Notes and Queries, Number 43, August 24, 1850

NOTES AND QUERIES

The history of books and periodicals of a similar character ought to be the object of interest to the readers of this work. The number of works in which answers have been given to proposed questions is not small. Not to mention the Spectator and its imitators, nor the class of almanacs which give riddles and problems, nor mathematical periodicals of a more extensive character,—though all these ought to be discussed in course of time,—there yet remains a class of books in which general questions proposed by the public are answered periodically, either by the public or by the editors. Perhaps an account of one of these may bring out others.

In 1736 and 1737 appeared the Weekly Oracle; or, Universal Library. Published by a Society of Gentlemen. One folio sheet was published weekly, usually ending in the middle of a sentence. (Query. What is the technical name for this mode of publication? If none, what ought to be?) I have one folio volume of seventy numbers, at the end of which notice of suspension is given, with prospect of revival in another form probably no more was published. The introduction is an account of the editorial staff to wit, a learned divine who "hath entered with so much discernment into the true spirit of the schoolmen, especially Thomas Aquinas and Duns Scotus, that he is qualified to resolve, to a hair's breadth, the nicest cases of conscience." A physician who "knows, to a mathematical point, the just tone and harmony of the risings pulses...." A lawyer who "what he this day has proved to be a contingent remainder, to-morrow he will with equal learning show must operate as an executory devise or as a springing use." A philosopher "able to give the true reason of all things, from the composition of watches, to the raising of minced pies … and who, if he is closely questioned about the planner of squaring the circle, or by what means the perpetual motion, or longitude, may be discovered, we believe has honesty, and we are sure that he has skill enough to say that he knows—nothing of the matter." A moral philosopher who has "discovered a perpetuum mobile of government." An eminent virtuoso who understands "what is the best pickle to preserve a rattle-snake or an Egyptian mummy, better than the nature of the government he lives under, or the economy and welfare of himself and family." Lastly, a man of mode. "Him the beaus and the ladies may consult in the affairs of love, dress, and equipage."

There is a great deal of good answering to tolerably rational questions, mixed with some attempts at humour, and other eccentricities, and occasionally a freedom, both of question and answer, by which we might, were it advisable, confirm the fact, that the decorums of 1736 and of 1850 are two different things.

First, as an instance of a question and answer, which might do as well (if the record be correct) for the present publication.

"Q. We read in our public papers of the Pope's Bull and the Pope's Brief; pray, Gentlemen, what is the difference between them?

"A. They differ much in the same manner as the Great Seal and Privy Seal do here in England. The Bull being of the highest authority where the papal power extends; the Brief is of less authority. The Bull has a leaden seal upon silk affixed to the foot of the instrument, as the wax under the Great Seal is to our letters patent. The Brief has sub annulo piscatoris upon the side."

Query. Is this answer complete and correct?

Now for another specimen:

The following is an example of unanswerable refutation. To show why a man has not one rib less than a woman, it is stated that imperfections are not hereditary; as in the case of

"One Mr. L–, an honest sailor not far from Stepney, who has but one arm, and who cannot walk himself without the assistance of a wooden leg, and yet has a son, born some years after the amputation of is own limbs, whom he has bred both a fiddler and a dancing master."

One more, not for the wretched play upon words, but because it may make a new Query,—What does it all mean?

"Q. Gentlemen, in the preamble to the late Earl of Oxford's patent, I observed, 'And whom they have congratulated upon his escape from the rage of a flagitious parricide.' I desire to know by whom, at what time, and in what manner, the said parricide was to have been committed.

"A. Was to have been! He actually was committed—to Newgate."

So much for some of the "NOTES AND QUEERIES" (as the word ought to be spelt) of a century ago.

COLLAR OF SS

The interest which attaches to this very ancient and distinguished ensign of chivalrous honour will excuse the introduction into your pages of a fuller dissertation upon the subject than what appears in "NOTES AND QUERIES," Nos. 39. and 41., in answer to the several questions put by your correspondents B. and [Greek: Ph].

After referring to the papers on the Collar of SS., and other collars of livery, published a few years ago in the Gentleman's Magazine, and his intention to arrange them, and other additional collections on the same subject, in the shape of a small volume, MR. J.G. NICHOLS proceeds to say:

"As a direct answer to B.'s question, 'Is there any list of persons who were honoured with that badge, (viz., the Collar of SS.?)', I may reply, No. Persons were not, in fact, 'honoured with the badge,' in the sense that persons are now decorated with stars, crosses, or medals; but the livery collar was assumed by parties holding a certain position. So far as can be ascertained, these were either knights attached to the royal household or service, who wore gold or gilt collars, or esquires in the like position who wore silver collars."

From the statute for the regulation of apparel, passed in the 2nd year of the reign of Henry IV., it is ordained that—

"All the sons of the king, dukes, earls, barons, and baronettes, might use the livery of our Lord the King of his collar as well in his absence as in his presence; and that all other knights and esquires should use it only in the presence of the king and not in his absence."

The royal assent to this bill was accompanied with further regulations, among which were:

"That the dukes, earls, barons, and baronettes of the realm might use the said livery in their counties and elsewhere; and that knights and esquires might use the said livery in going from the hostel of the king and returning, to it, always provided that they did not use it in the counties and countries in which they resided or sojourned."

That the golden Collar of SS. was the undoubted badge or mark of a knight (chevalier, eques auratus seu ordo equestris, for these words respectively indicate the same grade or dignity of knighthood) all our ancient heraldic writers allow. But, were it otherwise, the extract from the statute above given shows that MR. NICHOLS is incorrect in stating, 1st. That there is no list of persons who were honoured with the collar of SS.; 2nd. That persons were not honoured with the badge, in the sense that persons are now decorated with stars, crosses, &c.; 3rd. That the collar was assumed; and, 4th. That the assumers were, "so far as can be ascertained, knights holding a certain position,—such as being attached to the royal household or service."

It is important to point out these four inaccuracies of MR. NICHOLS' reply to B., because it is desirable that his forthcoming volume should not be a heterogeneous collection of notices relating to the Collar of SS., mixed up with observations that will only serve the purpose of darkening knowledge upon the subject of which he treats.

The Collar of SS. is found in great variety of shapes, and at what precise time it became an ensign of equestrian nobility no one can tell. Collars were worn at least so far back as the days of Livy (i.e. the commencement of the Christian era); for he recounts that Manlius having pulled off the collar of a Gaul, took the name of Torquatus, and afterwards always wore the collar. Such being the case, there is no room for doubting that this ensign formed one of the ornaments of knighthood from the period of that dignity's earliest introduction into England.

There is a notion, from the circumstance of "Soverayne" being the favourite motto or impress of Henry IV., that the Collar of SS. takes its name from the initial letter of that word; and the introduction of the portcullis into the collar, which was the device of the House of Lancaster, is also considered by some as proof that the collar originated with that king. In the effigies, however, of Henry IV. and his queen, Joan of Navarre, in the Chapel of St. Thomas Becket, Canterbury Cathedral, the collar which appears round the neck of the queen (there is none upon that of the king) has no portcullis. And as to the derivations of the name of the collar from "Soverayne," from St. Simplicius, from the martyrs of Soissons (viz. St. Crespin and St. Crespinian, upon whose anniversary the battle of Agincourt was fought), from the Countess of Salisbury, of Garter notoriety, from the word "Souvenez" and, lastly, from Seneschallus or Steward (which latter is MR. NICHOLS' notion)—they may all be regarded as mere monkish or heraldic gossip.

Nicholas Upton, one of our earliest heraldic writers, who was present at the siege of Orleans in 1428, states,—"Rex etiam scoeie dare solebat pro signo vel titulo suo unum COLLARIUM de gormettis fremalibus equorum de auro vel argento;" whilst, in a wood-cut engraving of the arms of a German, Herr Florian Waldauff, of about the time of Albert Durer, are three collars, one of the letters SS. linkings into each other, terminating in front with portcullises. Put these notices together and they may be considered sufficient to demolish the Lancastrian origin theory of the collar, on the one hand, and to unfold the true source of the collar's nomenclature on the other, viz. that it comes from the S-shaped lever upon the bit of the bridle of the war steed.

To [Greek: Ph].'s question, "Who are the persons now privileged to wear these collars?" MR. NICHOLS answers, "I believe the reply must be confined to the judges, the Lord Mayor of London, the Lord Mayor of Dublin, the kings and heralds of arms." The privilege of wearing a Collar of SS., so far as the various persons enumerated are concerned, is a mere official privilege, and can scarcely be cited in reply to [Greek: Ph].'s interrogative, except upon the principle, "Exceptio probat regulam." The persons now privileged to wear the ancient golden Collar of SS. are the equites aurati, or knights (chevaliers) in the British monarchy, a body which includes all the hereditary order of baronets in England, Scotland, and Ireland, with such of their eldest sons, being of age, as choose to claim inauguration as knights. It is presumable too that the Collar of SS. is also an incident of the minor degree of knight bachelor (bas-chevalier seu miles-bachillarus); whilst the silver Collar of SS. belongs to every head of a family of ancient esquirage quality, bearing arms. It is true, the fashion of wearing the collar, whether gold or silver, may be said to have been in desuetude for centuries. But rights of blood never prescribe; and there are strong grounds to believe that there will again be a general revival of the use of such distinctions.

There are various other points bearing upon the subject of the Collar of SS., upon which I wish to offer some remarks, and with your permission I will return to the subject. I cannot, however, conclude without observing, that it would much add to the value of MR. NICHOLS' compilation if he would extend it so as to embrace a description of the floreal coronet of knighthood, the belt of honour, the helmet, scarf, ring, spars, &c.,—all indeed, that the words "ad recipiendum a nobis ARMA MILITARIA" implied in the ancient proclamations for taking the order of knighthood. If MR. NICHOLS, in addition to this, will show also wherein the knights of this equestrian quality differed from such persons as were distrained "ad se milites faciendos," he will solve a number of knotty difficulties in heraldic literature, and will enable the public generally to understand that there are many more chivalrous rights and privileges inherent in the subject than what is dreamt of in the philosophy either of the court at St. James's, or the college on St. Bennet's Hill.

TENYSON.—COLERIDGE.—EXTRACT FROM BAKER'S MSS. ON BARTH. DODYNGTON, AND WILLIAM JENKYN

The well-known lines in Tenyson's Locksley Hall,—

appear to be taken from Dante (Inferno, canto v. Verse 121.),—

which is imitated by other writers, quoted by Mr. Cary. (Chaucer, Troilus and Creseide, iii. 1626. Marino, Adone, c. xiv., st. 100. Fortinguerra, Riciardetto, c. xi. st. 83.)

In Coleridge's second Lay Sermon (ed. 1839, p. 365.) the passage—

"What are you," (a philosopher was once asked), "in consequence of your admiration of these abstruse speculations?" He answered; "What I am, it does not become me to say; but what thousands are, who despise them, and even pride themselves on their ignorance, I see, and tremble."

is a quotation from Schiller (Werke, vol. i., p. 414. 1838)

In Appendix (B.) to Coleridge's first Lay Sermon (p. 276.), we read,—

"An age or nation may become free from certain prejudices, beliefs, and superstitious practices, in two ways. It may have really risen above them; or it may have fallen below them, and become too bad for their continuance."

Though not given as a quotation, this passage is no doubt borrowed from Baader, as quoted by Archdeacon Hare in a note to his Sermons on the Mission of the Comforter,—

"Nations, like individuals, may get free and rid of certain prejudices, beliefs, customs, abuses, &c., in two ways. They may really have risen above them, or they may have fallen below them and become too bad for them."

In a volume of tracts (Class mark Gg. 5. 27.) in St. John's College Library, Cambridge, is a copy of Nicolas Carr's edition of the Olynthiacs and Philippics of Demosthenes, (4to. London, Henry Denham 1571.). As Carr died before the work was published, his friends wrote a number of commemorative pieces in Greek and Latin, prose and verse, which are annexed to the volume. Amongst the rest, Barth. Dodyngton wrote a copy of Greek elegiacs, and a Latin prose epistle. On Dodyngton, Baker has written the following note:—

"Barthol. Dodyngtonus in Com. Middlesex. natus, admissus fuit Discipulus Coll. Jo. pro Fundatrice an. 1548.—Idem admissus Socius, Apr. 8, an. 1552.—Idem admissus Socius Senior, an. 1558.—Idem admissus Socius Major Coll. Trin. Oct. 29, an. 1580."

In the same volume is note on Cheke:—

"Joan. Cheke admissus Socius Coll. Jo. Cant., Mar. 26, an. 21. Henrici 8'vi."

Another tract in the same volume is "Exodus, &c., a Sermon Preach't Sept. 12, 1675. By occasion of the much lamented Death of that Learned and Reverend Minister of Christ, Dr. Lazarus Seaman."—By William Jenkyn. After Dr. Seaman's name Baker adds, "some time Master of Peter House." Of Jenkyn he says: "Gul. Jenkin Coll. Jo. admissus in Matriculam Academiæ (designatus Joannensis), Jul. 3, an. 1628."

St. John's College, Cambridge.

PARALLEL PASSAGES

I believe the following have not been hitherto noticed in "NOTES AND QUERIES."

"[Greek: O de Kritias … ekaleito idiotaes men en philosophois, philosuph s de en idiotais.]"—Schol. in Timoeum. Platonis.

"Sparsum memini hominem inter scholasticos insanum, inter sanos scholasticum."—Seneca, Controv. i 7., Excerpt. ex Controv. ii.

"Lord Chesterfield is a Wit among Lords, and a Lord among Wits."—Johnsoniana.

FOLK LORE

Power of Prophecy.—MR. AUG. GUEST (Vol. ii., p. 116.) will perhaps accept—as a small tribute to his interesting communication on the subject of that "power of prophecy" which I apprehend to be still believed by many to exist during certain lucid intervals before death—a reference to Sir Henry Halford's Essay on the [Greek: Kausos] of Aretæus. (See Sir H. Halford's Essays and Orations read and delivered at the Royal College of Physicians, Lond. 1831, pp. 93. et seq.)

Bay Leaves at Funerals.—In some parts of Wales it is customary for funerals to be preceded by a female carrying bays, the leaves of which she sprinkles at intervals in the road which the corpse will traverse.

Query, Is this custom practised elsewhere; and what is the meaning and origin of the use of the bay?

Shoes (old) thrown for luck.—Brand, in his Popular Antiquities, observes, that it is accounted lucky by the vulgar to throw an old shoe after a person when they wish him to succeed in what he is going about. This custom is very prevalent in Norfolk whenever servants are going in search of new places; and especially when they are going to be married, a shoe is thrown after them as they proceed to church.

Some years ago, when the vessels engaged in the Greenland whale-fishery left Whitby, in Yorkshire, I observed the wives and friends of the sailors to throw old shoes at the ships as they passed the pier-head. Query, What is the origin of this practice?

Roasting Mice for Hooping-cough is also very common in Norfolk; but I am sorry to say that a more cruel superstitious practice is sometimes inflicted on the little animal; for it is not many years since I accidentally entered the kitchen in time to save a poor little mouse from being hung up by the tail and roasted alive, as the means of expelling the others of its race from the house. I trust that this barbarous practice will soon be forgotten.

The Story of Mr. Fox.—Your correspondent F.L., who has related the story of Sir Richard, surnamed Bloody, Baker, is, doubtless, aware of a similar tale with which Mr. Blakeway furnished my late friend James Boswell, and which the latter observed "is perhaps one of the most happy illustrations of Shakspeare that has appeared."—(Malone's Shakspeare, vol. vii. pp. 20. 163.)

The two narratives of Bloody Baker and Mr. Fox are substantially the same. Variations will naturally creep in when a story is related by word of mouth; for instance, the admonition over the chamber in Mr. Fox's house—

is altogether of a more dignified character than the similar warning given by the parrot, at p. 68. Each of these worthies, Baker and Fox, is seen bringing into his house the corpse of a murdered lady, whose hand falls into the lap of the concealed visitor; but in Fox's story the ornament on the hand is a rich bracelet, in Baker's a ring. The assassins are, in both stories, invited to the visitor's house, and upon Fox summary justice is inflicted.

It may be asked, if Baker was burned, how came he to have a tomb with gloves, helmet, &c., suspended over it in Cranbrook Church? Such honour was not paid to a man of higher rank in Salisbury Cathedral, a murderer also, who was hung, viz., Lord Stourton. Dodsworth tells us that till about 1775, no chivalrous emblems were suspended over the latter, but only a twisted wire, with a noose, emblematic of the halter. Allow me to ask, What instances have we of tombs or gravestones, as memorials of individuals who have suffered at the stake, exclusive of those monuments which in after times may have been raised in honour of distinguished martyrs at the Reformation?

Bath.

Baptismal Superstition.—In the north of England, when several children are brought to be baptized at the same time, great anxiety is shown by the people lest the girls should take the precedence of the boys; in which case it is believed the latter, when arrived at man's estate, would be beardless.

Rushbearing (Vol. i., p 259.).—Wednesday, July 21, 1847, Grasmere Church was decorated with ribbons, which had some reference to the rushbearing which had taken place on the preceding Sunday.

It takes place at Ambleside one Sunday later.

Extract from Black's "Guide to the Lakes," p. 43.

"An interesting ceremony takes place at Ambleside once every year, which the stranger may think himself fortunate in seeing, not so much for the mere sight itself, though that is pretty enough, as for its being the vestige of a very ancient observance. The ceremony alluded to is called Rushbearing. On the eve of the last Sunday in July, the village girls walk in procession to the chapel bearing garlands of flowers (formerly rushes), which are there tastefully disposed. After service, the day following, these are removed, and it is usual that a sermon, in allusion to the event, be preached. This observance is probably as remote as the age of Gregory IV., who is known to have recommended to the early disseminators of Christianity in this country, that on the anniversary of the dedication of churches wrested from the Pagans, the converts should build themselves huts of the boughs of trees about their churches, and celebrate the solemnities with religious feasting. In former times, the rushes were spread upon the floor of the sacred edifice, and the garlands remained until withered. Possibly the practice of covering the floors of buildings with rushes by way of protection against the damp earth, may have had something to do with keeping the custom in existence, long after the origin of the institution had been forgotten. The ceremony of Rushbearing has now fallen into complete disuse, except in a few secluded hamlets in Westmoreland, and in one or two other places in the kingdom; nor can that disuse be much regretted, since what was founded as a religious act, every where degenerated into an occasion for unseemly revelry, in fact, into a sort of rustic saturnalia. And yet, when we look at this remain of the olden time, as observed at Ambleside, we are tempted to say with the poet,—

WHO WROTE SHAKSPEARE'S HENRY VIII.?

I had no sooner read the title of an essay in the current number of the Gentleman's Magazine, "Who wrote Shakspeare's Henry VIII.?" than I became aware that I had been anticipated in at least the publication of a discovery I made three or four years ago, but for the making known of which a favourable opportunity had not occurred. The fact is, that I was anxious to arrive at a more satisfactory conclusion than has yet presented itself to me, and a paper on the subject commenced more than two years ago, I, with this feeling, laid aside. My present object is to strengthen the argument of the writer in the Gentleman's Magazine, by recording the fact that I, having no communication with him, or knowledge of him, even of his name, should have arrived at exactly the same conclusion as his own. That conclusion is (should any of your readers not have seen the article referred to), that Fletcher has at least an equal claim with Shakspeare to the authorship of Henry VIII.