Chapter I: Part 1

[Transcriber's note: Original spelling varieties have not been standardized. Underscores have been used to indicate _italic_ fonts. A list of volumes and pages in "Notes and Queries" has been added at the end.]

NOTES AND QUERIES:

A MEDIUM OF INTER-COMMUNICATION

FOR

LITERARY MEN, ARTISTS, ANTIQUARIES, GENEALOGISTS, ETC.

"When found, make a note of."--CAPTAIN CUTTLE.

VOL. IV.--No. 95. SATURDAY, AUGUST 23. 1851.

Price Threepence. Stamped Edition 4_d._

CONTENTS.

Page

NOTES:--

The Pendulum Demonstration of the Earth's Rotation 129

Minor Notes:--The Day of the Month--Foreign English--Birds'
Care for the Dead--Snake's Antipathy to Fire--Aldgate,
London--Erroneous Scripture Quotations 130

QUERIES:--

The Lady Elizabeth Horner or Montgomery 131

Pope and Flatman, by W. Barton 132

Minor Queries:--Southampton Brasses--Borough-English
--Passage in St. Bernard--Spenser's Faerie Queene--Broad
Halfpenny Down--Roll Pedigree of Howard--Rev. John Paget,
of Amsterdam--Visiting Cards--Duke de Berwick and Alva--The
Earl of Derwentwater--"But very few have seen the
Devil"--Aulus Gellius' Description of a Dimple--Forgotten
Authors of the 17th Century 132

MINOR QUERIES ANSWERED:--Sundays, on what Days of the
Month?--John Lilburne 134

REPLIES:--

"Lay of the Last Minstrel" 134

Meaning of "Prenzie," by Samuel Hickson 135

House of Yvery 136

Queen Brunehaut 136

Lord Mayor not a Privy Councillor 137

Cowper or Cooper 137

Replies to Minor Queries:--Voce Populi Halfpenny--Dog's
Head in the Pot--"O wearisome Condition of
Humanity"--Bunyan and the "Visions of Heaven and
Hell"--Pope's Translations of Imitations of Horace
--Prophecies of Nostradamus--Thread the Needle--Salmon
Fishery in the Thames--Entomological Query--School of the
Heart--Fortune, Infortune, Fort une--Ackey Trade--Curious
Omen at Marriage 138

MISCELLANEOUS:--

Notes on Books, Sales, Catalogues, &c. 142

Books and Odd Volumes wanted 143

Notices to Correspondents 143

Advertisements 144

Notes.

THE PENDULUM DEMONSTRATION OF THE EARTH'S ROTATION.

If the propounders of this theory had from the first explained that they do not claim, for _the plane of oscillation_, an exemption from the general rotation of the earth, but only the difference of rotation due to the excess of velocity with which one extremity of the line of oscillation may be affected more than the other, it would have saved a world of fruitless conjecture and misunderstanding.

For myself I can say that it is only recently I have become satisfied that this is the real extent of the claim; and I confess that had I been aware of it sooner, I should have regarded the theory with greater respect than I have hitherto been disposed to do. Perhaps this avowal may render more acceptable the present note, in which I shall endeavour to make plain to others that which so long remained obscure to myself.

It is well known that the more we advance from the poles of the earth towards the equator, so much greater becomes the velocity with which the surface of the earth revolves--just as any spot near the circumference of a revolving wheel travels farther in a given time, and consequently swifter, than a spot near the centre of the same wheel: hence, London being nearer to the equator than Edinburgh, the former must rotate with greater velocity than the latter. Now if we imagine a pendulum suspended from such an altitude, and in such a position, that one extremity of its line of oscillation shall be supposed to reach to London and the other to Edinburgh; and if we imagine the ball of such pendulum to be drawn towards, and retained over London, it is clear that, so long as it remains in that situation, it will share the velocity of London, and rotate with it. But if it be set at liberty it will immediately begin to oscillate between London and Edinburgh, retaining, _it is asserted_, the velocity of the former place. Therefore during its first excursion towards Edinburgh, it will be impressed with a velocity greater than that of the several points of the earth over which it has to traverse; so that when it arrives at Edinburgh it will be in advance of the rotation of that place; and consequently its actual line of oscillation, instead of falling directly upon Edinburgh, will diverge, and fall somewhere to the east of it.

Now it is clear that if the pendulum ball be supposed to retain the same velocity of rotation, _undiminished_, which was originally impressed upon it at London, it must, in its return from Edinburgh, retrace the effects just described, and again return to coincidence with London, having all the time retained a velocity equal to that of London. If this were truly the case, the deviation in one direction would be restored in the opposite one, so that the only result would be a repetition of the same effects in every succeeding oscillation.

It is this absence of an element of increase in the deviation that constitutes the first objection to this theory as a sufficient explanation of the pendulum phenomenon. It is answered (as I suppose, for I have nowhere seen it so stated in direct terms) that the velocity of rotation, acquired and retained by the pendulum ball, is _not_ that of London, but of a point midway between the two extremes--in fact, of that point of the earth's surface immediately beneath the centre of suspension.

There is no doubt that, if this can be established, the line of oscillation would diverge in both directions--the point of return, or of restored coincidence, which before was in one of the extremes, would then be in the central point; consequently it would be of no effect in correcting the deviation, which would then go on increasing with every oscillation.

Therefore, in order to obtain credence for the theory, satisfactory explanation must be given of this first difficulty by not only showing that the medium velocity _is really that_ into which the extreme velocity first impressed upon the ball will ultimately be resolved; but it must also be explained _when_ that effect will take place, whether all at once or gradually; because, it must be recollected, the oscillations of the experimental pendulum cannot practically commence from the central point, but always from one of the extremes, to which the ball must first be elevated.

But this is not enough: there must also be shown reasonable ground to induce the belief that the ball is _really free_ from the attraction of each successive point of the earth's surface over which it passes; and that, although in motion, it is _not_ as really and as effectually a partaker in the rotation of any given point, during its momentary passage over it, as though it were fixed and stationary at that point. Those who maintain that this is not the case are bound to state the _duration of residence_ which any substance must make at any point upon the earth's surface, in order to oblige it to conform to the exact amount of velocity with which that point revolves.

Lastly, supposing theses difficulties capable of removal, there yet remains a third, which consists in the undeniable absence of _difference of velocity_ when the direction of oscillation is east and west. It has been shown that the difference before claimed was due to the nearer approach to the equator of one of the extremities of the line of oscillation in consequence of its direction being north and south; but when its direction is east and west both extremities are equally distant from the equator, and therefore no difference of velocity can exist.

I have directed these observations to the fundamental truth and reality of the alleged phenomenon; it is quite clear that these must first be settled before the laws of its distribution on the surface of the globe can become of any interest.

A. E. B.

Leeds, August 5. 1851.

Minor Notes.

_The Day of the Month._--Many persons might help themselves, as some do, by remembering throughout the year on what day the 1st of January fell, and by permanently remembering the first day of each month, which agrees with the first day of the year. Thus, this present year began on Wednesday, and the 6th of August is therefore Wednesday, as are the 13th, 20th, 27th. By the following lines the key to the months may be kept in mind:--

The first day of October, you'll find if you try,
The second of April, as well as July,
The third of September, which rhymes to December,
The fourth day of June, and no other, remember,
The fifth of the leap-month, of March, and November,
The sixth day of August, and seventh of May,
Show the _first_ of the year in the name of the day;
But in leap-year, when leap-month has duly been reckoned,
These month-dates will show, not the _first_, but the _second_.

M.

_Foreign English._--The specimens given in "NOTES AND QUERIES" have reminded me of one which seems worthy to accompany them; in fact, to have rather a peculiar claim.

I believe the facts of the case to have been these. When it was known that Louis XVIII. was to be restored to the throne of France, a report was circulated (whether on any good authority I do not know) that the then Duke of Clarence would take the command of the vessel which was to convey the returning monarch to Calais. At all events the people of Calais expected it; and inferring that the English royal duke would pass at least one night in their town, and of course go to the play, they deemed that it would be proper to perform the English national anthem at their theatre. It was obvious, however, that "God save the _King_" was so very appropriate to their own circumstances, that, notwithstanding its Anglicism, it left less of compliment and congratulation for the illustrious foreigner than they really intended to offer. So that happy people, who can do everything in no time, forthwith prepared an additional verse. This being quite new, and of course unknown, they printed on the playbill, from which I learned it. If you give his lines a place in your pages, I will not say that the French poet's labour was thrown away; but for the time it was so, as the English duke did not accompany the French king. I believe that the additional verse was as follows:--

"God save noble Clarence
Who brings our king to France,
God save Clarence;
He maintains the glory
Of the British navy,
Oh! God, make him happy,
God save Clarence."

I am sorry that I can only speak from memory of the contents of a document which I have not seen for so many years; but if I may have made any mistake, perhaps some reader may be able to correct me.

S. R. M.

_Birds' Care for the Dead._--It is not uncommon to find in poets of all ages some allusion to the pious care of particular birds for the bodies of the dead. Is there any truth in the idea? for certainly the old ballad of "The Children in the Wood" has made many a kind friend for the Robin Redbreast by the affecting lines:

"No burial this pretty pair
Of any man receives,
Till Robin Redbreast piously
Did cover them with leaves."

Herrick also alludes to the same tradition in his verses "upon Mrs. Elizabeth Wheeler, under the name of Amarillis." (_Works_, vol i. pp. 62-3.: Edin. 1823)

"Sweet Amarillis, by a spring's
Soft and soule-melting murmurings,
Slept; and thus sleeping, thither flew,
A Robin Redbreast; who at view,
Not seeing her at all to stir,
Brought leaves and moss to cover her;
But while he, perking, there did prie
About the arch of either eye,
The lid began to let out day,
At which poor Robin flew away;
And seeing her not dead, but all disleav'd,
He chirpt for joy, to see himself disceav'd."

In the earlier editions of Gray's _Elegy_, before the Epitaph, the following exquisite lines were inserted:

"There scatter'd oft, the earliest of the year,
By hands unseen, are showers of violets found:
The Redbreast loves to build and warble there,
And little footsteps lightly print the ground."

And about the same time Collin's "Dirge in Cymbeline" had adorned the "fair Fidele's grassy tomb" with the same honour:

"The Redbreast oft, at evening hours,
Shall kindly lend his little aid,
With hoary moss, and gather'd flowers,
To deck the ground where thou art laid."

RT.

Warmington, Aug. 9. 1851.

_Snake's Antipathy to Fire._--There is in Brazil a very common poisonous snake, the Surucucu (_Trigonocephalus rhombeatus_), respecting which the Matutos and Sertanejos, the inhabitants of the interior, relate the following facts. They say that such is the antipathy of this reptile to fire, that when fires are made in the clearing away of woods, they rush into it, scattering it with their tails till it is extinguished, even becoming half roasted in the attempt; and that when an individual is passing at night with a torch, they pass and repass him, lashing him with their tales till he drop it, and the snake is immediately found closely coiled round the extinguished torch. The greatest enemy of this snake is an immense Lacertian, five and six feet long, the Tiju-acu (the great lizard--its name in the Lingoa geral): it is said that when the snake succeeds in effecting a bite, the lizard rushes into the wood, eats some herb, and returns to the conflict, which almost invariable terminates in its favour.

JOHN MANLEY.

Pernambucco, June 30. 1851.

_Aldgate, London._ (A Note for London Antiquaries)--After this gate was taken down in 1760, Sir Walter Blackett, of Wallington, Northumberland, obtained some of the ornamental stone (part of the City arms, heads and wings of dragons, apparently cut in Portland stone, and probably set up when the gate was rebuilt in 1606), and used them in decorating Rothley Castle, an eye-trap which he erected on the crags of that name, near Wallington.

W. C. TREVELYAN.

Wallington Aug. 11. 1851.

_Erroneous Scripture Quotations._--Some of your correspondents have done good service by drawing attention to these things. Has it ever occurred to you that the _apple_ is a fruit never connected in Scripture with the fall of man;--that Eve was not Adam's helpmate, but merely a help _meet_ for him;--and that Absalom's long hair, of which he was so proud, and which as consequently so often served "to point a moral and adorn a tale," had nothing to do with his death, his head itself, and not the hair upon it, having been caught in the boughs of the tree?

P. P.

Queries.

THE LADY ELIZABETH HORNER OR MONTGOMERY.

In some curious manuscript memoirs of the family of Horner of Mells, co. Somerset, written probably about the middle of the last century, I find the following statement:--

"The gentleman at Mells last mentioned, whose name I don't know,
had his _eldest son George_, who succeeded him at Mells. He
married the Countess of Montgomery, supposed to be the widow of
that earl, who, in tilting with Henry II., King of France caused
his death by a splinter of his spear running into the king's eye.
But most probably she was the widow of that lord's son, which I
conjecture from the distance of the time of that king's death to
her death, which must needs be near seventy years, as she lived at
Cloford to the year 1628. She must certainly be a considerable
heiress, as several estates came with her into the family, and,
among others, Postlebury-woods in particular, and, possibly, also
the Puddimore estate; as her son, Sir John Horner, was the first
of the family that presented a clerk to that living in 1639, viz.,
William Kemp, who was afterwards one of the suffering clergy. Her
jointure was a 500_l._ a-year, which was very considerable at that
time."

Can any of your readers assist in elucidating this story, of which no existing family records afford any corroboration, and which the parochial registers of the neighbourhood appear rather to invalidate in some of its statements? As far as we can gather from such sources, the gentleman alluded to in the extract was not _George_ but _Thomas_ Horner, born 1547, M.P. for Somersetshire 1585, and sheriff 1607, who was buried 1612. He married three times: _first_, Elizabeth Pollard, who died, as well as her only son John in 1573; _secondly_, Jane Popham, who died 1591, having had, amongst other issues, _Sir John_, born about 1580; and _thirdly_, as it would seem, a person called "The Lady Elizabeth," who had issue _Edward_, born 1597, and who was buried at _Cloford_, in 1599. Even allowing for the errors attendant upon a tradition, it is scarcely _possible_ that this "Lady Elizabeth" should have been widow of Count Gabriel de Montgomery,--_Elizabeth de la Zouch_,--who married her first husband in 1549, and was left a widow in 1574. She _might_ have been widow of one of his sons; though the only two mentioned in the _Biographie Universelle_, Gabriel and Jacques, left issue, to whom their wives' property would have probably descended.

The whole matter, as far as I have been able to examine it, is a very obscure one, and yet can hardly, I should think, be without some foundation in fact. The title-deeds of Postlebury and Puddimore perhaps would throw light upon it.

C. W. B.

POPE AND FLATMAN.

I possess a small volume entitled _Manchester al Mondo; Contemplations of Death and Immortality_, by the Earl of Manchester: the 15th edit., 1688. At the end are appended several short but quaint poems on the subject of mortality. One of them is stated to be taken from the "incomparable Poems by the ingenious Mr. Thomas Flatman," and is entitled "A Thought of Death." I have transcribed it side by side with Pope's celebrated ode, "The Dying Christian to his Soul," in which some lines run remarkably parallel. Is it probable Pope borrowed his idea of the fine couplet,

"Hark! they whisper; angels say,
Sister Spirit, come away!"

from Flatman? If not, the coincidence is remarkable: has it been noticed before? Perhaps some of your readers may be better able to enter into the subject than he who communicates this.

WILLIAM BARTON.

19. Winchester Place, Southwark Bridge Road.

"THE DYING CHRISTIAN TO HIS SOUL.

"Vital spark of heavenly flame,
Quit, oh, quit this mortal frame!
[*]_Trembling, hoping, lingering, flying;
Oh the pain the bliss of dying!_
Cease, fond Nature, cease thy strife,
And let me languish into life!

"[+]_Hark! they whisper; angels say,
Sister Spirit, come away!_
What is this absorbs me quite,
Steals my senses, shuts my sight,
Drowns my spirits, draws my breath?
Tell me, my soul, can this be death?

"The world recedes; it disappears!
Heaven opens on my eyes; my ears
With sounds seraphic ring!
Lend, lend your wings! I mount! I fly!
O Grave! where is thy victory?
O Death! where is thy sting?"

[ALEXANDER POPE.]

"A THOUGHT OF DEATH.

"When on my sick Bed I languish,
Full of sorrow, fully of anguish,
[*]_Fainting, gasping, trembling, crying,
Panting, groaning, speechless, dying_,
My Soul just now about to take her flight
Into the Regions of eternal night;
O tell me, you
That have been long below,
What shall I do?
What shall I think when cruel death appears,
That may extenuate my fears?
[+]_Methinks I hear some Gentle Spirit say
Be not fearful, come away!_
Think with thyself that now thou shalt be free,
And find thy long-expected liberty,
Better thou mayest, but worse thou canst not be,
Than in this vale of Tears and Misery.
Like Caesar, with assurance then come on,
And unamaz'd attempt the Laurel crown
That lyes on th' other side Death's Rubicon."

[THOMAS FLATMAN.]

Minor Queries.

80. _Southampton Brasses._--French Church, otherwise God's House, Southampton. About eight or nine years ago, two monumental brasses were discovered, in making some alterations in this church. I should feel greatly obliged to any correspondent who could give me a description of them, and inform me if they are still to be found there.

W. W. KING.

81. _Borough-English._--Which are the towns or districts in England in which _Borough-English_ prevails or has prevailed; and are there any instances on record of its being carried into effect in modern times?

W. FRASER.

82. _Passage in St. Bernard._--Wordsworth's _Ecclesiastical Sonnets_, Part II. 1.:

"CISTERTIAN MONASTERY.

"Here man more purely lives, less oft doth fall,
More promptly rises, walks with nicer heed,
More safely rests, dies happier, is freed
Earlier from cleansing fires, and gains withal
A brighter crown."

_Note._--"Bonum est nos hic esse, quia homo vivit purius, cadit
rarius, surgit velocius, incedit cautius, quiescit securius,
moritur felicius, purgatur citius, praemiatur
copiosius."--_Bernard._

"This sentence," says Dr. Whitaker, "is usually inscribed in some conspicuous part of the Cistertian houses." I cannot find in St. Bernard's works the passage to which Wordsworth's sonnet alludes, though I often see it referred to: e. g. Whitehead's _College Life_, p. 44., 1845; and Mrs. Jameson's _Legends of the Monastic Orders_, Preface. Can any of your correspondents direct me to it?

RT.

83. _Spenser's Faerie Queene_ (b. ii. c. ix. st. 22.).--

"The frame thereof seemed partly circulare,
And part triangulare," &c.

Warton (_Observations on the Fairy Queen_, vol. i. p. 121.) says that the philosophy of this abstruse stanza describing the Castle of Alma is explained in a learned epistle of Sir Kenelm Digby addressed to Sir Edward Stradling. In a foot-note he states that this epistle was--

"First printed in a single pamphlet, viz., _Observations on XXII
Stanza, &c._, Lond. 1644, 8vo. It is also published in Scrinia
Sacra, 4to. pag. 244. London, 1654."

Could any of your readers, acquainted with Sir Kenelm Digby's works, give his explanation of this stanza? There is no note on it in the one-volume edition of Spenser lately published by Moxon. The best explanation of it that I have seen is in the _Athenaeum_, August 12, 1848.

E. M. B.

84. _Broad Halfpenny Down._--There is a beautiful chalk down in the parish of Hambledon, Hants, which goes by the above name, pronounced, of course, _ha'penny_, like the coin. Can any of your antiquarian readers give me the origin of this name? I have no doubt that the present appellation is a corruption of some British or Saxon word, having, when spoken, a sound somewhat analogous to the modern word into which it has been converted. The "Broad Down" had a name of its own, I doubt not, before the existence of either a penny or halfpenny.

EFFARESS.

85. _Roll Pedigree of Howard, of Great Howard, Co. Lancaster._--In 1826 an elaborate pedigree on vellum of the family of Howard, of Great Howard, in Rochdale, deduced, authenticated, and subscribed by Sir William Dugdale, about the year 1667, was in the possession of a gentleman in Rochdale, lately deceased. He is supposed to have lent it to some antiquarian friend, and its present _locale_ is unknown. As no record of this singular document exists in the College of Arms, the writer of this note would feel obliged by being permitted to have a copy of the original for his Lancashire M.S. Collections.

F. R. R.

86. _Rev. John Paget, of Amsterdam._--Of what family was John Paget, pastor of the Reformed English church at Amsterdam for thirty years? He died there 1639, and his works were published 1641, being edited by Thomas Paget, who was, according to his own account, "called to the work of ministry many years ago in Chester diocese," and R. Paget, who writes a Preface "from Dort, 1641." Perhaps the editors of the "NAVORSCHER" may be able to give some information on the subject.

CRANMORE.

87. _Visiting Cards._--When did these social conveniencies first come into use?

OUTIS.

88. _Duke de Berwick and Alva._--A sword amongst the Spanish jewels in the Great Exhibition is said to be ordered by "S. E. Jacques Stuart, Duc de Berwick and Alva." Is this a descendant of James II.'s illegitimate son, the Duke of Berwick? and if so, can any of your correspondents give me any information as to his descent, &c.?

L.

89. _The Earl of Derwentwater._--The first earl, Francis, had several sons--Francis his successor, Edward died unmarried, _Thomas_ a military officer, Arthur, &c. Can any of your readers inform me in which army this Thomas was an officer, whom he married, and where he died? The family name was Radcliffe.

BROCTUNA.

Bury, Lancashire.

90. _"But very few have seen the Devil."_--Can any of your readers inform me where some lines are to be found which run somewhat thus?--I cannot remember the intermediate lines:--

". . . .
But very few have seen the Devil,
Except old Noll, as Echard tells us:
. . . .
But then old Noll was one in ten,
And sought him more than other men."

W. FRASER.

Hordley, near Ellesmere, Aug. 4. 1851.

91. _Aulus Gellius' Description of a Dimple._--The poet Gray, writing to his friend Mr. West, asks him to guess where the following description of a _dimple_ is found:

"Sigilla in mento inpressa Amoris digitulo
Vestigio demonstrant mollitudinem."

_Lett._ viii. sect. iii. vol. i. p. 261. Mason's
edition. London, 1807.

Mr. West replies in the following letter:

"Your fragment is Aulus Gellius; and both it and your Greek
delicious."

I have never met with it in Aulus Gellius, and should be glad to find it.

RT.

92. _Forgotten Authors of the Seventeenth Century._--Can any of your correspondents point out any biographical particulars relative to the following authors of the seventeenth century?

1. WILLIAM PARKES, Gentleman, and sometimes student in Barnard's Inne, author of _The Curtaine-drawer of the World_, 1612.

2. PETER WOODHOUSE, author of _The Flea; sic parva componere magnis_, 1605.

3. ROWLAND WATKINS, a native of Herefordshire; author of _Flamma sine Fumo, or Poems without Fictions_, 1662.

4. RICHARD WEST, author of _The Court of Conscience, or Dick Whipper's Sessions_, 1607.

EDWARD F. RIMBAULT.

Minor Queries Answered.

_Sundays, on what Days of the Month?_--Is there any printed book which tells on what days of the several months the _Sundays_ in each year occurred, during the last three or four centuries?

If there be more such books than one, _which_ of them is the best and most accessible?

H. C.

[The most accessible works are Sir Harris Nicolas' _Chronology of
History_, and _Companion to the Almanack_ for 1830, pp. 32, 33.
Consult also _L'Art de Verifier les Dates_ and, above all,
Professor De Morgan's _Book of Almanacks_.]

_John Lilburne._--A list of the pamphlets published by, or relating to, John Lilburne, or any facts respecting his life or works, will be of service to one who is collecting for a biography of "Free-born John."

EDWARD PEACOCK, Jun.

Bottesford Moors, Kirton in Lindsey.

[Watt's _Bibliotheca Britannica_ contains a list of Lilburne's
pamphlets, which would occupy two pages of "NOTES AND QUERIES!" A
collection of tracts relating to Lilburne, 1646, 4to., 2 vols.,
will be found in the Towneley Catalogue, Part I. p. 636. Sold for
1_l._ 13_s._ _Truth's Victory over Tyrants, being the Trial of
John Lilburne_, London, 1649, 4to., contains a portrait of him
standing at the bar. Butler, in _Hudibrus_, Part III., Canto ii.,
has vividly drawn his character in the paragraph commencing at
line 421.:--

"To match this saint, there was another,
As busy and perverse a brother,
An haberdasher of small wares,
In politics and state-affairs," &c.

"This character," says Dr. Grey, "exactly suits John Lilburne and
no other. For it was said of him, when living, by Judge Jenkins,
'That if the world was emptied of all but himself, Lilburne would
quarrel with John, and John with Lilburne;' which part of his
character gave occasion for the following lines at his death:--

"'Is John departed, and is Lilburne gone?
Farewell to both, to Lilburne and to John.
Yet, being dead, take this advice from me,
Let them not both in one grave buried be:
Lay John here, and Lilburne thereabout,
For, if they both should meet, they would fall out.'

"Lilburne died a Quaker, August 28, 1657. See _Mercurius
Politicus_, No. 379. p. 1597.; Mr. Peek's _Desiderata Curiosa_,
from Mr. Smith's _Obituary_, vol. ii. lib. xiv. p. 30. Also a
character of Lilburne, in Thurloe's _State Papers_, vol. iii. p.
512; and an account of his obstinacy, in his _Trial_, reprinted in
the _State Trials_."]

Replies.

"LAY OF THE LAST MINSTREL."

(Vol. iii., p. 464.)

I am obliged to M. for his notice of my paper upon this poem, and gratified by his concurrence with my remarks.

Very likely M. may be right in his explanations of the "_incuria_" imputed by me to the great author, and I may have made a _mistake_, without pleading guilty to the same charge: but if M. will refer to the 4th and two following Sections of sixth canto of the _Lay_, he will find it thus written:

"Me lists not at this tide declare
The splendour of _the spousal rite_," &c.

Again, Sec. V.:

"Some bards have sung, the Ladye high
Chapel or altar came not nigh;
Nor dust the _rites of spousal grace_
So much she feared each holy place," &c.

Again, Sec. VI.:

"_The spousal rites_ were ended soon."

And again, in Sect. VIII. are these words:

"To quit them, on the English side,
Red Roland Forster loudly cried,
'A deep carouse to yon fair _bride_!'"

Now, in the ordinary acceptation of these words the _spousal rite_ means nuptials, and a _bride_ means a newly married wife; and as the ceremony of the _spousal rite_ is described as taking place with much pomp in the chapel, and at the altar, it looks very like a wedding indeed. But if, after all, it were only a betrothal, I willingly withdraw the charge of "_incuria_," and subscribe to the propriety of the "Minstrel's" information, that the bridal actually "befel a short space;"

"And how brave sons and daughters fair
Blest Teviot's flower and Cranstoun's heir."

And now a word touching M.'s hint of giving a corner in the "NOTES AND QUERIES" to the "Prophecy of Criticism." If he will forgive me the remark, I do not think the phrase a very happy one. Criticism does not _prophecy_, it _pronounces_, and is valuable only in proportion to the judgment, taste, and knowledge displayed in its sentence. Above all, the critic should be impartial, and by no means allow himself to be biassed by either prejudice or prepossession, whether personal or political. Still less should he sacrifice his subject in order to prove the acuteness and point of his own weapon, which is too often dipped in gall instead of honey. To what extent these qualifications are found in our modern reviewers let each man answer according to his own experience: but as critics are not infallible, and as authors generally see more, feel more, and think more than the ordinary run of critics and readers give them credit for, I doubt not that a place will always be open in the "NOTES AND QUERIES," in answer to the _fallacies_ of criticism, wherever they may be detected.

A. BORDERER.

MEANING OF "PRENZIE."

(Vol. iv., pp. 63, 64.)

As your correspondent A. E. B. has endeavoured to strengthen the case in favour of the word _precise_ being the proper reading of "prenzie," will you allow me to suggest a few further points for consideration in inquiring into the meaning of this word?

I am afraid your etymological readers are in danger of being misled by the plausible theory that "prenzie" is not an error of the press or copyist, but a true word. In reference to this view of the case, as taken by your several correspondents, allow me to suggest, first: that Shakspeare was no word-coiner; secondly, that, for application in a passage of such gravity, he would not have been guilty of the affectation of using a newly-imported Scotch word; and, thirdly, that, as we may reasonably infer that he was essentially popular in the choice of words, so he used such as were intelligible to his audience. A word of force and weight sufficient to justify its use twice in the passage in question, if merely popular, would surely not so entirely have gone out of use; whereas if merely literary it would still be to be found in books.

My greatest objection to the word _precise_ is its inharmoniousness in the _position_ it holds in the verse; and this objection would not be removed by adopting _Mr. Singer's_ suggestion of accentuating the first syllable, which must then be short, and the word pronounced _pressis_? How horrible! Besides, if that were the case, as Shakspeare does not vary in his accent, the corroboratory passage on which the advocates of _precise_ depend would read, then, thus:

"Lord Angelo is _pressis_,
Stands at a guard with envy, scarce _confesses_," &c.,

the double ending rhyme giving it the air of burlesque. The appropriateness of _precise_, moreover, depends chiefly upon its being assumed to express the quality of a _precision_, which has not only not been proved, but which I am inclined very much to doubt.

Has it not been a true instinct that has guided the early English commentators to the choice of words of the form of "prince_ly_," "priest_ly_," and myself to "saint_ly_," and do not the two passages taken together require this form in reference to a character such as that of a _prince_, a _priest_, or a _saint_? For instance, the term _pious_ might be applied to Angelo, equally well with _priestly_ or _saintly_; but it could not correctly be applied to garb or vestments, while either of the latter could.

In what respect is the "cunning" of the "livery of hell" shown, if "the damnedst body" be not invested in "guards" of the most opposite character? Shakspeare never exactly repeats himself, though we frequently find the same idea varied in form and differently applied. The following passage from _Othello_, Act II. Sc. 3., appears to be intended to convey the same idea as the one in question, and thus strengthens the opinion that, if not _saintly_, one of like form and meaning was intended:

"Divinity of hell!
When devils will their blackest sins put on,
They do suggest at first with heavenly shows,
As I do now."

Any of your readers who are acquainted with the common careless handwriting in use at the time, will greatly oblige by informing me if it be beyond likelihood that a word commencing with the letter _s_ should have been read as though it began with _p_.

I have no intention of continuing the contest on the meaning of "eisell," nor should I have felt it necessary to notice the remarks of J. S. W. in No. 91., had they been avowedly in opposition to mine and MR. SINGER'S. But when the advocate assumes the ermine, and proceeds to sum up the evidence and pass judgment, I feel it only right that those points in which he has _misrepresented_ my argument should not be passed over. I did _not_ say "that the word cannot mean a river because the definite article is omitted before it." What I did say was, that "English idiom requires an article _unless it be personified_." Milton's lines merely confirm this, though I am willing to admit that the argument is of little weight When, however, J. S. W. expresses his surprise that "a gentleman who exhorts," &c., had not looked to the _general drift_ of the passage, I fancy he cannot have read my first observations with regard to it, in which I say "the _idea_ of the passage appears to be," &c. What is this but the "general drift?" Before finally leaving this subject, allow me to explain, that, in objecting to the terms "mere verbiage" and "extravagant rant" of a correspondent, I took them _together_. I included the latter perhaps hastily. But, however "extravagant" the "rant" of his real or assumed madmen may be, I am satisfied that there is _no_ "mere verbiage" to be found in Shakspeare.

SAMUEL HICKSON.

HOUSE OF YVERY.

(Vol. iii., p. 101.)

Some years ago, in the library of a noble earl in the north of England, I met with a "fair and _perfect_" copy of this rare book. The following is a list of the plates which it contained:--

Vol. i.

1. View of the Manor of Weston, Somersetshire, p. 360.
2. Monument of Richard Perceval, p. 406.

Vol. ii.

3. Manor of Sydenham, co. Somerset, p. 24.
4. Portrait of Richard Perceval, p. 120.
5. Another of the same, _ib._
6. Portrait of Alice Perceval, p. 138.
7. Portrait of Sir Philip Perceval, p. 144.
8. View of Loghart Castle, Ireland, p. 192.
9. Castle Liscarrol, Cork, p. 215.
10. Portrait of Catherine, wife of Sir Philip, p. 320.
11. Portrait of George Perceval, p. 322.
12. Portrait of Sir John Perceval, p. 325.
13. View of Castle Kanturk, Cork, p. 335.
14. Portrait of Catherine, wife of Sir John Perceval, p. 361.
15. Portrait of Robert Perceval, p. 368.
16. Portrait of Sir Philip Perceval, second Baronet, p. 376.
17. Monument of ditto, p. 386.
18. Portrait of Sir John Perceval, eighth Baronet, p. 389.
19. Portrait of Catherine, wife to ditto, p. 396.
20. Portrait of the Hon. Philip Perceval, p. 400.
21. Portrait of John Perceval, Earl of Egmont, p. 403.
22. Map of part of the estate of John Perceval, Earl of Egmont,
p. 404.
23. Portrait of Sir P. Parker, ancestor of the Countess of Egmont,
p. 451.
24. Portrait of Catherine, wife of ditto, p. 452.
25. Portrait of the Countess of Egmont, born 1680, p. 453.
26. View of Mount Pleasant, near Tunbridge Wells, p. 461.
27. Portrait of John Viscount Perceval, p. 467.
28. Portrait of Catherine, wife of ditto, p. 467.
29. View of Beverstan Castle, p. 496.

The copy here described contains the "folding plate" mentioned by
your correspondent; and as it was a presentation copy from the
Earl of Egmont to Earl Ferrers, the presumption is that it is an
_unmutilated_ one.

EDWARD F. RIMBAULT.

In answer to the Query of your correspondent H.T.E., I beg to state that the folding map of part of the estate of John Perceval, Earl of Egmont, does occur in my copy of _The House of Yvery_, at page 92. of the _first_ volume. Lowndes, in his list of the plates, assigns this map to the second volume; but its proper place is as above. Perhaps this mistake of Lowndes may have given rise to the doubt as to the existence of this map; but I suppose any copy of the work without it must be considered imperfect.

J. H.

QUEEN BRUNEHAUT.

(Vol. iv., p. 86)

I am sure that you will not be sorry to hear that "NOTES AND QUERIES" is a great favourite with young people; and I hope you will have no objection to encourage our "pursuits of literature" by admitting into your delightful miscellany this little contribution.

I have been reading Thierry's _History of the Norman Conquest_ these holidays; and when I saw MR. BREEN'S Queries respecting St. Gregory and Queen Brunehaut, I remembered that the historian had mentioned them. On referring to the passage, at p. 11. of the translation published by Whittaker and Co., 1843, I found that (1.) "Le Saint Pape Gregoire," who "donna des eloges de gloire" to Queen Brunehaut, _was_ Gregory the Great;--that (2.) This illustrious Pope _did_ actually degrade himself by flattering the bad queen;--and (3.) That the proof of his having done so is to be found in a passage of one of Gregory's letters given by Thierry, and appearing in the foot-note "12" at p. 11. of Messrs. Whittaker's edition, as follows:

"Excellentia ergo vestrae quae proba in bonis consuevit esse
operibus."--"In omnipotentis Dei timore, excelleltiae vestrae mens
soliditate firmata."--_Epist. Greg. Papae, apud Script. rer.
Gallic. et Francic._, tom. iv. p. 21.

EDITH C.

Preston, Aug. 1851.

It is, I think, indisputable that the St. Gregory commemorated on the tomb of Brunehaut is _Pope Gregory the Great_. Among his _Letters_ are several addressed to the Frankish queen, betokening the unqualified esteem in which she was held by the Roman pontiff. See _Gregor. Opp._ (tom. ii., edit. Paris, 1586), Lib. v. Indict. xiv. ep. 5; Lib. vii. Indict. i. ep. 5.; Lib. ix. Indict. vi. ep. 8.; Lib. xi. Indict. vi. ep. 8. I will give a short specimen from the first and last _Letters_:

"Excellentiae vestrae praedicandam ac Deo placitam bonitatem et
gubernacula regni testantur et educatio fidel manifestat."--_Col._
766.

"Inter alia bona hoc apud vos prae ceteris tenet principatum, quod
in mediis hujus mundi fluctibus, qui regentis animos turbulenta
solent vexatione confundere, ita cor ad Divini cultus amorem et
venerabilium locorum disponendam quietam reducitis ac si vos nulla
alia cura sollicitet."--_Col. 1061._

Much to her merit, in the eyes of Gregory, arose from her abjuration of Arianism, and the patronage she extended to religious houses. At the same time, it is impossible to acquit her of the serious charges under which she labours.

"Elle est diffamee," says Moreri, "dans les ecrits des autres
auteurs, par sa cruaute, sa vengeance, son avarice, et son
impudicite."

C. H.

St. Catharine's Hall, Cambridge.

LORD MAYOR NOT A PRIVY COUNCILLOR.

(Vol. iv., p. 9.)

I entirely dissent from your correspondent's statements that "the Lord Mayor is no more a privy councillor than he is Archbishop of Canterbury." First, as to the argument on which your correspondent's conclusion is founded. He assumes first that the title of Lord is a mere courtesy title; and, secondly, that it is because of this courtesy title that the Mayor is deemed a privy councillor. The second assumption is the erroneous one. It is not necessary to have the courtesy title of Lord in order to be a privy councillor; nor are all courtesy lords styled Right Honorables. Your correspondent's assertion in this respect is a curious blunder, which every day's experience contradicts. No one styles a courtesy Lord "Right Honorable" except such persons as will persist in the equally absurd blunder of calling a Marquis "Most Noble." The Boards of the Treasury and Admiralty are not designated "Right Honorable" merely because of the courtesy title of "Lord" being attached to their corporate name, but because these Boards are respectively the equivalents of the Lord High Treasurer and Lord High Admiral, each of whom was always a member of the sovereign's Council. No individual member of the Board is, by membership, "Right Hon." Your correspondent's precedent is equally inconclusive on the subject. He says, "Mr. Harley, when (1768) Lord Mayor of London, was sworn of His Majesty's most honorable Privy Council." This precedent does not prove the argument; and for this simple reason, that the individual who holds the office is not "Right Honorable," but the officer is. Mr. Harley was not, as an individual, a privy councillor, till he was made one: he could only have appeared in council as "the Lord Mayor," and not as "Mr. Harley." The description, therefore, of "The Right Honorable A. B., Lord Mayor," which has probably misled your correspondent, is, like the "Most Noble the Marquis," a blunder of ignorant flattery; the correct description being "A. B., the Right Honorable the Lord Mayor:" or rather, the A. B. ought to be suppressed, except the individual, for a particular reason, is to be personally designated, and the style should be written, "The Right Honorable the Lord Mayor." This distinction between the officer and the man is almost universal in our system. Our Judges are Lords in court (yet, by-the-bye, this courtesy "Lord" does not give any one of them at any time the title of Right Honorable, another instance of the fallacy of your correspondent's reasoning), and they are Sirs in individual designation. In Scotland the Judges assume the titles of Baronies during their tenure of office, but become mere Esquires on surrender of it. The Lord Mayor is always summoned to the council on the accession of a new sovereign, and was formerly, when his office was of greater practical importance than at present, accustomed to put his name very high on the list of signatures attached to the declaration of accession. A commoner might by the bare delivery of the great seal become "Lord" in the Court of Chancery, and be the President of the House of Lords, where he would sit by virtue of his office, without having any title to speak or vote. Mr. Henry Brougham did so for one if not two nights before his patent of peerage was completed. The same distinction between officer and individual applies to the Lord Mayor, who is Right Honorable as Lord Mayor, but in no other way whatever.

L. M.

COWPER OR COOPER.

(Vol. iv., pp. 24.93)

The poet's family was originally of Stroode in Slinfold, Sussex, not Kent, as Lord Campbell (_Lives of the Chan._, vol. iv. p. 258.) states, and spelt their names Cooper. The first person who altered the spelling was John Cooper of London, father of the first baronet, and he probably adopted the spelling in affectation of the Norman spelling; the family having in those days been styled Le Cupere, Cuper, and Coupre in Norman-French, and Cuparius in Latin, as may be seen by the grants made to Battle Abbey. The pronunciation was never changed. All the Sussex branches continued the spelling of Cooper until the time of Henry Cowper of Stroode, who died 1706. In Lord Campbell's _Lives of the Chancellors_ (p. 259.) the first letter is signed "William Cooper."

W. D. COOPER.

_Cowper._--There is an affectation in the present day for pronouncing words, not only contrary to established usage, but in defiance of orthography. The Bar furnishes one example, and "polite society" the other. By the former, a judge on the bench is called, instead of "My _Lord_" and "His _Lordship_," "My _Lud_" and "His _Ludship_;" and in the latter, _Cowper_ is metamorphosed into _Cooper_. Now, I fancy that "My _Lord_" is a vast deal more euphonious than "My _Lud_" and _Cowper_, as Shakspeare has it, "becomes the mouth as well" as _Cooper_. We don't speak of getting milk from the _coo_, but from the _cow_; and _Cow_ being the first syllable of the poet's name should not be tortured into _Coo_, in compliment to a nonsensical fastidiousness, whoever may have set the example. As _Cowper_ the poet has been hitherto known, and by that name will be cherished by posterity. John Kemble, the great actor, I remember, tried to alter the pronunciation of _Rome_ to _room_, and was laughed at for his pains, though he had the authority of a pun of the bard's own for the change: "Old _Rome_ and _room_ enough." But Shakspeare was but an indifferent punster at the best, as is proved by Falstaff's refusing to give a _reason_ on compulsion, even though "_reasons_ were as plentiful as blackberries;" corrupting _raisin_ into _reason_, for his purpose, which is as far-fetched as any instance of the kind on record, I think. But I digress, and beg pardon for running so away from the _cow_.

JOHN BULL.

Lord Campbell, in his entertaining Lives of the _Chief Justices_, says, in paragraph introductory to the life of Sir Edward Coke:

"As the name does not correspond very aptly with the notion of
their having come over with the Conqueror, it has been derived
from the British word 'Cock' or 'Coke' a 'Chief;' but, like
'Butler,' 'Taylor,' and other names now ennobled, it much more
probably took its origin from the occupation of the founder of the
race at the period when surnames were first adapted in England.
Even in Queen Elizabeth's reign, as well as that of James I., Sir
Edward's name was frequently spelt 'Cook.' Lady Hatton, his second
wife, who would not assume it, adopted this spelling in writing to
him, and according to this spelling, it has invariably been
pronounced."

Lord Campbell, who seems rather fond of such speculations, however, in the case of Lord Cowper does not give the etymology of the name. But he gives a letter written from school by the subsequent chancellor, in which he signs his name "William Cooper." However, elsewhere, in a note he speaks of the propensity evinced by those who have risen to wealth and station to obliterate the trace of their origin by dropping, adding, or altering letters and among them he mentions "Cowper" as having its origin in "Cooper." Mr. Mark Antony Lower, too, in his _Essay on English Surnames_, classes Cowper among the surnames derived from trade. Possibly, therefore, notwithstanding the alteration, the original pronunciation has been continued.

TEE BEE.

Replies to Minor Queries

_Voce Populi Halfpenny_ (Vol. iv., pp. 19. 56.).--I have _four_ varieties of this coin:

1. The one which J. N. C. describes, and which is engraved by Lindsay, in his work on the coinage of Ireland, and is considered the rarest type.

2. A precisely similar type, with the exception that the "P" is _beneath_, instead of being _on the side_ of the portrait.

3. A more youthful portrait, and of smaller size than the preceding, and a trifle better executed. It wants the "P" altogether, and has for "MM." a small quatrefoil. The engrailing also very different.

4. A totally different, and older portrait than any of the preceding. "MM." and engrailing the same as No. 3., and it also wants the "P."

The reverses of all four appear to differ only in very minute particulars. Pinkerton, in his _Essay on Medals_, vol. ii. p. 127., after stating that the Irish halfpence and farthings were all coined in the Tower, and then sent to Ireland, there being no mint in that country, remarks--

"In 1760, however, there was a great scarcity of copper coin in
Ireland; upon which a society of Irish gentlemen applied for
leave, upon proper conditions, to coin halfpence; which being
granted, those appeared with a very bad portrait of George II.,
and 'VOCE POPULI' around it. The bust bears a much greater
resemblance to the Pretender; but whether this was a piece of
waggery in the engraver, or only arose from his ignorance in
drawing, must be left in doubt. Some say that these pieces were
issued without any leave being asked or obtained."

E. S. TAYLOR.

I would have referred J. N. C. to either Pinkerton or Lindsay, where he would find a full account about his Irish halfpenny, but as he may not possess a numismatic library, perhaps you will allow me to trouble you with the extracts. Pinkerton says:

"In 1760 there was a great scarcity of copper coin in Ireland upon
which a society of Irish gentlemen applied for leave, upon proper
conditions, to coin halfpence; which being granted, those appeared
with a very bad portrait of George II., and 'VOCE POPULI' around
it. The bust bears a much greater resemblance to the Pretender;
but whether this was a piece of waggery in the engraver, or only
arose from his ignorance in drawing, must be left to doubt."

Pinkerton does not here specially refer to the type, where "the letter P is close to the nose:" but if J. N. C. can turn to Lindsay's _Coinage of Ireland_, 1839, he will find his coin engraved in the fifth supplementary plate, No. 16., and in the advertisement, p. 139., the following remarks on it:

"This curious variety of the 'voce populi' halfpence exhibits a P
before the face, and illustrates Pinkerton's remark that the
portrait on these coins seems intended for that of the Pretender:
it is a very neat coin, perhaps a pattern."

BLOWEN.

_Dog's Head in the Pot_ (Vol. iii., pp. 264. 463.).--The sign is of greater antiquity than may be expected. See _Cocke Lorelle's Bote_:--

"Also Annys Angry with the croked buttocke
That dwelled at ye synge Of ye dogges hede in ye pot.
By her crafte a breche maker."

THOS. LAWRENCE.

Ashby de la Zouch.

"_O wearisome Condition of Humanity_" (Vol. iii., p. 241.).--As no one has hitherto appropriated these fine lines, as to the author of which your correspondent inquires, I may mention that they are taken from the "Chorus Sacerdotum," at the end of Lord Brook's _Mustapha_. (See his Works, fol. 1633, p. 159.) The chorus is worth quoting entire:

"_O wearisome condition of humanity!
Borne under one Law, to another bound:
Vainely begot, and yet forbidden vanity;
Created sick, commanded to be sound:_
What meaneth Nature by these diverse Lawes?
Passion and reason self division cause.
Is it the mark or majesty of power
To make offences that it may forgive?
Nature herself doth her own self defloure
To hate those Errors she herself doth give.
For how should Man think that he may not do
If Nature did not fail and punish too?
Tyrant to others, to herself unjust,
Only commands things difficult and hard,
Forbids us all things, which it knows is lust,
Makes easy pains, impossible reward.
_If Nature did not take delight in blood,
She would have made more easy ways to good._
We that are bound by vows and by promotion,
With pomp of holy sacrifice and rites,
To teach belief in good and still devotion,
To preach of Heaven's wonders and delights;
Yet when each of us in his own heart looks,
He finds the God there far unlike his Books."

I should like to see a collected edition of the works of the two noble Grevilles, Fulke and Robert, Lords Brook; the first the friend of Sir Philip Sidney, the second the honoured of Milton. The little treatise on _Truth_ of the latter, which Wallis answered in his _Truth Tried_, is amply sufficient to prove that he possessed powers of no common order.

JAMES CROSSLEY.