Chapter D: S. a

_Old-Shoe throwing at Weddings._--Can any of your readers inform me what is the origin of the custom of throwing an old shoe over the bride and bridegroom upon their leaving the church, or the "maison paternelle" after their wedding?

This ceremony, though peculiar as I believe to Scotland and our northern counties, has lately been adopted at our aristocratic marriages in London, and more should be known of its history.

BRAYBROOKE.

_Herbé's "Costumes Français."_--The valuable work by M. Herbé, _Costumes Français; Civiles, Militaires et Religieux_, 4to. Paris, is doubtless well known to your readers.

I have heard that after its publication sundry persons, judging perhaps from the eccentricity of many of the costumes, doubted their accuracy, and even considered them the result of M. Herbé's fancy; and that that gentleman, annoyed at the imputation, subsequently published another work citing his authorities.

Query, Can any one verify this statement? and if true, inform me of the title of this latter work; and whether it is to be found in any library in this country, and where?

PICTOR.

* * * * *

Minor Queries with Answers.

_Humphry Smith_ (Vol. vii., p. 80.).--Having heard of a work of his, giving an account of the persecution in his time, will you or one of your contributors be so good as furnish a list of the titles of his works; with a note naming where they may be met with for inspection?

GLYWYSIG.

[The first two in the following list of the works of Humphry Smith, the
Quaker, are in the British Museum; the remainder are in the Bodleian:
1. A Sad and Mournful Lamentation for the People of these Nations, but
especially for the Priests and Leaders of them, 4to. 1660. 2.
Meditations of an Humble Heart, 4to. 3. Something further laid open of
the Cruel Persecution of the People called Quakers, by the Magistrates
and People of Evesham, 4to. 1656. 4. For the Honour of the King, and
the great advancing thereof (amongst men) over all nations in the
world, in some proposals tending thereunto; stated in six particulars,
4to. 1661. 5. Sound Things Asserted in the King's own words, from late
experience, from Scripture truth, and according to reason and equity,
offered in meekness and goodwill unto the consideration of all Kings,
Lords, Counsellors, &c., 4to. 1662. 6. Something in Reply to Edmund
Skipp's book, which he calles "The World's Wonder, or the Quaker's
Blazing Starre," at the end of an Answer to Edmund Skipp's book by R.
F. Watt, in his _Bibliotheca_, has confounded Smith the Quaker with
Humphry Smith, Vicar of Tounstal and St. Saviour's, Dartmouth.]

_Meaning and Etymology of "Conyngers" or "Connigries."_--In the preamble to the statute 13 Rich. II. c. 13., entitled "None shall hunt but they which have a sufficient living," this word occurs; and I am totally at a loss as to its meaning. The passage is--

"Vont chaceants es parkes, garennes et conyngers des seignurs et
autres;"

which, in Pickering's edition of the _Statutes at Large_, is translated:

"They go hunting in parks, warrens, and connigries of lords and
others."

Would any reader of "N. & Q." kindly enlighten me on the subject?

A. W.

Kilburn.

[Blount explains _Coningeria_ as a coney-borough, or warren of conies.
"Item dicunt, quod idem Dominus potest capere in duabus _coningeriis_,
quas habet infra Insulam de Vecta, 100 cuniculos per annum, et valet
quilibet cuniculos 2d." Inq. de anno 47 Hen. III., n. 32.]

_Letters U, V, W, and St. Ives_ (Vol. vii., p. 39.).--Is St. Ives by any possibility connected with St. Jue's, St. Jew's, or St. Jude's? Jve's and Iue's must have been undistinguishable in the ancient confusion of J and I, V and U. If I am here displaying ignorance, I ask, What is the legend of St. Ives?

W. FRASER.

Tor-Mohun.

[St. Ives is named from Iä, who was one of the missionary band that
accompanied St. Kiaran, alias Piran, from Ireland in the fifth century.
The Cornish have consecrated almost all their towns to the memory of
these Irish saints: "witness," says Camden, "St. Burian, St. Ives, St.
Columb, St. Mewan, St. Erben, St. Eval, St. Wenn, and St. Enedor." It
appears that these missionaries landed in Cornwall at Pendinas,
hill-head, now called St. Ives; for in the Legend of St. Ives,
contained in _Nova Legenda Angliæ_, we read that "Tewdor was king at
that time, and had a palace at Pendinas; and that Dinan, a greate lord
of Cornwall, at the request of St. Iä, built a church at the same
place." See Butler's _Lives_, March 5th; and Haslam's _Perranzabuloe_,
p. 55.]

{183}

* * * * *

Replies.

THE ORKNEY ISLANDS IN PAWN.

(Vol. vii., p. 105.)

It gives me much pleasure to be enabled to inform your correspondent KIRKWALLENSIS that there is no fear of our losing these islands in the manner suggested by him, they having been renounced by Denmark nearly four hundred years ago, as will be seen from the following sketch.

The Orkneys were taken from the Picts about A.D. 838, by Kenneth II., king of Scotland, to which kingdom they were attached until 1099, when Donald VIII., surnamed Bane, brother to Malcolm Canmore, usurped the crown, to the prejudice of his nephews Edgar, Alexander, and David; and requiring assistance to maintain his position, he applied to Magnus, king of Norway, to whom, says Skene, "for help and supply he gave all the isles of Scotland (Camden says the Orkneys only), where, through and for other causes, many bloody battles were fought, until the battle of Larges, 3rd August, 1260, in the time of Alexander III. of Scotland, and Acho, king of Norway." The Scots proving victorious, Magnus of Norway, son and successor of Acho, made peace with Alexander, and renounced and discharged all right and title which he or his successors had, or might have or pretend, to the isles of Scotland, the king of Scotland paying therefor yearly to the said Magnus and his successors one hundred marks of sterling money. This contract was confirmed in 1312 by Haquin V. of Norway and Robert I. of Scotland. In 1426 Eric X. of Denmark renewed with James I. of Scotland these ancient treaties, particularly with regard to the Western Isles; the pension or annuity having been long omitted to be paid, Eric now freely gave it up to James; and thus, in appearance, the Orkneys were finally confirmed to Scotland; but virtually it was not so until 1468, when, says Skene, "at last the said annual, with all the arrearages and by-runs thereof, was discharged and renounced _simpliciter_, in the contract of marriage between King James III. and Margaret, daughter of Christian I., king of Norway, Denmark, and Sweden, on the 8th of September, 1468; which discharge is not only ratified, but renewed thereafter by the said king, on the 12th May, 1469. It appears that James III., on the 24th February, 1483, commanded his ambassador sent to the Pope to desire a confirmation of the said perpetual renunciation and discharge of the contribution of the Isles."

According to Dr. Wallace's account (1700), King Christian agreed that the isles of Orkney and Zetland should remain in the possession of King James and his successors, as the Princess Margaret's dower, until either King Christian or his successors should pay to King James or his successors the sum of fifty thousand florins of the Rhine; but in the year following, hearing of his daughter's delivery of a prince at Edinburgh, he "for joy thereof renounced for ever to the crown of Scotland all right or claim to the said isles."

BROCTUNA.

Bury, Lancashire.

KIRKWALLENSIS seems to have been led into an error respecting the Orkneys. It is true that Orkney and Shetland belonged to the crown of Norway, to which the Scottish family of St. Clair, or Sinclair, rendered military service for the earldom. It was not, however, to an English king, but to James III. of Scotland that Christian gave the hand of "the Maid of Norway." In the marriage preliminaries the latter thus stipulates respecting the dower:--"Rex cedit sexaginta aureorum Rhenensium [florenorum] millia, ejus summæ priusquam è Danæ regno sponsa digrediatur numeraturus aureorum decem millia, quod verò reliquum esset supplerent insulæ regni Norvegici, jam memoratæ, _Orcades_, una cum jurisdictione ac cæteris eodem pertinentibus, hac tamen lege, ut insulas eas, eousque teneat Scotiæ Rex sub firma _hypotheca_ donec vel ipse, vel ejus heredes, Daniæ ac Norvegiæ Reges, æqua vicissim portione easdem redimant." This article was afterwards embodied in the marriage contract:--"Et terræ insularum Orchaden Regi nostro Jacobo _impignoratæ, ad Norvegiæ reges revertentur_," &c. Both documents are preserved in Torfæus (_Orcades_, pp. 188--191.). Mr. Auker's discovery of the original is, however, an interesting circumstance, as it would seem that the marriage in question was but the result of an attempt to settle amicably an ancient dispute respecting the sovereignty of the Hebrides--"vetus controversia de Hæbudis et Mannia magnis utriusque populi cladibus agitata"--which the king of France, as umpire, had been unable to pronounce upon, in consequence of the loss or concealment of the original instruments.

W. G. A.

* * * * *

THE PASSAGE IN KING HENRY VIII., ACT III. SC. 2.

(Vol. vii., pp. 5. 111.)

Having no desire to enter into unnecessary controversy, I do not often reply to objections made to my conjectural emendations of passages in Shakspeare; but on the present occasion I think it incumbent on me to appeal to the common sense of those who take interest in such matters, by merely placing in juxta-position the reading I have proposed, and that of your Leeds correspondent, and thus leave it to their impartial decision without fear of the result. It may be necessary, as your correspondent has adverted to {184} what precedes, to give the passage as it stands in the folio at some length. Wolsey having said--

"For your great Graces
Heap'd upon me (poore Undeserver) I
Can nothing offer but my Allegiant thankes,
My Prayres to heaven for you; my Loyaltie
Which ever ha's, and ever shall be growing
Till death (that Winter) kill it."

The King replies:

"Fairely answer'd:
A Loyal, and obedient Subject is
Therein illustrated, the Honor of it
Does pay the Act of it, as i'th' contrary
The fowlenesse is the punishment. I presume
That as my hand ha's open'd Bounty to you,
My heart dropt Love, my powre rain'd Honor, more
On you, then any: So your Hand, and Heart,
Your Braine, and every Function of your power,
Should, notwithstanding that your bond of duty,
As 'twer in Love's particular, be more
To me your Friend, then any."

Wolsey rejoins:

"I do professe
That for your Highnesse good, I ever labour'd
More then mine owne: that am, haue, and will be
(Though all the world should crack their duty to you,
And throw it from their Soule, though perils did
Abound, as thicke as thought could make 'em, and
Appeare in formes more horrid) yet my Duty,
As doth a Rocke against the chiding Flood,
Should the approach of this wilde River breake,
And stand unshaken yours."

I read:

"I do profess
That for your highness' good I ever labour'd
More than mine own: that _I'm true_, and will be,
Though all the world should lack their duty to you,
And throw it from their soul: though perils did
Abound, as thick as thought could make them, and
Appear in forms more horrid; yet my duty
(As doth a rock against the chiding flood)
Should the approach of this wild river break,
And stand unshaken yours."

Your Leeds correspondent would read:

"I do profess
That for your highness' good I ever labour'd
More than mine own.--_That_, am _I_, have, and will be,
Though all the world should crack their duty to you
And throw it from their soul," &c.

For his arguments I must refer to his note (p. 111. _antè_), merely observing that I cannot conceive how any alteration in the punctuation of the King's speech could connect it with this! Making _That_ emphatic helps nothing, as there is no antecedent to which it can refer; and if "we can by no means part with _have_," we must interpolate _been_ after it to make it any way intelligible, to the marring of the verse.

With regard to the substitution of _lack_ for _crack_ in my former note, it should be recollected that I then said "I do not insist upon this." We might, however, substitute _slack_, if change should be deemed necessary, and it would be still nearer in form to the suspected word.

I may safely leave the _palpable_ error in _As You Like It_ to the decision of common sense.

As I am dealing with corrections in the play of _King Henry VIII._, I may take occasion to observe that MR. COLLIER, in his recent supplemental volume of _Notes and Emendations_, has, I have no doubt unwittingly, stated that a passage, Act IV. Sc. 2., has been absurdly pointed, "over and over again, from the year 1623 to our own day." Whereas it will be found corrected, exactly as it stands in his second folio, in the edition I gave of Shakspeare in 1826, with a note adverting to the absurdity of the old pointing. I may further add, that the first instance MR. COLLIER gives in his preface of the corrections in his folio, is in the same predicament. He has stated that the reading of "Aristotle's _cheeks_" for "Aristotle's _ethics_," in the first scene of the _Taming of the Shrew_, "has been the invariable text from the first publication in 1623 until our own day;" when the fact is, that it stands properly corrected in my edition in 1826, with the following note:

"Blackstone suggests that we should read _ethics_, and the sense seems
to require it; I have therefore admitted it into the text."

It is possible that MR. COLLIER may have never looked into my edition of the poet, and I may honestly say that I regret it, not on my own account but on his, for I think, had he consulted it, his own would not have been the worse for it.

S. W. SINGER.

Manor Place, South Lambeth.

* * * * *

MINIATURE RING OF CHARLES I.

(Vol. vi., p. 578.)

By the courtesy of W. K. Rogers, Esq. (in whose possession it is), I am enabled to account for another of these interesting and invaluable relics; one of the four said to have been presented by the Martyr prior to his execution.

"ROGERS OF LOTA.

This family was early remarkable for its loyalty and attachment to the
Crown; a ring is still preserved as an heir-loom, which was presented
to its ancestor by King Charles I. during his misfortunes."--Burke's
_Commoners of Great Britain and Ireland_.

Robert Rogers of Lota received extensive grants of land from Charles II., which upon the accession of James II. were confirmed to him by letters patent. He was Mayor of Cork, 1680, M. P. for that city 1692, and again 1695. In the body of his will, bearing date 1690, and registered in the Record Court, Dublin, occurs the following {185} paragraph, embraced by brackets, as if he wished to convey forcibly his appreciation of the value of the relic:

["And I also bequeath to Noblett Rogers the miniature portrait-ring of
the martyr Charles I., given by that monarch to my ancestor previous to
his execution; and I particularly desire that it may be preserved in
the name and family."]

The miniature, which is beautifully painted in enamel, and said to be by Vandyke, has been reset in a tasteful and appropriate style; and it is in this state that I have seen it. But Mr. Rogers informs me that its original setting and inscriptions exactly corresponded with those of the ring in the possession of the Misses Pigott, described in Hulbert's _History of Salop_; and the same tradition exists in the family as to its having been _one of four_ presented by Charles to certain of his friends or followers. There can be little question, therefore, as to the genuineness of both these rings. With regard to the portrait being the work of Vandyke, Mr. R. writes to me--

"I know not on what authority it is stated, but I believe there is not
a family of old standing in the county Cork in which tradition has not
assigned its execution to that master; and certainly in Rome, where it
was much admired, the artists, when questioned 'Whose style?'
frequently answered, 'Vandyke.'"

Portraits by Vandyke in enamel, it is said, are known to be in existence. Whether so renowned a master would have submitted to the wearisome and laborious operation of repeating a number of works so minute, even for a crowned head, seems to admit of a doubt; yet there is no difficulty in imagining him to have superintended the progress of the artist employed to copy his own portrait of Charles, and even to have bestowed some finishing touches upon it.

I have lately seen a ring with a portrait of Charles on ivory, in coarse and very inferior style, and in a plain gold setting. It is in the possession of a gentleman in whose family it has continued for several generations. Doubtless many such memorials of their murdered king were worn at the time by his devoted partizans, and may yet be in existence.