (1617). The king came to Preston; ther, at the crosse, Mr. Breares, the lawyer, made a speche, and the corporn presented him with a bowle; and then the king went to a banquet in the town-hall, and soe away to Houghton: ther a speche made. Hunted, and killed a stagg. Wee attend on the lords' table.

"August 16, Houghton. The king hunting: a great companie: killed affore dinner a brace of staggs. Verie hot: soe hee went in to dinner. Wee attend the lords' table, abt four o'clock the king went downe to the Allome mynes, and was ther an hower, and viewed them p[re]ciselie, and then went and shott at a stagg, and missed. Then my Lord Compton had lodged two brace. The king shott again, and brake the thigh-bone. A dogg long in coming, and my Lo. Compton shott agn and killed him. Late in to supper.

"Aug. 17, Houghton. Wee served the lords with biskett, wyne, and jellie. The Bushopp of Chester, Dr. Morton, p[re]ched before the king. To dinner. Abt four o'clock, ther was a rush-bearing and piping affore them, affore the king in the middle court; then to supp. Then abt ten or eleven o'clock, a maske of noblemen, knights, gentlemen, and courtiers, affore the king, in the middle round, in the garden. Some speeches: of the rest, dancing the Huckler, Tom Bedlo, and the Cowp Justice of Peace.

"Aug. 18. The king went away abt twelve to Lathome."

The journalist who would note so trivial a circumstance as the heat of the weather, was not likely to omit the knighting of the Sirloin, if it really occurred; and hence, in the absence of more positive proof, we are disposed to take Mr. Roby's view of the case, and treat it as one of the thousand and one pleasant stories which "rumour with her hundred tongues" ever circulates amongst the peasantry of a district where some royal visit, or {332} other unexpected memorable occurrence, has taken place.

But this is not the only "pleasant conceit" of which the "merrie monarch" is said to have delivered himself during his visit to Hoghton Tower. On the way from Preston his attention was attracted by a huge boulder stone which lay in the roadside, and was still in existence not a century ago. "O' my saul," cried he, "that meikle stane would build a bra' chappin block for my Lord Provost. Stop! there be letters thereon: unto what purport?" Several voices recited the inscription:--

"_Turn me o're, an I'le tel thee plaine._"

"Then turn it ower," said the monarch, and a long and laborious toil brought to light the following satisfactory intelligence:--

"_Hot porritch makes hard cake soft,_ _So torne me o'er againe._"

"My saul," said the king, "ye shall gang roun' to yere place again: these country gowks mauna ken the riddle without the labour." As a natural consequence, Sir Richard Hoghton's "great companie" would require a correspondingly great quantity of provisions; and the tradition in the locality is, that the subsequent poverty of the family was owing to the enormous expenses incurred under this head; the following characteristic anecdote being usually cited in confirmation of the current opinion. During one of the hunting excursions the king is said to have left his attendants for a short time, in order to examine a numerous herd of horned cattle then grazing in what are now termed the "Bullock Pastures," most of which had probably been provided for the occasion. A day or two afterwards, being hunting in the same locality, he made inquiry respecting the cattle, and was told, in no good-humoured way, by a herdsman unacquainted with his person, that they were all gone to feast the beastly king and his gluttonous company. "By my saul," exclaimed the king, as he left the herdsman, "then 'tis e'en time for me to gang too:" and accordingly, on the following morning, he set out for Lathom House.

In conclusion, allow me to ask the correspondents to the "NOTES AND QUERIES," what is meant by "dancing the _Huckler_, _Tom Bedlo_, and the _Cowp Justice of Peace_?"

T.T. WILKINSON.

Burnley, Lancashire, Sept. 21. 1850.

_Sirloin._-In Nichols's _Progresses of King James the First_, vol. iii. p. 401., is the following note:--

"There is a laughable tradition, still generally current in Lancashire, that our knight-making monarch, finding, it is presumed, no undubbed man worthy of the chivalric order, knighted at the banquet in Hoghton Tower, in the warmth of his honour-bestowing liberality, a loin of beef, the part ever since called the _sirloin_. Those who would credit this story have the authority of Dr. Johnson to support them, among whose explanations of the word _sir_ in his dictionary, is that it is 'a title given to the loin of beef, which one of our kings knighted in a fit of good humour.' 'Surloin,' says Dr. Pegge (_Gent. Mag._, vol. liv. p. 485.), 'is, I conceive, if not knighted by King James as is reported, compounded of the French _sur_, upon, and the English _loin_, for the sake of euphony, our particles not easily submitting to composition. In proof of this, the piece of beef so called grows upon the _loin_, and behind the small ribs of the animal.' Dr. Pegge is probably right, and yet the king, if he did not give the sirloin its name, might, notwithstanding, have indulged in a pun on the already coined word, the etymology of which was then, as now, as little regarded as the thing signified is well approved."

JOHN J. DREDGE.

_Sirloin._-Whence then comes the epigram--

"Our second _Charles_, of fame faeete, On loin of beef did dine, He held his sword pleased o'er the meat, 'Rise up thou famed sir-loin!'"

Was not a _loin_ of pork part of _James_ the First's proposed banquet for the devil?

K.I.P.B.T.

* * * * *

RIOTS OF LONDON.

The reminiscences of your correspondent SENEX concerning the riots of London in the last century form an interesting addition to the records of those troubled times; but in all these matters correctness as to dates and facts are of immense importance. The omission of a date, or the narration of events out of their proper sequence, will sometimes create vast and most mischievous confusion in the mind of the reader. Thus, from the order in which SENEX has stated his reminiscences, a reader unacquainted with the events of the time will be likely to assume that the "attack on the King's Bench prison" and "the death of Allen" arose out of, and formed part and parcel of, the Gordon riots of 1780, instead of one of the Wilkes tumults of 1768. By the way, if SENEX was "personally either an actor or spectator" in _this_ outbreak, he fully establishes his claim to the signature he adopts. I quite agree with him that monumental inscriptions are not always remarkable for their truth, and that the one in this case may possibly be somewhat tinged with popular prejudice or strong parental feeling; but, at all events, there can be but little doubt that poor Allen, whether guilty or innocent, was shot by a soldier of the Scotch regiment, be his name what it may; and further, the deed was not the effect of a random shot fired upon the mob,--for the young man was chased into a cow-house, and shot by his pursuer, away from the scene of conflict. {333}

Noorthouck, who published his _History of London_, 1773, thus speaks of the affair:--

"The next day, May 10. (1768,) produced a more fatal instance of rash violence against the people on account of their attachment to the popular prisoner (Wilkes) in the King's Bench. The parliament being to meet on that day to open the session, great numbers of the populace thronged about the prison from an expectation that Mr. W. would on that occasion recover his liberty; and with an intention to conduct him to the House of Commons. On being disappointed, they grew tumultuous, and an additional party of the third regiment of Guards were sent for. Some foolish paper had been stuck up against the prison wall, which a justice of the peace, then present, was not very wise in taking notice of, for when he took it down the mob insisted on having it from him, which he not regarding, the riot grew louder, the drums beat to arms, the proclamation was read, and while it was reading, some stones and bricks were thrown. William Allen, a young man, son of Mr. Allen, keeper of the Horse Shoe Inn in Blackman Street, and who, _as appeared afterwards, was merely a quiet spectator_, being pursued along with others, was unfortunately singled out and followed by three soldiers into a cow-house, and shot dead! A number of horse-grenadiers arrived, and these hostile measures having no tendency to disperse the crowd, which rather increased, the people were fired upon, five or six were killed, and about fifteen wounded; among which were two women, one of whom afterwards died in the hospital."

The author adds,--

"The soldiers were next day publicly thanked by a letter from the Secretary-at-War in his master's name. McLaughlin, who actually killed the inoffensive Allen, was withdrawn from justice and could never be found, so that though his two associates Donald Maclaine and Donald Maclaury, with their commanding officer Alexander Murray, were proceeded against for the murder, the prosecution came to nothing and only contributed to heighten the general discontent."

With respect to the monument in St. Mary's, Newington, I extract the following from the _Oxford Magazine_ for 1769, p. 39.:--

"Tuesday, July 25. A fine large marble tombstone, elegantly finished, was erected over the grave of Mr. Allen, junr., in the church-yard of St. Mary, Newington, Surry. It had been placed twice before, but taken away on some disputed points. On the sides are the following inscriptions:--

_North Side._

Sacred to the Memory of William Allen,

An Englishman of unspotted life and amiable disposition, [who was inhumanely murdered near St. George's Fields, the 10th day of May, 1768, by the Scottish detachment from the army.][1]

"His disconsolate parents, _inhabitants of this parish_, caused this tomb to be erected to an only son, lost to them and the world, in his twentieth year, as a monument of his virtues and their affections."

At page 53. of the same volume is a copperplate representing the tomb. On one side appears a soldier leaning on his musket. On his cap is inscribed "3rd Regt.;" his right hand points to the tomb; and a label proceeding from his mouth represents him saying, "I have obtained a pension of a shilling a day only for putting an end to thy days." At the foot of the tomb is represented a large thistle, from the centre of which proceeds the words, "Murder screened and rewarded."

Accompanying this print are, among other remarks, the following:--

"It was generally believed that he was m----d by one Maclane, a Scottish soldier of the 3d Regt. The father prosecuted, Ad----n undertook the defence of the soldier. The solicitor of the Treasury, Mr. Nuthall, the deputy-solicitor, Mr. Francis, and Mr. Barlow of the Crown Office, attended the trial, and it is said, paid the whole expence for the prisoner out of the Treasury, to the amount of a very considerable sum. The defence set up was, that young Allen was not killed by Maclane, but by another Scottish soldier of the same regiment, one McLaughlin, who confessed it at the time to the justice, as the justice says, though he owns he took no one step against a person who declared himself a murderer in the most express terms.... The perfect innocence of the young man as to the charge of being concerned in any riot or tumult, is universally acknowledged, and a more general good character is nowhere to be found. This McLaughlin soon made his escape, therefore was a deserter as well as a murtherer, yet he has had a discharge sent him with an allowance of a shilling a day."

Maclane was most probably the "Mac" alluded to by SENEX; but his account differs in so many respects from cotemporaneous records that I have ventured to trespass somewhat largely upon your space. I may add, that I by no means agree in the propriety of erasing a monumental inscription of more than eighty years' existence without some much stronger proof of its falsehood; for I quite coincide with the remarks of Rev. D. Lysons, in his allusion to this monument (_Surrey_, p. 393.), that

"Allen was illegally killed, whether he was concerned in the riots or not, _as he was shot apart from the mob at a time when he might, if necessary, have been apprehended and brought to justice_."

E.B. PRICE.

September 30. 1850.

The Rev. Dr. John Free[2] preached a sermon on the above occasion (which was printed) from the {334} 24th chapter of Leviticus, 21st and 22nd verses, "He that killeth a man," &c.; and he boldly and fearlessly denominates the act as a murder, and severely reprehends those in authority who screened and protected the murderer. The sermon is of sixteen pages, and there is an appendix of twenty-six pages, in which are detailed various depositions, and all the circumstances connected with the catastrophe.

§ N.

Your correspondent SENEX will find in Malcolm's _Anecdotes of London_ (Vol. ii., p. 74.), "A summary of the trial of Donald Maclane, on Tuesday last, at _Guildford Assizes_, for the murder of William Allen, Jun., on the 10th of May last, in St. George's Fields."

R. BARKER, JUN.

A long account of this lamentable transaction may be found in every magazine eighty-two years since. The riot took place in St. George's Fields, May 10. 1768, and originated in the cry of "Wilkes and Liberty."

GILBERT.

[Footnote 1: A foot-note informs us that "a white-wash is put over these lines between the crotchets."]

[Footnote 2: Dr. Free was of Christ Church, Oxford, and perhaps some of your readers may know where his biography is.]

* * * * *

MEANING OF "GRADELY."

(Vol. ii., p. 133.)

For the origin of this word, A.W.H. may refer to Brocket's _Glossary of North Country Words_, where he will find--

"Gradely, decently, orderly. Sax. _grad_, _grade,_ ordo. Rather, Mr. Turner says, from Sax. _gradlie_ upright; _gradely_ in Lanc., he observes, is an adjective simplifying everything respectable. The Lancashire people say, our _canny_ is nothing to it."

The word itself is very familiar to me, as I have often received a scolding for some boyish, and therefore not very wise or orderly prank, in these terns:--"One would think you were not altogether gradely," or, as it was sometimes varied into, "You would make one believe you were not _right in your head;_" meaning, "One would think you had not common sense."

H. EASTWOOD.

Ecclesfield.

_Gradely._--This word is not only used in Yorkshire, but also very much in Lancashire, and the rest of the north of England. I have always understood it to mean "good," "jolly," "out and out." Its primary meaning is "orderly, decently." (See Richardson's _Dictionary_.) The French have _grade_; It. and Sp., _grado_; Lat. _gradus_.

AREDJID KOOEZ.

_Gradely._--This word, in use in Lancashire and Yorkshire, means _grey-headedly_, and denotes such wisdom as should belong to old age. A child is admonished to do a thing _gradely_, _i.e._ with the care and caution of a person of experience.

E.H.

_Gradely._--In Webster's and also in Richardson's _Dictionaries_ it is defined, "orderly, decently." It is a word in common use in Lancashire and Yorkshire, and also Cheshire. A farmer will tell his men to do a thing gradely, that is, "properly, well."

G.W.N.

_Gradely._--In Carr's _Craven Dialect_ appears "_Gradely_, decently." It is also used as an adjective, "decent, worthy, respectable."

2. Tolerably well, "How isto?" "_Gradely._" Fr. _Gré_, "satisfaction"; _à mon gré._

S.N.

_Gradely._--Holloway[3] derives _gradely_ from the Anglo-Saxon _Grade_, a step, order, and defines its meaning, "decently." He, however, fixes its paternity in the neighbouring county of York.

In Collier's edition of _Tim Bobbin_ it is spelt _greadly_, and means "well, right, handsomely."

"I connaw tell the _greadly_, boh I think its to tell fok by."--p. 42.

"So I seete on restut meh, on drank meh pint o ele; boh as I'r naw _greadly_ sleekt, I cawd for another," &c.--p. 45.

"For if sitch things must be done _greadly_ on os teh aught to bee," &c.--p. 59.

Mr. Halliwell[4] defined it, "decently, orderly, moderately," and gives a recent illustration of its use in a letter addressed to Lord John Russell, and distributed in the Manchester Free Trade Procession. It is dated from Bury, and the writer says to his lordship,--

"Dunnot be fyert, mon, but rapt eawt wi awt uts reef, un us Berry foke'll elp yo as ard as we kon. Wayn helps Robdin, un wayn elp yo, if yoan set obeawt yur work _gradely_."

_Gradely._--I think this word is very nearly confined to Lancashire. It is used both as an adjective and adverb. As an adjective, it expresses only a moderate degree of approbation or satisfaction; as an adverb, its general force is much greater. Thus, used adjectively in such phrases as "a gradely man," "a gradely crop," &c., it is synonymous with "decent." In answer to the question, "How d'ye do?" it means, "Pretty well," "Tolerable, thank you."

Adverbially it is (1.) sometimes used in sense closely akin to that of the adjective. Thus in "Behave yourself gradely," it means "properly, decently." But (2.) most frequently it is precisely equivalent to "very;" as in the expressions "A gradely fine day," "a gradely good man"--which last is a term of praise by no means applicable to the mere gradely man, or, as such a one is most commonly described, a "gradely sort of man."

Though one might have preferred a Saxon origin for it, yet in default of such it seems most natural to connect it with the Latin _gradus_, especially as the word _grade_, from which it is immediately formed, has a handy English look about it, that would soon naturalise it amongst us. _Gradely_ {335} then would mean "orderly, regular, according to degree."

The difference in intensity of meaning between the adjective and the adverb seems analogous to that between the adjectives proper, _regular_, &c., and the same words when used in the vulgar way as adverbs.

G.P.

[Footnote 3: Dictionary of Provincialisms.]

[Footnote 4: Dictionary of Provincial Words.]

* * * * *

PASCAL AND HIS EDITOR BOSSUT.

(Vol. ii., p. 278.)

Although I am not afraid of the fate with which that unfortunate monk met, of whom it is said,--

"Pro solo puncto caruit Martinus Asello,"

yet a blunder is a sad thing, especially when the person who is supposed to commit it attempts to correct others.

Now the printer of the "NOTES AND QUERIES" has introduced, in my short remark on Pascal, the _very error_ which has led the author of the article in the _British Quarterly Review_, as well as many others, to mistake the Bishop of Meaux for the editor of Pascal's works. Once more, that unfortunate editor is BOSSUT, not BOSSUET; and if it may appear to some that the difference of one letter in a name is not of much consequence, yet it is from an error as trifling as this that people of my acquaintance confound Madame de Staël with Madame de Staal-Delauney, in spite of chronology and common sense. Again, by the leave of the _Christian Remembrancer_ (vol. xiii. no. 55.), the elegant and accomplished scholar to whom we owe the only complete text of Pascal's thoughts, is M. Faugère, not Fougère. All these are minutiæ; but the chapter of minutiæ is an important one in literary history.

Another remarkable question which I feel a wish to touch upon before closing this communication, is that of _impromptus_. Your correspondent MR. SINGER (p. 105.) supposes Malherbe the poet to have been "ready at an impromptu." But, to say the least, this is rather doubtful, unless the extemporaneous effusions of Malherbe were of that class which Voiture indulged in with so much success at the Hôtel de Rambouillet--sonnets and epigrams leisurely prepared for the purpose of being fired off in some fashionable "_ruelle_" of Paris. Malherbe is known to have been a very slow composer; he used to say to Balzac that ten years' rest was necessary after the production of a hundred lines: and the author of the _Christian Socrates_, himself rather too fond of the file, after quoting this fact, adds in a letter to Consart:

"Je n'ai pas besoin d'un si long repos après un si petit travail. Mais aussi d'attendre de moi cette heureuse facilité qui fait produire des volumes à M. de Scudéry, ce serait me connaître mal, et me faire une honneur que je ne mérite pas."

Malherbe certainly had a most happy influence on French poetry; he checked the ultra-classical school of Ronsard, and began that work of reformation afterwards accomplished by Boileau.

As I have mentioned Voiture's name, I shall add a very droll "_soi-disant_" impromptu of his, composed to ridicule Mademoiselle Chapelain, the sister of the poet. Like her brother, she was most miserly in her habits, and not distinguished by that virtue which some say is next to godliness.

"Vous qui tenez incessamment Cent amans dedans votre manche, Tenez-les au moins proprement, Et faites qu'elle soit plus blanche.

"Vous pouvez avecque raison, Usant des droits de la victoire, Mettre vos galants en prison; Mais qu'elle ne soit pas si noire.

"Mon coeur, qui vous est bien dévot, Et que vous réduisez en cendre, Vous le tenez dans un cachot Comme un prisonnier qu'on va pendre.

"Est-ce que, brûlant nuit et jour, Je remplis ce lieu de fumée, Et que le feu de mon amour En a fait une cheminée?"

GUSTAVE MASSON.

Hadley, near Barnet.

* * * * *

KONGS-SKUGG-SIO.

(Vol. ii., p. 298.)

The author of the _Kongs-skugg-sio_ is unknown, but the date of it has been pretty clearly made out by Bishop Finsen and others. (_V._ Finsen, _Dissertatio Historica de Speculo Regali_, 1766.) There is only one complete edition of this remarkable work, viz. that published at Soröe in 1768, in 4to. Bishop Finsen maintains the _Kongs-skugg-sio_ to have been written from 1154 to 1164. Ericksen believes it not to be older than 1184; while Suhm and Eggert Olafsen do not allow it to be older than the thirteenth century. Rafn, and the modern editors of the _Grönlands Historiske Mindesmærker_, p. 266., vol. iii., accept the date given by Finsen as the true one. From the text of the work we learn that it was written in Norway, by a young man, a son of one of the leading and richest men there, who had been on terms of friendship with several kings, and had lived much, or at least had travelled much, in Helgeland. Rafn and others believe the work to have been written by Nicolas, the son of Sigurd Hranesön, who was slain by the Birkebeiners on the 8th of September, 1176. Their reasons for coming to this conclusion are given at full length in the work above quoted. {336}

The whole of the _Kongs-skugg-sio_ is well worthy of being translated into English. It may, indeed, in many respects, be considered as the most remarkable work of the old northerns.

EDWARD CHARLTON.

Newcastle-on-Tyne, Oct 7. 1850.

If F.Q. will look into Halfdan Einersen's edition of _Kongs-skugg-sio_, Soröe, 1768, the first time it was printed, he will find in the editor's preliminary remarks all that is known of the date and origin of the work. The author is unknown, but that he was a Northman and lived in Nummedal, in Norway, and wrote somewhere between 1140 and 1270, or, according to Finsen, about 1154; and that he had in his youth been a courtier, and afterwards a royal councillor, we infer from the internal evidence the work itself affords us. _Kongs-skugg-sio_, or the royal mirror, deserves to be better known, on account of the lively picture it gives us of the manners and customs of the North in the twelfth century; the state of the arts and the amount of science known to the educated. It abounds in sound morals, and its author might have sate at the feet of Adam Smith for the orthodoxy of his political economy. He is not entirely free from the credulity of his age and his account of Ireland will match anything to be found in Sir John Mandeville. Here we are told of an island on which nothing rots, of another on which nothing dies, of another on one-half of which devils alone reside, of wonderful monsters and animals, and of miracles the strangest ever wrought. He invents nothing. What he relates of Ireland he states to have found in books, or to have derived from hearsay. The following extract must therefore be taken as a specimen of Irish Folk-lore in the twelfth century:--

"There is also one thing, he says, that will seem wonderful, and it happened in the town which is called Kloena [Cloyne]. In that town there is a church which is dedicated to the memory of a holy man called Kiranus. And there it happened one Sunday, as the people were at prayers and heard mass, that there descended gently from the air an anchor, as if it had been cast from a ship, for there was a cable to it, and the fluke of the anchor caught in the arch of the church-door, and all the people went out of church, and wondered, and looked up into the air after the cable. There they saw a ship floating above the cable, and men on board; and next they saw a man leap overboard, and dive down to the anchor to free it. He appeared, from the motions he made with both hands and feet, like a man swimming in the sea. And when he reached the anchor, he endeavoured to loosen it, when the people ran forwards to seize the man. But the church in which the anchor stuck fast had a bishop's chair in it. The bishop was present on this occasion, and forbade the people to hold the man, and said that he might be drowned just as if in water. And immediately he was set free he hastened up to the ship, and when he was on board, they hauled up the cable and disappeared from men's sight; but the anchor has since laid in the church as a testimony of this."

CORKSCREW.

* * * * *

GOLD IN CALIFORNIA.

(Vol. ii., p. 132.)

E.N.W. refers to Shelvocke's voyage of 1719, in which reference is made to the abundance of gold in the soil of California. In Hakluyt's _Voyages_, printed in 1599-1600, will be found much earlier notices on this subject. California was first discovered in the time of the Great Marquis, as Cortes was usually called. There are accounts of these early expeditions by Francisco Vasquez Coronada, Ferdinando Alarchon, Father Marco de Niça, and Francisco de Ulloa, who visited the country in 1539 and 1540. It is stated by Hakluyt that they were as far to the north as the 37th degree of latitude, which would be about one degree south of St. Francisco. I am inclined, however, to believe from the narrations themselves that the Spanish early discoveries did not extend much beyond the 34th degree of latitude, being little higher than the Peninsular or Lower California. In all these accounts, however, distinct mention is made of abundance of gold. In one of them it is stated that the natives used plates of gold to scrape the perspiration off their bodies!

The most curious and distinct account, however, is that given in "The famous voyage of Sir Francis Drake into the South Sea, &c. in 1577", which will be found in the third volume of Hakluyt, page 730., _et seq_. I am tempted to make some extracts from this, and the more so because a very feasible claim might be based upon the transaction in favour of our Sovereign Lady the Queen. At page 737. I find:

"The 5th day of June (1579) being in 43 degrees wards the pole Arctike, we found the ayre so colde, that our men being grievously pinched with the same, complained of the extremitie thereof, and the further we went, the more the colde increased upon us. Whereupon we thought it best for that time to seeke the land, and did so, finding it not mountainous, but low plaine land, till we came within thirty degrees toward the line. In which height it pleased God to send us into a faire and good baye, with a good winde to enter the same. In this baye wee anchored."

A glance at the map will show that "in this baye" is now situated the famous city of San Francisco.

Their doings in the bay are then narrated, and from page 738. I extract the following:--

"When they [the natives with their king] had satisfied themselves [with dancing, &c.] they made signes to our General [Drake] to sit downe, to whom the king and divers others made several orations, or rather supplications, that hee would take their province or {337} kingdom into his hand, and become their king, making signes that they would resigne unto him their right and title of the whole land, and become his subjects. In which, to persuade us the better, the king and the rest with our consent, and with great reverence, joyfully singing a song, did set the crowne upon his head, inriched his necke with all their chaines, and offred unto him many other things, honouring him by the name of Hioh, adding thereulto, as it seemed, a sign of triumph; which thing our Generall thought not meet to reject, because he knew not what honour and profit it might be to our countrey. Whereupon, in the name and to the use of Her Majestie, he took the scepter, crowne, and dignitie of the said country into his hands, wishing that the riches and treasure thereof might so conveniently be transported to the inriching of her kingdom at home, as it aboundeth in ye same.

"Our Generall called this countrey Nova Albion, and that for two causes; the one in respect of the white bankes and cliffes, which lie towards the sea, and the other, because it might have some affinities with our countrey in name, which sometime was so called."

Then comes the curious statement:

"_There is no part of earth heere to be taken up, wherein there is not some probable show of gold or silver._"

The narrative then goes on to state that formal possession was taken of the country by putting up a "monument" with "a piece of sixpence of current English money under the plate," &c.

Drake and the bold cavaliers of that day probably found that it paid better to rob the Spaniard of the gold and silver ready made in the shape of "the Acapulco galleon," or such like, than to sift the soil of the Sacramento for its precious grains. At all events, the wonderful richness of the "earth" seems to have been completely overlooked or forgotten. So little was it suspected, until the Americans acquired the country at the peace with Mexico, that in the fourth volume of Knight's _National Cyclopædia_, published early in 1848, in speaking of Upper California, it is said, "very little mineral wealth has been met with"! A few months after, intelligence reached Europe how much the reverse was the case.

T.N.

* * * * *

THE DISPUTED PASSAGE PROM THE TEMPEST.

(Vol. ii., pp. 259. 299.)

When the learning and experience of such gentlemen as MR. SINGER and MR. COLLIER fail to conclude a question, there is no higher appeal than to plain common sense, aided by the able arguments advanced on each side. Under these circumstances, perhaps you will allow one who is neither learned nor experienced to offer a word or two by way of vote on the meaning of the passage in the _Tempest_ cited by MR. SINGER. It appears to me that to do full justice to the question the passage should be quoted entire, which, with your permission, I will do.

"_Fer._ There be some sports are painful; and their labour Delight in them sets off: some kinds of baseness Are nobly undergone; and most poor matters Point to rich ends. This, my mean task Would be as heavy to me as odious, but The mistress, which I serve, quickens what's dead And makes my labours pleasures: O, she is Ten times more gentle than her father's crabbed, And he's compos'd of harshness. I must remove Some thousands of these logs, and pile them up Upon a sore injunction: my sweet mistress Weeps when she sees me work, and says, such baseness Had ne'er like executor. _I forget_; _But_ these sweet thoughts do even refresh my labour(s), Most busy(l)est when I do it."

The question appears to be whether "most busy" applies to "sweet thoughts" or to Ferdinand, and whether the pronoun "it" refers to the act of _forgetting_ or to "labour(s);" and I must confess that, to me, the whole significancy of the passage depends upon the idea conveyed of the mind being "most busy" while the body is being exerted. Every man with a spark of imagination must many a time have felt this. In the most essential particular, therefore, I think MR. SINGER is right in his correction but at the same time agreeing with MR. COLLIER, that it is desirable not to interfere with the original text further than is absolutely necessary, I think the substitution of "labour" for "labours" is of questionable expediency. What is the use of the conjunction "but" if not to connect the excuse for the act of forgetting with the act itself?

Without intending to follow MR. COLLIER through the course of his argument, I should like to notice one or two points. The usage of Shakspeare's day admitted many variations from the stricter grammatical rules of our own; but no usage ever admitted such a sentence as this,--for though elliptically expressed, MR. COLLIER treats it as a sentence,--

"Most busy, least when I do it."

This is neither grammar nor sense: and I persist in believing that Shakspeare was able to construct an intelligible sentence according to rules as much recognised by custom then as now.

But, indeed, does not MR. COLLIER virtually admit that the text is inexplicable in his very attempt to explain it? He sums up by saying "that in fact, his toil is no toil, and that when he is 'most busy' he 'least does it,'" which is precisely the reverse of what the text says, if it express any meaning at all. I will agree with him in preferring the old text to any other text where it gives a perfect meaning; but to prefer it here, when the omission of a single letter produces an image at once {338} noble and complete, would, to my mind, savour more of superstition than true worship.

P.S. It should be observed that MR. COLLIER'S "least" is as much of an alteration of the original text as MR. SINGER'S "busyest", the one adding and the other omittng a letter. The folio of 1632, where it differs front the first folio, will hardly add to the authority of MR. COLLIER himself.

SAMUEL HICKSON.

Oct. 10. 1850.

If one, who is but a charmed listener to Shakspeare, may presume to offer an opinion to practised interpreters, I should suggest to MR. SINGER and MR. COLLIER, another and a totally different reading of the passage in discussion by them from the exquisite opening scene of the 3d Act of the _Tempest_.

There can be little doubt that "most busy" applies more poetically to _thoughts_ than to _labours_; and, in so much, MR. SINGER'S reading is to be commended. But it is equally true that, by adhering to the early text, MR. COLLIER'S school of editing has restored force and beauty to many passages which had previously been outraged by fancied improvements, so that his unflinching support of the original word in this instance is also to be respected. But may not both be combined? I think they may, by understanding the passage in question as though a transposition had taken place between the words "least" and "when".

"Most busy _when least_ I do it,"

or,--

"Most busy when least employed."

forming just the sort of verbal antithesis of which the poet was so fond.

An actual transposition of the words may have taken place through the fault of the early printers; but even if the _present order_ be preserved, still the _transposed sense_ is, I think, much less difficult than the forced and rather contradictory meaning contended for by MR. COLLIER. Has not _the pause_ in Ferdinand's labour been hitherto too much overlooked? What is it that has induced him to _forget_ his task? Is it not those delicious thoughts, most busy in the _pauses_ of labour, making those pauses still more refreshing and renovating?

Ferdinand says--

"I forget,"--

and then he adds, _by way of excuse_,--

"_But_ the sweet thoughts do even refresh my labours, Most busy when least I do it."

More busy in thought when idle, than in labour when employed. The cessation from labour was favourable to the thoughts that made it endurable.

Malone quarrelled with the word "but", for which he would have substituted "and" or "for". But in the _apologetic_ sense which I would confer upon the last two lines of Ferdinand's speech, the word "but", at their commencement, becomes not only appropriate but necessary.

A.E.B.

Leeds, October 8. 1850.

* * * * *

"LONDON BRIDGE IS BROKEN DOWN."

(Vol. ii., p. 258.)

Your correspondent T.S.D. does not remember to have seen that interesting old nursery ditty "London Bridge is broken down" printed, or even referred to in print. For the edification then of all interested in the subject, I send you the following.

The old song on "London Bridge" is printed in Ritson's _Gammer Gurton's Garland_, and in Halliwell's _Nursery Rhymes of England_; but both copies are very imperfect. There are also some fragments preserved in the _Gentleman's Magazine_ for September, 1823 (vol. xciii. p. 232.), and in the _Mirror_ for November 1st of the same year. From these versions a tolerably perfect copy has been formed, and printed in a little work, for which I am answerable, entitled _Nursery Rhymes, with the Tunes to which they are still sung in the Nurseries of England_. But the whole ballad has probably been formed by many fresh additions in a long series of years, and is, perhaps, almost interminable when received in all its different versions.

The correspondent of the _Gentleman's Magazine_ remarks, that "London Bridge is broken down" is an old ballad which, more than seventy years previous, he had heard plaintively warbled by a lady who was born in the reign of Charles II., and who lived till nearly that of George II. Another correspondent to the same magazine, whose contribution, signed "D.," is inserted in the same volume (December, p. 507.), observes, that the ballad concerning London Bridge formed, in his remembrance, part of a Christmas carol, and commenced thus:--

"Dame, get up and bake your pies, On Christmas Day in the morning."

The requisition, he continues, goes on to the dame to prepare for the feast, and her answer is--

"London Bridge is broken down, On Christmas Day in the morning."

The inference always was, that until the bridge was rebuilt some stop would be put to the dame's Christmas operations; but why the falling of a part of London Bridge should form part of a Christmas carol it is difficult to determine.

A Bristol correspondent, whose communication is inserted in that delightful volume the _Chronicles of London Bridge_ (by Richard Thomson, of the London Institution), says,--

"About forty years ago, one moonlight night, in a street in Bristol, his attention was attracted by dance {339} and chorus of boys and girls, to which the words of this ballad gave measure. The breaking down of the bridge was announced as the dancers moved round in a circle, hand in hand; and the question, 'How shall we build it up again?' was chanted by the leader, whilst the rest stood still."

Concerning the antiquity of this ballad, a modern writer remarks,--

"If one might hazard a conjecture concerning it, we should refer its composition to some very ancient date, when, London Bridge lying in ruins, the office of bridge master was vacant, and his power over the river Lea (for it is doubtless that river which is celebrated in the chorus to this song) was for a while at an end. But this, although the words and melody of the verses are extremely simple, is all uncertain."

If I might hazard another conjecture, I would refer it to the period when London Bridge was the scene of a terrible contest between the Danes and Olave of Norway. There is an animated description of this "Battle of London Bridge," which gave ample theme to the Scandinavian scalds, in _Snorro Sturleson_; and, singularly enough, the first line is the same as that of our ditty:--

"London Bridge is broken down; Gold is won and bright renown; Shields resounding, War horns sounding, Hildur shouting in the din; Arrows singing, Mail-coats ringing, Odin makes our Olaf win."

See Laing's _Heimskringla_, vol. ii. p. 10.; and Bulwer's _Harold_, vol. i. p. 59. The last-named work contains, in the notes, some excellent remarks upon the poetry of the Danes, and its great influence upon our early national muse.

EDWARD F. RIMBAULT.

[T.S.D.'s inquiry respecting this once popular nursery song has brought us a host of communications; but none which contain the precise information upon the subject which is to be found in DR. RIMBAULT's reply. TOBY, who kindly forwards the air to which it was sung, speaks of it as a "'lullaby song,' well-known in the southern part of Kent and in Lincolnshire."

E.N.W. says it is printed in the collection of _Nursery Rhymes_ published by Burns, and that he was born and bred in London, and that it was one of the nursery songs he was amused with. NOCAB ET AMICUS, two old fellows of the Society of Antiquaries, do not doubt that it refers to some event preserved in history, especially, they add, as we have a faint recollection "of a note, touching such an event, in an almost used-up English history, which was read in our nursery by an elder brother, something less than three-fourths of a century since. And we have also a shrewd suspicion that the sequel of the song has reference to the reconstruction of that fabric at a later date."

J.S.C. has sent us a copy of the song; and we are indebted for another copy to AN ENGLISH MOTHER, who has accompanied it with notices of some other popular songs, notices which at some future opportunity we shall lay before our readers.--ED.]

* * * * *

ARABIC NUMERALS.

(Vol. ii., pp. 27. 61.)

I must apologise for adding anything to the already abundant articles which have from time to time appeared in "NOTES AND QUERIES" on this interesting subject; I shall therefore confine myself to a few brief remarks on the _form_ of each character, and, if possible, to show from what alphabets they are derived:--

1. This most natural form of the first numeral is the first character in the Indian, Arabic, Syriac, and Roman systems.

2. This appears to be formed from the Hebrew [Hebrew: b], which, in the Syriac, assumes nearly the form of our 2; the Indian character is identical, but arranged vertically instead of horizontally.

3. This is clearly derived from the Indian and Arabic forms, the position being altered, and the vertical stroke omitted.

4. This character is found as the fourth letter in the Phoenician and ancient Hebrew alphabets: the Indian is not very dissimilar.

5. and 6. These bear a great resemblance to the Syriac Heth and Vau (a hook). When erected, the Estrangelo-Syriac Vau is precisely the form of our 6.

7. This figure is derived from the Hebrew [Hebrew: z], zayin, which in the Estrangelo-Syriac is merely a 7 reversed.

8. This figure is merely a rounded form of the Samaritan Kheth (a travelling scrip, with a string tied round thus, [Character]). The Estrangelo-Syriac [Character] also much resembles it.

9. Identical with the Indian and Arabic.

0. Nothing; vacuity. It probably means the orb or _boundary_ of the earth.--10. is the first boundary, [Hebrew: tchwm], Tekum, [Greek: Deka], Decem, "terminus." Something more yet remains to be said, I think, on the _names_ of the letters. Cf. "Table of Alphabets" in Gesenius, _Lex_., ed. Tregelles, and "NOTES AND QUERIES," Vol. i., p. 434.

E. S. T.

_Arabic Numerals._--With regard to the subject of Arabic numerals, and the instance at Castleacre (Vol. ii., pp. 27. 61.), I think I may safely say that no archæologist of the present day would allow, after seeing the original, that it was of the date 1084, even if it were not so certain that these numerals were not in use at that time. I fear "the acumen of Dr. Murray" was wasted on the occasion referred to in Mr. Bloom's work. It is a very far-fetched idea, that the visitor must cross himself to discover the meaning of the figures; not to mention the inconvenience, I might say impossibility, {340} of reading them after he had turned his back upon them,--the position required to bring them into the order 1084. It is also extremely improbable that so obscure a part of the building should be chosen for erecting the date of the foundation; nor is it likely that so important a record would be merely impressed on the plaister, liable to destruction at any time. Read in the most natural way, it makes 1480: but I much doubt its being a date at all. The upper figure resembles a Roman I; and this, with the O beneath, may have been a mason's initials at some time when the plaister was renewed: for that the figures are at least sixty years later than the supposed date, Mr. Bloom confesses, the church not having been built until then.

X.P.M.

* * * * *

CAXTON'S PRINTING-OFFICE.

(Vol. ii., pp. 99. 122. 142. 187. 233.)

I confess, after having read MR. J.G. NICHOLS' critique in a recent number of the "NOTES AND QUERIES," relative to the locality of the first printing-press erected by Caxton in this country, I am not yet convinced that it was not within the Abbey of Westminster. From MR. NICHOLS' own statements, I find that Caxton himself says his books were "imprynted" by him in the Abbey; to this, however, MR. NICHOLS replies by way of objection, "that Caxton does not say in the church of the Abbey."

On the above words of Caxton "in the Abbey of Westminster," Mr. C. Knight, in his excellent biography of the old printer, observes, "they leave no doubt that beneath the actual roof of some portion of the Abbey he carried on his art." Stow says "that Caxton was the first that carried on his art in the Abbey." Dugdale, in his _Monasticon_, speaking of Caxton, says, "he erected his office in one of the side chapels of the Abbey." MR. NICHOLS, quoting from Stow, also informs us that printing-presses were, soon after the introduction of the art, erected in the Abbey of St. Albans, St. Augustin at Canterbury, and other monasteries; he also informs us that the scriptorium of the monasteries had ever been the manufactory of books, and these places it is well known formed a portion of the abbeys themselves, and were not in detached buildings similar to the Almonry at Westminster, which was situated some two or three hundred yards distant from the Abbey. I think it very likely, when the press was to supersede the pen in the work of book-making, that its capabilities would be first tried in the very place which had been used for the object it was designed to accomplish. This idea seems to be confirmed by the tradition that a printer's office has ever been called a chapel, a fact which is beautifully alluded to by Mr. Creevy in his poem entitled _The Press_:--

"Yet stands the chapel in yon Gothic shrine, Where wrought the father of our English line, Our art was hail'd from kingdoms far abroad, And cherish'd in the hallow'd house of God; From which we learn the homage it received And how our sires its heavenly birth believed. Each printer hence, howe'er unblest his walls, E'en to this day, his house a chapel calls."

Mr. Nichols acknowledges that what he calls a vulgar error was current and popular, that in some part of the Abbey Caxton did erect his press, yet we are expected to submit to the almost unsupported dictum of that gentleman, and renounce altogether the old and almost universal idea. With respect to his alarm that the _vulgar error_ is about to be further propagated by an engraving, wherein the mistaken draftsman has deliberately represented the printers at work within the consecrated walls of the church itself, I may be permitted to say, on behalf of the painter, that he has erected his press not even on the basement of one of the Abbey chapels, but in an upper story, a beautiful screen separating the workplace from the more sacred part of the building.

JOHN CROPP.

* * * * *

COLD HARBOUR.

(Vol. i., p. 60.; Vol. ii., p. 159.)

I beg leave to inform you that Yorkshire has its "Cold Harbour," and for the origin of the term, I subjoin a communication sent me by my father:--

"When a youngster, I was a great seeker for etymologies. A solitary farm-house and demesne were pointed out to me, the locality of which was termed Cad, or Cudhaber, or Cudharber. Conjectures, near akin to those now presented, occurred to me. I was invited to inspect the locality. I dined with the old yeoman (aged about eighty) who occupied the farm. He gave me the etymology. In his earlier days he had come to this farm; a house was not built, yet he was compelled by circumstances to bring over part of his farming implements, &c. He, with his men-servants, had no other shelter at the time than a dilapidated barn. When they assembled to eat their cold provisions, the farmer cried out, 'Hegh lads, but there's cauld (or caud) harbour here.' The spot had no name previously. The rustics were amused by the farmer's saying. Hence the locality was termed by them Cold Harbour, corrupted, Cadharber, and the etymon remains to this day. This information put an end to my enquiries about Cold Harbour."

C.M.J.

_Cold Harbour._--The goldfinches which have remained among the valleys of the Brighton Downs during the winter are called, says Mr. {341} Knox, by the catchers, "harbour birds, meaning that they have sojourned or harboured, as the local expression is, here during the season." Does not this, with the fact of a place in Pembroke being called Cold Blow, added to the many places with the prefix Cold, tend to confirm the supposition that the numerous cold harbours were places of protection against the winter winds?

A.C.

With regard to Cold Harbour (supposed "Coluber," which is by no means satisfactory), it may be worth observing that Cold is a common prefix: thus there is Cold Ashton, Cold Coats, Cold or Little Higham, Cold Norton, Cold Overton, Cold Waltham, Cold St. Aldwins, --coats, --meere, --well, --stream, and several _cole_, &c. Cold peak is a hill near Kendall. The latter suggests to me a _Query_ to genealogists. Was the old baronial name of Peche, Pecche, of Norman origin as in the Battle Roll? From the fact of the Peak of Derby having been Pech-e _antè_ 1200, I think this surname must have been local, though it soon became soft, as appears from the rebus of the Lullingstone family, a peach with the letter é on it. I do not think that _k_ is formed to similar words in Domesday record.

Caldecote, a name of several places, may require explanation.

AUG. CAMB.

I beg to give you the localities of two "Cold Harbours:" one on the road from Uxbridge to Amersham, 19½ miles from London (see Ordnance Map 7.); the other on the road from Chelmsford to Epping, 13½ miles from the former place (see Ordnance Map No. 1. N.W.).

DISS.

There are several Cold Harbours in Sussex, in Dallington, Chiddingly, Wivelsfield, one or two in Worth, one S.W. of Bignor, one N.E. of Hurst Green, and there may be more.

In Surrey there is one in the parish of Bletchingley.

WILLIAM FIGG.

There is a farm called Cold Harbour, near St. Albans, Herts.

S.A.

After the numerous and almost tedious theories concerning Cold Harbours, particularly the "forlorn hope" of the _Coal Depôts_ in London and elsewhere, permit me to suggest one of almost universal application. Respecting _here-burh_, an inland station for an army, in the same sense as a "harbour" for ships on the sea-coast, a word still sufficiently familiar and intelligible, the question seems to be settled; and the French "auberge" for an inn has been used as an illustration, though the first syllable may be doubtful. The principal difficulty appears to consist in the prefix "Cold;" for why, it may be asked, should a bleak and "cold" situation be selected as a "harbour"? The fact probably is that this spelling, however common, is a corruption for "COL.". Colerna, in Wiltshire, fortunately retains the original orthography, and in Anglo-Saxon literally signifies the habitation or settlement of a colony; though in some topographical works we are told that it was formerly written "Cold Horne," and that it derives its name from its bleak situation. This, however, is a mere coincidence; for some of these harbours are in warm sheltered situations. Sir R.C. Hoare was right when he observed, that these "harbours" were generally near some Roman road or Roman settlement. It is therefore wonderful that it should not at once occur to every one conversant with the Roman occupation of this island, that all these "COL-harbours" mark the settlements, farms, outposts, or garrisons of the Roman colonies planted here.

J.I.

Oxford.

_Cold Harbour._--Your correspondent asks whether there is a "Cold Harbour" in every county, &c. I think it probable, though it may take some time to catalogue them all. There are so many in some counties, that ten on an average for each would in all likelihood fall infinitely short of the number. The Roman colonists must have formed settlements in all directions during their long occupation of so favourite a spot as Britain. "Cold Harbour Farm" is a very frequent denomination of insulated spots cultivated from time immemorial. These are not always found in _cold_ situations. Nothing is more common than to add a final _d_, unnecessarily, to a word or syllable, particularly in compound words. Instances will occur to every reader, which it would be tedious to enumerate.

J.I.

After reading the foregoing communications on the subject of the much-disputed etymology of COLD HARBOUR, our readers will probably agree with us in thinking the following note, from a very distinguished Saxon scholar, offers a most satisfactory solution of the question:--

With reference to the note of G.B.H. (Vol. i, p. 60.) as well as to the very elaborate letter in the "Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries" (the paper in the _Archæologia_ I have not seen), I would humbly suggest the possibility, that the word _Cold_ or _Cole_ may originally have been the Anglo-Saxon Col, and the entire expression have designated _a cool summer residence_ by a river's side or on an eminence; such localities, in short, as are described in the "Proceedings" as bearing the name of Cold Harbour.

The denomination appears to me evidently the modern English for the A.-S. Col Hereberg. Colburn, Colebrook, Coldstream, are, no doubt, analagous denominations.

[Greek: PH.]

* * * * * {342}

ST. UNCUMBER.

(Vol. ii., p. 286.)

PWCCA, after quoting from Michael Wodde's _Dialogue or Familiar Talke_ the passage in which he says, "If a wife were weary of her husband _she offred otes at Paules_ in London to St. Uncumber," asks "who St. Uncumber was?"

St. Uncumber was one of those popular saints whose names are not to be found in any calendar, and whose histories are now only to be learned from the occasional allusions to them to be met with in our early writers,--allusions which it is most desirable should be recorded in "NOTES AND QUERIES." The following cases, in which mention is made of this saint, are therefore noted, although they do not throw much light on the history of St. Uncumber.

The first is from Harsenet's _Discoverie, &c._, p.l34.:

"And the commending himselfe to the tuition of S. Uncumber, or els our blessed Lady."

The second is from Bale's _Interlude concerning the Three Laws of Nature, Moses, and Christ_:

"If ye cannot slepe, but slumber, Geve _Otes_ unto Saynt Uncumber, And Beanes in a certen number Unto Saynt Blase and Saynt Blythe."

I will take an early opportunity of noting some similar allusions to Sir John Shorne, St. Withold, &c.

WILLIAM J. THOMS.

* * * * *

HANDFASTING.

(Vol. ii., p. 282.)

JARLTZBRG, in noticing this custom, says that the Jews seem to have had a similar one, which perhaps they borrowed from the neighbouring nations; at least the connexion formed by the prophet Hosea (chap. iii., v. 2.) bears strong resemblance to _Handfasting_. The 3rd verse in Hosea, as well as the 2nd, should I think be referred to. They are both as follows:

"So I bought her to me for fifteen pieces of silver, and for an homer of barley, and an half homer of barley: and I said unto her, Thou shalt abide for me many days; thou shalt not play the harlot, and thou shalt not be for another man; so will I also be for thee."

Now by consulting our most learned commentators upon the meaning which they put upon these two verses in connexion with each other, I cannot think that the analogy of JARLTZBERG will be found correct. In allusion to verse 2, "so I bought her," &c., Bishop Horsley says:

"This was not a payment in the shape of a dowry; for the woman was his property, if he thought fit to claim her, _by virtue of the marriage already had_; but it was a present supply of her necessary wants, by which he acknowledged her as his wife, and engaged to furnish her with alimony, not ample indeed, but suitable to the recluse life which he prescribed to her."

And in allusion, in verse 3., to the words "Thou shall abide for me many days," Dr. Pocock thus explains the context:

"That is, thou shalt stay sequestered, and as in a state of widowhood, till the time come that I shall be fully reconciled to thee, and shall see fit again to receive thee to the privileges of a wife."

Both commentators are here evidently alluding to what occurs after a marriage has actually taken place. Handfasting takes place before a marriage is consummated.

A chapter upon marriage contracts and ceremonies would form an important and amusing piece of history. I have not Picart's _Religious Ceremonies_ at hand, but if I mistake not he refers to many. In Marco Polo's _Travels_, I find the following singular, and to a Christian mind disgusting, custom. It is related in section l9.:--

"These twenty days journey ended, having passed over the province of Thibet, we met with cities and many villages, in which, through the blindness of idolatry, a wicked custom is used; for no man there marrieth a wife that is a virgin; whereupon, when travellers and strangers, coming from other places, pass through this country and pitch their pavilions, the women of that place having marriageable daughters, bring them unto strangers, desiring them to take them and enjoy their company as long as they remain there. Thus the handsomest are chosen, and the rest return home sorrowful, and when they depart, they are not suffered to carry any away with them, but faithfully restore them to their parents. The maiden also requireth some toy or small present of him who hath deflowered her, which she may show as an argument and proof of her condition; and she that hath been loved and abused of most men, and shall have many such favours and toys to show to her wooers, is accounted more noble, and may on that account be advantageously married; and when she would appear most honourably dressed, she hangs all her lovers' favours about her neck, and the more acceptable she was to many, so much the more honour she receives from her countrymen. But when they are once married, they are no more suffered to converse with strange men, and men of this country are very cautious never to offend one another in this matter."

J.M.G.

Worcester, Oct. 1850.

The curious subject brought forward by J.M.G. under this title, and enlarged upon by JARLTZBERG (Vol. ii., p. 282.), leads me to trouble you with this in addition. Elizabeth Mure, according to the _History and Descent of the House of Rowallane_ by Sir William Mure, was made choyce of, for her excellent beautie and rare virtues, by King Robert II., to be Queen of Scotland; and if their union may be considered to illustrate in any way the singular custom of _Handfasting_, it will be seen {343} from the following extract that they were also married by a priest:--

"Mr. Johne Lermonth, chapline to Alexander Archbishop of St. Andrews, hath left upon record in a deduction of the descent of the House of Rowallane collected by him at the command of the said Archbishop (whose interest in the familie is to be spoken of heirafter), that Robert, Great Stewart of Scotland, having taken away the said Elizabeth Mure, drew to Sir Adam her father ane instrument that he should take her to his lawful wife, (which myself hath seen saith the collector), as also ane testimonie written in latine by Roger Mc Adame, priest of our Ladie Marie's chapel (in Kyle), that the said Roger maried Robert and Elizabeth forsds. But yrafter durring the great troubles in the reign of King David Bruce, to whom the Earl of Rosse continued long a great enemie, at perswasion of some of the great ones of the time, the Bishop of Glasgow, William Rae by name, gave way that the sd marriage should be abrogate by transaction, which both the chief instrument, the Lord Duglasse, the Bishope, and in all likelihood the Great Stewart himself, repented ever hereafter. The Lord Yester Snawdoune, named Gifford, got to wife the sd Elizabeth, and the Earl of Rosse's daughter was maried to the Great Stewart, which Lord Yester and Eupheme, daughter to the Earle of Rosse, departing near to one time, the Great Stewart, being then king, openly acknowledged the first mariage, and invited home Elizabeth Mure to his lawfull bed, whose children shortlie yrafter the nobility did sweare in parliament to maintaine in the right of succession to the croune as the only lawfull heirs yrof."

"In these harder times shee bare to him Robert (named Johne Fairneyear), after Earle of Carrick, who succeeded to the croune; Robert, after Earl of Fyffe and Maneteeth, and Governour; and Alexander, after Earle of Buchane, Lord Badyenoch; and daughters, the eldest maried to Johne Dumbar, brother to the Earl of March, after Earle of Murray, and the second to Johne the Whyt Lyon, progenitor of the House of Glames, now Earle of Kinghorn."

So much for the marriage of Elizabeth Mure, as given by the historian of the House of Rowallane. Can any of your readers inform me whether Elizabeth had any issue by her second husband, Lord Yester Snawdoune? If so, there would be a relationship between Queen Victoria and the Hays, Marquesses of Tweeddale, and the Brouns, Baronets of Colstoun. One of the latter family received as a dowry with a daughter of one of the Lords Yester the celebrated WARLOCK PEAR, said to have been enchanted by the necromancer Hugo de Gifford, who died in 1267, and which is now nearly six centuries old. In the _Lady of the Lake_, James Fitz-James is styled by Scott "Snawdon's knight;" but why or wherefore does not appear, unless Queen Elizabeth Mure had issue by Gifford. Robert II. was one of three Scottish kings in succession who married the daughters of their own subjects, and those only of the degree of knights; namely, David Bruce, who married Margaret, daughter of Sir John Loggie; Robert II., who married Elizabeth, daughter of Sir Adam Mure; and Robert III., who married Annabell, daughter to Sir John Drummond of Stobhall.

SCOTUS.

* * * * *

GRAY'S ELEGY.--DRONING.--DODSLEY'S POEMS.

(Vol. ii., pp. 264. 301.)

I only recur to the subject of Gray's Elegy to remark, that although your correspondents, A HERMIT AT HAMPSTEAD, and W.S., have given me a good deal of information, for which I thank them, they have not answered either of my Queries.

I never doubted as to the true reading of the third line of the second stanza of Gray's Elegy, but merely remarked that in one place the penultimate word was printed _drony_, and other authorities _droning_. With reference to this point, what I wanted to know was merely, whether, in any good annotated edition of the poem, it had been stated that when Dodsley printed it in his _Collection of Poems_, 1755, vol. iv., the epithet applied to flight was _drony_, and not _droning_? I dare say the point has not escaped notice; but if it have, the fact is just worth observation.

Next, any doubt is not at all cleared up respecting the date of publication of Dodsley's Collection. The Rev. J. Mitford, in his Aldine edition of Gray, says (p. xxxiii.) that the first three volumes came out in 1752, whereas my copy of "the _second edition_" bears the date of 1748. Is that the true date, or do editions vary? If the second edition came out in 1748, what was the date of the first edition? I only put this last question because, as most people are aware, some poems of note originally appeared in Dodsley's _Collection of Poems_, and it is material to ascertain the real year when they first came from the press.

THE HERMIT OF HOLYPORT.

* * * * *

REPLIES TO MINOR QUERIES.

_Zündnadel Guns_ (Vol. ii., p. 247.).--JARLTZBERG "would like to know when and by whom they were invented, and their mechanism."

To describe mechanism without diagrams is both tedious and difficult; but I shall be happy to show JARLTZBRG one of them in my possession, if he will favour me with a call,--for which purpose I inclose my address, to be had at your office. The principle is, to load at the breach, and the cartridge contains the priming, which is ignited by the action of a pin striking against it. It is one of the worst of many methods of loading at the breach; and the same principle was patented in England by A.A. Moser, a German, more than ten years ago. {344}

It has already received the attention of our Ordnance department, and has been tried at Woolwich. The letter to which JARTZBERG refers, dated Berlin, Sept. 11., merely shows the extreme ignorance of the writer on such subjects, as the range he mentions has nothing whatever to do with the principle or mechanism of the gun in question. He ought also, before he expressed himself so strongly, to have known, that the extreme range of an English percussion musket is nearer _one mile_ than _150 yards_ (which latter distance, he says, they do not exceed) and he would not have been so astonished at the range of the Zündnadel guns being 800 yards, if he had seen, as I have, a plain English two-grooved rifle range 1200 yards, with a proper elevation for the distance, and a conical projectile instead of a ball.

The form and weight of the projectile fired from rifle, at a considerable elevation, say 25º to 30º, with sufficient charge of gunpowder, is the cause of the range and of the accuracy, and has nothing whatever to do with the construction or means by which it is fired, whether flint or percussion. The discussion of this subject is probably unsuited to your publication, or I could have considerably enlarged this communication. I will, however, simply add, that the Zündnadel is very liable to get out of order, much exposed to wet, and that it does not in reality possess any of the wonderful advantages that have been ascribed to it, except a facility of loading, _while clean_, which is more than counterbalanced by its defects.

HENRY WILKINSON.

_Thomson of Esholt_ (Vol. ii., p. 268.).--Dr. Whitaker tells us (Ducatus, ii. 202.) that the dissolved priory of Essheholt was, in the 1st Edw. VI., granted to Henry Thompson, Gent., one of the king's _gens d'armes_ at Bologne. About a century afterwards the estate passed to the more ancient and distinguished Yorkshire family of Calverley, by the marriage of the daughter and heir of Henry Thompson, Esq., with Sir Walter Calverley. If your correspondent JAYTEE consult Sims's useful _Index to the Pedigrees and Arms contained in the Genealogical MSS. in the British Museum_, he will be referred to several pedigrees of the family of Thomson of Esholt. Of numerous respectable families of the name of Thompson seated in the neighbourhood of York, the common ancestor seems to have been a James Thompson of Thornton in Pickering Lythe, who flourished in the reign of Elizabeth. (Vice Poulson's _Holderess_, vol. ii. p. 63.) All these families bear the arms described by your correspondent, but _without_ the bend sinister. The crest they use is also nearly the same, viz., an armed arm, embowed, grasping a broken tilting spear.

No general collection of Yorkshire genealogies has been published. Information as to the pedigrees of Yorkshire families must be sought for in the well-known topographical works of Thoresby Whitaker, Hunter, &c., or in the MS. collections of Torre, Hopkinson, &c.

In the _Monasticon Eboracense_, by John Burton M.D., fol., York, 1778, under the head of "Eschewolde, Essold, Esscholt, or Esholt, in Ayredale in the Deanry of the Ainsty," at pp. 139. and 140., your correspondent JAYTEE will find that the site of this priory was granted, 1 Edward VI., 1547, to Henry Thompson, one of the king's _gens d'armes_, at Boleyn; who, by Helen, daughter of Laurence Townley, had a natural son called William, living in 1585 who, assuming his father's surname, and marrying Dorothy, daughter of Christopher Anderson of Lostock in com. Lanc. prothonotary became the ancestor of those families of the Thompsons now living in and near York. He may see also Burke's _Landed Gentry_, article "Say of Tilney, co. Norfolk," in the supplement.

_Minar's Books of Antiquities_ (Vol. i., p. 277.).--A.N. inquires who is intended by Cusa in his book _De Docta Ignorantia_, cap. vii., where he quotes "Minar in his _Books of Antiquities_." Upon looking into the passage referred to, I remembered the following observation by a learned writer now living, which will doubtless guide your correspondent to the author intended:--

"On the subject of the imperfect views concerning the Deity, entertained by the ancient philosophical sects, I would especially refer to that most able and elaborate investigation of them, Meiner's very interesting tract, _De Vero Deo._"--(An Elementary Course of Theological Lectures, delivered in Bristol College, 1831-1833, by the Rev. W.D. Conybeare, now the Very Rev. the Dean of Llandaff. )

A.N. will not be surprised at Cusa Using the term "antiquitates" instead of "De Vero Deo," if he will compare his expressions on the same subject in his book _De Venatione Sapientiæ_, e.g.:--

"Vides nunc æternum illud _antiquissimum_ in eo campo (scilicet non aliud) dulcissima venatione quæri posse. Attingis enim _antiquissimum_ trinum et unum."--Cap. xiv.

T.J.

_Smoke Money_ (Vol. ii., pp. 120. 174.).--Sir Roger Twisden (_Historical Vindication of the Church of England_, chap. iv. p. 77.) observes--

"King Henry, 153¾, took them (Peter's pence) so absolutely away, as though Queen Mary repealed that Act, and Paulus Quartus dealt earnestly with her agents in Rome for restoring the use of them, yet I cannot find that they were ever gathered and sent thither during her time but where some monasteries did answer them to the Pope, and did therefore collect the tax, that in process of time became, as by custom, paid to that house which being after derived to the crown, and from thence, by grant, to others, with as ample {345} profits as the religious persons did possess them, I conceive they are to this day paid as an appendant to the said manors, by the name of _Smoke Money_.

J.B.

_Smoke Money_ (Vol. ii., pp. 120, 269.).--I do not know whether any additional information on _smoke money_ is required but the following extracts may be interesting to your Querist:--

"At this daie the Bp. of Elie hath out of everie parish in Cambridgeshire a certeine tribute called Elie Farthings, or _Smoke Farthings_, which the church-wardens do levie, according to the number of houses or else of chimneys that be in a parish."--MSS, Baker, xxix. 326.

The date of this impost is given in the next extract:--

"By the records of the Church of Elie, it appears that in the year 1154, every person who kept a fire in the several parishes within that diocese was obliged to pay one farthing yearly to the altar of S. Peter, in the same cathedral."--MSS. Bowtell, Downing Coll. Library.

This tax was paid in 1516, but how much later I cannot say.

The readers of Macaulay will be familiar with the term "heart-money" (_History_, vol. i. p. 283.), and the amusing illustrations he produces, from the ballads of the day, of the extreme unpopularity of the tax on chimneys, and the hatred in which the "chimney man" was held (i. 287.) but this was a different impost frown that spoken of above, and paid to the king, not to the cathedral. It was collected for the last time in 1690, having been first levied in 1653, when, Hume tells us, the king's debts had become so--

"Intolerable, that the Commons were constrained to vote him an extraordinary supply of 1,200,000l., to be levied by eighteen months' assessment, and finding upon enquiry that the several branches of the revenue fell much short of the sums they expected, they at last, after much delay, voted _a new imposition of 2s. on each hearth_, and this tax they settled on the king during his life."

The Rev. Giles Moore, Rector of Horstead Keynes, Sussex, notes in his _Diary_ (published by the Sussex Archæological Society),--

August 18, 1663.--I payed fore 1 half yeares earth-money 3s.

Other notices of this payment may be supplied by other correspondents.

E. VENABLES.

_Holland Land_ (Vol. ii., p. 267.).--Holland means _hole_ or _hollow land_--land lower than the level of contiguous water, and protected by _dykes_. So _Holland_, one of the United Provinces; so _Holland_, the southern division of Lincolnshire.

C.

_Caconac, Caconacquerie_ (Vol. ii., p. 267.).--This is a misprint of yours, or a misspelling of your correspondents. The word is _cacouac, cacouacquerie_. It was a cant word used by Voltaire and his correspondents to signify an _unbeliever_ in Christianity, and was, I think, borrowed from the name of some Indian tribe supposed to be in a natural state of freedom and exemption from prejudice.

C.

_Discourse of National Excellencies of England_ (Vol. ii., p. 248.).--_A Discourse of the National Excellencies of England_ was not written by Sir Rob. Howard, but by RICHARD HAWKINS, Whose name appears at length in the title-page to some copies; others have the initials only.

P.B.

_Saffron Bags_ (Vol. ii., p. 217.).--In almost all old works on Materia Medica the use of these bags is mentioned. Quincy, in his _Dispensatory_, 1730, p. 179., says:--

"Some prescribe it (saffron) to be worn with camphire in a bag at the pit of the stomach for _melancholy_; and others affirm that, so used, it will cure agues."

Ray observes (_Cat. Plant. Angl._, 1777, p. 84.):

"Itemque in sacculo suspenditur sub mento vel gutture ad dissipandam sc. materiam putridam et venenatam, ne ibidem stagnans, inflammationen excitet, ægrotumque strangulet."

The origin of the "saffron bag", is probably to be explained by the strong aromatic odour of saffron, and the high esteem in which it was once held as a medicine; though now it is used chiefly as a colouring ingredient and by certain elderly ladies, with antiquated notions, as a specific for "striking out" the measles in their grandchildren.

[Hebrew: t. a.]

_Milton's "Penseroso"_ (Vol. ii, p. 153.).--H.A.B. desires to understand the couplet--

"And love the high embower'd roof, With antique pillars massy proof."

He is puzzled whether to consider "proof" an adjective belonging to "pillars," or a substantive in apposition with it. All the commentators seem to have passed the line without observation. I am almost afraid to suggest that we should read "pillars'" in the genitive plural, "proof" being taken in the sense of _established strength_.

Before dismissing this conjecture, I have taken the pains to examine every one of the twenty-four other passages in which Milton has used the word "proof." I find that it occurs only four times as an adjective in all of which it is followed by something dependent upon it. In three of than thus:

"---- not proof Against temptation."--_Par. L._ ix. 298.

"---- proof 'gainst all assaults."--_Ib._ x. 88.

"Proof against all temptation."--_Par. R._ iv. 533.

In the fourth, which is a little different, thus:

"---- left some part Not proof enough such object to sustain." _Par. L._ viii. 5S5.

{346} As Milton, therefore, has in no other place used "proof" as an adjective without something attached to it, I feel assured that he did not use it as an adjective in the passage in question.

J.S.W.

Stockwell, Sept. 7.

_Achilles and the Tortoise_ (Vol. ii., p. l54.).--[Greek: Idiôtês] will find the paradox of "Achilles and the Tortoise" explained by Mr. Mansel of St. John's College, Oxon, in a note to his late edition of Aldrich's _Logic_ (1849, p. 125.). He there shows that the fallacy is a material one: being a false assumption of the major premise, viz., that the sum of an infinite series is itself always infinite (whereas it may be finite). Mansel refers to Plato, _Parmenid._ p. 128. [when will editors learn to specify the editions which they use?] Aristot. _Soph. Eleuctr._ 10. 2. 33. 4., and Cousin, _Nouveaux Fragments, Zénon d'Elée._

T.E.L.L.

_Stepony Ale_ (Vol. ii., p. 267.).--The extract from Chamberlayne certainly refers to ale brewed at _Stepney._ In Playford's curious collection of old popular tunes, the _English Dancing Master_, 1721, is one called "Stepney Ale and Cakes;" and in the works of Tom Brown and Ned Ward, other allusions to the same are to be found.

EDWARD F. RIMBAULT.

_North Side of Churchyards_ (Vol. ii., p. 253.).--In reference to the north region being "the devoted region of Satan and his hosts," Milton seems to have recognised the doctrine when he says--

"At last, Far in the horizon to the north appear'd From skirt to skirt a fiery region, stretched In battailous aspect, and nearer view Bristled with upright beams innumerable Of rigid spears, and helmets throng'd, and shields Various, with boastful argument pourtray'd, The banded powers of Satan hasting on With furious expedition."--Book vi.

F.E.

_Welsh Money_ (Vol. ii., p. 231.).--It is not known that the Welsh princes ever coined any money: none such has ever been discovered. If they ever coined any, it is almost impossible that it should all have disappeared.

GRIFFIN.

_Wormwood_ (Vol. ii., pp. 249. 315.).--The French gourmands have two sorts of liqueur flavoured with wormwood; Crême d'Absinthe, and Vermouthe. In the _Almanac des Gourmands_ there is a pretty account of the latter, called the _coup d'après._ In the south of France, I think, they say it is the fashion to have a glass brought in towards the end of the repast by girls to refit the stomach.

C.B.

_Puzzling Epitaph_ (Vol. ii., p. 311.).--J. BDN has, I think, not given this epitaph quite correctly. The following is as it appeared in the _Times_, 20th Sept., 1828 (copied from the _Mirror_). It is stated to be in a churchyard in Germany:--

"O quid tua te be bis bia abit ra ra ra es et in ram ram ram i i Mox eris quod ego nunc." The reading is--

"O superbe quid superbis? tua superbia te superabit. Terra es et in terram ibis. Mox eris quod ego nunc."

E.B. PRICE.

October 14. 1850.

[The first two lines of this epitaph, and many similar specimens of learned trifling, will be found in _Les Bigarrures et Touches de Seigneur des Accords,_ cap. iii., _autre Façons de Rebus_, p. 35., ed. 1662.]

_Umbrella_ (Vol. ii., pp. 25. 93.).--In the collection of pictures at Woburn Abbey is a full-length portrait of the beautiful Duchess of Bedford, who afterwards married the Earl of Jersey, painted about the year 1730. She is represented as attended by a black servant, who holds an open umbrella to shade her.

Cowper's "Task," published in 1784, twice mentions the umbrella:

"We bear our shades about us; self-deprived Of other screen, the thin umbrella spread, And range an Indian waste without a tree."