Volume 4 — Replies.

ROYAL LIBRARY. (Vol. iii., P. 427.; Vol. iv., p. 69.)

I have delayed contradicting the stories told about the Royal Library in the Quarterly Review of last December, and repeated in the Illustrated Boswell, and, I am sorry to say, still more gravely and circumstantially reproduced by the Editor of "NOTES AND QUERIES." I have delayed, I say, until I was enabled to satisfy myself more completely as to one of the allegations of your Note. I can now venture to assure you that the whole story of the projected sale to Russia is absolutely unfounded; and that the Princess Lieven, whose supposed agency is the gist of the story, never heard a syllable about it, till my inquiry brought it to her notice, and that she has given it the most absolute contradiction. As there never was any such proposition, I need not say that the interference against it attributed to Mr. Heber and Lord Sidmouth is equally unfounded. The real history of the affair is this:—Mr. Nash, the architect, had rendered himself very agreeable to George IV. by his alterations and additions to the Pavilion at Brighton, and he managed to obtain (somewhat irregularly, I believe) the job of altering old Buckingham House, which was originally intended, or at least proposed, to be only an extensive repair and more commodious arrangement of the existing edifice. Under that notion, Mr. Nash had little difficulty in persuading the king that the space occupied by so large a library could not be spared for that purpose, if the house was to be arranged as a palace both for private residence and for purposes of state; and as there was a very great jealousy in Parliament of the expense of Buckingham House, he was afraid to propose the erection of an additional building to receive the books. It was then that the scheme was hit on, I know not exactly by whom (but I believe by Mr. Nash), of giving the books to the British Museum. The principal part of the library occupied three large rooms, two oblong and one an octagon. The former were to have been absorbed into the living apartments, and the octagon was to be preserved as a chapel, which it was proposed to adorn with the seven cartoons of Raphael from Hampton Court. All these, and several other schemes, vanished before Mr. Nash's larger views and increased favour, which led by degrees to the total destruction of the old house, and the erection of an entirely new palace, which however retains strong evidence of the occasional and piecemeal principle on which it was begun. But in the meanwhile the library was gone. I know that some members of the government were very averse to this disposal of the library: they thought, and strongly represented, that a royal residence should, not be without a library; and that this particular collection, made especially ad hoc, should not have been, on any pretence, and above all on one so occasional and trivial, diverted from its original destination. It is very possible that Mr. Heber may have expressed this opinion; and I think I may say that Lord Sidmouth certainly did so: but, on the other hand, some of the king's advisers were not sorry to see the collection added to the Museum pro bono publico; and so the affair concluded,—very unsatisfactorily, as I thought and think, as regards the crown, to whom this library ought to have been an heirloom; and indeed I doubt whether it was not so in point of law. It is likely enough that the gift of the library may have been partly prompted by a hope of putting the public in better humour as to the expenses of Buckingham House; but the idea of a sale to Russia never, I am sure, entered the head of any of the parties.

C.

THE "EISELL" CONTROVERSY. (Vol. iv., pp. 64. 135.)

I can easily suppose, after the space you have given to J. S. W. (Vol. iv., p. 64.) to sum up on the long-protracted controversy of the Eisell interpretation, that you will scarcely permit it to be renewed. J. S. W.'s judgment, though given with much amenity and fulness, I cannot think satisfactory, as towards its close he evidently sinks into the advocate.

Theobald, a most admirable annotator, has narrowed the controversy very properly, to the consideration whether Hamlet was here proposing possibilities or impossibilities. J. S. W. dwells on the whole of the dialogue between Hamlet and Laertes as a rant; and sinks all the lines and passages that would bring it down to sanity. But this seems to line singularly unjust. Imprimis, Hamlet is not enraged like Laertes, "who hath a dear sister lost," and is a very choleric, impetuous, and arrogant young gentleman. It is this quality which irritates Hamlet, who is otherwise in the whole of this scene in a particularly moralising and philosophic mood, and is by no means "splenetic and rash." Hamlet, a prince, is openly cursed by Laertes: he is even seized by him, and he still only remonstrates. There is anything but rant in what he (Hamlet) says; he uses the most homely phrases; so homely that there is something very like scorn in them:

is the quietude of contempt for Laertes' insulting rant; and so, if my memory deceive me not, the elder Kean gave it; "Do for her" being put in contrast with Laertes' braggadocio say. Then come the possibilities:

(All, be it noted, common lover's tricks),

Now the eating a crocodile is the real difficulty, for that looks like an impossibility but then, no doubt, the crocodile, like all other monstrous things, was in the pharmacopœia of the time, and was considered the most revolting of eatables. Eat a crocodile, does not mean a whole raw one, but such as the alligator mentioned in the shop of Romeo's apothecary, probably preserved in spirits.

Here we have possibilities put against the rant of Laertes; the doing against the saying; the quietude of the philosophic prince, against the ranting of the robustious Laertes; things that could be done,—for Hamlet ends with "I'll do it." That is, he will weep, fight, fast, tear himself, drink bitterness, and eat monstrosities: and this is his challenge of Laertes to the true testimony of his love, in contrast to his wordy lamentation. But his quick imagination has caught an impetus from its own motion, and he goes on, "Nay, I will even outprate you;" and then follows his superior rant, not uttered with sincere vehemence, but with quiet and philosophic scorn; and he ends with the reproof of Laertes' mouthing; a thing particularly distasteful to him. And now, in accordance with this dignified contempt is his final remonstrance and his exit speech of—

We thus see that there is no real rant in Hamlet; he is not outbragging Laertes; but institutes the possible, in contradiction to swagger and mouthing. The interpretation of eisell thus becomes a matter of character, and to a great degree would determine an actor's mode of rendering the whole scene. This result I do not see that any of your correspondents have taken notice of; and yet it really is the main thing worth discussing.

This interpretation too has the advantage of coinciding with Shakspeare's perpetual love of contrast; the hot, hasty, wordy Laertes being in strong contrast to the philosophic, meditating, and melancholy young prince; always true to his character, and ever the first in every scene by his own calm dignity. He never rants at all, but rides over his antagonist by his cool reasoning and his own magnificent imagination. The adoption of Theobald and Hickson's interpretation of the word eisell becomes therefore of great importance as indicating the character of Hamlet.

F. G. T.

Many of your readers no doubt feel much indebted to your correspondent for his able summary of the eisell controversy; an example which it is to be hoped will be followed in other cases. It has induced me to collect a few passages for the purpose of showing that Shakspeare was accustomed to make use of what may be termed localisms, which were frequently as occult as in the instance of the eisell; and that he was especially fond of establishing himself with the children of his brain in the particular country by means of allusion to the neighbouring seas and rivers. What appropriate signs are the Centaur and the Phœnix for the city of Ephesus, the scene of the Comedy of Errors! The Italian, Iachimo, speaks of—

And Petruchio alludes to the bursting of "a chestnut in a farmer's fire," an incident probably of common occurrence in the sunny south. In Hamlet, with which we are chiefly concerned, the king "gulps his draughts of Rhenish down;" and the grave-digger talks of a flagon of Rhenish having been poured by the jester upon his head, the wine with which Denmark would naturally be supplied. His majesty inquires:

And the student Horatio is judiciously placed at the university of Wittenburg. Constant mention is made in The Merchant of Venice of the Rialto; and Portia, not unmindful of the remarkable position of the city, thus directs Balthazar:

What a fine Hebraism (Hazlitt remarks) is that of Shylock, where he declares, that he would not have given his ring "for a whole wilderness of monkeys!" And so, if the subjoined passage in Othello relates to the ceremony of the Doge's union with the sea, may we not exclaim "What an admirable Venetianism!"

The Moor has not travelled far to find the following simile:

Petruchio asserts in respect to Catherine:

In the Roman plays the Tiber is repeatedly noticed. The Thames occurs in Merry Wives of Windsor, and others. And in the Egyptian scenes of Antony and Cleopatra, the Nile is several times introduced.

"Master Brook [says Falstaff], I will be thrown into Etna, as I have been into Thames, ere I will leave her thus."

Antony exclaims:

while Cleopatra gives utterance to the same sentiment:

In the last two passages it may be observed, that the hyperbolical treatment of the two rivers bears some analogy to that of the eisell; and it may also be pointed out, that although one of your correspondents has rashly maintained that the word cannot mean a river because the definite article is omitted before it, Thames, Tiber, and Nile here occur without. Upon the whole it must appear that there is some reason for adopting the motto:

T.

Eisell will, I think, if examples from our old writers decide, be at least acknowledged to mean in Shakspeare what we now (improperly?) call vinegar, and not any river. In The Goolden Letanye of the Lyf and Passion of our Lorde Jesu Criste, edited from a MS. (No. 546.) in the library at Lambeth, by Mr. Maskell, Monumenta Ritualia, ii. 252., comes this entreaty:—

"For thi thirste and tastyng of gall and eysyl, graunte us to tast the swetnes of thi spirite; and have mercy on us."

All through the sixteenth century, and ages before, eisell was not only a housewife's word, but in every one's mouth—in the poet's as he sang, the preacher's as he preached, and the people's while they prayed. Surely, for this very reason, if Shakspeare meant Hamlet to rant about a river, the bard would never have made the king choose, before all others, that very one which bore the same name with the then commonest word in our tongue: a tiny stream, moreover, which, if hardly ever spoken of in these days of geographical knowledge, must have been much less known then to Englishmen.

DA. ROCK.

Buckland, Faringdon.

Your correspondent J. S. W. well deserves the thanks of all those of your readers who have taken an interest in the discussion on the meaning of eisell in Hamlet, for the able manner in which he has summed up the evidence put forward by the counsel on both sides. Perhaps he is correct in his conclusion, that, of twelve good men and true, nine would give their verdict for eisell being "a river;" while but three would favour the "bitter potion." Nevertheless, I must say, I think the balance yet hangs pretty even, and I rather incline myself to the latter opinion, for these reasons:

1. There is no objection whatever, even in the judgment of its enemies, against eisell meaning "a bitter potion," except that they prefer the river as more to their taste; for the objection of MR. CAUSTON I conceive to have no weight at all, that "to drink up" can only be applied "to a definite quantity;" surely it may also mean, and very naturally, to drink "without stint." And eisell need not be taken as meaning nothing more than "vinegar;" it may be a potion or medicament of extreme bitterness, as in the 111th sonnet, and in Lydgate's Troy Boke quoted by MR. SINGER, such, that while it would be possible to sip or drink it in small quantities, or diluted, yet to swallow a quantity at a draught would be almost beyond endurance; and hence, I submit, the appropriateness of "drink up."

2. There is this objection against eisell meaning a river,—Would the poet who took a world-wide illustration from Ossa, refer in the same passage to an obscure local river for another illustration? Moreover it does not appear to be sufficient to find any mere river, whose name resembles the word in question, without showing also that there is a propriety in Hamlet's alluding, to that particular river, either on account of its volume of water, its rapid flow, &c., or from its being in sight at the time he spoke, or near at hand.

Can any of your readers, who have Shakspeare more at their fingers' ends than myself, instance any exact parallel of this allusion of his to local scenery, which, being necessarily obscure, must more or less mar the universality, if I may so speak, of his dramas. Could such instances be pointed out (which I do not deny) or at least any one exactly parallel instance, it would go far towards reconciling myself at least to the notion that eisell is the river Essel.

H. C. K.

—— Rectory, Hereford, July 28.

LORD MAYOR NOT A PRIVY COUNCILLOR. (Vol. iv., pp. 9. 137.)

I will not attempt to follow all the statements of L. M., because some of them are totally beside the question, and others contradict each other. I shall only observe that he totally mistakes my argument when he says, as if in reply to me, that it is not necessary to have the courtesy title of lord to be a privy councillor. No one ever said any such thing. What I said was this, that the Mayor of London, like those of Dublin and York, had the courtesy title of lord, and that this title of lord brought with it the other courtesy designation of right honorable, which latter being also (but not likewise) the designation of privy councillors, had, as I suppose, occasioned the error now predicated of the Mayor of London being a privy councillor, which, I repeat, he is no more than any Lord John or Lady Jane, who have also the title of Right Honorable.

L. M., however, states as a matter of fact, that "the Lord Mayor is always summoned to council on the accession of a new sovereign." Now I assert, and I think have proved in my former note, that the Lord Mayor never was so summoned to council. I now add that he never has on any occasion entered the council chamber, that he has never taken the oath nor performed any act of a privy councillor, and that in short there is not the smallest doubt with any one who knows anything about the Privy Council, that the Lord Mayor of London no more belongs to it than the Lord Mayors of York or Dublin, or the Lord Provost of Edinburgh, all of whom are equally styled Right Honorable, which title, I repeat, is the sole and silly pretence of this new-fangled hypothesis.

C.

"HOUSE OF YVERY." (Vol. iv., pp. 101. 136.)

Observing the imperfect knowledge which Lowndes and your correspondents apparently have of the work called Anderson's House of Yvery, I send you a few Notes to clear up some points.

It may be said there were two editions of this work; one containing the censorious comments of (I presume) Lord Egmont on the degraded state of the peerage; the second, that in which those comments were cancelled. To the first, no printer's name appeared in the title-page; to the second is the name of "H. Woodfall, jun."

Lowndes has entirely mistaken the origin of the different paging in vol. i. The fact is, the original edition of the Introduction contained 41 pages of text, but the cancels reduced that number to 37; which p. 37., as Lowndes correctly remarks, is in the second edition misprinted 29. I possess both copies, with and without the cancels. By Lowndes we are led to believe that only p. xxxvii. was destroyed; but in truth they are p. xvi., and parts of pp. xv. and xvii., and nearly the whole of pp. xxxv.-vi., containing the anecdotes of the tailor's son and the apothecary's brother-in-law being sent, or intended to be sent, to foreign courts, as ambassadors from England. Another cancel occurs in vol. ii., of nearly the whole of pp. 444-5-6, which occasions Lowndes to say that pp. 446-7 are missing. The duplicate pages 453 to 460 are peculiar to the second edition only. One of my copies contains two additional plates, one of Wardour Castle, the other of Acton Burnell, evidently engraved for the work. The map of the baronies of Duhallow, &c., is only in one copy, viz. the original edition. Unfortunately, this original edition wants all the portraits of Faber, but it has the tomb of Richard Percival of 1190, beginning "Orate," as in Lowndes. It contains also a duplicate portrait of Sir Philip Percival, engraved by Toms in 1738 (who also engraved the Wardour and Acton Burnell Castles); and this duplicate is also in the other copy.

Were I to form any judgment when this work was commenced, I should say about 1738, and that all the engravings for it were done by Toms; and the first edition was printed in 1742, without any printer's name, and that some copies were so bound up. The other copies remained in sheets until the next year, when Faber was employed to engrave the portraits, and till 1744 or 1747; 1747 being the latest date of Faber's plates. There is some curious information in these volumes, and I would recommend your readers to observe how much the conduct of the Catholics of Ireland, recorded in vol. ii. p. 271., resembles that of the Catholics of the present day.

P.

ON "RACK" IN THE TEMPEST. (Vol. iv., pp. 37. 121.)

I think A. E. B. has not understood MR. HICKSON'S argument in reference to this word. Perhaps the latter may not have expressed himself very clearly; and not having by me his original paper on the subject, I cannot cite his exact words; but his argument I take to be to this effect:—In construction of the passage there is a double comparison, which, though perfectly clear to the intelligent reader, causes some confusion when a doubt is first raised as to the meaning of the word, and which can be cleared up only by a thorough analysis. "The cloud-capp'd towers," &c., are first compared with "the baseless fabric of this vision," like which they "shall dissolve," and afterwards with "this insubstantial pageant," like which (having "faded") they shall "leave not a rack behind." A given object can be said to "leave behind" only that which was originally of its elements, and for this reason only a general term such as wreck or vestige will accord with the construction of the passage.

I am sorry to find that any one should misquote Shakspeare for the purpose of obtaining a temporary triumph: probably, however, in the instance I am about to cite, A. E. B. has really fallen into the common error of regarding two similes as one. He says, giving the substance of Shakspeare's passage, "the globe itself shall dissolve, and, like this vision, leave not a wreck behind." What Shakspeare in substance does say is, "The globe itself, like this vision, shall dissolve, and, like this faded pageant, shall leave not a rack behind." A. E. B.'s question, therefore, "in what was the resemblance to the vision to consist, if not in melting, like it, into thin air?" is thus answered: The resemblance does consist in dissolving, or "melting" away.

My object in making these remarks is not to express an opinion on one side or the other, but to draw the attention of your readers to the real question at issue. I therefore say nothing as to whether Shakspeare may or may not have had a prevision of the nebular theory; though I cannot see that this would be in the least affected by our decision as to the meaning of this word, since the wrack or wreck of the world might well be represented by the "vapour" for which A. E. B. contends. As, however, this gentleman says such is its meaning "beyond all doubt," (a rather dogmatic way of settling the question, by the way, seeing that a doubt had been thrown upon it in the very paper he has engaged himself to answer,) I should like to be informed if there is any authority for the use of the word in Shakspeare, or his cotemporaries, as mere "haze" or "vapour." I have generally understood it to mean a particular description of cloud, or, as some say, more properly, the course of the clouds in motion.

In fine, as Prospero did undoubtedly point to the dissolution of the globe and all that it contained, it is quite clear that it could in such case leave neither "cloud" nor "vapour," nor anything else behind it. The simple question then remains: Is the word rack, as elsewhere used by Shakspeare and his contemporaries, logically applicable there?

A LOOKER-ON.

Dawlish, Aug. 16. 1851.

Wolken Zug, English Term corresponding to.

—Coleridge (Death of Wallenstein, Act V. Sc. 1.) gives the lines—

as a translation of

In a note on this passage he says:

"The words wanken and schweben are not easily translated. The English words by which we attempt to render them are either vulgar or pedantic, or not of sufficiently general application. So 'der Wolken Zug,' the draft, the procession of clouds, the masses of the clouds sweep onward in swift stream."

On reading this, it struck me that the English word rack exactly expresses the meaning of "der Wolken Zug."

Malone, in his note on the Tempest, Act IV. Sc. 1., says:

"Rack is generally used for a body of clouds, or rather for the course of clouds in motion."

I add a few instances of the use of this word, many of which are collected in the note I have referred to.

In Antony and Cleopatra—

In Fletcher's Faithful Shepherdess—

In Dryden's tenth Æneid—

The term scud, used by sailors, seems to express the same idea.

X. Z.

RICHARD ROLLE OF HAMPOLE. (Vol. iv., pp. 49. 116.)

The productions of the writer known by the name of the Hermit of Hampole have been hitherto much neglected: they afford copious illustrations of ancient manners, and are very valuable in a philological point of view. I would especially name the Speculum Vitæ, or Mirrour of Life, of which I possess two MSS. in entirely distinct dialects.

Your Cambridge correspondent has shown that the Metrical Sermons contain interesting passages also illustrative of manners and as the extracts he has made have given occasion to some glossarial Queries from an Oxford correspondent, J. E., should they not be more satisfactorily answered by C. H., to whom they are addressed, perhaps the following attempt to resolve them may not be unacceptable.

1. By the devenisch most probably the Danish is meant, which we find elsewhere written Deniske, Daniske, and Danske.

2. Guystroun should be quystroun, which is used by Chaucer in the Romaunt of the Rose, and signifies a scullion, as is evident from this passage. It is from the O. Fr. quistron or cuistron. Thus in K. Alisaunder (Weber's Metr. Rom.), v. 2511.:

3. By Chaunsemlees we may probably understand schoon-semeles, signifying, no doubt, sandals.

4. "Hir chere was ay semand sori," which your correspondent says is "an expression very strange to English verse," is nothing more than the old form of seeming: her cheer was ever sorrowful or sad-seeming. The termination and or ande, as well as inde, was formerly used where we now have ing. Examples are numerous of this form; as semand and semynd, spekand, strikinde, &c. &c.

In Gawin Douglas, Eneados, we have glaidsembland for an appearance of joy or gladness, a cheerful countenance; and in b. ii. v. 159.:

There are other words which appear in an uncommon form in these extracts, for instance, telid and telith, hirched and hirching; and the following plural form I do not recollect to have observed elsewhere:

In the last line of the first page, Salhanas should be Sathanas:

reminding us of the tradition mentioned by DR. RIMBAULT, "the Devil died when Christ suffered," not when he was born.

S. W. Singer.

Mickleham, Aug. 18. 1851.

Replies to Minor Queries.

Lady Flora Hastings' Bequest (Vol. iii., pp. 443. 522.; Vol. iv., pp. 44. 92. 108.).

—ERZA regrets extremely the mistake she has made with regard to the above poem. The person from whom, and the circumstances under which she received it, all tended to confirm her in her error till the last moment—with which, if the authoress of this beautiful poem were acquainted, ERZA is sure she would be forgiven.

[To these regrets on the part of ERZA we have to add the expression of our own that our columns should have been made the medium of a statement which it is obvious originated in error. We regret also that, after the contradictions given to the first statement, ERZA should, without a positive knowledge of the real facts of the case, have reiterated in such strong terms the claims of Lady Flora Hastings to the authorship of a poem which it is now quite clear is really the production of Miss Barber.]

"The Right Divine of Kings to govern wrong" (Vol. iv., p. 125).

—I cannot concur in MR. CROSSLEY'S conjecture that the marks of quotation affixed to this line in the eighteenth book of the Dunciad may have been a mere error of the press; because, in the first place, I do not find that the Dunciad is more negligently printed than other works of the day. I should say rather less so; but (which is more important) any one who will look at the successive editions will, I think, be satisfied that the remarkable typography of the line, carefully reproduced in all, could not be accidental. This matter is less trifling than it at first sight may seem, because there are several lines in Pope's works similarly marked as quotations, on which questions have arisen; and my belief is that everything so marked will turn out to have really been a quotation, though in this case, and in that other,

we have, as yet, failed to find the original.

C.

Fairlight Church (Vol. iv., p. 57.).

—The old church was Early English; the original windows were lancet-shaped. It was built, like all the adjoining churches, of stone; but it had been repaired with brick, and the roof of the tower had been covered with tiles instead of shingles. The earliest brick building in Sussex, after the Roman period, is Herstmonceux Castle, built by Sir Roger de Fynes, treasurer of the household to Henry VI.

W. D. COOPER

Dogmatism and Puppyism (Vol. iv, p. 102).

—The quotation your correspondent writes about to be found in MR. DOUGLAS JERROLD'S A Man Made of Money, p. 252.:

"'Robert, my dear,' said Jenny, with the deferential air of a scholar, 'Robert, what did Mr. Carraways mean when he said he hated dog—dogmatism?' Topps was puzzled. 'Robert, my dear,' Jenny urged, 'what—what in the world is dogmatism?' Now it was the weakness of Topps, never to confess ignorance of anything soever to his wife. 'A man should never do it,' Topps had been known in convivial seasons to declare; 'it makes 'em conceited.' Whereupon Topps prepared himself, as was his wont, to make solemn, satisfying, answer. Taking off his hat, and smoothing the wrinkles of his brow, Topps said, 'Humph! what is dogmatism? Why, it is this, of course: dogmatism is puppyism come to its full growth.'"

E D. STEANE JACKSON.

Saffron Walden, Aug. 10.

Was Stella Swift's Sister? (Vol. iii., p. 450.; Vol. iv., p. 110.).

—That Swift was the son of Sir William Temple seems to have been completely disproved by Mason. Swift was born in Dublin, 30th November, 1667, in the house of his uncle Godwin Swift, who, after the death of his younger brother, Jonathan, in the preceding April, took charge of his widow. Sir William Temple appears from his letters to have been abroad in a public capacity from 1665 to 1670. If therefore, there existed such consanguinity between Swift and Stella as to be a bar to their marriage, it must have arisen in some other way. Swift says that Stella "was born at Richmond in Surrey, on 13th March, 1681; her father being the younger brother of a good family in Nottinghamshire [Qy. Sir Wm. Temple? Sheen, where he resided, was close by], her mother of a lower degree." There can be little doubt that she was illegitimate. The question arises, who was her mother? On this point the Richmond registry might perhaps throw some light. Has it ever been searched? In order that the supposed consanguinity should have existed, her mother must have been either Swift's mother, Abigail Swift (née Erick) of Leicestershire, or (what seems more probable) an illegitimate half-sister of Swift. It has been surmised, however, that an impediment to Swift's marriage of an entirely different nature from consanguinity may have existed; or that, feeling himself to be labouring under an hereditary disease, he may have been unwilling to propagate it. I am much inclined to think that the objection to the marriage of Swift and Stella, which certainly must have existed, was of this last description; and that it would have been equally strong the case of any other female. However this may be, I believe that full credit may be given to what Swift has stated respecting the perfect purity of his intercourse with Stella.

"I knew her from six years old, and had some share in her education, by directing what books she should read, and perpetually instructing her in the principles of honour and virtue, from which she never swerved in any one action or moment of her life."—Swift's Works, vol ix. p. 489. (citante Mason).

E. H. D. D.

Charles Lamb's Epitaph (Vol. iii., pp. 322. 459.).

—It has been suggested to me by a lady who was an intimate friend of Lamb's, that Mr. Justice Talfourd was the author of this epitaph. The observation, however, was made without, I believe, any certain knowledge on the subject.

COWGILL.

Meaning of Carnaby (Vol. iii., p. 495.).

—ARUN inquires as to the meaning of Carnaby as the name of a street. Carnaby is a surname probably deriving from the parish of Carnaby in Yorkshire. It has become a Christian name in the family of —— Haggerston, Bart., since the marriage of an heiress of Carnaby's into that family.

Streets are often called after proper names.

†

Scandinavian Mythology (Vol. ii, p. 141.).

—Your correspondent T. J. has called attention to the tradition-falsifying assertion of Mr. G. Pigott, that the custom with which the Scandinavians were long reproached, of drinking out of the skulls of their enemies, has no other foundation than a blunder of Olaus Wormius in translating a passage in the death-song of Regner Lodbrog.

The following extracts from the curious and learned work of Bartholinus, De Causis Contemptæ a Danis Adhuc Gentilibus Mortis, will, I think, show that the subject deserves further inquiry before we consent to place this ancient historical tradition in the category of vulgar errors. Speaking of the banquets of the beatified heroes in Valhalla, Bartholinus says:

"Neque tamen ex communi animalium cornu elaborata pocula in Valhalla viserentur; sacratiora desiderabantur ex cæsorum craniis inimicorum confecta, quæ apud Danos vel ex Daniâ oriundos, alias quoque gentes, in summo erant pretio."—Lib. ii. cap. xii. p. 555.

In proof of this assertion he quotes the following authors; Herodotus (lib. iv. cap. 65.) and Plato (Euthydemus), who attribute this custom to the Scythians. Aristotle is supposed to allude to it, De Repub. lib. vii. cap. 2. In the Historia Miscellanea, lib. vi., it is mentioned as a custom of the Scordisci; and similar customs are recorded of the Panebi by Nicolaus Damascenus, of the Essedones by Solinus and Mela, of the Boii by Livy (lib iii. cap. 24.), of the Celts by Silius Italicus (lib. ii.), of the Langobards by Paulus Diaconus (lib. i. cap. 27.). The last-mentioned author informs us that these skull cups were alled "scalæ;" upon which Bartholinus remarks—

"Unde genus, undeque morem ejusmodi conficiendarum paterarum unde etiam nomen scalæ iis inditum, ex septentrione nempe traxerunt Langobardi manifestum facient Vaulundar qvidu.

W. B. R.

Scandal against Queen Elizabeth (Vol. iii., pp. 225. 285. 393.).

—I do not recollect that either of your correspondents on this subject has brought forward the aspersion upon Queen Elizabeth's fair fame in precisely the same form in which the Jesuit Sanders places it in the following passage:—

"Hâc Ecclesiæ contra ipsam sententiâ, et Catholicorum novis incrementis quotidianis, non mediocriter offensa Elizabetha, convocatis ordinibus, leges valde iracundas et cruentas contra veteris fidei cultores promulgat: quibus primum cavetur, ne quis Elizabetham hæreticam, schismaticam, infidelem, usurpatricemve, sub pœnâ capitis vocet. Item. Ne quis aliam quamcunque certam personam nominet, cui regnum vel in vitâ, vel post mortem ipsius, deberi dicatur, exceptâ Elizabethæ naturali prole. Ea enim sunt ipsa decreti verba. In eam enim homines vel adulationem vel necessitatem ita perduxit hæresis, ut quod illud nobilissimum regnum illegitimæ illius regis sui proli ægre unquam concessit, nunc naturali, id est, spuriæ, soboli reginæ in cujus sexu fornicationis peccatum est fœdius, non denegarint: pariter et reipublicæ, ex proximi successoris ignoratione, extremum periculum, et Elizabethæ incontinentiam prodentes."—Nicolai Sanderi Hist. Schism. Angl. lib. iii. § Novæ leges latæ in Catholicos, ann. 1571, ed. 8vo. Col. Agr. 1628, p. 299.

To some of your readers this passage may seem to indicate that the use of the equivocal word naturali may have given colour, not to say occasion, to the whole scandal against Queen Elizabeth. By many, I apprehend, it will be acknowledged that spuriæ is not the only, if an allowable, interpretation.

J. SANSOM.

Oxford, July 22. 1851.

Meaning of "Deal" (Vol. iv., p. 88.).

—I think the following may help to throw a little light upon the use of the word deal as meaning divide. I was in Wensleydale about a month ago; and on inquiring where the boundary between the North and West Ridings of Yorkshire ran, was told, "On the top of Penhill, where God's water deals" (i. e. the rain divides). I may further add, on my own knowledge, that in the north-west corner of Suffolk, where the country is almost entirely open, the boundaries of the different parishes are marked by earthen mounds, from three to six feet high, which are known in the neighbourhood as dools the word being probably derived from the same root. I have been told, however, that it should be spelled duals, and that the derivation of it was from the Latin duo as marking two parishes; but I am sure that it is always pronounced by the country-people at a monosyllable, and therefore the chances are in favour of the former derivation being the right one.

A propos to Suffolk, another of your correspondents (Vol. iv., p. 55) lately mentioned the fashion the people there have of leaving out the ve in the middle of the names of places. In this I can bear him witness also; but I do not think it is confined to those letters only: e. g. Eriswell, pronounced Asel; Wymondham (in Norfolk) Wyndham, &c. Among those names of places in which the ve is left out, your correspondent has omitted Elveden (commonly, though erroneously, Elvedon), which is always called and often spelled Elden.

A. N.

"The Worm in the Bud," &c. (Vol. iv., p. 86.).

—This quotation is from Cowper's lines appended to the Bill of Mortality for the parish of All Saints, Northampton, for 1787:

I know not with whom the idea originated. The imagery is frequently used by Shakspeare, but with him never indicates disease or death.

I can call to mind no similar expression in the classics.

H. E. H.

Moore's Almanack (Vol. iv., p. 74.).

—Your correspondent FRANCIS is in error as to the MSS. and correspondence of Henry Andrews being in the possession of his son, Mr. Wm. Henry Andrews. Mr. W. H. Andrews some time ago sold to me the whole of his father's MSS. correspondence, astronomical and astrological calculations, with a mass of very curious letters from persons desirous of having their "nativities cast." I have also some copies of Andrews' portrait, one of which shall be much at your service.

Moore's Almanack was known by that name long before Andrews had any connection with it, but he was for upwards of forty years its compiler for the Company of Stationers, whose liberal (?) treatment of Andrews may be collected from the following postscript to a letter addressed to me by his son:—

"My father's calculations, &c., for Moore's Almanack, continued during a period of forty-three years; and although through his great talent and management he increased the sale of that work from 100,000 to 500,000, yet, strange to say, all he received for his services was 25l. per ann.!! Yet I never heard him murmur even once about it; such was his delight in pursuing his favourite studies, that his anxiety about remuneration was out of the question. Sir Richard Phillips, who at times visited him at Royston, once met him in London, and endeavoured to persuade him to go with him to Stationers' Hall, and he would get him 100l.; but he declined going, saying that he was satisfied."

Andrews was also computer to the Board of Longitude, and Maskelyne's Letters evidence the value and correctness of his calculations.

The only materials left by Andrews for a memoir of his life I believe I possess, and some day I may find leisure to put them into order for publication.

ROBT. COLE.

Scurvy Ale.

—The Query (Vol. iv., p. 68.) "What was scurvy ale?" may perhaps be answered by an extract from a little work, The Polar Sea and Regions, published by Oliver and Boyd, Edinburgh. In the account of Baffin's voyage, in which he discovered the bay called after him Baffin's Bay, we are told that—

"Finding the health of his crew rather declining, he sailed across to Greenland, where an abundance of scurvy grass boiled in beer quickly restored them; and the Lord then sent them a speedy and good passage homeward."

Johnson explains scurvy-grass as spoonwort.

W. FRASER.

Siege of Londonderry (Vol. iv., p. 87.).

—Will you have the goodness to inform your correspondent that I have a pamphlet, printed soon after the famous siege was over, giving a particular account of it, though it altogether omits mentioning the name of an ancestor of mine who distinguished himself in the relief of that place. I shall be happy to afford E. A. any information or assistance he may require.

B. G.

Salting the Bodies of the Dead (Vol. iv., p. 6.),

about which MR. MCCABE asks, is a very old custom in England. Matt. Paris, in his description of Abbot William's funeral at St. Albans, A.D. 1235, tells us how—

"Corpus apertum est. &c. Et quicquid in corpore repertum est, in quadam cuna repositum est, sale conspersum. Et in cœmiterio, est humatum. Corpus autem interius, aceto lotum et imbutum et multo sale respersum et resutum. Et hoc sic factum est circumspecte et prudenter, ne corpus per triduum et amplius reservandum, tetrum aliquem odorem olfacientibus generaret et corpus tumulandum, contrectantibus aliquod offendiculum praesentaret."—Vitæ S. Albani Abbatum, p. 87. ed. Wats, Paris, 1644.

DA. ROCK.

Buckland, July 24. 1851.

In the 86th and two following sections of the Second Book of Herodotus is the description of the ancient Egyptian methods of preserving the bodies of the dead. These were more or less embalmed with aromatic spices, according to the condition of the person, and then corned with saltpetre (λιτρον, nitre) for seventy days; strictly, salted. Is it possible that the early Christians, in adopting this practice, may have been influenced by that very obscure passage, Mark ix. 49.: "Every one shall be salted with fire?"

ALFRED GATTY.

The custom of placing a plate of salt on the body of the dead is very general in Wales. I remember, when a child, inquiring the reason of the practice, and being told by an old woman that it was to prevent the body from swelling. My remark, that any weight might answer the same purpose, was met by the reply; "there's no weight so heavy as salt gets when it is on the dead." This proves that some feeling of superstition mingles with the custom. Has not the use of salt in baptism, amongst the Italians &c., come allusion to the banishment of the evil spirit?

SELEUCUS.

The Word "Repudiate" (Vol. iv., p. 54.).

—That the use of the word repudiate, in the sense of refuse, repel, reject, abandon, disown, cast off, is by no means modern; and that such phrases as "I repudiate the idea," "I repudiate the sentiment," "I repudiate the proposal," are strictly correct, is evident from the use of the word by "standard classical authors" in the original language from which it has come down to us. Sallust, for instance, in his History of Catiline's Conspiracy, says that Lentulus advised him to seek assistance everywhere, even amongst the dregs of the populace; asking him at the same time, "Why, since the senate had already adjudged him to be an enemy to the republic, he should repudiate the slaves?" i. e., refuse to enrol them in his levies.

"Cum ab senatu hostis judicatus sit, quo consilio servitia repudiet?"—Sall. Cat. 44.

Cicero, in his Offices, in opposition to the opinion of the peripatetic school, that anger is implanted in us by nature for useful ends, lays it down as a principle, that "on all occasions anger ought to be repudiated;" that is, "cast out of the mind," and says that "it is to be wished that persons who are at the head of the state should be like the laws, which inflict punishment not in anger but in justice."

"Illa (iracundia) vero omnibus in rebus repudianda est."—Cic. de Off. I. xxv. 13.

Cicero knew nothing of the Christian grace of "being angry and sinning, not;" he knew nothing of the severity of love. In another place he tells us that on one occasion Themistocles declared in the Athenian assembly, that he had a plan to propose which would be of great advantage to the state, but ought not to be made public. He was willing, however, to communicate it to any one person whom they might select. Aristides, rightly named the Just, being the person selected, Themistocles disclosed his plan to him: which was, secretly to set fire to the Lacedæmonian fleet in the dockyard of Gytheum, by which means they would effectually crush the power of the Lacedæmonians. Aristides returned to the assembly, and at once declared that Themistocles' plan was certainly very advantageous, but by no means honourable; whereupon the Athenians, rightly considering that what was not attended with honour, could not be attended even with advantage in reality, without hearing another word, "repudiated the whole affair;" that is, utterly rejected the proposal.

"Itaque Athenienses, quod honestum non esset, id ne utile quidem putaverunt; totamque eam rem, quam ne audierant quidem, auctore Aristide, repudiaverunt."—Cic. de Off. III. xi. 12.

In a third place, he relates that some persons forged a will of one Minucius Basilus, who had died in Greece; and, in order that they might the more easily obtain their end, put down Marcus Crassus and Quintus Hortensius, two of the most influential men in Rome at that time, as co-legatees with themselves, who although they suspected the will to be forged, yet did not repudiate the little legacy coming to them through other persons' fraud, because forsooth they were not privy to the actual commission of the forgery.

"Qui cum illud falsum esse suspicarentur, sibi autem nullius essent conscii culpæ, alieni facinoris munusculum non repudiaverunt."—Cic. de Off. III. xviii. 4.

A little further research might easily multiply instances, but I think these are quite sufficient to prove that we moderns are but following the ancients in using the word repudiate without reference to any obligation expressed or implied.

F. F. F.

Repudiate, Ringlet, Outburst (Vol. iv., p. 54.).

—Your correspondent H. C. K. has dealt, I fear, somewhat too harshly with "repudiate." Surely "repudiare" is "to reject what one is ashamed of, scorns, or disdains." Two instances immediately suggest themselves in Cicer. pro Plancio, 18 (44). 20 (50). In the former—

"Respuerent aures, nemo agnosceret, repudiarent,"

perhaps the word is a gloss upon "respuerunt." The latter, however, is unexceptionable:

"Nunquam enim fere nobilitas, integra præsertim atque innocens, a Populo Romano supplex repudiata fuit."

Why then should "repudiate" necessarily imply the notion of "obligation?" and why should I, if I "repudiate" the criticism of H. C. K., be held to "talk nonsense?"

May I be allowed room for a couple of Queries? 1. Is our modern usage of "ringlet" found before the time of Milton? 2. What is the earliest authority for "outburst?"

CHARLES THIRIOLD.

Cambridge, July 29. 1851.

On the Letter "v" (Vol. iv., p. 55.).

—I have read with pleasure the paragraphs in your "NOTES AND QUERIES" on "the letter v," and beg space for a further notice, with an especial reference to the patronymic of Ray or Wray. One family uses the motto, "Juste et Vrai," whose name is Wray; and another the same motto, whose name is Ray. And it will be remembered that John Ray, the naturalist, changed the orthography of his name from Wray to Ray, as he concluded it had been formerly written; and in one of the letters published by the Ray Society, [9] allusion is made to the adjective or substantive vrai, as if that distinguished philosopher and divine had either derived his name thence, or it had the same signification as that French word. Are we then to take this as an instance of the silent v or double u or v; and as any proof that families writing their names Wray and Ray were originally of one patronymic and one common root, and that presumptively Norman?

Under a separate heading, perhaps you will also indulge me with a Query as to the coat of arms, under the portrait by Bathon, 1760, after W. Hibbart, of Joannes Rajus, A.M., prefixed to Dr. Derham's Life of John Ray, published by George Scott, M.A. and F.R.S.: London, 1760. The shield is, gules, on a fesse, between three crescents, three cross crosslets. Is it inferable that that coat was ever borne by patent or admissible prescriptive right, by any of his ancestors? Several families in the north of England, whence his father came, also have registered in respectable armories crescents against their names. The poor origin of John Ray is obviated, in some degree, by what is said in a Life of him, published in The Portrait Gallery of British Worthies, by Charles Knight. I suppose he himself used the armorials in question, and was related to the family of nearly the same name, bearing crescents, viz. Reay.

The glasses of some of your correspondents may assist one more shortsighted than themselves.

H. W. G. R., Presbyter, and Member of the Ray Society.

1. Mead Place, Derby, Aug. 2. 1851.

I beg leave to correct a remark of W. S. W***. as to Tiverton, Devon, which was never pronounced Terton; it is Twiverton, near Bath, which is pronounced Twerton.

S. S.

"Whig" and "Tory" (Vol. iv., p. 57.).

—The name "Whig" is derived from the Celtic ugham, a sort of large saddle, with bags attached to it, in use among the freebooters of the borders of Scotland: hence those robbers were known to the Highlanders by the name of Whiggam-more, or "big-saddle thieves;" and when the Civil War broke out, the Highlanders and Irish, who supported the king, called themselves a taobh Righ, i. e. "the king's party," and gave the name of Whiggamore thieves to their opponents. Whiggammore and taobh Righ soon became shortened to Whig and Tory, and in aftertimes served to distinguish the supporters of the rival houses of Hanover and Stuart. The modern signification of the terms is different, Whig being taken to mean "liberal," and Tory "exclusive."

FRAS. CROSSLEY.

Planets of the Months (Vol. iv., p. 23.).

—I do not understand this Query. What is meant by "planets for the months?" There are twelve months, and in common parlance only seven planets. Nor do I see what is meant by "precious stones symbolizing those planets." In heraldry, the arms of sovereigns and royal personages are blazoned by the names of the sun, moon, and planets, for colours, as those of noblemen are by precious stones. If this is what is asked after, the following table will explain it:—

Colours. Pr. Stones. Planets.

Or Topaz Sol

Argent Pearl Luna

Sable Diamond Saturn

Gules Ruby Mars

Azure Sapphire Jupiter

Vert Emerald Venus

Purpure Amethyst Mercury

C.

Baronets of Ireland (Vol. iv., p. 44.).

—The two following extracts may throw some light upon the origin of the title of baronet. James I. probably adopted this title, which he found to have been so long existing in Ireland, for the new order of nobility he was about to establish. And it should be remembered that the order of baronet was instituted for the purpose of promoting the plantation of Ulster.

The names mentioned in the second extract are probably those of the baronets whom Spenser mentions as being, in existence in his time. There was, thirty years ago, a "Baron of Galtrim;" perhaps there is still.

EUDOX: "You say well, for by the increase of Freeholders, their numbers hereby will be greatly augmented; but how should it passe through the higher house, which still must consiste all of Irish?"

IREN: "Marry, that also may bee redressed by ensample of that which I heard was done in the like case by King Edward III. (as I remember), who being greatly bearded and crossed by the Lords of the cleargie, they being there [i. e. in the Parliament of Ireland] by reason of the Lords Abbots, and others, too many and too strong for him, so as hee could not for their frowardnesse order and reforme things as hee desired, was advised to direct out his writts to certaine Gentlemen of the best ability and trust, entitling them therein Barons, to serve and sitt as Barons in the next Parlament. By which meanes hee had so many Barons in his Parlament, as were able to weigh down the Cleargie and their friends: the which Barons, they say, were not afterwards Lords, but onely Baronets, as sundry of them doe yet retayne the name."—Spenser's "View of the State of Ireland," in the Ancient Irish Histories, Dublin Edition, 1809, pp. 223, 224.

T. J.

Hopkins the Witchfinder (Vol. ii., pp. 392. 413.).

—Your correspondents will find some "curious memoirs" of this person in the Anthologia Hibernica for June, 1793, p. 424. The memoirs are embellished with a plate "correctly copied from an extreme rare print in the collection of J. Bindley, Esq."

R. H.

Plowden (Vol. iv., p. 58.).

—From Burke's Landed Gentry, 1846, under "Plowden of Plowden" (A.D. 1194), it would appear that Edmund was of Wansted, Hampshire, and ancestor of the Plowdens of Lassam, Hants, and that he "was styled in his will, July 29, 1655, Sir Edmund, lord earl palatine, governor, and captain general, of the province of New Albion." I would suggest to your Transatlantic readers the interest that would be derived from a compilation of surnames in the United States; and in cases where it can be ascertained, the date of introduction, position of first immigrant, ancestry, and descendants. The names and subsequent history of those families who remained loyal during the American Revolution, are worthy of record; most of whom have, I believe, prospered in the world since the confiscation of their property.

The names of the followers of William the Conqueror are often alluded to; but the "comers over" at the conquest of Wales, Scotland, and Ireland are but seldom thought of, though they lend to their descendants' pedigree a degree of historical interest.

A. C.

As lazy as Ludlam's Dog (Vol. i., pp. 382. 475.).

—This proverb is to be found in Ray's first edition (1670), and is quoted in a little book entitled Scarronides, et cet., a burlesque on the second book of Virgil's Æneid. Æneas, reposing on the "toro alto," is likened to "Ludlam's curr, on truckle lolling;" whilst a marginal note says "'Tis a proverb, Ludlam's dog lean'd his head against a wall when he went to bark." Both here and in Ray the name is spelt Ludlam.

CRANMORE.

Pope and Flatman (Vol. iv., p. 132.).

—The piece quoted by MR. BARTON had long since been pointed out by Warton (Essay on Pope), who has also collected many others which Pope may have known and made use of, some which he must.

V.

Spenser's Faerie Queene (Vol. iv., p. 133.).

—The explanation of the stanza in question would occupy more space than I think you would spare me. It will suffice to note that a very sufficient one will be found in Todd's edition of Spenser (1803) in vol. iii., at the close of canto ix. book ii.; and that the letter of Sir K. Digby is given at full length, before the editor's own commentary and explanation, in that place.

V.

Belgravia.

Bells in Churches (Vol. ii., p. 326.).

—In reply to the inquiry whether there is still a law against the use of bells as a summons to divine services, except in churches, which has not been answered, permit me to quote the following sentences from a judgment of Lord Chief Justice Campbell, as reported in the Times of August 14.

"First, with regard to the right of using bells at all. By the common law, churches of every denomination had a full right to use bells, and it was a vulgar error to suppose that there was any distinction at the present time in this respect. At the same time, those bells might undoubtedly be made use of in such a manner as to create a nuisance; and in that case a Protestant church and a Roman Catholic one were equally liable."

The case (Soltan v. De Weld) from the judgment in which the above remarks are extracted was tried at the Croydon Assizes, and related to the use of bells by a Romanist community in such a manner as was alleged to be a nuisance.

ARUN.

Proverb of James I. (Vol. iv., p. 85.).

—The meaning of this proverb will be found in Jamieson's Scottish Dictionary, 4to. ed:—To "cone" or "cunne" thanks, is "to give thanks; to express a sense of obligation; to leave a sense of obligation."

S. WMSON.