Chapter M: A. Balliol (2)

U. U. Club.

* * * * *

CRANMER'S MARTYRDOM.

(Vol. ix., p. 392.)

The long-received account of a very striking act in the martyrdom of Cranmer is declared to involve an "impossibility." The question is an important one in various ways, for it involves moral and religious, as well as literary and physiological, considerations of deep interest; but as I think the pages of "N. & Q." not the most appropriate vehicle for discussion on the former heads, I shall pass them over at present with a mere expression of regret that such a subject should have been so mooted there. With reference, then, to the literary evidence in favour of the fact, that the noble martyr voluntarily put forth his hand into the hottest part of the fire which was raging about him, and burnt it first, the historians quoted are entirely agreed, differing as they do only in such details as might seem rather to imply independent testimony than discrepant authority. But the action is declared to be "utterly impossible, because," &c. Why beg the question in this way? "Because," says H. B. C., "the laws of physiology and combustion show that he could not have gone beyond _the attempt_;" adding, "If the hand were chained over the fire, the shock would produce death." Leaving the _hypothetical_ reasoning in both cases to go for what it is worth, it would surely be easy to produce facts of almost every week from the evidence given in coroners' inquests, in which persons have had their limbs burnt off--to say nothing of farther injury--without the shock "producing death." The only question then which I think can fairly arise, is, whether a person in Cranmer's position could _voluntarily_ endure that amount of mutilation by fire which many others have _accidentally_ suffered? This may be matter of opinion, but I have no doubt, and I suppose no truly Christian philosopher will have any, that the man who has faith to "give his body to be burned," and to endure heroically such a form of martyrdom, would be quite able to do what is attributed to Cranmer, and to Hooper too, "high medical authority" to the contrary notwithstanding. I might, indeed, adduce what might be called "high medical authority" for my view, _i. e._ the historical evidence of the fact, but I think the bandying of opinions on such a subject undesirable. It would be more to the point, especially if there really existed any ground for "historic doubt" on the subject, or if there was any good reason for creating one, to cite cotemporaneous evidence against that usually received. With respect to the heart of the martyr being "entire and unconsumed among the ashes," I must be permitted to say that, neither on physiological nor other grounds, does even this alleged fact, taken in its plain and obvious meaning, strike me as forming one of the "impossibilities of history."

J. H.

Rotherfield.

Your correspondent H. B. C. doubts the possibility of the story about Cranmer's hand, and says that "if a furnace were so constructed that a man might hold his hand in the flame without burning his body, the shock to the nervous system would deprive him of all command over muscular action before the skin could be entirely consumed. If the hand were chained over the fire, the shock would produce death." Now, this last assertion I doubt. The following is an extract from the account of Ravaillac's execution, given with wonderfully minute details by an eye-witness, and published in Cimber's _Archives Curieux de l'Histoire de France_, vol. xv. p. 103.:

"On le couche sur l'eschaffaut, on attache les chevaux aux mains et aux
pieds. Sa main droite percée d'un cousteau fut bruslée à feu de
souphre. Ce misérable, pour veoir comme ceste exécrable main rotissoit,
eut le courage de hausser la teste et de la secouer pour abattre une
étincelle de feu qui se prenoit à sa barbe."

So far was this from killing him that he was torn with red-hot pincers, had melted lead, &c. poured into his wounds, and he was then "longuement tiré, retiré, et promené de tous costez" by four horses:

"S'il y eut quelque pause, ce ne fut que pour donner temps au bourreau
de respirer, au patient de se sentir mourir, aux théologiens de
l'exhorter à dire la vérité."

And still:

"Sa vie estoit forte et vigoureuse; telle que retirant {548} une fois
une des jambes, il arresta le cheval qui le tiroit."

I fear your correspondent underrates the power of the human body in enduring torture. I have seen a similar account of the execution of Damiens, with which I will not shock your readers. The subject is a revolting one, but the truth ought to be known, as it is (most humanely, I fully believe) questioned.

G. W. R.

Oxford and Cambridge Club.

* * * * *

PHOTOGRAPHIC CORRESPONDENCE.

_Difficulties in making soluble Cotton._--In making soluble cotton according to the formula given by Mr. Hadow in the _Photographic Journal_, and again by MR. SHADBOLT in "N. & Q.," I have been subject to the most provoking failures, and should feel obliged if MR. SHADBOLT or any other of your correspondents could explain the causes of my failures, which I will endeavour to describe.

1st. In using nitrate of potash and sulphuric acid, with a certain quantity of water as given, I have _invariably_ found that on adding the cotton to the mixture it became _completely dissolved_, and the mass began to effervesce violently, throwing off dense volumes of deep red fumes, and the whole appearing of a similar colour. I at first thought it might be the fault of the sulphuric acid; but on trying some fresh, procured at another place, the same effects were produced.

Again, in using the mixed acids (which I tried, not being successful with the other method) I found, on following Mr. Hadow's plan, that the cotton was also entirely dissolved.

How is the proper temperature at which the cotton is to be immersed to be arrived at? Are there any thermometers constructed for the purpose? as, if one of the ordinary ones, mounted on wood or metal, was used, the acids would attack it, and, I should imagine, prove injurious to the liquids.

At the same time I would ask the reason why all the negative calotypes I have taken lately, both on Turner's and Sandford's papers, iodized according to DR. DIAMOND'S plan, are never intense, especially the skies, by transmitted light, although by reflected light they look of a beautiful black and white. I never used formerly to meet with such a failure; but at that time I used always to wet the plate glass and attach the paper to it, making it adhere by pressing with blotting-paper, and then exciting with a buckles brush and dilute gallo-nitrate. But the inconvenience attending that plan was, that I was compelled to take out as many double slides as I wished to take pictures, which made me abandon it and take to DR. DIAMOND'S plan of exciting them and placing them in a portfolio for use. I imagine the cause of their not being so intense is the not exposing them while wet.

A bag made of yellow calico, single thickness, has been recommended for changing the papers in the open air. I am satisfied it will not do, especially if the sun is shining; it may do in some shady places, but I have never yet seen any yellow calico so fine in texture as not to allow of the rays of light passing through it, unless two or three times doubled. I have proved to my own satisfaction that the papers will not bear exposure in a bag of single thickness, without browning over immediately the developing fluid is applied.

With regard to the using of thin collodion, as recommended by Mr. Hardwick in the last Number of the _Photographic Journal_, I am satisfied it is the only plan of producing thoroughly good positives; and I have been in the habit of thinning down collodion in the same manner for a long time, finding that I produced much better pictures with about half the time of exposure necessary for a thick collodion.

H. U.

_Light in Cameras._--I cannot sufficiently express my acknowledgments to "N. & Q." for the photographic benefits I have derived from its perusal, more especially from the communication in No. 240. of LUX IN CAMERA. Since I took up the art some months ago, I have had (with two or three exceptions) nothing but a succession of failures, principally from the browning of the negatives, and on examining my camera, as recommended by LUX IN CAMERA, I find it lets in a blaze of light from the cause he mentions[3], and thence doubtless my disappointments. But why inflict this history upon you? I inclose for your acceptance the best photograph I have yet produced from DR. DIAMOND'S "Simplicity of the Calotype." Printed from Delamotte's directions:--

First preparation, 5 oz. of aq. dist.; ¼ oz. of muriate of ammonia.

Second process, floating on solution 60 grains of nitrate of silver, 1 ounce of distilled water.

Is there any better plan than the above?

CHARLES K. PROBERT.

P.S.--The view inclosed is the porch and transept of Newport Church, Essex, from the Parsonage garden. Is it printed too dark? I wish I could get the grey and white tints I saw in the Photographic Exhibition.[4] Had your readers behaved with ordinary gratitude, your photographic portfolio ought to have overflowed by this time.

[Footnote 3: It was an expensive one, bought of one of the principal houses for the supply of photographic apparatus, &c.]

[Footnote 4: [Some of the best specimens of these tints were forwarded to us by MR. PUMPHREY, accompanying the description of his process, printed in our eighth volume, p. 349.--ED. "N. & Q."]]

_Cameras._--The note of LUX IN CAMERA has brought in more than one letter of thanks; and a valued correspondent has written to us, suggesting "That the attention of the Photographic Society, who have as yet done far less than they might have done to advance the Art, should be _at once_ turned, and that seriously and earnestly, to the production of a light, portable, and effective camera for field purposes; one which, at the same time that it has the advantages of lightness and portability, should be capable of resisting our variable climate." Our correspondent throws out a hint which possibly may be adopted with advantage, {549} that papier maché has many of the requisites desired, being very firm, light, and impervious to wet.

_Progress of Photography._--As a farther contribution to the History of Photography, we have been favoured with the following copy of a letter from a well-known amateur, which details in a graphic manner his early photographic experiences.

"As there is a sort of reflux of the tide to Mr. Fox Talbot's plan, and different people have succeeded best in different ways, it may amuse you to hear how I _used_ to work, with better luck than I have had since.

"Mr. Talbot's sensitive wash was very strong, so he floated his paper upon distilled water immediately after its application.

"Mr. G. S. Cundell, of Finsbury Circus, diluted the sensitive wash with water, instead of floating the paper. Amateurs date their success from the time Mr. Cundell published this simple modification of the original process.

"Mr. William Hunt, of Yarmouth, was my first friend and instructor in the art; and _if_ there be any merit in the pictures I did before I knew you, the credit is due to _him entirely_.

"The first paper we tried was Whatman's ivory post, very thick and hard, and yet it gave good negatives. We afterwards got a thinner paper, but always stuck to Whatman. Neither were we troubled with that _porosity_ in the skies of which you complain in the more recently-made papers of that manufacturer.

"We first washed the paper with a solution of nitrate of silver, fifteen grains to the ounce, going over the surface in all directions with a camel-hair brush. As soon as the fluid ceased to run, the paper was _rapidly dried before the fire_, and then immersed in a solution of iodide of potassium, 500 grains to the pint of water. We used to draw it through the solution frequently by the corners, and then let it lie till the yellow tint was visible at the back. It was then immediately taken to the pump and pumped upon vigorously for two or three minutes, holding it at such an angle that the water flushed softly over the surface. We then gave it a few minutes in a rain-water bath, inclining the dish at different angles to give motion to the water. By this time the iodide of silver looked like pure solid brimstone in the wet paper. Then we knew that it was good, and hung it up to dry.

"To make this paper sensitive, we took 5 drops of gallic acid (saturated solution), 5 drops of glacial acetic acid, 10 drops of a 50-grain solution of nitrate of silver, and 100 drops of water. The sensitive wash was poured upon a glass plate, and the paper placed thereon. We used to lift the paper frequently by one or other corner till it was perfectly limp. We then blotted off and placed in the camera, where it would keep a good many hours.

"Whether such pictures would have come out spontaneously under the developing solution, I know not, for we had not patience enough to try. We forced them out in double quick time with red-hot pokers; and great was the alarm of my wife to see me rush madly about the house armed with these weapons. Yet the plan had its advantages; by presenting the point of the poker at a refractory spot, its reluctance to appear was speedily overcome, and we persuaded out the shadows.

* * *

"P.S.--I now have the first picture I ever did, little, if at all, altered. It was done in July, 1845, with a common meniscus lens. I have just got a _capital negative_ by DR. DIAMOND'S plan, but which is spoiled by the metallic abominations in Turner's paper."

_A Collodion Difficulty._--With reference to MR. J. COOK'S collodion, I would suggest that his ether was indeed "still very strong" of _acid_; by which the iodine was set free, and gave him "nearly a port-wine colour." This is a common occurrence when the ether or the collodion is acid. The remedy is at hand, however. Powder a few grains of _cyanide of potassium_, and introduce about a grain at a time, according to the quantity: shake up till dissolved, and so on, until you get the clear golden tint. Thus will "the mystery be cleared up." I need not say that the essential properties of the solution will not be impaired.

ANDREW STEINMETZ.

P.S.--In a day or two I shall send you a _recipe_ for easily turning to immediate use the "used-up dipping baths" of _nitrate_, without the troublesome process recommended to one of your correspondents.

_Ferricyanide of Potassium._--I have used with success the ferricyanide of potassium (the _red_ prussiate of potash, as it is called) for removing the stains contracted in photographing. This it does very readily when the stains are recent, and it has no injurious effect upon cuts and sore places should any exist on the hands. An old stain may with a little pumice be very readily removed. I have mentioned this to several friends, and, if not a novelty, it is certainly not generally known.

S. PELHAM DALE.

Sion College.

* * * * *

Replies to Minor Queries.

_Postage System of the Romans_ (Vol. ix., p. 350.).--Your correspondent ARDELIO probably alludes to the system of posts for the conveyance of persons, established by the Romans on their great lines of road. An account of this may be seen in the work of Bergier, _Histoire des Grands Chemins de l'Empire Romain_, lib. iv.; and compare Gibbon's _Decline and Fall_, chap. xvii. Communications were made from Rome to the governors of provinces, and information was received from them, by means of these posts: see Suet. _Oct._ c. xlix. But the Romans had no public institution for the conveyance of private letters. A letter post is a comparatively modern institution; in England it only dates from the reign of James I. An account of the ancient Persian posts is given by Xenoph. _Cyrop._ VIII. vi. § 17, 18.; Herod. viii. 98.: compare Schleusner, _Lex. N. T._ in [Greek: angareuô].

L.

As a proof that there is at least one eminent exception to the assertion of ARDELIO, that "_we_ know that the Romans must have had a postal system," I send the following extract from Dr. William {550} Smith's _Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities_, sub voc. Tabellarius:

"As the Romans had no public post, they were obliged to employ special
messengers, who were called Tabellarii, to convey their letters, when
they had not an opportunity of sending them otherwise."

[Greek: Halieus].

Dublin.

_Epigram on the Feuds between Handel and Bononcini_ (Vol. ix., p. 445.).--This epigram, which has frequently been printed as Swift's, was written by Dr. Byrom of Manchester. In his very interesting _Diary_, which is shortly about to appear under the able editorship of my friend Dr. Parkinson in the series of Chetham publications, Byrom mentions it.

"Nourse asked me if I had seen the verses upon Handel and Bononcini,
not knowing that they were mine; but Sculler said I was charged with
them, and so I said they were mine; they both said they had been
mightily liked."--Byrom's _Remains_ (Cheetham Series), vol. i. part i.
p. 173.

The verses are thus more correctly given in Byrom's _Works_, vol. i. p. 342., edit. 1773:

"_Epigram on the Feuds between Handel and Bononcini._

Some say, compar'd to Bononcini,
That Mynheer Handel's but a ninny;
Others aver that he to Handel
Is scarcely fit to hold a candle:
Strange all this difference should be,
'Twixt Tweedledum and Tweedledee!"

JAS. CROSSLEY.

_Power of prophesying before Death_ (Vol. ii., p. 116.).--In St. Gregory's _Dialogues_, b. IV. ch. xxv., the disciple asks,--

"Velim scire quonam modo agitur quod plerumque morientes multa
prædicunt."

The answer begins (ch. xxvi.),--

"Ipsa aliquando animarum vis subtilitate sua aliquid prævidet.
Aliquando autem exituræ de corpore animæ per revelationem ventura
cognoscunt. Aliquando vero dum jam juxta sit ut corpus deserant,
divinitus afflatæ in secreta coelestia incorporeum mentis oculum
mittunt."

J. C. R.

_King John_ (Vol. ix., p. 453.).--I cannot reply to the Queries of PRESTONIENSIS, but I have a note of a grant made by John (as _Com. Moritoniæ_) of the tithes of the parishes between Rible and Merse, which appears to have received the Bishop of Coventry's confirmation, _ap. Cestriam, an. 2 Pont. Papæ Coelestini_. John's grant was to the Priory of Lancaster. My reference is to Madox, _Formulare Anglicanum_, Lond. 1702, p. 52, MXCVI. The deed is witnessed by Adam de Blakeburn and Robert de Preston, as well as by Phil. Sanson (De Worcester?) and others.

ANON.

_Demoniacal Descent of the Plantagenets_ (Vol. ix., p. 494.).--H. B. C. will find another passage, illustrative of this presumption, in Henry Knyghton's _Chronica_:

"De isto quoque Henrico, quondam infantulo et in curia regis Francorum
nutrito, beatus Bernardus Abbas de eo sic prophetavit, præsente rege,
_De Diabolo venit, et ad Diabolum ibit_: Notans per hoc tam tyrannidem
patris sui Galfridi, qui Sagiensem episcopum eunuchaverat, quam etiam
istius Henrici futuram atrocitatem qua in beatum Thomam
desæviret."--Twysden, _Hist. Angl. Scriptores_, pp. 2393. 32., and
2399. 10.

C. H.

_Burial Service Tradition_ (Vol. ix., p. 451.).--The only cases in which a clergyman is legally justified in refusing to read the entire service over the body of a parishioner or other person admitted to burial in the parochial cemetery, are the three which are mentioned in the preliminary rubric, which, as expounded by the highest authorities, are as follows: 1. In case the person died without admission to the universal church by Christian baptism. 2. Or "denounced 'excommunicate majori excommunicatione' for some grievous and notorious crime, and no man able to testify of his repentance." (Canon 68.) 3. Or _felo de se_; for in a case of suicide the acquittal of the deceased by a coroner's jury entitles him to Christian burial. The extraordinary notion of the clergyman, mentioned by the REV. S. ADAMS, is certainly erroneous in law. I can only suppose it originated from some case in which the severance of the deceased's right hand was regarded by the jury as a proof that he did not kill himself. Except in certain special cases, none but parishioners are entitled to burial in a parochial burying-place at all.

ADVOCATUS.

_Paintings of our Saviour_ (Vol. ix., p. 270.).--Your correspondent J. P. may hear of something to his advantage by visiting the church of Santa Prassede (Saint Praxedes?), not far from Santa Maria Maggiore in Rome. In the former he will see, as usual, a list of wonderful relics preserved therein, and amongst them "A Portrait of the Saviour, presented by St. Peter to Santa Prassede." A valuable gift, truly, if only authentic. The name of the artist is not given, I believe, in the above veracious document. They had better have made the catalogue complete by putting in the name of St. Luke himself, whose pencil, I rather think, is stated to have furnished other such portraits elsewhere. "Credat Judæus!"

The Santa Prassede above alluded to is stated to have been a daughter of Pudens, mentioned in the Epistles of St. Paul.