Chapter 5

It is therefore of good antiquity in the language, and not having been taken from the French may best be referred to the Saxon, in which _spannan_ means to stretch. Hence _span-new_ is fresh from the _stretchers_, or frames, alluding to cloth, a very old manufacture of the country; and _spick_ and _span_ is fresh from the spike, or tenter, and frames. This is Johnson's derivation, and I cannot but think it preferable to any other."

A very early instance of the expression, not quoted by Todd, may be found in the _Romance of Alexander_: {331}

"Richelich he doth him schrede In _spon-neowe_ knightis weode."--L. 4054-5.

And _Weber_, in his _Glossary_ (or rather, Mr. Douce, for the "D" appended to the note shows it to have proceeded from that accomplished antiquary), explains it, "_Spon-neowe_, span-new, newly spun. This is probably the true explanation of spick and span new. Ihre renders sping-spang, _plane novus_, in voce fick fack." The learned Jamieson, in his _Dictionary_, s. v. _Split-new_ (which corresponds to the German _Splitter neu_, i. e. as new as a splinter or chip from the block), shows, at greater length than we can quote, that _split_ and _span_ equally denote a splinter or chip; and in his _Supplement_, s. v. _Spang-new_, after pointing out the connexion between _spinga_ (assula) and _spaungha_ (lamina), shows that, if this be the original, the allusion must be to metal newly wrought, that has, as it were, the gloss from the fire on it: in short, that the epithet is the same as one equally familiar to us, i. e. _fire-new_, Germ. _vier-neu_. We will bring this note to a close by a reference to Sewell's _Dutch Dictionary_, where _Spikspelder nieuw_ is rendered "Spick and span new."]

_Theory of the Earth's Form._--Have any objections to the received theory of the earth's spherical form, or any revival of the old "plane" doctrine, been recently noticed and controverted by _scientific_ men of known standing?

BRUNO.

[The old theory has been advanced, and even lectured on, within these two years; but no notice has been taken of it by scientific men.]

_Carolus Lawson._--Who was "Carolus Lawson," of whom I have a good print, engraved by Heath. He is called "Scholae Mancuniensis Archididascalus," 1797. "Pietas alumnorum" is inscribed underneath, and on the back is written, probably by some grateful pupil--

"Cari propinqui, cari liberi, cari parentes, sed omnes omnium caritates _Archididascalus noster_ comprehendit."--_Cicero_ (verbis quibusdam mutatis).

NEMO.

[Mr. Charles Lawson was educated at Corpus Christi College, Oxford, and was presented by the president, Dr. Randolph, in 1749, to the place of Second Master of Manchester Grammar School; upon the death of Mr. Purnell, in 1764, he succeeded him as Head Master. The colleges of St. John, in Cambridge, and of Brazenose, in Oxford, can bear witness to the success with which he laboured for more than half a century in his profession, having received from the Manchester school, whilst under his direction, a very considerable number of well-grounded classical scholars. He died at Manchester on April 19, 1807, aged seventy-nine. Some further particulars respecting him may be found in the _Gentleman's Magazine_, vol. lxxvii. part i. p. 583.]

* * * * *

Replies.

HAYBANDS IN SEALS.

(Vol. iii., pp. 186. 248. 291.)

I am sorry that in referring to a peculiarity in ancient seals under this title, MR. LOWER should have pinned to his notice a theory which I feel persuaded is quite untenable. It is surely something new to those who have directed their attention to the numerous devices upon seals to find that the husbandman had so low an opinion of his own social status as to reject the use of any emblematical sign upon his seal, when Thomas the smith, Roger the carpenter, and William the farrier, bore the elements of their respective crafts as proudly as the knight did his chevron or fess. But the question is one of facts. The following examples of the use of the "hayband" are now before me:--

6 June, 7 Henry IV. Grant by John Dursley, citizen and armorer of London, to William Serjaunt Taverner, of Stanes, and another, of a messuage, &c. in Westminster. Seal of dark red was, about 1-1/2 inch in diameter; a hay-stalk twisted and pressed into the wax while hot, inclosing a space as large as a shilling, in which is a poor impression of a badly engraved seal; the whole very clumsy and rough.

26 November, 24 Henry VI. Grant by Maurice Brune, Knight, Robert Darcy, John Doreward, Henry Clovill, Esquire, John Grene, and Henry Stampe, to Richard Hill and others, of lands, &c., in Sprinfield, &c., in Essex. Each seal is round and thick, and has the impression of a small armorial bearing. The 1st, 2nd, and 5th seals have a small plaited coil of hay pressed into the wax, and inclosing the impression.

26 Henry VI. Receipt by Jane Grene for 10l. paid her by the Earl of Ormond. Seal of diminutive size, and the impression nearly defaced. Round the extreme edge is a "diminutive hayband."

2 January, 34 Henry VI. Grant by Thomas Tudenham, Knight, John Leventhorp, Esquire, and Thomas Radclyff, of the reversion of the manor of Newhall to John Neell and others. All the seals, which are large and thick and more than two inches in diameter, have the impression of a signet ring inclosed with a "hayband" _of parchment_ pressed into them. One of these coils being loose shows itself to be a thin strip of the label itself brought through the wax.

10 February, 14 Edward IV. Lease by Sir Thomas Urswyk, Knight, Chief Baron of the Exchequer, and Thomas Lovell, to John Morton and others, of the manor of Newhall, Essex, and other lands, &c. The seal of Lovell has his armorial bearings and legend; that of the Lord Chief Baron is the impression of a signet ring, being a classical bust. The seal itself is a thick ball of wax about {332} two inches across, pressed into the face of which is a "hayband" or twisted coil of _thin parchment_ inclosing the impression.

I am sure that I have seen many examples much earlier and later, but those given are merely in reference to the theory of your Lewes correspondent. Even they are surely inconsistent with the idea of the practice being peculiar to any locality or distinctive of any class. My recollection would lead me to assign the fourteenth to the sixteenth centuries as the period of its use. But still the question remains--Has it any, and what signification? I have always considered it to have been a contrivance to strengthen the substance of the seal itself. The earliest instances I have seen were "applique" seals, such as the royal privy seals, and with these it would seem to have originated. Their frail nature suggested the use of some substance to protect the thin layer of wax from damage by the crumpling of the parchment on which they were impressed. For some time its use was confined to this kind of seal; and fashion may perhaps have extended the practice to pendent seals, where, however, it was often efficacious in neutralising the bad quality of the wax so general in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. The plaiting of the hay or straw sometimes assumed a fanciful shape. Although the impressions of seals of the time of Henry VII. are often very bad, there are generally traces of their existence; these may perhaps be discovered in MR. LOWER'S seals if he looks more to the enclosure than to the substance forming it.

JOSEPH BURTT.

_Haybands in Seals._--M. A. LOWER thinks that MR. T. HUDSON TURNER has misapplied his description of the seals in his possession. The seals are not _impressed upon haybands_, neither do "some ends of the hay or straw protrude from the surface." The little fillet or wreath of hay, about equal in diameter to a shilling, is _inlaid_ upon the pendent lump of wax, and forms the ornament or device of the seal, rather than an integral portion of it, like that in the specimens referred to by MR. TURNER.

M. A. LOWER begs, under favour, to add, that the very fact of a Query being inserted in the pages of this invaluable--one might almost say indispensable--publication, implies a candid avowal _pro tanto_ of ignorance on the part of the Querist, who might reasonably expect a plain answer, unaccompanied by any ungracious reflection on the side of the more highly-gifted _savant_ that furnished the reply. As a simple matter of taste, many other correspondents besides MARK ANTONY LOWER may probably object, like the latter's eminent namesake, Mr. Tony Weller, to being "pulled up so wery short," especially in cases where there is a clear misapprehension on the part of the respondent.

_Haybands in Seals._--It is impossible for one moment to doubt the correctness of MR. HUDSON TURNER'S remarks on this question, and I hasten to retract my own suggestions, frankly acknowledging them to be erroneous.

I had always taken the same view as MR. TURNER (for it is very palpable to the eye, and speaks for itself), till diverted from it by one of those sudden fancies which, spite of all caution, will ever and anon unaccountably cross the mind and bewilder the better judgment. To have established my view, these rushes should have been proved to be affixed to deeds of _feoffment alone_; a point which, at the moment, I overlooked. Even while I write, I have before me a _lease_ granted by the abbey of Denney in the fifteenth century, with a rush in the seal; and MR. TURNER'S cited instances of royal charters put an end to all question.

Lest others be led astray by my freak of fancy, without an opportunity of correcting it by MR. TURNER'S statement, the proper course for me is to acknowledge myself wrong--palpably, unmistakeably wrong,--MR. TURNER'S explanation is the correct one; thanks to him for it--_liberavi animam meam_.

L. B. L.

* * * * *

NORTH SIDE OF CHURCHYARDS.

(Vol. ii., pp. 93. 253.; Vol. iii., p. 125.)

Your correspondents on this subject have generally taken it as granted, that the prejudice against burying in this portion of the churchyard is almost universal. In a former communication (Vol. ii., p. 93.) I stated that there are at least some exceptions. Since that time I have visited perhaps a hundred churchyards in the counties of York, Derby, Stafford, Bucks, Herts, and Oxford, and in nearly half of these burial had evidently been long since practised on the north side of the several churches. The parish church of Ashby de la Zouch is built so near the south wall of the churchyard, that the north must clearly have been designed for sepulture. I was incumbent of an ancient village church in that neighbourhood, which is built in the same manner, with scarcely any ground on the south, the north being large and considerably raised by the numerous interments which have taken place in it. It has also some old tombs, which ten years ago were fast falling to decay. The part south of the church contains very few graves, and all apparently of recent date.

In my former communication I mentioned, that in this churchyard burial has been chiefly, till of late, on the north side of the church; and, since that communication, a vault has been made on the south side, which has convinced us the ground had never before been there broken up. The soil is chalk; whereas, whenever a grave is made on the north side, human dust and bones are so {333} abundant, that the chalk soil has almost lost its nature.

Till more light can be thrown on the subject than what has yet appeared in "NOTES AND QUERIES," I cannot but retain my original opinion, viz., that the favourite part of interment, in earlier times, was that nearest the principal entrance into the church. The original object of burying in churches and churchyards was the better to insure for the dead the prayers of the worshippers, as they assembled for public devotion. Hence the churchyard nearest the entrance into church would be most in request. The origin of the prejudice for the south side, which I believe to be of recent date, may, I doubt not, be ascertained from any superstitious cottager who entertains it. "It would be so cold, sir," said one to me, "to be always lying where the sun would never shine on me."

If your correspondent on this subject in Vol. iii., p. 125., would ask an old inhabitant of his parish which is the _backside_ of their church, and why it is so called? he would probably come at the fact. I would refer him to Burn's _History of Parish Registers_, page 96., foot-note, where he will find it stated that "a part of the churchyard was sometimes left unconsecrated, for the purpose of burying excommunicated persons."

W. HASTINGS KELKE.

Drayton Beauchamp.

_North Side of Churchyards._--Your correspondents seem to be agreed as to the facts, not as to the origin of the objection. I suspect MR. HAWKER (Vol. ii., p. 253.) is nearest the truth; and the following, from _Coverdale on Praying for the Dead_, may help to strengthen his conjecture:

"As men die, so shall they arise: _if in faith_ in the Lord _towards the south_, they need no prayers; they are presently happy, and shall arise in glory: _if in unbelief_ without the Lord _towards the north_, then are they past all hope."

N. S.

_North Side of Churchyards_ (Vol. ii., pp. 253. 346.).--The subjoined extract from Bishop Wilkins's _Discourse concerning a New Planet, tending to prove that it is probable our Earth is one of the Planets_, 8vo., 1640, pp. 64-66., will serve to illustrate the passage from Milton, of the north being "the devoted region of Satan and his hosts:"

"It was the opinion of the Jewish rabbies, that man was created with his face to the east; therefore the Hebrew word signifies _ante_, or the east; _post_, or the west; _dextra_, or the south; _sinistra_, or the north. You may see all of them put together in that place of Job xxiii. 8, 9.: 'Behold I go forward, and he is not there; and backward, but I cannot perceive him: on the left hand, where he doth work, but I cannot behold him. He hideth himself on the right hand, that I cannot see him.' Which expressions are, by some interpreters, referred unto the four coasts of heaven, according to the common use of those original words. From hence it is that many of the ancients have concluded hell to be in the north, which is signified by the left hand; unto which side, our Saviour tells us, that the goats shall be divided. Which opinion likewise seems to be favoured by that place in Job xxvi. 6, 7., where it is said, "Hell is naked before God, and destruction hath no covering.' And presently it is added, 'He stretcheth out the north over the empty place.' Upon these grounds, St. Jerome interprets that speech of the Preacher, Eccles. xi. 3.: 'If the tree fall toward the south, or toward the north, in the place where the tree falleth, there shall it be,' concerning those who shall go either to heaven or hell. And in this sense also do some expound that of Zechariah (xiv. 4.), where it is said that 'the Mount of Olives shall cleave in the midst: half of it shall remove toward the north, and half of it toward the south.' By which it is intimated, that amongst those Gentiles, who shall take upon them the profession of Christ, there are two sorts: some that go to the north, that is, to hell; and others to the south, that is, to heaven. And therefore it is, say they, that God so often threatens evil out of the north: and upon this ground it is, saith Besoldus, that there is no religion that worships that way. We read of the Mahometans, that they adore towards the south; the Jews towards the west; Christians towards the east; but none to the _north_."

J. Y.

Hoxton.

* * * * *

THE ROLLIAD, AND SOME OF ITS WRITERS.

(Vol. iii., p. 276.)

MR. DAWSON TURNER asks for information regarding three writers in the _Rolliad_, viz.: Tickell, Richardson, and Fitzpatrick. Memoirs of the first two are given in Chalmers's _Dictionary_; but in Moore's _Life of Sheridan_, MR. TURNER will find several notices of them, far more attractive than dry biographical details. They were both intimately associated with Sheridan; Tickell, indeed, was his brother-in-law. One would prefer calling them his _friends_, but steady friendship must rest upon a firmer basis than those gifts of wit, talent, and a keen sense of the ridiculous, which prevailed so largely amongst this clever trio.

Tickell's production, _Anticipation_, is still remembered from its cleverness and humour; but when every speaker introduced into its pages has long been dead, and some of them were little known to fame, the pamphlet is preserved by a few solely from the celebrity which it once possessed.

His death in 1793 was a most melancholy one. It is described by Professor Smyth in in his interesting _Memoir of Sheridan_, a book printed some years ago for distribution among his friends, and which well deserves publication.

Independent of his contributions to the _Rolliad_, {334} Richardson did little as an author. His comedy of _The Fugitive_, acted and published in 1792, was well received, and is much praised. Why has this production so completely disappeared?

General Fitzpatrick was born in 1749, and died in 1815. He was the second son of John, Earl of Upper Ossory; twice Secretary-at-War; once secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, the Duke of Portland, but what he regarded as his highest distinction, and it is recorded on his tomb, was the friendship of Fox during forty years of their lives.

Some of his speeches on the union with Ireland will be found in the thirty-fourth volume of the _Parliamentary History_.

His epitaph, by himself, is inscribed on a sarcophagus in the church-yard at Sunning Hill, in which he describes himself--what his friends admitted to be truth--a politician without ambition, a writer without vanity.

Which is the true reading in the following lines by Fitzpatrick on Fox? In my copy the word "course" in the third line is erased, and the word "mind" is substituted.

"A patriot's even course he steered, Mid Faction's wildest storms unmoved: By all who marked his _course_ revered, By all who knew his heart beloved."

Sheridan says most justly:

"Wit being generally founded upon the manners and characters of its own day, is crowned in that day, beyond all other exertions of the mind, with splendid and immediate success. But there is always something that equalises. In return, more than any other production, it suffers suddenly and irretrievably from the hand of Time."

Still some publications, from their wit and brilliancy, are sufficiently buoyant to float down to posterity. The publication in question, the _Rolliad_, is one; the _Anti-Jacobin_ another. You may not be unwilling, in your useful pages, to give a list of some of the writers in the latter publication. My own copy of it is marked from that belonging to one of the writers, and is as follows:--

Nos. 1. 4. 9. 19. 26, 27--33., by Mr George Ellis. Nos. 6. and 7., by Messrs. Ellis and Frere. Nos. 20, 21, 22. 30--36., by Mr. Canning. No. 10. by M.; No. 13. by C. B.; No. 39. by N.

To the remaining numbers, neither names nor initials are affixed. Can any of your readers explain the initials, M., C. B., and N., and give us the authors of the _remaining_ numbers?

In replying to Mr. TURNER'S Queries, I shall attend to the wish expressed by so old and so valued a friend, and substitute for initials, of which he disapproves, the name of

J. H. MARKLAND.

* * * * *

RICHARDSON--TICKELL--FITZPATRICK.

(Vol. iii., p. 276.)

I am much surprised at MR. DAWSON TURNER'S inquiry about these names. I will not say with him that, "not to know them argues himself unknown." On the contrary, my wonder is, that one, himself so well and so favourably known as MR. TURNER, should have need to ask such a question about men with whom, or, at least, with whose fame, he must have been a contemporary, presuming, as I do, that he is the same MR. DAWSON TURNER with whose works we have been acquainted for above half a century. Since, however, he has made the Query, I will answer it as succinctly as I can.

The Right Honourable Richard Fitzpatrick was the only brother of the last Earl of Upper Ossory, and prominent in fashion, in politics, and in elegant literature, and not undistinguished as a soldier. He sat in _nine_ successive parliaments (in two which I knew him). As early as 1782 he was Secretary for Ireland, and in 1783 Secretary-at-War, which office he again filled in 1806. In the galaxy of opposition wits, when opposition was wittiest, Fitzpatrick was generally admitted to be the first, and there were those who thought him _in general powers_ superior even to Fox and Sheridan. His oratory, however, did not do justice to his talents, and he was both shy and indolent. His best speech was that in December, 1796, for the release of Lafayette, to which even the ridicule of the _Anti-Jacobin_ allowed the merit of pathetic eloquence. His share in the _Rolliad_ was considerable, and there are many other sprightly and some elegant specimens of his poetical talents scattered through various publications. I wish they were collected.

Richard Tickell, the grandson of Addison's friend, and brother-in-law to Sheridan, was the author of _Anticipation_, one of the liveliest political pamphlets ever written. He published many occasional poems, the best of which is a poetical "Epistle from Charles Fox, partridge shooting, to Lord John Townsend, cruising." MR. DAWSON TURNER will find more about him in the _Biographical Dictionary_.

Joseph Richardson, who died in 1803, was M.P. for Newport in three parliaments. He was an intimate friend of Sheridan's, and partner with him in Drury Lane Theatre. He wrote a play, entitled _The Fugitive_; but he is only remembered for his contributions (whatever they were) to the _Rolliad_. In the _Gentleman's Magazine_ (vol. lxxiii. p. 602.), MR. DAWSON TURNER will find a longer notice of him.

There are a few remarks on the authors of the _Rolliad_ in Moore's _Life of Sheridan_, i. 420.

C.

* * * * * {335}

QUAKERS' ATTEMPT TO CONVERT THE POPE.

(Vol. iii., p. 302.)

I have never met with any satisfactory account of this singular Quaker aggression. Perhaps it may be a contribution towards one if you can find room for some notice of a tract in my possession. It is entitled, _A Narrative of some of the Sufferings of J. P. in the City of Rome. London, printed for Thomas Simmons, at the Bull and Mouth, near Aldersgate_, 1661, 4to., pp. 16. This narrative of John Perrot's does not, however, give any particulars respecting his going to Rome, or the proceedings which led to his captivity there, but begins with the words--

"When I was cast into Prison, because I loved the souls of my enemies," &c.;

and after eight pages, chiefly occupied by inflated description of his sorrows, from which one obtains no facts, he tells us that God took pity on him,

"And raised up his little babe, my dear Brother Thomas Hart, to set his tender soul nearer unto my sufferings, and made him take my burdens on his back, and the yoak of my tribulation on his neck, and made him sup of my sore sorrows, and drink of the bleedings of my grief,'--

and so he goes on; but we do not learn what Thomas Hart did, except that he comforted John Perrot in his confinement.

"Moreover," he says, "the everlasting mercies of my God did stir up the bowels of other two of his tender babes, named in the tent Jane Stokes and Charles Baylie, to come to visit me whilest I was as forsaken of all men."

They persevered, he tells us,