Chapter II: Part 2

The popular tradition of the knighting of the Sirloin has found its way into many publications of a local tendency, and, amongst the rest, into the graphic _Traditions of Lancashire_, by the late Mr. Roby, whose premature death in the Orion steamer we have had so recently to deplore. Mr. Roby, however, is not disposed to treat the subject very seriously; for after stating that Dr. Morton had preached before the king on the duty of obedience, "inasmuch as it was rendered to the vicegerent of heaven, the high and mighty and puissant James, Defender of the Faith, and so forth," he adds:--

"After this comfortable and gracious doctrine, there was a rushbearing
and a piping before the king in the great quadrangle. Robin Hood and
Maid Marian, with the fool and Hobby Horse, were, doubtless, enacted to
the jingling of morris-dancers and other profanities. These fooleries
put the king into such good humour, that he was more witty in his
speech than ordinary. Some of these sayings have been recorded, and
amongst the rest, _that well-known quibble which has been the origin of
an absurd mistake, still current through the county, respecting the
sirloin_. The occasion, as far as we have been able to gather, was
thus. Whilst he sat at meat, casting his eyes upon a noble _surloin_ at
the lower end of the table, he cried out, 'Bring hither that _surloin_,
sirrah, for 'tis worthy a more honourable post, being, as I may say,
not _sur_-loin, but _sir_-loin, the noblest joint of all;' which
ridiculous and desperate pun raised the wisdom and reputation of
England's Solomon to the highest."--_Traditions_, vol. ii. pp. 190-1.

Most probably Mr. Roby's view of the matter is substantially correct; for although _tradition_ never fails to preserve the remembrance of transactions too trivial, or perhaps too indistinct for sober history to narrate, the _existence_ of a tradition does not necessarily _prove_, or even _require_, that the myth should have had its foundation in fact.

Had the circumstance really taken place as tradition prescribes, it would probably have obtained a greater permanency than oral recital; for during the festivities at Hoghton Tower, on the occasion of the visit of the "merrie monarch", there was present a gentleman after Captain Cuttle's own heart, who would most assuredly have made a note of it. This was Nicholas Assheton, Esq., of Downham, whose _Journal_, as Dr. Whitaker well observes, furnishes an invaluable record of "our ancestors of the parish of Whalley, not merely in the universal circumstances of birth, marriage, and death, but acting and suffering in their individual characters; their businesses, sports, bickerings, carousings, and, such as it was, religion." This worthy chronicler thus describes the King's visit:--

"August 15. (1617). The king came to Preston; ther, at the crosse, Mr.
Breares, the lawyer, made a speche, and the corporn presented him with
a bowle; and then the king went to a banquet in the town-hall, and soe
away to Houghton: ther a speche made. Hunted, and killed a stagg. Wee
attend on the lords' table.

"August 16, Houghton. The king hunting: a great companie: killed affore
dinner a brace of staggs. Verie hot: soe hee went in to dinner. Wee
attend the lords' table, abt four o'clock the king went downe to the
Allome mynes, and was ther an hower, and viewed them p[re]ciselie, and
then went and shott at a stagg, and missed. Then my Lord Compton had
lodged two brace. The king shott again, and brake the thigh-bone. A
dogg long in coming, and my Lo. Compton shott agn and killed him. Late
in to supper.

"Aug. 17, Houghton. Wee served the lords with biskett, wyne, and
jellie. The Bushopp of Chester, Dr. Morton, p[re]ched before the king.
To dinner. Abt four o'clock, ther was a rush-bearing and piping affore
them, affore the king in the middle court; then to supp. Then abt ten
or eleven o'clock, a maske of noblemen, knights, gentlemen, and
courtiers, affore the king, in the middle round, in the garden. Some
speeches: of the rest, dancing the Huckler, Tom Bedlo, and the Cowp
Justice of Peace.

"Aug. 18. The king went away abt twelve to Lathome."

The journalist who would note so trivial a circumstance as the heat of the weather, was not likely to omit the knighting of the Sirloin, if it really occurred; and hence, in the absence of more positive proof, we are disposed to take Mr. Roby's view of the case, and treat it as one of the thousand and one pleasant stories which "rumour with her hundred tongues" ever circulates amongst the peasantry of a district where some royal visit, or {332} other unexpected memorable occurrence, has taken place.

But this is not the only "pleasant conceit" of which the "merrie monarch" is said to have delivered himself during his visit to Hoghton Tower. On the way from Preston his attention was attracted by a huge boulder stone which lay in the roadside, and was still in existence not a century ago. "O' my saul," cried he, "that meikle stane would build a bra' chappin block for my Lord Provost. Stop! there be letters thereon: unto what purport?" Several voices recited the inscription:--

"_Turn me o're, an I'le tel thee plaine._"

"Then turn it ower," said the monarch, and a long and laborious toil brought to light the following satisfactory intelligence:--

"_Hot porritch makes hard cake soft,_
_So torne me o'er againe._"

"My saul," said the king, "ye shall gang roun' to yere place again: these country gowks mauna ken the riddle without the labour." As a natural consequence, Sir Richard Hoghton's "great companie" would require a correspondingly great quantity of provisions; and the tradition in the locality is, that the subsequent poverty of the family was owing to the enormous expenses incurred under this head; the following characteristic anecdote being usually cited in confirmation of the current opinion. During one of the hunting excursions the king is said to have left his attendants for a short time, in order to examine a numerous herd of horned cattle then grazing in what are now termed the "Bullock Pastures," most of which had probably been provided for the occasion. A day or two afterwards, being hunting in the same locality, he made inquiry respecting the cattle, and was told, in no good-humoured way, by a herdsman unacquainted with his person, that they were all gone to feast the beastly king and his gluttonous company. "By my saul," exclaimed the king, as he left the herdsman, "then 'tis e'en time for me to gang too:" and accordingly, on the following morning, he set out for Lathom House.

In conclusion, allow me to ask the correspondents to the "NOTES AND QUERIES," what is meant by "dancing the _Huckler_, _Tom Bedlo_, and the _Cowp Justice of Peace_?"

T.T. WILKINSON.

Burnley, Lancashire, Sept. 21. 1850.

_Sirloin._-In Nichols's _Progresses of King James the First_, vol. iii. p. 401., is the following note:--

"There is a laughable tradition, still generally current in Lancashire,
that our knight-making monarch, finding, it is presumed, no undubbed
man worthy of the chivalric order, knighted at the banquet in Hoghton
Tower, in the warmth of his honour-bestowing liberality, a loin of
beef, the part ever since called the _sirloin_. Those who would credit
this story have the authority of Dr. Johnson to support them, among
whose explanations of the word _sir_ in his dictionary, is that it is
'a title given to the loin of beef, which one of our kings knighted in
a fit of good humour.' 'Surloin,' says Dr. Pegge (_Gent. Mag._, vol.
liv. p. 485.), 'is, I conceive, if not knighted by King James as is
reported, compounded of the French _sur_, upon, and the English _loin_,
for the sake of euphony, our particles not easily submitting to
composition. In proof of this, the piece of beef so called grows upon
the _loin_, and behind the small ribs of the animal.' Dr. Pegge is
probably right, and yet the king, if he did not give the sirloin its
name, might, notwithstanding, have indulged in a pun on the already
coined word, the etymology of which was then, as now, as little
regarded as the thing signified is well approved."

JOHN J. DREDGE.

_Sirloin._-Whence then comes the epigram--

"Our second _Charles_, of fame faeete,
On loin of beef did dine,
He held his sword pleased o'er the meat,
'Rise up thou famed sir-loin!'"

Was not a _loin_ of pork part of _James_ the First's proposed banquet for the devil?

K.I.P.B.T.

* * * * *

RIOTS OF LONDON.

The reminiscences of your correspondent SENEX concerning the riots of London in the last century form an interesting addition to the records of those troubled times; but in all these matters correctness as to dates and facts are of immense importance. The omission of a date, or the narration of events out of their proper sequence, will sometimes create vast and most mischievous confusion in the mind of the reader. Thus, from the order in which SENEX has stated his reminiscences, a reader unacquainted with the events of the time will be likely to assume that the "attack on the King's Bench prison" and "the death of Allen" arose out of, and formed part and parcel of, the Gordon riots of 1780, instead of one of the Wilkes tumults of 1768. By the way, if SENEX was "personally either an actor or spectator" in _this_ outbreak, he fully establishes his claim to the signature he adopts. I quite agree with him that monumental inscriptions are not always remarkable for their truth, and that the one in this case may possibly be somewhat tinged with popular prejudice or strong parental feeling; but, at all events, there can be but little doubt that poor Allen, whether guilty or innocent, was shot by a soldier of the Scotch regiment, be his name what it may; and further, the deed was not the effect of a random shot fired upon the mob,--for the young man was chased into a cow-house, and shot by his pursuer, away from the scene of conflict. {333}

Noorthouck, who published his _History of London_, 1773, thus speaks of the affair:--

"The next day, May 10. (1768,) produced a more fatal instance of rash
violence against the people on account of their attachment to the
popular prisoner (Wilkes) in the King's Bench. The parliament being to
meet on that day to open the session, great numbers of the populace
thronged about the prison from an expectation that Mr. W. would on that
occasion recover his liberty; and with an intention to conduct him to
the House of Commons. On being disappointed, they grew tumultuous, and
an additional party of the third regiment of Guards were sent for. Some
foolish paper had been stuck up against the prison wall, which a
justice of the peace, then present, was not very wise in taking notice
of, for when he took it down the mob insisted on having it from him,
which he not regarding, the riot grew louder, the drums beat to arms,
the proclamation was read, and while it was reading, some stones and
bricks were thrown. William Allen, a young man, son of Mr. Allen,
keeper of the Horse Shoe Inn in Blackman Street, and who, _as appeared
afterwards, was merely a quiet spectator_, being pursued along with
others, was unfortunately singled out and followed by three soldiers
into a cow-house, and shot dead! A number of horse-grenadiers arrived,
and these hostile measures having no tendency to disperse the crowd,
which rather increased, the people were fired upon, five or six were
killed, and about fifteen wounded; among which were two women, one of
whom afterwards died in the hospital."

The author adds,--

"The soldiers were next day publicly thanked by a letter from the
Secretary-at-War in his master's name. McLaughlin, who actually killed
the inoffensive Allen, was withdrawn from justice and could never be
found, so that though his two associates Donald Maclaine and Donald
Maclaury, with their commanding officer Alexander Murray, were
proceeded against for the murder, the prosecution came to nothing and
only contributed to heighten the general discontent."

With respect to the monument in St. Mary's, Newington, I extract the following from the _Oxford Magazine_ for 1769, p. 39.:--

"Tuesday, July 25. A fine large marble tombstone, elegantly finished,
was erected over the grave of Mr. Allen, junr., in the church-yard of
St. Mary, Newington, Surry. It had been placed twice before, but taken
away on some disputed points. On the sides are the following
inscriptions:--

_North Side._

Sacred to the Memory of
William Allen,

An Englishman of unspotted life and amiable disposition, [who was
inhumanely murdered near St. George's Fields, the 10th day of May,
1768, by the Scottish detachment from the army.][1]

"His disconsolate parents, _inhabitants of this parish_, caused this
tomb to be erected to an only son, lost to them and the world, in his
twentieth year, as a monument of his virtues and their affections."

At page 53. of the same volume is a copperplate representing the tomb. On one side appears a soldier leaning on his musket. On his cap is inscribed "3rd Regt.;" his right hand points to the tomb; and a label proceeding from his mouth represents him saying, "I have obtained a pension of a shilling a day only for putting an end to thy days." At the foot of the tomb is represented a large thistle, from the centre of which proceeds the words, "Murder screened and rewarded."

Accompanying this print are, among other remarks, the following:--

"It was generally believed that he was m----d by one Maclane, a
Scottish soldier of the 3d Regt. The father prosecuted, Ad----n
undertook the defence of the soldier. The solicitor of the Treasury,
Mr. Nuthall, the deputy-solicitor, Mr. Francis, and Mr. Barlow of the
Crown Office, attended the trial, and it is said, paid the whole
expence for the prisoner out of the Treasury, to the amount of a very
considerable sum. The defence set up was, that young Allen was not
killed by Maclane, but by another Scottish soldier of the same
regiment, one McLaughlin, who confessed it at the time to the justice,
as the justice says, though he owns he took no one step against a
person who declared himself a murderer in the most express terms....
The perfect innocence of the young man as to the charge of being
concerned in any riot or tumult, is universally acknowledged, and a
more general good character is nowhere to be found. This McLaughlin
soon made his escape, therefore was a deserter as well as a murtherer,
yet he has had a discharge sent him with an allowance of a shilling a
day."

Maclane was most probably the "Mac" alluded to by SENEX; but his account differs in so many respects from cotemporaneous records that I have ventured to trespass somewhat largely upon your space. I may add, that I by no means agree in the propriety of erasing a monumental inscription of more than eighty years' existence without some much stronger proof of its falsehood; for I quite coincide with the remarks of Rev. D. Lysons, in his allusion to this monument (_Surrey_, p. 393.), that

"Allen was illegally killed, whether he was concerned in the riots or
not, _as he was shot apart from the mob at a time when he might, if
necessary, have been apprehended and brought to justice_."

E.B. PRICE.

September 30. 1850.

The Rev. Dr. John Free[2] preached a sermon on the above occasion (which was printed) from the {334} 24th chapter of Leviticus, 21st and 22nd verses, "He that killeth a man," &c.; and he boldly and fearlessly denominates the act as a murder, and severely reprehends those in authority who screened and protected the murderer. The sermon is of sixteen pages, and there is an appendix of twenty-six pages, in which are detailed various depositions, and all the circumstances connected with the catastrophe.

Sec. N.

Your correspondent SENEX will find in Malcolm's _Anecdotes of London_ (Vol. ii., p. 74.), "A summary of the trial of Donald Maclane, on Tuesday last, at _Guildford Assizes_, for the murder of William Allen, Jun., on the 10th of May last, in St. George's Fields."

R. BARKER, JUN.

A long account of this lamentable transaction may be found in every magazine eighty-two years since. The riot took place in St. George's Fields, May 10. 1768, and originated in the cry of "Wilkes and Liberty."

GILBERT.

[Footnote 1: A foot-note informs us that "a white-wash is put over these lines between the crotchets."]

[Footnote 2: Dr. Free was of Christ Church, Oxford, and perhaps some of your readers may know where his biography is.]

* * * * *

MEANING OF "GRADELY."

(Vol. ii., p. 133.)

For the origin of this word, A.W.H. may refer to Brocket's _Glossary of North Country Words_, where he will find--

"Gradely, decently, orderly. Sax. _grad_, _grade,_ ordo. Rather, Mr.
Turner says, from Sax. _gradlie_ upright; _gradely_ in Lanc., he
observes, is an adjective simplifying everything respectable. The
Lancashire people say, our _canny_ is nothing to it."

The word itself is very familiar to me, as I have often received a scolding for some boyish, and therefore not very wise or orderly prank, in these terns:--"One would think you were not altogether gradely," or, as it was sometimes varied into, "You would make one believe you were not _right in your head;_" meaning, "One would think you had not common sense."

H. EASTWOOD.

Ecclesfield.

_Gradely._--This word is not only used in Yorkshire, but also very much in Lancashire, and the rest of the north of England. I have always understood it to mean "good," "jolly," "out and out." Its primary meaning is "orderly, decently." (See Richardson's _Dictionary_.) The French have _grade_; It. and Sp., _grado_; Lat. _gradus_.

AREDJID KOOEZ.

_Gradely._--This word, in use in Lancashire and Yorkshire, means _grey-headedly_, and denotes such wisdom as should belong to old age. A child is admonished to do a thing _gradely_, _i.e._ with the care and caution of a person of experience.

E.H.

_Gradely._--In Webster's and also in Richardson's _Dictionaries_ it is defined, "orderly, decently." It is a word in common use in Lancashire and Yorkshire, and also Cheshire. A farmer will tell his men to do a thing gradely, that is, "properly, well."

G.W.N.

_Gradely._--In Carr's _Craven Dialect_ appears "_Gradely_, decently." It is also used as an adjective, "decent, worthy, respectable."

2. Tolerably well, "How isto?" "_Gradely._" Fr. _Gre_, "satisfaction"; _a mon gre._

S.N.

_Gradely._--Holloway[3] derives _gradely_ from the Anglo-Saxon _Grade_, a step, order, and defines its meaning, "decently." He, however, fixes its paternity in the neighbouring county of York.

In Collier's edition of _Tim Bobbin_ it is spelt _greadly_, and means "well, right, handsomely."

"I connaw tell the _greadly_, boh I think its to tell fok by."--p. 42.

"So I seete on restut meh, on drank meh pint o ele; boh as I'r naw
_greadly_ sleekt, I cawd for another," &c.--p. 45.

"For if sitch things must be done _greadly_ on os teh aught to bee,"
&c.--p. 59.

Mr. Halliwell[4] defined it, "decently, orderly, moderately," and gives a recent illustration of its use in a letter addressed to Lord John Russell, and distributed in the Manchester Free Trade Procession. It is dated from Bury, and the writer says to his lordship,--

"Dunnot be fyert, mon, but rapt eawt wi awt uts reef, un us Berry
foke'll elp yo as ard as we kon. Wayn helps Robdin, un wayn elp yo, if
yoan set obeawt yur work _gradely_."

_Gradely._--I think this word is very nearly confined to Lancashire. It is used both as an adjective and adverb. As an adjective, it expresses only a moderate degree of approbation or satisfaction; as an adverb, its general force is much greater. Thus, used adjectively in such phrases as "a gradely man," "a gradely crop," &c., it is synonymous with "decent." In answer to the question, "How d'ye do?" it means, "Pretty well," "Tolerable, thank you."

Adverbially it is (1.) sometimes used in sense closely akin to that of the adjective. Thus in "Behave yourself gradely," it means "properly, decently." But (2.) most frequently it is precisely equivalent to "very;" as in the expressions "A gradely fine day," "a gradely good man"--which last is a term of praise by no means applicable to the mere gradely man, or, as such a one is most commonly described, a "gradely sort of man."

Though one might have preferred a Saxon origin for it, yet in default of such it seems most natural to connect it with the Latin _gradus_, especially as the word _grade_, from which it is immediately formed, has a handy English look about it, that would soon naturalise it amongst us. _Gradely_ {335} then would mean "orderly, regular, according to degree."

The difference in intensity of meaning between the adjective and the adverb seems analogous to that between the adjectives proper, _regular_, &c., and the same words when used in the vulgar way as adverbs.

G.P.

[Footnote 3: Dictionary of Provincialisms.]

[Footnote 4: Dictionary of Provincial Words.]

* * * * *

PASCAL AND HIS EDITOR BOSSUT.

(Vol. ii., p. 278.)

Although I am not afraid of the fate with which that unfortunate monk met, of whom it is said,--

"Pro solo puncto caruit Martinus Asello,"

yet a blunder is a sad thing, especially when the person who is supposed to commit it attempts to correct others.

Now the printer of the "NOTES AND QUERIES" has introduced, in my short remark on Pascal, the _very error_ which has led the author of the article in the _British Quarterly Review_, as well as many others, to mistake the Bishop of Meaux for the editor of Pascal's works. Once more, that unfortunate editor is BOSSUT, not BOSSUET; and if it may appear to some that the difference of one letter in a name is not of much consequence, yet it is from an error as trifling as this that people of my acquaintance confound Madame de Stael with Madame de Staal-Delauney, in spite of chronology and common sense. Again, by the leave of the _Christian Remembrancer_ (vol. xiii. no. 55.), the elegant and accomplished scholar to whom we owe the only complete text of Pascal's thoughts, is M. Faugere, not Fougere. All these are minutiae; but the chapter of minutiae is an important one in literary history.

Another remarkable question which I feel a wish to touch upon before closing this communication, is that of _impromptus_. Your correspondent MR. SINGER (p. 105.) supposes Malherbe the poet to have been "ready at an impromptu." But, to say the least, this is rather doubtful, unless the extemporaneous effusions of Malherbe were of that class which Voiture indulged in with so much success at the Hotel de Rambouillet--sonnets and epigrams leisurely prepared for the purpose of being fired off in some fashionable "_ruelle_" of Paris. Malherbe is known to have been a very slow composer; he used to say to Balzac that ten years' rest was necessary after the production of a hundred lines: and the author of the _Christian Socrates_, himself rather too fond of the file, after quoting this fact, adds in a letter to Consart:

"Je n'ai pas besoin d'un si long repos apres un si petit travail. Mais
aussi d'attendre de moi cette heureuse facilite qui fait produire des
volumes a M. de Scudery, ce serait me connaitre mal, et me faire une
honneur que je ne merite pas."

Malherbe certainly had a most happy influence on French poetry; he checked the ultra-classical school of Ronsard, and began that work of reformation afterwards accomplished by Boileau.

As I have mentioned Voiture's name, I shall add a very droll "_soi-disant_" impromptu of his, composed to ridicule Mademoiselle Chapelain, the sister of the poet. Like her brother, she was most miserly in her habits, and not distinguished by that virtue which some say is next to godliness.

"Vous qui tenez incessamment
Cent amans dedans votre manche,
Tenez-les au moins proprement,
Et faites qu'elle soit plus blanche.

"Vous pouvez avecque raison,
Usant des droits de la victoire,
Mettre vos galants en prison;
Mais qu'elle ne soit pas si noire.

"Mon coeur, qui vous est bien devot,
Et que vous reduisez en cendre,
Vous le tenez dans un cachot
Comme un prisonnier qu'on va pendre.

"Est-ce que, brulant nuit et jour,
Je remplis ce lieu de fumee,
Et que le feu de mon amour
En a fait une cheminee?"

GUSTAVE MASSON.

Hadley, near Barnet.

* * * * *

KONGS-SKUGG-SIO.

(Vol. ii., p. 298.)

The author of the _Kongs-skugg-sio_ is unknown, but the date of it has been pretty clearly made out by Bishop Finsen and others. (_V._ Finsen, _Dissertatio Historica de Speculo Regali_, 1766.) There is only one complete edition of this remarkable work, viz. that published at Soroee in 1768, in 4to. Bishop Finsen maintains the _Kongs-skugg-sio_ to have been written from 1154 to 1164. Ericksen believes it not to be older than 1184; while Suhm and Eggert Olafsen do not allow it to be older than the thirteenth century. Rafn, and the modern editors of the _Groenlands Historiske Mindesmaerker_, p. 266., vol. iii., accept the date given by Finsen as the true one. From the text of the work we learn that it was written in Norway, by a young man, a son of one of the leading and richest men there, who had been on terms of friendship with several kings, and had lived much, or at least had travelled much, in Helgeland. Rafn and others believe the work to have been written by Nicolas, the son of Sigurd Hranesoen, who was slain by the Birkebeiners on the 8th of September, 1176. Their reasons for coming to this conclusion are given at full length in the work above quoted. {336}

The whole of the _Kongs-skugg-sio_ is well worthy of being translated into English. It may, indeed, in many respects, be considered as the most remarkable work of the old northerns.

EDWARD CHARLTON.

Newcastle-on-Tyne, Oct 7. 1850.

If F.Q. will look into Halfdan Einersen's edition of _Kongs-skugg-sio_, Soroee, 1768, the first time it was printed, he will find in the editor's preliminary remarks all that is known of the date and origin of the work. The author is unknown, but that he was a Northman and lived in Nummedal, in Norway, and wrote somewhere between 1140 and 1270, or, according to Finsen, about 1154; and that he had in his youth been a courtier, and afterwards a royal councillor, we infer from the internal evidence the work itself affords us. _Kongs-skugg-sio_, or the royal mirror, deserves to be better known, on account of the lively picture it gives us of the manners and customs of the North in the twelfth century; the state of the arts and the amount of science known to the educated. It abounds in sound morals, and its author might have sate at the feet of Adam Smith for the orthodoxy of his political economy. He is not entirely free from the credulity of his age and his account of Ireland will match anything to be found in Sir John Mandeville. Here we are told of an island on which nothing rots, of another on which nothing dies, of another on one-half of which devils alone reside, of wonderful monsters and animals, and of miracles the strangest ever wrought. He invents nothing. What he relates of Ireland he states to have found in books, or to have derived from hearsay. The following extract must therefore be taken as a specimen of Irish Folk-lore in the twelfth century:--

"There is also one thing, he says, that will seem wonderful, and it
happened in the town which is called Kloena [Cloyne]. In that town
there is a church which is dedicated to the memory of a holy man called
Kiranus. And there it happened one Sunday, as the people were at
prayers and heard mass, that there descended gently from the air an
anchor, as if it had been cast from a ship, for there was a cable to
it, and the fluke of the anchor caught in the arch of the church-door,
and all the people went out of church, and wondered, and looked up into
the air after the cable. There they saw a ship floating above the
cable, and men on board; and next they saw a man leap overboard, and
dive down to the anchor to free it. He appeared, from the motions he
made with both hands and feet, like a man swimming in the sea. And when
he reached the anchor, he endeavoured to loosen it, when the people ran
forwards to seize the man. But the church in which the anchor stuck
fast had a bishop's chair in it. The bishop was present on this
occasion, and forbade the people to hold the man, and said that he
might be drowned just as if in water. And immediately he was set free
he hastened up to the ship, and when he was on board, they hauled up
the cable and disappeared from men's sight; but the anchor has since
laid in the church as a testimony of this."

CORKSCREW.

* * * * *

GOLD IN CALIFORNIA.

(Vol. ii., p. 132.)

E.N.W. refers to Shelvocke's voyage of 1719, in which reference is made to the abundance of gold in the soil of California. In Hakluyt's _Voyages_, printed in 1599-1600, will be found much earlier notices on this subject. California was first discovered in the time of the Great Marquis, as Cortes was usually called. There are accounts of these early expeditions by Francisco Vasquez Coronada, Ferdinando Alarchon, Father Marco de Nica, and Francisco de Ulloa, who visited the country in 1539 and 1540. It is stated by Hakluyt that they were as far to the north as the 37th degree of latitude, which would be about one degree south of St. Francisco. I am inclined, however, to believe from the narrations themselves that the Spanish early discoveries did not extend much beyond the 34th degree of latitude, being little higher than the Peninsular or Lower California. In all these accounts, however, distinct mention is made of abundance of gold. In one of them it is stated that the natives used plates of gold to scrape the perspiration off their bodies!

The most curious and distinct account, however, is that given in "The famous voyage of Sir Francis Drake into the South Sea, &c. in 1577", which will be found in the third volume of Hakluyt, page 730., _et seq_. I am tempted to make some extracts from this, and the more so because a very feasible claim might be based upon the transaction in favour of our Sovereign Lady the Queen. At page 737. I find:

"The 5th day of June (1579) being in 43 degrees wards the pole Arctike,
we found the ayre so colde, that our men being grievously pinched with
the same, complained of the extremitie thereof, and the further we
went, the more the colde increased upon us. Whereupon we thought it
best for that time to seeke the land, and did so, finding it not
mountainous, but low plaine land, till we came within thirty degrees
toward the line. In which height it pleased God to send us into a faire
and good baye, with a good winde to enter the same. In this baye wee
anchored."

A glance at the map will show that "in this baye" is now situated the famous city of San Francisco.

Their doings in the bay are then narrated, and from page 738. I extract the following:--

"When they [the natives with their king] had satisfied themselves [with
dancing, &c.] they made signes to our General [Drake] to sit downe, to
whom the king and divers others made several orations, or rather
supplications, that hee would take their province or {337} kingdom into
his hand, and become their king, making signes that they would resigne
unto him their right and title of the whole land, and become his
subjects. In which, to persuade us the better, the king and the rest
with our consent, and with great reverence, joyfully singing a song,
did set the crowne upon his head, inriched his necke with all their
chaines, and offred unto him many other things, honouring him by the
name of Hioh, adding thereulto, as it seemed, a sign of triumph; which
thing our Generall thought not meet to reject, because he knew not what
honour and profit it might be to our countrey. Whereupon, in the name
and to the use of Her Majestie, he took the scepter, crowne, and
dignitie of the said country into his hands, wishing that the riches
and treasure thereof might so conveniently be transported to the
inriching of her kingdom at home, as it aboundeth in ye same.

"Our Generall called this countrey Nova Albion, and that for two
causes; the one in respect of the white bankes and cliffes, which lie
towards the sea, and the other, because it might have some affinities
with our countrey in name, which sometime was so called."

Then comes the curious statement:

"_There is no part of earth heere to be taken up, wherein there is not
some probable show of gold or silver._"

The narrative then goes on to state that formal possession was taken of the country by putting up a "monument" with "a piece of sixpence of current English money under the plate," &c.

Drake and the bold cavaliers of that day probably found that it paid better to rob the Spaniard of the gold and silver ready made in the shape of "the Acapulco galleon," or such like, than to sift the soil of the Sacramento for its precious grains. At all events, the wonderful richness of the "earth" seems to have been completely overlooked or forgotten. So little was it suspected, until the Americans acquired the country at the peace with Mexico, that in the fourth volume of Knight's _National Cyclopaedia_, published early in 1848, in speaking of Upper California, it is said, "very little mineral wealth has been met with"! A few months after, intelligence reached Europe how much the reverse was the case.

T.N.

* * * * *

THE DISPUTED PASSAGE PROM THE TEMPEST.

(Vol. ii., pp. 259. 299.)

When the learning and experience of such gentlemen as MR. SINGER and MR. COLLIER fail to conclude a question, there is no higher appeal than to plain common sense, aided by the able arguments advanced on each side. Under these circumstances, perhaps you will allow one who is neither learned nor experienced to offer a word or two by way of vote on the meaning of the passage in the _Tempest_ cited by MR. SINGER. It appears to me that to do full justice to the question the passage should be quoted entire, which, with your permission, I will do.

"_Fer._ There be some sports are painful; and their labour
Delight in them sets off: some kinds of baseness
Are nobly undergone; and most poor matters
Point to rich ends. This, my mean task
Would be as heavy to me as odious, but
The mistress, which I serve, quickens what's dead
And makes my labours pleasures: O, she is
Ten times more gentle than her father's crabbed,
And he's compos'd of harshness. I must remove
Some thousands of these logs, and pile them up
Upon a sore injunction: my sweet mistress
Weeps when she sees me work, and says, such baseness
Had ne'er like executor. _I forget_;
_But_ these sweet thoughts do even refresh my labour(s),
Most busy(l)est when I do it."

The question appears to be whether "most busy" applies to "sweet thoughts" or to Ferdinand, and whether the pronoun "it" refers to the act of _forgetting_ or to "labour(s);" and I must confess that, to me, the whole significancy of the passage depends upon the idea conveyed of the mind being "most busy" while the body is being exerted. Every man with a spark of imagination must many a time have felt this. In the most essential particular, therefore, I think MR. SINGER is right in his correction but at the same time agreeing with MR. COLLIER, that it is desirable not to interfere with the original text further than is absolutely necessary, I think the substitution of "labour" for "labours" is of questionable expediency. What is the use of the conjunction "but" if not to connect the excuse for the act of forgetting with the act itself?

Without intending to follow MR. COLLIER through the course of his argument, I should like to notice one or two points. The usage of Shakspeare's day admitted many variations from the stricter grammatical rules of our own; but no usage ever admitted such a sentence as this,--for though elliptically expressed, MR. COLLIER treats it as a sentence,--

"Most busy, least when I do it."

This is neither grammar nor sense: and I persist in believing that Shakspeare was able to construct an intelligible sentence according to rules as much recognised by custom then as now.

But, indeed, does not MR. COLLIER virtually admit that the text is inexplicable in his very attempt to explain it? He sums up by saying "that in fact, his toil is no toil, and that when he is 'most busy' he 'least does it,'" which is precisely the reverse of what the text says, if it express any meaning at all. I will agree with him in preferring the old text to any other text where it gives a perfect meaning; but to prefer it here, when the omission of a single letter produces an image at once {338} noble and complete, would, to my mind, savour more of superstition than true worship.

P.S. It should be observed that MR. COLLIER'S "least" is as much of an alteration of the original text as MR. SINGER'S "busyest", the one adding and the other omittng a letter. The folio of 1632, where it differs front the first folio, will hardly add to the authority of MR. COLLIER himself.

SAMUEL HICKSON.

Oct. 10. 1850.

If one, who is but a charmed listener to Shakspeare, may presume to offer an opinion to practised interpreters, I should suggest to MR. SINGER and MR. COLLIER, another and a totally different reading of the passage in discussion by them from the exquisite opening scene of the 3d Act of the _Tempest_.

There can be little doubt that "most busy" applies more poetically to _thoughts_ than to _labours_; and, in so much, MR. SINGER'S reading is to be commended. But it is equally true that, by adhering to the early text, MR. COLLIER'S school of editing has restored force and beauty to many passages which had previously been outraged by fancied improvements, so that his unflinching support of the original word in this instance is also to be respected. But may not both be combined? I think they may, by understanding the passage in question as though a transposition had taken place between the words "least" and "when".

"Most busy _when least_ I do it,"

or,--

"Most busy when least employed."

forming just the sort of verbal antithesis of which the poet was so fond.

An actual transposition of the words may have taken place through the fault of the early printers; but even if the _present order_ be preserved, still the _transposed sense_ is, I think, much less difficult than the forced and rather contradictory meaning contended for by MR. COLLIER. Has not _the pause_ in Ferdinand's labour been hitherto too much overlooked? What is it that has induced him to _forget_ his task? Is it not those delicious thoughts, most busy in the _pauses_ of labour, making those pauses still more refreshing and renovating?

Ferdinand says--

"I forget,"--

and then he adds, _by way of excuse_,--

"_But_ the sweet thoughts do even refresh my labours,
Most busy when least I do it."

More busy in thought when idle, than in labour when employed. The cessation from labour was favourable to the thoughts that made it endurable.

Malone quarrelled with the word "but", for which he would have substituted "and" or "for". But in the _apologetic_ sense which I would confer upon the last two lines of Ferdinand's speech, the word "but", at their commencement, becomes not only appropriate but necessary.

A.E.B.

Leeds, October 8. 1850.

* * * * *

"LONDON BRIDGE IS BROKEN DOWN."

(Vol. ii., p. 258.)

Your correspondent T.S.D. does not remember to have seen that interesting old nursery ditty "London Bridge is broken down" printed, or even referred to in print. For the edification then of all interested in the subject, I send you the following.

The old song on "London Bridge" is printed in Ritson's _Gammer Gurton's Garland_, and in Halliwell's _Nursery Rhymes of England_; but both copies are very imperfect. There are also some fragments preserved in the _Gentleman's Magazine_ for September, 1823 (vol. xciii. p. 232.), and in the _Mirror_ for November 1st of the same year. From these versions a tolerably perfect copy has been formed, and printed in a little work, for which I am answerable, entitled _Nursery Rhymes, with the Tunes to which they are still sung in the Nurseries of England_. But the whole ballad has probably been formed by many fresh additions in a long series of years, and is, perhaps, almost interminable when received in all its different versions.

The correspondent of the _Gentleman's Magazine_ remarks, that "London Bridge is broken down" is an old ballad which, more than seventy years previous, he had heard plaintively warbled by a lady who was born in the reign of Charles II., and who lived till nearly that of George II. Another correspondent to the same magazine, whose contribution, signed "D.," is inserted in the same volume (December, p. 507.), observes, that the ballad concerning London Bridge formed, in his remembrance, part of a Christmas carol, and commenced thus:--

"Dame, get up and bake your pies,
On Christmas Day in the morning."

The requisition, he continues, goes on to the dame to prepare for the feast, and her answer is--

"London Bridge is broken down,
On Christmas Day in the morning."

The inference always was, that until the bridge was rebuilt some stop would be put to the dame's Christmas operations; but why the falling of a part of London Bridge should form part of a Christmas carol it is difficult to determine.

A Bristol correspondent, whose communication is inserted in that delightful volume the _Chronicles of London Bridge_ (by Richard Thomson, of the London Institution), says,--

"About forty years ago, one moonlight night, in a street in Bristol, his attention was attracted by dance {339} and chorus of boys and girls, to which the words of this ballad gave measure. The breaking down of the bridge was announced as the dancers moved round in a circle, hand in hand; and the question, 'How shall we build it up again?' was chanted by the leader, whilst the rest stood still."

Concerning the antiquity of this ballad, a modern writer remarks,--

"If one might hazard a conjecture concerning it, we should refer its
composition to some very ancient date, when, London Bridge lying in
ruins, the office of bridge master was vacant, and his power over the
river Lea (for it is doubtless that river which is celebrated in the
chorus to this song) was for a while at an end. But this, although the
words and melody of the verses are extremely simple, is all uncertain."

If I might hazard another conjecture, I would refer it to the period when London Bridge was the scene of a terrible contest between the Danes and Olave of Norway. There is an animated description of this "Battle of London Bridge," which gave ample theme to the Scandinavian scalds, in _Snorro Sturleson_; and, singularly enough, the first line is the same as that of our ditty:--

"London Bridge is broken down;
Gold is won and bright renown;
Shields resounding,
War horns sounding,
Hildur shouting in the din;
Arrows singing,
Mail-coats ringing,
Odin makes our Olaf win."

See Laing's _Heimskringla_, vol. ii. p. 10.; and Bulwer's _Harold_, vol. i. p. 59. The last-named work contains, in the notes, some excellent remarks upon the poetry of the Danes, and its great influence upon our early national muse.

EDWARD F. RIMBAULT.

[T.S.D.'s inquiry respecting this once popular nursery song has brought
us a host of communications; but none which contain the precise
information upon the subject which is to be found in DR. RIMBAULT's
reply. TOBY, who kindly forwards the air to which it was sung, speaks
of it as a "'lullaby song,' well-known in the southern part of Kent and
in Lincolnshire."

E.N.W. says it is printed in the collection of _Nursery Rhymes_
published by Burns, and that he was born and bred in London, and that
it was one of the nursery songs he was amused with. NOCAB ET AMICUS,
two old fellows of the Society of Antiquaries, do not doubt that it
refers to some event preserved in history, especially, they add, as we
have a faint recollection "of a note, touching such an event, in an
almost used-up English history, which was read in our nursery by an
elder brother, something less than three-fourths of a century since.
And we have also a shrewd suspicion that the sequel of the song has
reference to the reconstruction of that fabric at a later date."

J.S.C. has sent us a copy of the song; and we are indebted for another
copy to AN ENGLISH MOTHER, who has accompanied it with notices of some
other popular songs, notices which at some future opportunity we shall
lay before our readers.--ED.]

* * * * *

ARABIC NUMERALS.

(Vol. ii., pp. 27. 61.)

I must apologise for adding anything to the already abundant articles which have from time to time appeared in "NOTES AND QUERIES" on this interesting subject; I shall therefore confine myself to a few brief remarks on the _form_ of each character, and, if possible, to show from what alphabets they are derived:--

1. This most natural form of the first numeral is the first character in the Indian, Arabic, Syriac, and Roman systems.

2. This appears to be formed from the Hebrew [Hebrew: b], which, in the Syriac, assumes nearly the form of our 2; the Indian character is identical, but arranged vertically instead of horizontally.

3. This is clearly derived from the Indian and Arabic forms, the position being altered, and the vertical stroke omitted.

4. This character is found as the fourth letter in the Phoenician and ancient Hebrew alphabets: the Indian is not very dissimilar.

5. and 6. These bear a great resemblance to the Syriac Heth and Vau (a hook). When erected, the Estrangelo-Syriac Vau is precisely the form of our 6.

7. This figure is derived from the Hebrew [Hebrew: z], zayin, which in the Estrangelo-Syriac is merely a 7 reversed.

8. This figure is merely a rounded form of the Samaritan Kheth (a travelling scrip, with a string tied round thus, [Character]). The Estrangelo-Syriac [Character] also much resembles it.

9. Identical with the Indian and Arabic.

0. Nothing; vacuity. It probably means the orb or _boundary_ of the earth.--10. is the first boundary, [Hebrew: tchwm], Tekum, [Greek: Deka], Decem, "terminus." Something more yet remains to be said, I think, on the _names_ of the letters. Cf. "Table of Alphabets" in Gesenius, _Lex_., ed. Tregelles, and "NOTES AND QUERIES," Vol. i., p. 434.

E. S. T.

_Arabic Numerals._--With regard to the subject of Arabic numerals, and the instance at Castleacre (Vol. ii., pp. 27. 61.), I think I may safely say that no archaeologist of the present day would allow, after seeing the original, that it was of the date 1084, even if it were not so certain that these numerals were not in use at that time. I fear "the acumen of Dr. Murray" was wasted on the occasion referred to in Mr. Bloom's work. It is a very far-fetched idea, that the visitor must cross himself to discover the meaning of the figures; not to mention the inconvenience, I might say impossibility, {340} of reading them after he had turned his back upon them,--the position required to bring them into the order 1084. It is also extremely improbable that so obscure a part of the building should be chosen for erecting the date of the foundation; nor is it likely that so important a record would be merely impressed on the plaister, liable to destruction at any time. Read in the most natural way, it makes 1480: but I much doubt its being a date at all. The upper figure resembles a Roman I; and this, with the O beneath, may have been a mason's initials at some time when the plaister was renewed: for that the figures are at least sixty years later than the supposed date, Mr. Bloom confesses, the church not having been built until then.

X.P.M.

* * * * *

CAXTON'S PRINTING-OFFICE.

(Vol. ii., pp. 99. 122. 142. 187. 233.)

I confess, after having read MR. J.G. NICHOLS' critique in a recent number of the "NOTES AND QUERIES," relative to the locality of the first printing-press erected by Caxton in this country, I am not yet convinced that it was not within the Abbey of Westminster. From MR. NICHOLS' own statements, I find that Caxton himself says his books were "imprynted" by him in the Abbey; to this, however, MR. NICHOLS replies by way of objection, "that Caxton does not say in the church of the Abbey."

On the above words of Caxton "in the Abbey of Westminster," Mr. C. Knight, in his excellent biography of the old printer, observes, "they leave no doubt that beneath the actual roof of some portion of the Abbey he carried on his art." Stow says "that Caxton was the first that carried on his art in the Abbey." Dugdale, in his _Monasticon_, speaking of Caxton, says, "he erected his office in one of the side chapels of the Abbey." MR. NICHOLS, quoting from Stow, also informs us that printing-presses were, soon after the introduction of the art, erected in the Abbey of St. Albans, St. Augustin at Canterbury, and other monasteries; he also informs us that the scriptorium of the monasteries had ever been the manufactory of books, and these places it is well known formed a portion of the abbeys themselves, and were not in detached buildings similar to the Almonry at Westminster, which was situated some two or three hundred yards distant from the Abbey. I think it very likely, when the press was to supersede the pen in the work of book-making, that its capabilities would be first tried in the very place which had been used for the object it was designed to accomplish. This idea seems to be confirmed by the tradition that a printer's office has ever been called a chapel, a fact which is beautifully alluded to by Mr. Creevy in his poem entitled _The Press_:--

"Yet stands the chapel in yon Gothic shrine,
Where wrought the father of our English line,
Our art was hail'd from kingdoms far abroad,
And cherish'd in the hallow'd house of God;
From which we learn the homage it received
And how our sires its heavenly birth believed.
Each printer hence, howe'er unblest his walls,
E'en to this day, his house a chapel calls."

Mr. Nichols acknowledges that what he calls a vulgar error was current and popular, that in some part of the Abbey Caxton did erect his press, yet we are expected to submit to the almost unsupported dictum of that gentleman, and renounce altogether the old and almost universal idea. With respect to his alarm that the _vulgar error_ is about to be further propagated by an engraving, wherein the mistaken draftsman has deliberately represented the printers at work within the consecrated walls of the church itself, I may be permitted to say, on behalf of the painter, that he has erected his press not even on the basement of one of the Abbey chapels, but in an upper story, a beautiful screen separating the workplace from the more sacred part of the building.

JOHN CROPP.

* * * * *

COLD HARBOUR.

(Vol. i., p. 60.; Vol. ii., p. 159.)

I beg leave to inform you that Yorkshire has its "Cold Harbour," and for the origin of the term, I subjoin a communication sent me by my father:--

"When a youngster, I was a great seeker for etymologies. A solitary farm-house and demesne were pointed out to me, the locality of which was termed Cad, or Cudhaber, or Cudharber. Conjectures, near akin to those now presented, occurred to me. I was invited to inspect the locality. I dined with the old yeoman (aged about eighty) who occupied the farm. He gave me the etymology. In his earlier days he had come to this farm; a house was not built, yet he was compelled by circumstances to bring over part of his farming implements, &c. He, with his men-servants, had no other shelter at the time than a dilapidated barn. When they assembled to eat their cold provisions, the farmer cried out, 'Hegh lads, but there's cauld (or caud) harbour here.' The spot had no name previously. The rustics were amused by the farmer's saying. Hence the locality was termed by them Cold Harbour, corrupted, Cadharber, and the etymon remains to this day. This information put an end to my enquiries about Cold Harbour."

C.M.J.