Part 2

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

"Jovisque et soror et conjux."--Both the _ets_ are emphatic. "Jovisque _et_ soror _et_ conjux."

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

JAMES HENRY.

Minor Notes.

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

Advants George Monck, and Monck St. George shall be, England's restorer to its liberty, Scotland's protector, Ireland's president, Reducing all to affree parliament. And if thou dost intend the other thing, Go on, and all shall cry God save ye king.

R. R doth rebellion represent, V. By V nought else but villainy is meant, M. M murther signifies all men doe knowe, P. P perjuries in fashion grow.

Then R and V with M and P Conjoined make up our misery.

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

E. L. B.

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

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

EUPATOR.

Queries.

CROSSES AND CRUCIFIXES.

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

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

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

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

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

In the same paper Mr. Logan observes--

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

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

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

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

F. W. J.

Mr. Curzon states, in the introduction to his _Monasteries of the Levant_, that--

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

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

DRYASDUST.

MASTER OF THE BUCKHOUNDS.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

JOHN BRANFILL HARRISON.

Maidstone.

Minor Queries.

300. "_No Cross no Crown._"--Where did Penn get the title of his well-known work? St. Paulinus, Bishop of Nola, in allusion to the custom of crowning crosses, has these lines:--

"Cerne coronatam Domini super _atria Christi_, Stare crucem, duro spondentem celsa labori Praemia: _tolle crucem, qui vis auferre coronam_."

"See how the cross of Christ a crown entwines: High o'er God's temple it refulgent shines; Pledging bright guerdon for each passing pain: Take up the cross, if thou the crown would'st gain."

Vide Dr. Rock's _Hierurgia_. Quarles says, in his _Esther_:

"The way to bliss lies not on beds of down, And he that had no cross deserves no crown."

MARICONDA.

301. _Dido and AEneas._--

"When Dido found AEneas did not come, She wept in silence, and was--di-do-dum."

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

A. A. D.

302. _Pegs and Thongs for Rowing: Torture among the Athenians._--Dr. Schmitz (in Smith's _Antiq._, article SHIPS) speaks of "the pegs, [Greek: skalmoi], _between which the oars move[d]_, and to which they were fastened by a thong, [Greek: tropoter]." What is the authority for two pegs, _between which_, &c? A single peg and thong, as still in frequent use, would be intelligible!

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

A. A. D.

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

S. QUARTO.

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

FANNY.

305. _Grand-daughter of John Hampden._--According to the _Friend of India_ of 4th September, 1851, there is at Cossimbazar the following inscription:--

"SARAH MATTOCKS, Aged 27. Much lamented by her husband, Lieutenant-Colonel JOHN MATTOCKS. Was the grand-daughter of the Great JOHN HAMDEN, Esq., Of St. James's, Westminster."

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

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

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

SALOPIAN.

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

C. I. R.

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

AMANUENSIS.

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

A. B. C.

Brighton.

309. _Caleva Atrebatum, Site of._--May not the site of Caleva Atrebatum have been at Caversham, on the north of the Thames, near Reading?

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

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

G. J.

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

J. S. WARDEN.

Balica.

311. _Etymology of Durden._--Jacob, in his _Law Dictionary_, giving Cowel as his authority (who, however, advances no further elucidation), derives the word from _dur-den_, a coppice in a valley. Does the word _dur_ signify wood, or, if the British _dwr_, is it not water?

F. R. R.

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

J. N. C.

King's Lynn.

Minor Queries Answered.

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

H. N. E.

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

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

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

J. D. D.

[In Rees's _Essay on the Welsh Saints_, p. 268., and Williams's _Ecclesiastical Antiquities of the Cymry_, p. 137. The college of Beuno is now called Clynog Vawr. See also _The Cambro-Briton_, vol. iii. p. 14.]

_Lists of Knights Bachelor._--What publication contains a list of the _knights bachelor_ made by George I. and George II. (1714-1760)? With regard to the subsequent reign I have found the _Calendar of Knights_, by Francis Townsend, London, 1828, very accurate and perfect.

==> N.

[There is not any continuous list of _Knights Bachelors_ in any published works since Philpot's _Catalogue_, 1660, until Townsend's _Calendar_, which commences in 1760. The knights made by Kings George I. and II. will be found only in some of the genealogical publications of the day, such as the _British Compendium_, published at intervals between 1720 and 1769; Chamberlayne's _State of Great Britain_; or Heylin's _Help to English History_, or Phillipps's _List of Nobility_, and similar works.

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

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

DAVUS.

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

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

H. F.

Clapham, Nov. 3. 1851.

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

Replies.

CONVOCATION OF YORK.

(Vol. iv., p. 368.)

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

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

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