Notes.

THE ENGLISH, IRISH, AND SCOTCH KNIGHTS OF THE ORDER OF ST. JOHN OF JERUSALEM.

For the following list of the English, Irish, and Scotch knights of the Order of St. John, who are mentioned in the records of this island when under its rule, I am in a great measure indebted to Dr. Vella, who, after having made at my request a diligent search through very many old volumes and manuscripts, has kindly favoured me with the result of his labours. The names of the knights and places mentioned in this Note are written, in every instance, as Dr. Vella and myself have seen them recorded. Before commencing with the list, I have a few remarks to offer, that the terms peculiar to the Order which I shall make use of may be understood by those of your readers who are unacquainted with its history.

The English tongue comprised the priories of England, Ireland, and Scotland, and thirty-two different commanderies. Its property, which was seized by Henry VIII. in 1534, was afterwards restored by Queen Mary, and finally and effectually confiscated by Elizabeth in the first year of her reign. Her Majesty's order for the seizure of the Irish estates was dated on the 3rd of June, 1559, and addressed to William Fitzwilliam. Vide the "Diplomatic Code of the Order," and Rymer, vol. xv. p. 527.

Although Dr. Vella and myself had every wish to classify the knights of the English tongue under their different languages, still we have failed in our first attempt, and to enable us to succeed we must ask for assistance from your correspondents in England. They must be known by their names; thus, for instance, the Dundas's of 1524 and 1538 were as evidently of Scotch, as the Russells of 1536, 1537, and 1554 were of English descent. We might apply the same remark to many other knights whose names will be found recorded in the following list.

Whenever a vacancy occurred by the death of a grand master, who was always a sovereign prince, the election for his successor could only take place in the convent. It was not necessary that the person elected should be present. Villiers De L'Isle Adam was residing in France in 1521, when his brethren at Rhodes made him their chief. The grand priors, commanders, and knights, who were absent from Malta, whether employed in the service of the Order or not, had neither voice nor ballot in the election; and the more effectually to prevent their interference, as also that of the Roman pontiff, only three days were allowed to transpire before a successor was chosen, and proclaimed as the head of the convent.

Henry VIII. addressed L'Isle Adam as follows: "Reverendissimo in Christo Patri Domini, F. de Villers L. Isleadam, Magno Hierosolymitani Ordinis Magistro, et consanguineo, et amico nostro carissimo." George II., as the king of a Protestant country, sent a letter to Emmanuel Pinto, bearing the following superscription: "Eminentissimo Principi Domino Emanueli Pinto, Magno Ordinis Melitensis Magistro, Consanguineo, et Amico Nostro Carissimo."

Boisgelin has stated in the first volume of his History of Malta, p. 194., that the—

"King of England addressed the grand master by the following titles: 'Eminentissime princeps consanguinea et amice noster carissime.' The King of France gave the Order the title of 'Très chers et bons amis;' and the grand master that of 'Très cher et très aimé cousin," in the same style as he addressed the Dukes of Tuscany."

That this note may not occupy too much space in your interesting, publication, I would now merely remark that the "convent" was known as the place where the grand master, or his lieutenant, resided, and the "tongue," according to the code of the Order, was the term applied to a nation. A grand prior was the chief of his language, who resided in his native country. A "Turcopolier" was the title of the conventual bailiff of the venerable language of England, "and it took its name from the Turcopoles, a sort of light horse mentioned in the history of the wars carried on by the Christians in Palestine." The English knights won for themselves this high honour by their gallantry in the Holy Land, and in remembrance it ever after remained with their tongue. A Turcopolier was the third dignity in the convent, and the last knight who enjoyed it was Sir Richard Shelley, Prior of England. At his decease the grand master assumed the title for himself. The two interesting letters addressed by Sir Richard Shelley to Henry VIII., in which he complained of his majesty's treatment to the Order of St. John, and pleaded in its favour, were published in the English language, and five years ago were to be seen in the government library of this island. But, on my asking a short time ago to refer to them, I regretted to find that they had been taken from the library by a gentleman who was well introduced to the librarian, and whose conduct in this, and some other transactions where valuable books are concerned, cannot be too strongly condemned. Before returning from this brief digression to the subject of my Note, might I ask if these letters are known in England, and whether copies could be easily procured for a friend who is desirous of having them inserted in a forthcoming publication?

The Knights of St. John being members of a masonic institution, termed each other brothers, is customary with members of the craft at the present time. And it may not be out of place to remark that several of the chapels, churches, and fortifications of Malta are ornamented with masonic signs and emblems, which have been several times referred to, and cleverly explained within the last three years in different numbers of the Masonic Quarterly Review. Those of your readers who take an interest in masonry may peruse these papers of a distinguished mason, now stationed in the West Indies, with instruction and pleasure.

Boisgelin has recorded in the first volume of his History of Malta, p. 182., that the Order of St. John of Jerusalem "might with propriety be considered as being at the same time hospitaller, religious, military, republican, aristocratical, monarchical," and lastly, as if these different terms, which, without his explanation, would appear to be incorrect as applying to one institution, were not sufficient, he has added in a note, that in the last days of its existence it might also have been called democratical. He has stated that it was—

Before taking leave of Boisgelin, it should be recorded that he was a Knight of Malta; and his history, one of the best now extant, appeared in those troubled times, when he hoped by conciliating all governments, to see his Order again restored. Influenced in all things by this hope, vain as it was, his statements should be received with some grains of allowance.

Before calling attention to the following list, I have to state that a knight could not become commander before he had made four cruises in the galleys, or served five years in the convent. He had also to remain three years a commander before he could claim a pension. Those knights who are known to have been at Malta will be distinguished by a †.

A.

†Aylmer, Sir George 1521

Commander of Holstone.

Adfil, George 1524

Albrit, Oliver 1527

B.

Bouth, John 1522

Turcopolier, killed at the siege of Rhodes.

Blasly, Robert 1526

Boydel, Edward 1529

†Babington, John 1531

Bailiff of Aguila, Commander of Dalby.

†Babington, Philip 1531

†Belingham, Edward 1531

Commander of Dynmore.

†Balfard, Richard 1531

†Brown, Edward 1531

†Broke, Richard 1531

Commander of Mount St. John.

Boydel, George 1532

Boydel, Roger 1533

Turcopolier.

†Bentham, Anthony 1536

Boyse, Andrew 1588

C.

Corbet, William 1522

Commander of Templebruer.

Cane, Sir Ambrose 1525

Chanure, John 1525

Campledik, Thomas 1529

Commander of Corbroke.

Chambers, Sir James 1533

D.

Deston, Claude 1522

Docray, Thomas 1523

Prior of the English tongue.

Dundas, George 1524

Commander of Turfichin in Scotland.

†Dingley, Thomas 1531

†Dundas, Alexander 1538

†Dudley, George 1545

Received in the Order at Malta in 1545.

E.

Edward, George 1525

†Eluyn, Edmund 1545

Received in the Order at Malta in 1545.

F.

Fairfax, Nicholas 1522

Commander of Temple Combe.

Fitzmorth, Robert 1527

Fortescue, Adrian 1532

This brave knight perished on the scaffold in England at the time of the Reformation (vide "N. & Q.," Vol. vii., p. 628.); was enrolled among the Saints; and his portrait, with a sprig of palm in the hand, as an emblem of his martyrdom, is now to be seen in one of the chapels of St. John's Church at this island. The 8th of July is the day now observed in commemoration of his sufferings, and of those who suffered with him.

Fortescue, Nicholas 1638

This nobleman, of the same family as the preceding, was received in the Order on his own urgent application; and with the hope that, by his assistance, the English language would be restored.

G.

Golings, Thomas 1520

Commander of Bodisford.

†Gonson, Sir David 1533

The last lieutenant of the Turcopolier at Malta.

†Gerard, Sir Henry 1541

Glene, Lewis 1555

H.

Hyerton, George 1523

Hall, Thomas 1526

†Halison, James 1526

Hussey, Edmund 1528

Hussey, Nicholas 1531

Hill, Edward 1531

†Hornebill, Thomas 1536

I.

Irving, James 1569

Solely by the strenuous exertions of this knight it was decided, in a general chapter held in 1569, that the Scotch should enjoy the same dignities and emoluments which had been previously granted to the English and Irish knights.

J.

Jones, William 1522

L.

Layton, Ambrose 1527

Commander of Beverly.

Layton, Cuthbert 1528

Lyndesey, Walter 1532

Lambert, Nicholas 1538

M.

Mobysteyn, John 1526

Capellano, and Chancellor, of the Provincial Chapter of the English Language.

Massinbert, Oswaldus 1527

N.

Newport, Thomas 1528

Bailiff of Aquila, and Commander of Newland.

Nevil, Richard 1528

Commander of Willington.

Newton, Thomas 1529

Newdegatt, Donston 1536

O.

Ozis, John.

On the 16th of March, 1533, this knight obtained permission to return to England. Vide fol. 168.

P.

Pole, Alban 1520

Commander of Mount St. John.

Philip, Thomas 1521

Plunket, Nicholas 1527

Pool, George 1531

Pool, Henry 1531

Pemperton, Thomas 1533

Commander of Mount St. John.

R.

Ransom, John (Senior) 1521

Prior of Ireland.

Roberts, Nicholas 1522

Roche, Edward 1527

Ransom, William 1527

†Roger, Anthony 1533

†Ransom, John (Junior) 1533

Turcopolier.

†Russell, Philip 1536

†Russell, Anthony 1537

†Russell, Egidius 1554

Governor of the city, and Captain of the forces.

S.

Sheffield, Thomas 1521

Commander of Beverly.

Sand, George 1528

†Sandiland, James 1530

Sutton, John 1530

Salisbury, William 1537

†Starkey, Oliver 1555

Confidential secretary of La Valetta, and buried in St. John's Church, at the foot of his tomb.

†Shelley, Sir Richard 1566

Prior of England, and last Turcopolier of his language. On the 25th of June, 1567, Sir Richard obtained permission to dispose of his property as he wished.

†Shelley, James 1566

†Shelley, John 1582

†Stuart, Fitzjames 1689

A natural son of James II. A letter is now existing in which this monarch requested the Grand Master to receive his son as Grand Prior of the English language, if it should be agreeable to the will of the Pope. It may be noted that the Germans were the only knights in the Convent who would never admit a natural son of a noble or monarch among them.

T.

Theril, William 1533

Tyrell, William 1535

U.

Urton, George 1523

Upton, Nicholas 1536

Turcopolier, and greatly distinguished in July, 1551, when, at the head of thirty knights and four hundred mounted volunteers, he very gallantly repulsed Dragut's attack on the island. Returning to the convent he died of his wounds. On the 20th of June, 1565, Dragut fell mortally wounded in the famous siege of Malta, and the point where he was killed still bears his name. His scimetar is now to be seen in the Maltese armoury.

W.

Wagor, John 1523

Weston, Sir William 1525

A brief historical description of Sir William Weston's sufferings, decease, and burial will be found in the second volume of Sutherland's Knights of Malta, p. 115., which appears to be a correct translation from Vertot's History of the Order.—Vide "N. & Q.," Vol. vii., p. 629.; and Vertot, lib. 10.

Wyhtt, Sir Rowland 1528

West, Clement 1532

This knight was a Turcopolier, and never placed his signature to a document without writing immediately above it "As God wills."

Wise, Andrew 1593

Nominally Prior of England in 1598. Being reduced to the greatest extremity, the Roman Pontiff decreed that the language of Castile and Leon should allow him out of its revenue a thousand ducats a-year. The Spanish knights objecting to pay this sum, there was a trial before the Grand Master to enforce it; a report of which is now in the Record Office. The Pope's decree was confirmed.

In looking through the records of the "English tongue," I have met with the name of only one lady, Catherine Burchier, who was prioress of Buckland in 1524. Any information respecting her history, or that of the knights whose names are recorded in the above list, will be most acceptable.

William Winthrop.

La Valetta, Malta.

DUPORT'S LINES TO IZAAK WALTON.

Sometime since I met with the following epigrams of the learned scholar, divine, and loyalist James Duport, written on the fly-leaf of a copy of his Musæ Subsecivæ, seu Poetica Stromata, presented by him to Izaak Walton. I presume that they have never been printed, and that they were written in Duport's own hand. If so, they may be thought worthy of a place in the columns of "N. & Q." They will be read with some interest by those who respect Duport, and love the memory of good old Izaak Walton. I may add, that the autograph of I. W. is in the book, thus:

"Izaak Walton, Given by the Author, 3ᴰ May, 1679."

W. H. G.

Winchester.

"Ad virum optimum mihique amicissimum Isaacum Waltonum, de libris a se editis, mihique dono missis, nec non de vita Hookeri, Herberti, et aliorum:

Tuissimus, J. D."

"Ad eundem de suâ Episcopi Sandersoni Vitâ.

J. Duport."

SHAKSPEARE CORRESPONDENCE.

Zachariah Jackson.—"N. & Q." will not, I am sure, refuse to give his due to Zachariah Jackson, the author of Shakspeare's Genius Justified, by showing to how great an extent the conjectures of Jackson had, by thirty-four years, anticipated the Notes and Emendations. I subjoin a list of the old corrector's emendations, which are also found in Jackson's work:

Play. Text. Emendation. Page in Collier. Page in Jackson.

Two Gentlemen of Verona, Act II. Sc. 1. "In telling her mind." "In telling you her mind." 18. 9.

Merry Wives of Windsor, Act I. Sc. 3. "She carves." "She craves." 30. 17.

Measure for Measure, Act I. Sc. 3. "Propagation of a dower." "Procuration of a dower." 43. 39.

Ditto Ditto Act III. Sc. 2. "What say'st thou, trot?" "What say'st thou, troth?" 49. 44.

Taming of the Shrew, Act IV. Sc. 4. "Except they are busied." "Except while they are busied." 152. 127.

All's Well that Ends Well, Act III. Sc. 1. "Happiness and prime." "Happiness in prime." 159. 89.

Twelfth Night, Act V. Sc. 1. "Then cam'st in smiling." "Thou cam'st in smiling." 181. 31.

Winter's Tale, Act IV. Sc. 3. "So attir'd, sworn." "So attir'd, so worn." 192. 142.

Henry V., Act V. Sc. 2. "Untempering effect." "Untempting effect." 264. 229.

Besides these nine verbatim coincidences, the following four are very approximate.

Taming of the Shrew, Induction, Sc. 2:

Folios.—"And when he says he is, say that he dreams."

Collier MS.—"When he says what he is, say that he dreams."—Notes and Emendations, p. 142.

Jackson.—"And what he says he is, say that he dreams."—Restorations and Illustrations, p. 114.

Taming of the Shrew, Act II. Sc. 1.:

Folios.—"No such jade, Sir, as you, if me you mean."

Collier MS.—"No such jade to bear you, if me you mean."—Notes and Emendations, p. 147.

Jackson.—"No such jade as you,—bear! if me you mean."—Restorations and Illustrations, p. 119.

1 Henry VI., Act V. Sc. 3.:

Folios.—"Confounds the tongue, and makes the senses rough."

Collier MS.—"Confounds the tongue, and mocks the sense of touch."—Notes and Emendations, p. 276.

Jackson.—"Confounds the tongue, and makes the senses touch."—Restorations and Illustrations, p. 233.

Cymbeline, Act III. Sc. 4.:

Folios.— ... "Some jay of Italy, Whose mother was her painting, hath betray'd him."

Collier MS.—"Who smothers her with painting, hath betray'd him."—Notes and Emendations, p. 495.

Jackson.—"Who smoother was: her painting hath betray'd him."—Restorations and Illustrations, p. 375.

Besides these four emendations, which at any rate are very suggestive of those in Mr. Collier's folio, I beg to call attention to Jackson's defence of Theobald's (and his own) proposition to read untread for unthread, in King John, Act V. Sc. 4., which is strikingly like Mr. Collier's defence of the same reading in the margin of the Folio 1632. The whole of Jackson's notes on King John are well worth reading. I beg to mention two of these, as illustrations of old Jackson's acuteness, when not under the warping influence of the cacoëthes emendandi. His defence of untrimmed bride, in Act II. Sc. 1., is most convincing. He says,—

"Constance stimulates [Lewis] to stand fast to his purpose, and not to let the devil tempt him, in the likeness of an untrimmed bride, to waver in his determination; for that the influence of the Holy See would strip King John of his present royalty. Where then would be the great dowry Lewis was to receive with his wife? At present he has only the promise of five provinces, and 30,000 marks of English coin; therefore as the dowry has not been paid, Blanche is still an untrimmed bride."—Recollections and Illustrations, p. 179.

His note on the use of invisible, in Act V. Sc. 7., is also excellent:

"Death having prayed upon the reduced body of the king, quits it, and now invisible, has laid siege to the mind."

I have elsewhere stated my opinion that "all Jackson's emendations are bad." I should have added that some few are very plausible and specious, and worthy of consideration. I will mention one in King John, Act IV. Sc. 2. Pembroke says,—

Now, rest and right are no antithesis, nor are they allied in meaning. Jackson inserts a t' between in and rest—

which he supports by admirable parallels from the same play. I will cite one more example of Jackson's sagacity, from his notes on 1 Henry IV., Act I. Sc. 3. Hotspur says,—

Jackson reads,—

Mr. Collier never once refers to Jackson. Mr. Singer, however, talks familiarly about Jackson, in his Shakspeare Vindicated, as if he had him at his fingers' ends; and yet, at page 239., he favours the world with an original emendation (viz. "He did behood his anger," Timon, Act III. Sc. 1.), which, however, will be found at page 389. of Jackson's book. I may be in error, but I cannot but think such ignorance, on the part of professional Shakspearians, very culpable.

C. Mansfield Ingleby.

Birmingham.

On Three Passages in "Measure for Measure."—I have to crave a small space in your columns, which have already done much good service for the text of Shakspeare, to make a very few remarks on three passages in the play of Measure for Measure. It is no sweeping change of reading that I am about to advocate, nor, as I think, anything over ingenious; inasmuch as, in two of the passages in question, I propose to defend the reading of the first folio, which, I contend, has been departed from unnecessarily; while, in the third, I suggest the simple change of an f into an s.

In Act II. Sc. 4., these lines occur in Angelo's soliloquy, in my folio of 1623:

Mr. Knight, and other editors, read feard, as in the original, but give no explanation; though such a strange epithet would seem to require one. I propose to read seared, i.e. dry, the opposite of fresh. This, as the saying is, "requires," I think, "only to be pointed out to be admitted."

Lower down in the same scene we find the following passage, in one of Angelo's addresses to Isabel:

The word building has always been a stumbling-block to editors. Johnson first proposed to read binding, and his successors have adopted it, and such is now the generally received reading. Mr. Collier's old corrector is also in favour of the same change. I have always felt convinced, however, that building was the word which Shakspeare wrote. That which answers to it in the A.-S. is bytling, bytleing, a building; bytlian, to build; which are inflected from byth, biotul, a hammer or mallet (whence our beetle); so that the strict meaning of the verb is firmare, confirmare, to fasten, close, or bind together. This will give much the same meaning to building as that implied in the proposed substitute binding.

Not having met with the word used in this peculiar sense by any old writer, I could not venture to maintain the reading of the folio on these grounds, which I have just mentioned, alone. At length, however, I have been successful, and I am now able to quote a passage from a work published very shortly before this play, entitled:

"The Jewel House of Art and Nature", &c., "faithfully and familiarly set downe according to the Author's owne experience, by Hugh Platte, of Lincoln's Inne, gentleman. London, 1594."

in which this word building is used in precisely the same sense as that which I defend. In "the Preface of the Author," the following passage occurs:

"I made a condicionall promise of some farther discouerie in arteficiall conceipts, then either my health or leisure would then permit: I am now resolued (notwithstanding the vnkind acceptation of my first fruits, which then I feared and hath since falne out, is a sufficient release in law of the condition) to make the same in some sort absolute (though not altogether according to the fulnesse of my first purpose), and to become a building word unto me."

I apprehend that this parallel instance is all that is wanting to preserve, for the future, the reading of the first folio unimpaired.

The third passage on which I have a remark to offer, is that much tormented one in Act III. Sc. 1., which stands in my first folio thus:

I need not say a word about the various suggestions of primzie, priestly, princely, precise, &c., which have appeared from time to time; my business is solely with the original word in the first folio. I have always felt sure that this is none other than the poet's own word, and no error of the printer; for how could it be possible to make a gross mistake in a word which occurs twice within four lines, and one, moreover, so unusual; the printer must surely have been able to decipher the letters from one of the two written specimens. It will be observed that there is a comma after prenzie in the original, indicating that the word is a substantive, not an adjective. Now what is the Italian for a prince? Not only principe, but also prenze; and in like manner we find principessa and prenzessa. I have no doubt that what Shakspeare did write was—

while a little lower down he converted the word into an adjective:

It is obvious to remark that this meaning of prenzie exactly fits the sense: Angelo was a prince, and he was clad in robes of office, adorned with princely "gardes," or trappings. Shakspeare, no doubt, was very well acquainted with Italian tales and poems; the word may have become quite familiar to him. His intention here, in putting the term in question into Claudio's mouth, may have been to give an Italian character to the scene, introducing thus the local term of dignity of the deputy; thus recalling the audience, by the occurrence of a single word, to the scene of the plot; for though this is said to be in Vienna, yet it is to be observed that not a name throughout the play is German, everything is Italian. And let it not be objected that the use of this word involves an obscurity which Shakspeare would have avoided; we are hardly able to judge, now-a-days, whether a particular word was obscure or not in his time: at all events, there would be no difficulty in adducing instances of what we should call more obscure allusions, and I think there can be little doubt that the well-educated in those days well understood the Italian prenze to mean a prince.

H. C. K.

—— Rectory, Hereford.

"Hamlet" and G. Steevens.—In Act I. Sc. 4., Horatio asks Hamlet "What does this mean, my Lord?" (The noise of music within). Hamlet replies:

G. Steevens, in a note of this passage, says: "The swaggering up-spring was a German dance." Is not the allusion directed to the king, whom Hamlet describes as "a swaggering up-spring," or "upstart?" Should not the line—

in the Ghost's narrative in the fifth scene, be given to Hamlet?

James Cornish.

Falmouth.

Minor Notes.

Sir Francis Drake.—Having traversed the globe within three years, his travels were thus noticed by a poet of his day:

Clericus (D.)

Similarity of Idea in St. Luke and Juvenal.—Examples of identity of expression existing between the Scriptures and ancient heathen writers have already appeared in "N. & Q." Permit me to add the following passages, which appear to me to afford an instance of similarity of idea:

"Λέγω ὑμῖν, ὅτι ἐὰν οὗτοι σιωπήσωσῖν, οἱ λίθοι κεκρὰξονται."—Luc. cap xix. v. 40.

The satirist would seem to say (taking the sceptic's view), that even if Jupiter existed only in brass and marble, the very statues would "cry out" against the impious perjury.

I drop my initials, and beg to subscribe myself

Arch. Weir.

Sincere.—Trench, On the Study of Words, 4th ed., p. 197., says:

"They would be pleased to learn that 'sincere' may be, I will not say that it is, without wax (sine cerâ), as the best and finest honey should be."

Is not this derivation erroneous? Sincere does not mean "pure, like virgin-honey;" but it expresses the absence of deception. I doubt not that it is derived from—

"The practice of Roman potters to rub wax into the flaws of their unsound vessels when they sent them to market. A sincere [without wax] vessel was the same as a sound vessel, one that had no disguised flaw."

So says Bushnell (God in Christ, p. 17.). The derivation is no novelty. I reproduce it merely to correct an error which is obtaining currency under the name of Mr. French. I should be obliged to any of your correspondents who would refer me to, or still better cite, any passages in the Latin classics relating to the practice I have mentioned.

C. Mansfield Ingleby.

Birmingham.

Epitaph in Appleby Church-yard, Leicestershire.—

J. G. L.