{"collection":"myth-cosmogony","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_13406/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_13406","id":"gutenberg_13406","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/13406","summary":null,"tags":["Category: Essays, Letters & Speeches","Category: Journals","Category: Mythology, Legends & Folklore","Notes and Queries","Questions and answers -- Periodicals"],"text":"NOTES AND QUERIES:\n\nA MEDIUM OF INTER-COMMUNICATION FOR LITERARY MEN, ARTISTS, ANTIQUARIES,\nGENEALOGISTS, ETC.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n\"When found, make a note of.\"--CAPTAIN CUTTLE.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *  {193}\n\nNo. 43.] SATURDAY, AUGUST 24, 1850 [Price Threepence. Stamped Edition 4d.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nCONTENTS.\n\nNOTES:--\n  Notes and Queries. 193\n  Collar of SS. 194\n  Tenyson--Coleridge--Extract from Baker's MSS. on\n    Barth. Dodyngton, and William Jenkin, by J.E.B.\n    Mayor. 195\n  Parallel Passages. 196\n  Folk Lore:--Power of Prophecy--Bay Leaves at Funerals--Shoes\n    (old) thrown for Luck--Roasting Mice for Hooping-Cough--The\n    Story of Mr. Fox--Baptismal Superstition--Rushbearing. 196\n\nQUERIES:--\n  Who wrote Shakspeare's Henry VIII.? by Samuel\n    Hickson. 198\n  Minor Queries:--The Abb\u00e9 Strickland--Works on\n    Aerostation--Pilgrims' Road to Canterbury--\"\u00c6dricus\n    qui signa fundebat\"--Osmund, the Waterman--Logic--Darbon\n    Gatherall--Damasked Linen--Flourish--Drax Abbey and Free\n    School--Ancient Catalogue of Books. 198\n\nREPLIES:--\n  Shakspeare's Use of the Word \"Delighted,\" by S.W.\n    Singer. 200\n  Family of Love. 201\n  Translation of the Philobiblon. 202\n  Etymological Queries, by S.W. Singer. 203\n  Replies to Minor Queries:--Lord Richard\n    Christophilus--Poker--Querela Cantabrigiensis--\"One\n    Bell\"--Fabulous Account of the Lion--Pomfret on the\n    Thames--Walrond Family--Armenian Language--Genealogical\n    Query--Richard Baxter's Descendants--Duresme and Dunelm. 204\n\nMISCELLANEOUS:--\n  Notes on Books, Sales, Catalogues, &c. 207\n  Books and Odd Volumes Wanted. 207\n  Notices to Correspondents. 207\n  Advertisements. 207\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n\nNOTES\n\nNOTES AND QUERIES\n\nThe history of books and periodicals of a similar character ought to be\nthe object of interest to the readers of this work. The number of works\nin which answers have been given to proposed questions is not small. Not\nto mention the _Spectator_ and its imitators, nor the class of almanacs\nwhich give riddles and problems, nor mathematical periodicals of a more\nextensive character,--though all these ought to be discussed in course\nof time,--there yet remains a class of books in which general questions\nproposed by the public are answered periodically, either by the public\nor by the editors. Perhaps an account of one of these may bring out\nothers.\n\nIn 1736 and 1737 appeared the _Weekly Oracle; or, Universal Library.\nPublished by a Society of Gentlemen._ One folio sheet was published\nweekly, usually ending in the middle of a sentence. (Query. What is the\ntechnical name for this mode of publication? If none, what ought to be?)\nI have one folio volume of seventy numbers, at the end of which notice\nof suspension is given, with prospect of revival in another form\nprobably no more was published. The introduction is an account of the\neditorial staff to wit, a learned divine who \"hath entered with so much\ndiscernment into the true spirit of the schoolmen, especially Thomas\nAquinas and Duns Scotus, that he is qualified to resolve, to a hair's\nbreadth, the nicest cases of conscience.\" A physician who \"knows, to a\nmathematical point, the just tone and harmony of the risings pulses....\"\nA lawyer who \"what he this day has proved to be a contingent remainder,\nto-morrow he will with equal learning show must operate as an executory\ndevise or as a springing use.\" A philosopher \"able to give the true\nreason of all things, from the composition of watches, to the raising of\nminced pies ... and who, if he is closely questioned about the planner\nof squaring the circle, or by what means the perpetual motion, or\nlongitude, may be discovered, we believe has honesty, and we are sure\nthat he has skill enough to say that he knows--nothing of the matter.\" A\nmoral philosopher who has \"discovered a _perpetuum mobile_ of\ngovernment.\" An eminent virtuoso who understands \"what is the best\npickle to preserve a rattle-snake or an Egyptian mummy, better than the\nnature of the government he lives under, or the economy and welfare of\nhimself and family.\" Lastly, a _man of mode_. \"Him the beaus and the\nladies may consult in the affairs of love, dress, and equipage.\"\n\nThere is a great deal of good answering to tolerably rational questions,\nmixed with some attempts at humour, and other eccentricities, and\noccasionally a freedom, both of question and answer, by which we might,\nwere it advisable, confirm the fact, that the decorums of 1736 and of\n1850 are two different things.{194}\n\nFirst, as an instance of a question and answer, which might do as well\n(if the record be correct) for the present publication.\n\n    \"Q. We read in our public papers of the Pope's Bull and the\n    Pope's Brief; pray, Gentlemen, what is the difference between\n    them?\n\n    \"A. They differ much in the same manner as the Great Seal and\n    Privy Seal do here in England. The Bull being of the highest\n    authority where the papal power extends; the Brief is of less\n    authority. The Bull has a leaden seal upon silk affixed to the\n    foot of the instrument, as the wax under the Great Seal is to\n    our letters patent. The Brief has _sub annulo piscatoris_ upon\n    the side.\"\n\nQuery. Is this answer complete and correct?\n\nNow for another specimen:\n\n  \"Q. Wise Oracle show,\n        A good reason why,\n      When from tavern we _go_,\n        You're wel_come_ they cry.\n\n  \"A. The reason is plain,\n       'Cause doubtful to know,\n      Till seeing their gain,\n        If you _came well_ or no.\"\n\nThe following is an example of unanswerable refutation. To show why a\nman has not one rib less than a woman, it is stated that imperfections\nare not hereditary; as in the case of\n\n    \"One Mr. L----, an honest sailor not far from Stepney, who has\n    but one arm, and who cannot walk himself without the assistance\n    of a wooden leg, and yet has a son, born some years after the\n    amputation of is own limbs, whom he has bred both a fiddler and\n    a dancing master.\"\n\nOne more, not for the wretched play upon words, but because it may make\na new Query,--What does it all mean?\n\n    \"Q. Gentlemen, in the preamble to the late Earl of Oxford's\n    patent, I observed, 'And whom they have congratulated upon his\n    escape from the rage of a flagitious parricide.' I desire to\n    know by whom, at what time, and in what manner, the said\n    parricide was to have been committed.\n\n    \"A. Was to have been! He actually was committed--to Newgate.\"\n\nSo much for some of the \"NOTES AND QUEERIES\" (as the word ought to be\nspelt) of a century ago.\n\nM.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nCOLLAR OF SS.\n\n  \"All the ensigns and marks of honour appertaining\n  to persons of highest distinction, are equestrian.\"--_Sabnasins_.\n\nThe interest which attaches to this very ancient and distinguished\nensign of chivalrous honour will excuse the introduction into your pages\nof a fuller dissertation upon the subject than what appears in \"NOTES\nAND QUERIES,\" Nos. 39. and 41., in answer to the several questions put\nby your correspondents B. and [Greek: Ph].\n\nAfter referring to the papers on the Collar of SS., and other collars of\nlivery, published a few years ago in the _Gentleman's Magazine_, and his\nintention to arrange them, and other additional collections on the same\nsubject, in the shape of a small volume, MR. J.G. NICHOLS proceeds to\nsay:\n\n    \"As a direct answer to B.'s question, 'Is there any list of\n    persons who were honoured with that badge, (viz., the Collar of\n    SS.?)', I may reply, No. Persons were not, in fact, 'honoured\n    with the badge,' in the sense that persons are now decorated\n    with stars, crosses, or medals; but the livery collar was\n    _assumed_ by parties holding a certain position. So far as can\n    be ascertained, these were either knights attached to the royal\n    household or service, who wore gold or gilt collars, or esquires\n    in the like position who wore silver collars.\"\n\nFrom the statute for the regulation of apparel, passed in the 2nd year\nof the reign of Henry IV., it is ordained that--\n\n    \"All the sons of the king, dukes, earls, barons, and baronettes,\n    might use the livery of our Lord the King of his collar as well\n    in his absence as in his presence; and that all other knights\n    and esquires should use it only in the presence of the king and\n    not in his absence.\"\n\nThe royal assent to this bill was accompanied with further regulations,\namong which were:\n\n    \"That the dukes, earls, barons, and baronettes of the realm\n    might use the said livery in their counties and elsewhere; and\n    that knights and esquires might use the said livery in going\n    from the hostel of the king and returning, to it, always\n    provided that they did not use it in the counties and countries\n    in which they resided or sojourned.\"\n\nThat the golden Collar of SS. was the undoubted badge or mark of a\nknight (_chevalier, eques auratus seu ordo equestris_, for these words\nrespectively indicate the same grade or dignity of knighthood) all our\nancient heraldic writers allow. But, were it otherwise, the extract from\nthe statute above given shows that MR. NICHOLS is incorrect in stating,\n1st. That there is no list of persons who were honoured with the collar\nof SS.; 2nd. That persons were not honoured with the badge, in the sense\nthat persons are now decorated with stars, crosses, &c.; 3rd. That the\ncollar was _assumed_; and, 4th. That the assumers were, \"so far as can\nbe ascertained, knights holding a certain position,--such as being\nattached to the royal household or service.\"\n\nIt is important to point out these four inaccuracies of MR. NICHOLS'\nreply to B., because it is desirable that his forthcoming volume should\nnot be a heterogeneous collection of notices relating to the Collar of\nSS., mixed up with observations that will only serve the purpose of\ndarkening knowledge upon the subject of which he treats.\n\nThe Collar of SS. is found in great variety of {195} shapes, and at what\nprecise time it became an ensign of equestrian nobility no one can tell.\nCollars were worn at least so far back as the days of Livy (i.e. the\ncommencement of the Christian era); for he recounts that Manlius having\npulled off the collar of a Gaul, took the name of _Torquatus_, and\nafterwards always wore the collar. Such being the case, there is no room\nfor doubting that this ensign formed one of the ornaments of knighthood\nfrom the period of that dignity's earliest introduction into England.\n\nThere is a notion, from the circumstance of \"Soverayne\" being the\nfavourite motto or impress of Henry IV., that the Collar of SS. takes\nits name from the initial letter of that word; and the introduction of\nthe portcullis into the collar, which was the device of the House of\nLancaster, is also considered by some as proof that the collar\noriginated with that king. In the effigies, however, of Henry IV. and\nhis queen, Joan of Navarre, in the Chapel of St. Thomas Becket,\nCanterbury Cathedral, the collar which appears round the neck of the\nqueen (there is none upon that of the king) has no portcullis. And as to\nthe derivations of the name of the collar from \"Soverayne,\" from St.\nSimplicius, from the martyrs of Soissons (viz. St. Crespin and St.\nCrespinian, upon whose anniversary the battle of Agincourt was fought),\nfrom the Countess of Salisbury, of Garter notoriety, from the word\n\"Souvenez\" and, lastly, from Seneschallus or Steward (which latter is\nMR. NICHOLS' notion)--they may all be regarded as mere monkish or\nheraldic gossip.\n\nNicholas Upton, one of our earliest heraldic writers, who was present at\nthe siege of Orleans in 1428, states,--\"Rex etiam scoeie dare solebat\npro signo vel titulo suo unum COLLARIUM de gormettis fremalibus equorum\nde auro vel argento;\" whilst, in a wood-cut engraving of the arms of a\nGerman, Herr Florian Waldauff, of about the time of Albert Durer, are\nthree collars, one of the letters SS. linkings into each other,\nterminating in front with portcullises. Put these notices together and\nthey may be considered sufficient to demolish the Lancastrian origin\ntheory of the collar, on the one hand, and to unfold the true source of\nthe collar's nomenclature on the other, viz. that it comes from the\nS-shaped lever upon the bit of the bridle of the war steed.\n\nTo [Greek: Ph].'s question, \"Who are the persons now privileged to wear\nthese collars?\" MR. NICHOLS answers, \"I believe the reply must be\nconfined to the judges, the Lord Mayor of London, the Lord Mayor of\nDublin, the kings and heralds of arms.\" The privilege of wearing a\nCollar of SS., so far as the various persons enumerated are concerned,\nis a mere official privilege, and can scarcely be cited in reply to\n[Greek: Ph].'s interrogative, except upon the principle, \"Exceptio\nprobat regulam.\" The persons now privileged to wear the ancient golden\nCollar of SS. are the _equites aurati_, or knights (chevaliers) in the\nBritish monarchy, a body which includes all the hereditary order of\nbaronets in England, Scotland, and Ireland, with such of their eldest\nsons, being of age, as choose to claim inauguration as knights. It is\npresumable too that the Collar of SS. is also an incident of the minor\ndegree of knight bachelor (bas-chevalier seu miles-bachillarus); whilst\nthe silver Collar of SS. belongs to every head of a family of ancient\nesquirage quality, bearing arms. It is true, the fashion of wearing the\ncollar, whether gold or silver, may be said to have been in desuetude\nfor centuries. But rights of blood never prescribe; and there are strong\ngrounds to believe that there will again be a general revival of the use\nof such distinctions.\n\nThere are various other points bearing upon the subject of the Collar of\nSS., upon which I wish to offer some remarks, and with your permission I\nwill return to the subject. I cannot, however, conclude without\nobserving, that it would much add to the value of MR. NICHOLS'\ncompilation if he would extend it so as to embrace a description of the\nfloreal coronet of knighthood, the belt of honour, the helmet, scarf,\nring, spars, &c.,--all indeed, that the words \"ad recipiendum a nobis\nARMA MILITARIA\" implied in the ancient proclamations for taking the\norder of knighthood. If MR. NICHOLS, in addition to this, will show also\nwherein the knights of this equestrian quality differed from such\npersons as were distrained \"ad se milites faciendos,\" he will solve a\nnumber of knotty difficulties in heraldic literature, and will enable\nthe public generally to understand that there are many more chivalrous\nrights and privileges inherent in the subject than what is dreamt of in\nthe philosophy either of the court at St. James's, or the college on St.\nBennet's Hill.\n\nARMIGER.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nTENYSON.--COLERIDGE.--EXTRACT FROM BAKER'S MSS. ON BARTH. DODYNGTON, AND\nWILLIAM JENKYN.\n\nThe well-known lines in Tenyson's _Locksley Hall_,--\n\n      \"This is truth the poet sings,\n  That a sorrow's crown of sorrow is, remembering happier things.\"\n\nappear to be taken from Dante (_Inferno_, canto v. Verse 121.),--\n\n      \"nessun maggior dolore,\n  Che ricordarsi del tempo felice\n  Nella miseria.\"\n\nwhich is imitated by other writers, quoted by Mr. Cary. (Chaucer,\n_Troilus and Creseide_, iii. 1626. Marino, _Adone_, c. xiv., st. 100.\nFortinguerra, _Riciardetto_, c. xi. st. 83.)\n\nIn Coleridge's second _Lay Sermon_ (ed. 1839, p. 365.) the passage--\n{196}\n\n    \"What are you,\" (a philosopher was once asked), \"in consequence\n    of your admiration of these abstruse speculations?\" He answered;\n    \"What I am, it does not become me to say; but what thousands\n    are, who despise them, and even pride themselves on their\n    ignorance, I see, and tremble.\"\n\nis a quotation from Schiller (_Werke_, vol. i., p. 414. 1838)\n\n  \"AN DIE MUSE.\n\n  \"Was ich ohne dich w\u00e4re, ich weiss es nicht; aber mir\n          grauet,\n  Seh'ich, was ohne dich Hundert und Tausende sind.\"\n\nIn Appendix (B.) to Coleridge's first _Lay Sermon_ (p. 276.), we read,--\n\n    \"An age or nation may become free from certain prejudices,\n    beliefs, and superstitious practices, in two ways. It may have\n    really risen above them; or it may have fallen below them, and\n    become too bad for their continuance.\"\n\nThough not given as a quotation, this passage is no doubt borrowed from\nBaader, as quoted by Archdeacon Hare in a note to his _Sermons on the\nMission of the Comforter_,--\n\n    \"Nations, like individuals, may get free and rid of certain\n    prejudices, beliefs, customs, abuses, &c., in two ways. They may\n    really have risen above them, or they may have fallen below them\n    and become too bad for them.\"\n\nIn a volume of tracts (Class mark Gg. 5. 27.) in St. John's College\nLibrary, Cambridge, is a copy of Nicolas Carr's edition of the\nOlynthiacs and Philippics of Demosthenes, (4to. London, Henry Denham\n1571.). As Carr died before the work was published, his friends wrote a\nnumber of commemorative pieces in Greek and Latin, prose and verse,\nwhich are annexed to the volume. Amongst the rest, Barth. Dodyngton\nwrote a copy of Greek elegiacs, and a Latin prose epistle. On Dodyngton,\nBaker has written the following note:--\n\n    \"Barthol. Dodyngtonus in Com. Middlesex. natus, admissus fuit\n    Discipulus Coll. Jo. pro Fundatrice an. 1548.--Idem admissus\n    Socius, Apr. 8, an. 1552.--Idem admissus Socius Senior, an.\n    1558.--Idem admissus Socius Major Coll. Trin. Oct. 29, an.\n    1580.\"\n\nIn the same volume is note on Cheke:--\n\n    \"Joan. Cheke admissus Socius Coll. Jo. Cant., Mar. 26, an. 21.\n    Henrici 8'vi.\"\n\nAnother tract in the same volume is \"Exodus, &c., a Sermon Preach't\nSept. 12, 1675. By occasion of the much lamented Death of that Learned\nand Reverend Minister of Christ, Dr. Lazarus Seaman.\"--By William\nJenkyn. After Dr. Seaman's name Baker adds, \"some time Master of Peter\nHouse.\" Of Jenkyn he says: \"Gul. Jenkin Coll. Jo. admissus in Matriculam\nAcademi\u00e6 (designatus Joannensis), Jul. 3, an. 1628.\"\n\nJ.E.B. Mayor.\n\nSt. John's College, Cambridge.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nPARALLEL PASSAGES.\n\nI believe the following have not been hitherto noticed in \"NOTES AND\nQUERIES.\"\n\n  \"Nec mirum, quod divina natura dedit agros, ars\n  humana \u00e6didicavit urbes.\"--Varro, R. R. iii. 1.\n\n  \"God made the country and man made the town,\n  What wonder then,\" &c.--_The Task_, i.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n    \"[Greek: O de Kritias ... ekaleito idiotaes men en philosophois,\n    philosuph s de en idiotais.]\"--_Schol. in Timoeum. Platonis_.\n\n    \"Sparsum memini hominem inter scholasticos insanum, inter sanos\n    scholasticum.\"--Seneca, _Controv_. i 7., _Excerpt. ex Controv._\n    ii.\n\n    \"Lord Chesterfield is a Wit among Lords, and a Lord among\n    Wits.\"--_Johnsoniana_.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n  \"[Greek: Ostis eim ego; Meton,\n  On oiden Hellas cho Kolonos.]\"\n\n  Aristophanes, _The Birds_, 997.\n\n  \"Under the Tropics is our language spoke,\n  And part of Flanders hath received our yoke.\"\n\n  _Martinus Scriblerus_, Ch. xi.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n  \"Pandite, atque aperite propere januam hanc Orci,\n          obsecro:\n   Nam equidem haud aliter esse duco: quippe quo\n          memo advenit\n  Nisi quem spes reliqu\u00eare omnes.\"\n\n  Plautus, _Bacchis_, Act iii Sc. 1.\n\n\n  \"Per me si va nella citt\u00e0 dolente\n\n  Lasciate ogni speranza, voi che intrate.\"\n\n  Dante, _Inferno_, iii. 1-9.\n\nW.B.D.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n\nFOLK LORE.\n\n_Power of Prophecy._--MR. AUG. GUEST (Vol. ii., p. 116.) will perhaps\naccept--as a small tribute to his interesting communication on the\nsubject of that \"power of prophecy\" which I apprehend to be still\nbelieved by many to exist during certain lucid intervals before death--a\nreference to Sir Henry Halford's _Essay on the [Greek: Kausos] of\nAret\u00e6us_. (See Sir H. Halford's _Essays and Orations read and delivered\nat the Royal College of Physicians_, Lond. 1831, pp. 93. et seq.)\n\nJ. Sansom.\n\n\n_Bay Leaves at Funerals._--In some parts of Wales it is customary for\nfunerals to be preceded by a female carrying bays, the leaves of which\nshe sprinkles at intervals in the road which the corpse will traverse.\n\nQuery, Is this custom practised elsewhere; and what is the meaning and\norigin of the use of the bay?\n\nN.P.\n\n\n_Shoes (old) thrown for luck._--Brand, in his _Popular Antiquities_,\nobserves, that it is accounted {197} lucky by the vulgar to throw an old\nshoe after a person when they wish him to succeed in what he is going\nabout. This custom is very prevalent in Norfolk whenever servants are\ngoing in search of new places; and especially when they are going to be\nmarried, a shoe is thrown after them as they proceed to church.\n\nC.P.R.M.\n\nSome years ago, when the vessels engaged in the Greenland whale-fishery\nleft Whitby, in Yorkshire, I observed the wives and friends of the\nsailors to throw old shoes at the ships as they passed the pier-head.\nQuery, What is the origin of this practice?\n\n[Hebrew: T.A.]\n\n_Roasting Mice for Hooping-cough_ is also very common in Norfolk; but I\nam sorry to say that a more cruel superstitious practice is sometimes\ninflicted on the little animal; for it is not many years since I\naccidentally entered the kitchen in time to save a poor little mouse\nfrom being hung up by the tail and roasted alive, as the means of\nexpelling the others of its race from the house. I trust that this\nbarbarous practice will soon be forgotten.\n\nR.G.P.M.\n\n_The Story of Mr. Fox._--Your correspondent F.L., who has related the\nstory of Sir Richard, surnamed Bloody, Baker, is, doubtless, aware of a\nsimilar tale with which Mr. Blakeway furnished my late friend James\nBoswell, and which the latter observed \"is perhaps one of the most happy\nillustrations of Shakspeare that has appeared.\"--(Malone's _Shakspeare_,\nvol. vii. pp. 20. 163.)\n\nThe two narratives of Bloody Baker and Mr. Fox are substantially the\nsame. Variations will naturally creep in when a story is related by word\nof mouth; for instance, the admonition over the chamber in Mr. Fox's\nhouse--\n\n  \"Be bold, be bold! but not too bold\n  Lest that your heart's blood should run cold.\"\n\nis altogether of a more dignified character than the similar warning\ngiven by the parrot, at p. 68. Each of these worthies, Baker and Fox, is\nseen bringing into his house the corpse of a murdered lady, whose hand\nfalls into the lap of the concealed visitor; but in Fox's story the\nornament on the hand is a rich bracelet, in Baker's a ring. The\nassassins are, in both stories, invited to the visitor's house, and upon\nFox _summary_ justice is inflicted.\n\nIt may be asked, if Baker was burned, how came he to have a tomb with\ngloves, helmet, &c., suspended over it in Cranbrook Church? Such honour\nwas not paid to a man of higher rank in Salisbury Cathedral, a murderer\nalso, who was hung, viz., Lord Stourton. Dodsworth tells us that till\nabout 1775, no chivalrous emblems were suspended over the latter, but\nonly a twisted wire, with a noose, emblematic of the halter. Allow me to\nask, What instances have we of tombs or gravestones, as memorials of\nindividuals who have suffered at the _stake_, exclusive of those\nmonuments which in after times may have been raised in honour of\ndistinguished martyrs at the Reformation?\n\nJ.H.M.\n\nBath.\n\n_Baptismal Superstition._--In the north of England, when several\nchildren are brought to be baptized at the same time, great anxiety is\nshown by the people lest the girls should take the precedence of the\nboys; in which case it is believed the latter, when arrived at man's\nestate, would be beardless.\n\nE.H.A.\n\n_Rushbearing_ (Vol. i., p 259.).--Wednesday, July 21, 1847, Grasmere\nChurch was decorated with ribbons, which had some reference to the\nrushbearing which had taken place on the preceding Sunday.\n\nIt takes place at Ambleside one Sunday later.\n\n_Extract from Black's \"Guide to the Lakes,\" p. 43._\n\n    \"An interesting ceremony takes place at Ambleside once every\n    year, which the stranger may think himself fortunate in seeing,\n    not so much for the mere sight itself, though that is pretty\n    enough, as for its being the vestige of a very ancient\n    observance. The ceremony alluded to is called Rushbearing. On\n    the eve of the last Sunday in July, the village girls walk in\n    procession to the chapel bearing garlands of flowers (formerly\n    rushes), which are there tastefully disposed. After service, the\n    day following, these are removed, and it is usual that a sermon,\n    in allusion to the event, be preached. This observance is\n    probably as remote as the age of Gregory IV., who is known to\n    have recommended to the early disseminators of Christianity in\n    this country, that on the anniversary of the dedication of\n    churches wrested from the Pagans, the converts should build\n    themselves huts of the boughs of trees about their churches, and\n    celebrate the solemnities with religious feasting. In former\n    times, the rushes were spread upon the floor of the sacred\n    edifice, and the garlands remained until withered. Possibly the\n    practice of covering the floors of buildings with rushes by way\n    of protection against the damp earth, may have had something to\n    do with keeping the custom in existence, long after the origin\n    of the institution had been forgotten. The ceremony of\n    Rushbearing has now fallen into complete disuse, except in a few\n    secluded hamlets in Westmoreland, and in one or two other places\n    in the kingdom; nor can that disuse be much regretted, since\n    what was founded as a religious act, every where degenerated\n    into an occasion for unseemly revelry, in fact, into a sort of\n    rustic saturnalia. And yet, when we look at this remain of the\n    olden time, as observed at Ambleside, we are tempted to say with\n    the poet,--\n\n                  \"'Many precious rites\n      And customs of our rural ancestry\n      Are gone or stealing from us: _this_, I hope\n      Will last for ever.'\"\n\n       *       *       *       *       * {198}\n\nQUERIES.\n\nWHO WROTE SHAKSPEARE'S HENRY VIII.?\n\nI had no sooner read the title of an essay in the current number of the\n_Gentleman's Magazine_, \"Who wrote Shakspeare's Henry VIII.?\" than I\nbecame aware that I had been anticipated in at least the publication of\na discovery I made three or four years ago, but for the making known of\nwhich a favourable opportunity had not occurred. The fact is, that I was\nanxious to arrive at a more satisfactory conclusion than has yet\npresented itself to me, and a paper on the subject commenced more than\ntwo years ago, I, with this feeling, laid aside. My present object is to\nstrengthen the argument of the writer in the _Gentleman's Magazine_, by\nrecording the fact that I, having no communication with him, or\nknowledge of him, even of his name, should have arrived at exactly the\nsame conclusion as his own. That conclusion is (should any of your\nreaders not have seen the article referred to), that Fletcher has at\nleast an equal claim with Shakspeare to the authorship of _Henry VIII_.\n\nIn the unfinished paper to which I have alluded, having asked how it was\nthat, with so much to be learned personal to Shakspeare from his works,\nour criticism was so limited, and having stated it to be my intention to\nconfine myself to the simple inquiry, \"_What did Shakspeare really\nwrite?_\" I continued:\n\n    \"To those who consider the text as having been settled 'by\n    authority,' this question may seem superfluous; but, not to\n    refer to plays of very early date, in connection with which we\n    could bring forward facts that, we doubt not, would be\n    considered sufficiently startling; we now state it as our belief\n    that a great portion of the play of _Henry VIII_.--nay, more\n    than half, was _not_ written by Shakspeare.\"\n\nMy intention now is not to enter into any argument in support of this\nview, but to state the results, which will be shown in the following\nextract from my note-book:\n\n_Henry VIII._\nAct I.  Scene 1. Shakspeare.\n           \"  2.    Ditto.\n           \"  3. Fletcher.\n           \"  4.    Ditto.\nAct II.    \"  1.    Ditto.\n           \"  2.    Ditto.\n           \"  3. Shakspeare.\n           \"  4.    Ditto.\nAct III.   \"  1. Fletcher.\n           \"  2. Shakspeare, (ending with 'what\n                                appetite you have.')\n           \"  2. Fletcher, (beginning from the\n                                            above.)\nAct IV.    \"  1.    Ditto.\n           \"  2.    Ditto.\nAct V.  Scene 1. Shakspeare\n           \"  2. Fletcher.\n           \"  3.    Ditto.\n           \"  4.    Ditto.\nPrologue and Epilogue, Ditto.\n\nSo far all is clear, and in this apportionment Mr. Urban's correspondent\nand myself are agreed. My conviction here is as complete as it is of my\nown identity. But beyond, at present, all is dark; I cannot understand\nthe arrangement; and I doubt if my friend, who has treated the question\nwith so much ability, is altogether satisfied with his own explanation.\n\nIn the meanwhile, I would suggest one or two points for consideration.\nIn those parts which I have set down as Shakspeare's, and in which this\nwriter imagines he occasionally detects \"a third hand,\" does the metre\ndiffer materially from that of Shakspeare's early plays?\n\nIt will be observed that, in Act iii., Scene 2., there are _two_\nfarewells, the second being a kind of amplification of the first; both,\nhowever, being in the part which I ascribe to Fletcher. Is it not\nprobable that these were written at different periods? And supposing\nFletcher to have improved his part, might there not originally have been\na stronger analogy than now appears between this play and the _Two Noble\nKinsmen_?\n\nThe more it is tested the brighter shines out the character of\nShakspeare. The flatteries of James and Elizabeth may now go packing\ntogether. The following four lines which I have met with in no other\nedition of Shakspeare than Mr. Collier's, are worth any one of his plays\nfor their personal value; they show how he could evade a compliment with\nthe enunciation of a general truth that yet could be taken as a\ncompliment by the person for whom it was intended:\n\n  _Shakspeare on the King._\n\n  \"Crowns have their compass; length of days their date;\n  Triumphs, their tomb; felicity her fate;\n  Of nought but earth can earth make us partaker,\n  But knowledge makes a king most like his Maker.\"\n\nSamuel Hickson.\n\nAugust 12. 1850.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nMINOR QUERIES.\n\n_The Abb\u00e9 Strickland._--In the third volume of the _Castlereagh\nCorrespondence_, an Abb\u00e9 Strickland figures as a negotiator between the\nEnglish Catholics and the court of Rome. His name is also mentioned\nunfavourably in the \"_Quarterly_\" review of that work. Will some of your\nreaders direct me where further information can be had of him, and his\nultimate destination?\n\nJ.W.H. {199}\n\n_Aerostation, Works on._--Will you have the goodness to inquire for me\namong your readers and contributors, for the _titles of any works\non_--or references to good _articles in encyclopaedias or dictionaries_\non--or for remarkable isolated passages relating to--_Aerostation_, or\nthe arts of, or attempts at, flying, either by means of mechanical\nwings, &c., or by the aid of balloons.\n\nC.B.M.\n\n_Pilgrims' Road to Canterbury._--Can any of the readers of \"Notes and\nQueries\" point out the route which was pursued by Chaucer and his\nfellow-travellers on the pilgrimage which his genius has immortalised?\nIs the route of the old pilgrims' road laid down upon any early maps?\n(it is not, I believe, marked on the Ordnance Survey;) and would it be\npossible to traverse it at the present time? Any hints upon these\npoints, and any references to objects of interest on the line of road\ninquired after, will be thankfully received by\n\nPhilo-Chaucer.\n\n\"_\u00c6dricus qui signa fundebat._\"--In a chronicle of Battel Abbey,\ncompiled in the twelfth century, there is a list of the abbey's tenants\nin the town of Battel. Among many such names as Gilbertus Textor,\nGodwinus Cocus, Rotbertus filius Siflet, Rotbertus de Havena, I find\nthat of \"\u00c6dricus qui signa fundebat.\" As this phrase is susceptible of\nseveral widely different renderings, I shall be grateful to any of your\ningenious readers who will give me their opinions as to its actual\nmeaning. I may add that \u00c6dric was living about the year 1170, so that\nthe phrase can have no reference to events connected with the battle of\nHastings.\n\nM.A. Lower.\n\nLewes, July 30. 1850.\n\n_Osmund the Waterman._--In his description of the _Flowering Fern\n(Osmunda regalis)_, Mr. Newman observes, that \"the rhizoma [root-stock],\nwhen cut through, has a whitish centre or core, called by old Gerarde in\nhis _Herbal_, 'the heart of Osmund the waterman.' My lore is\ninsufficient to furnish my readers with the history of the said Osmund.\"\n(_History of British Ferns_, by Ed. Newman, 2nd ed., p. 334.) Can any of\n_your_ readers supply this deficiency?\n\nJ.M.B.\n\n_Logic._--What is the earliest printed book on logic? meaning the first\nwhich gives the common theory of the syllogism. Does it contain the\ncelebrated words _Barbara, Celarent_, &c. The difficulty will probably\narise from this, that each book has some _undated_ editions which are\nprobably earlier than the dated ones. Of books with dates there is the\nexposition of Petrus Hispanus by Joh. Versor, in 1473, and the _Summul\u00e6_\nof Paulus Venetus, in 1474; the first I find in Hain (who had not seen\nit), the second I have seen. Can any one of your readers go farther\nback?\n\nM.\n\n_Darvon Gatherall?_--Can any reader adduce further information\nrespecting an image, called _Darvon Gatherall_, brought from Wales at\nthe Reformation, than what is mentioned in one of the treatises\npublished by the Camden Society?\n\nW. Bell.\n\n_Damasked Linen._--I should feel obliged for any information on the\nearliest specimen of tablecloths being \"damasked,\" and the history of\nthat manufacture. I have lately had shown me as \"family curiosities\" a\nbeautiful \"damask service\" of Flemish or Dutch work. The centre\ncontained a representation of St. George and the Dragon. The hero is\nattired in the costume of the latter part of the seventeenth century\n(?), with it cocked hat and plume, open sleeves and breeches, heavy\nshoes and spurs: with this motto in German characters over him,\n\n  [German: Ben Gott ist Rath und That,]\n  \"With God is counsel and deed.\"\n\nAt each corner of the cloth and napkins is a representation of a female\nfigure kneeling on a rock, with clasped hands, with a lamb by her side\n(Query, St. Agnes?) On the border, at the top and bottom, St. George is\nfigured in armour stabbing with a spear an alligator; and then with a\nsword, in the act of killing a bear.\n\nOn the side borders, he is receiving the attack of a lion on his arm,\ncovered with a mantle; and then, with a raised sword, cutting at the\nproboscis of an elephant. I have seen, also, an older specimen, I think,\nof the same manufacture; the subject being the \"Bear and Ragged Staff,\"\non alternate rows, with figures of trumpeters. I know not if this\nsubject is of sufficient interest for your \"Notes and Queries,\" but I\ntrust you will make what use of it you please.\n\nR.G.P.M.\n\n_Flourish._--We are told that a writer _flourished_ at such and such a\ntime. Is any definite notion attached to this word? When it is said of a\ncentury there is no difficulty; it means that the writer was born and\ndied in that century. But when we are told that a writer flourished\nabout the year 1328 (such limitation of florescence is not uncommon),\nwhat is then meant? What are we to understand he did in or about 1328?\n\nM.\n\n_Drax Abbey and Free School._--Can you, or any of your intelligent\ncontributors, direct me where I can find any records of Drax Abbey, near\nSelby, Yorkshire, or of the Free School in Drax, endowed by Robert Reed,\nwhom tradition states to heave been a foundling amongst the _reeds_ on\nthe banks of the Ouse, about half a mile distant. Such information will\nplace me under great obligation.\n\nT. Dyson.\n\nGainsboro.\n\n_Ancient Catalogue of Books._--A few days since I made the acquisition\nof a curious old catalogue {200} of books, interleaved, and containing\nabout 200 pages, with the following title:\n\n    \"Catalogus Variorum, in quavis Facultate et materia Librorum\n    incompactum Officin\u00e6 Joannis Maire, quorum Auctio public\u00e8\n    habebitur in \u00e6dibus Joannis Maire, hora octav\u00e2 matutin\u00e2 et\n    secund\u00e2 postmeridiana ad diem ----, 1661. Lugduni Batavorum, ex\n    Typographia Nicolai Herculis, 1661.\"\n\nOn the back is the following notice to \"buyers:\"\n\n    \"Monitos volumus Emptores, hosce Libros e\u00e2 vendi conditione, ut\n    cum eorum traditione pretium pr\u00e6senti pecuni\u00e2 persolvatur. Et si\n    quis Libros \u00e0 se emptos intra sex septimanarum spatium, \u00e0 prim\u00e0\n    Auctionis die numerandum, \u00e0 Bibliopola non exegerit, eos cum\n    emptoris prioris damno aliis vendere integrum erit ac licitum.\n\n    \"Monentur etiam et rogantur, ut ant\u00e8 meridiem ad hor\u00e6 octav\u00e6,\n    post meridiem vero ad secund\u00e6 punctum pr\u00e6sentes sese sistere\n    dignentur.\"\n\nCan any of your readers give me particulars about this John Maire?\n\nW.J.\n\nHavre.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n\nREPLIES.\n\nSHAKSPEARE'S USE OF THE WORD \"DELIGHTED.\"\n\n(Vol. ii., pp. 113. 139.)\n\nAlthough Mr. Hickson's notion of the meaning of _delight_, in the three\npassages of Shakspeare he has cited, is somewhat startling, it was not\nto be summarily rejected without due examination; and yet, from a\ntolerably extensive acquaintance with old English phraseology, I fear I\ncannot flatter him with the expectation of having it confirmed by\ninstances from other writers.\n\nI believe that _lighted_ is rather an unusual form to express\n_lightened_, _disencumbered_, but that it was sometimes used is\napparent; for in Hutton's _Dictionary_, 1583, we have \"Allevo, to make\nlight, to light.\"--\"Allevatus, lifted up, _lighted_.\" And in the\n_Cambridge Dictionary_, 1594, \"Allevatus, lifted up, _lighted_, raised,\neased or recovered.\" The use of the prefix _de_ in the common instance\nof _depart_ for to _part_, _divide_, is noticed by Mr. Hickson; and\n_demerits_ was used for _merits_ by many of our old writers as well as\nShakspeare. I find _decompound_ for _compound_ in Heylyn's\n_Microcosmos_, 1627, p. 249., thus:--\"The English language is a\n_decompound_ of Dutch, French, and Latin.\"\n\nThese instances may serve to show that it is not at all improbable\nShakspeare may have used _delighted_ for _lighted==lightened==freed from\nincumbrance_; and it must be confessed that the sense and spirit of the\npassage in _Measure for Measure_ would be much improved by taking this\nview of it.\n\nOn the other hand, it certainly does appear that the poet uses the\ntermination _-ed_ for _-ing_, in the passages cited by Mr. Halliwell,\nwhere we have profess_ed_ for profess_ing_, becom_ed_ for becom_ing_,\nguil_ed_ for guil_ing_, brood_ed_ for brood_ing_, and deform_ed_ for\ndeform_ing_: it was not unreasonable, therefore, to conclude that he had\ndone so in these other instances, and that delight_ed_ stood for\ndelight_ing_, and not for delight_ful_, as Mr. Halliwell implies. How\nfar the grammatical usages of the poet's time may have authorised this\nhas not yet been shown; but it appears also that the converse is the\ncase, and that he has used the termination _-ing_ for _-ed_; e.g.\nlong_ing_ for long_ed_, all-obey_ing_ for all-obey_ed_, discontent_ing_\nfor discontent_ed_, multiply_ing_ for multipli_ed_, unrecall_ing_, for\nunrecall_ed_. Dr. Crombie (_Etymology and Syntax of the English\nlanguage_, p. 150.) says:\n\n    \"The participle in _ed_ I consider to be perfectly analogous to\n    the participle in _ing_, and used like it in either an active or\n    passive sense, belonging, therefore, neither to the one voice\n    nor the other exclusively.\"\n\nSupposing for a moment that Shakspeare used delight_ed_ for\ndelight_ing_, the sense of the passages would, I presume, be in _Measure\nfor Measure_, \"the spirit affording delight;\" in _Othello_, \"if virtue\nwant no beauty affording delight;\" in _Cymbeline_, \"the gifts delighting\nmore from being delayed.\" Here we have a simple, and, in the last two\ninstances, I think, a more satisfactory meaning than Mr. Hickson's sense\nof _lightened_, _disencumbered_, affords, even could it be more\nunquestionably established.\n\nI have, however, met with a passage in Sir Philip Sidney's _Arcadia_\n(ed. 1598, p. 294.) which might lead to a different interpretation of\n_delighted_ in these passages, and which would not, perhaps, be less\nstartling than that of Mr. Hickson.\n\n    \"All this night (in despite of darknesse) he held his eyes open;\n    and in the morning, when the _delight_ began to restore to each\n    body his colour, then with curtains bar'd he himselfe from the\n    enjoying of it; neither willing to feele the comfort of the day,\n    nor the ease of the night.\"\n\nHere, _delight_ is apparently used for _the return of light_, and the\nprefix _de_ is probably only intensive. Now, presuming that Shakspeare\nalso used _delighted_ for _lighted_, _illuminated_ the passage in\n_Measure for Measure_ would bear this interpretation: \"the delighted\nspirit, i.e., the spirit _restored to light_,\" freed from \"that dark\nhouse in which it long was pent.\" In _Othello_, \"if virtue lack no\ndelighted beauty,\" i.e. \"_want not the light of beauty_, your son-in-law\nshows far more fair than black.\" Here the opposition between _light_ and\n_black_ is much in its favour. In _Cymbeline_, I must confess it is not\nquite so clear: \"to make my gifts, by the dark uncertainty attendant\nupon delay, more lustrous (delighted), more radiant when given,\" is not\nmore satisfactory than Mr. {201} HICKSON'S interpretation of this\npassage. But is it necessary that _delighted_ should have the same\nsignification in all the three passages? I think not.\n\nThese are only suggestions, of course, but the passage from Sidney is\ncertainly curious, and, from the correct and careful manner in which the\nbook is printed, does not appear to be a corruption. I have not seen the\nearlier editions. I have only further to remark, that none of our old\nauthorities favour DR. KENNEDY'S suggestion, \"that the word represents\nthe Latin participle _delectus_.\"\n\nSince the above was written, Mr. HICKSON'S reply to MR. HALLIWELL has\nreached me, upon which I have only to observe that he will find _to\nguile_ was used as a verb. Thus in Gower, _Confessio Amantis_, fo. 135.\ned. 1532:\n\n  \"For often he that will begyle,\n  Is _gyled_ with the same gyle,\n  And thus the gyler is begyled.\"\n\nWe most probably had the word from the old French _Guiller_=tromper, and\nthe proverb is to the purpose:--\n\n  \"Qui croit de _Guiller_ Guillot, Guillot le Guile.\"\n\nHorne Tooke's fanciful etymology cannot be sustained. MR. HICKSON'S\nexplanation of \"guiled shore,\" is, however, countenanced by the\nfollowing passage in _Tarquin and Lucrece_:--\n\n  \"To me came Tarquin armed, so _beguil'd_\n  With outward honesty, but yet defil'd\n  With inward vice.\"\n\nMR. HICKSON has, I think, conferred a singular favour in calling\nattention to these perplexing passages in our great poet and these\nremarks, like his own, are merely intended as hints which may serve to\nelicit the _true_ interpretation.\n\nS.W. SINGER.\n\nMickleham, August 20. 1850.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nFAMILY OF LOVE.\n\nI do not know whether the following Notes on \"The Family of Love\" will\nbe deserving a place in the pages of \"NOTES AND QUERIES;\" as I may\npossibly have been anticipated in much of what I send.\n\nThe Family of Love attracted notice as early as 1575, but not in such a\nmanner as to call for direct coercion. An apology was published for\nthem, from which it might be inferred that they possessed no distinct\nopinions, but merely bound themselves to a more exalted interpretation\nof Christian duties, on the principle of imitating the great love of God\nmanifested in their creation and retention. This principle, unrestrained\nby any confession of faith or system of discipline, naturally attracted\nto it the loose and irregular spirits that were at that time so\nprevalent, and the sect became the receptacle for every variety of\nopinion and disorder, exposing itself to more particular notice from its\ncontempt for outward observances, and its opposition to the civil\ngovernment. The _Evangelium Regni_ of Henry Nicholas, the acknowledged\nfounder of the sect, is written in such a manner as to include all\nreligious persuasions, and permits all parties to hold whatever\nsentiments they please, if they merely declare themselves _members of\nthe Family of Love_.\n\n    \"Omnes vos, O amatores veritatis! qui amabilem vitam charitatis\n    diligitis vocatmini et invitamini.\" (cap. 41.) ... \"Omnes\n    peribunt, qui extra Christum extra communionem charitatis\n    manent.\" (Ibid.)\n\nA confutation of this sect was written in the year 1579; the privy\ncouncil called upon the convocation of the year 1580 to notice it. We\nfind the sect still described in the publications of 1641, and\ncontinuing under the same name with its preachers and congregations in\n1645.\n\nBp. Cooper, in speaking of the sect in 1589 (_Admonition, &c._, p.\n146.), terms them \"that peevish faction of the 'Familie of Love,' which\nhave been breeding in this realm the space of these thirty years.\"\n\nFuller (_Ch. Hist._, 17th cent., p. 610.) says that in his time \"they\nhad obtained the name of Ranters.\"\n\nLeslie, in his _Works_ (vol. ii. p. 609.), considers the sect \"identical\nwith that of the Quakers.\"\n\nThat this was not the case is evident, I conceive, from George Fox, the\nfather of the Quakers, having severely chastised this \"Family of Love,\"\nbecause they would take an oath, dance, sing, and be cheerful. See\nSewel's _History of the Quakers_, iii. p. 88, 89, 344.\n\nThe founder of the sect, Henry Nicolai, was born at Munster, and\ncommenced his career about 1546 in the Netherlands; thence he passed\nover to England, in the latter years of Edward VI.'s life, and joined\nthe Dutch congregation. But his sect did not become visible till some\ntime in the reign of Elizabeth.\n\nIn 1575 they presented a confession of their faith to parliament, along\nwith a number of their books, and prayed toleration.\n\nNicolai, or Nicolas, their founder, published a number of tracts and\nletters in Dutch for the edification of his followers: and now I will\npropose a Query, in hopes that some of your correspondents will solve\nit. Is there extant any list of their writings as presented to\nparliament in 1575, and has their confession been published, and when?\nPerhaps the following works, none of which I am able to consult, would\nfurnish the means of solving my Query, all of which treat of the\nsubject:--\n\n    J. Hombeck's _Summa Controversiarum._ Godfr. Arnold's _Kirchen-\n    und Kitzer-historie._ Ant. Wilh. Bohm's _Englische\n    Reformations-historie._ Schroekh's _Kirchengesch. seit der\n    Reformation._\n\n{202}\n\nThese sources would, I conceive, be useful to N.B., who inquires into\ntheir tenets and lives.\n\nI find I have omitted to mention one of their assailants, \"the last and\nmost learned,\" Henry More, the English divine. See his _Mystery of\nGodliness_, book vi., chap. 12-18.\n\n[Hebrew: SP'T]\n\n_The Family of Love._--In addition to the work of John Rogers, referred\nto by DR. RIMBAULT (Vol. ii., p. 49.), the two following treatises,\nwhich were also published in the year 1579, will present your readers\nwith much curious information respecting the \"Family of Love.\" The first\nis entitled,--\n\n    \"A Confutation of certaine Articles delivered unto the Familye\n    of Loue, with the exposition of Theophilus, a supposed elder in\n    the sayd Familye, upon the same Articles, by William Wilkinson,\n    Maister of Artes, and student of Divinitye, &c. &c. At London:\n    Printed by John Daye, dwelling ouer Aldersgate, Au. 1579.\"\n\nIn the _Epistle Dedicatorie_, dated Cambridge, September 30, 1579, and\naddressed to Richard (Cox), Bishop of Ely, the author describes the new\ndoctrine as,--\n\n    \"The most pestiferous and deadly Heresie of all others, because\n    there is not almost any one particular erroneous and\n    schismaticall phantasie, whereof the _Familie of Loue_ hath not\n    borrowed one braunche or other thereof, to peece vnto themselves\n    this their Religion.\"\n\nA passage is then added which may serve in some measure as a reply to\nN.B. (Vol. ii., p. 89.) It seems to slow that, however vile might be the\ntheology of this sect, their morals were not at least publicly\noffensive.\n\n    \"The encrease of this _Familie_ is great, and that dayly,\n    because the withstanders are not many; the defenders are wily as\n    serpentes, and would fayne in lyfe seeme innocent and\n    vnblameable. In profession of the one they boast very much: of\n    the other they walkyng very closely do iustifie themselues,\n    because fewe haue to finde fault with them, yet haue they their\n    lothsome spottes and ougly deformities, as in this booke to the\n    diligent reader playnely may appeare.\"\n\nThe \"lothsome spottes\" here intended are the 13th and 14th articles of\nWilkinson's indictment. They run as follows;--\n\n    (1.) \"H.N. (i.e. Henry Nicholas) saith, It is lawfull for one of\n    his Familie to dissemble,\" (i.e., to conceal his religion when\n    questioned by the magistrate); and (2.) \"H.N. maketh God the\n    Author of sinne, and the sinner guiltless,\" (but no proof is\n    alleged that this speculative impiety was carried out into\n    actual life).\n\nThe title of the second treatise to which I alluded is--\n\n    \"A Confutation of monstrous and horrible Heresies, taught by\n    H.N., and embraced of a number who call themselves the Familie\n    of Love, by I. Knewstub. Imprinted in London, at the Three\n    Cranes in the Vinctree, by Thomas Dawson, for Richard Sergies.\n    1579.\"\n\nHe characterises the doctrine of the \"Familists\" as--\n\n    \"A masse or packe of Poperie, Arianisme, Anabaptisme, and\n    Libertinisme. Respecting their morals we are told, that although\n    for their loosenesse of life, they are from the toppe to the toe\n    nothing but blottes, yet bragge they of all perfection, euen\n    vnto a verie deifying of themselues.\"\n\nSome further light is thrown upon this point by a letter sent to\nKnewstub from a \"godly learned man, W.C.\" He says,--\n\n    \"Howsoeuer, they seduce some goodly and zealous men and women of\n    honest and godly conuersation, placing them at the porch of\n    their synagogue to make a shewe of holinesse, and to stand there\n    as baites and stalles to deceiue others; yet, alas! who can\n    without blushing vtter the shame that is committed in the\n    inwarde roomes, and as it were in the heart of that synagogue of\n    Satan.\"\n\nAppended to Knewstub's book is a further--\n\n    \"Confutation of the doctrine of Dauid George, and H.N., the\n    father of the Familie of Loue, by M. Martyn Micronius, minister\n    of the woorde in the Dutche Churche, at London.\"\n\nIt was originally written in Latin during the reign of Edward VI. The\nauthor charges the \"Familists\" with maintaining that--\n\n    \"Idolatry, superstition, and outwarde vices are free and pure\n    vnto them, which, vnder the pretence of a certaine fayth and\n    inwarde puritie, boast that they knowe no sinne in the heart.\"\n    (Fo. 87 b.)\n\nTwo features particularly distinguish them from other sectaries of the\nage: they professed obedience to the civil magistrate, whatever might be\nhis religion; and they argued in favour of unlimited toleration both in\nregard to themselves and others.\n\nC.H.\n\nSt. Catharine's Hall, Cambridge.\n\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nTRANSLATION OF THE PHILOBIBLON.\n\nL.S. (Vol. ii, p. 153.) inquires for a \"translation of Robert de Bury's\n_Philobiblon_.\" An English version of this famous treatise by Richard,\nnot Robert Aungerville (see, for the surname, Pits, p. 467.) de Bury,\nBishop of Durham in 1333, was published by Mr. Rodd in the year 1832.\nThe translator has not given his name, but he was Mr. John Bellingham\nInglis, formerly a partner in the house of Inglis, Ellis, and Co. It is\ngreatly to be desired that there should be a careful reprint of this\nmost interesting work, and that the first edition of 1473 should be\ncollated with MSS. The translation by Mr. Inglis might be revised, and\nmade to accompany the Latin text. Let us hope, however, that his notes,\nif they be permitted again to appear, may be purified from scepticism\nand profaneness.\n\nThe claim of Holcot to be the author of this tract, should be well\nconsidered and decided upon; {203} and the errors of the learned\nFabricius (who had a manuscript copy in which the writer was styled\n\"Muiegervile\", instead of Aungerville), which have been repeated by\nMansi, should be corrected. Dr. James, the first Bodleian librarian,\nfell into a strange mistake when he imagined that his inaccurate reprint\nat Oxford, in 1599, was the _second_ edition of this treatise. It was in\nreality the _fourth_, having been preceded by the impressions, Colon.\n1473; Spir\u00e6, 1483; and Paris, 1500. So far as I remember, the editio\nprinceps has not been specified by Gough. (_Brit. Topog_. ii. 121.)\n\nR.G.\n\nI find I can answer the Query of L.S. (Vol. ii., p. l53.), who asks,\n\"Where can I procure a _translation_ of Robert de Bury's _Philobiblon_?\"\n\nA translation was published by Mr. Rodd, in 1832, of which the following\nis the title:--\n\n    \"Philobiblon: a Treatise on the Love of Books, by Richard de\n    Bury, Bishop of Durham, written in MCCCXLIV; and translated from\n    the first Edition, MCCCCLXXIII, with some Collations. London:\n    Printed for Thomas Rodd, 2 Great Newport Street, Leicester\n    Square, 1832.\"\n\nThis translation is a small 8vo. volume, of which there is a copy in the\nDouce collection in the Bodleian; at the beginning of which copy, on a\nfly-leaf, the words, \"J.B. Inglis to his friend F. Douce, Esq.,\" are\nwritten; and opposite, on the inside of the cover, there is written in\npencil, apparently in Douce's own hand, \"I had read the MS. of this work\nbefore it was printed.\"\n\nThere appears to have existed some difference of opinion with respect to\nthe authorship of the _Philobiblon_. Leland, in his _Itinerary_, ed.\n8vo. Oxford 1744, vol. iii. pp. 77, 78, sub loc. _Saresbyri_, says,--\n\n    \"Ex tabella in Sacello S. Mari\u00e6. Orate pro anima Ricbardi Poure,\n    quondam Sarum Episcopi.\" ...\n\n    \"Qui quidem Richardus Episcopus postea translatus fuit ad\n    Episcopatum Dunelmensem ... Incipit Prologus in Philobiblon\n    Richardi Dunelmensis Episcopi, _quem librum compilavit Robertus\n    Holcot_ de Ord. Pr\u00e6dicatorum _sub nomine dicti Episcopi_.\"\n\nStill, however, in the appendix to vol. iv. of the _Itinerary_, p. 164.,\nit is said:--\n\n    \"Richardus de _Bury_, alias _Angravyle_ dictus, episc. Dunelm.,\n    scripsit Philobiblon.\"\n\nUpon Leland's authority, the Bodleian catalogue ascribes the work in\nquestion to Robertus Holcot. Watt, however (_Bibl. Brit._), seems to\nimagine R. de Bury and Holcot to be the same person. His words are (vol.\ni. c. 176 ):--\"Bury, Richard. Dunelm., _alias_ Robertus Holcot, Bishop\nof Durham, and Chancellor and Treasurer of England, in the reign of\nEdward III.;\" and again, under Holcot's name, \"Holcot, Robert, _or_\nRichard D. Bury.\"\n\nThe translator (J.B. Inglis) distinguishes in his Preface between these\ncontemporary writers, and considers R. de Bury to be the undoubted\nauthor of this work passing under his name. In corroboration of his\nopinion, Mr. Inglis refers to the _Biographical and Retrospective\nMiscellany_; and, in order to prove that the work was finished in the\nauthor's lifetime, he produces the words:\n\n    \"Quod opus (Philobiblon) Aucklandi\u00e6 in habitatione sua\n    complevit, 24 die Januarii, anno a communis salutis origine\n    1344, \u00e6tatis su\u00e6 58, et 11 su\u00e6 pontificatus.\"\n\nand then adds:\n\n    \"He died 14 April, 1345. Holcot died in 1349.\"\n\nThere appears to be some confusion about the _editions_, also, of the\n_Philobiblon_. There is an edition, 4to. Par., apud Gaspar. Philippum,\n1500; also edit. _secund_. 4to. Oxoni\u00e6, 1598; and it is printed in the\n_Philolog. Epist. ex Bibl. Melch. Goldasti_, ed. Lipsi\u00e6, 1674. But prior\nto all these is the edition \"printed at Cologne, 1473,\" from which the\n_translation_ is made, and which is described by Watt as \"the editio\nprinceps, and a work of uncommon rarity.\"\n\nQuery. Why does the Oxford edition of 1598 call itself \"editio\n_secundo_?\" If the Paris edit. of 1500 so far differ from that of 1473\nas to entitle it to be considered a different work, had the second MS.\npassed through Holcot's hands?\n\nJ. SANSOM.\n\nThe translation of Richard de Bury's _Philobiblon_, by Mr. Inglis,\nprinted in 1832 for the late Mr. Rodd, is an unsatisfactory performance.\nThe version is bald and spiritless, and some of the best passages of the\noriginal are rendered in language that does no justice to the author's\nmeaning. His style is so peculiar, so allusive, and so full of metaphor\nand quotation, and the work is luminous with \"the sparks of so many\nsciences,\" that a good translation is a desideratum.\n\nI may inform your correspondent that one has lately been prepared and is\nannounced for publication, with a memoir of the illustrious bishop. I\nmay add that the _Philobiblon_ has been six times printed: the last\nedition, if I remember rightly, was by Dr. James: but some old MS.\ncopies of this remarkable treatise on the Love of Books exist, with some\nof which the text used by the translator should be collated. But, of the\npublication announced, it would not become me to say anything more, as\nthe biographer is\n\nYour faithful servant,\n\nW.S.G.\n\nNewcastle-upon-Tyne.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nETYMOLOGICAL QUERIES.\n\n(Vol. ii., p. 153.)\n\nThe very satisfactory replies of Mr. WAY to some of the Queries of J.\nMN., given at p. 169-70., make us wish for more, which I trust we shall\nhave, should he be supplied with the context in which the words occur;\nwithout which it is difficult {204} to elucidate them fully. In the\nmeantime, I venture a few suggestions on some of the remaining words.\n\n    \"In the fever or the _berebarde_,\"\n\n    \"_Berbi_, O.F., chancre, dartre; a _boil, bubo_, or _tetter_,\n    commonly attendant upon pestilent fever. 'Correpta fuit\n    vehementissima febri. Subtus ejus axillis detectis quoque\n    _Bubonibus_, magnam duritiem ac timorem pr\u00e6 se\n    ferentibus.'\"--_Miraculi S. Francisci Solani, A.S._, tom. v.,\n    Julii, p. 909.\n\n(See Bullein's _Dialogue bothe pleasant and pitiful, wherein is a goalie\nregimente against the Fever Pestilence_, &c., 1578.)\n\n\"_Deale_,\" if an interjection (?), may possibly stand for \"_De\u00e2_,\" or\n\"_Ouy De\u00e2_, Yes, truly! verily!\" &c. (See Cotgrave in v. _De\u00e2_.)\n\n\"_Schunche away_\".--To _shun_ or _shunche_ is used for to _shove_, in\nSussex. \"I _shunched_ him away.\"\n\n\"Wear no iron, nor haircloth, nor _irspilles felles_\"--that is, no\n_skins having hard or bristly hair_ like that of goats.\n\n\"HIRCIPILUS, Durorum pilorum homines sicut hirci.\"--_Festus_.\n\nHere the context clearly leads to this interpretation.\n\n_Sabraz_, or _sabras_, is a _decoction_ or _infusion_. One of the\nnumerous terms which the apothecaries adopted from the Arabic, in which\n_shabra_ is a drink.\n\n_Sabe_, in O.F.; _saba_, Ital., an inspissated juice or decoction.\n\n    \"_Sabaricio_, a kind of strong drinke made of barley.\"\n\nI doubt whether Ducange is right in explaining _sabrierium_ in the\nfollowing passage, by _condimentum_, Gallic\u00e8 _saupiquet_. It most\nprobably signified a beverage.\n\n    \"In omnibus secundis feriis dent illis ova quatuor uniquique\n    clerico pinguia, cum bono _Sabrierio_.\"\n\nS.W. SINGER.\n\n[We take this opportunity of correcting two errata in the\nEtymological Queries of our valued correspondent J. MN.\n\n\"Hete_n_este\" should be \"hete_u_este\"--\"Inclosed heteueste in a\nstone coffin or tomb:\" and in a later Query \"isti_l_ed\" should\nbe \"isti_h_ed\"--\"Let their hesmel be istihed, al without\nbroach.\"]\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nReplies to Minor Queries.\n\n_Lord Richard Christophilus._--CH. (Vol. ii., p. 130.) will probably\nfind as much information as he requires, if he can consult a small\nvolume in the British Museum (catalogued under the head of \"_Isuf,\nBassa_,\") of which the title is--\n\n    \"A True Relation of the Conversion and Baptism of Isuf, the\n    Turkish Chaons, named Richard Christophilus, 8vo. Lond. 1684.\"\n\nAlso, in the Bodleian Catalogue, under the head of \"Bassa (Isuf),\" CH.\nmay find--\n\n    \"The History of Isuf Bassa, Capt.-General of the Ottoman Army at\n    the Invasion of Candia. 8vo. Lond. 1684.\"\n\nIn reference to the former of these volumes, there is a note in the\n_Fasti Oxonienses_, ad ann. 1683, v. Thom. White, of which the following\nis a copy:--\n\n    \"Qu\u00e6re, if Tho. White, Lecturer of S. Andrew's Holborn,\n    published an Epistle to the Reader of 'A True Relation of the\n    Conversion and Baptism of Isuf, the Turkish Chaons, named\n    Richard Christophilus, in the presence of a full congregation,\n    Jan. 30, 1658, in Covent Garden, where Mr. Martin is Preacher.\n    Lond. 1658. 8vo.' Kenneth.\" (_Athen\u00e6 Oxon_. ed. Phil. Bliss,\n    1820, vol. iv. _Fasti_, coll. 392, 393.)\n\nJ. SANSOM.\n\n\n_Poker._--Among the muniments of the corporation of Bodmin is a\ncertificate of the mayor and burgesses respecting the claims of the\ninhabitants of the town to take wood in Dunmere Wood, belonging to the\nPriory of Bodmin. The language of it seems to throw light on the origin\nof the word _pocarius_, or _poker_, which has been so often noticed and\ndiscussed. (_Ant\u00e8_, Vol. i., pp. 185. 218. 236. 269. 281. 323. 369.) The\npassage also illustrates the _Hook or Crook_ privilege, which has been\nalready satisfactorily explained. The date is A.D. 1525:\n\n    \"We say, and for truth testify that the wood called Dynmure\n    Wood, was ever open and common to all burgesses and inhabitants\n    of Bodmin till now of late, as well for all manner kind of their\n    beasts to common therein, as to have their burden wood, to bear\n    and carry away upon their backs, of lop, crop, _hook_, _crook_,\n    and _bag_ wood; ... always reserving to the Prior the stems of\n    the trees for their fuel and building.\"\n\n(See the _Bodmin Register_, collected by the Rev. John Wallis, of\nBodmin, and printed at Bodmin, 1827-1838, p. 303.)\n\nI presume that _bag wood_ is such wood as can be cut with a hook or\ncrook, and bunched. In another nearly contemporary petition (Ibid. p.\n306.), the same identical privilege is described by the townsmen as a\nright to lop and crop with a hook and crook, and to carry away on their\nbacks, and \"none other ways.\" This explains the former passage, and\nshows that the wood was probably carried away on the back in a bag.\n\nThe woodward, who carried a bill for such purposes, would also carry a\nbag, or _poke_, and might therefore be very appropriately called a\npoker.\n\nIt will be seen in Halliwell's _Dictionary_, verb. \"Bag\" and \"Bagging,\"\nand in the _Hereford Glossary_ (London, 1839), verb. \"Bag,\" that\n_bagging_ is sometimes used to signify cutting; and, more particularly,\ncutting for burning.\n\nI mention this, because it may be thought pertinent {205} to the present\ninquiry; but as this use of the word has been plausibly supposed to be\nderived from the Welsh _Bach_, a hook, it seems to have nothing to do\nwith a _poke_.\n\nE. Smirke.\n\n\n_Querela Cantabrigiensis_ (Vol. ii., p. 168.).--J.M.B. inquires whether\nanything is known of the _authorship_ of the _Querela Cantabrigiensis_?\nThe tract in question appears to have been \"written by Bruno Ryves,\" the\nauthor of _Mercurius Rusticus_, and some few other treatises, in\nconnexion with which it is commonly bound. Ryves is described by Watt as\n\"a loyal divine,\" who was \"born in Dorsetshire,\" and \"died 1677.\" His\n_Querela_ was first printed at Oxford in 1646. There was a second\nedition in 1647.\n\nIn case J.M.B. do not himself intend to send out a new edition of this\ntract, it is to be hoped that his Query may induce some one else to do\nso. Indeed, a reprint of several similar pamphlets and short treatises,\nbelonging to the same period, might be brought out with great advantage\nat this crisis. The series might begin with\n\n    \"The Answere of the Vice-Chancellour, the Doctors, both the\n    Proctors, and other the Heads of Houses in the Universitie of\n    Oxford:\n\n    \"(Agreeable, undoubtedly, to the joint and uniforme opinion of\n    all the Deanes and Chapters, and all other the learned and\n    obedient Cleargy in the Church of England:)\n\n    \"To the humble Petition of the Ministers of the Church of\n    England, desiring Reformation of certaine ceremonies and abuses\n    of the Church. At Oxford: Printed by Joseph Barnes, and are to\n    be sold in Paule's Church Yard, at the sign of the Crowne, by\n    Simon Waterson, 1603.\"\n\nJ. Sansom.\n\n\n\"_One Bell_\" (Vol ii., p. 166.)--In the sixth edition of the _Book of\nthe Church_ (I _believe_ references are also given in all editions since\nthe first), Southey gives us his authority for this, \"Strype's\n_Cranmer_, p. 266. (edition of 1694.)\" The passage occurs in book ii.\nchap. 26.: \"The Duke of Somerset's death.\" I quote it from the reprint\nby the Ecclesiastical History Society (vol. ii. p. 345.):\n\n    \"He (Somerset) is generally charged for the great spoil of\n    churches and chapels; defacing ancient tombs and monuments, and\n    pulling down the bells in parish churches, and _ordering only\n    one bell in a steeple, as sufficient to call the people\n    together_, which set the commonalty almost into a rebellion.\"\n\nR.B.\n\nAugust 12.\n\n\n_Fabulous Account of the Lion_ (Vol. ii., p. 142.).--Jarltzberg is right\nin supposing that this is given by Philippe de Thaun. It is, however, of\nolder date. Turner (_History of England during the Middle Ages_, vol.\niv. chap. iv. p. 209.) gives part of a Latin version of it from the\n\"Physiologus\" of a certain Theobald. The \"Physiologus,\" which is in\nsubstance the same as the \"Bestiary\" of Philippe de Thaun, occurs,\naccording to Mr. Turner's account of it, in MSS. of the eighth or ninth\ncentury. Anglo-Saxon versions of \"The Whale and the Panther\" are in the\n_Codex Exoniensis_. In the works of Hildebert, who died Abp. of Tours\n1134, a poem called \"Physiologus\" is printed, which appears to be the\nsame as that ascribed by Turner to Theobald. The fable and application\nof the Lion are the same as those given by Turner, with very trifling\nvariations.\n\nAmong the poems ascribed to Abp. Hildebert is an \"Epitaphum Magistri\nTheobaldi,\" who, I conjecture, is the same Theobald as the supposed\nauthor of the \"Physiologus.\" It is rather long; but there is nothing to\nidentify Theobaldus except the word \"Dervensis.\" What place this\nindicates I know not.\n\n  \"Hoc vivente, locus Dervensis floruit, isto\n  Sublato, marcet nominis hujus odor.\"\n\n  _Opera Hildeberti_, p. 1322., Paris, 1708.\n\nIn the _Opera Hildeberti_ there occur some verses on the symbols of the\nEvangelists. I subjoin them: though it is perhaps hardly worth while to\nprint any more on this subject.\n\n    ON THE SYMBOLS OF THE EVANGELISTS.\n\n    \"Matth\u00e6um signat vir, bos Lucain, leo Marcum, Ales discipulum\n    qui sine sorde fuit.\n\n    \"Matth\u00e6o species humana datur, quia scripto Indicat et titulo\n    quid Deus egit homo. Os vituli Lucam declarat, qui specialem\n    Materiam sumpsit de cruce, Christe tu\u00e2. Effigiat Marcum leo,\n    cujus littera clamat Quant\u00e2 surrexit vi tua, Christi, caro.\n    Discipulum signat species aquilina pudicum, Vox cujus nubes\n    transit ad astra volans. Christus homo, Christus vitulus,\n    Christus leo, Christus Est avis, in Christo cuncta notare potes.\n    Est homo dum vivit, bos dum moritur, leo ver\u00f2 Quando resurgit,\n    avis quando superna petit.\"\n\n    _Hildeberti Opera_, Paris, 1708, p. 1318.\n\nB.F.\n\n\n_Pomfret on the Thames_ (Vol. ii., p. 56.).--In a former number N.\nrequired to be informed where the Pons fractus, or Pountfreyt super\nThamis, was situate, from whence several documents were dated by Edward\nII. This question has puzzled many learned antiquaries, and I do not\nthink has ever been properly resolved. Both Pons fractus and Pountfreyt\noccur in Rymer's _Foedera_, tomus iii., p. 904. Lond. 1706. If you will\npermit, I would hazard the conjecture that it was Kingston Bridge. Till\nwithin the last two centuries, the only bridges across the Thames were\nLondon and Kingston; and the latter in the thirteenth century appears to\nhave been in a ruinous condition. And I find in _Rot. Litterar.\nClausar_. {206} anno 7 Hen. III. (A.D. 1223) memb. 4. p. 558. \"de ponte\nde Kingeston,\" that Henry de St. Alban, and Matthew, son of Geoffry de\nKingston, are directed to repair the bridge, date Wednesday, Aug. 9,\n1223 and there is also a recurrence to the same subject, memb. 15. p.\n579., dated on Tuesday, Dec. 12, 1223. I would therefore ask, with\nsubmission to those who may be better informed, whether the bridge,\nthough ordered to be repaired by Henry III., may not have remained in\nsuch a dilapidated state in the time of Edw. II., that it may then have\nbeen styled \"Pons fractus?\"\n\n\u00b6.S.\n\n\n_Walrond Family_ (Vol. ii., p. 134.).--Among my very numerous Notes\nrelating to the several families of this name, I find only the following\nwhich appears likely to be of any interest to your correspondent in\nconnection with his Query.\n\n    \"Mrs. Ureth, daughter of Lieut.-Col. Walrond, was married to\n    James Huish, Esq. of Sidbury, co. Devon, on the 25th July,\n    1684.\"\n\nBut it is probable that in so numerous a family there was more than one\ncolonel at that time. Your correspondent is, no doubt, aware that\nBurke's _Landed Gentry_ states the names of the wife and children of\nColonel Humphrey Walrond, and that the monument of Humphrey Walrond,\nEsq., who died in 1580, in the church of Ilminster, co. Somerset,\nexhibits his coat armour quartering Polton, Fissacre, and Speke, and\nimpaling Popham and another coat, viz., Per fesse indented quarterly or\nand sable, in each quarter an annulet counterchanged. This coat of arms\nI shall be glad if your correspondent will enable me to assign to its\nproper family.\n\nS.S.S.\n\n\n_Armenian Language_ (Vol. ii., p. 136.).--Jarltzberg may refer to two\nworks printed at the press of the Mechitaristican Society at Venice; 1.\n_Quadro della Storia Letteraria di Armenia_, 1829; and 2. _Quadro delle\nOpere di Vari Autori anticamente tradotte in Armeno_, 1825. He may also,\nperhaps, be interested by another little work, printed at the same\nplace, 1825, entitled, _A brief Account of the Mechitaristican Society,\nfounded on the Island of St. Lazaro_, by Alexander Goode; in which work\nit is stated (p. 26.) that \"by Lord Byron's assistance a grammar of the\nArmenian and English languages was composed by the Rev. Dr. Aucher;\" and\nthat \"this reverend gentleman has likewise compiled, with John Brand,\nEsq., of the University of Cambridge, a dictionary of the Armenian and\nEnglish languages.\"\n\nAll these works are in the writer's possession and shall be lent to\nJarltzberg if he wishes to see them, and is not able to find them in any\nlibrary near him.\n\nM.D.\n\n\n_Genealogical Query_ (Vol. ii., p. 135)--Sir Philip Courtenay, first of\nPowderham Castle, fifth son of Hugh, the second of that name, Earl of\nDevon, by Margaret de Bohun, grand-daughter of King Edward I., married\nAnne, daughter of Sir Thomas Wake of Bisworth, co. Northampton, son of\nHugh, younger son of Baldwin Lord Wake, and had issue three sons and two\ndaughters, of which Margaret was married to Sir Robert Carey, of\nCockington, Knt. See _Cleaveland's History of the Family of Courtenay_,\npp. 265. 270.\n\nS.S.S.\n\n\n_Richard Baxter's Descendants_ (Vol. ii, p. 89.).--Your correspondent\nW.H.B., who wishes for information respecting the descendants of the\ncelebrated Richard Baxter, describes him to have been a Northamptonshire\nman; now this (supposing the Nonconformist divine of that name is meant)\nis a mistake, for he was, according to his own account, a Shropshire\nman. In a narrative of the most memorable passages of his life and\ntimes, by himself, and published soon after his death under the title of\n_Reliqui\u00e6 Baxterian\u00e6_, 1696, he says,\n\n    \"My father's name was Richard (the son of Richard) Baxter; his\n    habitation and estate at a village called Eaton Constantine, a\n    mile from the Wrekin Hill, and above half a mile from Severn\n    River, and five miles from Shrewsbury in Shropshire. A village\n    most pleasantly and healthfully situate. My mother's name was\n    Beatrice, the daughter of Richard Adeney of Rowton, a village\n    near High Encall, the Lord Newport's seat, in the same county.\n    There I was born, A.D. 1615, on the 12th of November, being the\n    Lord's Day, in the morning, at the time of divine worship, and\n    baptized at High Encall the 19th day following: and there I\n    lived from my parents with my grandfather till I was near ten\n    years of age, and then was taken home.\"\n\nHe was married on Sept. 10, 1662, to a Miss Charlton. They had no\nchildren. The only descendant of Richard Baxter known to his\nbiographers, was his nephew, William Baxter, a person of considerable\nattainments as a scholar and an antiquary. He was born in Shropshire in\n1650. He published several works, and kept an academy for some years at\nTottenham Cross, Middlesex, which he gave up on being chosen master of\nMercer's School, London, where he continued for twenty years, and\nresigned a short time before his death, which took place in 1723.\n\nBaxter makes mention, at the close of his own Life and Times, of one\nRichard Baxter, a Sabbatarian Anabaptist, and says of him, \"that he was\nsent to gaol for refusing the oath of allegiance, and it went for\ncurrent that it was I.\"\n\nH.M. Bealby.\n\nNorth Brixton.\n\n\n_Duresme and Dunelm_ (Vol. ii., p. 108.).--Three _successive_ bishops,\nMorton, Cosin, and Crewe, took the signature of Duresme after their\nChristian names. Three _successive_ bishops, Barrington, {207}\nVan-Mildert, and the present occupant of the see, have taken the\nsignature of Dunelm. I think, therefore, J.G.N. is mistaken in saying\nthat the Bishops of Durham have assumed the French and Latin signatures\nalternately.\n\nE.H.A.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n\nMISCELLANEOUS.\n\nNOTES ON BOOKS, SALES, CATALOGUES, ETC.\n\nThat the good service which the _English Historical Society_ has\nrendered to that branch of our national literature, for the promotion of\nwhich it was instituted, is clearly recognised, is shown by the fact,\nthat of the small paper copies of the Society's publications, many of\nthe earlier volumes are now entirely out of print. Of the six volumes of\nMr. Kemble's invaluable _Codex Diplomaticus_, a work alike honourable to\nthe patriotic zeal of the Society and to the profound learning of its\neditor, the first two volumes are, we believe, no longer to be procured.\nGood texts of our early chronicles, in an acceptable form, have long\nbeen wanted. That want, the English Historical Society is gradually\nsupplying. Their last publication is now before us. To Mr. Benjamin\nWilliams, the editor of _La Chronique de la Traison et Mort de Richard\nII., Roy d'Angleterre_, the Society and the public is now indebted for\n_Henrici Quinti Anglice Regis Gesta, cum Chronic\u00e2 Neustri\u00e6 Gallic\u00e8, ab\nanno MCCCCXIV. ad MCCCCXXII._, a volume containing an account of the\nbattle of Agincourt, one of those mighty struggles, the result of which\nchanged the face of Europe; as well as a detailed narrative of Henry's\nsecond expedition to the Continent, a subject passed over by historians\nwith less attention than it deserves. Mr. Williams' Preface gives a very\ninteresting notice of the MSS. which he has employed, and the points\nwhich they serve to illustrate, and he has accompanied his text by a\nnumber of useful and judicious notes.\n\nA gentleman of Devonshire is preparing for publication a Catalogue of\nthe numerous published works which relate to the History, Antiquities,\nBiography, Natural History, and Local Occurrences of that county, and\nhas already sufficient matter to occupy upwards of seventy octavo pages\nin print, and would be glad to receive notices of any rare books and\ntracts on those subjects on the shelves of private libraries. A similar\nwork is in contemplation as to existing manuscripts, ancient and modern,\nrelating to the same county; any information respecting which will be\nhighly acceptable, and may be forwarded to Mr. William Roberts, 197.\nHigh Street, Exeter.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nBOOKS AND ODD VOLUMES\n\nWANTED TO PURCHASE.\n\nEDWARD'S BOTANICAL REGISTER, BY LINDLEY. Quite complete.\n\nMARSDEN'S ORIENTAL COINS.\n\nGRAY'S MONOGRAPHY OF THE GENUS PHASMI.\n\nPRITCHARD'S MICROSCOPIC CABINET, 1822.\n\nWEBSTER, A BRIEF HISTORY OF EPIDEMIC AND PESTILENTIAL DISEASE. Hartford,\n1799.\n\nPHILOSOPHICAL MAGAZINE. The entire series to 1848.\n\nHALL'S LIBRARY ATLAS.\n\nM'COG'S SYNOPSIS OF THE CHARACTERS OF FOSSILS OF IRELAND.\n\nR. GRIFFITH'S NOTICE RESPECTING THE FOSSILS OF THE MOUNTAIN LIMESTONE OF\nIRELAND, 4to.\n\nDONOVAN'S INSTRUCTIONS FOR COLLECTING AND PRESERVING. 8vo. 1794.\n\nFORSTER'S DIRECTONS IN WHAT MANNER SPECIMENS OF ALL KINDS MAY BE\nCOLLECTED, 8vo. London, 1771.\n\nOdd Volumes\n\nSecond Vol. of BIOGRAPHIA ECCLESASTICA, or The Lives of the most Eminent\nFathers of the Christian Church, who flourished in the first Four\nCenturies and part of the Fifth, adorned with their Effigies, in 2 vols.\nLondon, printed for Tho. Atkinson, at the White Swan, in St. Paul's\nChurch Yard. 1705.\n\nLetters, stating particulars and lowest price, _carriage free_, to be\nsent to Mr. Bell, Publisher of \"NOTES AND QUERIES,\" 186. Fleet Street.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nNOTICES TO CORRESPONDENTS.\n\nVOLUME THE FIRST OF NOTES AND QUERIES, _with Title-page and very copious\nIndex, is now ready, price 9s. 6d., bound in cloth, and may be had, by\norder, of all Booksellers and Newsmen_.\n\nNOTES AND QUERIES _may be procured by the Trade at noon on Friday; so\nthat our country Subscribers ought to experience no difficulty in\nreceiving it regularly. Many of the country Booksellers are, probably,\nnot yet aware of this arrangement, which enables them to receive Copies\nin their Saturday parcels_.\n\nJ.B. _Will the correspondent from whom we received the account of the\nTreatise of Equivocation, printed in No. 41., favour us with the means\nof addressing a letter to him?_\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nTESTIMONIAL TO DR. CONOLLY.--At a meeting held at 12. Old Burlington\nStreet, Saturday, August 3d, 1850, the Right Hon. Lord Ashley in the\nchair; the following resolutions among others were unanimously agreed\nto:\n\nThat Dr. John Conolly, of Hanwell, is, in the opinion of this meeting,\neminently entitled to some public mark of esteem and gratitude, for his\nlong, zealous, disinterested, and most successful labours in\nameliorating the treatment of the insane.\n\nThat a committee be now formed, for the purpose of carrying into effect\nthe foregoing Resolution, by making the requisite arrangements for the\npresentation to Dr. Conolly of _A Public Testimonial_, commemorative of\nhis invaluable services in the cause of humanity, and expressive of the\njust appreciation of those services by his numerous friends and\nadmirers, and by the public generally.\n\nThe Committee subsequently resolved:\n\nThat in the opinion of the committee, the most appropriate Testimonial\nwill be a Portrait of Dr. Conolly (for which he is requested to sit), to\nbe presented to his family, and an Engraving of the same, to be\npresented to the subscribers; and that the ultimate arrangement of this\nlatter point be made at a future meeting of the committee.\n\nIt has been determined that the individual subscriptions shall be\nlimited to Five Guineas; that subscribers of Two Guineas and upwards\nshall receive a proof impression of the Engraving; and subscribers of\nOne Guinea, a print.\n\nIt is also proposed to present Dr. Conolly with a piece of plate, should\nthe funds permit after defraying the expenses of the painting and\nengraving.\n\nSubscribers' names and subscriptions will be received by the\nsecretaries, at 12. Old Burlington Street, and 4. Burlington Gardens,\nand by the Treasurers, at the Union Bank, Regent Street Branch, Argyll\nPlace, London. Post-office Orders should be made payable at the\nPost-office, _Piccadilly_, to one of the Secretaries.\n\nJohn Forbes, Richard Frankum, _Secretaries_.\n\nLondon, August 3, 1850.\n\n       *       *       *       *       * {208}\n\nWORKS\n\nCONNECTED WITH\n\nECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY.\n\nIn 3 vols. royal 8vo., cloth, price l_l_. 16_s_.\n\n\nTHE LETTERS AND JOURNALS OF ROBERT BAILLIE, Principal of the University\nof Glasgow, 1637-62, and one of the Commissioners from Scotland to the\nWestminster Assembly. Edited from the original MSS., with Memoir, by\nDavid Laing, Esq.\n\n(_Only a few copies now remain_.)\n\n\"The Letters abound in allusions to the ecclesiastical affairs of the\nperiod, and in characteristic sketches of the most prominent leaders of\nthe several parties who were then struggling either for ascendancy or\nfor life.\"--_Eclectic Review_.\n\n\"We give it no small praise when we say there is, perhaps, no book of\nthat period which will in the end better reward the trouble of\nreading.\"--_Westminster Review_.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nIn 3 vols. royal 8vo., cloth, price 1l. 11s. 6d.\n\nTHE PRESBYTERIAN'S ARMOURY, containing the works of George Gillespie,\nRutherford's \"Lex Rex, or the Laws and the Prince,\" Brown's\n\"Apologetical Relation,\" Calderwood's \"Pastor and Prelate,\" &c.\n\n\"We have already expressed a high opinion of the style in which these\nworks have been got up, and the works themselves are of such a standard\ncharacter, that they require no encomium from us to recommend\nthem.\"--_Witness_.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nIn 2 vols. royal 8vo., cloth, price 1_l_. 1_s_.\n\nTHE WORKS OF GEORGE GILLESPIE, one of the Commissioners to the\nWestminster Assembly, with Memoir, by the Rev. Dr. Hetherington.\n\n\"The public are under a lasting debt of gratitude to the publisher for\nthe spirit and enterprise which he showed in projecting a cheap and\nuniform edition of the works of George Gillespie. There are few of the\nworks of our early Scottish writers so worthy of being held in\nremembrance, and the republication of them is peculiarly\nseasonable.\"--_The Warder_.\n\nLondon: Hamilton, Adams, & Co. Edinburgh: Robert Ogle and Oliver and\nBoyd.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nImportant to Curators of public Libraries and Book Collectors.\n\nThe ACTS of the GENERAL ASSEMBLIES of the CHURCH of SCOTLAND. Complete\nfrom commencement in 1638 to 1842, inclusive; 9 vols. folio, full bound\nnew in calf, neat, 30l.\n\nThe advertiser would beg respectfully to call special attention to the\nabove most important collection of the Acts of the Church of Scotland,\nas being the only authentic records of the proceedings of the church,\nand which must be both interesting and invaluable to the ecclesiastical\nhistorian and antiquary. No library, public or private, which lays claim\nto the possession to any extent of works of an analogous kind, can be\nsaid to be complete without a set of the Church of Scotland Acts. The\ncopy now for sale is in very fine condition and quite entire, and has\nthe very rare first volume (1638-49) in the original folio size, which\nis generally supplied by the small octavo reprint, and such a copy the\nadvertiser confidently presumes will not be found for sale in the\nkingdom.\n\nApplication to be made to\n\nRobert Ogle, Bookseller, South Bridge, Edinburgh.\n\nN.B. A liberal price will be given for a _first_ volume of the above\nwork, 1638-49, _in folio_.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nSecond Edition, with Illustrations, 12mo., 3s. cloth.\n\nTHE BELL: its Origin, History, and Uses.\nBy the Rev. Alfred Gatty, Vicar of Ecclesfield.\n\n\"A new and revised edition of a very varied, learned, and amusing essay\non the subject of bells.\"--_Spectator_.\n\nGeorge Bell, 186. Fleet-street.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nPrice 3d., or 5s. for 25 copies for distribution amongst\nCottage Tenantry,\n\nTHE COTTAGERS' CALENDAR OF\nGARDEN OPERATIONS.\n\nBy Joseph Paxton,\n\nGardener to His Grace the Duke of Devonshire, &c., &c.\n\nReprinted from the _Gardeners' Chronicle_. Above 57,000 have already\nbeen sold.\n\nINDEX OF THE CONTENTS:\n\nAfrican Lilies\nAgapanthus\nAnemones\nAnnuals\nApples\nApricot\nAuriculas\nBeans\nBeet\nBiennials\nBlack Fly\nBooks, list of, for Cottagers\nBorage\nBorecole\nBox edgings\nBroccoli\nBrussels Sprouts\nBudding\nBulbs\nCabbage\nCactus\nCalceolarias\nCalifornian Annuals\nCampanulas\nCarnations\nCarrots\nCauliflowers\nCelery\nCherries\nChina Asters\nChina Roses\nChrysanthemums, Chinese\nChives\nClarkias\nClematis\nCollinsias\nColeworts\nCress\nCreepers\nCrocus\nCrown Imperials\nCucumbers\nCultivation of Flowers in Windows\nCurrants\nDahlias\nDaisies\nDog's tooth Violets\nExhibitions, preparing articles for\nFerns, as protection\nFruit\nFruit Cookery\nFuchsias\nGentianella\nGilias\nGooseberries\nGrafting\nGrapes\nGreen Fly\nHeartsease\nHerbs\nHerbaceous Perennials\nHeliotrope\nHollyhocks\nHoneysuckle\nHorse-radish\nHyacinths\nHydrangeas\nHyssop\nIndian Cress\nIris\nKidney Beans\nLavender\nLayering\nLeeks\nLeptosiphons\nLettuce\nLobelias\nLondon Pride\nLychnis, Double\nMarigold\nMarjoram\nManures\nMarvel of Peru\nMesembryanthemums\nMignonette\nMint\nMushroom\nMustard\nNarcissus\nNemophilas\nOEnothera bifrons\nOnions\nP\u00e6onies\nParsnip\nParsley\nPeaches\nPea-haulm\nPears\nPeas\nPelargoniums\nPerennials\nPersian Iris\nPetunias\nPhlox\nPigs\nPinks\nPlanting\nPlums\nPolyanthus\nPotatoes\nPrivet\nPruning\nPropagate by cuttings\nPyracantha\nRadishes\nRanunculus\nRaspberries\nRhubarb\nRockets\nRoses\nRue\nRustic Vases\nSage\nSalvias\nSavoys\nSaxifrage\nScarlet Runner Beans\nSeeds\nSea Daisy or Thrif\nSeakale\nSelect Flowers\nSelect Vegetables and Fruit\nSlugs\nSnowdrops\nSoups\nSpinach\nSpruce Fir\nSpur pruning\nStews\nStocks\nStrawberries\nSummer-savory\nSweet Williams\nThorn Hedges\nThyme\nTigridia Pavonia\nTransplanting\nTree lifting\nTulips\nTurnips\nVegetable Cookery\nVenus's Looking-glass\nVerbenas\nVines\nVirginian Stocks\nWallflowers\nWillows\nZinnias\n\nIllustrated with several Woodcuts.\n\nPublished at the 'Gardeners' Chronicle and Agricultural Gazette'\nOffice, 5. Upper Wellington-street, Covent-garden, London,\nat the rate of 3d. each copy, or 5s. for 25 for distribution amongst\nCottage Tenantry; delivered anywhere in London. on a Post-office\nOrder being sent to the Publisher, James Matthews, at the\nOffice, and made payable at the Post-office, 180. Strand. London.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nPrinted by Thomas Clark Shaw, of No. 8. New Street Square, at No. 5. New\nStreet Square, in the Parish of St. Bride, in the City of London; and\npublished by George Bell, of No. 186. Fleet Street, in the Parish of St.\nDunstan in the West, in the City of London, Publisher, at No. 186. Fleet\nStreet aforesaid.--Saturday, August 24. 1850.","title":"Notes and Queries, Number 43, August 24, 1850","tradition":"myth-cosmogony","translated_text":null,"word_count":13967}